Comrade Corbyn

A lot of stuff in the papers about the current Leader of the Opposition hanging around with top Eastern Bloc  spys in the eighties (sounds like a good title for a Fall song) although I notice they don't go so far as to actually call him a spy. I remember the Labour Party ending their conferences with a rousing rendition of the 'Red Flag' during the Foot and early Kinnock eras. He seems to have been more enthused with the Soviet Union than the European Union.

Ray

Original Post
thebigfredc posted:

A lot of stuff in the papers

By "in the papers" you mean predominantly those Right Wing papers who have been smearing Corbyn since he was elected leader?

about the current Leader of the Opposition hanging around with top Eastern Bloc  spys in the eighties although I notice they don't go so far as to actually call him a spy.

Well lets be accurate - as far as I can see; the Czech security services have documents showing that one agent met with Corbyn; but that Corbyn never shared any information of note. 

I remember the Labour Party ending their conferences with a rousing rendition of the 'Red Flag'

That would be because Red Flag is the official anthem of the Labour Party since its founding.  The song has nothing to do with Soviet Union.

thebigfredc posted:

I don't remember them (the Labour Party) singing it much when Tony Blair was leader. Bit disrespectful really as its their founding anthem.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/462871.stm

thebigfredc posted:

Although line 3 of the chorus is perfect for Pacificst/collaborator Jezza:

'though cowards and traitors sneer'

Rather Pacifism than War Mongering.

And your rather quoting the 3rd line out of context... given it’s talking about those coward against or traitors to Socialism...

Going back to your original subject though ... given the demands for transparency from May following the claims by Jan Sarkocy, shouldn’t we know if he is being paid for his interviews with the Sun and the Mail?  Apparently though thanks to Mr Corbyn the Czech intelligence service learned vital information such as what Margret Thatcher ate for breakfast.  And another little titbit ... Jan Sarkocy should be being hailed as hero of humanitarian aid given he launched Live Aid ( https://evolvepolitics.com/the...-launching-live-aid/ )

thebigfredc posted:

I don't remember them (the Labour Party) singing it much when Tony Blair was leader. Bit disrespectful really as its their founding anthem.

Maybe that's because Blair's New Labour was largely indistinguishable from the Conservative Party.

Clive B posted:
thebigfredc posted:

I don't remember them (the Labour Party) singing it much when Tony Blair was leader. Bit disrespectful really as its their founding anthem.

Maybe that's because Blair's New Labour was largely indistinguishable from the Conservative Party.

You apart from the very significant investment in public services like education and the NHS (lots of new schools and hospitals built), and not being anti-Europe?  

Mathew d'Anconna writing in that bastion of the right wing press, the Guardian, on Sunday doesn't share your analysis in relation to Corbyn exchanging pleasantries with representatives from the evil empire. It's available for free on line and perhaps carries more clout coming from a broadsheet paper.

Clive B posted:
thebigfredc posted:

I don't remember them (the Labour Party) singing it much when Tony Blair was leader. Bit disrespectful really as its their founding anthem.

Maybe that's because Blair's New Labour was largely indistinguishable from the Conservative Party.

It appears that the Red Flag singing was dropped in 2000, then in 2003 Suzannah Clarke lead the singing of it along with Jerusalem to close the conference.  It was reported Blair even sung along!

thebigfredc posted:

Mathew d'Anconna writing in that bastion of the right wing press, the Guardian, on Sunday doesn't share your analysis in relation to Corbyn exchanging pleasantries with representatives from the evil empire. It's available for free on line and perhaps carries more clout coming from a broadsheet paper.

My take on his article is that it’s important to get to the truth, not start mud slinging!

MDS posted:
Clive B posted:
thebigfredc posted:

I don't remember them (the Labour Party) singing it much when Tony Blair was leader. Bit disrespectful really as its their founding anthem.

Maybe that's because Blair's New Labour was largely indistinguishable from the Conservative Party.

You apart from the very significant investment in public services like education and the NHS (lots of new schools and hospitals built), and not being anti-Europe?  

I can ensure you Clive B's comment about the NHS is very well made. Blair created large burdens of NHS PFI debt but more importantly (and with the majority of his Party feigning blindness) he triggered a very substantial push to privatisation with his Choice agenda stuffing the pockets of privately run clinics and surgical centres etc. Most continue to grab substantial amounts of low intensity, high profit NHS work. He also created a bureaucratically top heavy management structure (PCTs) charged with meeting multiple, often spurious, targets in a culture riddled with perverse incentives and system-gaming.

Blair did not just start the cannibalisation of the NHS by private firms he gave it a very, very hearty push down the road that the Tories have failed to slow down. Oddly in some ways they have actually restricted it compared to Blair! As with most Blair policies it was done in name of populism ('look, falling wait lists; please love me') rather than socialism or principle.

Corbyn at least has a different NHS policy slant, although how realistic it may be I have no idea. He has to go a long way for me convince that the NHS will be 'saved' by a Labour administration in light of past history though.

Taking the Politics out of NHS politics is the only solution in my view. We need a national debate on what we expect and can afford plus a commitment to long term investment across health and social care that is used for innovation and system reform not just (usually pre-election) fire-fighting.

I would not place any bets on it mind you.

Bruce

Interesting view from the inside, Bruce. Thank you. Since the NHS is paid for by the taxpayer I think it impossible to remove it from politics but I do agree a more grown-up debate is needed especially about the interaction with social care. 

Eloise posted;

'Rather Pacifism than War Mongering'

Both approaches are wrong and have serious ramifications. I agree with Churchill in that better the jaw-jaw than the war-war but sometimes you have to puff your chest out, issue a threat to use force and then actually use it if the conditions you have set are breached. There are both recent and  historic examples of what happens when these rules are flaunted and on other occasions when they are followed. The Assad regime in Syria had given Obama's platitudes a good ignoring and continued to use poison gas in its civil war, sometimes against the civil population, until Trump came in as president and used 50 or so cruise missiles on Assad's Air Bases.

 

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

I mean removing it from being an ideological football in Party Politics and having long term consistent planning.

The first years of any new administration tend to be spent dismantling the structures and plans of the last, which is rarely helpful.

If only life was that simple! The current government and opposition ideologies are so polarised that it seems, like most common sense ideas, to be politically unattainable.

thebigfredc posted:

Mathew d'Anconna writing in that bastion of the right wing press, the Guardian, on Sunday doesn't share your analysis in relation to Corbyn exchanging pleasantries with representatives from the evil empire. It's available for free on line and perhaps carries more clout coming from a broadsheet paper.

It might be in teh Graun, but do spare a moment to consider who d'Ancona is.  Came up through the Times & Sunday Telegraph, then succeeded BoJo as editor of the Spectator.  And is chairman of a Conservative (with a big C)  think-tank.

And he spins his wheels to smear Corbyn?  Quelle bleedin' surprise!  

Next we'll be hearing revelations that Polly Toynbee thinks an argument could be made that Cameron wasn't the greatest PM in history, or that Rod Liddle had some opinion on something or other that wound someone up.

The people's flag is palest pink
It's not the colour you might think
White collar workers stand and cheer
The Labour government is here

We'll change the country bit by bit
So nobody will notice it
And just to show that we're sincere
We'll sing The Red Flag once a year

The cloth cap and the woolen scarf
Are images outdated
For we're the party's avant garde
And we are educated

So raise the rolled umbrella high
The college scarf, the old school tie
And just to show that we're sincere
We'll sing The Red Flag once a year

Political ideology will always affect how a party in power approaches the NHS, as with other policy issues.  But my sense is that while there is a variety of views among the electorate about public v private sector solutions to things like rail, water etc, I don't detect the same degree of divergence on health.  I've yet to meet anyone who thinks more of the NHS should be privatised, even if they have health insurance and can go private for some treatments. 

thebigfredc posted:

The Assad regime in Syria had given Obama's platitudes a good ignoring and continued to use poison gas in its civil war, sometimes against the civil population, until Trump came in as president and used 50 or so cruise missiles on Assad's Air Bases.

And what, pray tell, did 50 cruise missiles achieve in putting an end to the Syrian problems?

Huge posted:

The people's flag is palest pink
It's not the colour you might think
White collar workers stand and cheer
The Labour government is here

We'll change the country bit by bit
So nobody will notice it
And just to show that we're sincere
We'll sing The Red Flag once a year

The cloth cap and the woolen scarf
Are images outdated
For we're the party's avant garde
And we are educated

So raise the rolled umbrella high
The college scarf, the old school tie
And just to show that we're sincere
We'll sing The Red Flag once a year

Time for a re-run of 70s sitcom Citizen Smith...

Eloise posted:
thebigfredc posted:

The Assad regime in Syria had given Obama's platitudes a good ignoring and continued to use poison gas in its civil war, sometimes against the civil population, until Trump came in as president and used 50 or so cruise missiles on Assad's Air Bases.

And what, pray tell, did 50 cruise missiles achieve in putting an end to the Syrian problems?

As far as I know they have not used chemical weapons on the general population since.

thebigfredc posted:
Eloise posted:
thebigfredc posted:

The Assad regime in Syria had given Obama's platitudes a good ignoring and continued to use poison gas in its civil war, sometimes against the civil population, until Trump came in as president and used 50 or so cruise missiles on Assad's Air Bases.

And what, pray tell, did 50 cruise missiles achieve in putting an end to the Syrian problems?

As far as I know they have not used chemical weapons on the general population since.

Apart from using chlorine gas last week.

Huge posted:
thebigfredc posted:
Eloise posted:
thebigfredc posted:

The Assad regime in Syria had given Obama's platitudes a good ignoring and continued to use poison gas in its civil war, sometimes against the civil population, until Trump came in as president and used 50 or so cruise missiles on Assad's Air Bases.

And what, pray tell, did 50 cruise missiles achieve in putting an end to the Syrian problems?

As far as I know they have not used chemical weapons on the general population since.

Apart from using chlorine gas last week.

I thought that was American chicken?

thebigfredc posted:

As far as I know they have not used chemical weapons on the general population since.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...m_term=.3ddff1678e1f On the 23rd January.

