Welcome to Cutting Edge. Guests can see and read the contents of most of the boards on this forum but need to become members to read all of them. Currently membership is instant, but new accounts may be deleted if not activated within fourteen days.

If you decide to join the forum, please open your welcome message for further details. New members are requested to introduce themselves on the appropriate thread on our welcome board.

Members may post messages and start threads, but it is essential that they read our posting rules and advice before doing so. If you have any immediate questions or queries, please post them on the suggestions board.

After posting at least ten messages, members are able to contact each other and the staff through our personal messaging system.

This forum is administrated by Ivan and moonbeam and moderated by boatlady and astradt1.

Thank you for visiting Cutting Edge.

Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Page 2 of 25 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 13 ... 25  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by blueturando on Tue Jan 17, 2012 5:10 pm

First topic message reminder :

Do Labour go hunting for the electorate who voted Blair into power 3 times and risk the wrath of the Unions, or side with the core Labour party supporters and the Unions at a risk of being unable to get back the voters who deserted them in the last election?
 
The scale of the rift between Labour and the unions over Ed Miliband's decision to embrace austerity measures has been made clear as a senior leader warned of long-term implications over the "most serious mistake" the party could have made.
Unions affiliated to Labour have been fuming since shadow chancellor Ed Balls told a conference at the weekend that he would not reverse the Government's planned 1% public sector pay cap, which affects millions of workers.
Unite leader Len McCluskey warned that Mr Miliband was setting Labour on course for electoral "disaster" and undermining his own leadership by accepting Government cuts and the cap on public sector pay.
Mr Miliband hit back against his union critics, insisting that Mr McCluskey was "wrong" to attack his decision to embrace austerity measures.
It has emerged that the leader of the GMB has written to the union's senior officials saying that the speech by Ed Balls may have a "profound impact" on its relationship with the Labour Party.
General secretary Paul Kenny said in the message: "I have spoken to Ed Milliband and Ed Balls to ensure they were aware of how wrong I think the policy they are now following is. It is now time for careful consideration and thought before the wider discussions begin on the long-term implications this new stance by the party has on GMB affiliation.
"It will be a fundamental requirement that the CEC (executive) and Congress determine our way forward after proper debate. I will update everyone as events unfold but I have to say this is the most serious mistake they could have made and the Tories must be rubbing their hands with glee." The GMB declined to comment on the message but confirmed it had been sent.
Mr McCluskey said in an article in The Guardian: "Ed Balls' sudden weekend embrace of austerity and the Government's public sector pay squeeze represents a victory for discredited Blairism at the expense of the party's core supporters. It also challenges the whole course Ed Miliband has set for the party, and perhaps his leadership itself."
Mr Miliband responded in a statement: "Len McCluskey is entitled to his views but he is wrong. I am changing the Labour Party so we can deliver fairness even when there is less money around and that requires tough decisions."

blueturando
Banned

Posts : 1203
Join date : 2011-11-21
Age : 50
Location : Jersey CI

Back to top Go down


Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Phil Hornby on Thu Jan 19, 2012 4:05 pm

Quote : "...11 Billion according to the Mail..."

So, that would put the true total at around £ 4.25 ( inc . VAT) .... Very Happy

Phil Hornby
Blogger

Posts : 3942
Join date : 2011-10-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Ivanhoe on Thu Jan 19, 2012 4:49 pm

blueturando wrote:I have no idea if it will improve business...maybe if they extend it up to Manachester and Scotland it will, but I believe it will create a good number of jobs too....If not, then it's a waste

But then £15-20 Billion on an unusable NHS IT system was a complete waste too

Bluey, As you didnt know that your hero Thatcher placed millions of pensioners into poverty from 1980, I thought you might also not know that your lovely party, never agreed to the concept of the NHS in the first place in the early 1940's when it first came about under a Labour Government.
avatar
Ivanhoe
Deactivated

Posts : 937
Join date : 2011-12-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by oftenwrong on Thu Jan 19, 2012 5:35 pm

The two consecutive Tory administrations from 1979 to 1990 and then on to 1997 saw the dismantling of British Industry, Privatisation of Electricity, Gas, Water, Railways AND the biggest inflow of Revenue to HM Treasury since the British Empire had crumbled. From North Sea Oil.

Why didn't the Tory Governments of 1979 to 1997 invest in the infrastructure which they are suddenly discovering to be desperately necessary in 2012?
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 11750
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Redflag on Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:31 pm

blueturando wrote:The Yacht aside, which is a ridiculous idfea and one that Im sure will be rejected by the Queen...are you staying the future investment in infrastructure is wrong?

