What no jeremy cobyn thread?

Phil V said:
You could have just answered my question (why would I expect that though?)
Click to expand...
I saved time, so you do not having to ask a second question of how the unions had screwed me and my workmates over.
 
nilagin said:
It's just the impression he gives me from his so far left views (he couldn't get any further left of he'd be off the edge of the planet) He's likely to want to give more control back to unions which will destroy any industry this country has left. Everything he stands for will destroy everything this country has achieved in the last few years, and all the money he needs to destroy it will come out of our pockets bringing everyone down to the same level ( don't be fooled, he'll still be doing very nicely whilst the rest of us are being crippled by taxes) instead of attempting to bring people up.
Interesting to see several Labour front benchers have already stood down. Also he has just made a substantial sum having his campaign T-Shirts made abroad at 49p/hr and sold for over £10. I wonder why he didn't employ some hard up people from his own constituency to do that.
Click to expand...

I think you will find it was a Conservative government that destroyed British industry, they managed to trash the coal industry, the steel industry, get rid of apprenticeships (something we are now suffering quite badly for), privatised all our utilities that are now owned by foriegn companies and governments and generally offer the customer a pretty s***ty deal, the trade unions were supporting and protecting the workforce, but then again I doubt it very much if you enjoy annual leave or sick pay?
 
dejongj said:
I do not recognise that as achievements by unions at all. Paid holidays just means that your employers will keep the money for your leave in their pocket and gain the interest and investment opportunities. A bit like how some employers help "you" budget by providing a thirteenth month.

A safe place to work is in the interest of the employers as well. In many ways it has created a whole industry around it.

Paid sick leave, again many a company already provided that. A better system should be created where short term illness is not covered in my opinion.

Burning out your staff is not a good idea for many companies, nor is constraining them with a possibility to earn.

So no, I would credit the unions with that at all. Protection for the few loose canons which is interference with the free market and thus letting corporations survive which otherwise wouldn't have.

In my opinion of course.
Click to expand...
Except that's not true, without unions, employers did none of those things voluntarily (right or wrong, most employers don't see it to be in their interest), and look how we are tumbling back to a Victorian workplace now unions no longer have any power.

There are of course some great employers - Richard Branson's oft quoted 'we don't put our customers first, we put our staff first and great customer service follows'. But clearly he's in a minority - with huge companies like Tesco and Group 4 who will do anything possible to get free and cheap labour and have appalling employee relations.
 
nilagin said:
I saved time, so you do not having to ask a second question of how the unions had screwed me and my workmates over.
Click to expand...
But you failed to answer my question as usual.
 
nilagin said:
No I didn't none of what I listed is trivial other than the baked beans, which you hoped it would be.
Click to expand...


Just about everything you post is rather trivial fella.
 
nilagin said:
No I didn't none of what I listed is trivial other than the baked beans, which you hoped it would be.
Click to expand...
It is trivial though (no matter what you feel).

I was once threatened by a large black guy in a pub in Sheffield - does that make all black people bad, all pubs bad, all people from Sheffield bad? Does it mean we can wipe out all the great things that Sheffield has given the world? or black people, or northerners, or pubs? I'd hope you'd agree that it doesn't, it was a life changing moment for me, but a huge irrelevance in the grand scheme of things.
 
rjbell said:
How can you say that with such conviction. Did you not see the crowds turning out for him and the same for Bernie in the US. Its stirring up in many countries.
Click to expand...

I say it because it is true.
For three pounds I could have had a vote . But as we have seen those that took up the offer were either not traditional labour supporters of any sort, or those who still believe in a marxist philosophy or the extreemist fringe.
The labour party has been hung up by their misguided electorial system.

It is true that Labour politicians have lost their political way and have no idea how to get back on track.
But the social problems caused by right wing politics are still doing their worst and need countering, but not by going back to neomarxism.
and union excess.
 
mex said:
I think you will find it was a Conservative government that destroyed British industry, they managed to trash the coal industry, the steel industry, get rid of apprenticeships (something we are now suffering quite badly for), privatised all our utilities that are now owned by foriegn companies and governments and generally offer the customer a pretty s***ty deal, the trade unions were supporting and protecting the workforce, but then again I doubt it very much if you enjoy annual leave or sick pay?
Click to expand...
Labour closed more coal mines, tories just finished it. Up until the last few years, my employer took on more apprentices under Tory governments than they did under Labour. Because of Labour and the unions attitudes, my employer drastically reduced it's workforce and plants in the UK, back in 1968 the company employed nearly 60,000 people in the UK in around 27 locations, Labour tried to flex it's muscles and stop any wage rises over 5%, but the workers wouldn't have it, and the company agreed to pay more. Labour tried to make sanctions against the company but realised they couldn't. In 1979 the company employed around 45000 people, but today the company employs around 5000 people in around 7 locations in the UK, whilst the company has never made an enforced redundancy in all the 36yrs I've worked there, the workforce has systematically reduced. Only one closure has occurred during a tory government and that was two years ago with the "loss" of 1000 jobs, again no enforced redundancies, but that was more a case of the companies struggles to return to profit in Europe rather than down to actions of a government or unions.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
I say it because it is true.
For three pounds I could have had a vote . But as we have seen those that took up the offer were either not traditional labour supporters of any sort, or those who still believe in a marxist philosophy or the extreemist fringe.
The labour party has been hung up by their misguided electorial system.

It is true that Labour politicians have lost their political way and have no idea how to get back on track.
But the social problems caused by right wing politics are still doing their worst and need countering, but not by going back to neomarxism.
and union excess.
Click to expand...
Well its not truth or fact its an opinion.

You could argue the people who voted are the real traditional labour voter. The party was then highjacked by new labour.
 
Last edited:
dejongj said:
I don't think Cameron as a PM is a bad one. I would have preferred someone strong like the late Lady Thatcher, but can't think of anyone on the current political scene that is capable like her.

Personally I'm really not happy with the Tory government, their summer budget will cost me a 15% tax increase next year. And in the a more variable element will limit me to a specific geographical area, estimated to be another 20% of 10% of my income affected.

So far no way around it, thus busy hatching plans to increase income streams and if not then non essential services like gardener, dog hotel, cleaner, new cars etc will have to be put on halt. So increasing my tax will affect others. The Tories don't get that, and I wonder whether Corbyn will get that.
Click to expand...

Thatcher was an opinionated bully, at war with ever one including members of her own party.
who eventually did the honerable thing and sacked her.
 
rjbell said:
Well its not truth or fact its an opinion.

You could argue the people who voted are the real traditional labour voter. The party was then highjacked by new labour.
Click to expand...

There never has been a government of any party who has not commanded the middle ground.
 
Phil V said:
It is trivial though (no matter what you feel).

I was once threatened by a large black guy in a pub in Sheffield - does that make all black people bad, all pubs bad, all people from Sheffield bad? Does it mean we can wipe out all the great things that Sheffield has given the world? or black people, or northerners, or pubs? I'd hope you'd agree that it doesn't, it was a life changing moment for me, but a huge irrelevance in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...
So your one experience (which I might add is very trivial) is equal to my 36yrs of many union experiences, I don't think so. Every single instance I have mentioned plus many more, the unions instant response has been to want to call a strike. The reason that Ford stopped producing cars in the UK in 2002 was purely down to the fact that they were fed up with the militancy and actions of the unions and how the unions oppressed the workers. Whenever there was a wage claim, the union strong hold would always turn it down no matter how reasonable the offer was and they would be calling for a strike, of which they got many. Fortunately the way votes were counted they lost that strangle hold on the rest of the Dagenham Estate. That didn't stop their militancy from disrupting production when ever they could for pathetic reasons like the price of baked beans. or an official Tea taster not getting to taste the tea first before it was served and sold from a tea urn.
Have you watched Made in Dagenham, how the union and Wilson didn't want to represent the women sewing machinists. Ford have done more since then to rectify their mistakes than unions have in their treatment of the workers.
 
rjbell said:
Well its not truth or fact its an opinion.

You could argue the people who voted are the real traditional labour voter. The party was then highjacked by new labour.
Click to expand...

No government has ever been formed from the votes of party members alone. Today that membership for all parties is at an all time low.
All governments have always needed to win the middle ground.
Both traditional labour and the right wing tories are devisiveand look only to their own.
 
rjbell said:
Centre ground has moved considerable. I do not consider his policies being far left Marxism
Click to expand...

That is of course the problem.... many in his own party, do, as do most of the rest of us.
 
Interesting that the labour party membership has increased some 14000 since Corbyn became leader only 24 hours ago, tells a tale?
 
I'm struggling to come up with a sensible reason why the prime minister has called Corbyn a threat to national security. That's extremely dangerous language for a politician to use.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
That is of course the problem.... many in his own party, do, as do most of the rest of us.
Click to expand...
That just shows how far they've all lurched to the right.

As we've discussed earlier in the thread. You just have to look at the majority of the developed world and their state ownership and tax rates to see its pretty normal ideas not crazy loony left communism.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
It's hilarious how the unthinking have allowed the billionnaire owned media to tell them how unions are a force for evil.

Lets look at industry, socialism and employee relations.

