politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour is paying a price for its elongated leadership conte
Comments
-
I'll have a guess at Ed Miliband.Casino_Royale said:
I didn't know, so I cheated.antifrank said:Quick quiz, no cheating. Who said this today?
"Any feasible future for the eurozone will require a much closer union in fiscal, banking and monetary policy. While the UK will thankfully stand outside those arrangements, that undoubtedly makes it harder to maintain influence and prevent the decisions of the eurozone from damaging British interests.
On top of that, increasing labour mobility is becoming ever more necessary as a means of adjustment for under-developed EU countries, just when open migration is becoming increasingly unsustainable — politically and economically — in the UK and elsewhere.
Given all those concerns, I understand the viewpoint of pessimists who cannot see an acceptable future for Britain within Europe. I also agree with Prime Minister David Cameron’s insistence on the need for reforms of the single market, labour mobility and benefits, as difficult as they will be to deliver."
I was very surprised at the answer.
Checking now0 -
Interesting comments from one of the architects of tax credits:Mortimer said:
Hear, hear!JEO said:
Thank you for this post. It does you credit. It also gets us to the point where we can debate the more detailed nuances of policy for the common good, rather than screaming at each other and pretending the other side holds an absolute position.SouthamObserver said:This has been a very helpful (from my perspective) conversation on here today. Thanks to all Tory posters for their explanations on benefits etc. I don't agree with you, but I do get the point you are making. I guess I think that there is a lot of grey and a lot of nuance around welfare and that this needs to be reflected in policy making. I worry that lines in the sand harm too many blameless people and that long term this damages the society of which we are all a part. This is no doubt based on my own experience. I have seen people make lifestyle choices around benefits - they were doing it back in the 80s and clearly do it now - but my sense is that the vast majority access welfare because they have no other choice, not because of decisions they have made but because of what life has thrown at them. I am pretty certain that had I found myself unemployed today, I would not have had the time and space to get myself back on my feet in the way that I was able to back in the 90s during the time of the Major government. And that would have been a complete waste for me, my family and, as it turns out, for a lot of other people too.
I completely understand the concerns about reducing incomes on working people who are not earning much, even if some of them are not working full time. But politics is the world of making difficult trade-offs, and the well-being of such workers has to be balanced against any poor incentives it provides them, in addition to not spend beyond our means as a nation. I think George Osborne is there, or thereabouts, although there is room for improvement. Personally, I think the council housing system is a mess, and there's ample room for efficiency savings or getting more revenue there, which could provide funds to lessen the impact on the working poor.
Your arguments always rise above the Labour rabble, SO.
Incidentally, I find the most vocal supporters of welfare are often those who have never encountered it themselves. Those who have tend to be quiet but not unthinking supporters. The most vocal opponents of the status quo I've encountered, and I include myself in this, are those who see their own extended families and friends use the state to make lifestyle decisions whilst they work. I think, in a way, my own railing against it owes something to the melancholy mix of shame, sadness and distaste I feel about this.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/07/alistair-darling-why-i-changed-my-mind-on-tax-credits/0 -
Not at all but are you suggesting this is not a possible outcome by 2018felix said:
Does the Big G stand for George perchance?Big_G_NorthWales said:George Osborne is master of all he surveys at present and must be one of the most accomplished political chancellors of all time. He has basically won the argument on benefits and audaciously stolen the 'living wage' concept from labour. He is enacting all the controversial elements of changing UK at the beginning of the Parliament and if over the next two to three years his economic decisions are successful, labour will have no where to go but to the hard left. The EU referendum has become much harder to predict with the possibility of the left joining the right to exit opening a whole new ball game. However as David Cameron is likely to stand down after the referendum it is really possible that George Osborne will become our next Prime Minister by 2018
0 -
Torn between Blair and Mandelson...Pulpstar said:
I'll have a guess at Ed Miliband.Casino_Royale said:
I didn't know, so I cheated.antifrank said:Quick quiz, no cheating. Who said this today?
"Any feasible future for the eurozone will require a much closer union in fiscal, banking and monetary policy. While the UK will thankfully stand outside those arrangements, that undoubtedly makes it harder to maintain influence and prevent the decisions of the eurozone from damaging British interests.
On top of that, increasing labour mobility is becoming ever more necessary as a means of adjustment for under-developed EU countries, just when open migration is becoming increasingly unsustainable — politically and economically — in the UK and elsewhere.
Given all those concerns, I understand the viewpoint of pessimists who cannot see an acceptable future for Britain within Europe. I also agree with Prime Minister David Cameron’s insistence on the need for reforms of the single market, labour mobility and benefits, as difficult as they will be to deliver."
I was very surprised at the answer.
Checking now
0 -
It was Mr Cooper.Mortimer said:
Torn between Blair and Mandelson...Pulpstar said:
I'll have a guess at Ed Miliband.Casino_Royale said:
I didn't know, so I cheated.antifrank said:Quick quiz, no cheating. Who said this today?
"Any feasible future for the eurozone will require a much closer union in fiscal, banking and monetary policy. While the UK will thankfully stand outside those arrangements, that undoubtedly makes it harder to maintain influence and prevent the decisions of the eurozone from damaging British interests.
On top of that, increasing labour mobility is becoming ever more necessary as a means of adjustment for under-developed EU countries, just when open migration is becoming increasingly unsustainable — politically and economically — in the UK and elsewhere.
Given all those concerns, I understand the viewpoint of pessimists who cannot see an acceptable future for Britain within Europe. I also agree with Prime Minister David Cameron’s insistence on the need for reforms of the single market, labour mobility and benefits, as difficult as they will be to deliver."
