Exactly these are not achievements but targets. Fiscal responsibility? How about fudging the debt rules so Labour can borrow more money?Has that all been delivered? Has any of it actually worked or will work?
Exactly these are not achievements but targets. Fiscal responsibility? How about fudging the debt rules so Labour can borrow more money?Has that all been delivered? Has any of it actually worked or will work?
Fence-sitter!They are representing no one except themselves and deserve no respect or support from anyone half decent. I suspect even their most ardent supporters are only supporting them to save face - or for personal gain. Personal gain is almost understandable: any support of this non entity for policy or other reasons is ludicrous and bordering on insanity.
He also does not understand the subject matter.Is he in the upper or lower sixth? Forget the subject he’s referring to. Is this the future? Being governed by spotty youngsters?
Quotes for a different age.Really this is what that well-known leftie Winston Churchill thought of landlordism:-
"Roads are made, streets are made, railway services are improved, electric light turns night into day, electric trams glide swiftly to and fro, water is brought from reservoirs a hundred miles off in the mountains - and all the while the landlord sits still. Every one of those improvements is effected by the labour and cost of other people. Many of the most important are effected at the cost of the municipality and of the ratepayers. To not one of those improvements does the land monopolist, as a land monopolist, contribute, and yet by every one of them the value of his land is sensibly enhanced. He renders no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general welfare; he contributes nothing even to the process from which his own enrichment is derived." [source]
And the tory bible 'Wealth of Nations' Adam Smith?
"As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed".
There is actually, an end product with capitalism, but not with landlordism only unearned profits it is really economic parasitism.
😎
'All property is theft'.Quotes for a different age.
Unearned? Really? They spent rather a lot on the properties let with rental a return on that capital investment.
And would councils and other social housing landlords also infringe your delicate sensibilities when it comes to renting property?
Otherwise, it would seem that you favour residential occupation through universal ownership. As such, would you describe yourself as a Thatcherite?
There is actually, an end product with capitalism, but not with landlordism only unearned profits it is really economic parasitism.
😎
'All property is theft'.
🙂
The level of national self harm for the next five years is only just starting to become clear.Actions of Rayner,Starmer ,and Co,are laughable,we're they not so serious as regards our ever increasing fragile economy:
P&O Ferries owner pulls £1bn UK investment after Rayner attack
Dubai company chief withdraws from investment summit after Deputy PM’s criticism of employment practiceswww.telegraph.co.uk
Stay where she is or spend a flight with that balloon animal? Tough choice.Anyone reckon Shamima Begum has been brought back on the quiet? Press warned off. Probably in a private jet with Lammy. Just guessing but it dawned on me this morning that it's exactly what would happen now.
Labour shooting themselves in the foot again. P&O owners sacked hundreds of staff breaking employment law. I will not defend that behaviour and Labour went to town against the Tory government at the time and quite rightly in my opinion, a terrible employer.Actions of Rayner,Starmer ,and Co,are laughable,we're they not so serious as regards our ever increasing fragile economy:
P&O Ferries owner pulls £1bn UK investment after Rayner attack
Dubai company chief withdraws from investment summit after Deputy PM’s criticism of employment practiceswww.telegraph.co.uk
P&O did not break ther law at the time, they exploited a loophole which is quite a different thing.Labour shooting themselves in the foot again. P&O owners sacked hundreds of staff breaking employment law. I will not defend that behaviour and Labour went to town against the Tory government at the time and quite rightly in my opinion, a terrible employer.
So the Transport Secretary has been rebuked by Starmer for only saying what the party said at the time. So which is it Starmer?
I fully understand any government saying we are not interested in doing business with a bad employer so why are you rebuking your own minister or do you now think P&O are fit and proper if so why have you changed your mind. Free ferry tickets?