British Politics Thread.

[Psychosplodge]

Maybe in a more contested seat. I bet they had a 20k majority when Blunkett was the MP That says more to me.

[Mr Mystery]

Who knows?

Holding a seat is still holding a seat.

Though the lower turnout - is that normal for by-elections I wonder, just in general? I've always felt there's more at stake during a General Election, even though by-elections are just as important (Tories lost a seat to Labour already thanks to by-election).

[Psychosplodge]

I think its probably a slightly higher turnout than it would have been just for the council elections. When they finish counting later we'll know.

[Mr Mystery]

Fair enough.

I hate trying to Google stuff to do with elections. You tend to get wildly contradictory information, and to even find that you need to get past all the 'arrrgh! IMMIGRUNTS!' and similar nonsense.

I mean, seriously. I just want a rough opinion on whether by-elections typically have a lower turnout than general elections, and if possibly, what's the average difference. No joy at all. Just lots of Daily Mail level ranting from all sides.

[Psychosplodge]

looking at the numbers for oldham I'd imagine so as it was only 40% and didn't the general election average around 65% turnout?

[grimmas]

Locals always have a lower turn out than a General election. Safe seats are also irrelevant in terms of gauging opinion they're called safe for a reason. It's the marginals that count.

The Scottish results are very interesting the Tories being the second party is big news and bad news for Labour who need Scotalnd back if they are going to be a serious threat. Also UKIP geting a seat in Wales is big news Labour need to start thinking quick because if UKIP start chucking out some more work long class policies they're going to take more votes away from them. Not enough for UKIP to be big challengers but enough to hurt Labour.

[Psychosplodge]

labour have lost a couple of councillors to greens in the student inhabited ward - cause the city centre isn't anti car enough.

Doncaster was only voting for Police and crime commissioner and had a turnout of around 20%.

Which I think is about 5% higher than when they were originally held?

[grimmas]

I think 20% is pretty good for a PCC election. I seem to remember it getting as low as 5% in some places.
I often chuck a local vote to the Greens I wouldn't want them running the country but I feel they'd do a nice job locally and keep things pleasant.

[Psychosplodge]

I think 20% is amazing for the PCC when no other elections are occurring.

- - - Updated - - -

Early election results in the "All out" election in Rotherham seem to be seeing the people who run the council during the CSA scandal re elected.

[grimmas]

7 seats for UKIP in Wales that's a bit of a turn up.

[Psychosplodge]

That is a rather durprising result, thought they'd jump to plaid cymru if they didn't go for the main two.

[grimmas]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/07/sadiq-khan-londoners-deserve-better-tory-campaign

Although it surprises me I find myself in a lot of agreement with Mr Khan here. Labour does need to widen its appeal and just not preach to the party faithful

[Psychosplodge]

Of course they do. That was why "New" labour was successful, because it ignored the party faithful that will vote for them regardless (look at the absolutely perverse result of the Rotherham council elections) and targeted the middleclass floating voter.

[Psychosplodge]

So instead of the EDLs football hooligans day out apparently they're importing proper neo-****s from Pegida to march through Rotherham this weekend.

[Mr Mystery]

Oh good.

Life going down the pan? Squandered the same education most of the country received? Can't get a job worth a damn? Angry, but don't know why?

WHY NOT BLAME AN IMMIGRANT!

Oh, and according to the Daily Express, Nigel Farage has 'put his money where his mouth is'. Which is a strange thing to do. I'd rather put £1,000.00 in the bank or through the local GW till (well, maybe £900 GW, £100 pub), than stick it up my nipsy. But then, he is a very, very strange man.

[Psychosplodge]

I don't think this is aimed at current immigrants is it? It's the ongoing stuff with the second/third generation and the sex abuse. Idk how much you see on the national news but its rare for it not to be mentioned on at least a weekly basis on the local news.

- - - Updated - - -

Also if I was a german considering a UK city break I don't think Rotherham would be particularly high on my list of destinations.

[Mr Mystery]

Oddly, given they're mindless bigots, they're not at all discriminatory in their discrimination. In short, if you're not them, then you're a kiddy fiddler. Despite they have at least one kiddy fiddler in their ranks....

[grimmas]

Both are anti-Muslim organisations. I've had the dubious pleasure of witnessing an EDL march and they are surprisingly diverse.

Tom Morrison the EDL founder it's Ex leader has been in Germany learning from Pegida and is the founder of its British wing.

Pegida makes the EDL look moderate though

[Psychosplodge]

Both are anti-Muslim organisations. I've had the dubious pleasure of witnessing an EDL march and they are surprisingly diverse.

So have I. They literally looked just like a group of football hooligans (something we have plenty of being a two team city). And would have been gone in about ten minutes if the UAF hadn't been spoiling for a fight honestly they're both as bad as each other those two.

Having looked at "protests" these pegida people have had in germany they look like proper nutcases.

[grimmas]

And would have been gone in about ten minutes if the UAF hadn't been spoiling for a fight honestly they're both as bad as each other those two.
.

Ain't that the truth

[Mr Mystery]

Speaking of wannabe fascists, there's a guy I know with the 'surely he must be somewhere to the right of Ghengis Khan' surname of 'Britton-Moseley'.

Except, he's not. He's a really lovely, massively intelligent bloke, and a total softy to boot with a penchant for Aardvarks!

[Psychosplodge]

Aardvarks? The **** *******s.
Everyone knows wallaby's are the true creature of penchants.

[Mr Mystery]

Stop being bigoted against the nasally blessed, you.

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/07/pip-disaster-disabled-access-report-benefits

They might as well just admit they want us dead, however a quicker way would be to just open euthanasia clinics. I'd be first in line.

[Denzark]

AX - lets work on the presumption that the government want to be in power. Therefore they would probably think it is important to work efficiently and to the measurable and noticeable benefit of the many after all, if they don't, they don't get voted in and hence retain their power.

If you agree that, then it is reasonable to work on the assumption that the government want any given policy to be seen to work. They don't deliberately make policy that they think will fail.

As such, I would think the government - whose policy it is to implement PIP - actually don't want it to fail and to be seen as inept. They want it to work. They don't want it to be seen as pointless with private firms having the litany of failure and inefficiency within the report.

I don't think they want to kill off all disabled, I respectfully admit I find that slightly hyperbolic.

I don't find it unreasonable as a tax payer for taxpayers money to only be given out following an assessment of need. I don't find it unreasonable for a government to attempt to improve the system either - they should always seek efficiency improvements.

