Join the Labour Party and save your country!

1…153154156158159…491

Comments

  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    Jez mon wrote:
    bompington wrote:
    ... so polls are showing the gap closing.

    Apart from the unreliability of polls - I very much doubt the gap is as small as some polls are saying - there is a message here: and I would say that it is chiefly about the sheer uselessness of May's campaign. And, I suppose, the Tories' offering - there's not a lot in it for remain-voting free-marketeers like me.
    Not to mention the depressing reinforcement of the fact that a huge number of otherwise intelligent people can't resist the two fundamentals of Labour's message:
    1. Never mind evidence or logic, Tories are just evil, OK?
    2. Free lunch for everybody! Yippeee!

    i think for a lot of otherwise educated people. It's not so much that tories are evil, it's a general feeling that they are not doing a good job. In spite of years of semi austerity, they haven't really seemed to gain a handle on the deficit...additionally, the pain that was first forecast when some of the cuts is starting to show. For example, increasing prison riots and a seemingly general crisis within the NHS.

    add to that, some bizzare policy decisions, like a 24/7 NHS (having had an ill relative recently, I can confirm that it's already open 24/7 and even including christmas and bank holidays!), capping energy bills, not to mention brexit...

    They aren't going to go down well in history are they?

    one thing that does make me think the Tories are evil! (or rather uncaring) is their cuts in Prison officers, this has lead to a doubling in Suicides within the prison population, cuts in counselling etc have happened at the same time.

    hatever someone has done, they should receive basic care and rehabilitation in Prison, allowing conditions to develop where prisoners kill themselves is inhumane, mentally ill folk should not be in mainstream prisons either.
    failure to invest in mental health (always the poor relation) has led to very ill people being put in Police cells...then when vulnerable people do enter the NHS and are sectioned, they can be placed in hospitals 100's of miles away, at the very time they need their families.

    they appear to target the most vulnerable who do not garner public support.
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    mamba80 wrote:
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    He's a tax adviser mambo, he's really going to pay more? Do you know how good he thinks he is?

    He'll get the chance to prove it.on his own finances under Corbyn I reckon should hell freeze over!

    i believe Stevo is PAYE so it's limited and i suspect he has already exploited any evasi... sorry avoidance schemes lol!

    i also have faith that stevo realises that tax pays for important public services, such as those involved in the MAnchester bombing, so will be more than happy to pay a small amount extra.
    You what? Public services involved in the bombing? You don't believe that false flag story do you?

    You might want to re-phrase that slightly or am I being pedantic here?
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    There was one story I heard about a family with two children with mental health issues. They could not get local treatment so one child got sent to one end of the country and the second to the other end. Well Scotland and the southeast England so close enough. That would be tough on the parents to support both kids.

    There's just a really big issue with public services. We don't have enough money in the pot and the need will only grow. We need to look at increasing the pot through general taxation across the board too. Or we have to reduce need for money. Such as stopping paying for certain treatments in the NHS completely. As difficult as it seems tax us a lot more or cut out treatments like state funded IVF, that prevention drug for HIV, expensive cancer drugs that only prolong life, etc. And while you're at it give up on any.idea of his adult social provision, good community policing, adequate mental health services, NHS dentistry, etc.
  • milton50
    milton50 Posts: 3,856
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    bompington wrote:
    ... so polls are showing the gap closing.

    Apart from the unreliability of polls - I very much doubt the gap is as small as some polls are saying - there is a message here: and I would say that it is chiefly about the sheer uselessness of May's campaign. And, I suppose, the Tories' offering - there's not a lot in it for remain-voting free-marketeers like me.
    Not to mention the depressing reinforcement of the fact that a huge number of otherwise intelligent people can't resist the two fundamentals of Labour's message:
    1. Never mind evidence or logic, Tories are just evil, OK?
    2. Free lunch for everybody! Yippeee!

    Tories typically outperform the polls, & Labour under, so worth baring in mind.

    The main polling companies have tried to correct that by changing the weights in their samples following the 2015 election, which they got badly wrong.

    We shall see.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 74,279
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    There was one story I heard about a family with two children with mental health issues. They could not get local treatment so one child got sent to one end of the country and the second to the other end. Well Scotland and the southeast England so close enough. That would be tough on the parents to support both kids.

    There's just a really big issue with public services. We don't have enough money in the pot and the need will only grow. We need to look at increasing the pot through general taxation across the board too. Or we have to reduce need for money. Such as stopping paying for certain treatments in the NHS completely. As difficult as it seems tax us a lot more or cut out treatments like state funded IVF, that prevention drug for HIV, expensive cancer drugs that only prolong life, etc. And while you're at it give up on any.idea of his adult social provision, good community policing, adequate mental health services, NHS dentistry, etc.


    Best way to grow tax receipts is to grow economy.

    Brexit means that economy will grow more slowly.

    Self inflicted wound by joe public. They value sovereignty, whatever they mean by that, over more money for services and themselves.
    _
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 59,735
    mamba80 wrote:
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    He's a tax adviser mambo, he's really going to pay more? Do you know how good he thinks he is?