Maybe if Cameron had not sacked so many in the public sector they would not need to spend £50 Million on an Airport because Boris wants to make himself look good for the up coming Mayoral Election or £32 Billion on a new Train set so the High and Mighty can travel in style because the normal working man will not be able to afford the cost of a ticket so if your saying there doing this to create jobs why sack so many in the public sector, Plus they keep harping on about there been NO MONEY remember Labour spent it all.
avatar
Redflag
Deactivated

Posts : 4282
Join date : 2011-12-31

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Ivanhoe on Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:21 pm

oftenwrong wrote:The two consecutive Tory administrations from 1979 to 1990 and then on to 1997 saw the dismantling of British Industry, Privatisation of Electricity, Gas, Water, Railways AND the biggest inflow of Revenue to HM Treasury since the British Empire had crumbled. From North Sea Oil.

Why didn't the Tory Governments of 1979 to 1997 invest in the infrastructure which they are suddenly discovering to be desperately necessary in 2012?

Because the right wing Tories want people on the dole, demoralised, desperate, disenfrachised, fearful, insecure.
avatar
Ivanhoe
Deactivated

Posts : 937
Join date : 2011-12-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by blueturando on Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:52 am

I swear you lot just make it up as you go along....bitter and twisted sad people

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill




blueturando
Banned

Posts : 1203
Join date : 2011-11-21
Age : 50
Location : Jersey CI

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Stox 16 on Fri Jan 20, 2012 5:41 am

blueturando wrote:I swear you lot just make it up as you go along....bitter and twisted sad people

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Winston Churchill




Ah, Conservatism is a philosophy,..... Tory's always say government doesn't work and then get elected and prove it

Abraham Lincoln

A conservative is one who admires radicals centuries after they're dead

Abraham Lincoln
avatar
Stox 16

Posts : 1064
Join date : 2011-12-18
Age : 58
Location : Suffolk in the UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by LWS on Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:32 am

There's no such thing as socialism in reality in any case. It only exists in theory, never in practice!
avatar
LWS

Posts : 67
Join date : 2012-01-06

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by sickchip on Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:44 am

Under 13yrs of Labours tenure economic inequality accelerated at its fastest rate in modern times, social mobility declined rapidly, and wage differentials continued to widen at pace.

Labour deregulated the banks thus facillitating practices that led us you know where, sold our gold reserves at their lowest price, got us involved in Afghan/Iraq - an engagement that has cost us £billions, bloated the number of those employed in the public sector by creating inessential jobs - I believe this was done to cover up for the lack of real jobs available and to massage the unemployment figures, and eventually used our taxes to bail out their buddies, and masters, in the banks.....

.....and I haven't even mentioned Labour's encouragement of house price inflation in order to create the illusionary boom blue blooded Brown and Tory Bliar liked to boast about. Now, of course. the housing market is knackered - young people can't get on the property ladder and renting is sky high so traditional households are out and dysfunctional dwelling is forced on people.....thanks New Labour!

- as much as I deplore the Tories victimisation of those at the bottom of the heap, I will not accept the lie that Labour is on the side of ordinary people.

They are only a Labour party in name - in truth they are as nasty as the tory party.


Oh and how come under Labour an underclass grew at pace?
Or do supporters of labour like to sweep such inconveniences under the mat like their party does?

Let us not forget that the two Eds and the other prominent labour mps all were part of the blair/brown machine.........they all championed and supported that betrayal of the working classes.
avatar
sickchip

Posts : 1149
Join date : 2011-10-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Ivanhoe on Fri Jan 20, 2012 10:30 am

sickchip wrote:Under 13yrs of Labours tenure economic inequality accelerated at its fastest rate in modern times, social mobility declined rapidly, and wage differentials continued to widen at pace.

Labour deregulated the banks thus facillitating practices that led us you know where, sold our gold reserves at their lowest price, got us involved in Afghan/Iraq - an engagement that has cost us £billions, bloated the number of those employed in the public sector by creating inessential jobs - I believe this was done to cover up for the lack of real jobs available and to massage the unemployment figures, and eventually used our taxes to bail out their buddies, and masters, in the banks.....

.....and I haven't even mentioned Labour's encouragement of house price inflation in order to create the illusionary boom blue blooded Brown and Tory Bliar liked to boast about. Now, of course. the housing market is knackered - young people can't get on the property ladder and renting is sky high so traditional households are out and dysfunctional dwelling is forced on people.....thanks New Labour!

- as much as I deplore the Tories victimisation of those at the bottom of the heap, I will not accept the lie that Labour is on the side of ordinary people.

They are only a Labour party in name - in truth they are as nasty as the tory party.








Oh and how come under Labour an underclass grew at pace?
Or do supporters of labour like to sweep such inconveniences under the mat like their party does?

Let us not forget that the two Eds and the other prominent labour mps all were part of the blair/brown machine.........they all championed and supported that betrayal of the working classes.

Sickchip, "New" Labour did not deregulate the banks, Thatcher did. New Labour did not encourage house price inflation, Thatcher's deregulated free market did. Young people can't get on the housing ladder also because Thatcher stopped building council houses in the 80's when she started her "right to buy" at knock down prices as an oportunist policy to get votes.