I'm not saying PIP is going well - I'm not saying anything about how it is now, except to say, I expect they want it to work. Add into the mix that the majority of DWP are supposedly apolitical civil servants, who have to make the policy work - take that all into account, and I posit one must find it hard to draw a conclusion that PIP is designed to kill off the disabled.

[Psychosplodge]

As someone who's better half has to undergo periodic ESA assessments I can tell you without a doubt the systems is horribly flawed.
And the reason it's flawed is because of private companies trying to meet goals. Three times the SO failed her annual assessment and passed at appeal. And at appeal the form the assessor had submitted bore little resemblance to what the SO had actually said in response to questions.
If you were being generous you could put it down to the assessor not having English as their first language. The reality appeared more like they were looking to fail people arbitrarily.
This is has been under both Labour and the coalition.

[grimmas]

There is a definite issue with these companies running services like this for a profit as it means at best the service will be of a lower standard than a non profit driven set up. I'd also allow AX a bit of room for hyperbole he's probably a bit upset as it effects him.

[Psychosplodge]

Yes. I've seen the stress create a not dis-similar reaction.

[CoffeeGrunt]

My uncle has had Schizophrenia for years, generally bad health, and has been on disability for some time. New assessment comes up and they write him off as fit for work, waving away his mental health issues as well as most of the general health problems.

It got thrown out at appeal, but not without causing him to lose it a bit over being forced back into work. He genuinely wouldn't be capable of doing so.

[Denzark]

I should clarify, in case it is not clear, I do not claim the PIP is the best/ideal system or that it is being delivered appropriately. Neither would I want to start finger poking at AX given that when down here in the Oubliette a lot of us can act twunts some of the time but I can't recall a single case of AX doing so.

Just that the whole thing about being wished dead and euthanasia clinics - a tad strong for me.

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

it doesnt effect me personally, and unlike a lot of you im not really well up on politics or debating. I just go more by how I feel about things and am not a very "logical" person, and tbh I don't even give a sh1t if you are right or left, as long as you are a good person. I am more upset/concerned for a number of my friends who are getting screwed over, including one of my best friends who is a schizophrenic man and one of the kindest lads you'll ever meet, and a girl that suffers from seizures and memory loss on a daily basis (she was denied) neither are coping and it makes me upset.

[Wolfshade]

As someone who's better half has to undergo periodic ESA assessments I can tell you without a doubt the systems is horribly flawed.
And the reason it's flawed is because of private companies trying to meet goals. Three times the SO failed her annual assessment and passed at appeal. And at appeal the form the assessor had submitted bore little resemblance to what the SO had actually said in response to questions.
If you were being generous you could put it down to the assessor not having English as their first language. The reality appeared more like they were looking to fail people arbitrarily.
This is has been under both Labour and the coalition.

My SO refused to go through them so receives no money for state because the process is so daunting.

[Psychosplodge]

My SO refused to go through them so receives no money for state because the process is so daunting.

Yeah I think if her rent's didn't push her she would hide and hope it all went away. **** knows what'll happen when they pop their clogs.

[Psychosplodge]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36550304
So what do you reckon this is over? I don't think I've ever heard of the woman.
I'd have more expected this to happen to Jeremy Hunt when he was threatening the NHS to be honest.

[Kirsten]

well the attacker is alleged to have shouted 'Britain First' which would likely mean far right attacker, so they attack left wing politicians, not right.

[Psychosplodge]

That's not being reported on the radio.
Three gunshots are mentioned. Attacker just wandering off.

[grimmas]

Apparently the attacker shouted "Britain First" during his attack but you'd think they'd choose someone better than a white English Cambridge graduate and relatively unknown person to target considering the sort of group they are.

Still this sort of **** needs to get stamped on, hard.

[Kirsten]

well Britain First are a bunch of fascist neanderthals, they couldn't plan an attack with any skill or aim. it was probably somebody local with a grudge, whipped up by their neo na zi propaganda

[Psychosplodge]

We aren't some 20s fascist state. I hope they throw the key away on him.

[grimmas]

Definitely not very British behaviour either. Though the irony is possibly lost on them.

[Denzark]

I would be very surprise to find out he is not suffering from some mental illness and/or diminished responsibility. It is not the most well thought out plan of attack as Kirsten pointed out. Normally when one commits a pre-meditated crime (pre-meditated - he took a gun and a knife with him) you have a plan for getting away with it.

[Kirsten]

the MP has died :/

[grimmas]

Very sad event

[Mr Mystery]

Britain First dismissing it as a single madman.

Unlike them. Normally they judge billions by the actions of a few...

[Denzark]

Now DT reporting he is mentally ill.

[Mr Mystery]

I know it's late in the day, but I really hope this senseless murder forces some eyes open, and Leave tone down the right wing rhetoric.

[CoffeeGrunt]

It remains to be seen, radio just said that they're still sussing out the exact motive.

[Kirsten]

the motive wont matter to a lot of people. friend of mine works in a shop and a bloke came in ranting about how it was the fault of black or pakistani people and they should never have been allowed in. the right wing nuts will spin this to suit their own agenda whatever happened.

[Kirsten]

there are a lot of things to hate about politicians, but apparently for the by election for Jo Cox's constituency, the Conservatives, Lib Dems, and UKIP will not contest the Labour candidate out of respect. unfortunately that respect is not felt everywhere, as a far right candidate is going to stand.

[Path Walker]

Its only Jack "Human Inadequacy Personified" Buckby, everyone should just go back to ignoring him again, giving him the oxygen of publicity is what he wants, i doubt he'll even stand in the end, Liberty GB can't afford to lose the deposit.

[Mr Mystery]

Going to put this (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36575314) here, as it is ultimately a political thing.

Personally, I don't think it's a bad idea, especially where there's a power of attorney in play.

The more hurdles we can place in the way of scam artists, the harder it is for them to find a poor rube. And when you do that, you drive the profitability down, dissuading further attempts.

My grandparents could be counted lucky that they had savvy kids who kept an eye out - and of course working where I work, I could highlight potential new risks to my parents for extra protection.

But there's many out there who could be scammed or ripped off by family members. Granted, a text alert won't achieve much if it goes to the person trying to fiddle them out their money, but it's a good starting point.

