Jump to content
stuie

efests Exit Poll

efests Exit Poll   

522 members have voted

  1. 1. Who did you vote for?

    • Brexit Party
      2
    • Conservatives
      33
    • Green Party
      23
    • Labour
      356
    • Liberal Democrats
      76
    • SNP
      17
    • UKIP
      2
    • Other
      12


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Benja100 said:

I didn’t sayr that £80k isn’t a lot of income, I’m not saying people on £80k can’t be taxed more. What I am saying is that if 5% of the population is ‘the few’ then it isn’t likely that you’re going to be able to make the other 95% of the population £6000 a year better off by taxing the 5% just because of the maths. 

I’m finding your debating style quite confrontational and aggressive. There’s no need for it we’re all friends here trying to make the best of a very poor result for Labour and the country. Please chill out a bit no one is here for a fight amongst ourselves :) 

When I hear those absolute figures from any party I don't pay much heed to them "no plan survives first contact with the enemy" - there are so many unknowns. So I hadn't read up on it.

But, I just did for the purpose of this debate. The source I read says 6k refers to savings that an average household would have made if Labour policies were implemented based on some figures and a bit of conjecture by the Labour party (2 season ticket rail cards etc) so yeah, take it with a pinch of salt anyway, but its not the same as spending an additional 6k, even if the way it was marketed maybe suggests that.

Even so, govt spending would increase yes but I can't find any evidence to suggest that the funding for the policies comes solely from increasing income tax on the top 5% of earners. They have made it clear that there would be increases in other taxes and borrowing. You mentioned that they are counting on interest rates being low and thats true in the first instance, but interests rates would only tend to go up in times of monetary expansion, when things are going good. At that point tax revenues also increase and reduce the need for borrowing. The investment in human capital and infrastructure would also generate income down the line and is absolutely necessary. Far more than tax relief for big business or whatever bullshit the tories come up with, what is holding productivity in this country back (particularly the regions) is exactly the fact that they have shit infrastructure, transport and skills shortages etc.

The infuriating thing about tory policy is that it isn't even consistent with neoclassical economics. The neoclassical ideal is markets of perfect competition. The contract based system for rails just breeds cronyism and local rail monopolies which are just as inefficient as any state owned monopoly with the difference being that they're run for profit so the profits are not put back into the business and they are able to get away with treating passengers with the contempt we expect from a private company rather than one owned by the state. Also, the tax system for companies, the loopholes and the regulations overwhelming benefit the large organisations at the expense of smaller businesses, competition and efficiency. Also being anti EU for what appear to be broadly trumpian protectionist/anti free movement reasons is vs neoclassical economics. And so much more besides. The conclusion being, they aren't driven by ideology, they are simply the Rich Mean Bastards Preservation Society.

Also, re your other comments on the unions in the 80s - I wasn't alive so I don't know and strikes can be disruptive, but in a world where executives are often unaccountable and policies are unfair, collective action and collective bargaining have been one of the few tools people have to improve things for themselves. We owe a lot to all those who those who fought for our rights.. like the Beastie Boys for example.

Also apologies for the tone previously, you're right, we are on the same team. But I do believe that we can't let the tories or the lib dems or the right wing press decide who the Labour party should be and what policies we should have. We just need to find a way to win the argument. I think that starts with a charismatic leader who can sell it. I wish to god we had somebody like Ocasio-Cortez over in the US but I'm sorry to say nobody springs to mind when I think of the current prospects.

Edited by mattiloy
bla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Political Correctness gone mad" is a massive phrase. Its how your Piers Morgan's & Katie Hopkins get airtime.

Labour is seen as a "snowflake" party. Thing is, say you dont support the queen, or when James McClean wont wear a poppy & that lot go mental. They are the most PC bunch of them all.

What they add into the anti political correctness argument is Jingoism and nationalism. Working class people are voting for a party they believes is "British", well actually "English".  Anti semitism wasnt mentioned at all arpund here. The IRA stuff was, big style. 

Not being able to fly a St Georges cross.

"Why do the Irish get St Paddys day off? We should get georges day"

All that bollocks (well to me it is).

That resonates with people around here. I will never ever understand it... but it does.

Edited by FuzzyDunlop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mattiloy said:

When I hear those absolute figures from any party I don't pay much heed to them "no plan survives first contact with the enemy" - there are so many unknowns. So I hadn't read up on it.

But, I just did for the purpose of this debate. The source I read says 6k refers to savings that an average household would have made if Labour policies were implemented based on some figures and a bit of conjecture by the Labour party (2 season ticket rail cards etc) so yeah, take it with a pinch of salt anyway, but its not the same as spending an additional 6k, even if the way it was marketed maybe suggests that.

Even so, govt spending would increase yes but I can't find any evidence to suggest that the funding for the policies comes solely from increasing income tax on the top 5% of earners. They have made it clear that there would be increases in other taxes and borrowing. You mentioned that they are counting on interest rates being low and thats true in the first instance, but interests rates would only tend to go up in times of monetary expansion, when things are going good. At that point tax revenues also increase and reduce the need for borrowing. The investment in human capital and infrastructure would also generate income down the line and is absolutely necessary. Far more than tax relief for big business or whatever bullshit the tories come up with, what is holding productivity in this country back (particularly the regions) is exactly the fact that they have shit infrastructure, transport and skills shortages etc.

The infuriating thing about tory policy is that it isn't even consistent with neoclassical economics. The neoclassical ideal is markets of perfect competition. The contract based system for rails just breeds cronyism and local rail monopolies which are just as inefficient as any state owned monopoly with the difference being that they're run for profit so the profits are not put back into the business and they are able to get away with treating passengers with the contempt we expect from a private company rather than one owned by the state. Also, the tax system for companies, the loopholes and the regulations overwhelming benefit the large organisations at the expense of smaller businesses, competition and efficiency. Also being anti EU for what appear to be broadly trumpian protectionist/anti free movement reasons is vs neoclassical economics. And so much more besides. The conclusion being, they aren't driven by ideology, they are simply the Rich Mean Bastards Preservation Society.

Also, re your other comments on the unions in the 80s - I wasn't alive so I don't know and strikes can be disruptive, but in a world where executives are often unaccountable and policies are unfair, collective action and collective bargaining have been one of the few tools people have to improve things for themselves. We owe a lot to all those who those who fought for our rights.. like the Beastie Boys for example.

Hahaha see what you did there :)

re the strikes.... it wasn’t like the strikes today. There were imposed 3 day weeks but only get paid 3 days, the power would keep going off, rubbish piling up in the streets. Imagine not having electricity in the UK today! Unthinkable. The U.K. had to get a bailout from the IMF! Quite extreme  

it wasn’t like the current SW train strike with 75% of services still running 

Don’t take my word for it, google Winter of Discontent and see what you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, FuzzyDunlop said:

That statement is very very odd to me. It's factually accurate, but I cannot understand what connection someone from Rochdale, Oldham, Bury or Burnley has with them. I can't at all.

Most people aren't all the politically engaged. I reckon, other than traditional left/right splits, most people just want to look at someone on TV/on the front of a paper and think they look vaguely authoritative/competent/trustworthy. This is where Blair and Cameron both did well.

Brown, Miliband and May can all be filed under competent enough politicians who didn't have the charisma, etc for the top job.