And while not chemical in nature... https://www.washingtonpost.com...m_term=.6e5184faa261 ...with Amnesty International saying “flagrant war crimes” were being committed in eastern Ghouta on an “epic scale.”

It’s all quite ridiculous.  Of course Jeremy Corbyn fraternised with folks from the Communist Block but to suggest he was able to leak sensitive information is absurd.  And dialogue was always recommended.  Even Mrs T sat down with Gorbachev. He (Corbyn) could though do himself a big favour and explain the purpose of the meeting and his recollection just for the record.  

And then of course there is the daftest claim of the lot by this guy from Prague - he seems to have several identities!  - that he was behind Live Aid.  

Must go and smell the coffee

Am I missing something?

Presumably the claimed spy didn’t introduce himself to Corbyn as “a Soviet spy”. The soviets are pretty good at spying, I’d guess the first page of the KGB training manual advises, “Don’t let anybody know you’re a spy”.

 

The Strat (Fender) posted:

It’s all quite ridiculous.  Of course Jeremy Corbyn fraternised with folks from the Communist Block but to suggest he was able to leak sensitive information is absurd. 

https://www.theguardian.com/po...intelligence-experts

That article also references Darren G Lilleker, associate professor at Bournemouth University - author of the 2004 book Against The Cold War: The History and Political Traditions of Pro-Sovietism in the British Labour Party, 1945-1989.  He states that Corbyn was never sympathetic to the Soviet Union that “He was against both sides, the US and the Soviet Union, seeing them both as a danger to world peace.”

The Strat (Fender) posted:

It’s all quite ridiculous.  Of course Jeremy Corbyn fraternised with folks from the Communist Block but to suggest he was able to leak sensitive information is absurd.  And dialogue was always recommended.  Even Mrs T sat down with Gorbachev. He (Corbyn) could though do himself a big favour and explain the purpose of the meeting and his recollection just for the record.  

And then of course there is the daftest claim of the lot by this guy from Prague - he seems to have several identities!  - that he was behind Live Aid.  

Must go and smell the coffee

I agree. And as a back-bencher on the Opposition benches what sensitive information would he have had access to anyway?  

Huge posted:
thebigfredc posted:
Eloise posted:
thebigfredc posted:

The Assad regime in Syria had given Obama's platitudes a good ignoring and continued to use poison gas in its civil war, sometimes against the civil population, until Trump came in as president and used 50 or so cruise missiles on Assad's Air Bases.

And what, pray tell, did 50 cruise missiles achieve in putting an end to the Syrian problems?

As far as I know they have not used chemical weapons on the general population since.

Apart from using chlorine gas last week.

Huge you are well informed, abreast of  current affairs.

These are the first confirmed use of such deplorable weapons since the intervention by the US with Tomahawks last April. Let's see what Trump does next but my hunch is he will not be sitting on his hands.

Eloise posted:
thebigfredc posted:

I don't remember them (the Labour Party) singing it much when Tony Blair was leader. Bit disrespectful really as its their founding anthem.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/462871.stm

thebigfredc posted:

Although line 3 of the chorus is perfect for Pacificst/collaborator Jezza:

'though cowards and traitors sneer'

Rather Pacifism than War Mongering.

And your rather quoting the 3rd line out of context... given it’s talking about those coward against or traitors to Socialism...

Going back to your original subject though ... given the demands for transparency from May following the claims by Jan Sarkocy, shouldn’t we know if he is being paid for his interviews with the Sun and the Mail?  Apparently though thanks to Mr Corbyn the Czech intelligence service learned vital information such as what Margret Thatcher ate for breakfast.  And another little titbit ... Jan Sarkocy should be being hailed as hero of humanitarian aid given he launched Live Aid ( https://evolvepolitics.com/the...-launching-live-aid/ )

So you admit Corbyn collaberated with the enemy or are you saying he did but it was all very trivial because it was about Margaret Thatcher, and nobody likes her so its ok?

Romi posted:

So you admit Corbyn collaberated with the enemy or are you saying he did but it was all very trivial because it was about Margaret Thatcher, and nobody likes her so its ok?

No, I’m saying that Jan Sarkocy is somewhat of a fantasist (it appears) and is “feeding the trolls / vultures” of the British right wing press.

My post https://forums.naimaudio.com/to...23#74215917412112823 includes a link to a “debunking” article.

thebigfredc posted:

A lot of stuff in the papers about the current Leader of the Opposition hanging around with top Eastern Bloc  spys in the eighties (sounds like a good title for a Fall song) although I notice they don't go so far as to actually call him a spy. I remember the Labour Party ending their conferences with a rousing rendition of the 'Red Flag' during the Foot and early Kinnock eras. He seems to have been more enthused with the Soviet Union than the European Union.

Would Corbyn not be an intelligence agent hired by Sarkocy, a Czechoslovak secret service spy? Or maybe a different Corbyn, who is now the Labour leader?

The Strat (Fender) posted:

But let’s be clear about this if the Guardian or New Stateman or Mirror had an expose on a Redwood like character collaborating with the SA Apartheid regime they’d be doing exactly the same as the leeches in the Mail etc.   

Yes good comparison from a rough and tumble of everyday politics perspective. There are a couple of crucial differences though: the apartheid regime was an insular entity not trying to impose its ideology on the rest o the world; neither was it part of a greater organisation which had nuclear weapons pointing at the UK. Corbyn seems to not given one hoot about any of that although we won't know for sure until he discloses how he was first contacted by them and why agreed to those meetings.

Ray

I cannot believe this story is actually being taken seriously. It does show though that the Tories are increasingly worried about Labour and Corbyn. Personally instead of giving this nonsense air time I would be more interested in whether Theresa May will refund some of the 'unfair' and 'poor value' tuition fees that my partner is still repaying from her unfair and poor value nurses salary.

I am not worried about Jezza at all. The UK has never had a proper socialist Prime Minister and never will.

The electorate has a right to know the past of somebody putting themselves forward to lead the country, especially if that past involved sleeping with the enemy (and I done mean Dianne Abbot). 

thebigfredc posted:
The Strat (Fender) posted:

But let’s be clear about this if the Guardian or New Stateman or Mirror had an expose on a Redwood like character collaborating with the SA Apartheid regime they’d be doing exactly the same as the leeches in the Mail etc.   

Yes good comparison from a rough and tumble of everyday politics perspective. There are a couple of crucial differences though: the apartheid regime was an insular entity not trying to impose its ideology on the rest o the world; neither was it part of a greater organisation which had nuclear weapons pointing at the UK. Corbyn seems to not given one hoot about any of that although we won't know for sure until he discloses how he was first contacted by them and why agreed to those meetings.

Ray

That’s the point for the most part I think it is stuff and nonsense - we’ll i presume so - but Jeremy Corbyn could simply prove that by just explaining what actually happened.  As it is all we’ve had is a piece from Tom Watson in the Independent accusing the media of “bile and vitriol” l

Corbyn was probably just receiving info from his network of Eastern block spies, informing what was happening there, of course not using the official British secret service because that is part of the establishment serving the Torres and not accessible to or perhaps not necessarily trusted by Corbyn.

The Strat (Fender) posted:

But let’s be clear about this if the Guardian or New Stateman or Mirror had an expose on a Redwood like character collaborating with the SA Apartheid regime they’d be doing exactly the same as the leeches in the Mail etc.   

Only The Sun (and later Times and Mail) don't have an expose on Corbyn collaborating with Czechoslovakian intelligence.  The evidence they have actually shows that Corbyn DIDN'T collaborate with Czechoslovakian, but they are repeating the half-truths from a disgruntled Slovak "spy" who has made some pretty wild, even fantastic, claims which do not hold up under scrutiny ... the kind of scrutiny that a half decent newspaper should be doing.

The most damming accusation is that Corbyn drew the spy's attention to an article in a newspaper - presumably Czechoslovakian intelligence, being (its claimed) second only to the KGB in Eastern Intelligence services, would read the newspapers.

As for Corbyn being a Soviet sympathiser - that doesn't particular hold up either.  He was anti BOTH US and Soviet Union.  He was a supporter of the Prague Spring uprising against the Soviet Union's rule over Czechoslovakia.

You don't need to have sympathy/empathy for a country to be in the pocket of their intelligence services.

Lots of informants do it/did it for the love of money, the thrill of feeling important or worse they simply had no choice as they were being black mailed.

Which of those applied to Agent COB as he was known by his handlers?

I can provide some answers to your questions Huge as you seem puzzled by your  - I am a spy/I am not a spy - status:

'I drive a Skoda, does that make me a Czech spy?'

WTF

'I've visited Russia and met some Russians, does that me a Russian spy?'

Possibly, even today the UK and Russia do not have easy relations , although the precise answer to that question depends on the reasons and nature of your visit/meetings.

'I've visited America and met some Americans, does that make me an American spy?'

No.

Eloise posted:
The Strat (Fender) posted:

But let’s be clear about this if the Guardian or New Stateman or Mirror had an expose on a Redwood like character collaborating with the SA Apartheid regime they’d be doing exactly the same as the leeches in the Mail etc.   

Only The Sun (and later Times and Mail) don't have an expose on Corbyn collaborating with Czechoslovakian intelligence.  The evidence they have actually shows that Corbyn DIDN'T collaborate with Czechoslovakian, but they are repeating the half-truths from a disgruntled Slovak "spy" who has made some pretty wild, even fantastic, claims which do not hold up under scrutiny ... the kind of scrutiny that a half decent newspaper should be doing.

The most damming accusation is that Corbyn drew the spy's attention to an article in a newspaper - presumably Czechoslovakian intelligence, being (its claimed) second only to the KGB in Eastern Intelligence services, would read the newspapers.

As for Corbyn being a Soviet sympathiser - that doesn't particular hold up either.  He was anti BOTH US and Soviet Union.  He was a supporter of the Prague Spring uprising against the Soviet Union's rule over Czechoslovakia.

I agree entirely.  However, that a meeting(s) took place is also clear. All Jeremy Corbyn has to do is recall from his recollection the purpose and what happened.  Easy. 