As far as Afgan and Iraq are concerned, these had cross party support by a majority vote.

sickchip, "New" Labour under Blair and Brown, came into Government in 1997 and continued all of Thatcher's fundamental right wing free market policies.
avatar
Ivanhoe
Deactivated

Posts : 937
Join date : 2011-12-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by oftenwrong on Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:31 am

All of which seems to leave a clear field for a Monster Raving Loony Party landslide in 2015. Unless Westminster surrenders to Alex Salmond as the alternative.
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 11750
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by sickchip on Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:51 am

Ivanhoe wrote:
sickchip wrote:Under 13yrs of Labours tenure economic inequality accelerated at its fastest rate in modern times, social mobility declined rapidly, and wage differentials continued to widen at pace.

Labour deregulated the banks thus facillitating practices that led us you know where, sold our gold reserves at their lowest price, got us involved in Afghan/Iraq - an engagement that has cost us £billions, bloated the number of those employed in the public sector by creating inessential jobs - I believe this was done to cover up for the lack of real jobs available and to massage the unemployment figures, and eventually used our taxes to bail out their buddies, and masters, in the banks.....

.....and I haven't even mentioned Labour's encouragement of house price inflation in order to create the illusionary boom blue blooded Brown and Tory Bliar liked to boast about. Now, of course. the housing market is knackered - young people can't get on the property ladder and renting is sky high so traditional households are out and dysfunctional dwelling is forced on people.....thanks New Labour!

- as much as I deplore the Tories victimisation of those at the bottom of the heap, I will not accept the lie that Labour is on the side of ordinary people.

They are only a Labour party in name - in truth they are as nasty as the tory party.








Oh and how come under Labour an underclass grew at pace?
Or do supporters of labour like to sweep such inconveniences under the mat like their party does?

Let us not forget that the two Eds and the other prominent labour mps all were part of the blair/brown machine.........they all championed and supported that betrayal of the working classes.

Sickchip, "New" Labour did not deregulate the banks, Thatcher did. New Labour did not encourage house price inflation, Thatcher's deregulated free market did. Young people can't get on the housing ladder also because Thatcher stopped building council houses in the 80's when she started her "right to buy" at knock down prices as an oportunist policy to get votes.

As far as Afgan and Iraq are concerned, these had cross party support by a majority vote.

sickchip, "New" Labour under Blair and Brown, came into Government in 1997 and continued all of Thatcher's fundamental right wing free market policies.


.....and in 13yrs labour did what exactly to reverse such policies and redress the social balance?

Precisely nothing! They accelerated tory/thatcherite policies and pursued precisely the same course of favouring the wealthy and increasing inequality. The labour party are batting for the bankers and corporations........exactly like the tories.

On the question of banking deregulation - did blue blooded Gordon not take Thatchers deregulation further when he created the wholly farcical FSA? Yes.

Did the labour party reinvest in affordable social housing to a point that made a difference? No.
avatar
sickchip

Posts : 1149
Join date : 2011-10-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by astradt1 on Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:57 am

Did the Torys say they were going to make massive cuts in public spending by making massive cuts in our Armed Forces, Police, Benefits, Education and Health before the last election?

If they had would they have got the number of votes they did?

Did they spell out exactly what they intended to do or did they say they would have to wait and see what the government finances were like?

Is that not the latter what Miliband and Balls have said...That they would have to wait and see what they can do, should they get back into power?

Is the fact that they are being honest upsetting Camoron and his government more......

Camoron failed to see when he took a swipe at Miliband over 'U' Turns he made himself look stupid in the fact that he seems to have now got them down to a fine art have made so many in such a short time.........



avatar
astradt1
Moderator

Posts : 961
Join date : 2011-10-08
Age : 62
Location : East Midlands

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by sickchip on Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:14 pm

Miliband and Balls sat behind Blair and Brown championing their every Thatcherite move for more than a decade.......that is ample demonstration of their lack of judgement, insight, and integrity.

A message to Labour - we don't want, or need, the Blair Witch Project 2. Get shot of Miliband, Balls, and all others associated with the 13yrs of betrayal.........and start again with real labour people.
avatar
sickchip

Posts : 1149
Join date : 2011-10-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by sickchip on Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:47 pm

Stare long and hard at the Labour party and the Tory party......the LibDems too if your so inclined; and commence a game of Spot the Difference
avatar
sickchip

Posts : 1149
Join date : 2011-10-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Redflag on Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:36 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:
blueturando wrote:Ivanhoe......Yes I am still posting Smile Not as much as I would like but it's a busy time of year in my profession, so sometimes I actually have to get me head down at work.

My issue with the more 'far left/socialist' posters on here that you all seemed to have a morbid fixation on Thatcher. It's time you forgot about her and moved on, it's 20 years since she left office and the women is nearly dead and can hardly string 2 words together. You lot are starting to sound like and old fella I know in my street who still hates the germans and would never buy anything made in that country

How can socialism move forward if you are always looking backwards?

Hi bluey, Surely you can see that Thatcher's ideoligy is still running Britain ?

The Tory Ideology and Dogma are alive and kicking here in the UK.
avatar
Redflag
Deactivated

Posts : 4282
Join date : 2011-12-31

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by witchfinder on Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:44 pm

Let us remind ourselves of the good old fashioned Labour governments of the 1970s when the party had traditional Labour core values.

Large sections of the British car industry were still nationalized, productivity was amongst the lowest in the world, the industry never made a profit, the workers seemed to be on strike more than they were at work.

The coal minning industry was still nationalized, in 1972 after holding the country to ransome the miners got a 21% wage increase, a year later the NUM held the country to ransome again - but they werent greedy.

In the 1970s according to the Guinness Book of Records the largest annual loss in terms of money by any company in the world was by British Steel, but the loss of course was tax payers money.

In the 1970s the economy of Britain was run by a series of night-time meetings between trade union leaders and the government, these regular long drawn out negotiations were sustained by the famed "beer and sandwiches.

The culture of Britain at the time was best potrayed by a whole host of comedy writers who poked fun at the way business and industry was held back by the Trade Union Movement, phrases like "one out, all out" and "according to the rule book".

Some citys and towns in Britain were not run by Labour councillors, instead they were controled by the "Millitant Tendancy" a parasytic group that hid inside the Labour Party and only showed themselves after using Labour to get elected, one such city was Liverpool.

If the Labour Party went back to this, the my personal choice at the next election would either be the Monster Raving Looney Party, emigrate or simply DONT BOTHER.

avatar
witchfinder
Forum Founder

Posts : 703
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : North York Moors

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Penderyn on Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:50 pm

witchfinder wrote:Let us remind ourselves of the good old fashioned Labour governments of the 1970s when the party had traditional Labour core values.

Large sections of the British car industry were still nationalized, productivity was amongst the lowest in the world, the industry never made a profit, the workers seemed to be on strike more than they were at work.

The coal minning industry was still nationalized, in 1972 after holding the country to ransome the miners got a 21% wage increase, a year later the NUM held the country to ransome again - but they werent greedy.

In the 1970s according to the Guinness Book of Records the largest annual loss in terms of money by any company in the world was by British Steel, but the loss of course was tax payers money.

In the 1970s the economy of Britain was run by a series of night-time meetings between trade union leaders and the government, these regular long drawn out negotiations were sustained by the famed "beer and sandwiches.

The culture of Britain at the time was best potrayed by a whole host of comedy writers who poked fun at the way business and industry was held back by the Trade Union Movement, phrases like "one out, all out" and "according to the rule book".

Some citys and towns in Britain were not run by Labour councillors, instead they were controled by the "Millitant Tendancy" a parasytic group that hid inside the Labour Party and only showed themselves after using Labour to get elected, one such city was Liverpool.

If the Labour Party went back to this, the my personal choice at the next election would either be the Monster Raving Looney Party, emigrate or simply DONT BOTHER.


Every 'bad thing' you mention benefited large numbers of British people and had their backing. Now we have only the extremely rich to please, who treat us all like turds.
avatar
Penderyn
Deactivated

Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Ivanhoe on Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:08 pm

Penderyn wrote:
witchfinder wrote:Let us remind ourselves of the good old fashioned Labour governments of the 1970s when the party had traditional Labour core values.

Large sections of the British car industry were still nationalized, productivity was amongst the lowest in the world, the industry never made a profit, the workers seemed to be on strike more than they were at work.

The coal minning industry was still nationalized, in 1972 after holding the country to ransome the miners got a 21% wage increase, a year later the NUM held the country to ransome again - but they werent greedy.

In the 1970s according to the Guinness Book of Records the largest annual loss in terms of money by any company in the world was by British Steel, but the loss of course was tax payers money.

In the 1970s the economy of Britain was run by a series of night-time meetings between trade union leaders and the government, these regular long drawn out negotiations were sustained by the famed "beer and sandwiches.

The culture of Britain at the time was best potrayed by a whole host of comedy writers who poked fun at the way business and industry was held back by the Trade Union Movement, phrases like "one out, all out" and "according to the rule book".

Some citys and towns in Britain were not run by Labour councillors, instead they were controled by the "Millitant Tendancy" a parasytic group that hid inside the Labour Party and only showed themselves after using Labour to get elected, one such city was Liverpool.

If the Labour Party went back to this, the my personal choice at the next election would either be the Monster Raving Looney Party, emigrate or simply DONT BOTHER.


Every 'bad thing' you mention benefited large numbers of British people and had their backing. Now we have only the extremely rich to please, who treat us all like turds.

And I dont blame them, we deserve it.
avatar
Ivanhoe
Deactivated

Posts : 937
Join date : 2011-12-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by blueturando on Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:09 pm

At last Sickchip.....someone who is honest as tells it as it is. I have been trying to get through to the ' Labour Lite ' crowd on here for ages that the hypocrisy on here is astounding.
90% of the Tory policies and virtually Identical to the current labour partys policies and it was the same when Blair and Brown were in Government...they more or less carried on where the Tories left off......Tory policies disguised with a Red tie and a title 'New Labour'. Could and should have been called New Conservatives really.

