|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 16:25:14 GMT
Corbyn being leader and brexit are the two main reasons why labour can’t get elected, I’m not sure a different leader would make much difference though, it’s mostly down to Brexit, the way Labours voters are split on it makes it very difficult for them to bridge the gap between them, whichever way labour came down on brexit it was always going to upset a chunk of their voters and potential voters and Their fence sitting/2nd referendum proposal hasn’t really worked very well because they’re essentially cancelling the first vote, that’s going to upset many northern leavers who would perhaps have voted labour. Exactly this. Miliband in 2015 was about as benign a leader as you could possibly get, and he was torn to shreds by the media. It doesn't matter who Labour put forward, as long as they are even mildly more opposed to big business than the Tories they will be mauled in public. I think people will be voting more on Brexit than anything else, which is a shame because I think 1. Labour have the most sensible position on it, and 2. for me it isn't the most important thing at this election. Ed Miliband was also labelled anti semitic by some because he was pro Palestine. Ed Miliband is a Jew! But not the right sort of pro-Israel Jew apparently...
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Dec 1, 2019 16:28:19 GMT
How come you don't post as eebygum anymore, mate? 😊 I think you have new confused for somebody else friend I disagree but crack on 'fella' 😊
|
|
|
Post by heyzeus on Dec 1, 2019 16:29:00 GMT
I think you have new confused for somebody else friend I disagree but crack on 'fella' 😊 I disagree but that's fine friend
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 16:29:53 GMT
What concerned me the most was that Corbyn would stick around long enough to get into power by default of everyone getting sick of the Tories, as much as I dislike the Tories I’m glad it’s looking like they’ll see off Corbyn and his crazy state socialism on steroids ideas, I just hope the next labour leader drops the stupid expensive green ideas, identity politics, attacks on business, nanny statism and all the other stuff that makes This Labour Party unappealing, it’s unlikely as it will probably be someone like Emily Thornberry, but who knows, maybe there’s a decent labour leader lurking somewhere ? All of those things make it appealing to me. The green ideas are far less expensive than if we ignore them. The 'nanny statism' being that people shouldnt be dying in a 1st world country. The attacks on business being that business shouldn't run the country and should pay workers a wage they can live on. Those big green ideas have been disastrous in other countries where they’ve been implemented IE Germany and Spain, lost jobs and billions wasted. I’m all for people living healthy lives but not by state dictate, people should be free to choose how they live and what they put in their own bodies, nothing wrong with the state offering nutritional advice but that’s as far as it should go, although even this is fraught with problems as the state has been telling people to avoid saturated fat for years and go low fat yet more evidence is coming out that actually saturated fat isn’t the demon it’s been made out to be and it’s perhaps grains and carbs (which the state have been encouraging people to eat more of for decades) which are problematic.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 16:34:17 GMT
Pretty sure Clinton got the bigger share of corporate donors ? Obviously that might be down to her being the overwhelming favorite to win, but still. I don't think you understand his point Clinton is also right wing She’s neoliberal and kind of 3rd way Like Tony Blair, I wouldn’t say she’s right wing.
|
|
|
Post by claytonscrubs on Dec 1, 2019 16:36:38 GMT
11 days to go...and the Lib Dem’s are getting desperate. All aboard...the Lib Dem bang bus. . Do they honestly think displaying Swinson’s ‘cracking pair’ of tits on the side of a bus will attract swing voters?... Batshit crazy!! 😀
|
|
|
Post by heyzeus on Dec 1, 2019 16:38:25 GMT
I don't think you understand his point Clinton is also right wing She’s neoliberal and kind of 3rd way Like Tony Blair, I wouldn’t say she’s right wing. But he made the point about the press hounding out leaders that didn't side with big money. Neoliberal and third way (same thing) is just that.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 16:39:45 GMT
11 days to go...and the Lib Dem’s are getting desperate. All aboard...the Lib Dem bang bus. . Do they honestly think displaying Swinson’s ‘cracking pair’ of tits on the side of a bus will attract swing voters?... Batshit crazy!! 😀 Might attract some swinger votes ..if you know what I mean
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Dec 1, 2019 16:41:37 GMT
Exactly this. Miliband in 2015 was about as benign a leader as you could possibly get, and he was torn to shreds by the media. It doesn't matter who Labour put forward, as long as they are even mildly more opposed to big business than the Tories they will be mauled in public. I think people will be voting more on Brexit than anything else, which is a shame because I think 1. Labour have the most sensible position on it, and 2. for me it isn't the most important thing at this election. Ed Miliband was also labelled anti semitic by some because he was pro Palestine. Ed Miliband is a Jew! But not the right sort of pro-Israel Jew apparently... Indeed. That's the first time Maureen Lipman very publicly withdrew her support from Labour. The second being under Corbyn. She has never been a member. Vast majority of the Jews I know are disgusted their views are not represented in the media. The family I'm closest to signed the recent letter supporting Corbyn. Half of British Jews are not even under a synagogue never mind the chief Rabbi.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Dec 1, 2019 16:44:42 GMT
Having left wing policies isn't the problem for corbyn. Labours policies for this election are borderline lunacy. Removing gas boilers from every home and business, planting billions of trees , free broadband for all , re nationalization of utilities and railways is all unachievable and everyone knows it The billions of trees is completely achievable. It's a fairly moderate number, in Ethiopia they planted 100's of millions in a day. Whatever your views on nationalisation of course it is achievable, in the case of rail they simply allow each franchise to end and take over the reigns, like any government it boils down to getting the sums right and steering the economy in the right direction. But that's no different to the policies of any other party. On broadband it's a radical policy and if I'm honest probably too ambitious, but people underestimate the magnitude of this in terms of business start ups, people working from home to reduce business costs/improve work life balance, less traffic on the road. And the social benefits to those in rural communities who are isolated. It's potentially huge....... 200 trees a minute 24 hrs a day for 20 years isn't achievable 😉
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 16:53:11 GMT
All of those things make it appealing to me. The green ideas are far less expensive than if we ignore them. The 'nanny statism' being that people shouldnt be dying in a 1st world country. The attacks on business being that business shouldn't run the country and should pay workers a wage they can live on. Those big green ideas have been disastrous in other countries where they’ve been implemented IE Germany and Spain, lost jobs and billions wasted. I’m all for people living healthy lives but not by state dictate, people should be free to choose how they live and what they put in their own bodies, nothing wrong with the state offering nutritional advice but that’s as far as it should go, although even this is fraught with problems as the state has been telling people to avoid saturated fat for years and go low fat yet more evidence is coming out that actually saturated fat isn’t the demon it’s been made out to be and it’s perhaps grains and carbs (which the state have been encouraging people to eat more of for decades) which are problematic. Literally posted articles in response to you saying this a few days ago which explained why they didn’t work as the existing infrastructure wasn’t the same as it is here. You might not agree with a big green deal but you keep pointing to this when it doesn’t tell the full story and it’s not necessarily the same case here.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 16:56:02 GMT
The billions of trees is completely achievable. It's a fairly moderate number, in Ethiopia they planted 100's of millions in a day. Whatever your views on nationalisation of course it is achievable, in the case of rail they simply allow each franchise to end and take over the reigns, like any government it boils down to getting the sums right and steering the economy in the right direction. But that's no different to the policies of any other party. On broadband it's a radical policy and if I'm honest probably too ambitious, but people underestimate the magnitude of this in terms of business start ups, people working from home to reduce business costs/improve work life balance, less traffic on the road. And the social benefits to those in rural communities who are isolated. It's potentially huge....... 200 trees a minute 24 hrs a day for 20 years isn't achievable 😉 Sounds crazy but in fact it is achievable. A state in India planted 50m trees in one day: www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/50591261
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 17:06:41 GMT
The billions of trees is completely achievable. It's a fairly moderate number, in Ethiopia they planted 100's of millions in a day. Whatever your views on nationalisation of course it is achievable, in the case of rail they simply allow each franchise to end and take over the reigns, like any government it boils down to getting the sums right and steering the economy in the right direction. But that's no different to the policies of any other party. On broadband it's a radical policy and if I'm honest probably too ambitious, but people underestimate the magnitude of this in terms of business start ups, people working from home to reduce business costs/improve work life balance, less traffic on the road. And the social benefits to those in rural communities who are isolated. It's potentially huge....... 200 trees a minute 24 hrs a day for 20 years isn't achievable 😉 I know you're not that daft fella. The're won't be one man planting trees on his own for the next 20 years 24 hours a day now will there? Even Roosevelt's government 80 odd years ago planted 3 billion trees, in India they planted 66 million trees in a day, in Ethiopia they planted 350 million.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 17:08:26 GMT
Ed Miliband was also labelled anti semitic by some because he was pro Palestine. Ed Miliband is a Jew! But not the right sort of pro-Israel Jew apparently... Indeed. That's the first time Maureen Lipman very publicly withdrew her support from Labour. The second being under Corbyn. She has never been a member. Vast majority of the Jews I know are disgusted their views are not represented in the media. The family I'm closest to signed the recent letter supporting Corbyn. Half of British Jews are not even under a synagogue never mind the chief Rabbi. Lipman has rejoined Labour more times than Martin Allen has taken the Barnet job......
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 17:08:27 GMT
Those big green ideas have been disastrous in other countries where they’ve been implemented IE Germany and Spain, lost jobs and billions wasted. I’m all for people living healthy lives but not by state dictate, people should be free to choose how they live and what they put in their own bodies, nothing wrong with the state offering nutritional advice but that’s as far as it should go, although even this is fraught with problems as the state has been telling people to avoid saturated fat for years and go low fat yet more evidence is coming out that actually saturated fat isn’t the demon it’s been made out to be and it’s perhaps grains and carbs (which the state have been encouraging people to eat more of for decades) which are problematic. Literally posted articles in response to you saying this a few days ago which explained why they didn’t work as the existing infrastructure wasn’t the same as it is here. You might not agree with a big green deal but you keep pointing to this when it doesn’t tell the full story and it’s not necessarily the same case here. I’m pretty sure Germany and Spain didn’t envision any problems when they set out to transform to a green economy either, it’s a massive undertaking, at a massive cost with massive risks.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 17:10:08 GMT
I don’t really mind the tree planting idea, as it goes, I can get behind that idea, although 2 billion ? Is there even space for 2 billion trees ? Maybe if we controlled immigration there’d be more space for trees 🤔😄
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Dec 1, 2019 17:50:43 GMT
11 days to go...and the Lib Dem’s are getting desperate. All aboard...the Lib Dem bang bus. . Do they honestly think displaying Swinson’s ‘cracking pair’ of tits on the side of a bus will attract swing voters?... Batshit crazy!! 😀 might attract a male vote and a bunch of swingers though
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 17:55:27 GMT
All of those things make it appealing to me. The green ideas are far less expensive than if we ignore them. The 'nanny statism' being that people shouldnt be dying in a 1st world country. The attacks on business being that business shouldn't run the country and should pay workers a wage they can live on. Those big green ideas have been disastrous in other countries where they’ve been implemented IE Germany and Spain, lost jobs and billions wasted. I’m all for people living healthy lives but not by state dictate, people should be free to choose how they live and what they put in their own bodies, nothing wrong with the state offering nutritional advice but that’s as far as it should go, although even this is fraught with problems as the state has been telling people to avoid saturated fat for years and go low fat yet more evidence is coming out that actually saturated fat isn’t the demon it’s been made out to be and it’s perhaps grains and carbs (which the state have been encouraging people to eat more of for decades) which are problematic. Fat has never been the issue, sugar has. That has been known since the 80s. 'The state' was right to tell people to avoid sugar and saturated fat. Are you really telling me that green jobs will not work? Because there will be zero fossil fuel jobs soon, whether we stop using them or not. There are barely any left, and if we decide to use all of the last scraps we will be fucked as a civilised society by famine, drought, fuel scarcity and huge refugee crises. Green policies are a necessity, however much it costs.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 17:55:32 GMT
Why are people so scared of another referendum? If leaving the European Union is still the will of the people then 'Leave' will win again and we'll be out as this time we'll have voted on a deal, not a binary yes or no. As such, Parliament will have nothing to discuss as the people have chosen an actual deal. The problem with the original referendum is that a simple 'Leave' vote meant our sovereign, democratic Parliament couldn't decide on the best form of leaving that would see the country reap the most benefits. That's exactly what they're elected to do. These cries of Parliament stopping democracy simply aren't true. Some people seem to think they're electing a dictator rather than a Prime Minister. Vote Labour, get the Tories out, restore our public services AND get Brexit. Seems the only logical choice to me. Nobody is scared of a 2 referendum, firstly it would be totally anti democratic to have another referendum without implementing the first one, secondly, a 2nd referendum on a deal under labour would give us the choice of remain Vs basically remain,
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 17:56:43 GMT
I don’t really mind the tree planting idea, as it goes, I can get behind that idea, although 2 billion ? Is there even space for 2 billion trees ? Maybe if we controlled immigration there’d be more space for trees 🤔😄 absolutely there is, we'd go from 13% tree coverage to about 19% if we planted 2 billion. Easily done and lower than most EU countries who are at about 35% on average.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 18:08:11 GMT
Those big green ideas have been disastrous in other countries where they’ve been implemented IE Germany and Spain, lost jobs and billions wasted. I’m all for people living healthy lives but not by state dictate, people should be free to choose how they live and what they put in their own bodies, nothing wrong with the state offering nutritional advice but that’s as far as it should go, although even this is fraught with problems as the state has been telling people to avoid saturated fat for years and go low fat yet more evidence is coming out that actually saturated fat isn’t the demon it’s been made out to be and it’s perhaps grains and carbs (which the state have been encouraging people to eat more of for decades) which are problematic. Fat has never been the issue, sugar has. That has been known since the 80s. 'The state' was right to tell people to avoid sugar and saturated fat. Are you really telling me that green jobs will not work? Because there will be zero fossil fuel jobs soon, whether we stop using them or not. There are barely any left, and if we decide to use all of the last scraps we will be fucked as a civilised society by famine, drought, fuel scarcity and huge refugee crises. Green policies are a necessity, however much it costs. People were told to go low fat in the 80s and 90s, low fat foods contained sugar to make up for the lack of taste after taking the fat out, thus people ate more carbs and got fat, it’s not true to say the state was telling people not to eat sugar in the 80s, that’s a more recent government drive, it was all about reducing saturated fat consumption, but saturated fat is not bad for most people, it’s trans fats and carbs that Do the damage. Peak oil is not credible, new reserves of oil are being found, ie Iran just found 53 billion barrels worth.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 18:22:28 GMT
Fat has never been the issue, sugar has. That has been known since the 80s. 'The state' was right to tell people to avoid sugar and saturated fat. Are you really telling me that green jobs will not work? Because there will be zero fossil fuel jobs soon, whether we stop using them or not. There are barely any left, and if we decide to use all of the last scraps we will be fucked as a civilised society by famine, drought, fuel scarcity and huge refugee crises. Green policies are a necessity, however much it costs. People were told to go low fat in the 80s and 90s, low fat foods contained sugar to make up for the lack of taste after taking the fat out, thus people ate more carbs and got fat, it’s not true to say the state was telling people not to eat sugar in the 80s, that’s a more recent government drive, it was all about reducing saturated fat consumption, but saturated fat is not bad for most people, it’s trans fats and carbs that Do the damage. Peak oil is not credible, new reserves of oil are being found, ie Iran just found 53 billion barrels worth. Oil shouldn't be a part of our thinking going forward. It is not sustainable and the burning of it is destroying our habitat.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 18:31:54 GMT
People were told to go low fat in the 80s and 90s, low fat foods contained sugar to make up for the lack of taste after taking the fat out, thus people ate more carbs and got fat, it’s not true to say the state was telling people not to eat sugar in the 80s, that’s a more recent government drive, it was all about reducing saturated fat consumption, but saturated fat is not bad for most people, it’s trans fats and carbs that Do the damage. Peak oil is not credible, new reserves of oil are being found, ie Iran just found 53 billion barrels worth. Oil shouldn't be a part of our thinking going forward. It is not sustainable and the burning of it is destroying our habitat. Well then, be prepared to have a considerable lower standard of living as renewables cannot power modern 1st world civilizations.
|
|
|
Post by potteringermany on Dec 1, 2019 18:36:09 GMT
All of those things make it appealing to me. The green ideas are far less expensive than if we ignore them. The 'nanny statism' being that people shouldnt be dying in a 1st world country. The attacks on business being that business shouldn't run the country and should pay workers a wage they can live on. Those big green ideas have been disastrous in other countries where they’ve been implemented IE Germany and Spain, lost jobs and billions wasted. I’m all for people living healthy lives but not by state dictate, people should be free to choose how they live and what they put in their own bodies, nothing wrong with the state offering nutritional advice but that’s as far as it should go, although even this is fraught with problems as the state has been telling people to avoid saturated fat for years and go low fat yet more evidence is coming out that actually saturated fat isn’t the demon it’s been made out to be and it’s perhaps grains and carbs (which the state have been encouraging people to eat more of for decades) which are problematic. Hi Serpio, where did you get the information of lost jobs and billions wasted for Germany? Obviously implementing some green policies has a price, but as far as I'm aware Germany's employment is at an all time high. They will have problems switching to electric cars, but I've not heard of lost jobs or billions wasted
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 18:37:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 18:44:41 GMT
Those big green ideas have been disastrous in other countries where they’ve been implemented IE Germany and Spain, lost jobs and billions wasted. I’m all for people living healthy lives but not by state dictate, people should be free to choose how they live and what they put in their own bodies, nothing wrong with the state offering nutritional advice but that’s as far as it should go, although even this is fraught with problems as the state has been telling people to avoid saturated fat for years and go low fat yet more evidence is coming out that actually saturated fat isn’t the demon it’s been made out to be and it’s perhaps grains and carbs (which the state have been encouraging people to eat more of for decades) which are problematic. Hi Serpio, where did you get the information of lost jobs and billions wasted for Germany? Obviously implementing some green policies has a price, but as far as I'm aware Germany's employment is at an all time high. They will have problems switching to electric cars, but I've not heard of lost jobs or billions wasted Sorry, should have been clearer, Spain suffered job loses. For Germany wasting billions read www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-failure-on-the-road-to-a-renewable-future-a-1266586.html
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 18:54:43 GMT
Someone should make a dystopian film based in a future where the eco authoritarians have taken over society and implemented their strict green laws, everyone forced to eat quinoa and drive cars powered by peddles a’la the Flintstones,... I should have kept this to myself 🧐 lying in bed with the lurgy really does bring out some great ideas 🤧
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2019 19:05:45 GMT
Oil shouldn't be a part of our thinking going forward. It is not sustainable and the burning of it is destroying our habitat. Well then, be prepared to have a considerable lower standard of living as renewables cannot power modern 1st world civilizations. 1. yes they can. along with nuclear, granted, but they can. 2. we will absolutely have to make concessions now, because if we don't, we will be making huge concessions in the future.
|
|
|
Post by serpico on Dec 1, 2019 19:11:36 GMT
Well then, be prepared to have a considerable lower standard of living as renewables cannot power modern 1st world civilizations. 1. yes they can. along with nuclear, granted, but they can. 2. we will absolutely have to make concessions now, because if we don't, we will be making huge concessions in the future. Sound so like you’re advocating austerity 🥴 Sorry, Was meant to issue this guy ——> 😄 not him ^
|
|
|
Post by potteringermany on Dec 1, 2019 19:25:37 GMT
Hi Serpio, where did you get the information of lost jobs and billions wasted for Germany? Obviously implementing some green policies has a price, but as far as I'm aware Germany's employment is at an all time high. They will have problems switching to electric cars, but I've not heard of lost jobs or billions wasted Sorry, should have been clearer, Spain suffered job loses. For Germany wasting billions read www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-failure-on-the-road-to-a-renewable-future-a-1266586.htmlThanks - a good article - I think that somes it up - but as it indicates, it's more a question of waste through government inefficiencies, rather than anything else.
|
|