@thebigfredc

It's not literal, it's called reductio ad absurdum.

Extrapolate an argument [ in this case 'Corbyn met a Czechoslovak spy therefore he must be a Czechoslovak spy (or a Russian spy )'  ] to it's logical conclusion to show that it doesn't really make sense.

As an example of where this type of rationale leads, one need look no further than McCarthyism in the USA (~1950-54)

Huge posted:
Mike-B posted:

All Comrade Corbyn needs to do is publish his Stasi files,  that'll clear it all up once & for all.   

I didn't know that the East Germans ran spies for the Czechoslovak intelligence services!

The SSD had fingers into everything from everywhere,  their files are legendary, I kid you not.   

Huge,

My understanding of 'extrapolation' is an educated guess by extending a trend or pattern to predict a future or unknown value/event. Its still a guess though or, put it another way, a distortion.

I like to keep things simpler: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck - its probably a duck ( or a collaborator if a person is meeting a servant of a hostile state).

Ray

thebigfredc posted:

My understanding of 'extrapolation' is an educated guess by extending a trend or pattern to predict a future or unknown value/event. Its still a guess though or, put it another way, a distortion.

You're right ... the Sun (and subsequently the Mail and the Telegraph) have extrapolated from a name in a Czech document referencing 3 meetings with someone who by their nature would be lying about their identity, a completely fictitious narrative!  Or to put it another way a distortion.  Or to put it another way a complete fantasy which fits their desired ends.

I like to keep things simpler: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck - its probably a duck ( or a collaborator if a person is meeting a servant of a hostile state).

So as Corbyn doesn't have feathers, doesn't waddle and never quacks ... that means he isn't a duck despite meeting with a duck in the past.

Seems to me the right-wing press, and by extension their wealthy backers, are really running scared of Mr Corbyn, and are desperate to discredit him. There appears to be little actual substance to this story, but there in people's minds is now the idea he's a traitorous spy. 

In further news on this front... Corbyn says he was in Derbyshire on the day Jan Sarkocy claims he was meeting with Corbyn in Westminster - the day in question was also a Saturday making such a meeting unlikely.  http://www.independent.co.uk/n...ommons-a8221321.html

And if you're so worried about politicians meeting spies ... where's the investigation into what Theresa May might have been saying to Stanislav Yezhov?

From Wikipedia...

"Natalia and Irina Dubinin, daughters of then-Soviet ambassador Yuri Dubinin, are cited as indicating that a seemingly chance meeting of their father with Trump in the autumn of 1986, was part of Dubinin's assignment to establish contact with America's business elite and a determined effort by the Soviet government to cultivate Trump in particular."

Ergo, by the 'rationale' postulated in this thread, the current president of the USA is a Soviet spy!  This is particularly apposite as in this case the 'cultivation' was a declared intent, whereas with Corbyn, the purpose of the meeting is unknown.

Sorry, I still don't buy it; either for Trump or for Corbyn (even though I don't like either of them!).

thebigfredc posted:

Corbyn had previously admitted to meeting Sarkocy so was he telling the truth then or is he telling the truth now with this Derbyshire business?

He admits to meeting a Czechoslovakian diplomat who's real identity is likely to be Sarkocy.  Its the number and frequency of these meeting which is in doubt and the importance of those meetings. 

However the point is that if some of the meetings are "impossible" to have happened, it casts doubt on the veracity of other information that Jan Sarkocy reported back to his superiors.  But you (alone with the Sun, Mail and Telegraph not to mention the Prime Minister specifically and Conservatives generally) have Corbyn tried and convicted of treason off the back of information supplied by a low-level spy who's reliability is dubious!

The Strat (Fender) posted:

Ironically the Yeznhov meeting was reported in the Telegraph.  In any event the meeting is surely on record albeit redacted?

Well technically speaking she didn't say anything to Yeznhov (yes despite what I implied above) as he was the interpreter for the Ukrainian Prime Minister.  The "suggestion" would be that everything May said to the Ukrainian Prime Minister was reported to the Russians.

Eloise posted:
<snip>
Conservatives generally) have Corbyn tried and convicted of treason off the back of information supplied by a low-level spy who's reliability is dubious!
<snip>

Hang on a mo...    I'm generally conservative and I'm defending him here!

Huge posted:

Hang on a mo...    I'm generally conservative and I'm defending him here!

I was meaning Conservative MPs and politicians (I can look up a list of specific individuals if you wish) rather than general supporters.

thebigfredc posted:

It’s only a matter of time before Jezza reaches for his  trusty sword of integrity and shield of truth. It didn’t end well for Jonathon Aitkin though. 

I was unaware of Jeremy Corbyn appearing in court and lying...

I would just like to caution members here. Please bear in mind what happened when discussion about another politician got overheated (see the sticky at the top of the Padded Cell if you're not sure what I'm talking about). So let's keep calm, avoid making any undue aspersions, and not jump to conclusions until the full facts are known. 

Richard Dane posted:

I would just like to caution members here. Please bear in mind what happened when discussion about another politician got overheated (see the sticky at the top of the Padded Cell if you're not sure what I'm talking about). So let's keep calm, avoid making any undue aspersions, and not jump to conclusions until the full facts are known... 

PS: Also, just remember that it is perfectly acceptable to talk exclusively here in this forum about UK politics while discriminating against Americans and others with an open mind while defending Socialism and other such topics carte blanch. 

PSS:  Just testing the humour capacity or possible lack of it here.  This message brought to you exclusively by your local Macedonian content farmers union. 

Richard, isn't it about time to be fair and let discussions about all valid topics return?  Rather than threaten to ban those who hold a view on any subject (non-UK endorsed) as in any normal discussion.  Why not just hold those who can't behave or control their language or tempers accountable for themselves rather than punish the lot ?  

Corbyn is just another politician. He, like all the rest will talk the talk and walk the walk, until a wheel comes off and then shall blame the opposition. Our political system is flawed, filled with self serving people who care little for the real working man [or woman, for the sake of balance]

My advice? Stick to listening to the music you enjoy and ignore the rest of the daily diatribe from ALL the press and radio broadcast. AKA as sticking your head in the sand. Works well for me anyway :-)

I don’t hold to this view that all politicians are charlatans.  Sure their ambition can be as naked as anyone in any other walk of life but during my long career in the Public Sector in many occasions I came up against MPs who were truly fighting the cause on behalf of their constituents.   And from all sides of the House.  

Further I know from relatives who live in Camden that Jeremy Corbyn is very highly thought of   I also admire him for being true to his socialist beliefs little of which I agre with but that’s not the point    

 

One or two earlier posts have suggested that this is something of a smear campaign because the Conservatives are fearful of the popularity that Corbyn seems to be enjoying. Reading today's Evening Standard which carried the results of polls carried out ahead of the forthcoming borough elections in London, I can see what they are fearful.  If they are to be believed, some big name 'Conservative' boroughs like Wandsworth, Westminster could well be lost. The only group of electors where the Conservative vote is holding is among the 65s and above!

GTB-Buckaroo posted:

Corbyn is just another politician. He, like all the rest will talk the talk and walk the walk, until a wheel comes off and then shall blame the opposition. Our political system is flawed, filled with self serving people who care little for the real working man [or woman, for the sake of balance

I also don’t hold this view. Most politicians have a real conviction and public service duty that far exceeds that of people in many other walks of life... my observation is that some politicians seem to encourage negative unhealthy associates around them... and here Corbyn and Farage have quite a lot in common... though both as professional politicians and individuals with conviction I respect though not necessarily always agree with... and I personally think these two are a bit too idealistic..

Of course as soon as you become a politician you are in the public eye and under scrutiny.  And as much I don’t like the Mail or Murdoch journals — for the record I read the Independent — they still have a crucial role in investigating the conduct of our elected representatives.   

So in this case we now know that Jeremy Corbyn was in Chesterfield at a conference on the alleged date of the meeting. So come on Jeremy - thinking cap on if you can’t remember the actual date(s) you met this gentlemen you must have some recollection of the discussion?

God help us if he does get in at the next election.

The State already takes nearly half my income before I get it and then adds 20 per cent to everything I buy and takes that. And that's under a Torry administration. We will be on our way back to super tax rates under Agent COB.

thebigfredc posted:

The State already takes nearly half my income before I get it and then adds 20 per cent to everything I buy and takes that. And that's under a Torry administration. We will be on our way back to super tax rates under Agent COB.

And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi while many who work full time (more than full time in many cases) have to choose between heating their homes and eating.

The other issue is that those at the higher end of incomes pay less tax as a percentage of their income, vastly less as a percentage of their disposable income, than those at the lower end.  Its only when you consider income tax in isolation does the tax burden fall disproportionately on the rich.

The Strat (Fender) posted:

Of course as soon as you become a politician you are in the public eye and under scrutiny.  And as much I don’t like the Mail or Murdoch journals they still have a crucial role in investigating the conduct of our elected representatives.   

I do agree with this position Strat, but it has to be "responsible" journalism where this has (in my opinion) crossed from responsible investigative journalism into smearing and "right wing propaganda" rather than news or holding people to account.

I would suggest that much of "tabloid" journalism crosses into sensationalism and even as a politician or other person in the public eye your private life should remain private unless it moves into hypocrisy (not that I'm suggesting political meetings of any kind should be considered private*).  For example a political having an affair is NOT in (imo) in the public interest unless that politician has been preaching about family values.

Note *: personally I think that, with a few exceptions such as meeting constituents and for security matters, a politicians meetings should be diarised and that diary should be open to public scrutiny.  Any meetings held in a formal setting should be minuted even if those minutes are considered confidential.  The irony is that this suggestion would actually protect both the public AND MPs.

So in this case we now know that Jeremy Corbyn was in Chesterfield at a conference on the alleged date of the meeting. So come on Jeremy - thinking cap on if you can’t remember the actual date(s) you met this gentlemen you must have some recollection of the discussion?

I doubt it was Jeremy who remembered he was in Chesterfield...

A meeting with a foreign diplomat, had it been minuted, would have been completely open to scrutiny as it should be.  As the government often tells the population: if you're doing nothing wrong; you've nothing to fear.

Eloise posted 'And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi ...'

And glory be, long may it continue:

Over the last twelve months I got hold of a used REGA Ear and AT W1000 headphones, upgraded the platter on my RP6 to a Groovetracer, swapped out the REGA cart for a Dynavector 10x5 and added a Groovetracer record clamp.

Who knows what the next year will bring...maybe a Supernait 2 and i would love a CD555.

Ray

Eloise posted:

And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi while many who work full time (more than full time in many cases) have to choose between heating their homes and eating.

The other issue is that those at the higher end of incomes pay less tax as a percentage of their income, vastly less as a percentage of their disposable income, than those at the lower end.  Its only when you consider income tax in isolation does the tax burden fall disproportionately on the rich.

<snip>

I'd be be interested to see how one works that out:  Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes, the personal allowance becomes a smaller percentage and VAT is flat rate (and quite a few essentials are lower rate, VAT exempt or zero rated).

People on lower incomes are financially penalised, but I don't see it being the tax system that's responsible for this.

Huge posted:
Eloise posted:

And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi while many who work full time (more than full time in many cases) have to choose between heating their homes and eating.

The other issue is that those at the higher end of incomes pay less tax as a percentage of their income, vastly less as a percentage of their disposable income, than those at the lower end.  Its only when you consider income tax in isolation does the tax burden fall disproportionately on the rich.

<snip>

I'd be be interested to see how one works that out:  Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes, the personal allowance becomes a smaller percentage and VAT is flat rate (and quite a few essentials are lower rate, VAT exempt or zero rated).

People on lower incomes are financially penalised, but I don't see it being the tax system that's responsible for this.

Nice riposte on my behalf Huge. Only next time try to not use a capital for the first letter of the word following the colon.

The Strat (Fender) posted:

Various data sets have been published on this but the better off surely bear most of the tax burden?

And so we should!

Interesting that a thread purporting to express concern about Corbyn's loyalty/ threat to national security turns into a whinge about taxation - the mask slips!

thebigfredc posted:
Huge posted:
Eloise posted:

And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi while many who work full time (more than full time in many cases) have to choose between heating their homes and eating.

The other issue is that those at the higher end of incomes pay less tax as a percentage of their income, vastly less as a percentage of their disposable income, than those at the lower end.  Its only when you consider income tax in isolation does the tax burden fall disproportionately on the rich.

<snip>

I'd be be interested to see how one works that out:  Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes, the personal allowance becomes a smaller percentage and VAT is flat rate (and quite a few essentials are lower rate, VAT exempt or zero rated).

People on lower incomes are financially penalised, but I don't see it being the tax system that's responsible for this.

Nice riposte on my behalf Huge. Only next time try to not use a capital for the first letter of the word following the colon.

If the expression following the colon can stand alone as a full sentence, then, even in British English it is permissible to use a capital, particularly when used to emphasise where there is a separate nature of the two sentences: but there are several forms of this rule.

(In  American English a capital is almost always used after a colon, unless the following expression is in the form of a list).

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

Surely it is Income Tax as a definitive article; whatever precedes it? If we are talking about UK Income Tax rather than the generic principle of course.

Bruce

I think you mean a proper noun!

However we're getting to a digression from the previous digression from the original subject of Corbyin's interaction with a Czech spy!

thebigfredc posted:

Ok, so its a 'norm' in Yank twang and 'permissible' in contemporary slack English. Why not just use a full stop. Dickens must be rolling in his grave.

Because a full stop separates two sentences that are potentially unrelated.  A full colon indicates that two expressions (the first of which is a full sentence and the second of which may be a full sentence) are linked, the second being an expansion, explanation or conclusion derived from the first (in addition, there may be other reasons for using a colon but I'm not entirely sure on the full list of reasons).

That usage isn't contemporary slack English, it's present in formal English from at least 50 years ago.  On further thought, it may however now actually be archaic!

Huge posted:

I'd be be interested to see how one works that out:  Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes, the personal allowance becomes a smaller percentage and VAT is flat rate (and quite a few essentials are lower rate, VAT exempt or zero rated).

People on lower incomes are financially penalised, but I don't see it being the tax system that's responsible for this.

Yes, Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes - but income tax only makes up 25% of tax revenues; national insurance another 19%.  Most taxes have a ceiling or are paid equally by rich and poor alike.

So yes - looking at income tax alone: figures from IFS ( https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9178 ) show the top 1% do pay 27% of income tax; the top 50% of earners pay 90% of income tax; but that is only 1/4 of the tax burden.

Looking at tax as a whole however paints a different picture - the Equalities Trust using figured from the IFS (https://www.equalitytrust.org....r-income-tax-richest) suggest the those in the top 10% of earning pay an average of 34% of their income in tax.  That pales in comparison to those in the bottom 10% who pay an average of 42% of their income in tax.

From the Equalities Trust report: "Council tax and VAT hit the poorest particularly hard, with the poorest 10% of households paying 7% of their gross income in council tax, compared to just 1.5% for the richest, and 12.5% of gross income paid in VAT (5% for rich)"

Huge posted:
Bruce Woodhouse posted:

Surely it is Income Tax as a definitive article; whatever precedes it? If we are talking about UK Income Tax rather than the generic principle of course.

Bruce

I think you mean a proper noun!

However we're getting to a digression from the previous digression from the original subject of Corbyin's interaction with a Czech spy!

Indeed. That is Comprehensive School education for you!

Bruce Woodhouse posted:
Huge posted:
Bruce Woodhouse posted:

Surely it is Income Tax as a definitive article; whatever precedes it? If we are talking about UK Income Tax rather than the generic principle of course.

Bruce

I think you mean a proper noun!

However we're getting to a digression from the previous digression from the original subject of Corbyin's interaction with a Czech spy!

Indeed. That is Comprehensive School education for you!

You seem to have done very well on it: Mr Corbyn would approve!

Corbyn for me sort of represent a Jekyll & Hyde character.  He likes to present to the public as a holier than thou  socialist, but on the other hand he attracts extreme ways eg his supporters using menacing tactics against other Labour candidates, his association with the IRA (we only have his word as to the reason for his meetings} and now contact with Chechoslovakian (Soviet) Intelligence.  If someone dug deeper to his past and past acts I would not be surprised that more  anomolies would appear which would be in contrast to the political 'persona' he attempts to show to us.

thebigfredc posted:

A lot of stuff in the papers about the current Leader of the Opposition hanging around with top Eastern Bloc  spys in the eighties (sounds like a good title for a Fall song) although I notice they don't go so far as to actually call him a spy. I remember the Labour Party ending their conferences with a rousing rendition of the 'Red Flag' during the Foot and early Kinnock eras. He seems to have been more enthused with the Soviet Union than the European Union.

Think USSR has had a bad press for too many years.. We have listened too much to the US and how bad russians suposedley are... Ive been to Russia a few times as I have family there.. Its a great place with lovely people who have a positive outlook on life. 

Hello Garry,

Of course you can interpret my posts anyway you like and I have no doubt most of the present day people in Russia are lovely too. My post doesn't question any of that. It is about Corbyn and his past involvement with the apparatus of the Soviet Union in a different era.

Ray

Oh no doubt If you believe Teresa May is an ineffective Prime Minister - she is - wait until Jeremy Corbyn takes office.  He may be a principled socialist, thecurrent rumpus may be much ado about nothing, but the economic chaos that will engulfe the UK will be on a scale not seen before.   

Minh Nguyen posted:

I remember the Virgin trains fiasco. Richard Branson provided video footage of Corbyn walking past empty seats. It's a matter of credibility: who are you Corbyn? Are you trying to pretend that you're more than you really are?

Did you know that there was later footage which came to light which actually supported Corbyn’s point... footage with other passengers sitting on the floor inbetween carriages?

On both sides I think carefully edited footage was released as propaganda.

TM is not a typical PM in that she lacks charisma which is crucial for the media age we live in and that this is often read by the population as not possessing true leadership qualities. I think there is something in this and it's fair to say she has been promoted one step beyond her abilities.

She's obviously diligent, hard working and made a good Home Secretary. Ironically these same qualities may well ensure that she leads us to a successful exit from the EU although I am sure she will not be rewarded by her Party with a long stint as PM.

Eloise posted:
Minh Nguyen posted:

I remember the Virgin trains fiasco. Richard Branson provided video footage of Corbyn walking past empty seats. It's a matter of credibility: who are you Corbyn? Are you trying to pretend that you're more than you really are?

Did you know that there was later footage which came to light which actually supported Corbyn’s point... footage with other passengers sitting on the floor inbetween carriages?

On both sides I think carefully edited footage was released as propaganda.

I would prefer to give more credence to Branson's claims. In my humble opinion it was a publicity stunt that went wrong for Corbyn.

I actually feel sorry for TM.  She was a remainer and took on the challenge when nobody else was anything like capable.  And before people start jumping up and down and saying JC’s moment is coming just remember the chaos there has been around his attempts to put together a shadow cabinet.  

"She's obviously diligent, hard working and made a good Home Secretary. Ironically these same qualities may well ensure that she leads us to a successful exit from the EU although I am sure she will not be rewarded by her Party with a long stint as PM."

Sorry, but as Home secretary, she cannot be described as being good. Certainly not if you are a Policeman anyway. And come to think of it, she wasn't all that on immigration either, though that's another story. (My apologies for any poor grammar from the purists).

TM lacks the persona, casisma & whatever is needed to be a magnetic leader to appeal to the public.  I'm not so she has that much support of her party in the house either, some are keeping quiet because they understand the need for unity,  others have no alternative unifying leader to put forward, others fear for the next election & a lot more than a few are a combination of all that.     No doubt its JC in ascendancy now.   I can see it coming after brexit - & that alone will require stability for a few more years than the "transition" period - then an election where labour will win by some margin, despite if Momentum do sucede in having all PLP candidates 're-selected' or not.   JC & his outdated socialist ideology will then will be a re-run of the previous left wing labour & the biggest casualty will be GB Ltd. 

Yes she reminds me of John Major in so much as an accidental PM who just happened to be in the right place at the right time to get the top job.