I was very surprised at the answer.
Checking now0 -
I too took a "pick a Labourite" approach... and I was wrong...Mortimer said:
Torn between Blair and Mandelson...Pulpstar said:
I'll have a guess at Ed Miliband.Casino_Royale said:
I didn't know, so I cheated.antifrank said:Quick quiz, no cheating. Who said this today?
"Any feasible future for the eurozone will require a much closer union in fiscal, banking and monetary policy. While the UK will thankfully stand outside those arrangements, that undoubtedly makes it harder to maintain influence and prevent the decisions of the eurozone from damaging British interests.
On top of that, increasing labour mobility is becoming ever more necessary as a means of adjustment for under-developed EU countries, just when open migration is becoming increasingly unsustainable — politically and economically — in the UK and elsewhere.
Given all those concerns, I understand the viewpoint of pessimists who cannot see an acceptable future for Britain within Europe. I also agree with Prime Minister David Cameron’s insistence on the need for reforms of the single market, labour mobility and benefits, as difficult as they will be to deliver."
I was very surprised at the answer.
Checking now
Actually a pretty strong article generally.0 -
Nope - just trying to lighten the mood - all this lefty angst is quite depressing. Enough alreadyBig_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all but are you suggesting this is not a possible outcome by 2018felix said:
Does the Big G stand for George perchance?Big_G_NorthWales said:George Osborne is master of all he surveys at present and must be one of the most accomplished political chancellors of all time. He has basically won the argument on benefits and audaciously stolen the 'living wage' concept from labour. He is enacting all the controversial elements of changing UK at the beginning of the Parliament and if over the next two to three years his economic decisions are successful, labour will have no where to go but to the hard left. The EU referendum has become much harder to predict with the possibility of the left joining the right to exit opening a whole new ball game. However as David Cameron is likely to stand down after the referendum it is really possible that George Osborne will become our next Prime Minister by 2018
0 -
Wow, if he truly believes that, Labour ought to scrap the leadership election and appoint him now. Probably the only hope they have of winning in 2020...Mortimer said:
Torn between Blair and Mandelson...Pulpstar said:
I'll have a guess at Ed Miliband.Casino_Royale said:
I didn't know, so I cheated.antifrank said:Quick quiz, no cheating. Who said this today?
"Any feasible future for the eurozone will require a much closer union in fiscal, banking and monetary policy. While the UK will thankfully stand outside those arrangements, that undoubtedly makes it harder to maintain influence and prevent the decisions of the eurozone from damaging British interests.
On top of that, increasing labour mobility is becoming ever more necessary as a means of adjustment for under-developed EU countries, just when open migration is becoming increasingly unsustainable — politically and economically — in the UK and elsewhere.
Given all those concerns, I understand the viewpoint of pessimists who cannot see an acceptable future for Britain within Europe. I also agree with Prime Minister David Cameron’s insistence on the need for reforms of the single market, labour mobility and benefits, as difficult as they will be to deliver."
I was very surprised at the answer.
Checking now0 -
Fair enoughfelix said:
Nope - just trying to lighten the mood - all this lefty angst is quite depressing. Enough alreadyBig_G_NorthWales said:
Not at all but are you suggesting this is not a possible outcome by 2018felix said:
Does the Big G stand for George perchance?Big_G_NorthWales said:George Osborne is master of all he surveys at present and must be one of the most accomplished political chancellors of all time. He has basically won the argument on benefits and audaciously stolen the 'living wage' concept from labour. He is enacting all the controversial elements of changing UK at the beginning of the Parliament and if over the next two to three years his economic decisions are successful, labour will have no where to go but to the hard left. The EU referendum has become much harder to predict with the possibility of the left joining the right to exit opening a whole new ball game. However as David Cameron is likely to stand down after the referendum it is really possible that George Osborne will become our next Prime Minister by 2018
0 -
''I see that George Osborne agrees with me that the new intake of Labour MPs are more leftwing.''
I saw a tweet that of the gang of 48, 22 were new intake MPs.0 -
Oy pack it in!!Sunil_Prasannan said:
JICIPM?TGOHF said:Was this the 24hrs wot won it for Corbyn ?
0 -
Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.0
-
The interesting question is whether Mr. Cooper would have said the same thing, and acted accordingly, had he retained his seat and been competing in/won the subsequent leadership contest.antifrank said:Yvette Cooper has written a blogpost on the Welfare Bill fiasco and what to do next:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/yvette-cooper/welfare-bill-labour-party_b_7841884.html?1437497109&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067
She evidently sees the problem but it's all rather light on solutions.0 -
Were in the moneyTGOHF said:
Not yet - but if Jezza has a chance I will give up my £3 - one more putch..TheScreamingEagles said:
So I'll be the only PBer who won't be voting in the Labour leadership election ?MikeSmithson said:I've now spent my £3 and have completed my registration to vote in the LAB leadership contest.
0 -
Whats an Acronym????Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
0 -
I don't see it as the state subsiding their lifestyle choice - I'd argue most do not chose to be poor as a lifestyle, and nor do they have kids purely to get tax credits. Obviously people should not have kids in that situation if they know they can afford them. I see tax credits as temporary solution, as part of a wider aim to eventually getting people out of poverty. I would advocate tax credits and the like, because the alternative - which is poorer people falling through the cracks - has even bigger social costs, which will cost the state anyway.Disraeli said:
So, in other words, regardless of how people come to be poor, the state has to absolve people of any blame and keep paying.The_Apocalypse said:Ultimately, who is to blame for someone being poor doesn't change the situation, nor the social costs caused by poverty.
For example,
- A couple have two children, but would like four.
