Jump to content
Demitri_C

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

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Worse that racism? Many things are worse than racism, doesn't make the poster any better though. The fact that a Labour MP gets away with clear as day racism like that is beyond me. What if the poster said "The Conservatives will put White people first to preserve a diverse nation." Half the posters on here would be in uproar. The fact that it happens in one of the most ethically diverse boroughs in our country makes it even worse. A lot of my mother's Jewish family lives around Stamford Hill and they aren't voting Labour any more because of stuff like this being put out by Abbott and her team in Hackney.

I would assume that they had taken leave of their senses, since regardless of morality, that would make no logical sense at all. 

EDIT: Irrelevant anyway now I've seen Tony's post. 

Edited by HanoiVillan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bickster said:

I'm sure this has been disproved time and time again

Tories have borrowed far more and taxed higher than Labour have, pretty consistently since WW2

Wait where in my post did I say the conservatives are any better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Demitri_C said:

Wait where in my post did I say the conservatives are any better?

It's implied due to the fact they've been the only other party in power since WW2. If Labour are bad and can't be trusted, the implication is that something must have been better, the only something is the Tories. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bickster said:

I'm sure this has been disproved time and time again

Tories have borrowed far more and taxed higher than Labour have, pretty consistently since WW2

If you're willing to ignore the fact that Labour threw their and other peoples money at problems that either didn't exist or were impossible to solve under the structure they put in place then yes, absolutely, ignoring Labours financial failures shows the Tories as the real problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bickster said:

It's implied due to the fact they've been the only other party in power since WW2. If Labour are bad and can't be trusted, the implication is that something must have been better, the only something is the Tories. 

Bicks, no mention of the Tories from me.  But my point is that people really think things will be better under Corbyns manifesto. It won't be be it will be the same shit. Both parties are terrible and untrustworthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

as per Labours 50p rate previously higher tax rates generally result in lower than expected revenues , so there is some  evidence to support this

Trying to draw any serious conclusions from that short lived tax rate change is a bit barmy. :)

Edit: Other than people with the money and opportunity to do so will either bring forward or defer earnings if they're given the chance and the clear indication that these shenanigans would reduce their tax bill.

Edited by snowychap
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, magnkarl said:

Talking of hypocritical politicians, I sat in on a lecture by a professor

C9gIO5SXYAEuApJ.jpg



 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, snowychap said:

Trying to draw any serious conclusions from that short lived tax rate change is a bit barmy. :)

Edit: Other than people with the money and opportunity to do so will either bring forward or defer earnings if they're given the chance and the clear indication that these shenanigans would reduce their tax bill.

That's fair comment but it's why I also mentioned the US where the higher tax rate had a longer life span

your edit is kinda exactly the point though , there's a big assumption that the wealthy will just pay these higher rates of tax when history suggests they don't 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

your edit is kinda exactly the point though , there's a big assumption that the wealthy will just pay these higher rates of tax when history suggests they don't 

Except my edit was about a particular set of circumstances, i.e what happened in the UK at the start of the decade. There's only so long that people can defer their incomes before they cease to be incomes. :)

 

You'll have to elaborate on the US stuff (e.g. when, what, where and how it was measured) but one wonders whether the empirical evidence is as supportive as it is often claimed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my way on the tube from Twickenham to Clapham today I picked up my first City A.M copy ever that was lying next to the free Metro newspapers for some reason. On the editor's page there was an article on Corbyn that was quite interesting. Now I haven't done enough research about City A.M to know if it is a serious paper or not, but the editor had some good points.

Linky

Quote

Those of us who refuse to forget Jeremy Corbyn’s appalling support for the IRA and Middle Eastern terror groups have to concede that attacks on this subject failed to deter a significant portion of the population from voting for him.

Nevertheless, as a senior government source put it to me this week, it’s possible that if the Tory campaign didn’t focus on this (and the questions raised about his judgement, character and values) he may well have done even better in June’s election.

Small comfort for a Tory party still licking its wounds after an electoral punishment. But whereas his enthusiasm for the IRA’s agenda is a historical issue, his support for the policies of Venezuelan socialism is a glaringly contemporary issue, and ought to serve as a reminder that for Corbyn, the inconvenient realities of the Maduro regime are not enough to make an old socialist repent.

His supporters claim that people like me are simply seizing on Venezuela’s current turmoil to make cheap political points, but we should cast aside this shoddy riposte and focus on the very real, and very alarming, implications of Corbyn’s refusal to condemn the regime outright.

Lamenting violence “on both sides” while shoehorning in praise for the regime’s success in driving up literacy rates reveals a man blinded by a dogmatic, lifelong commitment to the old left-wing mantra that the end justifies the means. Maduro, like Hugo Chavez before him, is a socialist and a revolutionary, standing up to America and the “neoliberal consensus”. For Corbyn, these qualities far outweigh any damage done in pursuit of what he recently praised as “a better way of doing things.”

The Labour leader’s support for oppressive regimes (so long as they carry the right flag) is not a silly-season side issue, it is the central issue – and a reminder of just how unfit he is for high office.

If we isolate the issue here rather than saying "well, the tories are just as bad", I do think that there are some good points in here. We need to be stricter with both Corbyn and May for their leanings abroad as they are a reflection of their voters. Venezuela is tethering on civil war and it's revolutionary socialism that got them there. Meanwhile the rest of the socialist world is turning a blind eye to the reprisals Maduro is dishing out in the name of socialism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, magnkarl said:

On my way on the tube from Twickenham to Clapham today I picked up my first City A.M copy ever that was lying next to the free Metro newspapers for some reason. On the editor's page there was an article on Corbyn that was quite interesting. Now I haven't done enough research about City A.M to know if it is a serious paper or not, but the editor had some good points.

Linky

If we isolate the issue here rather than saying "well, the tories are just as bad", I do think that there are some good points in here. We need to be stricter with both Corbyn and May for their leanings abroad as they are a reflection of their voters. Venezuela is tethering on civil war and it's revolutionary socialism that got them there. Meanwhile the rest of the socialist world is turning a blind eye to the reprisals Maduro is dishing out in the name of socialism.

I gave up at IRA in the first sentence. The bias was already apparent. I'm not even a Corbyn supporter

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Oh Venezuela, yes, interesting subject:

Turns out the government have been selling military equipment to Venezuela all along. 

 

Shocking really. Both parties should be ashamed, one is a wine buddy with Maduro and the other made sure he can kill protesters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bickster said:

I gave up at IRA in the first sentence. The bias was already apparent. I'm not even a Corbyn supporter

Like for fashionable 'not Corbyn fanboy' closer.

;)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, magnkarl said:

Shocking really. Both parties should be ashamed, one is a wine buddy with Maduro and the other made sure he can kill protesters. 

Assuming Corbyn is a 'wine buddy', what's worse, being a wine buddy? Or selling arms. Why should both be 'ashamed' when one party is doing something far more destructive. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â