Corbynomics: A Dystopia

Moby

Malthusian wrote: »

Every sympathy for her. But if you are a woman in the Labour Party this is exactly what you can expect. The Tories are about to appoint their second female leader (out of a field of two women). Labour want simpering girls like Jess "I feel awfully silly resigning as Parliamentary Private Secretary" Phillips, women who know their place next to the brothers. Google "Muslim Women's Network" and Labour for other examples.

Sexism is present in all political parties you are just political point scoring and by the way google can quite easily be used to justify your pre-existing prejudices.....it's called confirmation bias!


For the benefit of Rugged.......the speech by Neil Kinnock ...meant to be private to the PLP but leaked.....it explains the reasons why Corbyn has to resign:-
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/08/secret-recording-neil-kinnock-jeremy-corbyn-step-down-speech-to-mps-in-full

'Because we are a democratic socialist party, committed to a parliamentary road to power, it is vital, essential, irreplaceable, that the leader of this party has substantial – at least substantial, if not majority – support from those who go to the country and seek election to become lawmakers, the way chosen by the people who established the Labour party.'

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

you say you know and meet with him

so just ask him and report back

No .....you can't turn this around. You are the accuser......put up or shut up!.......because otherwise you are simply an anonymous troll smearing a stranger and not actually contributing to debate on these threads. Remember primary sources Clapton.....not hearsay .........

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

No .....you can't turn this around. You are the accuser......put up or shut up!.......because otherwise you are simply an anonymous troll smearing a stranger and not actually contributing to debate on these threads. Remember primary sources Clapton.....not hearsay .........

you can be a primary source : you can ask directly: nothing gets better than that especially as he is currently refusing to discuss his view on the IRA with the press.

posh*spice

Moby wrote: »

No .....you can't turn this around. You are the accuser......put up or shut up!.......because otherwise you are simply an anonymous troll smearing a stranger and not actually contributing to debate on these threads. Remember primary sources Clapton.....not hearsay .........

Oh come on - why are you defending the idiot corbyn all of a sudden - frightened you're stuck with him?

ruggedtoast

CLAPTON wrote: »

you can be a primary source : you can ask directly: nothing gets better than that especially as he is currently refusing to discuss his view on the IRA with the press.

Actually provide a credible source (hint, one that isn't you), or shut up about this issue.

You are the most vacant debater on here. Constantly denigrating people with facetious rhetorical questions, not one of which you have the wherewithal to provide a shred of evidence for.

The fact that my taxes are paying for you to sit around on your backside polluting the internet really gets my goat.

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Actually provide a credible source (hint, one that isn't you), or shut up about this issue.

You are the most vacant debater on here. Constantly denigrating people with facetious rhetorical questions, not one of which you have the wherewithal to provide a shred of evidence for.

The fact that my taxes are paying for you to sit around on your backside polluting the internet really gets my goat.

we can wait until Moby reports back from his discussion with Corbyn

you could of course provide a creditble source where Corbyn explicitly condemns the IRA
or repremands McDonnell for disgraceful

In 2003, at a gathering in London to commemorate the IRA hunger striker Bobby Sands, he said IRA terrorists should be “honoured”:

“It's about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of the IRA.”

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2015/09/what-did-jeremy-corbyn-s-new-shadow-chancellor-really-say-about-ira



and

In August during the triumphant final leg of his leadership campaign Jeremy Corbyn took part in a BBC Five Live interview with Stephen Nolan. During the course of the interview Nolan offered Corbyn an opportunity to condemn IRA murders. Asked outright five times, five times he refused to do so. Finally having proffered the idea that they might discuss this some other time the line goes dead.

Listen to it here

Corbyn hung up.

http://capx.co/the-inconvenient-truth-about-corbyn-and-the-ira/

BobQ

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Many young people can't join the unions, even if they wanted to.

You had best explain this nonsense.

Article 23
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of
his interests

As far as I know the UK has not yet withdrawn its support from the UN Charter on Human Rights.

Most grads are entering low wage insecure employment for which there isn't a union for them to join.

Its the generations that went before who are enjoying the kind of jobs that have unionised workforces.

You seem to believe that a trade union is a benefit conferred by an employer. An individual can join any union representing people in that industry. The employer does not need to grant permission or recognise the employees right to do so. I can quite see that an employer might not wish to recognise a militant union but not all unions are politically aligned or militant. Young people need to join if they want the benefits. Your argument seems to be that my employer does not provide a gym so I am unable to join a gym. It is not so!

