• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

Nicktendo86
Member
(06-15-2015, 05:04 PM)
Nicktendo86's Avatar

Originally Posted by Uzzy

I rather want to see the meltdowns from the right wing press if Corbyn gets the leadership.

Lol meltdowns? They are already pissing themselves that he is on the ballot, if he won it would guarantee a Tory win in 2020.
Kuros
Member
(06-15-2015, 05:09 PM)
Kuros's Avatar

Originally Posted by Uzzy

I rather want to see the meltdowns from the right wing press if Corbyn gets the leadership.

It would never happen but the right wing press would love him to somehow get elected as he'd lurch them so far to the left they'd be smashed in 2020. Mind you the likelihood of them losing in 2020 is very strong anyway so maybe they need to get another Michael Foot esque era out of their system.
CyclopsRock
Member
(06-15-2015, 05:15 PM)
CyclopsRock's Avatar

Originally Posted by Kuros

It would never happen but the right wing press would love him to somehow get elected as he'd lurch them so far to the left they'd be smashed in 2020. Mind you the likelihood of them losing in 2020 is very strong anyway so maybe they need to get another Michael Foot esque era out of their system.

That's what I'm thinking. It's a bit like the Eurosceptics in the Tories - they need the EU referendum so the rest can finally point to them and go "Look, no one gives a fuck, just shut up about it you morons." Likewise with the old curmudgeonly buffoons on the left who genuinely think there's an appetite out there for a radical left party. Give them the opportunity, watch it burn and then they can get back to grown up business.
Walshicus
(06-15-2015, 10:05 PM)
Walshicus's Avatar
I think there absolutely *is* an appetite for a truly left wing party. An awful lot of privatised companies need to be recovered by the state (British Rail, several utilities, Royal Mail etc.) and I think most people would support that.
Kuros
Member
(06-15-2015, 10:33 PM)
Kuros's Avatar

Originally Posted by Sir Fragula

I think there absolutely *is* an appetite for a truly left wing party. An awful lot of privatised companies need to be recovered by the state (British Rail, several utilities, Royal Mail etc.) and I think most people would support that.

Would they? IMO People will say they support it and then vote for a different party at the ballot box. Fiscal prudence has won the day. If a party announced a renationalisation program middle England would desert them.

They won't win in 2020 anyway so I'd say go for it. It'd be certainly prove it one way or another.
Nicktendo86
Member
(06-15-2015, 11:54 PM)
Nicktendo86's Avatar

Originally Posted by Sir Fragula

I think there absolutely *is* an appetite for a truly left wing party. An awful lot of privatised companies need to be recovered by the state (British Rail, several utilities, Royal Mail etc.) and I think most people would support that.

A party in power who has just privatised royal mail and overseen the largest austerity measures in decades has just not only won but increased its vote share and seats, a first for a governing party since the 1900's. There is no evidence to show that there is any significant appetite in this country for a true left wing party.

If labour's answer to why it lost is that it wasn't left wing enough then it truly has lost the plot.
RobotNinjaHornets
Samantha Hain,
The Pagan Princess
(06-16-2015, 12:36 AM)
RobotNinjaHornets's Avatar

Originally Posted by Nicktendo86

A party in power who has just privatised royal mail and overseen the largest austerity measures in decades has just not only won but increased its vote share and seats, a first for a governing party since the 1900's. There is no evidence to show that there is any significant appetite in this country for a true left wing party.

If labour's answer to why it lost is that it wasn't left wing enough then it truly has lost the plot.

Labour weren't arguing against that austerity though, they were going along with it. They let the Tories control the economy debate, basically admitting they were at fault for the financial crisis, which has caused a lot of people to think that A) austerity is the right answer and B) Labour can't be trusted with the economy.

We can't assume that a more left wing party has no chance of winning because they didn't even try to argue with the Tories on something that they could have quite easily argued against.

I am new to this politics thing please don't laugh at me :c
Kuros
Member
(06-16-2015, 12:03 PM)
Kuros's Avatar

Originally Posted by RobotNinjaHornets

Labour weren't arguing against that austerity though, they were going along with it. They let the Tories control the economy debate, basically admitting they were at fault for the financial crisis, which has caused a lot of people to think that A) austerity is the right answer and B) Labour can't be trusted with the economy.

We can't assume that a more left wing party has no chance of winning because they didn't even try to argue with the Tories on something that they could have quite easily argued against.