They say we get the politicians we deserve so I suppose we are to blame to some degree although I  think the great British public have enough about them not to let Agent COB and his buddies McDonald and Mcluskey get in.

I loved the day Portilllo was announcing a new Royal Yacht and when asked what the new ship would be called up stepped the Beast of Bolsover “ obvious what it will be called isn’t it.  Will be called Camilla won’t it”. As he exited the Chamber courtesy of Speaker Boothroyd Nicholas Soames was heard to say “give him a good thrashing Betty”.!!

thebigfredc posted:
thebigfredc posted:

He's dead.

My bad, he's alive, at least according to Wikipedia.

I was getting him confused with that other arch socialist - Dennis Healey, only joking, I meant Tony Benn.

 

Hilary Benn seems to be carrying the family torch pretty well. I suspect we'll see him as a leader of the party one day.

Nick from Suffolk posted:

Skinner would be head and shoulders above the current half dead halfwit currently holding down the position of FO. Or perhaps his (BJ's) skulking out of the Commons yesterday presaged his downfall; one can but wish.  

You may not agree with his politics, but he's one of the very few politicians who shows a fair degree of integrity. I think he's great - best "Skinnerism" was when he stood up in the House and said, "Half of the opposite bench are crooks". Admonished by the speaker and told to retract, Dennis replied: "OK, half of them aren't crooks".

Nick from Suffolk posted:

Skinner would be head and shoulders above the current half dead halfwit currently holding down the position of FO. Or perhaps his (BJ's) skulking out of the Commons yesterday presaged his downfall; one can but wish.  

Currently reading David Laws account of  the Coalition.   He comments that Boris can appear to be a complete and utter fool and then in the next breath absolutely brilliant. 

thebigfredc posted:
thebigfredc posted:

He's dead.

My bad, he's alive, at least according to Wikipedia.

I was getting him confused with that other arch socialist - Dennis Healey, only joking, I meant Tony Benn.

 

if every mp served his  seat in Bolsover like dennis   then  parliament would be a better place

northpole posted:
Huge posted:

The one politician who, from the point of charisma, still stands out...   Is Boris Johnson...  

Imagine him as PM...  

Not sure who would be worse him or Jeremy Corbyn!

I sincerely hope that we never get to find out.

Peter

But there's a chance that they may become the only realistic choices presented.

The tory's are always in a form of disagreement over something simply because they are not automatons.     I agree the bit about Boris being an utter fool & a moment later brilliant;  the problem I have with that is it makes him unsuitable for PM,  & yes I agree   

I suspect if/when the big push is applied to TM,  the most likely replacement will be Jacob Rees-Mogg,  & that will be interesting

Well I’m an avid remainer, internationalist by nature and believe 100% in dialogue.  But national interest has to be protected.  Although not a Labour voter I have previously tended towards giving Jeremy Corbyn the benefit of the doubt on the grounds that he stands by his principles but yesterday in the House of Commons proved him to be a quite despicable character.   He should resign as Labour leader and be deselected as MP for Camden. 

100%   I watched the HoC broadcast & was shocked but at the same time not surprised at his unwise/misguided party political point-scoring of such a serious subject.    I did note that during the Q&A session after the PM statement many labour MP's made a point of distancing themselves in one way or other from JC's position.  

A military weapon of Russian origin and of a type banned from use by international law has been deployed in Britain.
That is the simple fact.

As there was only very limited care to limit the "collateral damage" (hence the extent of the necessary cleanup operation), it's as stark as if a Russian military jet with stealth technology had been flown over Salisbury and dropped a smart-bomb on the house (it's just a lot less physically dramatic than that option would have been).

Corbyn's response will be seen by some in the Russian oligarchy as an invitation to carry out whatever atrocities they wish to inflict on this country, should he ever come to power.  He is now a definite and clear security risk to Britain.

Dozey posted:

To be honest the Russians can do what they like in the UK and they know it. The UK has no retaliation which will make any difference. We will just look stupid for making further empty threats.

We can seize Russian assets in Britain.

In time of war that is perfectly acceptable.  Since a military asset was deployed on foreign soil, if Russia cannot show this action to have been committed by rogue agent or foreign power; then, in international law, that is an act of war that constitutes a declaration of war by the Russians (N.B. it's a declaration of war by the Russians, not by us!).  We are entitled to at least temporarily treat Russia as a hostile power.  We can legitimately seize assets and, even without trial, we can inter all citizens of hostile powers.

I'm not advocating doing these just yet (particularly not the latter), but I think they are a couple of things that may make a difference to Russia.  To say that "The UK has no retaliation which will make any difference." is patently not correct.

I agree with Huge. Some very strong action needs to be taken against Russia and Russian interests in the UK.

We need to negotiate some very strong counter measures with our European and American friends. Hopefully, the sacking of Rex Tillerson (who made some pretty strong statements about the Russian involvement in the Salisbury poisoning) by Trump this morning won't impact the position that the US takes on the incident. However, given recent astonishing events over the past couple of days relating to Russia in the States, then quite frankly - your guess is as good as mine.  

naim_nymph posted:
Huge posted:
 

....We can seize Russian assets in Britain.

 

Does that include all Russian money donations to Tory Party funds?

It'll financially bankrupt the Tory Party!

 

How about we turn all Russian assets into funds for the Tory party?   

Problem solved.   

Huge posted:
naim_nymph posted:
Huge posted:
 

....We can seize Russian assets in Britain.

 

Does that include all Russian money donations to Tory Party funds?

It'll financially bankrupt the Tory Party!

 

How about we turn all Russian assets into funds for the Tory party?   

Problem solved.   

It doesn't need that amount, the Kremlin already owns the Tory Party with Russian funding.

This is probably why Comrade May & the Tory Brexit Party has gone against UK national interest and democracy, and gone hell for leather to leave the EU, their Russian paymasters demand nothing less.

naim_nymph posted:
Huge posted:
naim_nymph posted:
Huge posted:
 

....We can seize Russian assets in Britain.

 

Does that include all Russian money donations to Tory Party funds?

It'll financially bankrupt the Tory Party!

 

How about we turn all Russian assets into funds for the Tory party?   

Problem solved.   

It doesn't need that amount, the Kremlin already owns the Tory Party with Russian funding.

This is probably why Comrade May & the Tory Brexit Party has gone against UK national interest and democracy, and gone hell for leather to leave the EU, their Russian paymasters demand nothing less.

I've learnt to hate the Russians through my whole life, if another war comes its them we must fight.

THEBIGFREDC posted:

"I've learnt to hate the Russians through my whole life, if another war comes its them we must fight".

How utterly absurd!

You mean you hate "them" even more than our European friends? I hope your comment was meant to be tongue in check.  

 

Hmack posted:

THEBIGFREDC posted:

"I've learnt to hate the Russians through my whole life, if another war comes its them we must fight".

How utterly absurd!

You mean you hate "them" even more than our European friends? I hope your comment was meant to be tongue in check.  

 

It's a quotation from the Dylan song With God on Our Side.

naim_nymph posted:
Huge posted:
naim_nymph posted:
Huge posted:
 

....We can seize Russian assets in Britain.

 

Does that include all Russian money donations to Tory Party funds?

It'll financially bankrupt the Tory Party!

 

How about we turn all Russian assets into funds for the Tory party?   

Problem solved.   

It doesn't need that amount, the Kremlin already owns the Tory Party with Russian funding.

This is probably why Comrade May & the Tory Brexit Party has gone against UK national interest and democracy, and gone hell for leather to leave the EU, their Russian paymasters demand nothing less.

How has Teresa May gone against democracy. She is enacting the expressed wish of the people even though she was a remainer herself.   And I say that as a passionate rremainer and non-Tory voter.  

Regards,

Lindsay

The Strat (Fender) posted:
naim_nymph posted:
Huge posted:
naim_nymph posted:
Huge posted:
 

....We can seize Russian assets in Britain.

 

Does that include all Russian money donations to Tory Party funds?

It'll financially bankrupt the Tory Party!

 

How about we turn all Russian assets into funds for the Tory party?   

Problem solved.   

It doesn't need that amount, the Kremlin already owns the Tory Party with Russian funding.

This is probably why Comrade May & the Tory Brexit Party has gone against UK national interest and democracy, and gone hell for leather to leave the EU, their Russian paymasters demand nothing less.

How has Teresa May gone against democracy. She is enacting the expressed wish of the people even though she was a remainer herself.   And I say that as a passionate rremainer and non-Tory voter.  

Regards,

Lindsay

What has been proven by the referendum result on 23rd June 2016 is that the will of the UK people is to remain in the EU. The 17.4 million leave vote isn't anywhere near enough to commit to leaving the EU. On the same day 29 million electorate didn't vote to leave the EU, and that's not including the 16 & 17 year olds who were deliberately & inappropriately denied the vote because the Tory/UKIP party know most would vote to remain, and then there's the estimated 4 million UK people who are not on the electoral register, mostly due to Tory austerity measures that create homelessness, rough sleeping, sofa-surfers, inadequate sheltered accommodation, no fixed abode, they can't get registered to vote - the Tory/UKIP government don't give a damn about them because they know most are young and would vote to remain in the EU. Basically the referendum election was too heavily flawed and rigged in favour of leaving the EU. The result should be null and voided, especially as other concerns have been confirmed such as the weekly £360 million to the NHS Whopper.

People in the UK have been really conned by the fascicle Tory contrived cock-up referendum, it maybe a lot of things, expression of many Britons hatred of Johny Foreigner, Racism, Fascism, Popularism, a good deal for tax-haven millionaires... but whatever it is, democracy is ain't. 

Teresa May is a disgusting turncoat, she voted remain but when offered a Prime Minister job opportunity she jumped at the chance for her own selfish career prospects and damn the EU and remain voter, you can never ever trust anyone like that. On the day she said Brexit Means Brexit she knew how populist and contentious the whole stinky issue is, and Brexit Means Fascism would be too close to the truth, so the new Tory Brexit Party führer said 'Brexit Means Brexit" which has served really well for the gullible.

