Join the Labour Party and save your country!

rjsterry

mamba80 wrote:

....i think the Tories do hypocrisy as well, perhaps insisting on min turn outs in union ballots BUT having no such concerns for any other elections that suit them, is a good example.

or perhaps continually saying they ll be no snap election and then having one.... or is that classed as lying?

these things effect peoples lives, unlike where Abbott sends her kids,
incidentally, my extremely wealthy neighbour tried to send his kids to a state primary school but within a term or two they were in private, they were bullied for whom there father was, its not a straight fwd decision is it?

The best one was the Back to Basics campaign extolling traditional family values, followed by a long string of resignations for extra-marital affairs. The poster boy was Tim Yeo, who liked to blame the world's ills on single mothers. Obviously that didn't include his own shagging about.

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

these things effect peoples lives, unlike where Abbott sends her kids,
incidentally, my extremely wealthy neighbour tried to send his kids to a state primary school but within a term or two they were in private, they were bullied for whom there father was, its not a straight fwd decision is it?

So if Abbott had her way, your neighbour wouldn't have the option of going private and his kids would get bullied for years. It's not her sending her kid private that affects people, it is her trying to deny others the same choice as she has exercised. 'Do as I say, don't do as I do...'

I agree the other things affect people. If unions can't call strikes on a whim (like the Southern Rail dispute which had a very small turn out), that makes my life better. Good point !

hey? Abbott doesnt want to ban Private schools! where did you get that from? as i said, a famous persons kids in a inner city state school might not necessarily get an easy life.

Labour policy is about improving state schools by not spending money on new Grammars, incidentally a policy that the Tories will soon be adopting, if they wish to stay in Gov lol!!!
and if you can justify why fee's are vat exempt, i d like to hear that!

surrey_commuter

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

these things effect peoples lives, unlike where Abbott sends her kids,
incidentally, my extremely wealthy neighbour tried to send his kids to a state primary school but within a term or two they were in private, they were bullied for whom there father was, its not a straight fwd decision is it?

So if Abbott had her way, your neighbour wouldn't have the option of going private and his kids would get bullied for years. It's not her sending her kid private that affects people, it is her trying to deny others the same choice as she has exercised. 'Do as I say, don't do as I do...'

I agree the other things affect people. If unions can't call strikes on a whim (like the Southern Rail dispute which had a very small turn out), that makes my life better. Good point !

hey? Abbott doesnt want to ban Private schools! where did you get that from? as i said, a famous persons kids in a inner city state school might not necessarily get an easy life.

Labour policy is about improving state schools by not spending money on new Grammars, incidentally a policy that the Tories will soon be adopting, if they wish to stay in Gov lol!!!
and if you can justify why fee's are vat exempt, i d like to hear that!

Because they are not for profit organisations whose primary purpose is education
They now have to offer facilities and expertise to the local community/schools
Each kid educated privately saves circa £5k a year - why discourage it?
Can you provide an estimate of how much this measure would make as it just has a whiff of class warfare about it

city_boy

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

My favourite is being called a snowflake by someone and when I call them a racist they get all upset.

Boo. Hoo.

How does calling you a snowflake make someone a racist?

I was wondering the same..?

rjsterry

City Boy wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

My favourite is being called a snowflake by someone and when I call them a racist they get all upset.

Boo. Hoo.

How does calling you a snowflake make someone a racist?

I was wondering the same..?

Just an example, no? People who go around calling others snowflakes seem to have a very thin skin when they get any criticism themselves.

mamba80

Surrey Commuter wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

these things effect peoples lives, unlike where Abbott sends her kids,
incidentally, my extremely wealthy neighbour tried to send his kids to a state primary school but within a term or two they were in private, they were bullied for whom there father was, its not a straight fwd decision is it?

So if Abbott had her way, your neighbour wouldn't have the option of going private and his kids would get bullied for years. It's not her sending her kid private that affects people, it is her trying to deny others the same choice as she has exercised. 'Do as I say, don't do as I do...'

I agree the other things affect people. If unions can't call strikes on a whim (like the Southern Rail dispute which had a very small turn out), that makes my life better. Good point !

hey? Abbott doesnt want to ban Private schools! where did you get that from? as i said, a famous persons kids in a inner city state school might not necessarily get an easy life.

Labour policy is about improving state schools by not spending money on new Grammars, incidentally a policy that the Tories will soon be adopting, if they wish to stay in Gov lol!!!
and if you can justify why fee's are vat exempt, i d like to hear that!

Because they are not for profit organisations whose primary purpose is education

so they dont pay vat on things they buy... no problem with that.

They now have to offer facilities and expertise to the local community/schools

Do they? never seen that.

Each kid educated privately saves circa £5k a year - why discourage it?

ok, what about all the great teachers lost because no longer in the state sector?

Can you provide an estimate of how much this measure would make as it just has a whiff of class warfare about it

irrelevant, its about not subsidising some of the countries wealthiest families, poorer folk dont get little jonnys bike he uses to cycle to school, vat exempted, even though it saves on public transport or one less car on the road!

just to be clear, i dont care who goes to private school, i can well understand why people do it but please dont expect the tax payer to subsidise their fee's because a tax break given means someone else whose kids dont go to private school has to pay a little more or go without.

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

these things effect peoples lives, unlike where Abbott sends her kids,
incidentally, my extremely wealthy neighbour tried to send his kids to a state primary school but within a term or two they were in private, they were bullied for whom there father was, its not a straight fwd decision is it?

So if Abbott had her way, your neighbour wouldn't have the option of going private and his kids would get bullied for years. It's not her sending her kid private that affects people, it is her trying to deny others the same choice as she has exercised. 'Do as I say, don't do as I do...'

I agree the other things affect people. If unions can't call strikes on a whim (like the Southern Rail dispute which had a very small turn out), that makes my life better. Good point !

hey? Abbott doesnt want to ban Private schools! where did you get that from? as i said, a famous persons kids in a inner city state school might not necessarily get an easy life.

Labour policy is about improving state schools by not spending money on new Grammars, incidentally a policy that the Tories will soon be adopting, if they wish to stay in Gov lol!!!
and if you can justify why fee's are vat exempt, i d like to hear that!

They would like to for ideological reasons I believe, but they don't have the balls so have tried to price people out with their VAT plan - which discriminates between different educational establishments, mainly on the basis that a lot of people they don't like send their kids private. More than a faint whiff of class warfare IMO.

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

just to be clear, i dont care who goes to private school, i can well understand why people do it but please dont expect the tax payer to subsidise their fee's because a tax break given means someone else whose kids dont go to private school has to pay a little more or go without.

All education is VAT free so I don't see how one lot is subsidising the other via equal VAT treatment.

However it's pretty clear to me that people who send their kids private are still subsididising the state education sector (that they don't use) via their taxes - which if they are as well off as you say, will be quite substantial.

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

My favourite is being called a snowflake by someone and when I call them a racist they get all upset.

Boo. Hoo.

How does calling you a snowflake make someone a racist?

Also I always think people should not be punished for telling the truth

It doesn't.

High corrolation though.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

My favourite is being called a snowflake by someone and when I call them a racist they get all upset.

Boo. Hoo.

How does calling you a snowflake make someone a racist?

Also I always think people should not be punished for telling the truth

It doesn't.

High corrolation though.

You must get a lot of people calling you a snowflake for you to have done some statistical correlation on it. Ever wondered why so many people do that'?

Stevo_666

And in the meantime, McDonnell thinks it is acceptable to try to bring down governments by stirring up street protests:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/15/john-mcdonnell-calls-one-million-protesters-take-streets-bid/

If you can't win via the ballot box, try rabble rousing. FFS.

rick_chasey

Within reason and social graces, I am quite happy to put my money where my mouth is and call out stuff if I see it as wrong.

So yeah, you put yourself in the firing line, you expect to get hit a few times. *shrugs*.

Doesn't bother me. Usually anyway.

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

And in the meantime, McDonnell thinks it is acceptable to try to bring down governments by stirring up street protests:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/15/john-mcdonnell-calls-one-million-protesters-take-streets-bid/

If you can't win via the ballot box, try rabble rousing. FFS.

Did you vote for his boss to be leader of Labour?

Hypocrite.

verylonglegs

Stevo 666 wrote:

And in the meantime, McDonnell thinks it is acceptable to try to bring down governments by stirring up street protests:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/15/john-mcdonnell-calls-one-million-protesters-take-streets-bid/

If you can't win via the ballot box, try rabble rousing. FFS.

I don't want to see that either but the only reason such ideas get traction is because of poor governance to start with. Paddy Ashdown was right when he said during the election campaigning that the abandoning of the centre ground was bad news for the country. We've got a hard left promising everything through socialist policies and a hard right promising everything by trying to ape UKIP. I look at either side with distaste quite frankly.

rick_chasey

Stevo is in no credible position to complain about anyone in Corbyn's shadow cabinet, given the context of this thread.

That ship sailed when he cynically joined and cast his ballot.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Stevo is in no credible position to complain about anyone in Corbyn's shadow cabinet, given the context of this thread.

That ship sailed when he cynically joined and cast his ballot.

Ballot box OK, rabble rousing no.

Although I can see why you may have started to sympathise with the latter tactics given that you are electorally utterly irrelevant.

rick_chasey

Hahaha.

Complain all you want. You helped put this guy in the position to rabble rouse, full knowing this was the kind of stuff Corbyn etc get up to.

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

And in the meantime, McDonnell thinks it is acceptable to try to bring down governments by stirring up street protests:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/15/john-mcdonnell-calls-one-million-protesters-take-streets-bid/

If you can't win via the ballot box, try rabble rousing. FFS.

oh for ffs there isnt one million trade unionists willing to march... and even the article says its to make May step aside, not regime change!!!
2m protested against the Iraq war, that worked didnt it !!!
May is being stabbed in the back by her own party and likely to be long gone before any protest... see this for what it is, tory press desperate to blame anyone but the tory party/PM for the state of the nation.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Hahaha.

Complain all you want. You helped put this guy in the position to rabble rouse, full knowing this was the kind of stuff Corbyn etc get up to.

Of course I knew what they were like. Disapproving of it done mean I think it will get far.

Maybe the Lib Dems should give it a shot since everything else has failed

rick_chasey

Why do you keep banging on about it? It's not a football team.

I think they have good ideas on how to run the content. I think it's a shame more people don't agree.

Why is that a come back? At least I put my money where my mouth is about politics and try and do something constructive.

I haven't heard much about your campaigning?

So far all I've seen is myopic tribalism and the only political act you did was a backfired attempt of sabotage.

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

And in the meantime, McDonnell thinks it is acceptable to try to bring down governments by stirring up street protests:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/15/john-mcdonnell-calls-one-million-protesters-take-streets-bid/

If you can't win via the ballot box, try rabble rousing. FFS.

oh for ffs there isnt one million trade unionists willing to march... and even the article says its to make May step aside, not regime change!!!
2m protested against the Iraq war, that worked didnt it !!!
May is being stabbed in the back by her own party and likely to be long gone before any protest... see this for what it is, tory press desperate to blame anyone but the tory party/PM for the state of the nation.

Doesn't excuse stirring up trouble like that. Just shows how unfit he is for high office. As if we didn't know that already.

And btw, I will concede one thing: I will never ever match you on the use of exclamation marks

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Why do you keep banging on about it? It's not a football team.

I think they have good ideas on how to run the content. I think it's a shame more people don't agree.

Why is that a come back? At least I put my money where my mouth is about politics and try and do something constructive.

I haven't heard much about your campaigning?

So far all I've seen is myopic tribalism and the only political act you did was a backfired attempt of sabotage.

Call it what you want, it's worked better than all that pointless work you've put in for the Lib Dems.

And as mentioned before, Labour very probably would have done better with a more moderate leader, so job's a good 'unas far as I'm concerned.

pblakeney

Job's not finished yet...

surrey_commuter

mamba80 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

these things effect peoples lives, unlike where Abbott sends her kids,
incidentally, my extremely wealthy neighbour tried to send his kids to a state primary school but within a term or two they were in private, they were bullied for whom there father was, its not a straight fwd decision is it?

So if Abbott had her way, your neighbour wouldn't have the option of going private and his kids would get bullied for years. It's not her sending her kid private that affects people, it is her trying to deny others the same choice as she has exercised. 'Do as I say, don't do as I do...'

I agree the other things affect people. If unions can't call strikes on a whim (like the Southern Rail dispute which had a very small turn out), that makes my life better. Good point !

hey? Abbott doesnt want to ban Private schools! where did you get that from? as i said, a famous persons kids in a inner city state school might not necessarily get an easy life.

Labour policy is about improving state schools by not spending money on new Grammars, incidentally a policy that the Tories will soon be adopting, if they wish to stay in Gov lol!!!
and if you can justify why fee's are vat exempt, i d like to hear that!

Because they are not for profit organisations whose primary purpose is education

so they dont pay vat on things they buy... no problem with that.

They now have to offer facilities and expertise to the local community/schools

Do they? never seen that.

Each kid educated privately saves circa £5k a year - why discourage it?

ok, what about all the great teachers lost because no longer in the state sector?

Can you provide an estimate of how much this measure would make as it just has a whiff of class warfare about it

irrelevant, its about not subsidising some of the countries wealthiest families, poorer folk dont get little jonnys bike he uses to cycle to school, vat exempted, even though it saves on public transport or one less car on the road!

just to be clear, i dont care who goes to private school, i can well understand why people do it but please dont expect the tax payer to subsidise their fee's because a tax break given means someone else whose kids dont go to private school has to pay a little more or go without.

You assume all parents of privately educated kids are loaded. For many it will be a marginal decision, if not schools would hike their prices 20%. There is a chance the Govt would make no money from this course of action.

Now you know private schools must prove they are a benefit to the local community does that change your opinion?

rick_chasey

Where's the net social gain for private schools?

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Why do you keep banging on about it? It's not a football team.

I think they have good ideas on how to run the content. I think it's a shame more people don't agree.

Why is that a come back? At least I put my money where my mouth is about politics and try and do something constructive.