- They know that they can't really afford four. This would push them into "poverty".
- However, they also know the state will subsidise them with tax credits.
- They go ahead and have the two extra children, and the state has to pick up the tab.
Why should their lifestyle choice be subsidised by the state?0 -
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
0 -
Mr. Owls, I was thinking of 'the acronym'
And I'm rather glad you're as wrong on DBTA as you were on EICIPM.0 -
Glad you can laugh about it now....bigjohnowls said:
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
0 -
TitterMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, I was thinking of 'the acronym'
And I'm rather glad you're as wrong on DBTA as you were on EICIPM.
So am I0 -
Remarkably trenchant analysis and succinct statement of the problem. I, like others, am moving more in the BOO direction than hitherto.Pulpstar said:
It was Mr Cooper.Mortimer said:
Torn between Blair and Mandelson...Pulpstar said:
I'll have a guess at Ed Miliband.Casino_Royale said:
I didn't know, so I cheated.antifrank said:Quick quiz, no cheating. Who said this today?
"Any feasible future for the eurozone will require a much closer union in fiscal, banking and monetary policy. While the UK will thankfully stand outside those arrangements, that undoubtedly makes it harder to maintain influence and prevent the decisions of the eurozone from damaging British interests.
On top of that, increasing labour mobility is becoming ever more necessary as a means of adjustment for under-developed EU countries, just when open migration is becoming increasingly unsustainable — politically and economically — in the UK and elsewhere.
Given all those concerns, I understand the viewpoint of pessimists who cannot see an acceptable future for Britain within Europe. I also agree with Prime Minister David Cameron’s insistence on the need for reforms of the single market, labour mobility and benefits, as difficult as they will be to deliver."
I was very surprised at the answer.
Checking now0 -
Osborne's living wage is not as clever as it looks, in terms of 'stealing it from Labour'. As Southam has said, in order for the strategy to actually work, it has to be a wage in which workers feel they can live on.0
-
£9.35 by 2020 should do the trickThe_Apocalypse said:Osborne's living wage is not as clever as it looks, in terms of 'stealing it from Labour'. As Southam has said, in order for the strategy to actually work, it has to be a wage in which workers feel they can live on.
0 -
Well, we'll see what the workers say;)Big_G_NorthWales said:
£9.35 by 2020 should do the trickThe_Apocalypse said:Osborne's living wage is not as clever as it looks, in terms of 'stealing it from Labour'. As Southam has said, in order for the strategy to actually work, it has to be a wage in which workers feel they can live on.
0 -
bigjohnowls said:
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
0 -
MarqueeMark said:
Glad you can laugh about it now....bigjohnowls said:
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
Second and last PTS councelling session on Friday
Think I am nearly over it.
Wonder if they can help with the GE2015 flashbacks now.0 -
Mr. Owls, glad to hear that.
Hope your wife and daughter are also doing well.0 -
-
ThanksMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, glad to hear that.
Hope your wife and daughter are also doing well.
All joking apart the PTS session provided by Thomson was really good and time is a great healer too.
God thats a bit serious.
Need a good funny book hows Edric 2 coming along?0 -
I presume (and hope) you don't have to pay for those PTS sessions! As with other posters, wishing you and your family all the best. PB's very own correspondent in the field!bigjohnowls said:MarqueeMark said:
Glad you can laugh about it now....bigjohnowls said:
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
Second and last PTS councelling session on Friday
Think I am nearly over it.
Wonder if they can help with the GE2015 flashbacks now.0 -
Yvette's Huff piece is remarkably feeble:
The reality is that Labour did oppose the Welfare Reform Bill yesterday; we voted for a Labour amendment that would have stopped the whole Bill altogether.
In that case, what on earth were all the fuss and arguments within Labour about? Why not vote against it if you were trying to 'stop it altogether'?
Admittedly she's not quite as feeble as Andy B, but it's a close-run thing.0 -
Hope it goes well on Friday!bigjohnowls said:MarqueeMark said:
Glad you can laugh about it now....bigjohnowls said:
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
Second and last PTS councelling session on Friday
Think I am nearly over it.
Wonder if they can help with the GE2015 flashbacks now.0 -
pass the sick bucket.Sandpit said:No Comment.
http://twitter.com/GerryAdamsSF /photo/1 corbyn and comrades
0 -
Mr. Owls, hoping it'll be out before Christmas, but we'll have to wait and see. Temple also gets re-released around that time, but those who don't want to wait can get it here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Edrics-Temple-Adventures-Edric-Book-ebook/dp/B00GCAF2CI/
Third book (larger than 1 and 2 put together) is well on the way to completion as well.0 -
They should make you pledge and oath of allegiance before getting a cup of tea. That'd stop the abstentionists enjoying subsidised refreshments!TCPoliticalBetting said:
pass the sick bucket.Sandpit said:No Comment.
http://twitter.com/GerryAdamsSF /photo/1 corbyn and comrades0 -
What solution could be delivered within say 8-10 years of a party following your ideas being in Govt?The_Apocalypse said:
I don't see it as the state subsiding their lifestyle choice - I'd argue most do not chose to be poor as a lifestyle, and nor do they have kids purely to get tax credits. Obviously people should not have kids in that situation if they know they can afford them. I see tax credits as temporary solution, as part of a wider aim to eventually getting people out of poverty. .....Disraeli said:
So, in other words, regardless of how people come to be poor, the state has to absolve people of any blame and keep paying.The_Apocalypse said:Ultimately, who is to blame for someone being poor doesn't change the situation, nor the social costs caused by poverty.
For example,
- A couple have two children, but would like four.
- They know that they can't really afford four. This would push them into "poverty".