Debs

Looks like Putin is using the UK as his preferred playground for settling scores with those who fell out with him in Russia. I also see Nikolai Grushkov, another Putin enemy, has been found strangled in New Malden. which he was unlikely to have done by himself. Commie Corbyn also seems to have been falling over himself to avoid any words of recrimination for Putin further nailing the traitor's colours of allegiance to anywhere but the UK. The man is an utter disgrace. 

As our politicians have allowed the country to be the dustbin for a significant proportion of the detritus of the world, we can hardly be surprised when vendettas are settled in our very open and over-tolerant society. 

Eoink posted:
Hmack posted:

THEBIGFREDC posted:

"I've learnt to hate the Russians through my whole life, if another war comes its them we must fight".

How utterly absurd!

You mean you hate "them" even more than our European friends? I hope your comment was meant to be tongue in check.  

 

It's a quotation from the Dylan song With God on Our Side.

Yep, Eoink got it, an absolute Dylan classic with poignant words.

I also loved the Half Man Half Biscuit's version with Goth on Our Side.

Resurrection posted:

Looks like Putin is using the UK as his preferred playground for settling scores with those who fell out with him in Russia. I also see Nikolai Grushkov, another Putin enemy, has been found strangled in New Malden. which he was unlikely to have done by himself. Commie Corbyn also seems to have been falling over himself to avoid any words of recrimination for Putin further nailing the traitor's colours of allegiance to anywhere but the UK. The man is an utter disgrace. 

As our politicians have allowed the country to be the "dustbin for a significant proportion of the detritus of the world", we can hardly be surprised when vendettas are settled in our very open and over-tolerant society. 

Unless these are also lines from a Dylan song, then you have personally gone too far and are an utter disgrace. I don't swear, but was tempted to include a swear word here.

The second sentence I have highlighted in your post is on the fringe of being blatantly and openly racist.  

 

Well my name it is Dai Young
I’m the King of Welsh Goth
The village I come from
Is near Abersoch
I was brought up on Bauhaus
And black bedroom walls
And I had my first Snakebite
When I was in halls

Now the graveyard is calling
The sky’s getting greyer
I’ll drink the warm blood of
The Borough Surveyor
And I’ll murder the Verger
I’ve seen how he gawps
And I’ll write on his headstone:
“Here lies Jones the Corpse”

Now my overweight girlfriend
She sits and she crimps
Her mother’s convinced she’s
Communing with imps
Her brother’s alright though
He’s a good lad is Wilf
‘Cos he’s into Placebo
And Cradle Of Filth

At my gig up in Butlins
The Redcoats complained
They tried to remove me
With bottles they rained
But for the first time in history
I didn’t run and hide
And the Scousers in shellsuits
Had Goths on their side

Now this Land Of My Fathers
It don’t suit my needs
I’d rather be some place
Like Bradford or Leeds
Where the Gipton teenagers
Could meet in my shed
For advice on mascara
And all things undead

Now my left index finger
Is nine inches long
It’s hovering over
A world that’s gone wrong
Ask me to Prestatyn
And that’s what I’ll do
And we’ll all die together
And Dylan can’t sue

naim_nymph posted:

What has been proven by the referendum result on 23rd June 2016 is that the will of the UK people is to remain in the EU. The 17.4 million leave vote isn't anywhere near enough to commit to leaving the EU. On the same day 29 million electorate didn't vote to leave the EU, and that's not including the 16 & 17 year olds who were deliberately & inappropriately denied the vote because the Tory/UKIP party know most would vote to remain, and then there's the estimated 4 million UK people who are not on the electoral register, mostly due to Tory austerity measures that create homelessness, rough sleeping, sofa-surfers, inadequate sheltered accommodation, no fixed abode, they can't get registered to vote - the Tory/UKIP government don't give a damn about them because they know most are young and would vote to remain in the EU. Basically the referendum election was too heavily flawed and rigged in favour of leaving the EU. The result should be null and voided, especially as other concerns have been confirmed such as the weekly £360 million to the NHS Whopper.

People in the UK have been really conned by the fascicle Tory contrived cock-up referendum, it maybe a lot of things, expression of many Britons hatred of Johny Foreigner, Racism, Fascism, Popularism, a good deal for tax-haven millionaires... but whatever it is, democracy is ain't. 

Teresa May is a disgusting turncoat, she voted remain but when offered a Prime Minister job opportunity she jumped at the chance for her own selfish career prospects and damn the EU and remain voter, you can never ever trust anyone like that. On the day she said Brexit Means Brexit she knew how populist and contentious the whole stinky issue is, and Brexit Means Fascism would be too close to the truth, so the new Tory Brexit Party führer said 'Brexit Means Brexit" which has served really well for the gullible.

Debs

Debs - as you probably know from my posts, I'm a Remainer, but I can't agree with your argument that the referendum and result was a con by the Conservative Party. For sure there are some rabid Europhobes among the Tories but they are in the minority.  Cameron and Osborne activity campaigned to stay in and I believe they were genuine in pursuit of this. Yes, it's arguable their campaign was weak, and it has become clear since that their preparations for a result saying 'No' were woeful, or more accurately, non-existent.  Both Cameron and Osborne paid for this with their jobs, perhaps their political careers (though I suspect Osborne will be back one day).  

As for TM, there was a vacuum to be filled and she stepped forward.  Okay, there was probably some ambition fulfilment in that judgement but, again, I think she did what she thought was the right thing to do.  Would things have been better under BJ or Gove? I very much doubt it.    

Was the result of the referendum the wrong answer? In my view, yes. Was it a stitch-up by the Conservative Party? No.

Mike

Hmack posted:
Resurrection posted:

Looks like Putin is using the UK as his preferred playground for settling scores with those who fell out with him in Russia. I also see Nikolai Grushkov, another Putin enemy, has been found strangled in New Malden. which he was unlikely to have done by himself. Commie Corbyn also seems to have been falling over himself to avoid any words of recrimination for Putin further nailing the traitor's colours of allegiance to anywhere but the UK. The man is an utter disgrace. 

As our politicians have allowed the country to be the "dustbin for a significant proportion of the detritus of the world", we can hardly be surprised when vendettas are settled in our very open and over-tolerant society. 

Unless these are also lines from a Dylan song, then you have personally gone too far and are an utter disgrace. I don't swear, but was tempted to include a swear word here.

The second sentence I have highlighted in your post is on the fringe of being blatantly and openly racist.  

 

I think you are too wrapped up in your own biased opinions to allow one from anyone other than those that match your own. Your rabid rant matches the intolerance that Corbyn, McDonnell and of course Putin represent. It is also wrapped up in faux morality that people like you and them use to close down free speech and thought. 

Resurrection posted:
Hmack posted:
Resurrection posted:

Looks like Putin is using the UK as his preferred playground for settling scores with those who fell out with him in Russia. I also see Nikolai Grushkov, another Putin enemy, has been found strangled in New Malden. which he was unlikely to have done by himself. Commie Corbyn also seems to have been falling over himself to avoid any words of recrimination for Putin further nailing the traitor's colours of allegiance to anywhere but the UK. The man is an utter disgrace. 

As our politicians have allowed the country to be the "dustbin for a significant proportion of the detritus of the world", we can hardly be surprised when vendettas are settled in our very open and over-tolerant society. 

Unless these are also lines from a Dylan song, then you have personally gone too far and are an utter disgrace. I don't swear, but was tempted to include a swear word here.

The second sentence I have highlighted in your post is on the fringe of being blatantly and openly racist.  

 

I think you are too wrapped up in your own biased opinions to allow one from anyone other than those that match your own. Your rabid rant matches the intolerance that Corbyn, McDonnell and of course Putin represent. It is also wrapped up in faux morality that people like you and them use to close down free speech and thought. 

Your post speaks for itself, and how ironically it does just that.

I detest intolerance which is precisely why I responded to your own post which was itself the epitome of intolerance, and which I suspect was designed to provoke in exactly this way. This is why I also detest those on the lunatic or racist fringe (granted a small number of those who voted to leave) on the Brexit side.

You appear to think that I am a lifelong supporter of Corbyn and McDonnel, and that your attempt to equate them with Putin and intolerance as will provoke me further. I am happy to share my political leanings on this forum and have done so in the past. As it happens, my political affiliations for most of my life have been with the Liberal or Social Democratic parties rather than with the left wing of the Labour party as you appear to assume. Unfortunately my party or parties of choice have been relegated to the fringe of British politics, and so I now largely vote tactically. That means for me, voting for any of the mainstream parties other than the Conservative party, and that includes potentially voting for Corbyn and the the Labour party.

I hope the one thing on which we might agree is that the UK must act with its allies to ensure that Putin cannot get away with what appears to be a blatant attempt to silence his critics wherever they might reside.   

  

MDS posted:
naim_nymph posted:

What has been proven by the referendum result on 23rd June 2016 is that the will of the UK people is to remain in the EU. The 17.4 million leave vote isn't anywhere near enough to commit to leaving the EU. On the same day 29 million electorate didn't vote to leave the EU, and that's not including the 16 & 17 year olds who were deliberately & inappropriately denied the vote because the Tory/UKIP party know most would vote to remain, and then there's the estimated 4 million UK people who are not on the electoral register, mostly due to Tory austerity measures that create homelessness, rough sleeping, sofa-surfers, inadequate sheltered accommodation, no fixed abode, they can't get registered to vote - the Tory/UKIP government don't give a damn about them because they know most are young and would vote to remain in the EU. Basically the referendum election was too heavily flawed and rigged in favour of leaving the EU. The result should be null and voided, especially as other concerns have been confirmed such as the weekly £360 million to the NHS Whopper.

People in the UK have been really conned by the fascicle Tory contrived cock-up referendum, it maybe a lot of things, expression of many Britons hatred of Johny Foreigner, Racism, Fascism, Popularism, a good deal for tax-haven millionaires... but whatever it is, democracy is ain't. 

Teresa May is a disgusting turncoat, she voted remain but when offered a Prime Minister job opportunity she jumped at the chance for her own selfish career prospects and damn the EU and remain voter, you can never ever trust anyone like that. On the day she said Brexit Means Brexit she knew how populist and contentious the whole stinky issue is, and Brexit Means Fascism would be too close to the truth, so the new Tory Brexit Party führer said 'Brexit Means Brexit" which has served really well for the gullible.

