Jeremy Corbyn

Actually, Murdoch and Co are a great deal to blame for the poor performance of the Labour party at the last election (along with poor leadership over the past 5 years).

Here's an mildly interesting report which investigated why people who voted Labour in 2010 didn't (in general) in 2015:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/271940748/Listening-to-Labour-s-Lost-Labour-Voters-bbm-Research-July-2015

Some of the 10 points in that report have partial basis in fact (weak Leadership for example), but much of it is utter nonsense which shows people just believe what they are told by the media. Notably, most of these people interviewed believed the financial crash was caused by overspending by the Labour government and that the coalition had done a good job with the economy. The idea that the crash was caused by overspending is simply a complete and utter lie promulgated by the Tories (and LibDem lackeys) and their captive media yet is now taken as fact by too many ill-informed people. Still can't get my head around the fact that Labour didn't point out from the off it was nonsense. Almost as if they wanted to lose. Baffling. As I've noted in the past in many threads on this board, Osborne is economically illiterate which is why the recovery has been the worst on record - it's only the collapse in oil prices which reduced inflation to zero which saved him this last time. Can he continue to be so lucky when so many of his policies are so destructive? I tend to doubt it. The latest budget was shockingly bad and will lead to great hardship amongst the young and poor. Obviously too many "All Right Jacks" out there to be bothered about this, unfortunately. You're one of 'em.

Many of the other points show that the respondents have taken in the right-wing propaganda on subjects such as immigration, welfare, Labour being anti-business and the like. Most are easily disprovable if the data is actually examined.

I tell you what, you don't half talk some bullshit a lot of the time:

Quoted Text

People want better for themselves a nice car, nice house, good school for the kids, with a nice holiday now and then , but labour are against all this their policies are based on class warfare and they seek to punish success.

Yeah, I distinctly remember being worried that the Labour party policies of being against "all this kind of thing". You're absolutely flipping crackers if you actually believe what you typed there. The class warfare is being carried out by the Tories as the latest budget shows:

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/.....arning-12000-a-year/

Look at that chart from the IFS - the budget implies huge cuts in income (after all benefits are taken into account) for the poorer people in our society. How can this be anything but class warfare, especially when it comes at the same time as Osborne cutting inheritance tax so the wealthiest 6% can pass on more money to their already privileged offspring?

An amusing rant from you about the NHS. You really do believe everything you are told by the Tories, don't you?

The NHS was the first major Nationalised Healthcare system in the world and its success led many countries to set up their own equivalents (though not all use the same operational system). Trying to ignore this fact is both perverse and dishonest.

However, I do find it amusing that you've hoisted yourself on your own petard with the linked report about how the NHS isn't even among the top ten systems in Europe. Here's a useful link which will go some way to explaining this fact to you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_%28PPP%29_per_capita

Pretty much all of those European countries appearing slightly higher in the ratings than the NHS spend more money per capita on healthcare than the NHS. All but Norway (can't count Luxembourg as a proper country as it is a crooked tax haven with a population less than Sheffield!) spend a higher percentage of their GDP on healthcare than the UK. Note that Norway spend a vast amount more per capita on healthcare than the UK as well - over 65% more by those figures. Those crazy, healthy, Nordic socialists, eh?

The Tory wet dream is of a US-style system with private healthcare and insurance. Look where the US system appears in both expenditure and the efficacy ratings and any sane person will see that this is not something to be desired.

Grim 74, are you the armed wing of UKIP?

I hope Corbyn wins.  But I am a Tory.

Quoted from Maringer

Actually, Murdoch and Co are a great deal to blame for the poor performance of the Labour party at the last election (along with poor leadership over the past 5 years).

Here's an mildly interesting report which investigated why people who voted Labour in 2010 didn't (in general) in 2015:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/271940748/Listening-to-Labour-s-Lost-Labour-Voters-bbm-Research-July-2015

Some of the 10 points in that report have partial basis in fact (weak Leadership for example), but much of it is utter nonsense which shows people just believe what they are told by the media. Notably, most of these people interviewed believed the financial crash was caused by overspending by the Labour government and that the coalition had done a good job with the economy. The idea that the crash was caused by overspending is simply a complete and utter lie promulgated by the Tories (and LibDem lackeys) and their captive media yet is now taken as fact by too many ill-informed people. Still can't get my head around the fact that Labour didn't point out from the off it was nonsense. Almost as if they wanted to lose. Baffling. As I've noted in the past in many threads on this board, Osborne is economically illiterate which is why the recovery has been the worst on record - it's only the collapse in oil prices which reduced inflation to zero which saved him this last time. Can he continue to be so lucky when so many of his policies are so destructive? I tend to doubt it. The latest budget was shockingly bad and will lead to great hardship amongst the young and poor. Obviously too many "All Right Jacks" out there to be bothered about this, unfortunately. You're one of 'em.

Many of the other points show that the respondents have taken in the right-wing propaganda on subjects such as immigration, welfare, Labour being anti-business and the like. Most are easily disprovable if the data is actually examined.

I tell you what, you don't half talk some bullshit a lot of the time:



Yeah, I distinctly remember being worried that the Labour party policies of being against "all this kind of thing". You're absolutely flipping crackers if you actually believe what you typed there. The class warfare is being carried out by the Tories as the latest budget shows:

http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/.....arning-12000-a-year/

Look at that chart from the IFS - the budget implies huge cuts in income (after all benefits are taken into account) for the poorer people in our society. How can this be anything but class warfare, especially when it comes at the same time as Osborne cutting inheritance tax so the wealthiest 6% can pass on more money to their already privileged offspring?

An amusing rant from you about the NHS. You really do believe everything you are told by the Tories, don't you?

The NHS was the first major Nationalised Healthcare system in the world and its success led many countries to set up their own equivalents (though not all use the same operational system). Trying to ignore this fact is both perverse and dishonest.

However, I do find it amusing that you've hoisted yourself on your own petard with the linked report about how the NHS isn't even among the top ten systems in Europe. Here's a useful link which will go some way to explaining this fact to you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_%28PPP%29_per_capita

Pretty much all of those European countries appearing slightly higher in the ratings than the NHS spend more money per capita on healthcare than the NHS. All but Norway (can't count Luxembourg as a proper country as it is a crooked tax haven with a population less than Sheffield!) spend a higher percentage of their GDP on healthcare than the UK. Note that Norway spend a vast amount more per capita on healthcare than the UK as well - over 65% more by those figures. Those crazy, healthy, Nordic socialists, eh?

The Tory wet dream is of a US-style system with private healthcare and insurance. Look where the US system appears in both expenditure and the efficacy ratings and any sane person will see that this is not something to be desired.

Interesting report there shame I couldn't get past page 3 because of the dam advert anyway  'no excrement with the weak leader' but I don't necessarily think people rightly or wrongly blame Brown for the crash, as in the link it does says that the people agreed the banks had played a part,  but I do think labour taking our debt up to £500 million just before the crash certainly didn't help our cause,
The other stand out reason for people not wanting to vote labour in the report that you didn't mention was that labour appeared to be anti business and against those who where making something of their lives, concentrating instead on the state subsidised and this is what I keep banging on about.

It seems a bit sour grapes with you and the good work Osbournes doing we have a growing economy, wages rising, record low inflation, record employment, well if that's all about luck then keep touching  wood George because it's working.

As for the budget Jesus! You take some pleasing  don't you, you sound like a right bleeding heart liberal yes I did read your rant on the other thread it took me a few days mind, the only time you gave them an ounce of credit on a policy was when you claimed it was nicked of the labour, like I said sour grapes.
It was no surprise in your cherry picked rant that you failed to mention tax free earnings to £11000, raised the level where 40% tax kicks in, a tax increase for those earning over £100,000, introduced a scheme for 3 million high quality apprentices,homes worth up to £1m exempt from inheritance tax to replace labours ill l thought spiteful mansion tax,  £5 billion to be gained by tax avoidance by 2018 and More support for the armed forces.

Regarding the 18-21 year olds I understand they will have to earn or learn to receive there benefits so if thats the case then another tick in the box from me, I just hope this includes the - have a baby get a house teens, we might then start to see a bit more responsibility from the parents.
Not going to go on about the benefits cap but totally reasonable, I want to live in a country where nobody is better off on benefits, a country where aspiration is rewarded not despised and getting back to your link this is what the people voted for and this is what we are getting.