There is a reason the Unions supported Ed rather than his brother and that was they believed he was going to take the party down a new path to progressive socialism...now they have Blair and Brown mark 2.
The 2 Eds have bottled it really...They started off on the right path offering an alternative to the electorate, but have now decided to adopt the same policies as the coalition and hope Labours marketing strategy works better than the Tories in the next election....In reality they have SOLD OUT.

Take the proposed new high speed rail link. If this was proposed by Blair, Brown or Millaband, it would have been a fantastic idea to the hypocrites on here. They would have said...Look Labour is investing in infrastructure, jobs, public transport and Britain’s future. But because it's a coalition plan then they have to critisise it, but reverse it they won't........I know it and they know it...Hypocrisy once again!!!.

Iraq and Afghanistan.....Yes it was a cross party decision based on a suspect dossier from Blair and his merry crew.

Once again Sickchip is right....New Labour had 13 years to change or reverse Tory policy, but they didn't...Why is that???

There are very few real socialists on this forum and Sickchip has now given you a dose of the truth...so are you Red Tories, or do you really have socialist principles that you wouldn't sell off for a few middle class votes?
Maybe Britain needs a new party, one that will offer real opposition to the Government, one that will stick to their true socialist principles and not sell out for a bit of power

blueturando
Banned

Posts : 1203
Join date : 2011-11-21
Age : 50
Location : Jersey CI

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Penderyn on Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:51 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:
Penderyn wrote:
witchfinder wrote:Let us remind ourselves of the good old fashioned Labour governments of the 1970s when the party had traditional Labour core values.

Large sections of the British car industry were still nationalized, productivity was amongst the lowest in the world, the industry never made a profit, the workers seemed to be on strike more than they were at work.

The coal minning industry was still nationalized, in 1972 after holding the country to ransome the miners got a 21% wage increase, a year later the NUM held the country to ransome again - but they werent greedy.

In the 1970s according to the Guinness Book of Records the largest annual loss in terms of money by any company in the world was by British Steel, but the loss of course was tax payers money.

In the 1970s the economy of Britain was run by a series of night-time meetings between trade union leaders and the government, these regular long drawn out negotiations were sustained by the famed "beer and sandwiches.

The culture of Britain at the time was best potrayed by a whole host of comedy writers who poked fun at the way business and industry was held back by the Trade Union Movement, phrases like "one out, all out" and "according to the rule book".

Some citys and towns in Britain were not run by Labour councillors, instead they were controled by the "Millitant Tendancy" a parasytic group that hid inside the Labour Party and only showed themselves after using Labour to get elected, one such city was Liverpool.

If the Labour Party went back to this, the my personal choice at the next election would either be the Monster Raving Looney Party, emigrate or simply DONT BOTHER.


Every 'bad thing' you mention benefited large numbers of British people and had their backing. Now we have only the extremely rich to please, who treat us all like turds.

And I dont blame them, we deserve it.

I said so when the mugs betrayed the miners. 'You'll pay for this, mugs', said I, and they have. I think we've done our time now though, and might reasonably be allowed to string up the odd banker, or something pleasurable at least.
avatar
Penderyn
Deactivated

Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by witchfinder on Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:28 pm

In recent days the opinion polls have shown the Conservatives and Labour neck and neck, the most recent one ( this morning ) actualy shows the Conservatives ahead, and if this YouGov poll is accurate, then it has nothing to do with people been satisfied with the government.

With the economy now in a much worse position than it was in May 2010, the opposition Labour Party should be streets ahead in all opinion polls.

The lack of support to Labour has nothing to do with what Ed Milliband DID say, but has much more to do with what he DID NOT say, the headline is "I will go along with the coalition pay freeze on public sector wages and salaries" - < And thats it.

WE NEED TO HEAR MORE WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT ELSE YOU WILL DO

The public of Britain want to hear a genuine, credible alternative to this government, and because Mr Milliband is not shouting his alternative from the mountain tops for everyone to hear, people are begining to think that there is no alternative.

Whatever happened to Gordon Brown and Alistair Darlings credible, workable plan to half the defecit by 2015. ?

Why do most British people feel that Her Majesties opposition are not saying anything, keeping quite, have nothing to say. ?

Should Labour supporters and members start realisticly considering a leadership challenge to put a strong leader at the helm who will shout at the top of his / her voice what the alternative is to the mess we are in. ?
avatar
witchfinder
Forum Founder

Posts : 703
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : North York Moors

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by bobby on Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:31 pm

witchfinder said,
The lack of support to Labour has nothing to do with what Ed Milliband DID say, but has much more to do with what he DID NOT say, the headline is "I will go along with the coalition pay freeze on public sector wages and salaries" - < And thats it.

WE NEED TO HEAR MORE WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT ELSE YOU WILL DO

The public of Britain want to hear a genuine, credible alternative to this government, and because Mr Milliband is not shouting his alternative from the mountain tops for everyone to hear, people are begining to think that there is no alternative.