- However, they also know the state will subsidise them with tax credits.
- They go ahead and have the two extra children, and the state has to pick up the tab.
Why should their lifestyle choice be subsidised by the state?
0 -
I also wish you, and your family the best @bigjohnowls. Glad to hear that your PTS meetings are helping, it must not be easy moving on from what happened in Tunisia.0
-
Your supporter status may require a full public renunciation of the Lib Dems as you cannot be a member of both or else. you have just made a 3 quid donation.MikeSmithson said:I've now spent my £3 and have completed my registration to vote in the LAB leadership contest.
0 -
I'd like there to be increases in the minimum wage and productivity, so workers could earn higher wages, and therefore not need to qualify for tax credits etc, and generally measures which strengthen the economy. In the long-term, the aim would be to improve social mobility through education reform, so that more young people have a range of skills to offer in the work place whether it be through university, apprenticeships, etc, and can go into well-paid jobs as soon as possible.TCPoliticalBetting said:
What solution could be delivered within say 8-10 years of a party following your ideas being in Govt?The_Apocalypse said:
I don't see it as the state subsiding their lifestyle choice - I'd argue most do not chose to be poor as a lifestyle, and nor do they have kids purely to get tax credits. Obviously people should not have kids in that situation if they know they can afford them. I see tax credits as temporary solution, as part of a wider aim to eventually getting people out of poverty. .....Disraeli said:
So, in other words, regardless of how people come to be poor, the state has to absolve people of any blame and keep paying.The_Apocalypse said:Ultimately, who is to blame for someone being poor doesn't change the situation, nor the social costs caused by poverty.
For example,
- A couple have two children, but would like four.
- They know that they can't really afford four. This would push them into "poverty".
- However, they also know the state will subsidise them with tax credits.
- They go ahead and have the two extra children, and the state has to pick up the tab.
Why should their lifestyle choice be subsidised by the state?0 -
In practically every country in the world there is a version of this saying: "Tell me the company you keep, and I'll tell you what you are."TCPoliticalBetting said:
pass the sick bucket.Sandpit said:No Comment.
http://twitter.com/GerryAdamsSF /photo/1 corbyn and comrades
Imagine what a Corbyn-led Labour party would say in response to Cameron's speeches and actions on Islamist extremism. I thought it was quite bad enough that Milliband came up with his Islamophobia nonsense. But having an opposition leader who describes Hamas as friends certainly beats that.
Being polite and charming are fine qualities of course. But worth remembering that some very bad people, some very misguided and deluded people can be polite and charming. Most fraudsters are exceptionally charming and polite, for instance.
0 -
Seconded. And impressive of Thomson to provide this.The_Apocalypse said:I also wish you, and your family the best @bigjohnowls. Glad to hear that your PTS meetings are helping, it must not be easy moving on from what happened in Tunisia.
0 -
I like Hattie as leader.She is taking the right decisions to win middle England.
Hug the Tories close on welfare.
Pretend you are anti-EU.Differentiate on the NHS,economic policy,stand by social benefits for the working employed and there`s the backbones of a working strategy to get back into contention.0 -
I salute your indefatigability! You have clearly contracted acute Rowlingitis.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, hoping it'll be out before Christmas, but we'll have to wait and see. Temple also gets re-released around that time, but those who don't want to wait can get it here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Edrics-Temple-Adventures-Edric-Book-ebook/dp/B00GCAF2CI/
Third book (larger than 1 and 2 put together) is well on the way to completion as well.0 -
I do not agree with the general attack on poor people - the so-called "genuine cases". My own beef is with those who work the system. Many people in their comfortable middle-class areas probably never really mix with this group, and assume that the number must be tiny. Well sadly, due to my own humble upbringing and (more recently) experiences working in North London I have to report that there are depressingly many who do work the system as a permanent lifestyle choice. The dominant factors are idleness and a sense of entitlement. And, yes, they do have kids to get more money from the state (and better housing).The_Apocalypse said:
I don't see it as the state subsiding their lifestyle choice - I'd argue most do not chose to be poor as a lifestyle, and nor do they have kids purely to get tax credits.
I do agree with you that this dysfunctional lifestyle contributes heavily to the social costs that you mention, and must be tackled. The state CAN help, but people really do need to help themselves and take responsibility.
I'm not convinced that the Tories are the best ones to tackle the problem, but the left need to come up with their own solution PDQ.
There has been a consensus around the redistribution of wealth since the war, but the sheer cost of welfare threatens the patience of the net contributors.0 -
Mr. Flightpath, to be fair, the first two are novellas, the third's more a 'normal' length.
I'd not complain if my bank account contracted Rowlingitis
0 -
Not in the comments section. It is a joy to read the twisted vitriol on there....felix said:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/21/labour-tory-voters
At last somebody in the Grauniad gets it! Are we moving beyond the angry stage of grief?0 -
I cheated too - so at least we know the line that Mrs B will take as Shadow whatever.Mortimer said:
Wow, if he truly believes that, Labour ought to scrap the leadership election and appoint him now. Probably the only hope they have of winning in 2020...Mortimer said:
Torn between Blair and Mandelson...Pulpstar said:
I'll have a guess at Ed Miliband.Casino_Royale said:
I didn't know, so I cheated.antifrank said:Quick quiz, no cheating. Who said this today?
"Any feasible future for the eurozone will require a much closer union in fiscal, banking and monetary policy. While the UK will thankfully stand outside those arrangements, that undoubtedly makes it harder to maintain influence and prevent the decisions of the eurozone from damaging British interests.
On top of that, increasing labour mobility is becoming ever more necessary as a means of adjustment for under-developed EU countries, just when open migration is becoming increasingly unsustainable — politically and economically — in the UK and elsewhere.