I am new to this politics thing please don't laugh at me :c

It would be an interesting experiment (as like I said they're losing 2020 unless the Torys implode, they can lose a few % points and still get the same seats once the boundaries are changed) but I can only see a full left wing agenda being roundly rejected by the electorate.

They ran on some stuff that was very left wing (tax the rich, anti business) and were roundly rejected. How much of that was anti Miliband who knows...

Corbyn would be hilarious though. The lib dems would get all their lost seats back from Lab defections.
CyclopsRock
Member
(06-16-2015, 03:56 PM)
CyclopsRock's Avatar
Tbh I heard Corbyn is dead against FF7:R and it'll be the main ticket of his leadership bid. He's more beast than man.
MrChom
Member
(06-17-2015, 02:34 PM)
MrChom's Avatar

Originally Posted by Nicktendo86

A party in power who has just privatised royal mail and overseen the largest austerity measures in decades has just not only won but increased its vote share and seats, a first for a governing party since the 1900's.

Labour has a great case to make that selling the family silverware to pay your overdraft fees is not sustainable here.

Royal Mail - Massively undervalued
Bank shares - Sold at a loss
Directly Operated Rail - locked out of bidding against private companies despite profitability for the state.
Nursing Temp Jobs - costing the NHS a fortune because it's not in-house

Unfortunately for them they need someone who can sell that to the public....that person was never destined to be Ed Milliband...and I'm not sure they have a figure who could do it now. Give it a bit of time and Stella Creasy might be able to, though.
RobotNinjaHornets
Samantha Hain,
The Pagan Princess
(06-17-2015, 07:04 PM)
RobotNinjaHornets's Avatar
Anyone watching the Labour debate on BBC2?
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
(06-17-2015, 07:10 PM)
phisheep's Avatar

Originally Posted by RobotNinjaHornets

Anyone watching the Labour debate on BBC2?

No, there's some stunning cricket on Radio 5.
Nicktendo86
Member
(06-18-2015, 12:28 PM)
Nicktendo86's Avatar
Burnham made a lovely gaffe (although I don't think he made a mistake in saying it as he said it before) that the party comes first. Kendall had a cracking response with no, the country comes first.

She is clearly the best candidate for the job so will.obviously come last.
CyclopsRock
Member
(06-19-2015, 10:52 AM)
CyclopsRock's Avatar
The goons over at BritainElects didn't post any further information beyond....

EU Referendum poll (Ipsos Mori / 14 - 16 Jun): YES - 66% NO - 22%

I assume "YES" here = staying in the EU. So there we go, boys. Nothing to worry about.
Nicktendo86
Member
(06-19-2015, 12:22 PM)
Nicktendo86's Avatar

Originally Posted by CyclopsRock

The goons over at BritainElects didn't post any further information beyond....



I assume "YES" here = staying in the EU. So there we go, boys. Nothing to worry about.

Because the pollsters have shown themselves to be really accurate lately. Ahem.

'yes' will win, easily. We won't leave the EU.
Dan27
Member
(06-20-2015, 10:27 PM)
Dan27's Avatar
So not much in the way of coverage for both the latest anti-austerity rally or the Labour leadership hustings. Is there a general lack of interest or something else?
Uzzy
(06-22-2015, 01:01 PM)
Uzzy's Avatar
Cameron's giving a speech on welfare right now, and has dropped a suggestion that Working Tax Credits are going to be cut.
RobotNinjaHornets
Samantha Hain,
The Pagan Princess
(06-22-2015, 01:42 PM)
RobotNinjaHornets's Avatar

Originally Posted by Uzzy

Cameron's giving a speech on welfare right now, and has dropped a suggestion that Working Tax Credits are going to be cut.

Oh awesome, does this mean he's also raising the minimum wage to a livable level?

...nnnooooo? No? Oh. Hm.

I enjoyed how he answered a question about mental health services by talking about addiction. Just what?
Pie and Beans
Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
(06-22-2015, 02:19 PM)
Pie and Beans's Avatar
This migration worker salary stuff is... when did this happen?

A new pay threshold for migrants means non-European workers will have to leave the UK after six years if they are not earning at least 35,000.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-33201189

This is like the most savage idea of fucking the NHS through new means yet.

Ive almost been avoiding political news recently because I knew the boot was going to be coming crushing down in this period, and it genuinely feels like the Cons are trying to kill the country and leave scars so deep it'd take 15-20 years of a kinder government to heal.
FlammableD
Member
(06-22-2015, 02:24 PM)
FlammableD's Avatar

Originally Posted by Pie and Beans

A new pay threshold for migrants means non-European workers will have to leave the UK after six years if they are not earning at least 35,000.


CyclopsRock
Member
(06-22-2015, 02:25 PM)
CyclopsRock's Avatar
I'm not a fan of that since I'm largely pro-immigration, but it does say it'll affect less than 1% of nurses. Obviously there are UK trained nurses who are unemployed, too. I mean, yeah, I'm not cheering from the rooftops or ought, but "savage idea of fucking the NHS" seems a bit... strong.
QuicheFontaine
Member
(06-22-2015, 06:49 PM)
QuicheFontaine's Avatar

Originally Posted by Pie and Beans

This migration worker salary stuff is... when did this happen?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-33201189

This is like the most savage idea of fucking the NHS through new means yet.

Ive almost been avoiding political news recently because I knew the boot was going to be coming crushing down in this period, and it genuinely feels like the Cons are trying to kill the country and leave scars so deep it'd take 15-20 years of a kinder government to heal.

Uhh, what the chuff?

My wife is a non-EU citizen and the visa rules say that I, as her husband, have to be earning 18k for her to stay. So it's ok if we have a household income of 18k split between two people, but she wouldn't be able to stay if she was unmarried and earned 34k on her own?? What's the logic there?
f0rk
Member
(06-22-2015, 09:31 PM)
f0rk's Avatar

Originally Posted by QuicheFontaine

What's the logic there?

She's absorbing all your British values so she's alright
Uzzy
(06-24-2015, 12:57 PM)
Uzzy's Avatar

Originally Posted by RobotNinjaHornets

Oh awesome, does this mean he's also raising the minimum wage to a livable level?

...nnnooooo? No? Oh. Hm.

Harman asked him about tax credits at today's PMQs, and Cameron just repeated his claim that he wants a 'high wage, low tax, low welfare' country. Didn't explain how we're meant to get to a situation where we have high wages by cutting tax credits, so I can only assume that the policy is like this.

Step 1: Cut tax credits
Step 2: ?
Step 3: Higher wages for everyone!

Solid economic policy that. Simply can't fail to work.
Dan27
Member
(06-24-2015, 01:25 PM)
Dan27's Avatar

Originally Posted by Uzzy

Harman asked him about tax credits at today's PMQs, and Cameron just repeated his claim that he wants a 'high wage, low tax, low welfare' country. Didn't explain how we're meant to get to a situation where we have high wages by cutting tax credits, so I can only assume that the policy is like this.

Step 1: Cut tax credits
Step 2: ?
Step 3: Higher wages for everyone!

Solid economic policy that. Simply can't fail to work.

Welcome to politics.
Xun
Member
(06-26-2015, 11:52 AM)
Xun's Avatar
After todays tragic events I can only imagine they'll be pushing for the Snoopers Charter even more.
Jackpot
Member
(06-26-2015, 02:10 PM)
Jackpot's Avatar
Government scraps railway projects in the north of England, keeps the ones in the South.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33286270
Uzzy
(06-26-2015, 05:33 PM)
Uzzy's Avatar

Originally Posted by Jackpot

Government scraps railway projects in the north of England, keeps the ones in the South.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33286270

Man, I was actually hopeful that Osborne's Northern Powerhouse plan wasn't bullshit. Annoying.
CyclopsRock
Member
(06-26-2015, 05:37 PM)
CyclopsRock's Avatar

Originally Posted by Uzzy

Man, I was actually hopeful that Osborne's Northern Powerhouse plan wasn't bullshit. Annoying.

Well it's still getting HS2. This is "only" about electrifying existing rail.
Dan27
Member
(06-29-2015, 02:02 PM)
Dan27's Avatar
Looks like the CPS changed it's mind over Lord Janner..
Dan27
Member
(07-01-2015, 09:04 AM)
Dan27's Avatar
The Airports commission has backed a third runway at Heathrow.

I wonder what Boris is thinking right now?
CyclopsRock
Member
(07-01-2015, 10:00 AM)
CyclopsRock's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dan27

The Airports commission has backed a third runway at Heathrow.

I wonder what Boris is thinking right now?

Uxbridge is about 20 minutes from Heathrow, too!

Also, GDP for last year and last quarter was revised up by 0.2% and 0.1% respectively.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
(07-01-2015, 12:56 PM)
Sir_Crocodile's Avatar
heathrow heathrow, no one should
terrorise the neighbourhood
but heathrow just won't be undone,
laying runways on everyone

does labour even have a policy on this anymore? curious as to whether they'll back the third runway now the commision has come out in favour
Dan27
Member
(07-01-2015, 01:07 PM)
Dan27's Avatar

Originally Posted by Sir_Crocodile

heathrow heathrow, no one should
terrorise the neighbourhood
but heathrow just won't be undone,
laying runways on everyone

does labour even have a policy on this anymore? curious as to whether they'll back the third runway now the commision has come out in favour

They're coming out to back the 3rd runway plan just to expose splits in the Tory party.
Mindwipe
Member
(07-01-2015, 01:09 PM)
Mindwipe's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dan27

The Airports commission has backed a third runway at Heathrow.

I wonder what Boris is thinking right now?

He stuck to his guns pretty strongly on the Today programme about it this morning.
Dan27
Member
(07-01-2015, 01:12 PM)
Dan27's Avatar

Originally Posted by Mindwipe

He stuck to his guns pretty strongly on the Today programme about it this morning.

I'm not surprised. After spending almost a year around the Heathrow area doing a big project, the entire surroundings are already way too saturated in terms of traffic, noise, congestion as it is. A third runway will not go down well to anyone living near to there.

The prospect of building a runway over the M25 in that area (when the motorway is already a clusterfuck between the M40 through to the A3) makes me shudder.
Mindwipe
Member
(07-01-2015, 01:17 PM)
Mindwipe's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dan27

I'm not surprised. After spending almost a year around the Heathrow area doing a big project, the entire surroundings are already way too saturated in terms of traffic, noise, congestion as it is. A third runway will not go down well to anyone living near to there.

The prospect of building a runway over the M25 in that area (when the motorway is already a clusterfuck between the M40 through to the A3) makes me shudder.

I need to read the whole report, but I'm surprised it came to the conclusion it did. And it's a disaster for the Tories, who really don't need to be tearing themselves in half over it when they have a thin majority and the EU to worry about.

But by virtue of being a majority now, they will tear themselves in half over it.
Walshicus
(07-01-2015, 01:23 PM)
Walshicus's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dan27

The Airports commission has backed a third runway at Heathrow.

I wonder what Boris is thinking right now?

What a fuck-up. Gatwick is the only real choice.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
(07-01-2015, 01:39 PM)
Sir_Crocodile's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dan27

They're coming out to back the 3rd runway plan just to expose splits in the Tory party.

Originally Posted by Mindwipe

I need to read the whole report, but I'm surprised it came to the conclusion it did. And it's a disaster for the Tories, who really don't need to be tearing themselves in half over it when they have a thin majority and the EU to worry about.

But by virtue of being a majority now, they will tear themselves in half over it.

If labour are backing it already they should just make it a free vote.
Maledict
Member
(07-01-2015, 02:05 PM)
Maledict's Avatar

Originally Posted by Mindwipe

I need to read the whole report, but I'm surprised it came to the conclusion it did. And it's a disaster for the Tories, who really don't need to be tearing themselves in half over it when they have a thin majority and the EU to worry about.

But by virtue of being a majority now, they will tear themselves in half over it.

I'm not surprised at all- from my understanding the third runwayatHeathrow has realistically been the only option for some time. Everything else, be it the floating island, expanding capacity at Gatwick etc., are all either unachieveable or wouldn't fix the problem.

We can moan about Heathrow in a million ways, but that's not going to change the fundamental facts about the airports and usage. If we want to retain that usage and the impact on our economy, it basically has to be expanding Heathrow.
Mindwipe
Member
(07-01-2015, 02:32 PM)
Mindwipe's Avatar

Originally Posted by Sir_Crocodile

If labour are backing it already they should just make it a free vote.

Nah, that would be terrible for them. It wouldn't reunite the party, and the Tory party not binding it's members on a matter of crucial economic importance (TM) would be poll suicide given their rhetoric for the last five years.
CyclopsRock
Member
(07-01-2015, 02:51 PM)
CyclopsRock's Avatar

Originally Posted by Mindwipe

Nah, that would be terrible for them. It wouldn't reunite the party, and the Tory party not binding it's members on a matter of crucial economic importance (TM) would be poll suicide given their rhetoric for the last five years.

