An Evening With... Jeremy Corbyn

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

Read the Labour manifesto at the last election and that will help you understand;)

Foreword
We are a great country. With great people. In the last five years I have heard your
stories, your hopes and your dreams. And I have heard too your frustrations.
The countless people working as hard as they possibly can and still struggling to
pay the bills. The young people with great ambitions but great anxieties about
the future. The dedicated staff of our NHS, who are deeply concerned about
its future. And all those who have served our country, are now retired, and ask
where our country is going.
This manifesto is inspired by you.
I take a simple view. We are a great country, but we can be even better
The fundamental truth that runs through this manifesto is that Britain will only
succeed when working people succeed. It is an idea at the heart of my beliefs.
And it drives our better plan for a better future.
It means a country where hard work is rewarded, with high skill, high wage jobs.
An economy built on strong and secure foundations, where we balance the books.
It means building a future for all our young people, so they can get world-class
apprenticeships and access to affordable, higher education. It means strong
public services, rescuing our NHS.
It means strong communities, where power is shared by people in every part of
the country and where we respond to people’s concerns about immigration, with
proper controls.
It means a Britain where everyone plays by the same rules, including those at the
very top of our society. And it means an outward looking country, engaged in the
world for our national interest.
For me, the privilege of serving as Prime Minister in our country would be for one
purpose alone: to work every day to help build a country that works again for
working people. This manifesto is our plan to achieve that goal.
Ed Miliband

do you mean this dribble?

westernpromise

Moby wrote: »

The Labour view is to promote the opportunities of everyone.

Rubbish, the Labour view is to embed benefit dependency and reliance on the state, in part by ensuring that all schools are roughly equally bad. This is what John Prescott blurted out when he admitted that he considered good schools a "great danger" and is why Labour in power always wages war on good schools. The ideal Labour school is a bad school manufacturing envious underachieving future Labour voters..

Do you seriously think the tories care about those in the secondary modern as much as those who achieved selection?

Yes I do. You average comprehensive is in effect the local secondary modern.

LHW99

It also goes unrecognised by many that equality of opportunity is not in any way the same as equality of outcome.

For example, you could give me as much financial and coaching input as is provided for Mo Farah, but I will still never make a sprinter - or even a fast runner!

westernpromise

Can any Labour party supporter explain why Mo Farah should be allowed to hog Olympic gold medals through luck? That is, the luck of his genetic inheritance. As LHW99 points out, we could all train as hard as he does but never win a thing. So why doesn't the Labour Party want him punished?

ukcarper

westernpromise wrote: »

Can any Labour party supporter explain why Mo Farah should be allowed to hog Olympic gold medals through luck? That is, the luck of his genetic inheritance. As LHW99 points out, we could all train as hard as he does but never win a thing. So why doesn't the Labour Party want him punished?

I don't believe Labour want to damage him they just want everybody to achieve the best they can Grammar schools do not do that. You say you are not right wing but you paint a picture of Labour that might be true of a far left Labour Party but not a centre left party.

seven-day-weekend

ukcarper wrote: »

I don't believe Labour want to damage him they just want everybody to achieve the best they can Grammar schools do not do that. You say you are not right wing but you paint a picture of Labour that might be true of a far left Labour Party but not a centre left party.

No, they do not want that, they want everybody on a level playing field, and the philosophy is if all can't benefit, then no-one will.

They would rather none achieved, than some who happen to be the brightest should have a more academically-inclined education.

ruggedtoast

westernpromise wrote: »

Can any Labour party supporter explain why Mo Farah should be allowed to hog Olympic gold medals through luck? That is, the luck of his genetic inheritance. As LHW99 points out, we could all train as hard as he does but never win a thing. So why doesn't the Labour Party want him punished?

Whatever success you have enjoyed in your life, it seems to have given you precious little happiness.

People with views to the left of yours (which is almost everyone) aren't going to go away.

Rather than being eaten up with bitterness as you look back at a life you obviously feel was blighted by those less deserving than you holding you back, you should look at the positives.

And just because you are advanced in years, if you remain positive you never know what will happen.

Look what happened to Jeremy Corbyn.

ukcarper

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

No, they do not want that, they want everybody on a level playing field, and the philosophy is if all can't benefit, then no-one will.

They would rather none achieved, than some who happen to be the brightest should have a more academically-inclined education.

That is not true it's just your biased opinion. Many comps get very good results just look up results.

mrginge

westernpromise wrote: »

Can any Labour party supporter explain why Mo Farah should be allowed to hog Olympic gold medals through luck? That is, the luck of his genetic inheritance. As LHW99 points out, we could all train as hard as he does but never win a thing. So why doesn't the Labour Party want him punished?

I bet you're absolutely furious that we have all these disabled people swanning off to Rio on a big jolly. Despite their life disadvantages and however hard they train they are never going to be as good as Mo.
I bet you want all their funding cut and they can go live quietly out of the way so that you, mo and all the other 'elites' don't have to think about them.

ruggedtoast

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

No, they do not want that, they want everybody on a level playing field, and the philosophy is if all can't benefit, then no-one will.

They would rather none achieved, than some who happen to be the brightest should have a more academically-inclined education.

Academic achievement in state schools improved dramatically under Labour.

I went to school in the UK in the 90s. Leaking roofs, decaying mobile classrooms with no heating, three or four kids having to share a falling apart text book that you had to give back at the end of the lesson.

There is simply no comparison to schools now, and the legacy of the Thatcher years,. Although Tory cuts and 80% of children consigned to some educational non grammarised scrap heap seems to be what Theresa May wants to return to.

Britain actually does OK on most international league tables for high school education.

There is simply no reason to introduce a policy directly affecting young people, that is basically hollow grandstanding designed to appeal to right wing pensioners.