Join the Labour Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Job announcements today.
The trade agreement with China will create 3400 jobs. Yeah!
The steel closures will cost 5200 jobs. Oops!
Well played China. Well played.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.0 -
As Stevo points out above, Labour are committed to Trident at a cost of 100Bn(?) over the next decades. Its sole purpose is deterrence. The rationale being that a nuclear power would not attack us on the basis that there is a chance, no matter how slim, that we would retaliate.
Corbyn accepts that and then says that he would never use it, thereby removing the deterrence.
So his policy is to spend the money anyway, having flushed its use down the crapper.
Bravo!!
So write down a list of the top 10 states that could threaten the west, china in there? already threatening US (and our) allies in Pacific and we are giving them a hand in our crucial future power requirements.
Regardless, the UK would never ever launch an independant nuclear strike without the US having already done so, or maybe that should read " uk would only do so, if china told us too"
the amounts china is promising is relatively small and something we could either do our selves or borrow and invest in, securing our nuclear industry and know how.
Of course China is a potential threat. We are letting them build power stations. I don't see how that leads to nuclear war. :?
In a perfect world we would build our own. The building of our last nuclear power station was started in 1987. China has a current building programme. Could it be that they have more up to date techonogy than us?0 -
“There’s a global over-capacity in the steel industry and that’s caused prices to fall very precipitately over the last 12 months or so, and that’s causing a problem around the world. The EU has imposed tariffs on Chinese steel to ensure that the price of Chinese steel reaching consumers here is fair, but there is a problem in this industry.”
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/20/tata-steel-expected-to-announce-1200-job-losses-in-uk
Keeping prices artificially high? Price fixing? Why is this legal when other price fixing is cause for calls for imprisonment? Subsidies are illegal but this type of price fixing isn't? I get that people are trying to protect their own steel industry, but why is one legal and the other not?
If I were say a car manufacturer, would I not welcome cheaper materials and the cheaper costs passed on to the consumer.
This is a genuine question. I am not trying to defend or attack anyone's position. Who gets to decide what can and can't be price fixed?0 -
As an addendum to the above, keeping EU steel prices artificially high surely makes imported Chinese manufactured products even cheaper, in comparison, if the Chinese manufacturers have unlimited access to cheaper raw materials, does it not?0
-
This goes a long way to explain why the EU cannot, and will not compete with China.As an addendum to the above, keeping EU steel prices artificially high surely makes imported Chinese manufactured products even cheaper, in comparison, if the Chinese manufacturers have unlimited access to cheaper raw materials, does it not?
Game's over.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.0 -
A tarrif isn't price fixing.
It's against the spirit of free trade and protectionist but that is different.
UKIP want their own protectionist policies, especially with regard to labour.0 -
So write down a list of the top 10 states that could threaten the west, china in there? already threatening US (and our) allies in Pacific and we are giving them a hand in our crucial future power requirements.
Regardless, the UK would never ever launch an independant nuclear strike without the US having already done so, or maybe that should read " uk would only do so, if china told us too"
the amounts china is promising is relatively small and something we could either do our selves or borrow and invest in, securing our nuclear industry and know how.
Of course China is a potential threat. We are letting them build power stations. I don't see how that leads to nuclear war. :?
In a perfect world we would build our own. The building of our last nuclear power station was started in 1987. China has a current building programme. Could it be that they have more up to date techonogy than us?
you are missing the point, made by looky, So letting a potential threat build, control and run our power industry is good? China will be running these plants for decades to come, the Chinese dont respect us, they pity us, see us as weak and cow towing.
stating that Corbyn wont launch trident is obvious, not only isnt he in power but no uk PM ever would, so as you say, its a waste of money.
From the World Nuclear assoc - "China has become largely self-sufficient in reactor design and construction, as well as other aspects of the fuel cycle, but is making full use of western technology while adapting and improving it.
China’s policy is to ‘go global’ with exporting nuclear technology including heavy components in the supply chain"
We are just aiding them
0 -
I assume from the statement above that 'they are robbing us' that you know the legal and financial terms of the deal with China (and EDF by the way). Please do share, otherwise we have to assume it is just a preconception on your part.
Here's the thing.....There is a subtle difference between being involved in building and running a nuclear power station and 'having their finger on the nuclear button :roll:
Their involvement is at our detriment.
Think about it.
They are not investing in the UK, they are robbing us.
They invest in their companies who will be supplying the industry.
Once complete we have to pay for that investment.
Meanwhile our industries collapse leaving the Chinese industries with less competition.
If I am wrong and this is is a good business deal, then why is it China doing it and not our Government?
Personally I prefer to argue based on facts and evidence. Here is some information about the Chinese investment in the UK and UK investment in China:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34542147
And the UK investment in China:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/china-business/11353826/UK-to-quadruple-investment-in-China-within-five-years.html
Unfortunately it does not have a running total, but £6bn of investment in China just in the last year points to a total UK investment in China greater than the US$ 29bn (approx. £20bn) of Chinese investment in the UK to date in the first link. With those UK outbound amounts predicted to quadruple in the near future.
So on that basis, you tell me who is 'robbing' who? (If you take the overly simplistic and incorrect view that investment in an overseas country constitutes 'robbing').
Also while the UK has high levels of inward investment, it also has high levels of outward investment. I don't have time to dig out the figures now, but it is well up the table of the wealthier nations as a percentage of economic size. We are major exporters of capital - financial and intellectual - which is a strong contributor to the national economy. It's also something I see in the multinationals that I have worked in/are working in.
This is often the point that people on here fail to see when looking at their own local economic conditions. That said, some on here seem a bit desperate to do the country down for whatever reason."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'm sure Labour will be congratulating themselves on a coup like thisAs Stevo points out above, Labour are committed to Trident at a cost of 100Bn(?) over the next decades. Its sole purpose is deterrence. The rationale being that a nuclear power would not attack us on the basis that there is a chance, no matter how slim, that we would retaliate.
Corbyn accepts that and then says that he would never use it, thereby removing the deterrence.
So his policy is to spend the money anyway, having flushed its use down the crapper.
Bravo!!
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Good bit of backpedalling. 'Having the finger on the nuclear button' is a clear reference to nuclear weapons. They have nothing of the sort.There is a subtle difference between being involved in building and running a nuclear power station and 'having their finger on the nuclear button :roll: Would you like me to explain?
If youre going to ban trade with or investment from countries which have less than perfect human right record you will restrict the potential for trade quite a bit. USA and Guantanamo? Australia's treatment of asylum seekers? A few of our esteemed european partners are hardly whiter than white within living memory.
I'm fairly sure they arent going to invite them in and show them all of our nuclear secrets.
The bigger joke is a Labour leader who refuses to have his finger anywhere the nuclear button despite apparently being in charge of a party that wants to keep the UK nuclear deterrant I know lefties like wasting our money but that's taking things a bit too far...
Your an itelligent guy steve0, so i find it hard to believe you cant see the difference between day to day business and our future electricity needs, esp those derived from nuclear.
As for any pressure on china re human rights, the UK was frozen out of trade deals after cameron met the dia lama, china will not suffer any criticism and as i said, china is showing its colours in the S china seas.
We have zero clout, which is exactly why having china as a nuclear bed fellow is madness.
Corbyn isnt the threat here, Cameron and Osborne are, if china asked for our nuclear secrets, Cameron would be giving them the keys! least they pulled the plug on us!!!
Chinese saying (my sister in law is Chinese) "dig the hole, and let them jump in" we are jumping in with our eyes closed!"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I base my opinions of the Chinese attitude to business and industry on personal experience in an industry we no longer have.
Do we have a nuclear industry? Will we continue to have a nuclear industry?
Steel industry?
Rail industry?
.................and on and on.......
History tells me no.
Yes, I am bitter but it doesn't mean that I am wrong.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.0 -
“There’s a global over-capacity in the steel industry and that’s caused prices to fall very precipitately over the last 12 months or so, and that’s causing a problem around the world. The EU has imposed tariffs on Chinese steel to ensure that the price of Chinese steel reaching consumers here is fair, but there is a problem in this industry.”
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/20/tata-steel-expected-to-announce-1200-job-losses-in-uk
Keeping prices artificially high? Price fixing? Why is this legal when other price fixing is cause for calls for imprisonment? Subsidies are illegal but this type of price fixing isn't? I get that people are trying to protect their own steel industry, but why is one legal and the other not?
If I were say a car manufacturer, would I not welcome cheaper materials and the cheaper costs passed on to the consumer.
This is a genuine question. I am not trying to defend or attack anyone's position. Who gets to decide what can and can't be price fixed?
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/government-powerless-to-intervene-in-non-banking-industry-201510201031190 -
The bigger joke is a Labour leader who refuses to have his finger anywhere the nuclear button despite apparently being in charge of a party that wants to keep the UK nuclear deterrant I know lefties like wasting our money but that's taking things a bit too far...
Your an itelligent guy steve0, so i find it hard to believe you cant see the difference between day to day business and our future electricity needs, esp those derived from nuclear.
Corbyn isnt the threat here, Cameron and Osborne are, if china asked for our nuclear secrets, Cameron would be giving them the keys! least they pulled the plug on us!!!
Chinese saying (my sister in law is Chinese) "dig the hole, and let them jump in" we are jumping in with our eyes closed!
Good bit of backpedalling. 'Having the finger on the nuclear button' is a clear reference to nuclear weapons. They have nothing of the sort.[/quote]
oh yes they will, there are many forms of nuclear attack and a sabotaged reactor would devaste the UK, China is developing the s/w for the running of these plants, it would extremely easy for the Chinese to have a back door to allow the systems to be hacked and given their record on cyber attacks, is it wise to potentially give the Chinese, this option? and in time of crisis what do you imagine they could do with this?
A former Mi6 chief has also said this, even Liam Fox is against chinese involvement, hardly a left winger himself.
China is diametrically opposed to democracy in any form, just a few years ago, they would have been considered our enemy, they are still an emerging super power and who knows what threats we may face in the future? imho allowing them into our nuclear industry is a risk too far and one we dont even need to take.0 -
You are basing your entire position on the supposition that China is doing this for nefarious purposes and that they are a rogue state that would be hostile to the UK. You have presented no hard evidence for this."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
-
Getting back on topic again, didn't take long for the plotting to begin:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson-being-lined-up-by-unions-to-replace-jeremy-corbyn-a3093606.html
No wonder they call them 'New Old Labour'. Same old bunch of factional backstabbers in the pockets of hard left union barons.
Getting back on topic again...
First it was the plotting, now the defections: the cracks are really starting to show now:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11941709/Lord-Norman-Warner-resigns-the-Labour-whip-saying-the-party-is-no-longer-credible.html
http://order-order.com/2015/10/19/lord-warner-quits-labour/
I said at the start of this thread that Labour would be put of power for a long time if Corbyn got in. We now have a respected member of the Labour party resigning the whip and saying that Labour don't have a hope in hell of winning in 2020 or 2025 if it doesn't change very rapidly.
I'll get the t-shirts printed in the morning
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You are basing your entire position on the supposition that China is doing this for nefarious purposes and that they are a rogue state that would be hostike to the UK. You have presented no hard evidence for this.
Funny you use the phrase 'rogue state'. Just saw the fmr. strategy advisor to Cameron refer to China literally as a 'rogue state'.
It is not free, not liberal, there are countless daily abuses of women, political prisoners, state executions with sham trials, It threatens its neighbours with military action, it instigates state funded cyber warfare, it represses multiple faiths and ethnicities. It's not all that different from Russia.
There's plenty hard evidence that the day after the Chinese president met Obama and promised that they'd stop the state funded cyber attacks against the US, they started again.
Don't confuse shiny tall buildings with liberalism. It's anything but.
Now, we need to make a living, sure, but let's make it clear, China is ruled by a despotic and violent dictatorial regime. Sure, they embraced the free market (to an extent...) and finally they've lifted almost a billion out of poverty. That should be celebrated. But there's a long way to do before their leaders should be received with both open arms.
--
More importantly and on topic, all this internal strife within the Tory party is sucking all the limelight away from Labour. It's making Tories look big and diverse enough to cater to most mainstream views, and is making look Labour look like a freak sideshow. As long as they keep it spinning out of hand, that will work in their favour. Makes them look confident.
UK was gripped with the same idea with Tony vs Gordon, 15 years ago and the Tories were left whimpering increasingly desperate sounding policies that didn't do anything.0 -
There's a reason why the parties look that way - no smoke without fire as they say. If the tories didnt appeal to mainstream views they would not be in governent with an overall majority. QED.
More importantly and on topic, all this internal strife within the Tory party is sucking all the limelight away from Labour. It's making Tories look big and diverse enough to cater to most mainstream views, and is making look Labour look like a freak sideshow. As long as they keep it spinning out of hand, that will work in their favour. Makes them look confident.."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Two unknown Lords with right wing views leave a socialist party?Getting back on topic again, didn't take long for the plotting to begin:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson-being-lined-up-by-unions-to-replace-jeremy-corbyn-a3093606.html
No wonder they call them 'New Old Labour'. Same old bunch of factional backstabbers in the pockets of hard left union barons.
Getting back on topic again...
First it was the plotting, now the defections: the cracks are really starting to show now:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11941709/Lord-Norman-Warner-resigns-the-Labour-whip-saying-the-party-is-no-longer-credible.html
http://order-order.com/2015/10/19/lord-warner-quits-labour/
I said at the start of this thread that Labour would be put of power for a long time if Corbyn got in. We now have a respected member of the Labour party resigning the whip and saying that Labour don't have a hope in hell of winning in 2020 or 2025 if it doesn't change very rapidly.
I'll get the t-shirts printed in the morning
Hardly a surprise.
They were probably happy while the party was Conservative lite.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.0 -
What happened at the last election.
Quite a few will have learned a lesson and won't repeat it.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.0 -
You are basing your entire position on the supposition that China is doing this for nefarious purposes and that they are a rogue state that would be hostile to the UK. You have presented no hard evidence for this.
Its not just my opinion steve0. plenty tories and others related to the itellegence services feel the same way.
anyway, its not possible to present hard evidence for something that might happen in the future, its a judgement call.
but is £8bn chinese investment worth the risk? i am pretty sure Osbourne could come up with that over the next 10 15 years.
your losing the argument, hence your calls to get back on topic, but this is, the question is a direct challenge to your statement that Corbyn will destroy the country and the Tories would save it.0 -
If they had right wing views what were they doing in the Labour party? Do you think they had joined the wrong party by mistake?
Two unknown Lords with right wing views leave a socialist party?Getting back on topic again, didn't take long for the plotting to begin:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson-being-lined-up-by-unions-to-replace-jeremy-corbyn-a3093606.html
No wonder they call them 'New Old Labour'. Same old bunch of factional backstabbers in the pockets of hard left union barons.
Getting back on topic again...
First it was the plotting, now the defections: the cracks are really starting to show now:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11941709/Lord-Norman-Warner-resigns-the-Labour-whip-saying-the-party-is-no-longer-credible.html
http://order-order.com/2015/10/19/lord-warner-quits-labour/
I said at the start of this thread that Labour would be put of power for a long time if Corbyn got in. We now have a respected member of the Labour party resigning the whip and saying that Labour don't have a hope in hell of winning in 2020 or 2025 if it doesn't change very rapidly.
I'll get the t-shirts printed in the morning
Hardly a surprise.
They were probably happy while the party was Conservative lite.
One defection on its own is not a big deal, however it is symptomatic of the problem that a hard left Labour leadership now has, and it won't be the last. Party disintegrations don't happen overnight.
Out of interest the esteemed parliamentarian John Prescott felt the need to go on twitter and say pretty much what you've just said. So they must be absolutely fine "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
From memory -
They joined, or were active, during the Blair years.
It would be the power that seduced them.
Power gone, policies gone, leave.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.0 -
A tarrif isn't price fixing.
It's against the spirit of free trade and protectionist but that is different.
UKIP want their own protectionist policies, especially with regard to labour.
Price fixing by a different name.
If the EU produces steel at say €50 tonne and China €40 tonne. A tariff is imposed to make Chinese steel more expensive so that consumers have to pay the €50, the price has been fixed, hasn't it?
The rest of the world has access to cheap steel, but EU manufactures have to pay over the odds thereby making their goods uncompetitive.
Firms like JCB who have recently shed jobs must be ecstatic.0 -
In summary - It is a global market and we are fupped.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.0 -
Another simple question that is hard to answer.
The Government is against nationalisation of the energy industry yet in favour of the French nationalised company EDF running our energy.
Why is that?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.0 -
I get the feeling that your bad experience with China colours your judgement and makes it difficult for you to be rational about this. Global markets (IMO) are a big driver of wealth creation. If we can't compete on price with certain countries then either we deal with anti-competitive practices if they are engaging in that, or we have to adapt. Many industries have gone that way - coming from Teesside I am well aware of that. Steel on its own is a commodity and where it is pretty much down to price then the west will always find it hard to compete. The focus needs to be on value add activities, on information, services, IP.In summary - It is a global market and we are fupped.
Anecdotally, my own employer is in the process of transforming itself from a manufacturer to a service provider based on information, knowledge, IP etc - as well as pure technology/products. We are also coordinating globally and part of my functional areas are centralising on the UK because we have the skill set, the support services and relevant physical and non-physical infrastructure etc. We are effectively exporting knowledge/skills and earning good money from that. All to the benefit of the UK.
Stop being so damn negative!"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
If there was less austerity across Europe you'd imagine the extra demand would be able to soak up some of the extra supply, but anyway.
Jeremy should have stuck to 6 questions on tax credits during PMQs since it was an open goal, especially when Cameron claimed he was 'delighted' with them....0 -
There is also the rest of the world beyond our borders. One of the faults of the EU is that is can be quite inward looking, when around 90%? of the global population lives outside Europe and (at a guess) around 80% of global GDP is non-EU.If there was less austerity across Europe you'd imagine the extra demand would be able to soak up some of the extra supply, but anyway.
Jeremy should have stuck to 6 questions on tax credits during PMQs since it was an open goal, especially when Cameron claimed he was 'delighted' with them....
I think the UK is a good example of where austerity does not seem to be harming growth, judging by our own economic figures.
Anyway, have not seen PMQ today - what were the main questions?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
What happened at the last election.
Quite a few will have learned a lesson and won't repeat it.
Osborne didn't go to Eton.0 -
Spoilsport.
What happened at the last election.
Quite a few will have learned a lesson and won't repeat it.
Osborne didn't go to Eton.
Doesn't ruin the joke though.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.0