I haven't heard much about your campaigning?

So far all I've seen is myopic tribalism and the only political act you did was a backfired attempt of sabotage.

Call it what you want, it's worked better than all that pointless work you've put in for the Lib Dems.

And as mentioned before, Labour very probably would have done better with a more moderate leader, so job's a good 'unas far as I'm concerned.

I'll remind you of "job's a good'un" every time you complain about anyone from the labour shadow government.

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Why do you keep banging on about it? It's not a football team.

I think they have good ideas on how to run the content. I think it's a shame more people don't agree.

Why is that a come back? At least I put my money where my mouth is about politics and try and do something constructive.

I haven't heard much about your campaigning?

So far all I've seen is myopic tribalism and the only political act you did was a backfired attempt of sabotage.

Call it what you want, it's worked better than all that pointless work you've put in for the Lib Dems.

And as mentioned before, Labour very probably would have done better with a more moderate leader, so job's a good 'unas far as I'm concerned.

Keep telling yourself that, Stevo. Labour tried a more moderate leader at the 2015 election and that didn't work. Unfortunately there is an increasing appetite for Corbyn's Old Labour approach.

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

And in the meantime, McDonnell thinks it is acceptable to try to bring down governments by stirring up street protests:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/15/john-mcdonnell-calls-one-million-protesters-take-streets-bid/

If you can't win via the ballot box, try rabble rousing. FFS.

oh for ffs there isnt one million trade unionists willing to march... and even the article says its to make May step aside, not regime change!!!
2m protested against the Iraq war, that worked didnt it !!!
May is being stabbed in the back by her own party and likely to be long gone before any protest... see this for what it is, tory press desperate to blame anyone but the tory party/PM for the state of the nation.

Doesn't excuse stirring up trouble like that. Just shows how unfit he is for high office. As if we didn't know that already.

And btw, I will concede one thing: I will never ever match you on the use of exclamation marks

So you think people haven't the right to peaceful protest? just like Boris did, calling for a march on Russian embassy! so unfit to for high office... oh wait he was in high office when he said this

"“So I would therefore call once again on everyone who cares about the plight of Syrian civilians to picket the Russian embassy in London and in capitals around the world from today.
“Two million, three million, four million people. It can be done. It has been done in the past.
“That should carry on until the bombing campaign stops and all the relevant players are forced to get around the table to end this horrible war.”

right wing hypocrisy! something i know you will condemn

says the chap who uses with abandon !

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

And in the meantime, McDonnell thinks it is acceptable to try to bring down governments by stirring up street protests:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/15/john-mcdonnell-calls-one-million-protesters-take-streets-bid/

If you can't win via the ballot box, try rabble rousing. FFS.

oh for ffs there isnt one million trade unionists willing to march... and even the article says its to make May step aside, not regime change!!!
2m protested against the Iraq war, that worked didnt it !!!
May is being stabbed in the back by her own party and likely to be long gone before any protest... see this for what it is, tory press desperate to blame anyone but the tory party/PM for the state of the nation.

Doesn't excuse stirring up trouble like that. Just shows how unfit he is for high office. As if we didn't know that already.

And btw, I will concede one thing: I will never ever match you on the use of exclamation marks

So you think people haven't the right to peaceful protest? just like Boris did, calling for a march on Russian embassy! so unfit to for high office... oh wait he was in high office when he said this

"“So I would therefore call once again on everyone who cares about the plight of Syrian civilians to picket the Russian embassy in London and in capitals around the world from today.
“Two million, three million, four million people. It can be done. It has been done in the past.
“That should carry on until the bombing campaign stops and all the relevant players are forced to get around the table to end this horrible war.”

right wing hypocrisy! something i know you will condemn

says the chap who uses with abandon !

Most people can distinguish between the legitimate protest that you mention above and the sort of sh1t stirring that McDonnell is trying to do in the link I posted ( )

Stevo_666

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Why do you keep banging on about it? It's not a football team.

I think they have good ideas on how to run the content. I think it's a shame more people don't agree.

Why is that a come back? At least I put my money where my mouth is about politics and try and do something constructive.

I haven't heard much about your campaigning?

So far all I've seen is myopic tribalism and the only political act you did was a backfired attempt of sabotage.

Call it what you want, it's worked better than all that pointless work you've put in for the Lib Dems.

And as mentioned before, Labour very probably would have done better with a more moderate leader, so job's a good 'unas far as I'm concerned.

Keep telling yourself that, Stevo. Labour tried a more moderate leader at the 2015 election and that didn't work. Unfortunately there is an increasing appetite for Corbyn's Old Labour approach.

'Red Ed' was the most left wing Labour leader in quite a long time - until Corbyn came along. Labour lost in 2015 mainly due to their left wing stance then and they did this time as well - IMO.