Johnson seems to have created a new category for himself, which is people think he's a laugh riot (said on Newsnight last night that his positive approach was a big plus).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone is interested in what are are discussing now - what Labour did wrong and needs to do now and why people 'like' Johnson - then they were discussing it right at the end of Newsnight last night when I got in and it was very interesting. Discussion with a Labour activist and columnist and a uni politics expert - about the last 5/10 mins:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000c64d/newsnight-13122019

Edited by Homer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

interests rates would only tend to go up in times of monetary expansion that’s when the going is good

Sorry not being confrontational but try telling that to the people trapped in years of negative equity or losing their homes when interest rates hit 15% in the early 90’s. My mortgage is £1300 a month. At 15% interest it would be over £3000. 2 months of that and we’re homeless. And the economy was not good then so it’s not like I’d just had a pay rise that could cover the £20,000 annual increase. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Homer said:

If anyone is interested in what are are discussing now - what Labour did wrong and needs to do now and why people 'like' Johnson - then they were discussing it right at the end of Newsnight last night when I got in and it was very interesting. Discussion with a Labour activist and columnist and a uni politics expert - about the last 5/10 mins:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000c64d/newsnight-13122019

Just watched it. Quite a good debate. 

Corbyn's refusal to sing the national anthem was a big thing for a few people I know of. People I follow due to the football team I support. They had it in for him for that.  I pointed out how poltically correct that is, to have to sing a song... it didn't go down too well.

Edited by FuzzyDunlop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Benja100 said:

I think everyone can join me in saying FUCK KATIE HOPKINS

 

Ignore her, give her no mentions. She's just a professional troll trying to sort out her finances and get back on the property ladder after being rinsed in court. Ignore her and let her stay poor, it's the best lesson for her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, scaryclaireyfairy said:

Ignore her, give her no mentions. She's just a professional troll trying to sort out her finances and get back on the property ladder after being rinsed in court. Ignore her and let her stay poor, it's the best lesson for her.

That goes for all controversial commentators right or left. They're just paid to pretend they have an opinion. Saw someone dug up an old apparent Owen Jones column advocating leaving the EU (unless it was fake, I didn't check).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, FuzzyDunlop said:

Just watched it. Quite a good debate. 

Corbyn's refusal to sing the national anthem was a big thing for a few people I know of. People I follow due to the football team I support. They had it in for him for that.  I pointed out how poltically correct that is, to have to sing a song... it didn't go down too well.

 

If you're feeling really brave, Johnson addressing northern town coming up on BBC News. I'm not sure I'm up to it yet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Homer said:

 

If you're feeling really brave, Johnson addressing northern town coming up on BBC News. I'm not sure I'm up to it yet...

Sod that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Homer said:

Nationalising broadband? And even that were the case, they chose the wrong man to sell it then 

Why is that considered so radical? Internet access is an essential service. We know it is as there’s a load of government stuff you can only apply for online. Not to mention job hunting and so on. It’s new, so doesn’t have the history of being nationalised like utilities or trains, but it absolutely would have been if it were about in the 30s. So why do we all find that notion so weird? I’d imagine in the answer to that is the answer to why Labour did so badly. Why do people believe that free broadband for everyone is less realistic then negotiating a whole new trade deal with the largest trading block in the world by next Christmas?

For me, I think it’s over now. We had our shot at doing some radical and different, the British people were even onside, but then the referendum happened and that was where people chose to make their stand against what the establishment was telling them to do. And it still hasn’t happened, we still haven’t left, and people no longer believe that if you vote something different it’ll actually happen. And when it does happen and doesn’t actually fix any problems those people will assume they were screwed over again and cease to engage. I genuinely believe without the referendum a Corbyn like figure could have led a radical left party to an electoral majority. But it’s a once in a generation vote and that vote was for Brexit instead.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The country is too suspicious of socialism at the moment, Labour's manifesto was too radical for the UK as it is today.

It's pretty simple, if you've ever seen the Matrix it is explained there.

When Agent Smith explains to Morpheus that the first time the machines tried to build the matrix they made it so everyone was happy and content, but humans rejected it because it didn't feel realistic unless things were shit.

This is why people vote Conservative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Broadband I think made Labour a laughing stock and here’s why

If we believe in for the many not the few, then don’t spend billions of pounds giving away something that is not that expensive to start with to the entire population 

Don’t propose doing it by nationalising one provider

what would have happened to all the other companies and their employees? Laid off?

