General Election 2017

[choffer]

41 minutes ago, PompeyVillan said:

For anyone underestimating the power of social media.

 

 

[Davkaus]

2 hours ago, PieFacE said:

Having a government controlling what is and what is not published on the internet is **** crazy. Especially all under the name of "terror". If heroin addicts can figure out PGP encryption when purchasing their fix on the darkweb,  i'm sure terrorists can too....

All it will do is put them more "underground" and harder to catch. 

If it's under the name of terror, why is the crazy bitch always going after porn She has an unhealthy fascination in what I jerk off to.

Leave our porn alone, it's the will of the British people, you authoritarian word removed.

[markavfc40]

7 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

But does it mean bills go unpaid or that they got their estimate wrong?

I think the bills get paid but the government lends the trusts money to bail them out although how they'll ever get to a situation where they can repay it is anyone's guess. Last year NHS trusts borrowed over 3.3 billion.

[villaglint]

People talking about JC connecting with non voters and young voters is all IMO true and on the face of it great. But as @Chindie and others have said it's nowhere near enough.

The whole game has changed with them losing Scotland so emphatically to the SNP the very best they can do is build this progressive alliance. I don't know what that means constitutionally but I guess it means the Tories making the running and the Alliance voting down policies they don't like or turning the whole of government into some super huge coalition. Not sure but that seems the only hope of even tempering what the Tories want to do. I don't see anyway Labour can win their own majority. 

[mockingbird_franklin]

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

But they have lived through a phony rigged and pretend capitalist system failing and being bailed out by the state.

 

 

made it a little more accurate

[magnkarl]

2 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

But they have lived through a capitalist system failing and being bailed out by the state.

 

 

Oh, you must mean like Communist Russia/Cambodia/Belarus/Yugoslavia/Nicaragua/Cuba/North Korea/Iran etc is/was failing right? If you consider our country to be failing, what do you consider of the few proper socialistic countries left in the world? Capitalism is intrinsically going to ebb and flow with the market, while socialism holds one line until the boat crashes into an iceberg called reality. There isn't a single positive story to report for socialism, it's ended in genocide, hunger, millions of people dead and a repressive society. Everyone may be born into a different wealth class in our country, but we can all register a company, work, invent and say what we want. You couldn't do that in a socialist state.

[TrentVilla]

There may be an argument that Corbyn is connecting with young voters and there has been a recent spike in the registration of young voters but I just don't see it being enough.

In fact due to changes over voter registration I actually think that there will be less young people voting than in previous elections.

 

[Wainy316]

8 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Oh, you must mean like Communist Russia/Cambodia/Belarus/Yugoslavia/Nicaragua/Cuba/North Korea/Iran etc is/was failing right? If you consider our country to be failing, what do you consider of the few proper socialistic countries left in the world? Capitalism is intrinsically going to ebb and flow with the market, while socialism holds one line until the boat crashes into an iceberg called reality. There isn't a single positive story to report for socialism, it's ended in genocide, hunger, millions of people dead and a repressive society. Everyone may be born into a different wealth class in our country, but we can all register a company, work, invent and say what we want. You couldn't do that in a socialist state.

Labour aren't proposing to go full on Castro, they want to emulate the Swedish/Norwegian model.  You know, the places regularly cited as the happiest and best places to live in the world.

[darrenm]

1 minute ago, Wainy316 said:

Labour aren't proposing to go full on Castro, they want to emulate the Swedish/Norwegian model.  You know, the places regularly cited as the happiest and best places to live in the world.

You could cite the UK as an example of a successful socialist country

[magnkarl]

33 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Labour aren't proposing to go full on Castro, they want to emulate the Swedish/Norwegian model.  You know, the places regularly cited as the happiest and best places to live in the world.

Norway's system is artificially held to a standard that can't be achieved in our country due to oil. Sweden is good, however they've got more than a fair share of their own problems. It's a hell of a lot easier to run a country with 5 and 9 million people respectively than it is to run ours. Sweden has "no go zones" in several of its cities, Gothenburg, Malmo and Stockholm due to the multiculturalism that Corbyn likes to promote. I don't mean to pee on the JC parade but those two countries are pipe-dreams.

Edited May 19, 2017 by magnkarl

[magnkarl]

8 minutes ago, darrenm said:

You could cite the UK as an example of a successful socialist country

You think that our society is built on socialism? Please explain to me how we are socialist and how our history, propelling us to the crux of the world stage is in any way socialist? We're a capitalistic democratic country built on liberal values and conservative trade policy. Our Labour party is less socialist than the right wing of the Chinese Worker's Party..

Edited May 19, 2017 by magnkarl

[magnkarl]

I just saw on BBC that John McDonnell (shadow chancellor - Labour) claims £200 a year in winter fuel allowance even though he's paid almost £100k of taxpayers money. So much for socialism folks. Jeremy has a lot of work to do with his own people if he wants to be a principled leftist.

