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

[Awol]

If UKIP win anything more than a raffle in their current state it will highlight two things:

Just how untrusted the so called mainstream parties are; the huge opportunity that's still out there to build an alternative political force. 

[StefanAVFC]

12 minutes ago, blandy said:

There's a by election just up the road from here (I'm a revolting northerner, [by location, anyway]) pretty soon. It'll be that, I imagine.

I just think it's too little too late. Who is expected to win the seat/who held it previously?

I think his strongest support is left to centre-left. Student progressive types; Lib Dem voters in 2010.

They're the ones who joined in droves to vote for him in the leadership contest. And he's abandoned them for people who don't even vote Labour anymore.

I can see why he did it and I sympathise with his position, but it's too late. His fence sitting has pissed off both sides and the side more likely to come back to him are the ones he's turned his back on

Traditional working-class, Labour voters have never been left-wing in their views but they always voted Labour as they represented the working class and fairness.

As Labour shifted into the centre, they abandoned this base allowing UKIP to come in, where these people's views align more anyway IMO. The Tories spotted this, panicked with the ref and here we are.

 

Edited January 10, 2017 by StefanAVFC

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, Awol said:

If UKIP win anything more than a raffle in their current state it will highlight two things:

Just how untrusted the so called mainstream parties are; the huge opportunity that's still out there to build an alternative political force. 

The Sleaford by-election was interesting and fairly reflective. Strong 'Leave' constituency yet UKIP dropped 2.2%. Lib Dems rose 5.3% and the most damning was Labour dropping 7%. Even the Tories dropped 2.2% Obviously a microcosm but interesting none the less.

I think, with regards to your bolded, the Lib Dems have a real chance here but I'm so meh about Farron and I support the LD's so I can't imagine non-LD supporters warming to him.

[Chindie]

He's still fence sitting.

[Awol]

37 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

I think, with regards to your bolded, the Lib Dems have a real chance here but I'm so meh about Farron and I support the LD's so I can't imagine non-LD supporters warming to him.

I meant something completely new to fill the gap in the market rather than an existing party.

The Lib Dems are proven weasels imo and Farron, well... he's a pitifully weak character. 

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, Awol said:

The Lib Dems are proven weasels

Let me guess, tuition fees? 

[blandy]

58 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

I just think it's too little too late. Who is expected to win the seat/who held it previously?

I think his strongest support is left to centre-left. Student progressive types; Lib Dem voters in 2010.

They're the ones who joined in droves to vote for him in the leadership contest. And he's abandoned them for people who don't even vote Labour anymore.

I can see why he did it and I sympathise with his position, but it's too late. His fence sitting has pissed off both sides and the side more likely to come back to him are the ones he's turned his back on

Traditional working-class, Labour voters have never been left-wing in their views but they always voted Labour as they represented the working class and fairness.

As Labour shifted into the centre, they abandoned this base allowing UKIP to come in, where these people's views align more anyway IMO. The Tories spotted this, panicked with the ref and here we are.

 

Labour Seat, but not sure they'll win it this time. The local MP nobbed off and got a job with BNFL, mainly beause he's not a  Corbyn fan, but also apparently because he anted to spend more time with his kids, rather than in that London.

It's not the sort of place to vote Lib Dem. I also don't think Lib Dem types would (mostly) vote for anti EU Corbyn.

On this "Traditional working-class, Labour voters have never been left-wing in their views but they always voted Labour as they represented the working class and fairness." I think that depends on how you define left wing. If it means support for the Sandanistas and Co-operative free range lentil farming workshops for all, then, no. But if you mean standing up for working people against the power and authority and abuse of the Bosses, owners and so on, then that's what I'd call proper left wing stuff. Stuff that has a practical benefit. Protecting jobs and pensions and conditions.

Corbyn's just a hopeless, hapless disaster for Labour. If Labour had a clue what it was doing then it could clear away much of the "threat" of UKIP allegedly taking Labour votes.

[chrisp65]

I know there's a whole load of psych that comes with this. 

Anna Soubry MP was on a political talk show (Any Questions) last week along with Alan Johnson MP. She said that in part she was thankful that Johnson hadn't stood and become Labour leader as there was every chance the polls would look very different right now and the challenges to the tories would be much tougher. She said that she felt Labour were actually currently letting everyone down by giving the government a free pass.

As I say, this can't be taken wholly at face value. But bloody hell.

[StefanAVFC]

I do like Alan Johnson, apart from being a QPR fan *spit*

Edited January 10, 2017 by StefanAVFC

[markavfc40]

4 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

When JC finally managed to give an answer to an actual question, it was a wrong answer. He was asked if there should be an upper limit on pay, or whether there should be more tax on higher earnings. He decided greater taxation on greater earnings wasn’t the answer. He wanted to see a wage cap (he used the word ‘cap’), a legal limit on what you can earn in the UK.
Absolute winner of an idea there JC. Let’s not tax chrispy at 60, 70 or 80% if he earns £10 million. Let’s pass a law saying he can’t legally earn £10 million if he wants to live in the UK.

I guess his logic, assuming there is one, would be that if companies pay those at the very top of the tree a bit less they can then afford to pay those further down a bit more and have a fairer distribution of wealth.

Edited January 10, 2017 by markavfc40

[villaglint]

I find it difficult to believe he actually said that (wage cap). I didn't hear the interview and several people have said it to me so it must be true but really? Wow! 

Did he just make it up on the spot. It's probably the furthest left thing he's said so far. 

Populist relaunch, Day 1....

Edited January 10, 2017 by villaglint

[chrisp65]

1 minute ago, markavfc40 said:

I guess his logic, assuming there is one, would be that if companies pay those at the very top of the tree a bit less they can then afford to pay those further down a bit more and have a fairer distribution of wealth.

Oh I can see the logic, I can almost see the brain cogs processing the question.

The answer was there should be a maximum figure you can earn in the UK.

So rather than take £10 million in tax off someone that earned £20 million, he'd rather they moved out of the country and lived elsewhere.

I'm not an economist, but i think we're £10 million down on that deal.

He's also painted himself in to another corner. If Humphrys had been listening, not just waiting to speak again. The obvious next question was to ask: what will that maximum figure be?

JC actually dodged a bullet there, not having to name the maximum figure you'd be legally allowed to earn in a Labour Britain. 

He can't think on his feet. 

[tonyh29]

Sky News have a picture of Wayne Rooney next to Corbyn as their example to highlight overpaid people

The Sky News web bod deserves a promotion if nothing else

 

 

 

 

[HanoiVillan]

3 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Oh I can see the logic, I can almost see the brain cogs processing the question.

The answer was there should be a maximum figure you can earn in the UK.

So rather than take £10 million in tax off someone that earned £20 million, he'd rather they moved out of the country and lived elsewhere.

I'm not an economist, but i think we're £10 million down on that deal.

He's also painted himself in to another corner. If Humphrys had been listening, not just waiting to speak again. The obvious next question was to ask: what will that maximum figure be?

JC actually dodged a bullet there, not having to name the maximum figure you'd be legally allowed to earn in a Labour Britain. 

He can't think on his feet. 

I can't believe he actually said that. I mean, I know you're not lying, and I've seen it reported elsewhere, but it just boggles the mind. Such stupidity is like trying to grasp the size of the universe, it's easier to just give up than try to understand. 

[blandy]

3 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

He can't think on his feet. 

Probably not, but I think the bigger concern is that he'd rather have a "principle" that some people earn too much money, so have an idea that no-one should earn more than X amount, and then say it out loud, than actually get elected and make a difference to people's lives.

It's not the lack of quick thinking, it's the lack of practical thinking, or any actual tangible, credible, aim that irks me. I don't mind someone who would want to consider a question carefully before answering. I do mind someone who is basically a flaky dreamer with no concept of how to make the lives of most people a bit, or a lot, better. 

[Davkaus]

6 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

I think he's making a play for the revolting northerners, to get them back from UKIP.

Well, he's not doing a good job of it, the Beeb headline is currently "immigration is not too high -Corbyn".

Now, I don't really disagree, but right now, that's an election losing "quote". 

Edited January 10, 2017 by Davkaus

[Chindie]

It is an election losing quote.

But he's an election losing man.

[Amsterdam_Neil_D]

42 minutes ago, blandy said:

It's not the lack of quick thinking, it's the lack of practical thinking, or any actual tangible, credible, aim that irks me. I don't mind someone who would want to consider a question carefully before answering. I do mind someone who is basically a flaky dreamer with no concept of how to make the lives of most people a bit, or a lot, better. 

I actually think there is something wrong with him mentally. "flaky dreamer" is a good start but don't you think he gets a little more strange with both his mannerisms and overall grip on reality as the months tick by ? Maybe it's my imagination but all is not well on the good ship JC. 

[snowychap]

6 hours ago, blandy said:

I'm a revolting northerner

Sounds more apt than Player Manager.

[snowychap]

10 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

He was asked if there should be an upper limit on pay, or whether there should be more tax on higher earnings. He decided greater taxation on greater earnings wasn’t the answer. He wanted to see a wage cap (he used the word ‘cap’), a legal limit on what you can earn in the UK.

I haven't heard the thing on the radio or seen anything else other than just having a look on The Beeb's front page (saw nothing) and The Grauniad's front page which had him quoted as talking about the old chestnut of a 20:1 ratio for max:min pay which I don't think is a bad idea at all, though one would have to guard against this just reducing all workers' pay and transferring that reduction to profit/company balance sheets/capitalist bastards.

Corbyn proposes maximum wage for all government contractors

Quote

Company bosses should have their pay limited to less than 20 times that of their lowest paid worker if they want their firms to be eligible for government contracts, Jeremy Corbyn has suggested.

The Labour leader made the proposal as part of a speech on Brexit, in which he also set out plans to tackle pay inequality hours after he aired the idea of a “maximum wage cap” in an interview on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

The proposed pay ratio for government contractors would affect major outsourcing companies, some of whose bosses earn more than £1m every year. On Corbyn’s calculation it would permit executives to earn a maximum of about £350,000.

Speaking in Peterborough, Corbyn said: “In the 1920s, JP Morgan, the Wall Street banker, limited salaries to 20 times that of junior employees. Another advocate of pay ratios was David Cameron. His government proposed a 20:1 pay ratio to limit sky-high pay in the public sector and now all salaries higher than £150,000 must be signed off by the Cabinet Office.

“Labour will go further and extend that to any company that is awarded a government contract. A 20:1 ratio means someone earning the living wage, just over £16,000 a year, would permit an executive to be earning nearly £350,000. It cannot be right that if companies are getting public money that that can be creamed off by a few at the top.”

...more on link