Do they not get that if people earn more, people will then spend more? That should eventually offset any loss in profits that most businesses make. Also why not change your business strategy, use some initiative, think of new products or services. God forbid these companies actually try to utilise some business acumen and not just answer their problems with "Sack people, raise prices". So now we have lots of jobless people and the price of all services and products has increased meaning people cannot spend and businesses suffer more. good move, **** nuts.
Comes to something when Bernard Bastard Ingham even rails against it: http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news...ptable-facets-of-today-s-capitalism-1-7439236
Here's what today's Woodrow Wyatt makes of it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...-no-mistake-Labour-is-at-war-with-itself.html
Wait until the northern based Tories watch their party's future leader Big Bad Boris pledge the country's entire economy to London and the Home Counties and give them jack **** to fuel their "Northern Powerhouse " .
Agree with your last paragraph but the rest... nah it's lazy. I mean, you wrote that first paragraph like nobody's ever heard this before. It's tired and cliched. There are plenty of examples in history where the desire (or need) for real change has led to power. From simple examples such as Kennedy, Thatcher and Clinton to more complexed ones such as Mandela, the end of the Soviet Union to the Arab Spring. Now I'm not proposing the more extreme examples such as a revolution, but if you offer something real, something that appeals to ppl's aspirations and ideals, they will vote for you. Fcking hell, even Blair himself only came to power bcos ppl wanted change Had Smith not died, Smith would have won the 1997 election comfortably while staying true to Labour core values. The worst legacy of Blair is that ppl like yourself believe you need to sell your principles and present yourself like a used car salesman to earn power in this country. "Labour lite" vs Tory vs Libdem is democracy dead and buried in the fcking water. Right now there's a media witch hunt against Corbyn. He's upsetting the apple cart and most of the haters are painting him to be something he aint. On one side you have all right wing Labour haters chatting **** about him as some left wing communist, and on the other you have the "Labour lite" sell-outs waging a smear campaign against him. The truth of what he might just deliver - your last paragraph - is actually being lost in all the spin and bullshit.
Not sure I appreciate the patronising tone pal, save it for one of your fifteen year old pupils, as I wasn't asking for a ****ing critique on my opinion Corbyn is unelectable, it's a simple fact, the Tories are praying that Labour choose him as their next leader, that should tell you all you need to know.
Unfortunately I agree. If he is elected Labour will have a small hardcore of vociferous voters, but will never get any support from the middle ground which is what is required to win an election in this country. There will always be a hardcore support for both Labour and the Tories, but 50% of the voters can be swayed for either party depending on what is happening at election time.
Exactly. This bullshit notion that an old school Labour dinosaur like Corbyn could win an election in the UK of 2019 is ****ing laughable in its idiocy. Without appealing to the middle ground you don't win, smile as. You can have all the principles you ****ing like, but they mean nothing without the votes in the bag. What pisses me off about some of the diatribe I've read from labour supporters on this issue is exactly the kind of pompous attitude that Treble has so perfectly displayed here. A complete inability to accept the reality of what it will take to gain power in the UK of the 21st Century. The economic climate isn't going to change dramatically between now and 2019 and the Tories aren't going to be as abhorrent as Thatcher was 30 years ago, so perpetuating the notion that there's going to a mass demand for change like the examples he gave, is completely delusional. If they're to win the next election they're going to have to win the centre ground - the very people who ran a mile from the wet lettuce Milliband. They'll run for the ****ing hills from Corbyn.
I still think in order to have a healthy political system there has to be at least two parties with a chance of winning an election. Look at what Blair managed to do when the Tories were a useless mess. Would he have been so far up Bush's chuffpiece if he knew he had a very narrow majority and could have been out at the next election, of course not. Instead he kept the voters happy by running up a huge debt for the country whilst looking after his mates, the same people Corbyn hates.
Our electoral system is archaic, we need to adopt some form of PR, but turkeys don't vote for Christmas and all that.....
I have a mate that lives in Italy where they have PR, he says it is chaos, corrupt and they have elections every few months.
There's an argument that a weak Govt is more accountable by the mere fact that they have to run the country with a degree of consensus as opposed to some dictator style PM lead massive majority monstrosity like Thatcher at her most extreme
The downside to a weak government is nothing gets done. At least a strong government makes decisions and can always be voted out if the electorate disagree with those decisions.
It tells me you're one of the ignorant masses who believes in style over substance. That's what the tories are counting on if Corbyn becomes the next leader. Plenty like you around. The Walking Dead as I like to call them. If you dont like the tone, then stop the sell-out dumb rhetoric that so many ignorant ppl approach democracy with in this country. It's plastic politics. Why not take your logic further and bin Everton as they'll never win anything again in your lifetime.
There's also an argument that's the most productive outcome mate Do we really need party political inspired change constantly? What does most of it actually do to enhance our existence? Unless you're at the extremities of our social spectrum the answer until quite recently was next to **** all in reality. The middle ground behave been squeezed harder since the worldwide crash, but not enough to make them to become disillusioned with the status quo.
Ignorant masses? You daft ****ing prick, go stick your faux superiority up your plastic Manc hoop. Typical ****ing teacher, sanctimonious gobshite
Fair point but history has shown the most unpredictable surprises in politics. There is a whole generation of the British ppl who have never experienced a clear choice. I think it's worth a try. What have the labour party got to lose? Will it be any worse off than 5 years of Burnham. He's just another poor clone of modern politicians and there are 10 a penny like him ready to step up in 5 years if needed.
