The Labour Thread

[Kopper]

There is no data on what percentage of people on benefits voted for anyone. And we're currently not distinguishing between in- and out-of-work benefits. Frankly, if some turkeys want to vote for Christmas, that's their business, but I see no reason to demonise anyone in need of support.

And re: NHS, austerity is a political choice. Taking money out of the NHS has been a choice rather than a necessity. But for what it's worth, I would increase the top rate of income tax to pay for the NHS, I would means test pensioner benefits like the winter fuel allowance, I would increase corporation tax if it would help; there are lots of ways to fund the service without privatising it.

Interesting what you say about being a reflection of society. I don't actually agree, but surely it's not the job of politicians to exploit people's basest and least pleasant instincts?

Max, you seem to excuse and abdicate responsibility at every turn.
If someone uses the NHS they should pay for it. I don't mind NI contributions on top of this. But what I do mind is people thinking they can use the NHS to try out every legal high available, under the guise of mental health or back pain. There are numerous abuses of the NHS. Most of which could be avoided if we asked patients to pay a fee at the point of use.
I think the problems of raising corporation tax post brexit are obvious, so I won't be going into song and verse with that.
Taxing the richest will only mean a flight of capital from these shores. Besides the powerful interests in this country and affluent members of parliament wouldn't back a tax on the top income bracket.
These turkeys won't be voting for Christmas.
Max, it worries me when you suggest others should pay proportionately more for something they (presumably) barely use.
I could understand if you said you and many others wouldn't mind paying more tax to fund the NHS. That's reasonable and fair.
Although what it's not, is in your self interest.
A self serving attitude you claim isn't representative of society as a whole.

Is it just you then?

 

[.V.]

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/760191893435277312

https://twitter.com/omnibrilliance/status/760523684595523585

 

[.V.]

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/759045162072956928

 

[Abertawe]

All they prove is that the coup plotters have weakened the party and that BMG must be the shittest pollers of all times.

 

[.V.]

*sigh*

Summed up well.

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57a1d10fe4b0f42daa4b9b95

 

[Abertawe]

Summed up fuck all mate.

Standard procedure of a leadership election mate. Rallying with members of the party is what happens, it ain't a new thing mate. You just ain't seen someone command these audiences before mate, that's why your brain malfunctions and has to seek refuge in nonsensical metropolitan hyperbole. Abby Tomlinson, come the fuck on mate. Election for leadership of the party, you rally with the membership of the party, put your ideals up for scrutiny and the membership of the party decides if they want you or not. It seems Corbyn is the only leader in history expected to win a general election four years before it happens, he's good mate but he ain't that good.

 

[Captain Scumbag]

Yeah, from my admittedly limited (and largely disinterested) vantage point, this all looks rather shitty and unsporting.

Labour lost in 2010 and 2015 and then had a leadership election. That leadership election was the most democratic in the party's history (by virtue of it being the only one to date contested under OMOV) and Corbyn won by a landslide. He therefore has a clear democratic mandate to lead the party.

It's bad enough that the bad loser centrists in the PLP have forced him to re-fight a contest he's already won. To then criticise the poor bastard for focusing on re-election (attending rallies instead of carrying out usual Leader of the Opposition duties) is just fucking ridiculous.

Hope he beats them.

 

[Max]

Max, you seem to excuse and abdicate responsibility at every turn.
If someone uses the NHS they should pay for it. I don't mind NI contributions on top of this. But what I do mind is people thinking they can use the NHS to try out every legal high available, under the guise of mental health or back pain. There are numerous abuses of the NHS. Most of which could be avoided if we asked patients to pay a fee at the point of use.
I think the problems of raising corporation tax post brexit are obvious, so I won't be going into song and verse with that.
Taxing the richest will only mean a flight of capital from these shores. Besides the powerful interests in this country and affluent members of parliament wouldn't back a tax on the top income bracket.
These turkeys won't be voting for Christmas.
Max, it worries me when you suggest others should pay proportionately more for something they (presumably) barely use.
I could understand if you said you and many others wouldn't mind paying more tax to fund the NHS. That's reasonable and fair.
Although what it's not, is in your self interest.
A self serving attitude you claim isn't representative of society as a whole.

Is it just you then?

Not quite sure what you mean. People who earn more pay more tax, and this is generally understood. Also applies to the NHS. I don't really follow your point on 'every legal high available' and think you're chasing some weird straw man on this.

Summed up fuck all mate.
IO
Standard procedure of a leadership election mate. Rallying with members of the party is what happens, it ain't a new thing mate. You just ain't seen someone command these audiences before mate, that's why your brain malfunctions and has to seek refuge in nonsensical metropolitan hyperbole. Abby Tomlinson, come the fuck on mate. Election for leadership of the party, you rally with the membership of the party, put your ideals up for scrutiny and the membership of the party decides if they want you or not. It seems Corbyn is the only leader in history expected to win a general election four years before it happens, he's good mate but he ain't that good.

Or 'polling of the general public', as it is otherwise known. What is nonsensical is the theory that because Corbyn can get his supporters out to a rally, that he is a good leader of the opposition. Harry Potter fans and the English Defence League can also rally supporters to a public place; it doesn't make them a good opposition to the government.

I have never seen you accept one criticism of Corbyn, ever. You don't support him, you idolize him. I'm not sure, after all your posts, where you get your evidence that he's suddenly about to win over the electorate, who will tell you flatly, in poll after poll, that they aren't going to vote for JC.

 

[Abertawe]

Not quite sure what you mean. People who earn more pay more tax, and this is generally understood. Also applies to the NHS. I don't really follow your point on 'every legal high available' and think you're chasing some weird straw man on this.


Or 'polling of the general public', as it is otherwise known. What is nonsensical is the theory that because Corbyn can get his supporters out to a rally, that he is a good leader of the opposition. Harry Potter fans and the English Defence League can also rally supporters to a public place; it doesn't make them a good opposition to the government.

I have never seen you accept one criticism of Corbyn, ever. You don't support him, you idolize him. I'm not sure, after all your posts, where you get your evidence that he's suddenly about to win over the electorate, who will tell you flatly, in poll after poll, that they aren't going to vote for JC.

For heavens sake stop stalking me in this thread, just be mature, realise we have a difference of opinion and let it go. You've not provided one good reason as to why it is every single entity that can be filed under blairite/iraq/corruption/immoral is backing the coup and how that isn't reason enough to back the current leadership.

 

[blade1889]

Not quite sure what you mean. People who earn more pay more tax, and this is generally understood.

I know it's been done before but there's evidence to suggest that actually cutting the top rate tax band would increase the contributions from those people as they stop doing tax avoidance measures...so vice versa with increasing higher rate tax.

 

[TheMinsterman]

*sigh*

Summed up well.

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57a1d10fe4b0f42daa4b9b95

The staggering irony of a Huffington Post article criticising an echo chamber.

 

[.V.]

I don't have a problem attending rallies during a Labour leadership election, my issue is with his lack of engagement with the electorate from September to June.

I do think he's been treated poorly by the media, especially the BBC, but he still has to engage with them. It's not enough for him to rely on social media and rallies, that whilst predominantly worthy, are ultimately on the left politically.

 

[smat]

Summed up fuck all mate.

Standard procedure of a leadership election mate. Rallying with members of the party is what happens, it ain't a new thing mate. You just ain't seen someone command these audiences before mate, that's why your brain malfunctions and has to seek refuge in nonsensical metropolitan hyperbole. Abby Tomlinson, come the fuck on mate. Election for leadership of the party, you rally with the membership of the party, put your ideals up for scrutiny and the membership of the party decides if they want you or not. It seems Corbyn is the only leader in history expected to win a general election four years before it happens, he's good mate but he ain't that good.

mate

 

[Techno Natch]

I know it's been done before but there's evidence to suggest that actually cutting the top rate tax band would increase the contributions from those people as they stop doing tax avoidance measures...so vice versa with increasing higher rate tax.

I'll say again I refuse to believe that people who can and will go far to avoid tax will suddenly stop if they have a chance to put even more money aside.

 

[Kopper]

Not quite sure what you mean. People who earn more pay more tax, and this is generally understood. Also applies to the NHS. I don't really follow your point on 'every legal high available' and think you're chasing some weird straw man on this.

Yes, people who earn more pay more tax. But how much more is the question. The current rate of high income tax is 45%. Ed Milliband proposed 52%. Under Harold Wilson it was 83%. The Beatles and the Rolling Stones along with thousands of others left England because of it. My point being, you can't have a punitive tax system on wealth, without there being consequences. I would also argue due to the foreseeable flight of capital, the increase would be counter productive in the mid to long term.

Corbyn won't win a election because he has no policies and the policies he does have, he can't explain how they'll be funded. QE isn't the answer as it debases the value of money and leads our creditors to stop lending.


Even if you don't accept people using the NHS to get access to pills like Oxycontin, Zispin and many others. You should accept there are many abuses to the system. For instance people taking legal highs and then calling the paramedics when they experience a side effects, threatens to overwhelm the NHS. If these idiots were made to pay a fee every time they called the emergency services, they'd soon stop calling.

It's strange how you claim Abertawe can't see the flaws in Corbyn. But you yourself manifest those same deficiencies. Corbyn doesn't do logic, he does emotion. Max, you're the same in this regard.
It's always about those in need and the vulnerable. Mental health!
I get sick of hearing about it. A ponce using a hard to diagnose illness to get their housing and living expenses paid for. Then these ingrates have the cheek to vote Conservative because they see too many foreigners on their street.
Give me a fucking break.
What's needed is a healthy dose of reality. Theresa May's appointment couldn't have come at a better time.

 

[Aber gas]

Yes, people who earn more pay more tax. But how much more is the question. The current rate of high income tax is 45%. Ed Milliband proposed 52%. Under Harold Wilson it was 83%. The Beatles and the Rolling Stones along with thousands of others left England because of it. My point being, you can't have a punitive tax system on wealth, without there being consequences. I would also argue due to the foreseeable flight of capital, the increase would be counter productive in the mid to long term.

Corbyn won't win a election because he has no policies and the policies he does have, he can't explain how they'll be funded. QE isn't the answer as it debases the value of money and leads our creditors to stop lending.


Even if you don't accept people using the NHS to get access to pills like oxycontin, Zispin and many others. You should accept there are many abuses to the system. People taking legal highs and then calling the paramedics when they experience a side effect, threatens to overwhelm the NHS. If these idiots were made to pay a fee every time they called the emergency services, they'd soon stop calling.

It's strange how you claim Abertawe can't see the flaws in Corbyn. But you yourself manifest those same deficiencies. Corbyn doesn't do logic, he does emotion. Max, you're the same in this regard.
It's always about those in need and the vulnerable. Mental health!
I get sick of hearing about it. A ponce using a hard to diagnose illness to get their housing and living expenses paid for. Then these ingrates have the cheek to vote Conservative because they see too many foreigners on their street.
Give me a fucking break.
What's needed is a healthy dose of reality. Theresa May's appointment couldn't have come at a better time.

Thing is Kopper, your views are perfectly valid but if you don't believe in a free at the point of use NHS, castigate vulnerable people as scroungers, don't believe in a progressive tax system and want an end to the welfare safety net then you're right the Labour Party isn't for you. If you want to label the working class as " ingrates " I think you've pretty much given up any position of leftist politics.

 

[Abertawe]

mate

Hi mate.

 

[Kopper]

Thing is Kopper, your views are perfectly valid but if you don't believe in a free at the point of use NHS, castigate vulnerable people as scroungers, don't believe in a progressive tax system and want an end to the welfare safety net then you're right the Labour Party isn't for you. If you want to label the working class as " ingrates " I think you've pretty much given up any position of leftist politics.

We will lose the NHS (either under Labour or the Conservatives) if it continues in it's present vein. Something has to give.
Ditto for the pension system. I, like many others, would benefit if I could draw my pension at 65. But I also know the system would go bankrupt if that were the case. I expect to be working well into my late 70's, even early 80's. When you grow up poor and want to stop being poor, you learn to accept the underlining principles, governing your situation.

Working class? No. The welfare class! I am part of the working class. If I didn't work I couldn't claim benefits. Why? Because I dream of bettering myself and have a few quid in savings.
The government has to do more to create jobs so people have the opportunity to better themselves.
But we all know of a section of society who could get a fairly decent job, but refuse to work. Ignoring these people does us no favours.
When you talk about vulnerable people who are you talking about? Please define vulnerable?

Labour should be about creating jobs, legislating for decent working conditions, welfare (for those in genuine need) and social justice.
I truly believe in those things. What I don't believe in is the something for nothing culture. It's not working class and it's not Labour.

 

[Abertawe]

We will lose the NHS (either under Labour or the Conservatives) if it continues in it's present vein. Something has to give.
Ditto for the pension system. I, like many others, would benefit if I could draw my pension at 65. But I also know the system would go bankrupt if that were the case. I expect to be working well into my late 70's, even early 80's. When you grow up poor and want to stop being poor, you learn to accept the underlining principles, governing your situation.

Working class? No. The welfare class! I am part of the working class. If I didn't work I couldn't claim benefits. Why? Because I dream of bettering myself and have a few quid in savings.
The government has to do more to create jobs so people have the opportunity to better themselves.
But we all know of a section of society who could get a fairly decent job, but refuse to work. Ignoring these people does us no favours.
When you talk about vulnerable people who are you talking about? Please define vulnerable?

Labour should be about creating jobs, legislating for decent working conditions, welfare (for those in genuine need) and social justice.
I truly believe in those things. What I don't believe in is the something for nothing culture. It's not working class and it's not Labour.

Bit shit that mate, you should aspire to enjoying your time on this planet.

 

[blade1889]

I'll say again I refuse to believe that people who can and will go far to avoid tax will suddenly stop if they have a chance to put even more money aside.