People do not want their broadband to be provided by the government

wouldnt a better idea to be a broadband voucher redeemable with the major players that could be purchased in bulk at discount, given to those that meet a criteria such as they are on a specific benefit. It only needs to be done every 2 years so not that onerous

and then spend money improving broadband in areas with poor coverage

seems more sensible to me

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Matt42 said:

 

Family members of friends in those seats around Manchester that have swung. They feel completely resentful of labour who resorted to promising the world instead of actually reaching out and engaging with the working class issues. Labours manifesto full of things that the working classes don’t want and has become too city centric for them to identify with it.

Thats an absolute load of nonesense. The working classes in Manchester satellite towns voted Tory because of Brexit, immigration and the bollocks the media spouted about Corbyn being a terrorist sympathiser.

Those were the key issues.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Homer said:

 

If you're feeling really brave, Johnson addressing northern town coming up on BBC News. I'm not sure I'm up to it yet...

Just as an aside, one thing I've detested in this campaign is the prefix 'northern'. Do you ever hear 'southern' used?  This focus on what bit of land you were born on, and how that makes you different (from London) is really frustrating. 

(Said as a tactical lib dem remainer not a million miles from Workington)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FuzzyDunlop said:

Ages of votes are interesting

20191213_175752.jpg

wow :) theres hope ... but not for a while yet ...Thats presumably why twitter was left leaning too 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, eastynh said:

the bollocks the media spouted about Corbyn being a terrorist sympathiser

His record on association with extremely dubious controversial organisations and individuals, many of whom were / are deeply opposed to the West, the UK and the liberal values that we all share, was not manufactured by the media. They may have had a field day on it but they didn’t force him to meet them. His meetings are a matter of public record.
 

Whilst people in denial about Corbyn’s associations that made him unelectable keep thinking / repeating that, lessons won’t be learned and Labour remain unelectable. And then the vulnerable suffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

wow :) theres hope ... but not for a while yet ...Thats presumably why twitter was left leaning too 

Strap in for constituency boundary change fuckery and other gerrymandering that's going to keep them ensconced in power until the end of time. They tried it before, but now they've got the numbers.  Voter ID, the works. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

wow :) theres hope ... but not for a while yet ...Thats presumably why twitter was left leaning too 

Isn't there also a generally accepted trend that people vote more right wing as they get older? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

wow :) theres hope ... but not for a while yet ...Thats presumably why twitter was left leaning too 

You’re assuming the young people won’t change their mind as they age, it’s a well established phenomenon That they do. Once people have kids, family, loans, mortgages, pensions, they might think differently, also the Tories might not be as shit by then. If Tories are more moderate and poverty is reduced and Food bank usage is reduced or gone, the NHS still hasn’t been sold, and Labour are still on a socialist tip, they might not be that appealing electorally. I’m not saying this will happen but I’m also saying you can’t just assume that people don’t swap sides, look what happened yesterday after all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Benja100 said:

His record on association with extremely dubious controversial organisations and individuals, many of whom were / are deeply opposed to the West, the UK and the liberal values that we all share, was not manufactured by the media. They may have had a field day on it but they didn’t force him to meet them. His meetings are a matter of public record.
 

Whilst people in denial about Corbyn’s associations that made him unelectable keep thinking / repeating that, lessons won’t be learned and Labour remain unelectable. And then the vulnerable suffer.

I can't disagree with anything you have said there, but I was speaking specifically in relation to the working class Manchester satellite towns that Matt was speaking about and the reasons the Conservatives have taken the seats. It had absolutely nothing to do at all with Labours policies. In Heywood/Middleton and Bury, the only reason Labour lost their seats was due to the Brexit party vote. The conservatives made hardly any gains in these areas, the significant loss of votes that Labour suffered pretty much all went to the Brexit party. If Labour had been pro Brexit, they would have retained these seats very easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...