Whatever happened to Gordon Brown and Alistair Darlings credible, workable plan to half the defecit by 2015. ?

Why do most British people feel that Her Majesties opposition are not saying anything, keeping quite, have nothing to say. ?

Should Labour supporters and members start realisticly considering a leadership challenge to put a strong leader at the helm who will shout at the top of his / her voice what the alternative is to the mess we are in. ?"


Witchy, I believe the problem is that the Newspapers and even the TV interrogators will not let any Labour spokesman finish what they want to say. They bandy around words like “Embrace” the Government cuts, when quizzing them, then will not allow them the time to answer, as for the Tory press, well as usual and in the true Tory style, they simply lie.
If Edd Miliband and his Shadow Cabinet are sincere in what they say, They are for me the change that is needed. Herr Cameron only has to sneeze and its all over the press, saying he has caught a cold off some low down Labourite. I wonder how much of what Edd Miliband says is actually published. They will only publish Edd Miliband, if its something they can twist, just like this Union Fight fiasco, and by simply adding the word “Embrace”.
Labour does have an uphill struggle, but its nothing to do with what he does or doesn’t say, it is to do with the quality of the lies those despicable Tory’s and their media henchmen say. Lets be fair the incumbent Government get so much more airtime than do the opposition.
avatar
bobby

Posts : 1939
Join date : 2011-11-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by sickchip on Sat Jan 21, 2012 3:39 am

blueturando wrote:At last Sickchip.....someone who is honest as tells it as it is. I have been trying to get through to the ' Labour Lite ' crowd on here for ages that the hypocrisy on here is astounding.
90% of the Tory policies and virtually Identical to the current labour partys policies and it was the same when Blair and Brown were in Government...they more or less carried on where the Tories left off......Tory policies disguised with a Red tie and a title 'New Labour'. Could and should have been called New Conservatives really.

There is a reason the Unions supported Ed rather than his brother and that was they believed he was going to take the party down a new path to progressive socialism...now they have Blair and Brown mark 2.
The 2 Eds have bottled it really...They started off on the right path offering an alternative to the electorate, but have now decided to adopt the same policies as the coalition and hope Labours marketing strategy works better than the Tories in the next election....In reality they have SOLD OUT.

Take the proposed new high speed rail link. If this was proposed by Blair, Brown or Millaband, it would have been a fantastic idea to the hypocrites on here. They would have said...Look Labour is investing in infrastructure, jobs, public transport and Britain’s future. But because it's a coalition plan then they have to critisise it, but reverse it they won't........I know it and they know it...Hypocrisy once again!!!.

Iraq and Afghanistan.....Yes it was a cross party decision based on a suspect dossier from Blair and his merry crew.

Once again Sickchip is right....New Labour had 13 years to change or reverse Tory policy, but they didn't...Why is that???

There are very few real socialists on this forum and Sickchip has now given you a dose of the truth...so are you Red Tories, or do you really have socialist principles that you wouldn't sell off for a few middle class votes?
Maybe Britain needs a new party, one that will offer real opposition to the Government, one that will stick to their true socialist principles and not sell out for a bit of power

blue - as you are aware I am not a tory person..........but I hope you now recognise that when I offer criticism of tory policy it is of my own volition/integrity and not blindly, or forcibly, tied to party politics.
avatar
sickchip

Posts : 1149
Join date : 2011-10-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Stox 16 on Sat Jan 21, 2012 4:20 am

bobby wrote:witchfinder said,
The lack of support to Labour has nothing to do with what Ed Milliband DID say, but has much more to do with what he DID NOT say, the headline is "I will go along with the coalition pay freeze on public sector wages and salaries" - < And thats it.

WE NEED TO HEAR MORE WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT ELSE YOU WILL DO

The public of Britain want to hear a genuine, credible alternative to this government, and because Mr Milliband is not shouting his alternative from the mountain tops for everyone to hear, people are begining to think that there is no alternative.

Whatever happened to Gordon Brown and Alistair Darlings credible, workable plan to half the defecit by 2015. ?

Why do most British people feel that Her Majesties opposition are not saying anything, keeping quite, have nothing to say. ?

Should Labour supporters and members start realisticly considering a leadership challenge to put a strong leader at the helm who will shout at the top of his / her voice what the alternative is to the mess we are in. ?"


Witchy, I believe the problem is that the Newspapers and even the TV interrogators will not let any Labour spokesman finish what they want to say. They bandy around words like “Embrace” the Government cuts, when quizzing them, then will not allow them the time to answer, as for the Tory press, well as usual and in the true Tory style, they simply lie.
If Edd Miliband and his Shadow Cabinet are sincere in what they say, They are for me the change that is needed. Herr Cameron only has to sneeze and its all over the press, saying he has caught a cold off some low down Labourite. I wonder how much of what Edd Miliband says is actually published. They will only publish Edd Miliband, if its something they can twist, just like this Union Fight fiasco, and by simply adding the word “Embrace”.
Labour does have an uphill struggle, but its nothing to do with what he does or doesn’t say, it is to do with the quality of the lies those despicable Tory’s and their media henchmen say. Lets be fair the incumbent Government get so much more airtime than do the opposition.