During the early 20th century, industry was owned by the few, and there was no social mobility, the Labour movement and Unions fought for workers rights, they gave us weekends, bank holidays, decent wages and health and safety laws that saved millions of lives and debilitating illnesses and injuries, and the gap between rich and poor shrunk - with both conservative and labour governments support.

From the 80's, we have dismantled the unions, and who'd have thought it, wages have shrunk, working conditions have worsened, there's less social mobility and the gap between rich and poor is at an all time high - again overseen by both Labour and Tory governments. If anyone thinks that's OK, or in some way 'inevitable' who is feeding them that b******t? No surprise it's the people who are benefiting most from cheap labour and a tax system that favours anyone who can buy their own form of justice.
Click to expand...

I think thats a simplistic view. In the 19th century workers got more rights and improvements, and that was without unions and Labour. Yes, unions did some great stuff, some of this would have happened naturally but it was speeded up with them and we are all grateful for that. However, the 70s saw it go too far, they were too powerful and wrecked the county. Hence why they needed more controls in the 80s. Look at how greedy the tube drivers are in London - they are actually making a stronger case for driverless trains as they don't strike! I don't think there is less social mobility - if you have the drive and desire you can achieve anything these days... Maybe the gap between rich and poor is more but the poor are far better off than they used to be.
 
rjbell said:
Well as we've discussed earlier in the thread. You just have to look at the majority of the developed world and their state ownership and tax rates to see its pretty normal ideas not crazy loony left communism.
Click to expand...
Indeed - and the fact that in a recent poll over 60% of us think that state owned utilities is actually a good idea. That's hardly far left. The truth is that our government (the last 30+ years) is in the pockets of what amounts to a very small number of extremely rich people, and they are happy to peddle what is an extremely right wing economic policy whilst repeating ad infinitum that they care about the 'average' person. It's becoming increasingly obvious that this is just a lie (they are governing for the few) and that a change is due. Whilst the last Labour administration nodded towards some to some left wing policies, the general rule was more of the same.
 
norters said:
I'm struggling to come up with a sensible reason why the prime minister has called Corbyn a threat to national security. That's extremely dangerous language for a politician to use.
Click to expand...
Dangerous how? Corbyn wants to do away with nuclear armament. Corbyn wants to sit down and talk peace with ISIS. If peace was on the agenda without ISIS wanting to annihilate everyone they see as threat to their beliefs I'm sure people wouldn't be wanting to escape to Europe where they hope they will be safe from ISIS.
Care to come up with a sensible reason how he wouldn't be a threat to national security.
 
Phil V said:
Except that's not true, without unions, employers did none of those things voluntarily (right or wrong, most employers don't see it to be in their interest), and look how we are tumbling back to a Victorian workplace now unions no longer have any power.

There are of course some great employers - Richard Branson's oft quoted 'we don't put our customers first, we put our staff first and great customer service follows'. But clearly he's in a minority - with huge companies like Tesco and Group 4 who will do anything possible to get free and cheap labour and have appalling employee relations.
Click to expand...
Let the free market work and those great employees will refuse to work there. Simples.
 
norters said:
Pretty sure Corbyn ran his while campaign on the premiseof zero personal attacks. Something Cameron's lot could take a leaf out of.
Click to expand...
And labour to their own candidates ;)
 
rjbell said:
That just shows how far they've all lurched to the right.

As we've discussed earlier in the thread. You just have to look at the majority of the developed world and their state ownership and tax rates to see its pretty normal ideas not crazy loony left communism.
Click to expand...

What tax rates are you talking about? I don't know what other countries are, I now the likes of sweden are high but how does Canada, Australia, US, Germany compare? What other taxes are there, we get taxed all the time on everything.

I actually quite like the idea of state ownership of many things, like utilities, although the inefficiency and ineptness probably killed that idea off. Privatisation drives competition and so drives service, if there was a way of nationalising some things but ensuring strict KPIs were in place and people were accountable for them would be a good thing.
 
cambsno said:
I think thats a simplistic view. In the 19th century workers got more rights and improvements, and that was without unions and Labour. Yes, unions did some great stuff, some of this would have happened naturally but it was speeded up with them and we are all grateful for that. However, the 70s saw it go too far, they were too powerful and wrecked the county. Hence why they needed more controls in the 80s. Look at how greedy the tube drivers are in London - they are actually making a stronger case for driverless trains as they don't strike! I don't think there is less social mobility - if you have the drive and desire you can achieve anything these days... Maybe the gap between rich and poor is more but the poor are far better off than they used to be.
Click to expand...
I do agree about the 70's but that doesn't excuse what has followed, the poor aren't 'better off' than they were 20 years ago, what has happened is some things globally have become very cheap due to technology. This gives the impression of people being surrounded by 'luxury goods', but it's nonsense. Fir what it cost to have a TV, games console and video in the mid 80's you can buy 2 TV's a DVD player, a laptop, a PS4 and a tablet. Food and utilities take up more of our income than it did in the 80's, housing massively more.
 
