Labour Party politics

silvertop said:
Would divesting power to the regions alter that?
Click to expand...
As with the current devolved assemblies, it will just mean more expensive buildings for more idiots to make idiotic decisions in, more bureaucracy and unnecessary jobs for the boys, more taxation to pay for it all. We have far too much government as it is, the last thing we need is more.
 
beak said:
It was in the manifesto wreck Coughlans bakery ! Hilarious where did you find that tripe in the Daily Mail. 😆 😆 😆 Priceless nonsense. They charge silly money and Greggs killed them off by lower prices ,smell the coffee.
Click to expand...


NI increases are down to Labour. And that has had a direct impact on small businesses.

But other than that John Galt, spot on.
 
50 years of neo-liberalism have largely destroyed manufacturing, there are a few bright sparks but mainly the UK was de-industrialised to foreign ownership and control by the conservatives.

China would invest in its own people and create the capacity and produce its own.

Buses, which Burnham has been successful in Manchester, its over to you.

The tfl buses are privately procured not directly he would have so much to overcome.

Do you like the UK? to chinese guest - yes. only I wonder why you do not build houses for your people to live in?

😎
 
steeleye20 said:
50 years of neo-liberalism have largely destroyed manufacturing, there are a few bright sparks but mainly the UK was de-industrialised to foreign ownership and control by the conservatives.

China would invest in its own people and create the capacity and produce its own.

Buses, which Burnham has been successful in Manchester, its over to you.

The tfl buses are privately procured not directly he would have so much to overcome.

Do you like the UK? to chinese guest - yes. only I wonder why you do not build houses for your people to live in?

😎
Click to expand...
Would largely tend to agree. After Brexit in particular, there was an opportunity to buy British wherever possible. Obviously not taken due to some kind of free market mantra which was obviously just to facilitate backhanders.
 
georgenorman said:
As with the current devolved assemblies, it will just mean more expensive buildings for more idiots to make idiotic decisions in, more bureaucracy and unnecessary jobs for the boys, more taxation to pay for it all. We have far too much government as it is, the last thing we need is more.
Click to expand...
The idea is divest existing power not add to it.

Economic models (as a base to understand) see, on the one hand, economies of scale thus supporting your view. However, on the other, they also see smaller, more flexible and locally positioned entities reacting better to the provision of local public service.

Good arguments either way.

However, 2 points. Firstly, I imagine the areas where they will divest power are likely to be left-leaning. Your issue may be more about power leaving what could be largely right-thinking central government to some Bolshy northerners.

Secondly, a major reason the fluid middle third of voters shifted to Leave (and are now attracted to Reform et al) is a total disconnect with the Westminster Village. Completely understandable (although voting Leave did nothing to address that - it was an act of protest). Transferring part of the power to their nearest city where they shop, go to hospital etc., may help to address that.
 
ASCPFC said:
Would largely tend to agree. After Brexit in particular, there was an opportunity to buy British wherever possible. Obviously not taken due to some kind of free market mantra which was obviously just to facilitate backhanders.
Click to expand...
The right/left split I grew up with is long dead.

Free market was the touch stone for the right. Now it is used as a slur for corrupt liberal "progressiveness".

Oh how times change.
 
silvertop said:
The right/left split I grew up with is long dead.

Free market was the touch stone for the right. Now it is used as a slur for corrupt liberal "progressiveness".

Oh how times change.
Click to expand...
I was including the Tories within that to be fair. But you are correct. I was always old Labour but I'm certainly not new Labour. Starmer is the worst I've seen. At least there were domestic improvements under Blair in some areas if I truly reflect on it.
His main issues were the silly wars, over reliance on borrowing and bond markets and then the immigration that he largely caused. He had to excuse his own faults so the made up all immigration is good became popularised. And was not halted by the Tories due to the obvious labour market advantages that were brought. Undermine the British working class.
And so it continues - which it clearly shouldn't under any real Labour. Which this is not.
 
Badger11 said:
So Labour's big crime idea is to let out violent sex offenders and other scum bags early on tag.

I wonder how that plan is working, I mean no one can foresee it going wrong can they?

www.bbc.co.uk

Thousands of offenders not wearing electronic tags, report says

The Ministry of Justice disputes the figure, saying its own review puts the number of un-monitored individuals at 5,450.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Look at countries with low rates of incarceration and then look at their crime rates.

Please to provide data on countries going "soft" on crime with corresponding and empirically connected rises in crime.

The coffers are bare. We can't afford to lock up folk just to appease those who want to see offenders get their just deserts.
 
silvertop said:
Price, reliability, quid pro quo with e.g. China preferentially using the City for finance, insurance, arbitration etc.

Just guesses.
Click to expand...
Weren't those Boris buses made in NI?.

They cost loads more than other buses were less reliable and are now being phased out.

Be great if we did source stuff from the UK but not if it's over priced pony.....
 
Spindle said:
TBF, he's not an idiot
Click to expand...

For me I don't think he's an idiot and his heart is in the right place.

He's left wing on social issues, which I'm obviously against him on.

I've never been against the left on reducing inequality, it's just always been how you go about it.

Just like Marx wasn't wrong in his criticisms of capitalism.....it's just that the solution of communism was orders of magnitude worse.

But the concern over increasing inequality and the continual asset transfer from the working classes to the very wealthy is accurate in my view.....what happened before Covid just accelerated and nothing has been done to change it.....Something that Thatcher was right about was the importance of small business and allowing ever more powerful corporation monopolies is bad for capitalism.

It's about finding a solution that doesn't worsen the already terrible situation.

The big flaw that needs a solution in his 2 percent wealth tax on those earning over 10 million is how you still keep rich people in the country in a globalised world where movement is so easy.

Thanks to the left and neoliberals.....Most of Britain isn't the shire anymore.....the places of low crime, high social cohesion amid beautiful surroundings is becoming smaller and smaller each year.

To tax the rich you have to have a high incentive for them to stick around......As they have in the Scandinavian countries that the left love to point it.

Social cohesion matters....When your kid can be Henry Nowak or you're a jew facing hate mobs, the dial has changed.
 
silvertop said:
Look at countries with low rates of incarceration and then look at their crime rates.

Please to provide data on countries going "soft" on crime with corresponding and empirically connected rises in crime.

The coffers are bare. We can't afford to lock up folk just to appease those who want to see offenders get their just deserts.
Click to expand...
Err so your solution is a discredited tagging system that is being abused by the bad guys.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top