Is 'Rochdale Pioneers' a labour plant?

tomstickland

I can't really decided whether Cameron is skillfully remodelling the party or whether he is a cosmetic makeover of the same old party. I'd say that, probably, he's doing a makeover and it goes a bit deeper than cosmetic, but it's hard to tell.

It is a common accusation that both parties suffer from the curse of career politicians. They talk to each other, drink together, argue together, essentially play in the same little world. They often follow the same route of student politics (awful), researcher, think tank or whatever, mp I think this applies more strongly the closer to the centre of the party you get; both main parties still have conscientious MPs who work for their consitituences.

TBH the whole political scene is rather tedious. I wrote to my local Lib Dems to ask them what their stance was on various issues and they replied that they were not strong in the area and didn't even have a prospective candidate. Where are the new ideas?

Extreme groups like the BNP do not appeal to me.

Greens can be quite a nasty bunch, combined with too much wooly thinking.

I'm thoroughly disillusioned with the current bunch and believe that they have become too complacent. The attitude seems to be very much "do as we say because we know better than you". It's arrogant.

I read the comments on the Guardian every day, and there are loads of lifelong left supports who hate the "Nu" Labour government.

I'm quite excited by the prospect of a sever financial change causing a re-evaluation of a lot of things, including the pet projects that have cost a lot of money and achieved little.

I was offered membership of the Conservative party, but declined because I'm not prepared to ally all my opinions with them.

For example, I don't believe that transport should have ever been privatised. Turning railways into profit making entities means that someone somwhere is trying to make profit out of providing a service that should be national infrastructure.

Overall, I wish that the government would stop spending so much on social causes and spend more on providing the basics.

Wookster

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

to convert some hardcore uder-Tories like Strickland and Wookster?

I never thought I'd see the day when I was eagerly waiting to vote Tory... well here it is. Crash is just wrecking this country. Pure and simple. Brown bankrupts Britain.

The sooner he goes, the better.

The Tories don't have any magic solutions but they certainly won't be as reckless with money as Brown is and in this case, do nothing is better than doing the wrong thing.

No Rochdale you can't borrow your way out of debt.

vivatifosi

SGE1 wrote: »

Does nobody think I'm a Labour plant?

I'm slightly hurt.

I will if that makes you feel better. Though you probably think I'm a rampant Tory, which would make us both wrong

purch

There are a few on here who I'm certain are a plant from the 'Monster Raving Loony Party' !!!!!!!!!!

Rochdale_Pioneers

Wookster wrote: »

I never thought I'd see the day when I was eagerly waiting to vote Tory... well here it is. Crash is just wrecking this country. Pure and simple. Brown bankrupts Britain.

The sooner he goes, the better.

The Tories don't have any magic solutions but they certainly won't be as reckless with money as Brown is and in this case, do nothing is better than doing the wrong thing.

Do nothing is just a spin being put about by brown. In reality Cameron objects to the fiscal stimulus stuff (the cut in VAT) but supports the banking bailouts and the other structural things being done to shore up the economy.
His main objections to the cash being spent is that it hasn't been done soon enough - his claim that all of Brown's policies were created by him months earlier. He doesn't shout about that too much, just a few selected interviews here and there.

In truth I very much doubt that any of the politicians have a clue what to do. Brown is following the herd in calling for big spending, Cameron is being brave and going his own way. Who is right and who is wrong? None of us can say, nor can we quote any experts and use that as "proof" that we are right and the other is wrong - the same experts that missed this one coming are not a trustworthy source of sage wisdom about how to fix it.

purch

Politicians all want to spend money.

The only differences are 'how much' and 'what on'

abaxas

purch wrote: »

Politicians all want to spend money on themselves.

The only differences are 'how much' and 'what on'

I've corrected your typo.

mower5

All the politicians look to their constituents. Who really does the voting? is tha basic question in the mind of those that want re-election.
To me it's all about looking after the baby boomers now. 17 million of them are fast approaching retirement and they VOTE unlike disenchanted younger people.
This present recession seems to me like a forerunner to the larger demographic issues:
-What happens to house prices when BBs sell up to downsize?
-What happens to pension funds as they reduce risk aversion in the run up to retirement?
-What happens to public services as those that have paid in for the last 35 years take more out though services like NHS and care help?
The truth is that government failed to tackle the issues earlier and now the good times have ended and the people picking up the bill will be those under 40.

dervish

abaxas wrote: »

Cant find the link ATM.

But about 2 weeks ago there was some talk of a major labour PR offensive. Getting out to the 'people' etc.

I wonder if he/she/it is a labour letter writer/plant.

Seems more like he was planted by TROTSKY.

Seems more a of a communist to me... :eek:

Rochdale_Pioneers

dervish wrote: »

Seems more like he was planted by TROTSKY.

Seems more a of a communist to me... :eek:

Thats right Comrade. You will be the first against the wall when the revolutions comes etc