As for power of attorney - my non-professional recommendation (because I have to be clear about that sort of thing!) is to have more than one. Again it's another safeguard thing.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Katie Hopkins, trollop that she is, is accusing the Left Wing media of utilising Jo Cox's death to undermine the Leave Campaign and push their agenda.

Which is horrible, absolutely despicable. Thank God the Right Wing media never did such things with Lee Rigby, Belgium, Paris, etc, etc...

[Mr Mystery]

Nigel Farage was claiming it's an underhanded tactic.

Unlike channeling propaganda from the German National Socialist movement of 1920-1945. Which of course is fine, just fine.

If only we could catapult Katie Hopkins into the sea. But, y'know. Pollution laws are there for a reason.

[Kirsten]

http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2016/06/17/union-calls-for-inquiry-after-bailiffs-seize-ambulances-as-contractor-goes-bust/

the tories are already selling off the NHS, it is not some vague fear for the future. they cannot be allowed to stay in power at the next election, and sure as hell cannot have a Brexit vote.

[Psychosplodge]

Unfortunately we will have them again if either the scots vote for the SNP again and/or they don't sort themselves out and offer a leader that floating voters can support.
TBH we might be better getting the libdems back in coalition again :D (never thought I'd say that)

[Kirsten]

yup, it is clear now that the Lib Dems did an awful lot to curb tory excesses

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

dunno how reliable/honest this rag is, but if true that is very messed up.

Tens of thousands of housewives to receive letters warning they have no state pension

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/22/tens-of-thousands-of-housewives-to-receive-letters-warning-they/

[Mr Mystery]

It's true. Kind of.

In short, it's to do with your National Insurance contributions.

If someone has never worked, but isn't registered for say, disability benefit, then they won't have paid NI, so aren't entitled to a State Pension.

Stuff like disability includes NI payments on your behalf.

At least, it used to last time I was on bennies. If this of concern to you, for goodness sake talk to your bennies officer.

[Psychosplodge]

holy **** they've just no confidenced corbyn. That was far faster than i expected.

[Haighus]

Have you got a link 'Splodge?

[Psychosplodge]

No it was on radio. I'm sure when one appears someone will post it.

[Haighus]

Fair enough. I'll have a poke around.

[Kirsten]

it is absurd

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36621777

[Haighus]

Oops, was ninja'd. Exact same link too...

[CoffeeGrunt]

Eh, 2 MPs filed it. Might go up for debate, who knows?

[Psychosplodge]

Ah. I thought they had to have 10% of the MPs for some reason.

[Haighus]

Maybe 10% is when they consider taking it to debate?

[Mr Mystery]

It's tabled, but I doubt it'll pass.

Anyways.

In a complete surprise to no-one, Scotland is already chuntering for a second Indy Ref.

In perhaps a surprise to some, there's calls for London to have the same....

[Psychosplodge]

IDK. Ten percent might have been a number that was mentioned when they were having leadership issues with brown and there was supposed to be a letter with thirty odd MPs on it or something? I might be confusing myself.

- - - Updated - - -



In a complete surprise to no-one, Scotland is already chuntering for a second Indy Ref.

35% of Scots didn't care enough to vote. Apparently there is some polling around somewhere (I think it was sky someone said) that suggests the SNP would lose again.


In perhaps a surprise to some, there's calls for London to have the same....

Ridiculous, if London had kept the rest of the country still in we'd have had to lump it.

[Mr Mystery]

Self-determination, that's the key.

[Psychosplodge]

Yorkshire first :p

[Mr Mystery]

And it wouldn't last long on it's own two feet....not after decades of Londoncentric policy.

This is the thing that really irritates me. Most of the stuff the North has a beef with? Is nothing to do with Europe. At all..

[Psychosplodge]

Maybe not. BUT NO ****ER LISTENED


*not "shouting" at you mystery

- - - Updated - - -

I mean lets face it, we essentially live in a two party system, with a pretend third party. Anyone who voted for a fringe party SNP/Greens/UKIP whatever else exists, you are responsible for us having a referendum, and ultimately responsible for today.

[Mr Mystery]

I just can't believe how dirty the Leave campaign was.

Lies, lies and more lies. No investment in the North? Oh yeah, that's totes the EU's fault, and not a matter of Tory policy. Have you seen the new trainline we're building to funnel more wealth to London?. Suppressed wages? Definitely not the erosion of the Unions who would've fought your corner. Oh no. It's the EU. Again.

[eldargal]

Not a single Leave campaign point was valid. Not immigration, most of which is unrelated to the EU anyway, not regulation, most of which we need to trade with partners anyway, not sovereignty which was based on some kind of archaic abstract idea of sovereignty which isn't relevant in a globalised world anyway, not democracy because we were democratic and did our own thing mostly anyway. It was all hyperbolic lies and misrepresentations.

[Kirsten]

Not a single Leave campaign point was valid. Not immigration, most of which is unrelated to the EU anyway, not regulation, most of which we need to trade with partners anyway, not sovereignty which was based on some kind of archaic abstract idea of sovereignty which isn't relevant in a globalised world anyway, not democracy because we were democratic and did our own thing mostly anyway. It was all hyperbolic lies and misrepresentations.

100% this

[Denzark]

Labour imploding. Hilarious.

[Mr Mystery]

Blairites GTFO - not seeing the downside here?

[CoffeeGrunt]

If Corbyn wins, that is. It's a pretty severe collapse of the party.

[Kirsten]

Hilary Benn is the opposite of a Labour MP, I would be quite surprised if he doesn't defect to the tories now. good riddance

[Denzark]

I'm sure a few hundred posts back I commented that from the perspective of a commissioned officer, Corbyn is no leader. And that very charge has been levied at him by one of the 11- count them- 11 from the shadow cabinet who have had enough of his buffoonery. Problem with Corbyn- he is a man of principle. No matter what else he is, he is a man of principle. And you can tell he just loathed the EU and its undemocratic nature, the way it supports big business. As a result he couldnt have raised a decent argument in favour of it if he and Diane abbot's love child's life was at stake. What will be really good for the country is if labour now splits in the way the libs did back in the day. Whole thing is priceless.

[Mr Mystery]

An yes. The military thing.

We don't need a dictator. We need a PM who listens and adapts, and doesn't blindly stick to their own ideology.

Labour are polling the same as the Tories right now. I want Corbyn for PM.

But you may want to look to your precious Conservatives. There's blood in the water there, and I suspect they're about to tear themselves apart...

[Denzark]

I fear the 'adaptable' piece you just described is more Cameron at his chameleonic best. As to my precious conservatives, there is not many at Westminster that I would give the steam off my wee wee - they merely happen to be the least worst in terms of responsible governance. Ymmv of course.

[CoffeeGrunt]

What traits would you consider good if not essential in a leader, then, based on your experience?

[Mr Mystery]

In short?

Corbyn is so far from the 'lame duck' the media so desperately want him to be. Under his leadership, Labour has expanded as a party, hasn't lost any seats, and is polling pretty well, all things considered.

His Shadow Cabinet are not the heart of the Labour Party, no matter what they might like to think. Corbyn has grassroots support. You can't politic that off him from Westminster.

So as I said - good riddance to the Blairites. They've had their day, and Labour supporters want Corbyn exactly where he is.

- - - Updated - - -


What traits would you consider good if not essential in a leader, then, based on your experience?

To be principled, yet able to distinguish their wishes from practicality. Corbyn is an honest man in a sea of gob****e opportunists. He hasn't sold his soul for media support - and you can tell that from the constant sniping from the press. Because God forbid we should wind up with a Prime Minister that doesn't owe the media a single favour.

[Denzark]

Moral and physical courage, willpower, ability to use ones initiative, knowledge of both your necessary skill set and the strengths and weaknesses of those under you, self confidence, enthusiasm and the ability to communicate. Integrity is the key one for me- when the whole list of what labour MPs with who gave him what levels of support came out, he started to lose trust. He can't communicate his ideas well because they are alien to much of his party and their core voters- old skool socialism is nearly dead. This implies a lack of knowledge. Some of the things he ticks the boxes, true- I acknowledge him to be a man of principle. It's his method of dealing with (potential) dissenters who want labour to fight in the centre ground as Blair did so successfully, that makes me question his leadership pedigree.

[Kirsten]

endless media attacks on Corbyn haven't worn down his popularity among voters. he has been attacked for not raising enough support for Remain, and supposedly sabotaged it, according to Laura Kuennsberg who loves to bash him. but he said very straightforwardly to vote remain, it was clear where his opinion lay. I don't think these resignations are a crisis, I think they are an excellent opportunity for labour

[Mr Mystery]

Core voters?

Core Blairites, perhaps. He's dragging Labour away from right of centre, to left of centre. Away from the days of 'we took away free University, LOL', back to a more compassionate form of politics.

This is what we need. Whether you agree with his political stance or not, we need a better choice than Tory or Diet Tory. We need the hard-right amongst the Tories to be challenged. Austerity is an ideology - not a necessity. We need to hear about the alternative to short-termism, which is all politics offered prior to his leadership. Life isn't about lining one's own pockets and an 'I'm alright Jack' attitude.

We need to be looking to the future. We need to ensure the kids of today and those to come have a few social barriers to progression as possible, because right now, if you're unlucky enough to be born into poverty, you're basically ****ed. It's the 21st Century FFS, and it's starting to feel like we're being dragged back to a feudal system.

It's bad enough that we have the concept of 'elite universities', and that a First from Oxbridge is somehow more of an achievement than a First from *****bridge Polytechnic, but the Tories are proposing that said same 'elite' Universities should be more expensive. Can you really dispute that such an idea is little more than an attempt to keep the riff-raff out, and ensure only the wealthy deserve to prosper?

It's bull****, it's morally reprehensible. I bear no grudge against those born into wealth. They can't help that position any more than the poor sod born with a heroin addiction.

But when an out of touch Etonian Elite refuse to see the issue with enforced elitism? We have to draw a line. We have to say that enough is enough. Because otherwise, where does that line of logic end?

And I say this as someone doing pretty well for themselves. I've been through the grinder. I know many perfectly intelligent people who had to pass up a University education because they just couldn't afford to be saddled with that much debt.

It's time for a sea change in how we run our country. And if I have to pay more tax for that to happen? Well so be it. It's for the good of our collective future.

[Denzark]

I thought the whole university issue was that the government took away the restrictions on charges. They don't set the charges of a given university, the university itself does. So actually it is the universities themselves being free market capitalists. I don't believe in free education post a-level anyway. It is too expensive to allow every person to attempt to scrape a third in meeja studies from an ex poly before making £17 grand a year as a customer services manager at b&q.

[Mr Mystery]

They introduced a new cap £9000.

They now want to allow the 'elite' to charge even more.

Education should be free for everyone. Finances shouldn't be a consideration. We should bankroll that as a nation, because it's in our interests to promote as skilled and educated a workforce as we can manage. The only limitation on education should be the capacity of the individual.

Not everyone is academically inclined. Not every (oh hai!) can be arsed to go 'all the way'. And that's fine.

We also need to match that with a proper programme of apprenticeships for those whose natural aptitude is more hands on - builders, sparkles, plumbers. This one is so simply done it's not even funny - Government subsidies for apprenticeships. Even if it's as simple as a grant to Apprentices, meaning the financial burden is shared between state and employer. I see no reason that can't begin around Key Stage 4 (or modern equivalent), because a kid who is seeing the practical application of otherwise kind of distant mathematics is far more likely to pay attention and take it all on board.

Examples? Working out the voltage for wiring up a building. That's maths right there. Even relatively innocuous stuff, like pricing up a job, it suddenly makes subjects like maths real and relevant.

We can do so much better as a country. We are failing our youngsters, and failing them badly.

[CoffeeGrunt]

I thought the whole university issue was that the government took away the restrictions on charges. They don't set the charges of a given university, the university itself does. So actually it is the universities themselves being free market capitalists. I don't believe in free education post a-level anyway. It is too expensive to allow every person to attempt to scrape a third in meeja studies from an ex poly before making £17 grand a year as a customer services manager at b&q.

Conversely, the lack of higher education is part of why we're dragging in so many foreign workers. For example, whenever we hire new Acoustic Technicians, they are foreign 90% of the time because no-one locally bothers to study that. The rest of the industry has similar issues, and the NHS is a monument to how studying to be a Doctor is a lot of stress for not an awful lot of benefit.

[Denzark]

There must be a finite point to free education. I think a-level is fine. Anything else is unaffordable. I would subsidise useful degrees - doctors, engineers, etc. Even pay bursaries outright with a guarantee return of service. But I think the country neither needs nor can afford to fund one degree for every one citizen. That would be what- £27k x 70m? I make that £1890000000 every 3 years...