Debs

Debs - as you probably know from my posts, I'm a Remainer, but I can't agree with your argument that the referendum and result was a con by the Conservative Party. For sure there are some rabid Europhobes among the Tories but they are in the minority.  Cameron and Osborne activity campaigned to stay in and I believe they were genuine in pursuit of this. Yes, it's arguable their campaign was weak, and it has become clear since that their preparations for a result saying 'No' were woeful, or more accurately, non-existent.  Both Cameron and Osborne paid for this with their jobs, perhaps their political careers (though I suspect Osborne will be back one day).  

As for TM, there was a vacuum to be filled and she stepped forward.  Okay, there was probably some ambition fulfilment in that judgement but, again, I think she did what she thought was the right thing to do.  Would things have been better under BJ or Gove? I very much doubt it.    

Was the result of the referendum the wrong answer? In my view, yes. Was it a stitch-up by the Conservative Party? No.

Mike

Mike - I agree.  Similarly I am a vehement remainer but I think the biggest mistake (or one of them) is to label those who genuinely see the UK’s position as better served outside of the EU as being racist, fascist or at least being conned by the Right.  It’s highly insulting. And after all for the vast majority of his career indeed until 2015 Jeremy Corbyn himself was amongst the firmest of the leavers.  

Lindsay

 

Unless these are also lines from a Dylan song, then you have personally gone too far and are an utter disgrace. I don't swear, but was tempted to include a swear word here.

The second sentence I have highlighted in your post is on the fringe of being blatantly and openly racist.  

 

I think you are too wrapped up in your own biased opinions to allow one from anyone other than those that match your own. Your rabid rant matches the intolerance that Corbyn, McDonnell and of course Putin represent. It is also wrapped up in faux morality that people like you and them use to close down free speech and thought. 

Your post speaks for itself, and how ironically it does just that.

I detest intolerance which is precisely why I responded to your own post which was itself the epitome of intolerance, and which I suspect was designed to provoke in exactly this way. This is why I also detest those on the lunatic or racist fringe (granted a small number of those who voted to leave) on the Brexit side.

You appear to think that I am a lifelong supporter of Corbyn and McDonnel, and that your attempt to equate them with Putin and intolerance as will provoke me further. I am happy to share my political leanings on this forum and have done so in the past. As it happens, my political affiliations for most of my life have been with the Liberal or Social Democratic parties rather than with the left wing of the Labour party as you appear to assume. Unfortunately my party or parties of choice have been relegated to the fringe of British politics, and so I now largely vote tactically. That means for me, voting for any of the mainstream parties other than the Conservative party, and that includes potentially voting for Corbyn and the the Labour party.

I hope the one thing on which we might agree is that the UK must act with its allies to ensure that Putin cannot get away with what appears to be a blatant attempt to silence his critics wherever they might reside.   

  

Thanks, I am pleased you clarified that. You align yourself with a Party, Liberal, whose leader has just racially insulted any older, white person who had the temerity to vote to Leave the EU i.e. Vince Cable. Your own paranoia of the Conservative Party means that you would also happily cast your vote for, IMHO, probably two of the nastiest extremists, Corbyn and McDonnell, to infest Parliament since Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness, who at least never took their seats. 

My gob is smacked at the suicidal, for the country, unpatriotic logic that would drive yourself to the conclusions and actions you have outlined above. 

But, of course, I agree with you that  something needs to be done about Putin. Apart from him settling old scores with nasty poisons and stranglings in this country, he and his mates are laundering billions here.

The Strat (Fender) posted:
MDS posted:
 

Mike - I agree.  Similarly I am a vehement remainer but I think the biggest mistake (or one of them) is to label those who genuinely see the UK’s position as better served outside of the EU as being racist, fascist or at least being conned by the Right.  It’s highly insulting. And after all for the vast majority of his career indeed until 2015 Jeremy Corbyn himself was amongst the firmest of the leavers.  

Lindsay

Yes. Good points, Lindsay. I find Corbyn's long-term anti-EU position hard to square with his more recent assertions about retaining protections for workers' rights. Surely that is harder to achieve by leaving when the UK is on its own rather than being part of a huge economic block.

Mike

MDS posted:

I find Corbyn's long-term anti-EU position hard to square with his more recent assertions

With respect ... isn't this comment akin to the Prime Minister complaining about Russian influence on UK politics while her party accepts unfettered donations from those very Russians she is commenting about.  When Corbyn raises this point, he is accused of playing "Party Politics" rather than people recognising he is raising specific points of policy which could improve how we secure British politics.

Hmack posted:

.............  I hope the one thing on which we might agree is that the UK must act with its allies to ensure that Putin cannot get away with what appears to be a blatant attempt to silence his critics wherever they might reside.     

An interesting watch (for UK viewers) tonite,  Panorama on BBC @ 19:30 ........... John Sweeney reports on the forthcoming Russian presidential elections, in which victory for Vladimir Putin appears to be a foregone conclusion. Sweeney investigates allegations that the Kremlin has subverted democracy in Russia and meets the Putin opponent who has been banned from the election.   

MDS posted:

Yes. Good points, Lindsay. I find Corbyn's long-term anti-EU position hard to square with his more recent assertions about retaining protections for workers' rights. Surely that is harder to achieve by leaving when the UK is on its own rather than being part of a huge economic block.

Mike

I don't think it's harder to achieve outside the EU.  Outside the EU JC could much more easily shift our economy back to a high tax / high spend / high inflation regime similar to that of the 1970s.  This appears to be his objective.

The situation can remain stable for a period of time before the corrective processes of international trade wreak havoc on our economy once more, and policy will then have to be abandoned.  (The subsequent forced austerity resulting from a collapsed national economy will make the current situation look like a minor inconvenience and will be further compound by the likely relative slowing of our economy post-brexit.)

Resurrection posted:

"....you would also happily cast your vote for, IMHO, probably two of the nastiest extremists, Corbyn and McDonnell, to infest Parliament since Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness" 

Perhaps you should replace your use of the acronym 'IMHO' with IMO in future. Your point of view and the way you regularly express it on this forum does not sound very humble to me at all.

By implication you attempt to portray me as a racist because I potentially align myself with a party led by Vince Cable!  Absolutely astonishing given your earlier response to someone (not me) who had the temerity to post "not all those who voted Brexit are racists, but all racists surely voted for Brexit". You question my "unpatriotic logic! I simply cannot apply the word "logic" to your reasoning on this one. 

Apparently, I have a paranoia of the Conservative party, and an "unpatriotic logic" for not supporting them. In fact I suspect you believe that I and others are "unpatriotic" simply for not supporting some of your more extreme views on the EU in general and Brexit in particular. Perhaps you should look a little closer to home for evidence of paranoia.  You may choose to believe this or not, but I have a number of very good friends who are supporters of the Conservative party. They still remain good friends even though our political standpoints differ. The truth is simply that the fundamental policies of the Conservative party do not align with my views of fairness in Society (such an 'airy fairy' concept I know) and so I cannot conceive of any possibility of voting for them - no more nor less than that. Others feel differently about Conservative policies, and they are perfectly entitled to their opinions and their votes.

Now, this will no doubt really annoy you, but I am about to patronize you.

Many of your posts on this and other threads would indicate that you are well educated and very literate. Some of your posts are very amusing, even if the barbs they contain are aimed at me and others who do not agree with your view of the world. On the other hand, some of your rhetoric throughout this thread is more worthy of the right wing gutter press or the views of those xenophobes and racists on the extreme right of the Brexit argument. 

"Commie Corbyn also seems to have been falling over himself to avoid any words of recrimination for Putinfurther nailing the traitor's colours of allegiance "  

"our politicians have allowed the country to be the "dustbin for a significant proportion of the detritus of the world",

 Unlike some of your previous posts, these statements are neither witty nor amusing. They are just plain nasty.

Do they truly reflect your views, or are they simply an amusing little distraction for you, and designed to wind some of us up?    

Hmack posted:

Resurrection posted:

"....you would also happily cast your vote for, IMHO, probably two of the nastiest extremists, Corbyn and McDonnell, to infest Parliament since Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness" 

Perhaps you should replace your use of the acronym 'IMHO' with IMO in future. Your point of view and the way you regularly express it on this forum does not sound very humble to me at all.

By implication you attempt to portray me as a racist because I potentially align myself with a party led by Vince Cable!  Absolutely astonishing given your earlier response to someone (not me) who had the temerity to post "not all those who voted Brexit are racists, but all racists surely voted for Brexit". You question my "unpatriotic logic! I simply cannot apply the word "logic" to your reasoning on this one. 

Apparently, I have a paranoia of the Conservative party, and an "unpatriotic logic" for not supporting them. In fact I suspect you believe that I and others are "unpatriotic" simply for not supporting some of your more extreme views on the EU in general and Brexit in particular. Perhaps you should look a little closer to home for evidence of paranoia.  You may choose to believe this or not, but I have a number of very good friends who are supporters of the Conservative party. They still remain good friends even though our political standpoints differ. The truth is simply that the fundamental policies of the Conservative party do not align with my views of fairness in Society (such an 'airy fairy' concept I know) and so I cannot conceive of any possibility of voting for them - no more nor less than that. Others feel differently about Conservative policies, and they are perfectly entitled to their opinions and their votes.

Now, this will no doubt really annoy you, but I am about to patronize you.

Many of your posts on this and other threads would indicate that you are well educated and very literate. Some of your posts are very amusing, even if the barbs they contain are aimed at me and others who do not agree with your view of the world. On the other hand, some of your rhetoric throughout this thread is more worthy of the right wing gutter press or the views of those xenophobes and racists on the extreme right of the Brexit argument. 

"Commie Corbyn also seems to have been falling over himself to avoid any words of recrimination for Putinfurther nailing the traitor's colours of allegiance "  

"our politicians have allowed the country to be the "dustbin for a significant proportion of the detritus of the world",

 Unlike some of your previous posts, these statements are neither witty nor amusing. They are just plain nasty.