Back in the 90s (think it was 90s) under Lord Lawson as chancellor that was seemingly what happened though. They cut the higher rate tax band and those people contributed proportionally waaaaay* more tax than they previously had done. If you make it such that there isn't much point in hiring an accountant to move your money around people will stop doing it, obviously no one can predict what exactly will happen if we suddenly increased/decreased higher rate tax now but it isn't a stretch to imagine increasing it would drive more people into avoidance measures. It's certainly not as simple as saying increase tax = more money, if only it were!

*tried to find the exact stats I had before but can't. It was something like a 10-15% increase in proportional contributions over 5-10 years.

 

[Techno Natch]

Yeah it's possible and it does make sense. I don't have faith that a move either way will make much difference to be honest with you.

 

[Techno Natch]

Yes, people who earn more pay more tax. But how much more is the question. The current rate of high income tax is 45%. Ed Milliband proposed 52%. Under Harold Wilson it was 83%. The Beatles and the Rolling Stones along with thousands of others left England because of it. My point being, you can't have a punitive tax system on wealth, without there being consequences. I would also argue due to the foreseeable flight of capital, the increase would be counter productive in the mid to long term.

Corbyn won't win a election because he has no policies and the policies he does have, he can't explain how they'll be funded. QE isn't the answer as it debases the value of money and leads our creditors to stop lending.


Even if you don't accept people using the NHS to get access to pills like Oxycontin, Zispin and many others. You should accept there are many abuses to the system. For instance people taking legal highs and then calling the paramedics when they experience a side effects, threatens to overwhelm the NHS. If these idiots were made to pay a fee every time they called the emergency services, they'd soon stop calling.

It's strange how you claim Abertawe can't see the flaws in Corbyn. But you yourself manifest those same deficiencies. Corbyn doesn't do logic, he does emotion. Max, you're the same in this regard.
It's always about those in need and the vulnerable. Mental health!
I get sick of hearing about it. A ponce using a hard to diagnose illness to get their housing and living expenses paid for. Then these ingrates have the cheek to vote Conservative because they see too many foreigners on their street.
Give me a fucking break.
What's needed is a healthy dose of reality. Theresa May's appointment couldn't have come at a better time.

In the terms of Legal highs you might get less people calling.... but the death rate might rise which isn't really a positive.

You also have an issue with poor people not actually ringing an ambulance until its to late because they don't feel they can afford it. So again there would be a rise in preventable death.

And yes it is always about those with poor mental health and the poor in general. We have a really big issue with funding in mental health at the moment which means people aren't getting the help they need so it is rightly on the agenda. We had a suicide in Bristol last Month where the person was waiting 18 weeks for a bed. It's not good enough and it's even worse outside of the Cities.

 

[Abertawe]

Shit ideas www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-corbyn-britain-been-down-8555673

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Stealth taxes and fines should be tied to your income with a base minimum, so they hurt the rich and much as the poor, and generate a fuck load more money too.

 

[Kopper]

Bit shit that mate, you should aspire to enjoying your time on this planet.

300,000 people 65+ are still working in this country. That figure is only going to rise.

 

[Abertawe]

300,000 people 65+ are still working in this country. That figure is only going to rise.

You said until your 80's. I presume you don't actually wanna work until your 80's?

 

[Kopper]

In the terms of Legal highs you might get less people calling.... but the death rate might rise which isn't really a positive.

You also have an issue with poor people not actually ringing an ambulance until its to late because they don't feel they can afford it. So again there would be a rise in preventable death.

And yes it is always about those with poor mental health and the poor in general. We have a really big issue with funding in mental health at the moment which means people aren't getting the help they need so it is rightly on the agenda. We had a suicide in Bristol last Month where the person was waiting 18 weeks for a bed. It's not good enough and it's even worse outside of the Cities.

You argue from the point of view, the country has unlimited resources. If it did we could have an ambulance waiting outside every home in the country, just in case someone needed their assistance.

If I do something silly which causes my death. How is that the government's fault?
It's the same with someone who wants to commit suicide. Nothing will stop them if they're intention is to carry it out.

I think of anybody with varying degrees of schizophrenia, autism or any mentally induced ailment that impairs their ability to function in society, as someone who is mentally ill. Someone claiming to be bi polar or manic depressive etc are just (by and large) playing the system.
Mocking those who genuinely need help and can't fend for themselves.

 

[Kopper]

You said until your 80's. I presume you don't actually wanna work until your 80's?

With all due respect, I think you're missing the point. What I want, has no bearing on what's going to happen.

 

[Abertawe]

With all due respect, I think you're missing the point. What I want, has no bearing on what's going to happen.

You've got a very distorted view of the world my friend.

 

[smat]

Someone claiming to be bi polar or manic depressive etc are just (by and large) playing the system.