Phil V said:
Indeed - and the fact that in a recent poll over 60% of us think that state owned utilities is actually a good idea.
Click to expand...
I didn't get to vote on that, so 60% of who exactly did vote in favour?
 
dejongj said:
Let the free market work and those great employees will refuse to work there. Simples.
Click to expand...
Which of course would happen. Because given the choice between a crap employer and starving is a simple choice.
 
cambsno said:
I think thats a simplistic view. In the 19th century workers got more rights and improvements, and that was without unions and Labour. Yes, unions did some great stuff, some of this would have happened naturally but it was speeded up with them and we are all grateful for that. However, the 70s saw it go too far, they were too powerful and wrecked the county. Hence why they needed more controls in the 80s. Look at how greedy the tube drivers are in London - they are actually making a stronger case for driverless trains as they don't strike! I don't think there is less social mobility - if you have the drive and desire you can achieve anything these days... Maybe the gap between rich and poor is more but the poor are far better off than they used to be.
Click to expand...
Still hasn't happened naturally for the US. Some of the lowest paid, the least holiday time, no sick pay or maternity.
 
Last edited:
nilagin said:
Dangerous how? Corbyn wants to do away with nuclear armament. Corbyn wants to sit down and talk peace with ISIS. If peace was on the agenda without ISIS wanting to annihilate everyone they see as threat to their beliefs I'm sure people wouldn't be wanting to escape to Europe where they hope they will be safe from ISIS.
Care to come up with a sensible reason how he wouldn't be a threat to national security.
Click to expand...

We don't need nuclear weapons. Nobody does.

It's sensible.
 
Phil V said:
It was a poll run last year - of course you didn't get to 'vote' :LOL:
Click to expand...
I didn't mean vote literally. So who and where exactly were these people that were poled, how many and was it a fair cross section of the voting public? Better?
 
cambsno said:
What tax rates are you talking about? I don't know what other countries are, I now the likes of sweden are high but how does Canada, Australia, US, Germany compare? What other taxes are there, we get taxed all the time on everything.

I actually quite like the idea of state ownership of many things, like utilities, although the inefficiency and ineptness probably killed that idea off. Privatisation drives competition and so drives service, if there was a way of nationalising some things but ensuring strict KPIs were in place and people were accountable for them would be a good thing.
Click to expand...
German has the 50% income tax rate on high earners as you mentioned them. They also have rental control and huge state ownership. Hardly what you would call a loonie left country.
 
Last edited:
Where is the money going to come from to reprivatize the Railways and Utilities? How does Corbyn propose to make them more cost effective than anyone did in the past?
 
nilagin said:
I didn't mean vote literally. So who and where exactly were these people that were poled, how many and was it a fair cross section of the voting public? Better?
Click to expand...
the poll
it's polled, I don't normally pick up on spelling errors on the internet - but when someone is pretending to be so superior and their grasp of their own language is so weak, it seems only fair (just like on all those badly spelled racist internet memes, people telling me I'm stupid because I don't understand how dangerous foriners are.


(there's not a chance that...... is there?)
 
nilagin said:
Where is the money going to come from to reprivatize the Railways and Utilities? How does Corbyn propose to make them more cost effective than anyone did in the past?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't cost anything to take the railways back into public ownership (reprivatize? - really? are you doing this on purpose?)
The contracts are temporary and come to an end - when they do, we could choose not to re tender them.

The utilities? that would come back into the exchequer from the customers (how do you think the private companies bought them?)
 
nilagin said:
Dangerous how? Corbyn wants to do away with nuclear armament. Corbyn wants to sit down and talk peace with ISIS. If peace was on the agenda without ISIS wanting to annihilate everyone they see as threat to their beliefs I'm sure people wouldn't be wanting to escape to Europe where they hope they will be safe from ISIS.
Care to come up with a sensible reason how he wouldn't be a threat to national security.
Click to expand...

You seem to have neglected the bit that tells a different story, Labour did not cut the defence budget nor reduce the number of armed forces,neither did they neglect repairing the fleet and aircraft in the Med bases and elsewhere, they did not introduce G4S to replace the police force and neither did Labour cut police numbers..... however JC is a threat to national security? nah, I think DC is a greater threat mate.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top