Labour party summed up in one stupid, embarassing speech.

[unclebulgaria67]

If the country wasn't so greedy and allowed the giveaways to be reduced, we could get the debt down and actually be in the black and there wouldn't be any requirement to borrow at all

in fact we could start to lend it and reap the benefits.

 

We lose tens of billions through corporation tax avoidance, which is legal, but often morally questionable.

 

If there had been a requirement to reinvest council houses sale money into building new homes, we would probably be saving billions in housing benefits every year and not have a problem.

 

The state pension scheme should have been changed decades ago. Money should be invested away and not have so much taken from current revenues. The Norwegian state pension scheme is apparently the largest sovereign wealth investment fund if its type in the world.

 

International aid money is subject to abuse.

[tobyjugg2]

We lose tens of billions through corporation tax avoidance, which is legal, but often morally questionable.

 

If there had been a requirement to reinvest council houses sale money into building new homes, we would probably be saving billions in housing benefits every year and not have a problem.

 

The state pension scheme should have been changed decades ago. Money should be invested away and not have so much taken from current revenues. The Norwegian state pension scheme is apparently the largest sovereign wealth investment fund if its type in the world.

 

International aid money is subject to abuse.

 

If all the money from the sale of council houses was put back into building houses in places suitable for lower/middle income families (brown sites),

 

then not only would there be no significant housing shortage or vastly inflated prices,

 

the housing bubble and its economic devastation would not have occurred

 

and the house building slump with its economic fallout and loss of skilled tradesman would not have occurred.

[tobyjugg2]

Now I think Corbyns utter incompetence in managing this latest Syria vote situation really and clearly shows he is unfit for any position this side of the back benches.

 

A single prime example

A big issue made of whether he would whip or not.

 

A competent leader would have said even/especially at the last minute -

This is a matter for conscience, and I urge the Conservative government to allow a free vote to it members, in which case I will also.

 

Instead the fool has left the party split and in an untenable position.

[Conniff]

Now I think Corbyns utter incompetence in managing this latest Syria vote situation really and clearly shows he is unfit for any position this side of the back benches.

 

You were told this the day after he was elected. The man is a baffoon not fit for any post.

[tobyjugg2]

You were told this the day after he was elected. The man is a baffoon not fit for any post.

 

But there is a difference between political rhetoric and demonstrated incompetence conniff.

 

I didn't believe he was the best option, even from a poor bunch, and stated that.

 

Some of us consider the reality of developing situations rather than unquestioned support of something right or wrong.

I gave him the benefit of some doubt - he has now proven that doubt.

 

Cameron and his barons blatantly lie and waffle and Corbyn is completely unable to address that let alone turn it back on them.

He must go (preferably Corbyn and Cameron)

[Conniff]

Not in this case. The very word 'Corbyn' means everything that is stupid in this world.

 

You more than gave him the benefit of the doubt, you were blatantly licking his boots.

[unclebulgaria67]

You were told this the day after he was elected. The man is a baffoon not fit for any post.

 

Jeremy Corbyn could be useful to Labour for several reasons.

 

1). If you choose a pig as leader, anyone who follows is likely to be seen as a PM in waiting.

 

2). It has increased the number of members and unions opposed to the Blairite new Labour project have rejoined

 

3) it has exposed the very left wing politics to more scrutiny and shown that it is mostly not credible for the real world we live in.

 

4). When Corbyn resigns, the new leader will be someone from the centre of the Labour party, who can unite the party. This would not have been possible had a blairite won the leaders contest originally.

 

5) Corbyn may have allowed the Tories to move more towards the left politics wise and therefore it makes it easier for a moderate middle of the road new leader to appeal to more voters.

[tobyjugg2]

Jeremy Corbyn could be useful to Labour for several reasons.

 

1). If you choose a pig as leader, anyone who follows is likely to be seen as a PM in waiting.

LOL

 

 

2). It has increased the number of members and unions opposed to the Blairite new Labour project have rejoined

 

Yes

 

 

3) it has exposed the very left wing politics to more scrutiny and shown that it is mostly not credible for the real world we live in.

 

Yes - inadvertently I'm sure

4). When Corbyn resigns, the new leader will be someone from the centre of the Labour party, who can unite the party. This would not have been possible had a blairite won the leaders contest originally.

 

I dont think he will resign. He will probably need to be forced out causing more damage.

5) Corbyn may have allowed the Tories to move more towards the left politics wise and therefore it makes it easier for a moderate middle of the road new leader to appeal to more voters.

 

Perhaps

[unclebulgaria67]

Corbyn will resign before September 2016, because he will come to realise that he does not have enough support and he is uncomfortable with the invasion into his private life. He is being chased around London on a daily basis by the media and he is not able to live the same life as he did on the backbenches.

[tobyjugg2]

Corbyn will resign before September 2016, because he will come to realise that he does not have enough support and he is uncomfortable with the invasion into his private life. He is being chased around London on a daily basis by the media and he is not able to live the same life as he did on the backbenches.

 

Good points - you could well be right. I certainly hope so although I see indications of a man who is realising a taste for power.

 

Be the worst thing in a long while for the Tories and their cheerleaders despite the fact they will undoubtedly rave on about it.

 

But who to replace him?

[Conniff]

Being anti labour and more so anti Corbyn doesn't follow that you are a tory cheerleader.

[tobyjugg2]

Being anti labour and more so anti Corbyn doesn't follow that you are a tory cheerleader.

 

No it doesn't Conniff, Even being a Tory supporter wouldn't necessarily make someone a Tory cheerleader. It takes a special sort.

 

'Bootlicker' was your offensive and wildly inaccurate name calling of me Conniff, but I think it fits the Tory cheerleader type much better.

[antone]

Yes we all borrow and we all end up on sites like this asking for help.

 

There is no similarity between household/personal finances and a national economy.

[SabreSheep]

Good result in the bi-election

[tobyjugg2]

Good result in the bi-election

 

Not according to Farage, who showed more of his true colours (LOL)| this morning.

 

aka it was

A fiddled postal vote and so undemocratic that none of the 'ethnic/immigrant' community voted for him

 

[andydd]

There is no similarity between household/personal finances and a national economy.

 

Really ?. Why not ?

 

Maggie for example was the first to always make this comparison

[unclebulgaria67]

National finances are different because of taxation which can be varied.. Also government revenues include investment earnings. Remember that government own a lot of property and land which is rented out. There is also trading done in terms of currencies etc. The vast majority of households only have employment income.

[Conniff]

Good result in the bi-election

 

Just sheep following one another. Some Labour peoples mentality is "My father voted for them and his father so I will". It matters not that they are crap with crap policies and brought the country to the verge of bankruptcy I just vote for them anyway.

Edited December 5, 2015 by Conniff
to make my statement clear as someone it obviously too thick to understand what was being said

[citizenB]

Not according to Farage, who showed more of his true colours (LOL)| this morning.

 

aka it was

A fiddled postal vote and so undemocratic that none of the 'ethnic/immigrant' community voted for him

 

 

Well I guess that it stands to reason that the ethnic/immigrant community wouldn't vote for him - especially if they are planning on bringing over their families.

 

I have long said there is something iffy with the postal vote and it wont be the first time where it has been proved that some votes have "gone missing".

 

I am also concerned that people will be allowed to vote on the internet - we have seen how easy it is to manipulate.

[citizenB]

There is no similarity between household/personal finances and a national economy.

 

Really ?. Why not ?

 

Maggie for example was the first to always make this comparison

 

I think Margaret Thatcher's position was that one should live within their budget whether you are a family, company or government.

[antone]

Really ?. Why not ?

 

Maggie for example was the first to always make this comparison

 

Yeah, she did make that comparison a lot, didn't she? She wasn't a daft woman either, she must have known it was deceptive.

 

Anyhow, Unclebulgaria lists some of the reasons below. There are a couple of other points, though.

 

Firstly, in our national economy, my expenditure is your income, and vice-versa. If everyone cuts spending, everyone (paradoxically, at first glance) gets poorer. This is especially true when the government cuts spending, since in times of recession it is, in effect, the "spender of last resort". There really is no parallel for this in a household budget, and it's fundamental to the way the national economy works. So the time for a government to cut spending is when there's plenty of other money around to pick up the slack.

 

Related to this is the fact that governments (at least, those outside the Eurozone) can create money. Obviously it would be unwise for a government just to create unlimited amounts of cash since this would be inflationary, but it's perfectly legitimate for a government to print money when it's needed, and the limit, roughly, is the productive capacity of the economy as a whole. In the UK at present we have spare capacity available - we know this because unemployment is still high (spare labour) and interest rates are very low (people are trying to save money rather than spend it, that is, spare capital). Again, no parallel for this in a household budget.

[determindator]

Just sheep following one another. My father voted for them and his father so I will. It matters not that they are crap with crap policies and brought the country to the verge of bankruptcy I just vote for them anyway.

 

They are not sheep. You under estimate the people. Thanks for making your views more clear.

[tobyjugg2]

Just sheep following one another. My father voted for them and his father so I will. It matters not that they are crap with crap policies and brought the country to the verge of bankruptcy I just vote for them anyway.

 

I didn't realise your father was a Tory Conniff?

 

Following in your fathers footsteps used to be considered an honorable profession.

[citizenB]

It would be really interesting to see you guys debating this point in a pub/club

[snowdragon]

seems everyone is either anti tory or anti labour, be nice to have something different to read about