- - - Updated - - -

Ok demographics - about 25% of country is under 19. Actual figure is 63m so at policy start for equality, you would need to fund 47m degrees at up to 27k over 3 years. Only a 1.2 trillion start up figure or have I transposed a 0?

[CoffeeGrunt]

63 million under 19s? There's only 64 million people in the country. Plus it's operating on the assumption that people would qualify for a degree, or even want one.

You could direct it towards what you consider "useful," but that's often viewed through a biased lens. Sure, a doctor or civil engineer is more pragmatic, but a degree in Media Studies could give us the next Edgar Wright or Alfred Hitchcock, a person who puts Britain on the cultural map and exports media to the world to generate income, while advertising Britain for tourism. People often disregard the arts, but they're an essential part of society because people aren't simple machines.

Britain defined itself by innovation. We pioneered so much, invented so much and discovered so much. What do we have now? If we want to do well in the coming years, we need to fuel that spirit of innovation again, it's the only thing that'll save us from ignobility. We can't manufacture on the scale of America, China or even Russia, but we can do quality design innovation if we only nurtured it, and we could do great things with the media and the arts if we only respected them.

[Denzark]

No look again mebbe not clear. 63m start of whom 25% are under 19. Quarter of 63 is about 15.75 so 47 is the remainder. It's very rough but you need to look at 47m people times 27k pounds for fees - to fund a degree for all. Rough like I said

[CoffeeGrunt]

Well no, because you're including newborns which means it doesn't add up. You're treating it as a singular payment, rather than a continual upkeep.
The actual cost would be whoever is 19 each year, and even then it's whatever proportion of that age group is eligible, willing, and has achieved the necessary grades. This also means the cost will alter as Uni fees do each year.

Plus due to our aging population, that percentage is set to decline (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/pop-estimate/population-estimates-for-uk--england-and-wales--scotland-and-northern-ireland/mid-2014/sty---overview-of-the-uk-population.html).

This means that due to people living longer, that investment lasts longer, we'll have to pay less each year due to the steady decrease in young'uns in terms of the overall population, and the youth will be better equipped to earn the money to keep the economy afloat and allow the older population to retire.

[Mr Mystery]

You're also labouring under the misapprehension that everyone is capable of getting the grades necessary for University, and that they all have the same desire to go on to Univeristy.

But nice attempt to rubbish it with hokey figures and 'absolute worst case scenario' illustration.

Seemingly, 225,000 students were accepted on full-time Uni courses in 2014. (http://fullfact.org/education/are-there-record-numbers-young-people-going-university/)

225,000 X 27,000 = £6,075,000 to get them all through Uni without a mountain of debt. In the grand scheme of things, that's a bloody bargain, when compared to our GDP (http://www.statista.com/statistics/281744/gdp-of-the-united-kingdom-uk-since-2000/).

It's an investment in our future. It's removing as many barriers as possible, so those with the aptitude can thrive as well as they might.

Typically, University Graduates earn more over their lifetime - which means more moolah for HMRC...see, that's long term politics. And that's not just PAYE tax. It's your VAT. It's your Road Tax. It's your council tax. All of it. Not to mention it can help to end cycles of poverty, not just for the individual, but communities. See trash TV like 'Benefits Street'? What sort of difference would it make to that sort of community to see even a single person they know work up from nothing, and not be dependant on state hand outs? You're a proud right winger. Surely you'd rather see your tax money spent on a project with eventual returns, than simply pissed up the wall?

It makes sense. It's morally correct. So why the hell are we charging for it? Why are we consciously trapping people in poverty?

[Mr Mystery]

Same goes for social housing.

Right now, there are few social homes around. We've got nowhere near enough.

And how is the gap filled? Private Landlords, who until recently were able to charge 'think of a number' rents. All picked up by the tax payer.

This of course makes 'buy-to-let' even more attractive, as if you accept social tenant, your rent is largely guaranteed.

This places a burden on the benefits bill, driving up rent costs ever higher.

But if we came to our sense, told the NIMBY brigade to STFU and invested in house building programmes, social tenants can be put up in proper social housing - and as private landlords will then be forced to only charge what the market will bear, rents may fall, discouraging further buy-to-let greed, causing house price inflation to stop being stupid.

As I've said before, Right To Buy was a good idea. Just the execution left a lot to be desired. A home owner is inherently more invested in the economy, so more likely to be in work and to seek ever higher wages. But because it was flogged off and not replaced, it was a one trick pony, and now we're suffering from it.

[Denzark]

When the government budgets for something, it has to account for the worst possible case scenario. Same as expensive cancer drugs, they look at maximum possible uptake. If a policy of 'free degrees for all' was announced then that's the maximum cost. One per every citizen of age. Actually I did not correlate ability to get grades or the amount of people who would die in the interim before completing degrees. But neither did I take into account the additional infrastructure, extra lecturers, classrooms, labs, etc etc. You have to draw the line somewhere with education. Saying 'free degrees for all' is pure socialist clap trap that highlights a truism I think Margaret Thatcher said: "the trouble with socialism is you run out of other people's money to spend". Looks like social housing will be more available if freedom of movement from the EU is modified, but that's a different story. Btw I would support 'a degree for all' if I thought the financial backing was there- but I can't see anyway it is.

[Psychosplodge]

Four more have resigned this morning. I doubt they're all blarites I'd assume Corbyn had some of his own people in he shadow cabinet?

regarding higher education. Just make the useful degrees free. Anything that gives you a bsc, a beng or the likes fully funded. The ones that award a ba? Someone needs to sit and make a sensible decision. There is no way we need a 1000+ sociology/business studies graduates a year - all we're doing is raising the entry requirements of pushing shopping trolleys.

[Denzark]

A good point - equality of opportunity does not need to be acheived by dragging everyone down to a poor standard (of living, wages, etc). If everyone had one of something* it devalues it.



*Obviously not including the essentials for life - water, oxygen, food, shelter.

[grimmas]

We don't need eveyone to have blinking degree we have a skills shortage not an education shortage. We've spent too long reading "studies" from academics talking rubbish about stuff they've never actually experienced studies which conveniently suggest they should be held in higher regard.