Do they truly reflect your views, or are they simply an amusing little distraction for you, and designed to wind some of us up?    

Yep, these are my views. Commie Corbyn IMHO is a Traitor. 

Hungryhalibut posted:

It seems odd that we cannot make negative comments about the US president, yet the Forum can be used happily for people to abuse the leader of the UK Opposition and to express views that could be taken as racist and xenophobic. I find it rather sad.

HH,

As for Corbyn, his nasty anti-Semitic version of the Labour Party as well as his alignment with very disagreeable  regimes around the world, from Russia, to Cuba to Argentina seems to be invisible to those of  you 'supporting' his cause. You personally may be Labour to the bone but Corbyn and McDonnell are simply using this vehicle as a means to impose Communism via Momentum, their party within a party.   

I am monitoring this thread.  Some comments are flying pretty close to the edge, so I would encourage some degree of moderation in the language used.  However, as it is personal opinion not entirely devoid of reasoned argument then I have allowed some leeway. In particular could members please be careful not to make judgements on other members, as this would indeed fall foul of forum AUP.  Thank you.

Resurrection posted:
Hungryhalibut posted:

It seems odd that we cannot make negative comments about the US president, yet the Forum can be used happily for people to abuse the leader of the UK Opposition and to express views that could be taken as racist and xenophobic. I find it rather sad.

HH,

As for Corbyn, his nasty anti-Semitic version of the Labour Party as well as his alignment with very disagreeable  regimes around the world, from Russia, to Cuba to Argentina seems to be invisible to those of  you 'supporting' his cause. You personally may be Labour to the bone but Corbyn and McDonnell are simply using this vehicle as a means to impose Communism via Momentum, their party within a party.   

I was more concerned about your comments on the U.K. being a dustbin for a significant proportion of the world’s detritus. I’d welcome reassurance that this isn’t racist or xenophobic.  Who exactly do you consider to be ‘detritus’?

Huge posted:

I don't think it's harder to achieve outside the EU.  Outside the EU JC could much more easily shift our economy back to a high tax / high spend / high inflation regime similar to that of the 1970s.  This appears to be his objective.

Alternatively we can have the low tax / low spend / high inflation regime the Tory's have as their objective.

Given the UK currently have average to low tax burden compared with the rest of the "developed" world, perhaps we can afford to pay a bit more tax to keep social services functioning ... or at least try to spread some of the wealth downwards so that everyone can afford a reasonable standard of life.

Resurrection posted:

As for Corbyn, his nasty anti-Semitic version of the Labour Party as well as his alignment with very disagreeable  regimes around the world, from Russia, to Cuba to Argentina seems to be invisible to those of  you 'supporting' his cause.

About as invisible the support for other "disagreeable regimes" such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey, unquestioning support of Israel and accepting money from questionable sources in Russia is to those who "support" the Tories.

Your claims against Corbyn only hold up if you selectively quote.  He has always held nuanced views which have at times questioned the belief that everything the "West" does is right and good, and everything in the "East" is bad.  The problem is politics and the media can't handle that.

Resurrection posted:
Hungryhalibut posted:

It seems odd that we cannot make negative comments about the US president, yet the Forum can be used happily for people to abuse the leader of the UK Opposition and to express views that could be taken as racist and xenophobic. I find it rather sad.

HH,

As for Corbyn, his nasty anti-Semitic version of the Labour Party as well as his alignment with very disagreeable  regimes around the world, from Russia, to Cuba to Argentina seems to be invisible to those of  you 'supporting' his cause. You personally may be Labour to the bone but Corbyn and McDonnell are simply using this vehicle as a means to impose Communism via Momentum, their party within a party.   

How is Corbyn anti-semitic, please don't confuse support for the Palestine and criticism of Israeli regime which the majority of the mainstream press and anti corbyn Labour MP's so conveniently use as anti-semitic.  This is the main problem within the Labour Party so much so they will suspend Jewish people for being anti-semitic if they speak out against the Israeli regime!

Eloise posted:
Huge posted:

I don't think it's harder to achieve outside the EU.  Outside the EU JC could much more easily shift our economy back to a high tax / high spend / high inflation regime similar to that of the 1970s.  This appears to be his objective.

Alternatively we can have the low tax / low spend / high inflation regime the Tory's have as their objective.

 

<snip>

"low tax / low spend / high inflation"...  that doesn't make any sense what so ever.

I believer you are a Labour Party supporter?  Then look at the Keynesian economic model to which the Labour party claim to subscribe * - you'll see that low tax / low spend can't result in high inflation relative to the general international economic environment.

*  The Labour party subscribe to one half of the Keynsian model, the Tories subscribe to the other half; unfortunately, between them they can't manage to co-ordinate the switch over in synchronisation with the necessities imposed by swings of phase in the performance of the global economy.

Richard Dane posted:

I am monitoring this thread.  Some comments are flying pretty close to the edge, so I would encourage some degree of moderation in the language used.  However, as it is personal opinion not entirely devoid of reasoned argument then I have allowed some leeway. In particular could members please be careful not to make judgements on other members, as this would indeed fall foul of forum AUP.  Thank you.

If this arrogant Icarus flies too close to the sun Richard will be the first one to know and clip his wings, which will unfortunately be a missed opportunity for some. 🤓

Hungryhalibut posted:
Resurrection posted:
Hungryhalibut posted:

It seems odd that we cannot make negative comments about the US president, yet the Forum can be used happily for people to abuse the leader of the UK Opposition and to express views that could be taken as racist and xenophobic. I find it rather sad.

HH,

As for Corbyn, his nasty anti-Semitic version of the Labour Party as well as his alignment with very disagreeable  regimes around the world, from Russia, to Cuba to Argentina seems to be invisible to those of  you 'supporting' his cause. You personally may be Labour to the bone but Corbyn and McDonnell are simply using this vehicle as a means to impose Communism via Momentum, their party within a party.   

I was more concerned about your comments on the U.K. being a dustbin for a significant proportion of the world’s detritus. I’d welcome reassurance that this isn’t racist or xenophobic.  Who exactly do you consider to be ‘detritus’?

Tsk! Tsk! You mean to say that all the people who have attempted to blow us up as well as themselves, or poison people or strangle them or foment and incite hatred within this country from whatever end of the spectrum you wish to choose are not detritus? I, as a right winger, am not fomenting hatred of anyone but am not happy to have anything I say or do that condemns those that execute hatred within my country being levelled as xenophobia or racism. 

Huge posted:

"low tax / low spend / high inflation"...  that doesn't make any sense what so ever.

It might not make sense ... but its the route they are heading towards ... or at least relatively high inflation as in inflation which is higher than wage growth!

It was intended as a general critique on how the Tory's economic plans over the last 8 years have hardly given the results they claimed to want.

I believer you are a Labour Party supporter? 

Actually more of a Liberal supporter though not a member of any particular party and try to examine and measure their policies against what I consider my own socialist / capitalist balanced moral philosophy.  Neither is completely the right philosophy; social improvement cannot happen without a good capitalist market however unfettered capitalism precludes social justice and equality.

As for the Keynesian model ... as I understand it (and I may be showing my lack of knowledge here) between the parties (and how the country vote) they have it all about face ... in times of good growth we need the Tory model of reducing borrowing and spending, in times of recession you have to increase spending (particularly investment type spending) and risk increasing borrowing.

Generally, despite the reputations, I think both parties are as economically illiterate as each other - neither actually have economic policies they have economic doctrine they follow.

Eloise posted:
Huge posted:

"low tax / low spend / high inflation"...  that doesn't make any sense what so ever.

It might not make sense ... but its the route they are heading towards ... or at least relatively high inflation as in inflation which is higher than wage growth!

I believer you are a Labour Party supporter? 

Actually more of a Liberal supporter though not a member of any particular party and try to examine and measure their policies against what I consider my own socialist / capitalist balanced moral philosophy.  Neither is completely the right philosophy; social improvement cannot happen without a good capitalist market however unfettered capitalism precludes social justice and equality.

As for the Keynesian model ... as I understand it (and I may be showing my lack of knowledge here) between the parties (and how the country vote) they have it all about face ... in times of good growth we need the Tory model of reducing borrowing and spending, in times of recession you have to increase spending (particularly investment type spending) and risk increasing borrowing.

Generally, despite the reputations, I think both parties are as economically illiterate as each other - neither actually have economic policies they have economic doctrine they follow.

It may appear that the Tories are pursuing a high inflation policy, but that's a mis-reading of the situation; the policies they are pursuing limit inflation growth to a level below that which would occur in a higher taxation regime.  True, price inflation is greater than wage inflation, but in a higher taxation environment, the difference would actually be even greater.

Yes, you've understood the problem with how the main parties apply the Keynsian model...  It's that each of them dogmatically applies one half of the Keynsian cycle without considering switching to the other half, and the lack of co-ordination of the change over with changes in the global situation (it only occurs after a general election when the political regime changes over).

There is one point you've missed though.  Initially in a recession you stimulate growth by spending, but you have to ensure that the resultant debt doesn't significantly impact the ability of the economy to recover rapidly when the economic situation again becomes more favourable.  To limit this requires that the debt is not allowed to exceed GDP and deficit must not exceed a small proportion of the economy's fixed costs.  When these thresholds are reached, the economy must be switched from stimulus to austerity, even in a recession.

Resurrection posted:

Tsk! Tsk! You mean to say that all the people who have attempted to blow us up as well as themselves, or poison people or strangle them or foment and incite hatred within this country from whatever end of the spectrum you wish to choose are not detritus?

You realise that since 2012/13 period ... over 70% of the "terrorist" related arrests have been arrests of British nationals?

thebigfredc posted:

Eloise posted;

'Given the UK currently have average to low tax burden compared with the rest of the "developed" world...'

It didn't seem like it when I worked overtime on Saturday as I will be taxed at 40% and National Insurance  will take a further 2%.

It may not seem like it Ray... but it’s still true.

Add Reply

Likes (1)
The Strat (Fender)
×
×
×
×