    He'll get the chance to prove it.on his own finances under Corbyn I reckon should hell freeze over!

    i believe Stevo is PAYE so it's limited and i suspect he has already exploited any evasi... sorry avoidance schemes lol!

    i also have faith that stevo realises that tax pays for important public services, such as those involved in the MAnchester bombing, so will be more than happy to pay a small amount extra.
    I am indeed PAYE, probably like most other people on here. But yes, if JC did get in it would give me an extra incentive to preserve my income levels (and TM, you don't have to be that good at tax to know how to do something about it but I already have a few options ready - no avoidance needed, just sensible use of the rules) :wink:
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 26,375
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    mamba80 wrote:
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    He's a tax adviser mambo, he's really going to pay more? Do you know how good he thinks he is?

    He'll get the chance to prove it.on his own finances under Corbyn I reckon should hell freeze over!

    i believe Stevo is PAYE so it's limited and i suspect he has already exploited any evasi... sorry avoidance schemes lol!

    i also have faith that stevo realises that tax pays for important public services, such as those involved in the MAnchester bombing, so will be more than happy to pay a small amount extra.
    You what? Public services involved in the bombing? You don't believe that false flag story do you?

    You might want to re-phrase that slightly or am I being pedantic here?
    I presume he means dealing with the aftermath.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    Yes I thought that, I doubt anybody missed his meaning but the literal meaning amused me.
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    This thread has been quiet of late. Getting worried Stevo? Has May messed up badly? Anyone looking forward to a Labour SNP coalition/confidence and supply pact instead of Tory government.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    This thread has been quiet of late. Getting worried Stevo? Has May messed up badly? Anyone looking forward to a Labour SNP coalition/confidence and supply pact instead of Tory government.

    I am increasingly of the opinion that a short period of Labour Govt to see us through Brexit would be better than TM. By short I mean 5 years as there is no way he would be able to enact his more left wing policies.
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    So you're going to vote Labour in the hope that they don't enact any of their policies? What could possibly go wrong?!
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    bompington wrote:
    So you're going to vote Labour in the hope that they don't enact any of their policies? What could possibly go wrong?!

    not what I wrote
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    This thread has been quiet of late. Getting worried Stevo? Has May messed up badly? Anyone looking forward to a Labour SNP coalition/confidence and supply pact instead of Tory government.

    I am increasingly of the opinion that a short period of Labour Govt to see us through Brexit would be better than TM. By short I mean 5 years as there is no way he would be able to enact his more left wing policies.

    Only because you know a Labour Govt is going to be a coalition govt including the Lib Dems and SNP

    Thus meaning that A50 would be revoked and there'll be a Indyref2 as part of the coalition govt. Who knows what additional damage they will do domestically in those 5 years :shock:

    Unfortunately we will not get a demonstration how submissive JC will be when in the same room as Nicola Sturgeon tonight
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    This thread has been quiet of late. Getting worried Stevo? Has May messed up badly? Anyone looking forward to a Labour SNP coalition/confidence and supply pact instead of Tory government.

    I am increasingly of the opinion that a short period of Labour Govt to see us through Brexit would be better than TM. By short I mean 5 years as there is no way he would be able to enact his more left wing policies.

    Only because you know a Labour Govt is going to be a coalition govt including the Lib Dems and SNP

    Thus meaning that A50 would be revoked and there'll be a Indyref2 as part of the coalition govt. Who knows what additional damage they will do domestically in those 5 years :shock:

    Unfortunately we will not get a demonstration how submissive JC will be when in the same room as Nicola Sturgeon tonight

    Not sure A50 can be revoked. Would the EU want that hanging around? Why is everybody so confident that TM would get a better deal - other than the fact that she keeps telling us.

    He would not have enough time to do more harm than the Tories did with Brexit.

    Scrap Trident, HS2 and the monarchy whilst giving back N. Ireland and the Falklands and I will be happy.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 28,379
    You are aware none of those are Labour policies?
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    giving back N. Ireland and the Falklands and I will be happy.
    Slightly OT, but exactly who will you give them back to, seeing as how no-one else has ever really owned them?
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 59,735
    rjsterry wrote:
    You are aware none of those are Labour policies?
    Maybe he should vote socialist workers party? Oh hang on.... :)
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    rjsterry wrote:
    You are aware none of those are Labour policies?

    How ironic that I could vote Labour based upon Tory scare stories
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    bompington wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    giving back N. Ireland and the Falklands and I will be happy.
    Slightly OT, but exactly who will you give them back to, seeing as how no-one else has ever really owned them?

    Maybe I should have written "reallocate them on a geographic proximity basis"
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 26,375
    Or maybe, just maybe, it might be an idea to let the population decide for themselves. Radical idea I know.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 59,735
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    bompington wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    giving back N. Ireland and the Falklands and I will be happy.
    Slightly OT, but exactly who will you give them back to, seeing as how no-one else has ever really owned them?

    Maybe I should have written "reallocate them on a geographic proximity basis"
    So can Germany have France back?
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 74,279
    Other way around innit.

    Italy to have the lot.
    _
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    well that turned out to be an interesting opinion poll and explains why no political party agrees with me
  • Lookyhere
    Lookyhere Posts: 987
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Tangled Metal wrote:
    This thread has been quiet of late. Getting worried Stevo? Has May messed up badly? Anyone looking forward to a Labour SNP coalition/confidence and supply pact instead of Tory government.

    I am increasingly of the opinion that a short period of Labour Govt to see us through Brexit would be better than TM. By short I mean 5 years as there is no way he would be able to enact his more left wing policies.

    Only because you know a Labour Govt is going to be a coalition govt including the Lib Dems and SNP

    Thus meaning that A50 would be revoked and there'll be a Indyref2 as part of the coalition govt. Who knows what additional damage they will do domestically in those 5 years :shock:

    Unfortunately we will not get a demonstration how submissive JC will be when in the same room as Nicola Sturgeon tonight

    2 weeks ago, it was inconceivable Labour would get within 50 seats of the Tories, now talk of coalition, which you slate but was ok when it was a ConLib one lol

    The cuts to Social Services, Miltary, Police NHS and Education will continue under the Tories, not least because May fully endorses the (little reported on) Naylor report, which will force NHS trusts to sell off their property estate, thats deemed not needed, note they dont use the wording not used! lets hope we dont need land to build new provision on as our population ages.

    The Tories have already started to implement it, despite it costing £10bn.
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 59,735
    Lookyhere wrote:

    2 weeks ago, it was inconceivable Labour would get within 50 seats of the Tories, now talk of coalition, which you slate but was ok when it was a ConLib one lol
    There's talk of it sure, mostly by over optimistic lefties.

    The 'shy tories' will win it for us again, just like in 2010 but with a bigger margin.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 74,279
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Lookyhere wrote:

    2 weeks ago, it was inconceivable Labour would get within 50 seats of the Tories, now talk of coalition, which you slate but was ok when it was a ConLib one lol
    There's talk of it sure, mostly by over optimistic lefties.

    The 'shy tories' will win it for us again, just like in 2010 but with a bigger margin.

    You know the 'shy tory' angle was disproved?

    It was just the methodology of polling misread the mood.
    _
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 59,735
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Lookyhere wrote:

    2 weeks ago, it was inconceivable Labour would get within 50 seats of the Tories, now talk of coalition, which you slate but was ok when it was a ConLib one lol
    There's talk of it sure, mostly by over optimistic lefties.

    The 'shy tories' will win it for us again, just like in 2010 but with a bigger margin.

    You know the 'shy tory' angle was disproved?

    It was just the methodology of polling misread the mood.
    OK - so what was your basis for saying quite recently that the Tories typically do better than the polls indicate? (Not arguing, just interested).
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 28,379
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    Lookyhere wrote:

    2 weeks ago, it was inconceivable Labour would get within 50 seats of the Tories, now talk of coalition, which you slate but was ok when it was a ConLib one lol
    There's talk of it sure, mostly by over optimistic lefties.

    The 'shy tories' will win it for us again, just like in 2010 but with a bigger margin.

    You know the 'shy tory' angle was disproved?

    It was just the methodology of polling misread the mood.
    OK - so what was your basis for saying quite recently that the Tories typically do better than the polls indicate? (Not arguing, just interested).
    IIRC they just weren't selecting their samples carefully enough.

    http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/3789/1/Report ... evised.pdf
    Our conclusion is that the primary cause of the polling miss in 2015 was
    unrepresentative samples. The methods the pollsters used to collect samples of voters
    systematically over-represented Labour supporters and under-represented
    Conservative supporters. The statistical adjustment procedures applied to the raw data
    did not mitigate this basic problem to any notable degree. The other putative causes
    can have made, at most, only a small contribution to the total error.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rolf_f
    rolf_f Posts: 16,015
    bompington wrote:
    So you're going to vote Labour in the hope that they don't enact any of their policies? What could possibly go wrong?!

    However dismal Corbyn might be as PM, given the Tories gave us Brexit it is hard to see how the Tories have any credibility left at least in terms of economics. It would be pretty much impossible for Corbyn to do as much damage to the country and peoples happiness as Cameron has done and for such a long period. I find myself in the unexpected position of tending towards intending to vote Labour despite feeling that Corbyn would be a poor PM. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he would be OK; there is some uncertainty; we know TM is a terrible PM.
    Faster than a tent.......
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    Rolf F wrote:
    It would be pretty much impossible for Corbyn to do as much damage to the country and peoples happiness as Cameron has done and for such a long period. I find myself in the unexpected position of tending towards intending to vote Labour despite feeling that Corbyn would be a poor PM. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe he would be OK; there is some uncertainty; we know TM is a terrible PM.
    You're not wrong about May: for a bit it looked like she might be somewhere about poor-average on the all time PM competency league table, but it's not looking as good as that right now, is it?

    But I wish I could share your optimism about Corbyn. I was young then, but I remember the seventies - and the governments then were more pragmatic and less ideological than Corbyn.
    And don't even get me started on JC's unerring ability to find himself in favour of anyone who hates this country, from the IRA and Black September to his sterling work for state propaganda outlets Press TV and RT.

Categories