Corbynomics: A Dystopia

mrginge

Moby wrote: »

...There again the usual tory tactic of hurling abuse...

Yes there is too much abuse thrown around. Some on the left seem to be culprits aswell...

Moby wrote: »

Only the tory ones.....I mean who votes for the very scum bags who are screwing you?;)

Enterprise_1701C

The idea is to bring everyone up to the same level, not down to a lower one.

Hence the grammar schools, intelligent kids actually having a chance of a reasonable education whatever background they are from, rather than having to sit in a class disrupted by kids that have no interest in an education because they expect to live on benefits. These grammar schools will also take kids out of the state system and give the teachers more time to concentrate on kids that want to learn but don't get into grammar schools.

What I cant work out is why you call handing the country to the unions so they can disrupt the workforce and put many thousands out of work social justice.

As for spreading the wealth, does that mean handing people £30-£40,000 a year for sitting on their rear ends? Does that mean giving drug addicts disability payments, or obese people (without health issues) disability payments? Problems where people could actually do something to correct them should be subject to severely restricted payments, in the form of vouchers for food and nothing more.

The wealth is there if you go out and earn it, you don't have to put thousands of small companies out of business to prove your credentials, which is what will happen if labour get in. Not many can afford such an increase in minimum wage, and I am sure if you asked a lot of people that actually bother to work whether they would like to have a job with the current minimum wage or to have no job at all, they would opt for the job in today's markets.

Arklight

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

The idea is to bring everyone up to the same level, not down to a lower one.

Hence the grammar schools, intelligent kids actually having a chance of a reasonable education whatever background they are from, rather than having to sit in a class disrupted by kids that have no interest in an education because they expect to live on benefits. These grammar schools will also take kids out of the state system and give the teachers more time to concentrate on kids that want to learn but don't get into grammar schools.

What I cant work out is why you call handing the country to the unions so they can disrupt the workforce and put many thousands out of work social justice.

As for spreading the wealth, does that mean handing people £30-£40,000 a year for sitting on their rear ends? Does that mean giving drug addicts disability payments, or obese people (without health issues) disability payments? Problems where people could actually do something to correct them should be subject to severely restricted payments, in the form of vouchers for food and nothing more.

The wealth is there if you go out and earn it, you don't have to put thousands of small companies out of business to prove your credentials, which is what will happen if labour get in. Not many can afford such an increase in minimum wage, and I am sure if you asked a lot of people that actually bother to work whether they would like to have a job with the current minimum wage or to have no job at all, they would opt for the job in today's markets.

Have you considered eugenics? Maybe if poor people could be stopped from breeding and passing on their innate desire to live on benefits then we wouldn't need grammar schools at all.

The only thing this abortion of a thread shows is that the more heartless, ignorant, and poorly educated people are, the more likely they are to vote Tory. Apparently.

antrobus

Moby wrote: »

Only the tory ones.....I mean who votes for the very scum bags who are screwing you?;)

Doesn't that help explain why you are 20 points behind?

Calling someone stupid is not the best strategy if you are after their vote.:)

seven-day-weekend

setmefree2 wrote: »

And Corbyn, Tony Blair, Mandelson, Diane Abbot, Ed Balls do?

Most of them went to private school for heavens sake...and have millions....

Theresa May went to a State Grammar School., which morphed into a Comprehensive while she was attending. And had a 'proper job' before entering politics. http://www.tmay.co.uk/about

JIL

Moby wrote: »

The mistake all the tory muppets make of course......is they miss the point that it's not what school you went to but what you want to do for a class ridden country....do you want to perpetuate social injustice or spread the wealth?

I don't give a toss how much money Blair has or how big his country house is.....that's not the point! The point is did Blair in power have the policies that lowered the class differences....did Blair have policies that improved the life chances and services of everyone......did Blair believe in social justice....yes he did!. There is no evidence that May has any understanding of that! Putting up examples of labour wealth as demonstrating hypocrisy completely misses the point and is a distraction from the social justice intention of the policies. There again the usual tory tactic of hurling abuse at the reds under the bed, champagne socialists is a distraction from the reality of their rather self interested view of the world......lets point the finger at socialist hypocrisy.....to avoid looking at our own values and motives!

A quick read of Theresa Mays voting record tells you all you need to know, in terms of how she protects the rich and voted against policies that directly affect the vulnerable in society.
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10426/theresa_may/maidenhead/votes

antrobus

JIL wrote: »

A quick read of Theresa Mays voting record tells you all you need to know, in terms of how she protects the rich and voted against policies that directly affect the vulnerable in society.
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10426/theresa_may/maidenhead/votes

What particular aspects of her voting record concern you?

What does the statement "voted against policies that directly affect the vulnerable in society" actually supposed to mean?

Moby

antrobus wrote: »

Doesn't that help explain why you are 20 points behind?

Calling someone stupid is not the best strategy if you are after their vote.:)

Just a throw away comment on a little forum. Its hardly going to change anything. Never ceases to amaze me why a person with little would vote Tory. The whole point of the self named Conservatives is to conserve ie keep things as they are for those who are already 'haves'. Totally understandable but why would a person who hasnt had a wage rise in years vote for that. Look at their house building record. Look at how public services are being savaged. Look at what they do not what May says. You see Andrew Neill challenge Brandon Lewis yesterday on Sunday Politics about their record?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08pl2sy/sunday-politics-london-14052017

Moby

mrginge wrote: »

Yes there is too much abuse thrown around. Some on the left seem to be culprits aswell...

I have no problem in calling rich financiers with huge bonuses and tax avoiding companies like Google 'scumbags'.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/13/millionaire-brexit-donor-targets-remain-mps

Enterprise_1701C

Moby wrote: »

I have no problem in calling rich financiers with huge bonuses and tax avoiding companies like Google 'scumbags'.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/13/millionaire-brexit-donor-targets-remain-mps

So are you happy for the ones that have money and pay tax?