I imagine it'd only be anything other than a footnote in a text book if they then lost the vote. If they won, I doubt very many people would even know, much less care. It would enable Boris, Zac etc to go back to their constituencies and say "Hey, I ain't no Nick Clegg, I didn't vote for that shit - sorry." Whetheir their constituents will buy it or not, I dunno. Obviously it's a big risk because they might lose.
pulsemyne
Member
(07-01-2015, 05:07 PM)
Oh my god the fucking irony

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10357601.html

Just...wow. IDS once again proves what a piece of shit he is.
Walshicus
(07-01-2015, 05:38 PM)
Walshicus's Avatar

Originally Posted by Maledict

I'm not surprised at all- from my understanding the third runwayatHeathrow has realistically been the only option for some time. Everything else, be it the floating island, expanding capacity at Gatwick etc., are all either unachieveable or wouldn't fix the problem.

We can moan about Heathrow in a million ways, but that's not going to change the fundamental facts about the airports and usage. If we want to retain that usage and the impact on our economy, it basically has to be expanding Heathrow.


I don't see that at all. Gatwick has always been the better option. You have a population in Crawley who actually want the additional flights, you can build it with minimal disruption, transport infrastructure is sound...
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
(07-01-2015, 06:43 PM)
phisheep's Avatar
... and it's the wrong side of London for 90% the population.
kharma45
Member
(07-01-2015, 06:59 PM)
kharma45's Avatar

Originally Posted by pulsemyne

Oh my god the fucking irony

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10357601.html

Just...wow. IDS once again proves what a piece of shit he is.

I am confused

Mr Duncan Smith currently owes no money.

Edit - I now am not

The debts were then recouped by not paying out valid claims filed by the politicians.

1K in expenses isn't a lot. I can easily do that in a week if I'm away with work.
pulsemyne
Member
(07-01-2015, 07:04 PM)

Originally Posted by kharma45

I am confused



Edit - I now am not



1K in expenses isn't a lot. I can easily do that in a week if I'm away with work.

This is the man who tells people he could live on 53 quid a week. Put simply the man is a slimy twat who has cost people their lives with his decisions and yet he has the gall to use public taxpayers money to pay for things when he's a millionaire.
CyclopsRock
Member
(07-01-2015, 07:20 PM)
CyclopsRock's Avatar

Originally Posted by pulsemyne

This is the man who tells people he could live on 53 quid a week. Put simply the man is a slimy twat who has cost people their lives with his decisions and yet he has the gall to use public taxpayers money to pay for things when he's a millionaire.

Well it's his employer, ain't it? I mean, what's he meant to do if - as part of his job - he's accruing expenses?

Originally Posted by Sir Fragula

I don't see that at all. Gatwick has always been the better option. You have a population in Crawley who actually want the additional flights, you can build it with minimal disruption, transport infrastructure is sound...

I can't imagine there are that many people in Crawley looking for flights, are there? Gatwick was my nearest airport when I was a kid and I've never lived outside the M25 (I'm 27 now) and I can tell you that 100%* of both my and my family's decisions on which airports to go to are based on cost. It was great when the cheapest was at Gatwick, but if it wasn't? Then, well, we went off to Luton or whatever. I went to school less than 18 miles from Gatwick (Eton, obviously) and yet our school skiing trip flew from Stansted which is 73 miles away, cause it was a bit cheaper.

*The only exception to the "price" thing are if there's only one or a few carriers going to a destination - for example, there's three carriers that fly to Gibraltar, all from different airports and none from Stansted (thank fuck) so if you live there and want to go to our little bit of Britain in the med, you're fuckerood anyway.
War Peaceman
Member
(07-01-2015, 07:29 PM)
War Peaceman's Avatar
The thing with IDS is he makes the social security cuts he is enacting a personal, moral crusade. He claims he could live off it and harps on about the moral rectitude of his reforms, but then lies, exploits his expenses, etc. It isn't wrong per se that he claims these expenses as they are within the rules (the debt was handled appropriately) but it is hypocritical of him to be so indulgent when he is already handsomely paid by taxpayers.
kharma45
Member
(07-01-2015, 07:37 PM)
kharma45's Avatar

Originally Posted by pulsemyne

This is the man who tells people he could live on 53 quid a week. Put simply the man is a slimy twat who has cost people their lives with his decisions and yet he has the gall to use public taxpayers money to pay for things when he's a millionaire.

As Cylops said, it's his employers expenses. And you're living in a fucking fantasy expecting someone to pay their own work related expenses, regardless of income or cash in bank. Absolutely crazy.

Thread Tools