Many people will give you an argument why unions are a bad thing (harping on about the excesses of the union barons of the 70s). But the fact remains those who were in work in the 1970s mostly chose to join a union. I should not have to teach you that The Labour Party was formed by the unions and employment laws were introduced mostly because unions existed and advocated them.

These graduates you speak of need to understand that unions have benefits but their role is dying out because too many people, particularly the young, think they have a better way of improving their work than joining a union. Fair enough, but no point moaning about unions. You may as well moan about not winning the lottery when you never buy a ticket.

Polls show that people like Corbn, and thats in spite of a relentless campaign of propaanda against him from the Tory owned press.

118,000 new Labour members in 11 days to help see off the coup. The man is a national treasure and the British people are coming together to preserve him. But of course no one will ever vote for him..

This is not about the Labour Party. If these 118000 are all supporting Corbyn, he can probably count on what 350,000 people? If so he will remain as party leader. But he needs to get about 12 million people to vote for him in an election. Alright getting young people who have never voted to vote for him will help.

But that 12 million includes people like me, approaching retirement, comfortable pension, house paid for, left of centre, with an innate sense of fairness who is unlikely to vote Tory. It includes boomers that you seem to despise. It includes people earning above the average salary with a sense of fairness It includes self employed people who are making a living but who are by no means rich. It includes small business owners who are scraping by, it includes the boomers who do not own houses and have modest pensions, it includes those who are struggling on below average pay who expect in five years to be above average.

Corbyn will not get elected if he cannot appeal to the centre and right of his own party, let alone the majority of the 12 million he needs to get elected many of which like me are not going to vote for his self indulgence. I do not care if he is a nice guy!

Sadly you and others seem to have missed the point that this is not about the Labour Party (it is expendable) its about having a credible left of centre party that can win and protect the interests of ordinary people..

gadgetmind

BobQ wrote: »

Many people will give you an argument why unions are a bad thing (harping on about the excesses of the union barons of the 70s).

Agreed but sadly they still thrive to this day. Their fangs aren't quite as sharp but they can still give a nasty nip.

their role is dying out because too many people, particularly the young, think they have a better way of improving their work than joining a union.

Too many? The more the merrier! Work hard, engage with your managers and colleagues, always ask what you can give rather than what you can take, and you'll go far.

There are no circumstances under which I'd have anything to do with a union. I would never join one for moral reasons. If an employee joins a union (never happened to date), fine, join weight watchers or the tufty club if you want, it makes zero difference to me. But I will *not* allow them on the premises or communicate with them verbally or in writing as they are a complete irrelevance from my POV.

BobQ

martinsurrey wrote: »

prosepect 2012 anual return

Page 13

You see when Paul noon retired he got given a £90k pension golden goodbye.

Taking his earnings £219,035 inc pension contributions.

And you are right it is 110k ish members, I took a number from an article, which on re reading doesnt say that the 34k civil servants are total members.

"Prospect represents 34,000 specialist civil servants who are struggling to cope with a three year pay freeze.
At the time the pay freeze was announced in 2010, Mr Noon criticised MPs for giving themselves a 1.5 per cent pay rise at the same time as treating civil servants "harshly"."

Prospect was originally a Civil Service TU (IPCS - I was a member of it 40 years ago and Paul Noon worked for it then) so it is not surprising that the union staff at that time had similar benefits to those professionals they represented. I agree that it is a sizeable lump sum but I doubt it is that unusual as a severance package to someone carrying those responsibilities who worked for an organisation for 40 years. I presume it was either a pension lump sum or an early severance package.

It is still the case that in 2015 the General Secretary is paid about £110K plus a contribution to his pension.

BobQ

gadgetmind wrote: »

Agreed but sadly they still thrive to this day. Their fangs aren't quite as sharp but they can still give a nasty nip.

Too many? The more the merrier! Work hard, engage with your managers and colleagues, always ask what you can give rather than what you can take, and you'll go far.

There are no circumstances under which I'd have anything to do with a union. I would never join one for moral reasons. If an employee joins a union (never happened to date), fine, join weight watchers or the tufty club if you want, it makes zero difference to me. But I will *not* allow them on the premises or communicate with them verbally or in writing as they are a complete irrelevance from my POV.

No point in trying to debate with you as your mind is clearly closed on the issue. Prejudice and ignorance are not the best place to exchange opinions.

But your last statement shows the flaw in your argument. You will not allow them on the premises because they are irrelevant. But if they are irrelevant why discourage them?

Germany has a far more enlightened view of unions. Employers need to have some form of consultation with staff in any medium or large business.

But anyway, the point I was making is not about people who have an irrational hatred of unions, it was merely that if people want unions to represent them they need to join them not blame others.