On the subject of Jeremy Corbyn (notice I've used his first name as well). He's in my mind one of the few politicians who's actually raised his stock over the last few days. He understand what democracy is for a start and he was very quick (possibly the first) to suggest we need to get down to working out how to enact the wil of the people. Good on him. He's also right he was voted the leader of the Labour part by its membership 18 cabinet memebers having a hissy fit doesn't change it. Also Brexit would actually allow him to enact his socialist vision for the UK being as though it would give him the necessary level of control to make it happen.

He's still a long way from getting a Mr from me but he's earning respect and hell Mr Mandela started off as an actual terrorist and he did pretty well in the end.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Government is innately a socialist construct to some degree. We all pay in, it pays for stuff for us.

Plus even at 10x Mystery's numbers, which is highly unlikely, it's still only slightly larger than the deficit the government needs to invest in Cornwall after the EU funding drops (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/26/cornwall-fears-loss-of-funding-after-backing-brexit).

- - - Updated - - -


We don't need eveyone to have blinking degree we have a skills shortage not an education shortage. We've spent too long reading "studies" from academics talking rubbish about stuff they've never actually experienced studies which conveniently suggest they should be held in higher regard.

We have a skills shortage, but what in? I've trained to be an electrician, spent two years trying to find an apprenticeship in it, and no dice. I gave up and just picked up any old job because no-one was hiring.

I've got friends who did everything from brickwork to carpentry in the same boat.

[Mr Mystery]

When the government budgets for something, it has to account for the worst possible case scenario. Same as expensive cancer drugs, they look at maximum possible uptake. If a policy of 'free degrees for all' was announced then that's the maximum cost. One per every citizen of age. Actually I did not correlate ability to get grades or the amount of people who would die in the interim before completing degrees. But neither did I take into account the additional infrastructure, extra lecturers, classrooms, labs, etc etc. You have to draw the line somewhere with education. Saying 'free degrees for all' is pure socialist clap trap that highlights a truism I think Margaret Thatcher said: "the trouble with socialism is you run out of other people's money to spend". Looks like social housing will be more available if freedom of movement from the EU is modified, but that's a different story. Btw I would support 'a degree for all' if I thought the financial backing was there- but I can't see anyway it is.

Ah yes.mquote Thatcher. Because she most definitely didn't balls things up at all. Oh no. Mass unemployment? A myth. The industry of entire communities asset stripped? A myth.

If as you claim Government budgets are always based on 'worst case scenario', that must be why the NHS, Police, Armed Forces etc are so very well funded and not at all somehow run on a shoe string...

[grimmas]

I can't speak for your personal experience Coffee.

I do know I've had great difficulty getting, electricians, plumbers, plasterers and gas fitters to do stuff for me with anything less than a months notice. And I know my father in Law had terrible trouble getting skilled work for his transformer/power supply business before he sold it.

It might be geographical thing though different things are needed in different areas at different times.

[Psychosplodge]

When we had work done last year, the electrician the builder used was trying to be in three places at once.

[grimmas]

When we had work done last year, the electrician the builder used was trying to be in three places at once.

I bet you managed to have a Sociologist there for the full project though 😝

[Psychosplodge]

I'm pretty sure we could have got a handful :D

[Al Shut]

The whole Corbyn thing seems ridiculous to me. Lots of people on all sides of the political system will be fed up, no matter what direction the Brexit will take from here. They need the leader with the support of the party basis and traditional voters now more than ever.

[Psychosplodge]

Unfortunately Corbyn has split the traditional voter base, and appears mostly supported by the young - who don't bother actually voting.

[Al Shut]

Wasn't the vote for him an open one, not just party members? Unfortunately details already escape my memory.

[Psychosplodge]

Anybody could become an associate member with a vote for something like £2 I think. There were certainly people that took the opportunity to skew the vote. Whether they did it in large enough numbers is debatable.

[Mr Mystery]

Yet since he clinched it, numbers of Party Members has only gone up. No has the party lost a seat....

This whole 'split the voter base' just isn't bearing out.

[Psychosplodge]

Only been in relatively safe seats so for hasn't it?

We've literally just had someone on the radio saying anyone who'd spent the last six weeks campaigning in Chesterfield wouldn't question Corbyn having lost the support of the voters.

[Denzark]

Ah yes.mquote Thatcher. Because she most definitely didn't balls things up at all. Oh no. Mass unemployment? A myth. The industry of entire communities asset stripped? A myth.

If as you claim Government budgets are always based on 'worst case scenario', that must be why the NHS, Police, Armed Forces etc are so very well funded and not at all somehow run on a shoe string...

Sort of not. We say 'we need X' - the budgeteers say 'raise a business case' so we do, and then someone says 'do without - take it at risk' which means if it goes wrong in the course of their 2 year tour, its their fault.

What I mean by worst case is, when you say 'I need 5 places on this course' you have to budget for 5 places. Doesn't matter if only 3 are taken up and one cancels last minute - the gap in your financial planning is for 5 places. If you have 2 posts where you need sergeants, even though you know one is L2 pay grade and one is a corporal given acting rank - you have to budget for 2 x L8 - the highest grade -in case you get one in.

Similarly, I assume on this basis, that if you put forward the fair and equal proposal that 'everyone can get a degree at the cost to the government' - the government must be able to carry that forward for everyone. Probably even those already with a first degree - why should Bloggs get something for free that Smith paid for? I entirely agree a reasonable follow on cost estimate is number of Students per year currently starting degrees, x£27k - no problem with that. But if you say everyone is entitled to something, that's what you budget for.

So then minus the people who can't get the grades from the cost, and add the amount of extra lecturers, infrastructure, administrators, exam writers, invigilators etc.

I'm sorry but I don't think the cost is viable. Its similar to why the NHS can screen out some more expensive drug costs on the basis of scale of
economy. Risk basis. You say graduates are cheaper, earn more, contribute more and therefore are more value to the economy. That may be but the risk that this doesn't pan out to be true especially as numbers of graduates go up (meaning their claim to special wages goes down) versus the 'risk' of not universally funding degree level education - I can see how they consider one to make economic sense.

For me its not ideological - its financial. I quit university after a year and have a chip on both shoulders from the university of life - I couldn't give arats arse if everyone got degrees - I just don't see the sums adding up.

[grimmas]

I did post some of this Data earlier for men going to university isn't really economically viable we tend to earn the same either way (it might have been in the EU thread to be fair)

[Psychosplodge]

we're now up to 27 shadow cabinet resignations. How big is the shadow cabinet?

[Denzark]

we're now up to 27 shadow cabinet resignations. How big is the shadow cabinet?

