LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI agree that we strongly disagreeOriginally Posted by TheAnimus
; any discussion beyond is doomed by our equal levels of intransigence.
I agree that we strongly disagree
One good reason for Ed Miliband to lead Labour .... if he gets the boot, Ed Balls may get in.
On second thoughts .....
Well that is about the only thing in favour of Ed, he has the Balls for the job (of chancellor - but -then he was Gordon ('call me prudence') Brown's advisor - 'nuff said.One good reason for Ed Miliband to lead Labour .... if he gets the boot, Ed Balls may get in.
On second thoughts .....
Interesting comment on R4 this morning - that Ed Miliband had failed to stamp his personality on the labour party - completely missing the point that he has little personality to stamp.
The Union block vote kicked out the most able potential leader of the Labour Party, David Milliband because the rightly thought Ed would be more malleable and 'owed' them. That might be coming back to bite them, but if the Unions withdraw support, the Labour Party is in dire straights.
Of course that might lead us back to the traditional two party state - Tories and Whigs.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
And much closer to the more efficient one party state.
It's simple, tell me an industry which in the last 40 years has been made better thanks to unions? It should be in a sustainable state (ie no pension deficits caused by blank cheques remuneration) and have fairly stable growth.I agree that we strongly disagree
There is a place for unionising in this world, but it isn't in UK politics. The problem comes do you let people who don't agree with the union, have the job? If yes, the union is weakened.
When you have a society which has chronic inequality and exploitation it is very unlikely that everyone will agree. It is why I've always admired the co-operative movement more than the union ones!
But one thing is clear for the Labour party, there are in a bad place right now. They either have to lurch back to the union line towing, which is less popular with the electorate, or they have to look at their money situation. When you consider that the labour party is better funded than the tory party, yet still in dire economic straights (pretty much dependant on the co-op bank!) they really do have a problem if they opt away from union funding. But they damn well need too. It simply isn't right that people have fees taken from them for union membership that are then transferred directly to one political party.
If they are brave and actually look at severing the ties a little bit, they would be in a much better position.
The problem is, that until now they have been busily trying to tell people how bad things are, when really they aren't. Our biggest problems right now things like youth un-employment, pension deficits, are direct results of their last tenure (reforms to university places, reduction of vocational courses etc). It is a tough place they will be in.
The biggest thing they have going for them is that most people are really pissed off with the Lib Dems. But then again anyone who voted for them last time should have considered it a protest vote, if they believed any of the promises then they are worryingly thick. Oh Hi Guardian!
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
ik9000 (20-08-2013)
We're just not going to agree, I thought we'd agreed that? Although I do agree with some of what you've said.
Y'know, we're gonna need a union to get you back on topic.
I'd like to see David Miliband back; what about that?
What about the money?
Labour have the advantage in they are kinda open about being continuously paid off by these large corporations to present their best interests at the expense of others.
That money accounts for a lot, some put it as pretty much all of it:
http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com...-life-support/
Where would they get the cash from?
A lot of people have not been impressed by their reterick of late, voters have short memories true, but if growth figures hold until the election Labour will be in a terrible place. Not only did they burn down the economy during the naughties, but then the reforms helped fix it faster than nations which had no such control.
They will not be in an enviable place, so will need a lot of cash to buy the voters. I don't know how much The Guardian doing a sun n telling people who to vote for will help. The question is, can they get Murdock on side?
If they loose the union funding, they will sure as hell need someone.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
EM is unelectable in my opinion, and I fully expect a leadership challenge before the next election, if Labour have the slightest glimmer of hope of a victory. It would be a crime of the highest order to hand the election to the ConDems (or either part) after the turd sandwich they've forced upon the country over the last few years.
Last edited by Spreadie; 20-08-2013 at 07:53 PM.
We should start a hexus party. Problem is the system is so messed up I doubt we'd get a look in. After all most of us want to be largely a-political, weigh-up rationally the arguments put forward and decide each thing on its own merits rather BS-derived/bribed/inherited bias, and generally just want to lead quiet lives. Hardly the selection criteria for politicians these days. Where oh where is the true statesman, servant of his country? Yes servant. Think about it MPs...
Ed Miliband is doing a David Cameron on David Cameron and the PM does not like it one bit. The PM doesn't have 1 policy to attack Ed Miliband on and you can see the frustration at PMQs.
Yay, yes, let's all get legless. Oh sorry you mean political party. Great idea, I nominate Saracen as fuhrer leader.
Ed Miliband has policies? Who knew?
Because the country was in such a wonderful condition after 13 years of Labour's loving attentions.
And the turds you get out...
...are based on what was forced fed in.
That said, MPs live very short term, when whats needed is less spin and media courting and more long term planning, ie let the civil service actually run everything and MPs just debate stuff theyre handed.
Let's try to not put this in to a party fight.
I think it is a great thought exercise of how you could make Labour electable again. Myself I think it would come to something like this:
- Stop been lackeys to the unions, be more democratic
- Admit that PFI / Gordon style economics are not the answer
- Be honest about spending reductions (ie everyone knows some have to be made, man up and say what they would be, rather than pretend it isn't a problem)
- Talk about state backed pensions and what the plans are
- Have some policies to fix the problems they created with University for 50%
- They could capitalise on the problems of the terror laws they created, by repealing them.
That would be just a great start.
The problem they have is a lot of the problems we have today are worse because of previous policies they brought in. They should try and distance themselves from that era, bring a transparency about what they would do, where they would spend, where they would cut. An acknowledgement that previous pork barrelling projects have harmed the local economy would be a good idea too, bring out some real plans for how to regenerate an area that do not rely on government funded work entirely.
However, they I don't think have the determination to do that. They are too dependant on the union money, which makes it very hard for them to do anything which reduces the kickbacks these guys get. If they try to even mention state pensions they will have a massive problem on their hands (with people who rightly feel that they own them).
But they do have one advantage going for them, a bunch of voters who would never vote for any other party, and a bunch of people realising that voting for a party that says 'yes' to everything because they know they won't get in, isn't a good answer.
So my prediction is, they will lurch to the left, because the Lib Dems will be busy holding the centre left as they try and make more credible policies this time. Meanwhile the Tories will be worried about UKIP, but they could probably do something about that by appearing harder on dem immergants!
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
That latter bit would be a wonderful way of uniting support, including mine .... around someone else.
For the record, even assuming I could get elected to the proper Parliament, which by the way is something I consider rather unlikely as, first, I wouldn't stand, and second, I don't consider myself qualified (whatever that means), and then assuming someone appointed me as Prime Minister, my first act would be to resign.
Even for a HEXUS party, I'm no politician. I'll say what I think, mean what I say, and if others don't like it, oh well, do me a favour and vote for someone else. Not a way to get elected, is it?
I wouldn't vote for me, so I'm beggared if I can see why anyone else would. And if they were daft enough to do so, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be long before they'd regret it.
Mind you, my first Paxman interview would be a, how shall I put it, 'lively" occasion.
ik9000 (21-08-2013)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote