Jump to content

The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread


Demitri_C

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, bickster said:

Shame you feel like that, I really would like to hear an opposing view if it adds to the debate

I sounded more passive aggressive than I meant too. Apologies for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, dAVe80 said:

Sharon Graham isn't messing about, and won't take crap from anyone when her members are getting messed about. Unite under her are heavily focused on their industrial strategy. Love to see it personally. 

Yep. My Union. And it’s a nice change from that word removed McLuskey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, trekka said:

This video has made me reconfirm my thoughts that some people just shouldn't be in politics.

She comes across so badly.  Great constituency MP,  but a national party level PR liability

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Welsh Labour Govt has announced a scheme to give all 18 year old care leavers a guaranteed basic income of £19,000 p.a. For the 3 years after they have left care.

The basic income is roughly equivalent to the real living wage, it is taxable. It’s a guaranteed minimum income for those first 3 years out of state care.

It’s the first part of their trial of a basic income policy, not quite being called UBI.

In other news, they are considering a tourism tax and considering tripling rates on holiday homes, and are currently funding a local banking project Banc Cambria to make sure every town has access to a bricks and mortar banking facility.

Finally! The first signs of growing a ball.

 

Do the care leavers have to work for the £19,000 or do they get it regardless?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Genie said:

Do the care leavers have to work for the £19,000 or do they get it regardless?

 

Basic income, regardless, and it’s taxable so if they do get other benefits or find a job then .

It’s an attempt to be an alternative to leaving care and then being back ‘in the system’ within 6 months as you’re sleeping rough or in trouble with the police. Three years of stable regular income to get you sorted and on your way.

It’s a demographic where it should be fairly easy to see if guaranteed income, guaranteed rent, and therefore an address, has an impact on how life turns out for people. 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

 

Basic income, regardless, and it’s taxable so if they do get other benefits or find a job then .

It’s an attempt to be an alternative to leaving care and then being back ‘in the system’ within 6 months as you’re sleeping rough or in trouble with the police. Three years of stable regular income to get you sorted and on your way.

It’s a demographic where it should be fairly easy to see if guaranteed income, guaranteed rent, and therefore an address, has an impact on how life turns out for people. 

 

It sounds like a great idea and well worth trialling. 

Edited by Genie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/02/2022 at 18:54, OutByEaster? said:

So, the Coventry bin men - union busting corporate centrist in battle against labour (small l) or Sir Kier standing up to egomaniacal unions threatening local services?

Probably a bit of both I reckon.

He has my LEV vote but jeez he makes it hard to feel okay about it.

 

 

Awkward.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bickster said:

Is that actually a laugh? Bit of a dry throat maybe,

I guess it depends on what one's opinion of Starmer was before watching the clip, as to whether it was clearing his throat, the cruel mocking of the proletariat by the elitist Tory Knight of the Realm, or something in between. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

I guess it depends on what one's opinion of Starmer was before watching the clip, as to whether it was clearing his throat, the cruel mocking of the proletariat by the elitist Tory Knight of the Realm, or something in between. 

Well yes, quite, it's a laugh, if you want it to be.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bickster said:

Is that actually a laugh? Bit of a dry throat maybe,

It's definitely a laugh for emphasis "an industrial dispute in Coventry" is being emphasised as trivial by the laugh. "This silly little spat shouldn't affect our relationship with the trade unions" is what he's saying. It'd be interesting to see how the Unions feel about that.

He's a very, very difficult politician to like - thankfully he gets to sit opposite a foul lump of odious crud.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see it as a laugh if it was anything that could remotely trigger one, you'd have to be pretty determined to see the worst to think that the mere thought of Coventry is enough for him to not be able to hold a laugh in. Don't know about you but if I were struggling to contain a laugh and it escaped mid sentence, I wouldn't contain it quite that easily either.

It's a cough/dry throat, clear as day, there are plenty of legitimate axes to grind, that is a bit silly.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

It's definitely a laugh for emphasis "an industrial dispute in Coventry" is being emphasised as trivial by the laugh. "This silly little spat shouldn't affect our relationship with the trade unions" is what he's saying. It'd be interesting to see how the Unions feel about that.

He's a very, very difficult politician to like - thankfully he gets to sit opposite a foul lump of odious crud.

 

You think he's deliberately emphasising with a laugh, mid-word? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a deliberate laugh to emphasise that he doesn't believe that the dispute in Coventry should affect relations between the Union and the Party - that's what the laugh is for, to demean the dispute as a way to put it into a context of the larger relationship!

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OutByEaster? said:

Yes, absolutely.

And the key giveaway for me on that is the bit where he deliberately, for emphasis, laughs, mid-word!

I'm genuinely baffled by this perspective, I just don't see it, and reading through the replies to that tweet, there are a lot of people also determined to see this, and I don't think it's particularly good company to be in. People calling it  "dripping with contempt", "the mask slipping", and all I'm seeing is a supressed cough. If he were trying to laugh for emphasis, he did a pretty shit job of it, and why does he try to keep talking?

I suspect we may have to agree to disagree here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â