Given all those concerns, I understand the viewpoint of pessimists who cannot see an acceptable future for Britain within Europe. I also agree with Prime Minister David Cameron’s insistence on the need for reforms of the single market, labour mobility and benefits, as difficult as they will be to deliver."
I was very surprised at the answer.
Checking now
But really as dissembling goes, this one... ''While Gordon Brown, who became chancellor in 1997, undoubtedly had an open mind as to whether the tests could be met, I suspected from the outset that they would not be. '' ... takes the biscuit. Who does he think he is kidding?0 -
how does Corbyn spin that - false memories, false consciousness.TCPoliticalBetting said:
pass the sick bucket.Sandpit said:No Comment.
http://twitter.com/GerryAdamsSF /photo/1 corbyn and comrades
0 -
Some things time can never heal....bigjohnowls said:MarqueeMark said:
Glad you can laugh about it now....bigjohnowls said:
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
Second and last PTS councelling session on Friday
Think I am nearly over it.
Wonder if they can help with the GE2015 flashbacks now.0 -
Glad to hear it helped BJO. Hope you and your family can put it all behind you.bigjohnowls said:
ThanksMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, glad to hear that.
Hope your wife and daughter are also doing well.
All joking apart the PTS session provided by Thomson was really good and time is a great healer too.
God thats a bit serious.
Need a good funny book hows Edric 2 coming along?0 -
It's my daily entertainment.MarqueeMark said:
Not in the comments section. It is a joy to read the twisted vitriol on there....felix said:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/21/labour-tory-voters
At last somebody in the Grauniad gets it! Are we moving beyond the angry stage of grief?0 -
I would say that would damage his chances. But, right now, the way Labour is, I'm honestly not so sure.TCPoliticalBetting said:
pass the sick bucket.Sandpit said:No Comment.
http://twitter.com/GerryAdamsSF /photo/1 corbyn and comrades0 -
Labour do not yet even see that there is a problem. They are a long way from coming up with any sort of solution.Disraeli said:
I do not agree with the general attack on poor people - the so-called "genuine cases". My own beef is with those who work the system. Many people in their comfortable middle-class areas probably never really mix with this group, and assume that the number must be tiny. Well sadly, due to my own humble upbringing and (more recently) experiences working in North London I have to report that there are depressingly many who do work the system as a permanent lifestyle choice. The dominant factors are idleness and a sense of entitlement. And, yes, they do have kids to get more money from the state (and better housing).The_Apocalypse said:
I don't see it as the state subsiding their lifestyle choice - I'd argue most do not chose to be poor as a lifestyle, and nor do they have kids purely to get tax credits.
I do agree with you that this dysfunctional lifestyle contributes heavily to the social costs that you mention, and must be tackled. The state CAN help, but people really do need to help themselves and take responsibility.
I'm not convinced that the Tories are the best ones to tackle the problem, but the left need to come up with their own solution PDQ.
There has been a consensus around the redistribution of wealth since the war, but the sheer cost of welfare threatens the patience of the net contributors.
A successful society is one where the amount spent on welfare is relatively small because people are able to earn enough to look after themselves and their families and are not left in dire straits when bad stuff happens. Labour are giving the impression that the amount spent on welfare is a mark of how successful a society is, that the more is spent, the better. It's a form of "clientilism" - handing out goodies in return for votes - which has so disfigured other economies e.g. Greece. They look as if they are on the side of the undeserving. Unfair? Possibly. But it's an impression which will stick if they carry on as they have been.
0 -
This is currently the favourite comment from Gulonogamma:MarqueeMark said:
Not in the comments section. It is a joy to read the twisted vitriol on there....felix said:http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/21/labour-tory-voters
At last somebody in the Grauniad gets it! Are we moving beyond the angry stage of grief?
" 'hug a Tory voter'
Hug them?
I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire."0 -
Given that he invited members of the IRA into parliament shortly after their nearly-successful attempt to murder the PM and most of the government, probably not.Casino_Royale said:I would say that would damage his chances. But, right now, the way Labour is, I'm honestly not so sure.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19841217&id=iP49AAAAIBAJ&sjid=Y0kMAAAAIBAJ&pg=3074,3464356&hl=en0 -
Trouble is: Labour activists HATE that policy with a vengeance .And say so ..Just read Labourlist. They are frothing at the mouth and turning to vote for that electable leader to be Jermey Corbyn...SMukesh said:I like Hattie as leader.She is taking the right decisions to win middle England.
Hug the Tories close on welfare.
Pretend you are anti-EU.Differentiate on the NHS,economic policy,stand by social benefits for the working employed and there`s the backbones of a working strategy to get back into contention.
What you have written would seriously drive them up the wall.
There are two adjectives of utter disdain hate for activists' enemies in the Labour Party: the first is of course "Tory", the second - and worse is "Blairite". HH's policy is seen as "Blairite".
She's an enemy of the workers...
0 -
Do the Liberal Democrats really think its credible to paint themselves as the left-wing anti-austerity opposition to the Conservatives when they have just been part of a centre-right, austerity government with the Conservatives for five years?0
-
Mr. JEO, worked well in the General Election.
Well, that's unfair. They tried to portray themselves as equi-distant, which was not necessarily a successful strategy.0 -
That could apply to most parties. But do you have specific steps that will create those changes? Labour's 13 years in Govt made most of those things worse compared to the average of other OECD countries.The_Apocalypse said:
I'd like there to be increases in the minimum wage and productivity, so workers could earn higher wages, and therefore not need to qualify for tax credits etc, and generally measures which strengthen the economy. In the long-term, the aim would be to improve social mobility through education reform, so that more young people have a range of skills to offer in the work place whether it be through university, apprenticeships, etc, and can go into well-paid jobs as soon as possible.TCPoliticalBetting said:
What solution could be delivered within say 8-10 years of a party following your ideas being in Govt?The_Apocalypse said:
I don't see it as the state subsiding their lifestyle choice - I'd argue most do not chose to be poor as a lifestyle, and nor do they have kids purely to get tax credits. Obviously people should not have kids in that situation if they know they can afford them. I see tax credits as temporary solution, as part of a wider aim to eventually getting people out of poverty. .....Disraeli said:
So, in other words, regardless of how people come to be poor, the state has to absolve people of any blame and keep paying.The_Apocalypse said:Ultimately, who is to blame for someone being poor doesn't change the situation, nor the social costs caused by poverty.
For example,
- A couple have two children, but would like four.
- They know that they can't really afford four. This would push them into "poverty".
- However, they also know the state will subsidise them with tax credits.
- They go ahead and have the two extra children, and the state has to pick up the tab.
Why should their lifestyle choice be subsidised by the state?0 -
Empathise with Labour voters for a second and see that support Corbyn is not really anything to do with his personality or electability, and all to do with not being thrown under the bus in the pursuit of 10 per cent of voters who, in some important ways, don't share the values of the 31 per cent who voted Labour last time.0
-
Well he invited IRA representatives to the Commons a fortnight after the Brighton bombing.dr_spyn said:
how does Corbyn spin that - false memories, false consciousness.TCPoliticalBetting said:
pass the sick bucket.Sandpit said:No Comment.
http://twitter.com/GerryAdamsSF /photo/1 corbyn and comrades
The Labour party judged him fit to remain as a member.
0 -
That was known but wasn't this photo taken today though? Or is it older?Richard_Nabavi said:
Given that he invited members of the IRA into parliament shortly after their nearly-successful attempt to murder the PM and most of the government, probably not.Casino_Royale said:I would say that would damage his chances. But, right now, the way Labour is, I'm honestly not so sure.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19841217&id=iP49AAAAIBAJ&sjid=Y0kMAAAAIBAJ&pg=3074,3464356&hl=en
If so, it's hard not to link with some sort of point he's making during a live leadership contest.
0 -
I can't remember the question, but the answer is "More Europe" (natch)
https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/6235594009727877130 -
Well, they tried pretty hard to do both whilst in the coalition as well. They will mostly be ignored now. We are no longer even at the laugh at you stage.JEO said:Do the Liberal Democrats really think its credible to paint themselves as the left-wing anti-austerity opposition to the Conservatives when they have just been part of a centre-right, austerity government with the Conservatives for five years?
I think Farron should forget making statements with parliamentary politics and focus on grassroots activism on liberal issues and pavement politics.0 -
Looks like today, so, yes, that's an interesting point.Casino_Royale said:If so, it's hard not to link with some sort of point he's making during a live leadership contest.
0 -
Harman messed things up.
She should have allowed a free vote as there is no leader to take critical decisions, instead she chose the worst of all options of making the party's line "abstention".
Now those outside Labour think that Labour don't have anything to say, and those inside Labour are hopping mad at their own party's decision.
It's unfortunate that Labour has Harriet Harman as it's temporary leader, instead of uniting the party she has managed to divide it and annoy everyone, the Tories know it and they are exploiting Harman's weakness.0 -
It will be quite an achievement as some eurozone members don't have any sovereignty left to give up.Disraeli said:I can't remember the question, but the answer is "More Europe" (natch)
https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/6235594009727877130 -
Of course - that's the answer to every question.Disraeli said:I can't remember the question, but the answer is "More Europe" (natch)
https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/623559400972787713
Good luck getting the support of the people of Europe though, or are these things now done without asking them?0 -
The Speaker by convention would vote in such a way as to keep the question open - which is not necessarily for the Government.felix said:On topic btw - surely on the basis of that poster there'd have been a tie and the speaker has to cast his vote for the govt. LDs - still getting it wrong?
0 -
But wouldn't that free vote have exposed Labour's divisions in the cold light of day?Speedy said:Harman messed things up.
She should have allowed a free vote as there is no leader to take critical decisions, instead she chose the worst of all options of making the party's line "abstention".
Now those outside Labour think that Labour don't have anything to say, and those inside Labour are hopping mad at their own party's decision.
It's unfortunate that Labour has Harriet Harman as it's temporary leader, instead of uniting the party she has managed to divide it and annoy everyone, the Tories know it and they are exploiting Harman's weakness.
I think the best thing to have done for them would be to make some noises about agreeing with the need to control spending and welfare, but not these particular proposals, explained why, made their own, moan about not being listened to or consulted by the government, rushing stuff through etc. and then used that as a whipped reason to vote against.
Hypocritical but probably better politics for them right now.0 -
. I don’t accept the line that if an election programme is rejected at one election that the party concerned must change its policies to have any chance of winning in the future. Circumstances do change including the opinion taken by the electorate on particular policies. I feel pretty sure that the failed 1992 Labour manifesto would have been accepted by the electorate in 1997. With hindsight there was no need to change because by 1997 the electorate was much more firmly in an anti-Tory mood and Labour would have won convincingly on its 1992 programme. Michael Foot would have won in 1997.0
-
Thanks RobRobD said:
I presume (and hope) you don't have to pay for those PTS sessions! As with other posters, wishing you and your family all the best. PB's very own correspondent in the field!bigjohnowls said:MarqueeMark said:
Glad you can laugh about it now....bigjohnowls said:
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
Second and last PTS councelling session on Friday
Think I am nearly over it.
Wonder if they can help with the GE2015 flashbacks now.
No Thomson pick up the bill.
They have been great TBH0 -
Thanks Sunil. I am sure it will the 3 of us are so much better than we were at the first session.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Hope it goes well on Friday!bigjohnowls said:MarqueeMark said:
Glad you can laugh about it now....bigjohnowls said:
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
Second and last PTS councelling session on Friday
Think I am nearly over it.
Wonder if they can help with the GE2015 flashbacks now.0 -
On the subject of decreasing the national debt, one obvious contribution is for those who received degrees prior to tuition fees, prior to the top-up fees of 2004 and prior to the trebling of fees in the last Parliament (ie, everyone who got a degree prior to the current system) to be charged a few grand for it.
In the past, I'd have opposed such an idea as changing the cost retrospectively is against the philosophy of allowing people to weigh up the value of a degree against it's cost, but as that's obviously no longer a valid philosophy, I trust that the Government will be instituting such.0 -
The_Apocalypse said:
I also wish you, and your family the best @bigjohnowls. Glad to hear that your PTS meetings are helping, it must not be easy moving on from what happened in Tunisia.
Cyclefree said:
Seconded. And impressive of Thomson to provide this.The_Apocalypse said:I also wish you, and your family the best @bigjohnowls. Glad to hear that your PTS meetings are helping, it must not be easy moving on from what happened in Tunisia.
Thanks everone hope ive not missed anyone.Casino_Royale said:
Glad to hear it helped BJO. Hope you and your family can put it all behind you.bigjohnowls said:
ThanksMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, glad to hear that.
Hope your wife and daughter are also doing well.
All joking apart the PTS session provided by Thomson was really good and time is a great healer too.
God thats a bit serious.
Need a good funny book hows Edric 2 coming along?
Will always be grateful for PBers help on that fateful Friday0 -
I think the LibDems are frankly astonished (and gratified) that the Labour Party is behaving as it is. The public hate nothing more than a split party. The Conservative Party is not split. The Labour Party appears astonishingly split, and increasingly willing to elect someone utterly unelectable.JEO said:Do the Liberal Democrats really think its credible to paint themselves as the left-wing anti-austerity opposition to the Conservatives when they have just been part of a centre-right, austerity government with the Conservatives for five years?
Harman's (sensible) veer to the right is going to bolster Corbyn's vote. As incredible as it sounds, he's highly likely to be in the last two. He might even - although I wouldn't bet on it, ho hum - win.
But even if Burnham wins, it'll be against Corbyn with 40% of the final round votes. The Labour Party, after veering right under Harman, will wither turn sharply left to mollify the left wing, or will become a party - as it was in the late 70s and before the Alliance - that is completely split on the issues of the day.
The Times was right: Farron is a student union politician. But when the other left wing party seems stuck in the kindergarden, that might just be enough.0 -
Good to hear, and well done to Thompsonbigjohnowls said:
Thanks RobRobD said:
I presume (and hope) you don't have to pay for those PTS sessions! As with other posters, wishing you and your family all the best. PB's very own correspondent in the field!bigjohnowls said:MarqueeMark said:
Glad you can laugh about it now....bigjohnowls said:
DBTA Die By Tunisian Attack!!!!!!Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Owls, those who live by the acronym DBTA.
Second and last PTS councelling session on Friday
Think I am nearly over it.
Wonder if they can help with the GE2015 flashbacks now.
No Thomson pick up the bill.
They have been great TBH 0 -
I would not disagree with that - particularly as those who graduated decades ago ended up with a degree much more valuable than those now graduating. What would OAP graduates say though? Why not reduce the Personal Allowance of earlier graduates by -say - £1000 per annum?Andy_Cooke said:On the subject of decreasing the national debt, one obvious contribution is for those who received degrees prior to tuition fees, prior to the top-up fees of 2004 and prior to the trebling of fees in the last Parliament (ie, everyone who got a degree prior to the current system) to be charged a few grand for it.
In the past, I'd have opposed such an idea as changing the cost retrospectively is against the philosophy of allowing people to weigh up the value of a degree against it's cost, but as that's obviously no longer a valid philosophy, I trust that the Government will be instituting such.0 -
This is exactly the issue that I have been banging on about for the last two years.Disraeli said:I can't remember the question, but the answer is "More Europe" (natch)
https://twitter.com/DanHannanMEP/status/623559400972787713
The Eurozone is going to look more and more like a country. There will be debt mutualisation. There will be a requirement for national budgets to be approved by a "committee of the finance ministers". There will be more and more pooling of sovereignty.
And that's going to make like very difficult, and quite likely intolerable, for those EU members who are not Eurozone members.
I think the non Eurozone members of the EU - us, the Swedes, the Danes, a few Eastern European countries - will need to choose between Eurozone and EFTA/EEA. We will choose EFTA/EEA, the Eastern Europeans will choose the Eurozone. I suspect Denmark will choose the Eurozone too, and Sweden will choose EFTA/EEA, but that's another story.0 -
new thread
0 -
It would apply to most parties? I don't really agree. But then I don't believe any of the parties have adequate solutions to solving poverty. As for Labour in the last 13 years, well I'm a pretty big critic of Labour's record in government.TCPoliticalBetting said:
That could apply to most parties. But do you have specific steps that will create those changes? Labour's 13 years in Govt made most of those things worse compared to the average of other OECD countries.The_Apocalypse said:
I'd like there to be increases in the minimum wage and productivity, so workers could earn higher wages, and therefore not need to qualify for tax credits etc, and generally measures which strengthen the economy. In the long-term, the aim would be to improve social mobility through education reform, so that more young people have a range of skills to offer in the work place whether it be through university, apprenticeships, etc, and can go into well-paid jobs as soon as possible.TCPoliticalBetting said:
What solution could be delivered within say 8-10 years of a party following your ideas being in Govt?The_Apocalypse said:
I don't see it as the state subsiding their lifestyle choice - I'd argue most do not chose to be poor as a lifestyle, and nor do they have kids purely to get tax credits. Obviously people should not have kids in that situation if they know they can afford them. I see tax credits as temporary solution, as part of a wider aim to eventually getting people out of poverty. .....Disraeli said:
So, in other words, regardless of how people come to be poor, the state has to absolve people of any blame and keep paying.The_Apocalypse said:Ultimately, who is to blame for someone being poor doesn't change the situation, nor the social costs caused by poverty.
For example,
- A couple have two children, but would like four.
- They know that they can't really afford four. This would push them into "poverty".
- However, they also know the state will subsidise them with tax credits.
- They go ahead and have the two extra children, and the state has to pick up the tab.
Why should their lifestyle choice be subsidised by the state?0 -
@BJO - Will always be grateful for PBers help on that fateful Friday
You’re a Gent – It was quite a remarkable day to see so many rallying to assist where they could. - V glad to hear you and your family BJO have got over the worst of it and things are ‘almost’ back to normal.0 -
'Harman's (sensible) veer to the right is going to bolster Corbyn's vote. As incredible as it sounds, he's highly likely to be in the last two. He might even - although I wouldn't bet on it, ho hum - win'
I disagree that it was a sensible thing for Harman to have done - and if Corbyn were to win - unlikely I think- she would be rightly blamed for the backlash caused that led to such a result.She has shown lack of political insight here.As an Acting Leader she simply lacked the authority for such a decision and has ended up creating difficulties for the new Leader. It might have been a bit different if she was running to be confirmed in the role herself..0 -
With respect, that's an absurd idea.Andy_Cooke said:On the subject of decreasing the national debt, one obvious contribution is for those who received degrees prior to tuition fees, prior to the top-up fees of 2004 and prior to the trebling of fees in the last Parliament (ie, everyone who got a degree prior to the current system) to be charged a few grand for it.
In the past, I'd have opposed such an idea as changing the cost retrospectively is against the philosophy of allowing people to weigh up the value of a degree against it's cost, but as that's obviously no longer a valid philosophy, I trust that the Government will be instituting such.0 -
Why?Casino_Royale said:
With respect, that's an absurd idea.Andy_Cooke said:On the subject of decreasing the national debt, one obvious contribution is for those who received degrees prior to tuition fees, prior to the top-up fees of 2004 and prior to the trebling of fees in the last Parliament (ie, everyone who got a degree prior to the current system) to be charged a few grand for it.
In the past, I'd have opposed such an idea as changing the cost retrospectively is against the philosophy of allowing people to weigh up the value of a degree against it's cost, but as that's obviously no longer a valid philosophy, I trust that the Government will be instituting such.
I'd have agreed before, but why is it fair to rule in 2015 to retrospectively increase the cost by 6k for a 3 year degree on those who started in 2013 yet not to retrospectively increase it for those who started in 2012? Or 2002? Or 1992?
0 -
The language of cost surrounding university study is misleading.
The whole thing is effectively a grant until someone earns £21,000 per annum and then a graduate earnings tax of 9% hits.
If they abolished the language of loans and adopted the tax, perhaps abolishing the write off age and reducing the rate to, say, 5% , then the whole thing might be viewed differently.
There is a legitimate debate to be had about the oldies getting freebies and imposing costs on the young.
Perhaps final salary, public sector pensions should be reassessed on career average terms for the children of post war Britain as well?0 -
The young have a lifetime of earnings and opportunity in front of them. The only reason they got there was thanks to the oldies and the sacrifices they made throughout their lives. Now you are saying the young should steal their retirement as well? Well they and anyone who suggests it can get stuffed. One word sums up the young - ungrateful.chestnut said:The language of cost surrounding university study is misleading.
The whole thing is effectively a grant until someone earns £21,000 per annum and then a graduate earnings tax of 9% hits.
If they abolished the language of loans and adopted the tax, perhaps abolishing the write off age and reducing the rate to, say, 5% , then the whole thing might be viewed differently.
There is a legitimate debate to be had about the oldies getting freebies and imposing costs on the young.
Perhaps final salary, public sector pensions should be reassessed on career average terms for the children of post war Britain as well?0 -
There is a word in the phrase 'deputy leader' you seem to be missing. 'leader'.justin124 said:'Harman's (sensible) veer to the right is going to bolster Corbyn's vote. As incredible as it sounds, he's highly likely to be in the last two. He might even - although I wouldn't bet on it, ho hum - win'
I disagree that it was a sensible thing for Harman to have done - and if Corbyn were to win - unlikely I think- she would be rightly blamed for the backlash caused that led to such a result.She has shown lack of political insight here.As an Acting Leader she simply lacked the authority for such a decision and has ended up creating difficulties for the new Leader. It might have been a bit different if she was running to be confirmed in the role herself..
If the job description is so pointless why do Labour have one? Why have one who is not naturally seen as second in line - ie 'deputy'.
If in a sane electoral system, rather than the fruit loop one that Labour have, Uncle Tom Cobley won, and Corbyn came second then Corbyn would have to be regarded as deputy with suitable authorities in the Party and in any Government.
Of course in a sane election system Harman might well not be there in the first place and Corbyn might easily have been superseded by a more photogenic choice from the left.
0