Bobby I could not of put it better myself. well posted Bobby
avatar
Stox 16

Posts : 1064
Join date : 2011-12-18
Age : 58
Location : Suffolk in the UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by blueturando on Sun Jan 22, 2012 1:10 am

Yes Sickchip....I certainly do recognise that and I applaud you for being one of the only Labour supporters to tell the truth on here, instead of the paranoid noises of Bobby's post once again blaming the media....that will get Labour nowhere, playing the blame game
I am not pouring scorn on the Labour party and as I have said before, the country always needs a strong opposition the keep the government of the day in check....so I do hope Labour can decide which way to go, but just towing the coalition line wont do it.

blueturando
Banned

Posts : 1203
Join date : 2011-11-21
Age : 50
Location : Jersey CI

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by bobby on Sun Jan 22, 2012 1:26 am

bluey said.
"that will get Labour nowhere, playing the blame game"

Well thats bloody rich coming from a Tory.
What was Gideons excuses for abject failure. The wrong type of snow, the tsunami in Japan, a heatwave, record cold weather, 1 day strike, but a day given for some wedding makes us money accoprding to him, His and his Boss Her Cameron are in a league of their own when it comes to blaming someone else. But what else should we expect from you, but to suport lies, cheats and thieves. You are after all, One of them.
avatar
bobby

Posts : 1939
Join date : 2011-11-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Stox 16 on Sun Jan 22, 2012 3:40 am

bobby wrote:bluey said.
"that will get Labour nowhere, playing the blame game"

Well thats bloody rich coming from a Tory.
What was Gideons excuses for abject failure. The wrong type of snow, the tsunami in Japan, a heatwave, record cold weather, 1 day strike, but a day given for some wedding makes us money accoprding to him, His and his Boss Her Cameron are in a league of their own when it comes to blaming someone else. But what else should we expect from you, but to suport lies, cheats and thieves. You are after all, One of them.

Cannot agree more with you Bobby. Gideon has more excuses for failure than we have UK bankers. all backed up by the right wing press in full. not once have they said its down to the actions of Gideon. even when its quite clear it has been down to his failed plan A what ever Plan A is now. so sorry bluey you need to watch what is being said by them than take a quite look at the real economic O.B.R Figures. as they sum it up fair better than either me or Bobby could ever do
avatar
Stox 16

Posts : 1064
Join date : 2011-12-18
Age : 58
Location : Suffolk in the UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Redflag on Sun Jan 22, 2012 3:23 pm

blueturando wrote:Yes Sickchip....I certainly do recognise that and I applaud you for being one of the only Labour supporters to tell the truth on here, instead of the paranoid noises of Bobby's post once again blaming the media....that will get Labour nowhere, playing the blame game
I am not pouring scorn on the Labour party and as I have said before, the country always needs a strong opposition the keep the government of the day in check....so I do hope Labour can decide which way to go, but just towing the coalition line wont do it.

I think your wrong at suggesting that Sickchip is the only one on this forum that tells the truth as it is and Im not been nasty Bluey, but I have to agree to a certain extent with bobby as soon as their butts where on the right side of the H.O.C they started their WAR CRY and have never stopped since so I sent an email to Ed Miliband pointing this out to him and said if it is said enough often enough the people will start to believe it and that is what has happened but IT could come back and bite them on their bums hard when the people work it out for themselves, what is this WAR CRY "The Mess the Last Gov't left us or we would not have too do all these cuts".

But what happened in the Autumn Statement they went back on what they had said in 2010 ( We will get the deficit paid by 2015) now they tell us that it will be 2017 possibly but this Tory led Gov't seem to enjoy playing the BLAME GAME I suppose in your eyes that is fine one law for us and another for them UNFAIR Blue I will leave this with you and if you feel you need to get back too me Please do Embarassed
avatar
Redflag
Deactivated

Posts : 4282
Join date : 2011-12-31

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Ivan on Sun Jan 22, 2012 3:46 pm

Redflag wrote:-
if it is said enough often enough the people will start to believe it
Yes, the Tories work on the same principle as Josef Goebbels, who said:-

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
avatar
Ivan
Administrator (Correspondence & Recruitment)

Posts : 7044
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : West Sussex, UK

http://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by bobby on Sun Jan 22, 2012 3:54 pm

Similarly with the holocaust Ivan they believed that as they killed so many people, it wouldn’t have been deemed as possible.
avatar
bobby

Posts : 1939
Join date : 2011-11-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Redflag on Sun Jan 22, 2012 4:16 pm

Ivan wrote:
Redflag wrote:-
if it is said enough often enough the people will start to believe it
Yes, the Tories work on the same principle as Josef Goebbels, who said:-

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”


This is one point that needs to be pointed out to the UK public but I do feel sorry for some when they work out the lie that the Tories have been Spinning.
avatar
Redflag
Deactivated

Posts : 4282
Join date : 2011-12-31

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by oftenwrong on Sun Jan 22, 2012 7:03 pm

Some people seem disappointed that Ed Milliband is resisting the temptation to cap Tory lies with even bigger lies!

Softly, softly, catchee monkey!
avatar
oftenwrong
Sage

Posts : 11750
Join date : 2011-10-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Stox 16 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:15 am

oftenwrong wrote:Some people seem disappointed that Ed Milliband is resisting the temptation to cap Tory lies with even bigger lies!

Softly, softly, catchee monkey!

Well I am not disappointed in Ed. as yet, Just disappointed in the fact the UK Media will not see that Cameron is always trying to steal his thunder all the time or say that this is what Ed has been saying all alone. right now its the Tory party who have far greater problems than Ed does. not that the media will report that at all. as we will see on Wednesday with the latest set of crap economic growth figures. you just watch the Tories try and talk them all away..... they will blame and hide behind the Euro and even us the people, but never blame there own actions in running the economy for the last two year.....I use the word Run the economy in a loose way. as they have in fact not been running or managing anything of note for there whole time in office.
avatar
Stox 16

Posts : 1064
Join date : 2011-12-18
Age : 58
Location : Suffolk in the UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Stox 16 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:16 am

Ivan wrote:
Redflag wrote:-
if it is said enough often enough the people will start to believe it
Yes, the Tories work on the same principle as Josef Goebbels, who said:-

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

How very true Ivan. still no great shock to most of us is it?
avatar
Stox 16

Posts : 1064
Join date : 2011-12-18
Age : 58
Location : Suffolk in the UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Stox 16 on Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:18 am

Redflag wrote:
Ivan wrote:
Redflag wrote:-
if it is said enough often enough the people will start to believe it
Yes, the Tories work on the same principle as Josef Goebbels, who said:-

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”


This is one point that needs to be pointed out to the UK public but I do feel sorry for some when they work out the lie that the Tories have been Spinning.

You know I reckon 2.8 million unemployed have already worked so of it out Red.
avatar
Stox 16

Posts : 1064
Join date : 2011-12-18
Age : 58
Location : Suffolk in the UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by witchfinder on Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:07 pm

Yesterdays YouGov poll for the Sunday Times is not only bleak for Ed Miliband, but it confirms certain views and sadly makes sense of a trend against Labour.

Lets be absolutely clear about this, the vast majority of ordinary working people on modest incomes support the coalitions cap on welfare, and I know that this fact will be a bitter pill to swallow for SOME Labour supporters, but never the less it is a fact.

In yesaterdays polling results (sunday) by YouGov, 76% of those asked were in agreement that no one should recieve benefits of more than £26,000.

By opposing the coalitions proposals, Labour are guilty of "self harm", yesterdays opinion poll results are the worst for Labour since Ed Miliband became leader, amazingly just 50% of Labour voters think he is doing a good job.

My personal opinion - the writting is on the wall, leadership challenge is coming, this is such a sorry state of affairs as the Tory led coalition effectively have no real opposition.

avatar
witchfinder
Forum Founder

Posts : 703
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : North York Moors

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Penderyn on Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:31 pm

The problem, as always, is, if the mugs believe the world is flat, you should pretend to agree. The Labour Party was built on getting out there and arguing with the Philanthropists, not letting the Sun decide 'truth' for us.
avatar
Penderyn
Deactivated

Posts : 833
Join date : 2011-12-11
Location : Cymru

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by blueturando on Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:46 pm

Very good post Witchfinder, but I fear it and the truth will be completely ignored by many of our fellow posters here...The facts should never get in the way of the ' Back our gang no matter what' mentality

It's fingers in the ears time....Lalalalalalalalala

blueturando
Banned

Posts : 1203
Join date : 2011-11-21
Age : 50
Location : Jersey CI

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by blueturando on Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:48 pm

Can anyone tell me what Basic salary you have to earn to take home £26,000 per year?

blueturando
Banned

Posts : 1203
Join date : 2011-11-21
Age : 50
Location : Jersey CI

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by astra on Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:00 pm

When I was working a few years ago now, deductions came to about 26% - 33% of the paypacket. So, that would make a take home (NET) pay of £26,000 be worth around £39,000 Gross.

It makes me quite sick to think that I was crawling out of bed at 0300hrs for £22,000 Gross and thought I was well orft!

I have no qualms about sick ill people getting help to this value as electricity and gas can run away with money, especially if the heating has to be turned higher or a kidney dialasis machine lives in the spare bedroom.
avatar
astra
Deceased

Posts : 1864
Join date : 2011-10-07
Location : North East England.

Back to top Go down

Re: Where should the Labour Party position itself? (Part 1)

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 25 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 13 ... 25  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum