How are Labour doing? I don't really follow much news and you lot in the Uk know better. Just to test the water...
Considerably better than the tories but nowhere near as good as they should be. Too wishy washy. Not going after the right people to get the money required. The NI (Employers contribution) is a half baked idea. Pandered too much to the orange turd. Hasn't addressed the EU / CU which is why he's has to pander too much to the orange turd. B- is perhaps generous. C+? That said we have a right wing press that contributes nothing to the country and a Labour government is not going to be in their best interests in the long term. farage is a thinly veiled fascist pandering to the actual nazis across the pond. The tories are still unelectable, however much keunnsberg and bruce keep bigging them up. Victoria Derbyshire remains the only balanced journalist at the BBC. It's an absolute **** show. Alas it's a ****show everywhere. Mark Carney has the right idea.
And the important one - under Labour the average cost of a pint is rising to £5:01 next month. Of course the Westminster bars won't be affected - we'll doubtless continue to subsidise them.
For me, the surprising thing is that after 14 years in opposition, they don't seem to have much plan of action. I don't like Trump, but you can't deny as soon as he was in office he moved fast to try to execute his policies! Similarly when Blair came in in 1997, there was obviously a clear plan of action (independence for the Bank of England, minimum wage, referenda on devolution, etc.). It's hard to say what the policy direction of the Labour government is, other than to be more competent than the last lot. We assumed before the election the reason why Starmer wasn't outlining any standout policies was to avoid rocking the boat when he had such a huge poll lead. But it turns out they actually didn't have any clear plans after all.
That's it, isn't it?! All very wishy washy and no clear plan. But worse in my book is that they have not made a meaningful attempt to get their money from the big corporations or the richest (say, £10m+) in our society: that is unforgivable in my book. More so if they prop up Thames Water or any of the other utility companies. They are wasting their opportunity.
This is what Labour once were - sadly no more, and probably gone forever. please log in to view this image
Labour..very poor...Starmer just not connecting with the electorate..foreign policy aligned witb Trump.. a government clearly aligned with business and punishing the less well off ..a pr disaster
With the world trading relationships in turmoil, I don't know how any party can plan for the next four years.
As you say BB. probably gone forever but this was unavoidable because society in Britain has changed so much since the days of Michael Foot. There is no longer a large industrial working class consciousness out there for whom messages like this had an appeal, and so the Labour Party has had to move to the middle to avoid oblivion. As his successor Neil Kinnock said ''To be always right and permanently in opposition sucks''. Even more so today than then it is the home owning middle classes which decide election results - voter turnout amongst the poorest 30% is lower now than at any time over the last hundred years. Maybe the time has come to consider the option of compulsory voting as they have in Belgium and Luxemburg (and I believe Australia). Unfortunately Michael Foot also lost badly with his one election campaign - or maybe luckily because his manifesto also included a Brexit referendum.
Well, the ghost of Michael Foot lives on - in the shape of Jeremy Corbyn. Very principled , but electorally disastrous and would hsave made a disastrous PM. I'm sorry that I beleve it, but seeing how Truss got dismantled by thre money markets, I can't imagine how Corbyn would have fared. And his Foreign policy ideas would look pretty stupid in todays climate. I was at a lecture the other day by Guy standing - Corbyn supporter - economist and social historian. His ideas weer/are brilliant - and backed up with evidence based on trial in several countries e.g. basic univeral income. The sad thing is - it's not mainstream and too many people, who influence, but don't think , prevent the changes we really need. Look up Guy standing - he is a revelation ! (Last thing, how pleasant not to have S***horns ruining any discussion.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Standing_(economist) I remember vaguely discussing this on here...when we had some more lively debates and it was rubbished by some... Dopnt they do somwthing like this in Swseden
There are pilot schemes for an unconditional citizens income in Ontario (Canada), and also in Finland and Kenya. There is also such a system in Alaska but this is paid for by the oil industry - this last example may be what Trump means by 'buying Greenland'. People often think that this is a left wing idea but it formed a part of Adam Smith's wealth of nations (which Maggie loved so much). Tom Paine also introducd the idea in 'Agrarian justice' and 'the rights of man' both in the late 18th Century. Tom Paine saw anyone born into a society in which all wealth had already been previously allotted as being born into a disinherited status, and this disinheritance must be acknowledged and compensated - bearing in mind that all property started initially with theft then this was logical. This whole idea is much, much older because a basic citizens income was also guaranteed in the first Caliphate after Mohamed - and not just for Moslems.
Well, it has taken a while, but justice has finally caught up with Marine Le Pen. She has a long history of getting money for her party, including a loan from Russia, that she claimed was a donation when she had trouble repaying it. The right wing is calling it bad for democracy, but embezzling €4.5 Million from EU funds for some reason isn't.
A group of barren, uninhabited volcanic islands near Antarctica, covered in glaciers and home to penguins, have been swept up in Donald Trump’s trade war, as the US president hit them with a 10% tariff on goods. Heard Island and McDonald Islands, which form an external territory of Australia, are among the remotest places on earth, accessible only via a two-week boat voyage from Perth on Australia’s west coast. They are completely uninhabited, with the last visit from people believed to be nearly 10 years ago. Nevertheless, Heard and McDonald islands featured in a list released by the White House of “countries” that would have new trade tariffs imposed. Do they have maps in the USA?
Ridiculous really. They may have maps in the USA, but it's questionable whether anyone in Trump's administration has the brainpower to use them. Am surprised you say the last visitors were nearly ten years ago - whilst there's no permanent population, the islands have been used as semi-regular research stations, and the Australian Navy patrols there. I guess that the next time US scientists ask for permission to go there, they might be told where to go. Especially if the Labor Party is kicked out of government in next month's general election - like Starmer, the PM is seen as a bit of a Trump bootlicker.