Just one final point on the budget regarding benefits being stopped after the 2nd child, how can anyone in the right mind disagree with this? Why should we the taxpayer have to pay for families that want to churn them out? Again this is where responsibility will have to come in to play, I was open mouthed listening to the wannabe labour clowns on TV yesterday who are against this policy, they are so out of touch it's unreal  

During the past five years Labour have opposed every single reform to welfare which helped people get back to work and end the something for nothing culture, but now at least things seem to be changing after last nights vote, this could be the start of a change in direction the party desperately need.

Didn't have any problems with that link myself? Perhaps you need a different adblocker on your browser?

Regarding your comments about the Labour party taking debt up to £500 million, I assume you mean something different there or there has been a typo because that's a drop in the ocean of the economy? As I noted in my posts in the General Election thread, up to the point where the economic crash occurred in 2007, the debt to GDP ratio was lower under the Labour government than was inherited in 1997 and this despite the fact that there had been considerable investment in schools and hospitals and wages had been increased. The debt ratio for the UK was lower than all of the other G7 countries as well (even if you include the deferred debt from the stupid PFI schemes). Brown wasn't profligate - it's simply not true. Any voter who believed this was misinformed.

I've never quite understood this stuff about the 'New Labour' government or even the Miliband bunch as being 'anti-business'. They didn't raise corporation tax (Osborne is currently engaged in a race to the bottom by cutting it), the New Labour business policies, especially, allowed the financial sector to balloon to ridiculous levels with enormous borrowing by business which ultimately led to the devastating crash back in 2007/08. What is anti business there, I wonder? The Telegraph periodically (before elections) publishes its letters from 'business leaders' (i.e. Conservative Party donors) warning about how terrible the Labour party are. The especially amusing one this time was the letter from "5,000 small businesses" which was actually organised by the Conservative party itself though the report made no mention of this! Absolutely shameful propaganda. Fundamentally, I think the issue is that any support for Unions is seen as anti-business which is utter nonsense of course. The latest attacks on Unions with more punitive legislation come at a time when the level of industrial action is at a historical low - virtually no strikes going on at all so, as with so much from this government, it's just another ideological attack.

I do have to laugh when you praise Osborne. As I've noted elsewhere, he inherited an economy with growth of around 2% following a recession and his austerity led us to the brink of a double-dip recession. We've had the weakest recovery from a recession on record, real wages aren't above levels from 2007 yet (pretty much unheard of in economic history). He borrowed more in 5 years than every Labour government, ever, oversaw a doubling of the national debt (not entirely his fault though his policies were dire) and utterly failed in his plans to eliminate the deficit. He managed to cut the deficit by around half which was actually pretty much what was planned by Brown in his last election! Difference was, of course, that the front loading of austerity has led to the loss of several percent of growth (at the very least). That's something we'll never get back and has cost thousands of pounds for every man, woman and child in the country.

The inflation target is 2% for a very good reason economically so lauding 0% inflation is preposterous (and on the borderline of damaging deflation) and it is down almost entirely to the fall in oil prices which Osborne had absolutely nothing to do with! It's like claiming credit for it being a warm day!

The increase in employment is a good thing to some degree but unfortunately to many of them are not good jobs. A huge rise in the numbers of people in part-time work who want more, underemployment is rife and productivity continues to fall. As noted, wage growth is pretty much non-existent which isn't too surprising when you consider the continued pay freezes on public sector workers. Private sector and public sector wages are linked closely due to the way that the market works so deliberately suppressing one directly affects the other.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Osborne is an economically inept chancellor. Politically astute, no doubt, but to the overall detriment of the country.

Osborne's latest 'emergency' budget was, unsurprisingly, regressive hitting the poorest hardest and giving away to the wealthier of society. You're lauding the rise of the inheritance tax level, something which will benefit the children of just the richest few percent of the population whilst praising cuts which will affect the poorest of workers. Note that many people in work will be worse off under this latest bill. It's all very well and good praising the rise in tax thresholds but, as the IFS noted, the people who benefit most from this aren't the lowest paid, but the wealthy. The associated cuts to tax credits and housing benefits mean that the poorest are worse off. As I note so often, we're the 6th wealthiest country in the world, but you're cheering on policies which impoverish the poor whilst transferring wealth to the better off.

