Off Topic Jeremy Corbyn

[Treble]

I'm not.

Kinnock lost the election way back in '92, as when stood in the booth middle England couldn't stomach electing a ginger Welshman, and instead re-elected the worst Govt in modern UK political history.

Well that was bcos he was a ginger welshman Much like bcos Brown was a dour scot. Sadly all about image isnt it.

The other thing Tobes is that, that happened more than a generation ago. People arent familiar with that politics anymore and the country may welcome it as something fresh, something different. I think you'll be surprised how much ppl are gagging for a real alternative... or at least willing to listen to one.

 

[Tobes]

It is in fact not a populist soundbite, next you will be telling me there is no establishment.

Of course its a populist soundbite.

"we should have used the cash that bailed out the banks on the ordinary working man"

Utter cobblers.

 

[Tobes]

Well that was bcos he was a ginger welshman Much like bcos Brown was a dour scot. Sadly all about image isnt it.

The other thing Tobes is that, that happened more than a generation ago. People arent familiar with that politics anymore and the country may welcome it as something fresh, something different. I think you'll be surprised how much ppl are gagging for a real alternative... or at least willing to listen to one.

People want an alternative - yes they do. And it's Labour's job to create one, but that alternative isn't merely a re-hash of 70's labour ideologies, it needs to be fresh and new - and that isn't Corbyn.

 

[Gucci.Mane]

Whilst I agree that Labour need to come up with a strategy and set of policies that differentiate them from the Tories. Equally, they can't swing wildly to the left, as that would make them unelectable.

Spot on there Tobes.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

Of course its a populist soundbite.

"we should have used the cash that bailed out the banks on the ordinary working man"

Utter cobblers.

While that comment is extremely simplified. Yes you should have let the banks crash.

Saving the banks vs letting them crash.
Saving them ensures pain for everyone but bankers and politicains for generations and generations.
Letting the fail meant more pain for THIS generation and much MUCH better for following generations.

I prefer the short sharp pain compared to the dull ache that lasts for 50 years Using your great great great grand kids as collateral to solve todays issues is criminal

 

[Page_Moss_Kopite]

Labour stopped being the working man's party 2 decades ago

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

It's pretty clear labour are now fractured into right and left, anyone else think that is a bit insane given what labour are supposed to represent.

Neoliberalism v socialism.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

I admit I know little of Corbyn I am very familiar with his Brother Piers Corbyn, a famous "man made climate change "denier".

The neolibertal right in labour are ****ting themselves, these ****s are in the pockets of the bankers and corporations. They see a purge coming and to be honest, purging neoliberalism from Labour would at least see the party return to it's original status and values.

Corbyn is not the end all and be all, he has to create a new labour with good people. One thing is certain, he has massive support all because Labour have sold out their voters and those voters can see what has happened Labour and really, a look at equality in the UK proves Labour have been an utter failure.

 

[Tobes]

While that comment is extremely simplified. Yes you should have let the banks crash.

Saving the banks vs letting them crash.
Saving them ensures pain for everyone but bankers and politicains for generations and generations.
Letting the fail meant more pain for THIS generation and much MUCH better for following generations.

I prefer the short sharp pain compared to the dull ache that lasts for 50 years Using your great great great grand kids as collateral to solve todays issues is criminal

No, we really shouldn't.

Had the largest Bank in the World collapsed, then the entire banking system would have followed as no-one would have had any faith in the system, and would have panicked into withdrawls and they'd have all folded like a pack of cards.

That in turn would have lead to economic disaster and then the social impact of the failure of the entire system could have lead to social collapse. A society without money is one without function.

Your agenda leads you to that conclusion, and it's a ****ing daft one.

 

[Treble]

People want an alternative - yes they do. And it's Labour's job to create one, but that alternative isn't merely a re-hash of 70's labour ideologies, it needs to be fresh and new - and that isn't Corbyn.

