Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[super_realist]

First topic message reminder :

Kobe beef isn't that a real thing.Not familiar with the gent but Basketball is a great spectator sport in that there is a score every few seconds and always a result .
Lowry has done very  well to say the least in view of the stick he gets.Good lad

Do you think so? It's certainly a great sport to play, but it's pretty boring to watch. 75% of the game is irrelevant. It only becomes slightly interesting in the last quarter when the match is won and lost. I thinks that's the problem with American sport. They concentrate so much on there being frequent scoring, that it becomes routine and lacks excitement when they do score.
I prefer moments of brilliance in sports rather than just constant routine points.

[dynamark]

I think its in the country interest for Starmer to get the job TBH.
He looks a bit soft around the edges but would probably be the better option.
However its a menbers vote(how very democratic) so RLB may well be the preferred candidate

[Soul Requiem]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

[dynamark]

Soul I didn't really want to say that but yep you are very correct

[navyblueshorts]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Interesting shenanigans surrounding Long-Bailey and Starmer's campaigns, don't you think? Strangely, after Starmer's campaign mentions an issue w/ L-B's accessing membership data, Starmer's campaign gets reported to the information Commissioner. Hmm...

https://politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/109755/labour-leadership-row-erupts-after-party-reports

[Soul Requiem]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Interesting shenanigans surrounding Long-Bailey and Starmer's campaigns, don't you think? Strangely, after Starmer's campaign mentions an issue w/ L-B's accessing membership data, Starmer's campaign gets reported to the information Commissioner. Hmm...

https://politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/109755/labour-leadership-row-erupts-after-party-reports

It just doesn't work having such contrasting views in one party. Whether you agree with him or not it is something Johnson has done well, anyone apposed to the direction he wants the Tories to go have been thrown out and it's what the membership voted him in to do.

[kwinigolfer]

Very Drumpfian . . . . . . .

[JAS]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea for the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

[Soul Requiem]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

Silly me, I forgot that the end of the Labour would mean the country reverting to the Victorian era, the left haven't been in power for over 40 years now so aren't doing a great deal for anyone.

Extinction will lead to the formation of a new party minus the left wing nutjobs like Long Bailey.

[super_realist]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

You must be the only one in the entire world who thinks that destitution and poverty disappears as soon as a Labour government comes in. Newsflash, if you're poor under a Tory party, you're poor under a Labour party.
The UK will always have a poor base of poverty and lack of education, like the vast majority of countries. I haven't seen anything from Labour which would change that.

[JAS]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

You must be the only one in the entire world who thinks that destitution and poverty disappears as soon as a Labour government comes in. Newsflash, if you're poor under a Tory party, you're poor under a Labour party.
The UK will always have a poor base of poverty and lack of education, like the vast majority of countries.haven't seen anything from Labour which would change that.

...and you go on about Mac’s (non) ability to correctly interpret posts?? Jesus Super, at no point ever would I have said that poverty disappears as soon as a Labour govt comes in. The point I was making was that before the Labour Party existed the ruling elite rode roughshod over ordinary working people. Without a decent Labour opposition that is what we’ll drift back to. The Tories are very much based on protecting the vested interests of the elite and they ride on greed and rule by division and have done for hundreds of years. They only care about peoples perceptions of them when there are votes to be had. The Labour Party on the other hand was created to advance the prospects of ordinary working people. They’ve only existed for just over 100 years, they’ve only really realistically had 3 shots at any decent semblance of power. In each they made a difference, the Tory loaded establishment will tell you they ruined the countries finances in the process, the facts actually paint a different picture but given the entrenchment of your views there’s no point in trying to enlighten you.

[JAS]

Where’s Diggers when you need him anyway, sure he would have agreed.

[Soul Requiem]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

You must be the only one in the entire world who thinks that destitution and poverty disappears as soon as a Labour government comes in. Newsflash, if you're poor under a Tory party, you're poor under a Labour party.
The UK will always have a poor base of poverty and lack of education, like the vast majority of countries.haven't seen anything from Labour which would change that.

...and you go on about Mac’s (non) ability to correctly interpret posts?? Jesus Super, at no point ever would I have said that poverty disappears as soon as a Labour govt comes in. The point I was making was that before the Labour Party existed the ruling elite rode roughshod over ordinary working people. Without a decent Labour opposition that is what we’ll drift back to. The Tories are very much based on protecting the vested interests of the elite and they ride on greed and rule by division and have done for hundreds of years. They only care about peoples perceptions of them when there are votes to be had. The Labour Party on the other hand was created to advance the prospects of ordinary working people. They’ve only existed for just over 100 years, they’ve only really realistically had 3 shots at any decent semblance of power. In each they made a difference, the Tory loaded establishment will tell you they ruined the countries finances in the process, the facts actually paint a different picture but given the entrenchment of your views there’s no point in trying to enlighten you.

The facts paint a different picture do they?

[kwinigolfer]

Where’s Diggers when you need him anyway, sure he would have agreed.

I'll agree for Digs.

Trouble is, both here and there, a sizeable proportion of voters vote against their own self-interest.
Which is largely why every possible metric of a healthy society in the American south sees their States vote Republican, even though generations of Republican representation has delivered p1ss poor health care, education, life expectancy, no new taxes, diminishing "entitlement" safety nets, you name it.
Can't say from 3,000 miles away that this Conservative Gov't follows the same playbook but it looks like they will.
I love it that the tosspots who run some rail services so ineptly look like those services/franchises are going to have to, effectively, be re-nationalised . . . . . . .

[superflyweight]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

You must be the only one in the entire world who thinks that destitution and poverty disappears as soon as a Labour government comes in. Newsflash, if you're poor under a Tory party, you're poor under a Labour party.
The UK will always have a poor base of poverty and lack of education, like the vast majority of countries.haven't seen anything from Labour which would change that.

...and you go on about Mac’s (non) ability to correctly interpret posts?? Jesus Super, at no point ever would I have said that poverty disappears as soon as a Labour govt comes in. The point I was making was that before the Labour Party existed the ruling elite rode roughshod over ordinary working people. Without a decent Labour opposition that is what we’ll drift back to. The Tories are very much based on protecting the vested interests of the elite and they ride on greed and rule by division and have done for hundreds of years. They only care about peoples perceptions of them when there are votes to be had. The Labour Party on the other hand was created to advance the prospects of ordinary working people. They’ve only existed for just over 100 years, they’ve only really realistically had 3 shots at any decent semblance of power. In each they made a difference, the Tory loaded establishment will tell you they ruined the countries finances in the process, the facts actually paint a different picture but given the entrenchment of your views there’s no point in trying to enlighten you.

I agree. The policies enacted by the last Labour government in their first 5 years alone had a direct effect in lifting people out of poverty.

[McLaren]

Kwini

I agree that in the US and now in the UK people vote against their interests but only some of their interests. It seems like people are increasingly putting their social preferences above their own economic interests.

By that I mean they vote in line with views on things like gay marriage, abortion, immigration, penal policies, gender issues, foreign policy etc rather than what actually effects their quality of life.

Why this happens I have no idea. It seems they are willing to take a rather large hit in their own wealth to have a say on how other people live their lifes.

[JAS]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

You must be the only one in the entire world who thinks that destitution and poverty disappears as soon as a Labour government comes in. Newsflash, if you're poor under a Tory party, you're poor under a Labour party.
The UK will always have a poor base of poverty and lack of education, like the vast majority of countries.haven't seen anything from Labour which would change that.

...and you go on about Mac’s (non) ability to correctly interpret posts?? Jesus Super, at no point ever would I have said that poverty disappears as soon as a Labour govt comes in. The point I was making was that before the Labour Party existed the ruling elite rode roughshod over ordinary working people. Without a decent Labour opposition that is what we’ll drift back to. The Tories are very much based on protecting the vested interests of the elite and they ride on greed and rule by division and have done for hundreds of years. They only care about peoples perceptions of them when there are votes to be had. The Labour Party on the other hand was created to advance the prospects of ordinary working people. They’ve only existed for just over 100 years, they’ve only really realistically had 3 shots at any decent semblance of power. In each they made a difference, the Tory loaded establishment will tell you they ruined the countries finances in the process, the facts actually paint a different picture but given the entrenchment of your views there’s no point in trying to enlighten you.

The facts paint a different picture do they?

Ok we can’t really count Ramsay MacDs term because he never had a working majority so...
Attlee 1945 - 1951 By any measure you like you’d have to class as successful.
Wilson/Callaghan 1964 -79 (with a 3-4 year gap for Heath). Ask yourself what did the average family have in 1964 and what did they have in ‘79. The perceived failure of Labour in the 70s was that they were unable to control unions (collective bodies bargaining for better pay for their workers), yes there is a case for saying it was allowed to go too far, an interest point here is that income inequality was at its historical low ebb. The country’s finances were perceived to be in a perilous state. Bear in mind for a good part of the 70s there was a global oil crisis as Arab nations began to realise they could hold western democracies to ransom.
Blair 1997 - 2010 Not quite so clear cut in terms of what people had at the start and at the end of the Blair/Brown era, yes they undoubtedly had more but for many what they had an awful lot more of was debt.
In the end it was debt (and Iraq) that killed the credibility of the last labour administration. Ironically it wasn’t govt debt (until 2008), it was personal debt which spiralled out of control, leading to corporate debt which the banks (rather than exercise due diligence) decided to play Russian roulette with which had inevitable consequences. The last labour administrations biggest mistake was turning a blind eye to both the growing personal debt and corporate banking debt, 12 years on ordinary working people are still paying to recapitalise the banks so they can do it again. Now, and I really to believe this (and why I sometimes call Blair a Tory with a red tie) a decent socialist PM with a majority as big as Blair had could and SHOULD have pressed for a reversal of the banking deregulation Poopie that took place in the Thatcher/Reagan era.

Only the elite or the relatively unresearched could blindly laugh at my original assertion that the facts surrounding the “actual” performance of Labour governments in office.

[Soul Requiem]

Families better off in 79 than 64? Hahahaha

Letting your Socialist goggles blind you a bit there I see.

[kwinigolfer]

Kwini

I agree that in the US and now in the UK people vote against their interests but only some of their interests. It seems like people are increasingly putting their social preferences above their own economic interests.

By that I mean they vote in line with views on things like gay marriage, abortion, immigration, penal policies, gender issues, foreign policy etc rather than what actually effects their quality of life.

Why this happens I have no idea. It seems they are willing to take a rather large hit in their own wealth to have a say on how other people live their lifes.

But that's the right-wing mantra isn't it, stigmatising social or cultural issues to try to divide rather than unite.
As Molly Ivins used to say about Shrub: "He's great at getting his message across. The trouble is, it's the wrong message."

Drumpf has been playing this card for the past decade - the Roy Cohn policy of repeating the same porkys and alarm bells incessantly. Doesn't matter if they're all inaccurate or downright lies - repeat 'em often enough and people will believe them.

Like the US economy which he browbeats the country into saying it's great. No it's not great, the haves have more, the inequality gap is widening by the day and the national debt is at an all-time high and widening by the second. If Drumpf gets a second four-year term he'll canibalise all the entitlement and health-care programmes that he's already had a go at. And the cycle will continue until China starts to call in their debt and we'll all be screwed.

Can see Boris following the same track.

[kwinigolfer]

Families better off in 79 than 64? Hahahaha

Letting your Socialist goggles blind you a bit there I see.

R Soul:

What's your criteria?
Can't imagine anyone thinking they were better off in 1964 than they were in '79.

To what extent that was due to government policies is debatable, but 1979 was two economic generations advanced from 1964. Or is your memory playing games?

[Soul Requiem]

So many people knew they were so much better off in 1979 that they've decided to ignore left wing policies ever since and have only considered voting Labour in when they had a fairly right wing leader but we'll ignore reality because Socialism works so well for everyone.

The greatest Labour leaders have been Blair and Gaitskell because they realised the reality.

[kwinigolfer]

So many people knew they were so much better off in 1979 that they've decided to ignore left wing policies ever since and have only considered voting Labour in when they had a fairly right wing leader but we'll ignore reality because Socialism works so well for everyone.

The greatest Labour leaders have been Blair and Gaitskell because they realised the reality.

R Soul,

There are so many parallels with the US experience that there's no time to list them all.
But Thatcher's nationalism (rather than nationalisation, and like Reagan) suckered people in, add in a convenient little war to raise jingoism to new heights and make irrevocable changes to social services and you're on a slippery slope.

Blair got caught up in his five minutes of (transatlantic) fame, idiot. Unfortunately.
Gaitskell was fine but sadly never made it to the top table.

[Soul Requiem]

So many people knew they were so much better off in 1979 that they've decided to ignore left wing policies ever since and have only considered voting Labour in when they had a fairly right wing leader but we'll ignore reality because Socialism works so well for everyone.

The greatest Labour leaders have been Blair and Gaitskell because they realised the reality.

R Soul,

There are so many parallels with the US experience that there's no time to list them all.
But Thatcher's nationalism (rather than nationalisation, and like Reagan) suckered people in, add in a convenient little war to raise jingoism to new heights and make irrevocable changes to social services and you're on a slippery slope.

Blair got caught up in his five minutes of (transatlantic) fame, idiot. Unfortunately.
Gaitskell was fine but sadly never made it to the top table.

The usual story then, people who vote differently to you don't have a clue

[kwinigolfer]

That's usually true but, as I said, the political influence is debatable, and I'm not debating it.

All I know is that I left school with A Levels in 1966 and walked into a job just off Regent Street, W1, and was paid 8 pound 10 shillings, of which I had to pay five pound to rent a bed in a lodging house.
You can imagine how thrilled I was when at last I got Luncheon Vouchers . . . . . .

If you seriously think I would have been better off then than in 1979 you're dreaming. And that snapshot is not about me, it's about the UK at the time. How's the Alzheimer's?

[McLaren]

The usual story then, people who vote differently to you don't have a clue :thumbsup:

I mean yeh, pretty much. If I thought the other side were correct I would vote differently.

[kwinigolfer]

R Soul,

As I said, I wasn't debating politically, just offering some facts and perspective. And certainly nothing to be hilarious about.

Somehow, Reagan hit a political sweet spot by persuading the US electorate that "government" was somehow bad. "conservatives" (small c) have been riding those coattails ever since with the relatively recent addition of god to the mix.

[Soul Requiem]

I'm not really too interested in Reagan or American politics in general so your insistence on repeatedly bringing him up is serving no purpose whatsoever aside from wasting your own time and mine.

[kwinigolfer]

I'm not really too interested in Reagan or American politics in general so your insistence on repeatedly bringing him up is serving no purpose whatsoever aside from wasting your own time and mine.

Except for my original point that the Thatcher/Reagan duo wrought the social changes that we've seen ever since. There and here.

Your point was 1964 vs 1979 and I think you've found that's a load of rubbish.

[dynamark]

tHis is becoming a test of memory .I can recall we got a colour tele in 66 world cup and we had a phone in the house but that was because my dad worked hard nothing to do with govt.
That basic rule still applies give folk a chance and an education and they all have the opportunity.My work is social housing and some of the stuff you see beggars belief you just cannot help some people ,A bit of the Charles Darwin theory sadly.

[McLaren]

I'm not really too interested in Reagan or American politics in general so your insistence on repeatedly bringing him up is serving no purpose whatsoever aside from wasting your own time and mine.

What a weird response. Is there any other areas of history you will refuse to engage with when people make arguments to you?

[kwinigolfer]

tHis is becoming a test of memory .I can recall we got a colour tele in 66 world cup.

You must have been one of the first colour TV adopters, dyna.
BBC didn't broadcast anything in colour until Wimbledon 1967.
Yup, we didn't have a phone until my Dad had to have one for his job in about 1964 . . . . . . . .

I don't think younger people appreciate how patrician (certainly by today standards) 1960's Britain was. Things changed in a hurry late 60's into the 70's.

Thank goodness the beer was good. Mostly.

[JAS]

So classy I love it, keep the hilarity coming buttercup.

I usually feel inclined to go do some objective research when my understanding and/or assumptions are highlighted as ludicrous, you should try it sometime Soul.

Most on here probably pigeon hole me as a loony left commie, well off the mark but I recognise that I come across that way as I rail against the self harming the masses are inflicting on themselves by continuing to support neoliberalism as ushered in by Thatcher and some other bloke you don’t think is relevant, it’s dead, it died in 2008 but it’s being kept alive by vested interests. It’s so much bigger than relatively parochial Labour v Tory, much bigger as well than the monstrous distraction that was Brexit.

[Soul Requiem]

If you come across as a loony commie you probably are a loony commie JAS.

I double find it ludicrous when others decide what is best for the masses. I personally prefer to let them choose for themselves but each to their own I suppose.

[beninho]

When you say let them choose for themselves, as it what way?

Referendums on everything?

[super_realist]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

You must be the only one in the entire world who thinks that destitution and poverty disappears as soon as a Labour government comes in. Newsflash, if you're poor under a Tory party, you're poor under a Labour party.
The UK will always have a poor base of poverty and lack of education, like the vast majority of countries.haven't seen anything from Labour which would change that.

...and you go on about Mac’s (non) ability to correctly interpret posts?? Jesus Super, at no point ever would I have said that poverty disappears as soon as a Labour govt comes in. The point I was making was that before the Labour Party existed the ruling elite rode roughshod over ordinary working people. Without a decent Labour opposition that is what we’ll drift back to. The Tories are very much based on protecting the vested interests of the elite and they ride on greed and rule by division and have done for hundreds of years. They only care about peoples perceptions of them when there are votes to be had. The Labour Party on the other hand was created to advance the prospects of ordinary working people. They’ve only existed for just over 100 years, they’ve only really realistically had 3 shots at any decent semblance of power. In each they made a difference, the Tory loaded establishment will tell you they ruined the countries finances in the process, the facts actually paint a different picture but given the entrenchment of your views there’s no point in trying to enlighten you.

You always bring this sort of crap up as if the Tories are there only to step on the poor in society. The majority of the last 60 years have been under Tory governments, yet life has not been any better when there's been Labour governments in place.
I agree that we need a decent Labour opposition in place, you were the one who thought Corbyn would be better though, so bear that in mind.
If we're talking about entrenchment of views, you're a perfect example. I'm no Tory voter, but at least if they do something different I could give them credit for it, you could never bring yourself to do so because of your views on the party. You can't bear that people changed their vote from Labour who were promising nothing to their core vote.

Labour are an absolute laughing stock, but you still stand by them despite this. Stop being a fanboy and accept that unless they return with Starmer to the centre they are finished. You also don't seem able to accept that their failure was almost entirely self inflicted. You blamed Ian Austin the other day for having a big influence on the Tory majority, but made no mention whatsoever about the ineptitude of the Labour party and their election policies and manifesto, not to mention a feeble leader who had no position on anything.

[navyblueshorts]

Kwini

I agree that in the US and now in the UK people vote against their interests but only some of their interests. It seems like people are increasingly putting their social preferences above their own economic interests.

By that I mean they vote in line with views on things like gay marriage, abortion, immigration, penal policies, gender issues, foreign policy etc rather than what actually effects their quality of life.

Why this happens I have no idea. It seems they are willing to take a rather large hit in their own wealth to have a say on how other people live their lifes.

Is that sort of thing so surprising? It'll be a rare person who thinks that everything one party claims it'll do matches their own priorities. This sort of behaviour is simply, IMO, people prioritising certain things over others.

[kwinigolfer]

navy,
The social things that Mac's talking about are different from the point I made, which referred to education, health care, life expectancy etc, etc which, in the US, are grossly inferior in States run by Republicans with overwhelmingly Republican representation in Congress.

That's a matter of fact; I just hope the same doesn't happen in Boris's Britain.

[super_realist]

navy,
The social things that Mac's talking about are different from the point I made, which referred to education, health care, life expectancy etc, etc which, in the US, are grossly inferior in States run by Republicans with overwhelmingly Republican representation in Congress.

That's a matter of fact; I just hope the same doesn't happen in Boris's Britain.

I can see life expectancy plunging in the UK, but it's not to do with any party.

[JAS]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

You must be the only one in the entire world who thinks that destitution and poverty disappears as soon as a Labour government comes in. Newsflash, if you're poor under a Tory party, you're poor under a Labour party.
The UK will always have a poor base of poverty and lack of education, like the vast majority of countries.haven't seen anything from Labour which would change that.

...and you go on about Mac’s (non) ability to correctly interpret posts?? Jesus Super, at no point ever would I have said that poverty disappears as soon as a Labour govt comes in. The point I was making was that before the Labour Party existed the ruling elite rode roughshod over ordinary working people. Without a decent Labour opposition that is what we’ll drift back to. The Tories are very much based on protecting the vested interests of the elite and they ride on greed and rule by division and have done for hundreds of years. They only care about peoples perceptions of them when there are votes to be had. The Labour Party on the other hand was created to advance the prospects of ordinary working people. They’ve only existed for just over 100 years, they’ve only really realistically had 3 shots at any decent semblance of power. In each they made a difference, the Tory loaded establishment will tell you they ruined the countries finances in the process, the facts actually paint a different picture but given the entrenchment of your views there’s no point in trying to enlighten you.

You always bring this sort of crap up as if the Tories are there only to step on the poor in society. The majority of the last 60 years have been under Tory governments, yet life has not been any better when there's been Labour governments in place.
I agree that we need a decent Labour opposition in place, you were the one who thought Corbyn would be better though, so bear that in mind.
If we're talking about entrenchment of views, you're a perfect example. I'm no Tory voter, but at least if they do something different I could give them credit for it, you could never bring yourself to do so because of your views on the party. You can't bear that people changed their vote from Labour who were promising nothing to their core vote.

Labour are an absolute laughing stock, but you still stand by them despite this. Stop being a fanboy and accept that unless they return with Starmer to the centre they are finished. You also don't seem able to accept that their failure was almost entirely self inflicted. You blamed Ian Austin the other day for having a big influence on the Tory majority, but made no mention whatsoever about the ineptitude of the Labour party and their election policies and manifesto, not to mention a feeble leader who had no position on anything.

JHC it’s like debating with an angst ridden teenager!!!
1. It’s not crap, it’s demonstrably true that the Tories represent to top 1% in society and do a reasonable job of extending that to the top 30ish % around election time using whatever lies are required
2. I think there is consensus that when the have been in they have moved things forward for Mr/Mrs average.
3. I’m no consistent Labour voter and am certainly NOT a fanboy, the inclination to vote Labour this time round even though there offering wasn’t great and their leader was at best insipid was that I have the view that what the Tories will deliver will be a helluva lot worse and societally divisive than anything Labour would have done.
4. I have already stated quite clearly that they need to elect Starmer from the candidates on offer, furthermore I’d see the election of RLB as confirmation that that party as a whole has disappeared up its own arse and stopped listening to the electorate.
5. I didn’t blame nomark Ian Austin for Labours defeat I said he was ONE example of the kind of disloyalty that undermined Corbyn and fostered disunity at a time when they needed to be united, the main reason they couldn’t unite was that Corbyn didn’t have the necessary leadership qualities. Again I never promoted Corbyn as some kind of hero, he was always the weak link. I’d have taken him over Johnson or Swinson but that’s an illustration of the poverty of choice the electorate had.

Listen if in 5 years time there is no crisis in the NHS (if it still exists), state education is demonstrably moving forward (my partner is a Tory voting head teacher and it’s excruciating watching her stress at trying to run a school under completely unrealistic parameters) food banks have been rendered obsolete, homelessness is a thing of the past. Global corporations and ultra wealthy individuals subscribe to the same HMRC rules as everybody else and those rules have their loopholes removed. The minimum wage and living wage keep pace with MPs pay and we have a balance of payments surplus and GDP growth consistently above 3% then I’ll be the first to hold my hands up and say “Well done Boris, sorry I ever doubted you” Quite frankly I think there’s more chance of Rangers winning the Champions League but we’ll see, time will tell.

[kwinigolfer]

navy,
The social things that Mac's talking about are different from the point I made, which referred to education, health care, life expectancy etc, etc which, in the US, are grossly inferior in States run by Republicans with overwhelmingly Republican representation in Congress.

That's a matter of fact; I just hope the same doesn't happen in Boris's Britain.

I can see life expectancy plunging in the UK, but it's not to do with any party.

Possibly, but let's hope it's not because of lack of access to basic human needs and education. Because that is what is being propagated in parts of the US.

[JAS]

If you come across as a loony commie you probably are a loony commie JAS.

I double find it ludicrous when others decide what is best for the masses. I personally prefer to let them choose for themselves but each to their own I suppose.

I won’t say how you come across Soul but I’d be interested to hear your definition of loony commie just to try and gauge how wide of the mark you are.

What do you mean by “others” do you mean democratically elected representatives in a representative democracy? So collectively we chose to be governed by a government that chose austerity as a way out of a banking crisis, is that the kind of choice you mean.

Or do you mean by letting people choose that we should do a Switzerland and have referendums on everything?

[JAS]

navy,
The social things that Mac's talking about are different from the point I made, which referred to education, health care, life expectancy etc, etc which, in the US, are grossly inferior in States run by Republicans with overwhelmingly Republican representation in Congress.

That's a matter of fact; I just hope the same doesn't happen in Boris's Britain.

I can see life expectancy plunging in the UK, but it's not to do with any party.

So can I and your are right insofar as no party up until now could be exclusively blamed because Blair’s government pursued the same neoliberal line as the Tories.

That ethos where big business buys political favour under the auspices of creating prosperity (for themselves)... alcohol, tobacco and sugar lobbyists and of course and more sinisterly big Pharma, promoting their wares at the expense of the nations health.

[dynamark]

Kwini I'm sure my dad went and bought the colour tv in the week before world cup final.Price of a car and mum didn't speak to him for weeks.Red shirts remember.
He worked in that area for Rank organisation and actually built the first zoom lens camera.
Offered a job out in LA servicing film cameras when I was 14 and guess what turned it down.I could have been playing pebble beach in the sun.

[McLaren]

dyna

You would now be voting Trump as well.

[navyblueshorts]

navy,
The social things that Mac's talking about are different from the point I made, which referred to education, health care, life expectancy etc, etc which, in the US, are grossly inferior in States run by Republicans with overwhelmingly Republican representation in Congress.

That's a matter of fact; I just hope the same doesn't happen in Boris's Britain.

[super_realist]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

You must be the only one in the entire world who thinks that destitution and poverty disappears as soon as a Labour government comes in. Newsflash, if you're poor under a Tory party, you're poor under a Labour party.
The UK will always have a poor base of poverty and lack of education, like the vast majority of countries.haven't seen anything from Labour which would change that.

...and you go on about Mac’s (non) ability to correctly interpret posts?? Jesus Super, at no point ever would I have said that poverty disappears as soon as a Labour govt comes in. The point I was making was that before the Labour Party existed the ruling elite rode roughshod over ordinary working people. Without a decent Labour opposition that is what we’ll drift back to. The Tories are very much based on protecting the vested interests of the elite and they ride on greed and rule by division and have done for hundreds of years. They only care about peoples perceptions of them when there are votes to be had. The Labour Party on the other hand was created to advance the prospects of ordinary working people. They’ve only existed for just over 100 years, they’ve only really realistically had 3 shots at any decent semblance of power. In each they made a difference, the Tory loaded establishment will tell you they ruined the countries finances in the process, the facts actually paint a different picture but given the entrenchment of your views there’s no point in trying to enlighten you.

You always bring this sort of crap up as if the Tories are there only to step on the poor in society. The majority of the last 60 years have been under Tory governments, yet life has not been any better when there's been Labour governments in place.
I agree that we need a decent Labour opposition in place, you were the one who thought Corbyn would be better though, so bear that in mind.
If we're talking about entrenchment of views, you're a perfect example. I'm no Tory voter, but at least if they do something different I could give them credit for it, you could never bring yourself to do so because of your views on the party. You can't bear that people changed their vote from Labour who were promising nothing to their core vote.

Labour are an absolute laughing stock, but you still stand by them despite this. Stop being a fanboy and accept that unless they return with Starmer to the centre they are finished. You also don't seem able to accept that their failure was almost entirely self inflicted. You blamed Ian Austin the other day for having a big influence on the Tory majority, but made no mention whatsoever about the ineptitude of the Labour party and their election policies and manifesto, not to mention a feeble leader who had no position on anything.

JHC it’s like debating with an angst ridden teenager!!!
1. It’s not crap, it’s demonstrably true that the Tories represent to top 1% in society and do a reasonable job of extending that to the top 30ish % around election time using whatever lies are required
2. I think there is consensus that when the have been in they have moved things forward for Mr/Mrs average.
3. I’m no consistent Labour voter and am certainly NOT a fanboy, the inclination to vote Labour this time round even though there offering wasn’t great and their leader was at best insipid was that I have the view that what the Tories will deliver will be a helluva lot worse and societally divisive than anything Labour would have done.
4. I have already stated quite clearly that they need to elect Starmer from the candidates on offer, furthermore I’d see the election of RLB as confirmation that that party as a whole has disappeared up its own arse and stopped listening to the electorate.
5. I didn’t blame nomark Ian Austin for Labours defeat I said he was ONE example of the kind of disloyalty that undermined Corbyn and fostered disunity at a time when they needed to be united, the main reason they couldn’t unite was that Corbyn didn’t have the necessary leadership qualities. Again I never promoted Corbyn as some kind of hero, he was always the weak link. I’d have taken him over Johnson or Swinson but that’s an illustration of the poverty of choice the electorate had.

Listen if in 5 years time there is no crisis in the NHS (if it still exists), state education is demonstrably moving forward (my partner is a Tory voting head teacher and it’s excruciating watching her stress at trying to run a school under completely unrealistic parameters)  food banks have been rendered obsolete, homelessness is a thing of the past. Global corporations and ultra wealthy individuals subscribe to the same HMRC rules as everybody else and those rules have their loopholes removed. The minimum wage and living wage keep pace with MPs pay and we have a balance of payments surplus and GDP growth consistently above 3% then I’ll be the first to hold my hands up and say “Well done Boris, sorry I ever doubted you” Quite frankly I think there’s more chance of Rangers winning the Champions League but we’ll see, time will tell.

1. That's simply conjecture, you mistake supporting business (something Corbyn wouldn't have done) with supporting the 1%. The top 30% in Britain contribute the largest amount to the exchequer. Why wouldn't you support them? They're vital to the success of the country.
2. What evidence is there that things have moved forward for Mr and Mrs Average under Labour? Higher taxes? Tuition fees? Yeah nice one.
3. What on earth makes you think a Marxist manifesto would be better for Britain than a continuation of the current capitalist system? Capitalism isn't perfect, but it's the best system and moving to a massively state owned system isn't good for anyone.
4. Glad you understand that Labour's survival is a coin toss depending on who their idiotic membership pick.
5. You said that Ian Austin should take his share of responsibility for the Tory majority. Why should Austin show any loyalty to a party which was moving away from the party he joined and wasn't doing what he thought it should? Why on earth would you think that such a party deserves his loyalty? Labour's lack of unity was down to their direction and leadership, their laughable cabinet and atrocious leader.

How many times do you have to be told that the NHS isn't up for sale? The NHS is ALWAYS going to be under massive pressure because it's not the system that people think it is, it was never designed to be perfect and never designed to take the ageing population, massively fat population or burgeoning population. Why do you never blame the UK population for their role in the catastrophic strain on the NHS? You can't do much about ageing, but the strain that the British lifestyle puts on the NHS is worth at least 25% to the NHS. Imagine what you could do with that?
You talk of HMRC loopholes, well Labour is equally guilty of not closing those. Which party is modifying IR35? Not Labour is it?
Why would homelessness be a thing of the past? Wasn't there homelessness under Labour? How many of these homeless are veteran soldiers struggling in the aftermath of Blair's illegal war? Rather a lot I would say.

Why can't we just agree that UK politics is a complete mess and that no particular party is likely to do anything massively positive in the next 5 years. I really don't think you have a realistic outlook at all.

[JAS]

Hopefully it's Long Bailey so the Labour party can finally die off for good.

Yeah because life for the majority was so so much better before that nasty upstart Keir Hardie thought it was a good idea work the working class poor to come together to fight for basic rights, Christ Soul do you really want to go back to Victorian levels of mass destitution & poverty? Actually we’re quite well along that road.

Undoubtedly there IS a need to let the top brass of the Labour Party know that they’re not listening very well to their base but extinction won’t solve it either.
Even the Irish working class are beginning to work out that neoliberal policies only work for the few.

You must be the only one in the entire world who thinks that destitution and poverty disappears as soon as a Labour government comes in. Newsflash, if you're poor under a Tory party, you're poor under a Labour party.
The UK will always have a poor base of poverty and lack of education, like the vast majority of countries.haven't seen anything from Labour which would change that.

...and you go on about Mac’s (non) ability to correctly interpret posts?? Jesus Super, at no point ever would I have said that poverty disappears as soon as a Labour govt comes in. The point I was making was that before the Labour Party existed the ruling elite rode roughshod over ordinary working people. Without a decent Labour opposition that is what we’ll drift back to. The Tories are very much based on protecting the vested interests of the elite and they ride on greed and rule by division and have done for hundreds of years. They only care about peoples perceptions of them when there are votes to be had. The Labour Party on the other hand was created to advance the prospects of ordinary working people. They’ve only existed for just over 100 years, they’ve only really realistically had 3 shots at any decent semblance of power. In each they made a difference, the Tory loaded establishment will tell you they ruined the countries finances in the process, the facts actually paint a different picture but given the entrenchment of your views there’s no point in trying to enlighten you.

You always bring this sort of crap up as if the Tories are there only to step on the poor in society. The majority of the last 60 years have been under Tory governments, yet life has not been any better when there's been Labour governments in place.
I agree that we need a decent Labour opposition in place, you were the one who thought Corbyn would be better though, so bear that in mind.
If we're talking about entrenchment of views, you're a perfect example. I'm no Tory voter, but at least if they do something different I could give them credit for it, you could never bring yourself to do so because of your views on the party. You can't bear that people changed their vote from Labour who were promising nothing to their core vote.

Labour are an absolute laughing stock, but you still stand by them despite this. Stop being a fanboy and accept that unless they return with Starmer to the centre they are finished. You also don't seem able to accept that their failure was almost entirely self inflicted. You blamed Ian Austin the other day for having a big influence on the Tory majority, but made no mention whatsoever about the ineptitude of the Labour party and their election policies and manifesto, not to mention a feeble leader who had no position on anything.

JHC it’s like debating with an angst ridden teenager!!!
1. It’s not crap, it’s demonstrably true that the Tories represent to top 1% in society and do a reasonable job of extending that to the top 30ish % around election time using whatever lies are required
2. I think there is consensus that when the have been in they have moved things forward for Mr/Mrs average.
3. I’m no consistent Labour voter and am certainly NOT a fanboy, the inclination to vote Labour this time round even though there offering wasn’t great and their leader was at best insipid was that I have the view that what the Tories will deliver will be a helluva lot worse and societally divisive than anything Labour would have done.
4. I have already stated quite clearly that they need to elect Starmer from the candidates on offer, furthermore I’d see the election of RLB as confirmation that that party as a whole has disappeared up its own arse and stopped listening to the electorate.
5. I didn’t blame nomark Ian Austin for Labours defeat I said he was ONE example of the kind of disloyalty that undermined Corbyn and fostered disunity at a time when they needed to be united, the main reason they couldn’t unite was that Corbyn didn’t have the necessary leadership qualities. Again I never promoted Corbyn as some kind of hero, he was always the weak link. I’d have taken him over Johnson or Swinson but that’s an illustration of the poverty of choice the electorate had.

Listen if in 5 years time there is no crisis in the NHS (if it still exists), state education is demonstrably moving forward (my partner is a Tory voting head teacher and it’s excruciating watching her stress at trying to run a school under completely unrealistic parameters)  food banks have been rendered obsolete, homelessness is a thing of the past. Global corporations and ultra wealthy individuals subscribe to the same HMRC rules as everybody else and those rules have their loopholes removed. The minimum wage and living wage keep pace with MPs pay and we have a balance of payments surplus and GDP growth consistently above 3% then I’ll be the first to hold my hands up and say “Well done Boris, sorry I ever doubted you” Quite frankly I think there’s more chance of Rangers winning the Champions League but we’ll see, time will tell.

1. That's simply conjecture, you mistake supporting business (something Corbyn wouldn't have done) with supporting the 1%. The top 30% in Britain contribute the largest amount to the exchequer. Why wouldn't you support them? They're vital to the success of the country.
2. What evidence is there that things have moved forward for Mr and Mrs Average under Labour? Higher taxes? Tuition fees? Yeah nice one.
3. What on earth makes you think a Marxist manifesto would be better for Britain than a continuation of the current capitalist system? Capitalism isn't perfect, but it's the best system and moving to a massively state owned system isn't good for anyone.
4. Glad you understand that Labour's survival is a coin toss depending on who their idiotic membership pick.
5. You said that Ian Austin should take his share of  responsibility for the Tory majority. Why should Austin show any loyalty to a party which was moving away from the party he joined and wasn't doing what he thought it should? Why on earth would you think that such a party deserves his loyalty? Labour's lack of unity was down to their direction and leadership, their laughable cabinet and atrocious leader.

How many times do you have to be told that the NHS isn't up for sale? The NHS is ALWAYS going to be under massive pressure because it's not the system that people think it is, it was never designed to be perfect and never designed to take the ageing population, massively fat population or burgeoning population.  Why do you never blame the UK population for their role in the  catastrophic strain on the NHS? You can't do much about ageing, but the strain that the British lifestyle puts on the NHS is worth at least 25% to the NHS. Imagine what you could do with that?
You talk of HMRC loopholes, well Labour is equally guilty of not closing those. Which party is modifying IR35? Not Labour is it?
Why would homelessness be a thing of the past? Wasn't there homelessness under Labour? How many of these homeless are veteran soldiers struggling in the aftermath of Blair's illegal war? Rather a lot I would say.

Why can't we just agree that UK politics is a complete mess and that no particular party is likely to do anything massively positive in the next 5 years. I really don't think you have a realistic outlook at all.

No problems at all agreeing that U.K. politics is a complete mess and realistically has been for quite some time and I’d advance the view that the main 2 triggers that helped create & develop the mess were a) The Iraq war (An “allegedly” Socialist PM taking us into an illegal war supporting a right wing US president). As an aside the vast majority of Tories at the time supported the war, ultimately tho Blair has to shoulder the responsibility and b) the financial crisis, the financial crisis really screwed up the political landscape, Brown told us for years he’d ended boom & bust, he hadn’t and he’d blinded himself to the effect of ever expanding bank credit, again an “allegedly” socialist chancellor being bestie mates with a banking megalomaniac who knew his bank was too big to fail and that the state would have to bail him out. So essentially the last Labour government whilst it did a lot of good things it committed two totally unsocialist clusterfxxxs. A coalition then came in and made wrong choices about how to get out of the banking crisis, austerity was the worst choice Cameron could have made, he then compounded that mistake by trying to distract attention away from it by holding a referendum on EU membership to pacify the ideological right in his own party and off we sailed into the complete chaos we’re in now. Ironically what we really could have done with was Johnson being elected with an 80 seat majority in 2010 not 2019. What we also could have done with was the other Milliband succeeding Brown but that didn’t happen either. Labour have retested the Foot experiment and confirmed (hopefully finally) that there is a line that you must not cross when tilting the party left. They’ve got 5 years to work out where that line is and how to stay on the right side of it. Still part of the post Brexit mess is what’s going to happen with Scotland and NI. We can only speculate how those 2 situations will go. Wee Jimmy Krankie needs to dial it back a bit but the more concerning issue is over the sea. I’d almost be tempted to put money on an Irish reunification vote in the next 5-10 years.

[JAS]

Javid’s off to the backbenches then...4 weeks before the budget. Not sure what if any difference it makes, I assume the budget is done mostly by treasury civil servants with the chancellor only effectively a figure head.

The reason seems a bit more sinister though, “sack your advisors and use mine” hmmm

[kwinigolfer]

Very Drumpfian.
Is Dominic Cummings BJ's answer to Stephen Miller?

[JAS]

Very Drumpfian.
Is Dominic Cummings BJ's answer to Steven Miller?

Or maybe a modern day Alastair Campbell? He must be an astute operator to be fair, Johnson does need to be careful how much influence he allows the unelected Cummings to be credited with.

[beninho]

10th housing minister in 10 years, we wonder why the system is fricked up and not getting any better.

[Sponsored content]