You seem very confused about what the proposed mansion tax was as you're comparing it to inheritance tax? They are entirely different things. A mansion tax was fundamentally a graduated property tax which is actually a very good idea though the particular implementation was a poor idea. Much better to instigate a graduated property tax as found in most developed countries.

The apprentice thing is an amusing one. The funding plans for this are a bit wavy but answer me this, the 3 million number would indicate that around 1 in 10 of the workforce will be in an apprenticeship in the next 5 years. Is this in any way believable? Where are you going to find enough trainers to work with these apprentices? The numbers don't make one jot of sense. Lots of shelf-stacking 'apprenticeships' coming up, I expect. What are the chances that the 'apprenticeships' also come with low levels of wages, eh? Pretty high.

The plans for recouping money from tax avoidance and evasion are ambitious and, frankly, unlikely to come to fruition. Amongst the other cuts to goverment services, HMRC has been hacked right back and it seems improbable that they will have the resources or the expertise to get anywhere near the £5 billion figure in the budget. Time will tell, but don't be surprised if this doesn't materialise. The number of workers at HMRC have been cut by 40% over the past 10 years. Doesn't seem likely to me that cuts in levels such as this can be sustainable.

The rest of your post is just the usual Tory stuff about 'shirkers vs workers'. You seem to imagine that every young person that needs assistance with housing is slacking off or deliberately has kids just to get a home. As with all of these stories you read in the press, they are the exceptions rather than the rule. Sweeping generalisations in the assumptions about the young which also ignores the fact that youth unemployment is 3 times higher than the rate for the general population! Not by choice, most of the time.

As for the point about removing benefits after the second child, please note that we have a severely aging population. The baby boomers are retiring now and the increase in expected lifespan due to improved health and medicine means somebody is going to need to be looking after them and earning taxes to pay for their pensions. If you try to persuade UK citizens to have fewer children, this implies greater immigration in the future to support the elderly both financially and socially. I'm sure you're all for that.

I see that all the Labour leadership candidates apart from Corbyn abstained from the welfare bill vote. Absolutely gutless bunch of directionless, beige party careerists. What even is the point of them being there if they are going to abstain?

Obviously I'm behind Corbyn but then again I am a bit of a commie basterd.

Yep. I doubt you would find many Labour Party supporters who would agree with this 'Welfare' bill so heaven only knows why the party line was to abstain in the first place or why all of them wouldn't go against the whip to oppose it regardless.

Here's a press release from Frank Field, Cameron's former 'poverty tsar' which shows some costing of how much hardship this will cause to millions in the country:

http://www.frankfield.co.uk/latest-news/press-releases/news.aspx?p=1021009

Plenty of losses there but very shocking to see that over half a million of the poorest working families will effectively be facing a nominal tax rate of 48% due to the cuts in tax credits. Remarkable that anybody can defend this.

Quoted from Maringer

Plenty of losses there but very shocking to see that over half a million of the poorest working families will effectively be facing a nominal tax rate of 48% due to the cuts in tax credits. Remarkable that anybody can defend this.

People defend it because they're stupid girl privates who anecdotally hear about one or two examples of people playing the system and think that the sensible and proportioned response is to cut benefits for everyone - the majority of which are claimed legitimally by the so called 'hardworking families' the Tory party claim to represent. The flipping cheek of them to try and rebrand themselves recently as 'The Workers Party' is beyond measure.

I absolutely abhor anyone who votes Tory and sticks up for their inexcusable attacks on society's most vulnerable. The millions of working & middle class idiots who vote for them in their droves because they've got a mortgage and think they're doing "alright" are going to be in for a big shock when Gideon runs out of ways to keep the interest rates down.

Quoted from HackneyHaddock

I hope Corbyn wins.  But I am a Tory.

No excrement.

The problem with Lefties is they actually believe everyone else thinks the same as they do.
Time and time again Leftie candidates have been whalloped in elections yet they still cant understand why they lost.
Every man and his dog said that Ed was divvy and would never be elected as PM , they wouldnt listen same as they are not listening now.
It's fanctastic watching these idiots continue to make total fools of themselves and