So what we need is New New Labour?

You use 70's labour ideology like it's a dirty word. The ideologies of the labour party go back over a hundred years and were the working man and woma's party. I do want that back and I dare say plenty of others do too.

If everyone simply thinks "ahh he's not electable so lets not risk it" we'll NEVER have a choice nor will we have a labour party true to its ideological beliefs. Politics at its best is often when it shakes things up a bit.

Would you vote for John Smith now if he was alive in THIS era and Labour Leader?

 

[moreinjuredthanowen]

I think its REALLY simple.

1. integrity.. genuine democratic reform and deliver on integrity

2. Tories reward the middle class for electing them... but... policy should be.... best public services, no nepotism or tough feeders... tax levels to be sufficent for these services in child care, health, education and crime.. army to be cut. reward work.

3. look after the vunderable. Those who are disabled genuinely, have special needs... etc

4. Create genuine meaningful work for the majority. anyone who wants to progress from burger flipping to a real job shouod find there is a route via training and that should be morning or even part time classes. end zero hour contracts.

 

[afcftw]

I like that corbyn is a genuinely different option, but some of his views I can't see being welcomed by the general public. He's too far to the left. He'd be a great Green Party leader IMO!

 

[Tobes]

So what we need is New New Labour?

You use 70's labour ideology like it's a dirty word. The ideologies of the labour party go back over a hundred years and were the working man and woma's party. I do want that back and I dare say plenty of others do too.

If everyone simply thinks "ahh he's not electable so lets not risk it" we'll NEVER have a choice nor will we have a labour party true to its ideological beliefs. Politics at its best is often when it shakes things up a bit.

Would you vote for John Smith now if he was alive in THIS era and Labour Leader?

It is. Labour in the 70's was lead by the Unions and the Unions in turn wielded way to much power, and it ended up with the crescendo of the Winter of discontent.

Labour of the 70's conjures images of strikes, inefficiencies, and inflation driven by unsustainable wage increases.

It's not about 'not risking it' it's about understanding that those times were ****e and have no relevance in 2015.

You're confusing a social conscience with outdated socio economic policies. Labour does need to re-invent itself again, but it doesn't need to use the 70's as it's template ffs.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

This is indicative of Neoliberalism.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...crackdown-on-youth-unemployment-10458357.html

Instead of making education free the conservatives prefer bootcamps for young people to find jobs that don't exist.

Here in a more socialist Finland young people all have the opportuity to go to university.

Neoliberalism wants young people out of work to work for free or attend bootcamps and practise interview skills ect, when the economy is not creating enough jobs to cater for Uni and school leavers let alone the already unemployed\underemployed.

..or they have their benefits stopped.

No, we really shouldn't.

Had the largest Bank in the World collapsed, then the entire banking system would have followed as no-one would have had any faith in the system, and would have panicked into withdrawls and they'd have all folded like a pack of cards.

That in turn would have lead to economic disaster and then the social impact of the failure of the entire system could have lead to social collapse. A society without money is one without function.

Your agenda leads you to that conclusion, and it's a ****ing daft one.

Can we have a debate without you talking your usual cack about Agendas

I have no agenda you nitwit I have no party affiliation or political affiliation.

You are firmly right wing labour. Neoliberal labour if you support labour.

You believe in capitalism? Capitalism says you let the banks fail by the way if you know what you are talking about, that is how it works, the weak get weeded out, the banks were weak. The banks are still hanging by a thread and sustaining on free money and interest free capitalisation. Pocketing profits even though they have massive debt and risks whislt not assisting the economy in any real way these days, they are not lending.

If the banks crashed as capitalism dictated happens then a restructuring is needed, you were denied this restructuring by bailing out defunct banks in order to avoid short term intense pain, going for decades of slightly less pain instead, but of course you personally are financially alright, and this fear of being not financially sound is what scared you all into this bailout nonsense.

This is the crux of the whole thing, those that are on financially are all in support of keeping it going and those who have lost out big time are saying no.
I reckon you and many labour supporters like you are the former, financially alright, **** those who were destroyed by the banking crash, as long as you can not be affected in any real way then **** everyone else. Suicide rates in the UK have gone up a LOT since 2008

Absolutely a right wing labour neolibaral mentality. You're almost Tory mate.

When something is collapsing you demolish it and start again, they did the opposite with the banks, propped up a rotten structure.

 

[Tobes]

Can we have a debate without you talking your usual cack about Agendas

I have no agenda you nitwit I have no party affiliation or political affiliation.

You are firmly right wing labour. Neoliberal labour if you support labour.

You believe in capitalism? Capitalism says you let the banks fail by the way if you know what you are talking about, that is how it works, the weak get weeded out, the banks were weak. The banks are still hanging by a thread and sustaining on free money and interest free capitalisation. Pocketing profits even though they have massive debt and risks whislt not assisting the economy in any real way these days, they are not lending.

If the banks crashed as capitalism dictated happens then a restructuring is needed, you were denied this restructuring by bailing out defunct banks in order to avoid short term intense pain, going for decades of slightly less pain instead, but of course you personally are financially alright, and this fear of being not financially sound is what scared you all into this bailout nonsense.

This is the crux of the whole thing, those that are on financially are all in support of keeping it going and those who have lost out big time are saying no.
I reckon you and many labour supporters like you are the former, financially alright, **** those who were destroyed by the banking crash, as long as you can not be affected in any real way then **** everyone else.

Absolutely a right wing labour neolibaral mentality. You're almost Tory mate.

When something is collapsing you demolish it and start again, you did the opposite with the banks.

Really...............I must have dreamt the reems of paragraphs that you've written about the banking industry and capitalism being the route of all evil. Yeah mate, no 'agenda' at all, you're completely objective when it comes to the banking industry, how silly of me to think otherwise.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

@donga darko

You're socialist aren't you. What do you reckon of Corbyn?

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

As usual @Tobes I think we'll agree to disagree mate

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

One thing I would say, making education free is more important now than ever with such unemployment\underemployment.
It's ****ing criminal that it isn't. INstead the tories are starting up bootcamps for people who want benefits. Send them to ****ing Uni instead of "bootcamps" where you work for free or practise interviews for jobs that are not out there

 

[Treble]

The trouble with Ed Milliband (apart from looking and sounding like something off Wallace and Gromit which should be irrelevant btw) was NOT that he had leftist views. No, the problem was that he tried to hide them under a facade of polished "middle ground" politics and therefore was open to attacks of "old labour through the back door".

The public are open to anything but the one thing they wont forgive is a fake and that's what Milliband came across as. Mutton dressed as lamb. Ed Balls and the rest of his cronies came across as the same.

If we keep trying to reinvent labour we will come across as more and more fake. YES we need to adapt to modern times BUT we should not compromise our principles in doing so. AND we shouldnt try and package them up and disguise them to sound like the tories which only shows we have a low opinion of the general public's ability to decide and judge for themselves. As the last election showed, that underestimation by the labour party is what came back to bite them on the ar5se. I fear they will just do more of the same and fail again with the candidates they have for labour leadership.

 

[afcftw]

One thing I would say, making education free is more important now than ever with such unemployment\underemployment.
It's ****ing criminal that it isn't

There's loads of lovely things I think we should all be able to have. It's how realistically those things can be delivered and how that is put into place.

Corbyn worries me because his economic policy doesn't seem thought out. Quantative easing for social projects for example just makes me think back to the last labour government trying to spend money it didn't have through PFI. Finding new ways to spend money we don't have isn't the answer. It's a short term way of thinking.

If workable left wing ideas were being put forward he'd be a more credible candidate I think, but it's all ideological rather than realistic. Or at least that's my perception of his ideas that I've seen.