Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

I've obviously not done a cost-benefit analysis of *this particular seating area*, but it is obviously true that there can be virtuous loops to making public spaces nicer and more people-friendly, ie if a place is a pleasant and fun place to visit, more people will do so, and more people will spend money in the area, which will allow rates to go up and improve the council's financial position.

It's just not true that the most prosperous bits of any country look like a complete shithole because the most effective thing to do is never spend money on anything. Generally, the most prosperous parts of countries tend to look quite nice, on the whole.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator

Just as an idea of how huge the wastage on filing these accounts late is. Council Tax on a band D property in Enfield is £1,795.47. Given the population of Enfield being 340,000, its just about double the 47p that has been wasted per property. Per person in the borough it's less than 30p

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

Just as an idea of how huge the wastage on filing these accounts late is. Council Tax on a band D property in Enfield is £1,795.47. Given the population of Enfield being 340,000, its just about double the 47p that has been wasted per property. Per person in the borough it's less than 30p

It does put it in perspective a little, but it's still money that could be put to much better use than (presumably) going back to central goverment's coffers. It's just wrong that councils are fined for failures like this. It's punishing the residents. The staff responsible for failures in office should be disciplined rather than further impacting the people who live in their area. This feels so blatantly obvious that it's just bizarre we have this system.

It's especially amusing, in a tragic sort of way, when the reason for the fine is due to funding issues at the council.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
1 hour ago, Demitri_C said:

I accept the councils are losing money thanks to cebtral government pete, however when this happens i expect the council to use the resources they do have on things that matter….

Instead these have just become a smoking weed haven for people. Its incredible. 

As for the current tory party they are greedy, money making filth. But that does not excuse labour for their shambolic handling of my local area where they have wasted money on things that could have been utilised better.

If only there was another choice that was not labour or conservative they both equally as shit as each other

 

20210502_130051.jpg

On the first point, Dem, sure in the first couple of years of the central government cuts to council funding, then yeah, maybe trim the fat from what you can. But then the cuts continued and it got harder and harder and essentials had to be cut, then harder still and then it really started hurting people…and it’s gone on for 11 years now.

Yore right that there are still some examples of individuals being greedy with council wages for the top brass and no council is perfect, Tory or Labour or whoever else.

But the narrative that they’re all the same is not right. The councils themselves have got together to oppose what the government has done. There are good Tory councils and bad ones. Ditto Labour, Lib Dem etc.

The problem is amplified when people get up in arms about stuff like that seating area picture. I mean in what universe is a council providing a tidy outdoor meeting area during a pandemic described as a bad thing?  If people drink coffee there in the daytime, or in the evening kids drink alcohol or smoke weed, then ok some won’t like it, but people using it as anti council propaganda are whoppers out for their own gain. I could go all HMHB Breaking news and say “People who moan at the council about the streets being full of litter (not stopping to think that it is people who drop litter, not the council)” should be arrested for annoying the nation

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

Sam that does not hide the fact you would be critising this if it was a conservative government not just dismissing the source.

Its not acceptable behaviour by any council

Believe what you want about me. It doesn't make it a fact.

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

I could go all HMHB Breaking news...

Someone should have played the bit about children's names to the one-time Royal Couple as well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bickster said:

How do you know? You don't even know why.

There's no nice way of putting this. You are being radicalised by propaganda

I mean, that's a pretty nice way of putting it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Demitri_C loves his car. He wants to be able to drive it wherever he wants to go and find a parking space when he gets there. Hence his pet bugbears are local traffic restriction zones and parking spaces being turned over to public seating. 

Unfortunately in a city as large as London (and many smaller cities as well) if everyone chose their car to travel around it would be permanent gridlock, not to mention the pollution. 

All urban councils have a need to aggressively make driving an unattractive option in order to push people to change to a more sustainable travel mode. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/05/2021 at 21:25, chrisp65 said:

Lawrence Fox was there?

Lawrence Fox wants more traffic?

Isn’t he polling lower than that guy that has a bin on his head?

 

 

Interesting back story about that guy when you look into him. Something along the lines of he used to be Lord Buckethead and run as a protest vote, he gained over 100k twitter followers and some decent media coverage. At this point an American film producer sued him for copyright breach as he had a minor character in a 1980s film by that name, he took the name and ownership of the twitter account. Continued pretending to be the original guy and paid someone to run as him in an election. All quite insidious. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rds1983 said:

Interesting back story about that guy when you look into him. Something along the lines of he used to be Lord Buckethead and run as a protest vote, he gained over 100k twitter followers and some decent media coverage. At this point an American film producer sued him for copyright breach as he had a minor character in a 1980s film by that name, he took the name and ownership of the twitter account. Continued pretending to be the original guy and paid someone to run as him in an election. All quite insidious. 

To be fair, the Lord Buckethead character used is the character from the 80s film that was sued over, not just a similar name. Although it is a bit shitty to then threaten legal action and co-opt the idea when it goes viral.

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, MessiWillSignForVilla said:

To be fair, the Lord Buckethead character used is the character from the 80s film that was sued over, not just a similar name. Although it is a bit shitty to then threaten legal action and co-opt the idea when it goes viral.

It's the pretending to be the same guy and posting political statements bit I don't like. He deleted all posts and the bio when he handed over the twitter account and the US guy reinstated them all pretending nothing had changed. Get him to stop using it, fine, enjoy the minor increased interest in your 30 Yr old film, absolutely fine. Using it to post political statements and paying someone to run for mayor in a foreign country and pretending to be someone you're not, I'm less fine with as it feels creepy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter

Count Binface did an interview with Owen Jones that's quite funny

And apparently there's a Redfield Wilton poll out tonight which is showing a huge Tory to Labour swing.

Which means that the recent Johnson issues have hurt the Tory vote and it could possibly be enough to keep Hartlepool, especially now that the left jokey protest vote of NIP has been split.

Then again, Thursday is enough time for the attention span of the British public to forget about last week's Johnson shenanigans and for the swing to go back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter
Posted (edited)

It's only a poll of 517 people but if it's anywhere near accurate it'll be devastating for Starmer considering Corbyn won it twice

edit: the major reason does seem to be that people just don't like the Labour leader

 

Edited by darrenm
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be devastating no matter what about Corbyn. You just can't lose a by-election to a sitting government in a seat held by the opposition by that sort of margin. That result would be so unbelievably terrible that I have a hard time thinking the poll is right.

However, the bad polling keeps coming this morning:

The only positive you can take out of this one is that the field work was done a couple of weeks ago when Labour's overall polling position was worse. But it doesn't so far look like this is going to be a close race, which would be a(nother?) devastating result.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, darrenm said:

It's only a poll of 517 people but if it's anywhere near accurate it'll be devastating for Starmer considering Corbyn won it twice

edit: the major reason does seem to be that people just don't like the Labour leader

 

Tories and Brexit, right wing parties got over 21,000 votes in 2019. Now with no Brexit party, its realistic that the votes will gravitate towards the tories. Would that be any different with another leader. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • VT Supporter
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

Tories and Brexit, right wing parties got over 21,000 votes in 2019. Now with no Brexit party, its realistic that the votes will gravitate towards the tories. Would that be any different with another leader. 

Yes, as in 2017:

image.png.7a4679804a3f0ef8c093a62692cb1cc4.png

source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartlepool_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#2017_general_election

Edited by darrenm
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Moderator

Two Indy Party on 6% each? Thats nowhere near what any other Poll has said. 12% of the people polled said they were voting for either of thiose two options

I really don't think that will reflect in reality

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Seat68 said:

Tories and Brexit, right wing parties got over 21,000 votes in 2019. Now with no Brexit party, its realistic that the votes will gravitate towards the tories. Would that be any different with another leader. 

*If* that poll were right - and as I said before, it's so bad that I have a hard time believing it will be close to right - then that would suggest 95%+ of the Brexit vote going to the Tories, and 0% net going to Labour, with Labour also leaking votes to other parties.

By contrast, when the UKIP vote collapsed in 2017 in Hartlepool, it split about 60:40 in Labour's favour.

Again, that would be absolutely dire. It's also not any kind of an excuse, because fundamentally you are not on track to win an election - to put it mildly - if you are nearly 200 seats behind and are losing one of the ones you do have, or if you are failing to gain net *any* voters from the Brexit party in the north of England.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â