[PompeyVillan]

37 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Oh, you must mean like Communist Russia/Cambodia/Belarus/Yugoslavia/Nicaragua/Cuba/North Korea/Iran etc is/was failing right? If you consider our country to be failing, what do you consider of the few proper socialistic countries left in the world? Capitalism is intrinsically going to ebb and flow with the market, while socialism holds one line until the boat crashes into an iceberg called reality. There isn't a single positive story to report for socialism, it's ended in genocide, hunger, millions of people dead and a repressive society. Everyone may be born into a different wealth class in our country, but we can all register a company, work, invent and say what we want. You couldn't do that in a socialist state.

I think you're mistaking the Labour Party for something it isn't, and talk of Russia, Cambodia or whatever is completely off topic.

It's a bit like comparing the Conservatives to the Nazis.

[bickster]

6 hours ago, magnkarl said:

Ah yes, most of these socialists haven't actually lived through an actual socialist country failing. It's a shame that most of them were in their diapers when the last failed experiment fell with the wall in 1989. You'd think that they'd stop cherrypicking and arguing moot points with so little proof to back their views up. This new age Labour resurrection we have going is funny as it wouldn't even exist without the framework from our free society that capitalism and right leaned politics have built around it. It's not cool to work hard to earn more money than the rest. God forbid.

Sorry when did Sweden or Norway fail?

Not sure how you've managed to confuse Socialism and Totalitarian Communism, they may come from the same root but are no way the same thing

I'm not a Socialist btw, I just think nonsensical arguments should be shown up for what they are

Oh and I was in Poland and the USSR just before the end, in fact Solidarity were just about to begin their talks when I was there, it was that close to the end. So you could say I saw them fail first hand

[magnkarl]

15 minutes ago, bickster said:

Sorry when did Sweden or Norway fail?

Not sure how you've managed to confuse Socialism and Totalitarian Communism, they may come from the same root but are no way the same thing

I'm not a Socialist btw, I just think nonsensical arguments should be shown up for what they are

Oh and I was in Poland and the USSR just before the end, in fact Solidarity were just about to begin their talks when I was there, it was that close to the end. So you could say I saw them fail first hand

Since when did two capitalistic unitary monarchies ran by one populist party and one conservative party become socialist? I get what socialism is and it's not in any way shape or form present in Sweden or Norway. Having a welfare state doesn't mean that a country is socialist - I think a lot of people confuse these two things. If Norway was socialist they'd share the wealth they have amongst their people, rather they are buying up streets and other things world wide to save for the future. That isn't in any way shape or form socialist. 

Definition of socialism: a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

What you are confusing socialism with is what is called the Nordic Model. This is not socialism, it's a mix between collective bargaining, capitalism and libertarianism with huge social mobility. Socialism isn't any of those. In fact Norway has one of the freest markets in Europe, strong property rights and extreme protection for doing business with extreme tax percentages. It's a pick and mix model that could work in our society if we had a democracy where more than two parties mattered.

 

Edited May 19, 2017 by magnkarl

[a m ole]

Sweden's "no-go zones" 

I assume they're like Birmingham's, according to Fox News.

[bickster]

12 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

Since when did two capitalistic unitary monarchies ran by one populist party and one conservative party become socialist? I get what socialism is and it's not in any way shape or form present in Sweden or Norway. Having a welfare state doesn't mean that a country is socialist - I think a lot of people confuse these two things. If Norway was socialist they'd share the wealth they have amongst their people, rather they are buying up streets and other things world wide to save for the future. That isn't in any way shape or form socialist. 

Definition of socialism: a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

What you are confusing socialism with is what is called the Nordic Model. This is not socialism, it's a mix between collective bargaining, capitalism and libertarianism with huge social mobility. Socialism isn't any of those. In fact Norway has one of the freest markets in Europe, strong property rights and extreme protection for doing business with extreme tax percentages. It's a pick and mix model that could work in our society if we had a democracy where more than two parties mattered.

 

By that definition there's never been a Socialist country, your original point is therefore moot by your own argument.

[magnkarl]

3 minutes ago, a m ole said:

Sweden's "no-go zones" 

I assume they're like Birmingham's, according to Fox News.

Go to Rinkeby outside Stockholm or Rosengård in Malmø and get back to me. The fact that you're making fun of it shows how little you know.

[magnkarl]

1 minute ago, bickster said:

By that definition there's never been a Socialist country, your original point is therefore moot by your own argument.

What? I listed a whole bunch of socialist countries. You are making absolutely no sense. Your definition of socialism is something else.

[bickster]

2 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

What? I listed a whole bunch of socialist countries. You are making absolutely no sense. Your definition of socialism is something else.

No, by your own definition, you didn't. You listed some countries, they do not fit even your description