If its 27 it would be as big as the EU commissioners without the UK one there...

- - - Updated - - -

Even better, an extract from the DT. Yes they are biased, sure - but it is direct quotes from Chris Bryant MP (Labour):

Did Jeremy Corbyn vote to leave the EU?
A senior Labour MP says he suspects that Jeremy Corbyn voted for Brexit after the party leader declined to tell him which way he cast his ballot.

Chris Bryant said he posed the question directly as he warned Mr Corbyn he would "destroy" the party unless he stepped aside and did not seek re-election, but received no answer.

"Jeremy's management of the campaign for the referendum left many voters on polling day not even knowing which way Jeremy himself was going to vote," he told BBC News.

"I suspect that Jeremy may have voted to leave.

"Not only is that a betrayal of Labour's historic position on the European Union - a fundamental economic and foreign policy objective of ours - but also it means that if he were to lead is into a general election, the latest poll shows we would lose 150 seats, we would be a rump of 75 Members of Parliament.

[grimmas]

It should have been no surprise if he did, he voted against all the other treaties. In fact he shared a stage with Enoch Powell in the EEC referendum so he must have been very against it.

He had no chance really. All those traditional labour types weren't even listening he is just another London type telling them what to do an doc course they were too busy think about how they were gong to stick their leave vote right up Cammeron. His big error was slipping into "it's not the EUs faults it's the Tory's" because right or wrong that's just the same old bumf.

[daboarder]

I love how all these blokes who lied to you lot about the benefits of leaving are now turning around and admitting they lied utterly, from farrage's NHS BS to the no more free movement.

you poor fools really are screwed and this has been nothing but an utter cluster on your politicians part's. I mean hell, this looks like the end of the UK rather than britain leaving the EU

[Psychosplodge]

If they don't reduce our payments and remove free movement it would go against why a significant number voted leave and render the entire exercise completely pointless. What that would mean for their political futures who the **** knows?

[Mr Mystery]

I still don think Article 50 will ever be invoked...

[daboarder]

If they don't reduce our payments and remove free movement it would go against why a significant number voted leave and render the entire exercise completely pointless. What that would mean for their political futures who the **** knows?

I know right, Im surprised you lot haven't been rioting in the streets over this sod. It would honestly be funny if it wasnt so damned tragic.
i dont think it will overly tank careers though, people have generally short memories

[eldargal]

I still don think Article 50 will ever be invoked...

Ditto. None of the idiots pushing it have the courage to actually take responsibility for it, and I'm quite convinced Johnson and Farage were convinced it would fail themselves and just wanted to use the wave of disappointment from Leavers to raise their profile further. Farage was conceding around the time counting had started ffs.

[grimmas]

I still don think Article 50 will ever be invoked...

Well it isn't quite as simple as some may have. The invoking of it is down to the legislature of the country doing it. It isn't simply the prime minister saying so we'd have to have an act passed through Parliament to revoke he 1972 one that said we could ask to join in the first place. So it'll be a while (whatever the EU Comission or French foreign minister says).

On the subject of contributions Norway (according to the t'internet) pays around €300M a year. Currently we pay around £160-190M a week (including our rebate) so if we did (no means a certainty) get a similar plan we would play significantly less. It wouldn't do anything on the free movement front though.


(In response to Daboarder)
We don't tend to have Right wing riots in the UK (ignoring frootball) it's the Left that indulges in political violence on that scale. Given the result they are very much a possibility. It is entirely possible that the working class out voters have had their moment though and are quite happy with the panic they've caused so wil get back in their box it Article 50 doesn't get invoked. The Older Brexiters aren't very likely or capable to kick off.

Oh and in case no one has had a look the DAX has dropped more than the FTSE. I guess no one will be ignoring the working classes on England and Wales for a while.

[Mr Mystery]

Norway has the same per-capita....and I'm still far from convinced Europe is in any mood to play nicely with us...

[Denzark]

The big question is either 'Do they have the balls to initiate Article 50' or 'Do they have the balls to NOT initiate Article 50'?

I am not convinced what is more motivating for them. It is interesting that I am not seeing any great move from Europe to say 'disregard the result'. I think the EU is sick of us and would rather cut out the opposition to the grand programme.

As to lies - both sides lied. But Leave is not a government with a country backed mandate to make policy. They are in no position to make sure £3.50 gets to the NHS, let alone £350m.

Perhaps we could try and keep the referendum stuff to that thread so as not to crayon over British politics - although they will be intertwined for a few years.

I see what people say about Corbyn's mandate from the labour voters - but under this political system he needs the support of the Parliamentary Labour Party. And given there is every chance he is a leave voter... I think he is gone.

[Mr Mystery]

Referendum isn't binding though - and I'm becoming ever more convinced the result was a botch for both sides. Given the dodgy actions after, I really don't think Leave really wanted to succeed - it was instead about furthering political careers.

Daft thing is, by wanting to stay in the Single Market, very little is going to change. Though we won't have any MEPs if Article 50 is invoked, so at least UKIP won't have any parasites suckling at the teat they claim to detest...

[grimmas]

Id say they have to be very careful how they deal with us, too harsh they look like the power crazed megalomaniacs they are being painted as by Europsceptics across the EU, to soft and leaving looks like a good option. Of course they do still need to keep a decent level of trade with us because if we buy a lot less off them they will experience drops which again Eurosceptics will be all over. Also if we do leave, any one else doing it isn't going to be alone. Make no mistake the whole thing is very finely balanced. Whatever happens it won't be dull.

Having a Eurosceptics party like UKIP as MEPs should be a good thing for us because in theory they should be working to get is the best deal rather than giving concessions to Europe. Much like the SNP does for Scotland in the UK.

I do think there is a significant portion of the EU who is glad to see the back of us we aren't the most cooperative bunch moving us to the EEA is probably the best result for them, they still get the money, trade and the like from us but we don't get in the way anymore. I'm not sure they'll be that keen seeing as they are basically to the UK what the UK is to the EU.

Speaking of the SNP Alex Salmond was on TV again this morning damn he's good, balanced, calm, realistic and confident everything you'd like to see in a politician during difficult times. Unfortunately all the things missing in our current crop main party politicians.

[Kirsten]

UKIP never work on anything in Europe, they just turn up to the occasional meeting and ***** about the EU whilst using the MEP wages to fund their party.

[CoffeeGrunt]

If they don't reduce our payments and remove free movement it would go against why a significant number voted leave and render the entire exercise completely pointless. What that would mean for their political futures who the **** knows?

Farage doesn't have one. He's not an MP and hasn't got a ghost of a chance of getting Prime Minister. His political future isn't as lucrative as being a scapegoat for Leave.


On the subject of contributions Norway (according to the t'internet) pays around €300M a year. Currently we pay around £160-190M a week (including our rebate) so if we did (no means a certainty) get a similar plan we would play significantly less. It wouldn't do anything on the free movement front though.


Loses the Sovereignty argument, too, as we'd have the same relationship with EU Law but no MEPs to vote on our behalf.

As Mystery points out though, Norway is 1/13th of our population.


We don't tend to have Right wing riots in the UK (ignoring frootball) it's the Left that indulges in political violence on that scale.

I don't remember any specifically left-wing riots, unless you're referring to the Student protest, which was simply a peaceful protest hijacked by *ssholes.


Having a Eurosceptics party like UKIP as MEPs should be a good thing for us because in theory they should be working to get is the best deal rather than giving concessions to Europe.

In practice UKIP MEPs simply don't attend or vote. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-meps-attend-the-fewest-european-parliament-votes-of-any-party-in-the-eus-28-countries-10316962.html)

[Path Walker]

We don't tend to have Right wing riots in the UK (ignoring frootball) it's the Left that indulges in political violence on that scale. Given the result they are very much a possibility. It is entirely possible that the working class out voters have had their moment though and are quite happy with the panic they've caused so wil get back in their box it Article 50 doesn't get invoked. The Older Brexiters aren't very likely or capable to kick off.


This is silly. Not sure if its ignorance or what, but its not true to say any of this.

We have vast swathes of Far Right idiots. Who often "march" and it often descends in to violence. The EDL, BNP and Britain First and so on are one thing but then you have the actual full on neo ****s like the National Action. whose "marches" (where they're instructed to wear all black, cover their faces and bring concealed weapons) are only stopped by counter protests by anti-fascist organisations arranging for local community groups to counter them.

Left wing marches are largely peaceful affairs, having been on 5-6 in the last year without a single incident, often police involvement and poor tactical responses (like "Kettle-ing" on huge groups and murdering old men walking home from the pub) were what caused the tensions to spill out, since the police have stopped doing silly things like that, there hasn't been anything violence.

[grimmas]

There's lots Poll Tax, welling, J18, May Day (lots of them), Heathrow Third runway, G20, Isreali Embassy, Students protests (numerous), TUC (number of), Anti Globalisation (numerous), Anti capitalism (numerous),G8 and anything the UAF turns up to, million mask March . All filled the criteria for a riot. Yes it wasn't everyone attending but the violence still happens in an attempt to secure political change. There's also a whole raft of other stuff that although they weren't left wing protests exactly were carried out for leftist causes.

Also Path Walker Black Blocs (the masking up and dressing all in Black) is a left wing thing. Yep some right wingers are adopting. Yep the EDL and Britain First are pretty vile accept their Marches don't degenerate into violence unless the UAF turn up to attack them.

Your belief or disagreement in the cause doesn't make the use of violence justified. Also I think you'd find the Death at he G20 occurred after the violence started. A shameful day for the police no doubt but it is notable because it police related deaths at these things are massively rare and to seemingly to suggest it's a common occurrence is a bit disingenuous.

Right wing groups do perpetrate crimes however but generally they are smaller scale and more directed


Apologies I forgot the Fox Hunting Protest. Defo fits for a Riot and I think we can safety call it right wing.

[Kirsten]

Britain First marches always descend in to violence, they are fascist thugs, same for EDL.

suggesting that it is left wing people who riot is rather fanciful. you would also have to consider why such a thing might be, perhaps because left wing people are routinely targeted and hurt most by elitist government policies? right wing people rarely have anything to riot over. still doesn't stop them getting violent.

[grimmas]

Farage doesn't have one. He's not an MP and hasn't got a ghost of a chance of getting Prime Minister. His political future isn't as lucrative as being a scapegoat for Leave.



Loses the Sovereignty argument, too, as we'd have the same relationship with EU Law but no MEPs to vote on our behalf.

As Mystery points out though, Norway is 1/13th of our population.



I don't remember any specifically left-wing riots, unless you're referring to the Student protest, which was simply a peaceful protest hijacked by *ssholes.



In practice UKIP MEPs simply don't attend or vote. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-meps-attend-the-fewest-european-parliament-votes-of-any-party-in-the-eus-28-countries-10316962.html)

Yep joining the EEA would be not in line with either the Leave or Remain groups wishes.

Also I did say "should" and "in theory" In respect of UKIP and other Eurosceptics I fully willing to admit they leave a lot to be desired.

[grimmas]

Britain First marches always descend in to violence, they are fascist thugs, same for EDL.

suggesting that it is left wing people who riot is rather fanciful. you would also have to consider why such a thing might be, perhaps because left wing people are routinely targeted and hurt most by elitist government policies? right wing people rarely have anything to riot over. still doesn't stop them getting violent.

Well I'm not going to argue that the EDL aren't a bunch of bellends but the trigger for the violence is often the intervention of Left opposition groups, UAF and the like. As to the reasons for the more occurances of Left wing political violence (in the form of riot) you may be right but it still happens.

[odinsgrandson]

I can't speak for you lot- but around here, violence is generally perpetrated by groups that feel the most fearful and unempowered- be they right or left wing. And this is whether or not they are oppressed (sometimes they are, sometimes they are simply losing privileges they had taken for granted).

Often, their ideals are on either extreme, and it usually happens when opposition enters into the equation. Protests are almost always a method for the powerless to exert a little power- and the more the group believes that they system ultimately works, the less likely they are to riot.




Anyway, I'm not from your end of the Atlantic, but I'm really interested to know what all of this is about for you.

To what extent do you think Parliament feels the need to follow what the people chose? Is the economic downturn temporary, or is the damage inevitable at this point?


From the outside, a lot of the anti-EU rhetoric is about how you don't want to be like the USA. Which is fine in a lot of ways (we've got our problems) but I think that generically, it is a pretty weak argument (a lot like how our health care system has to suffer because we need to be not like Europe).

Also- did the Prime Minister step down because he can't hold the support of his party? Basically, he had to? I mean, I guess the people called his bluff, right?

It strikes me as odd, because if our President quits when something doesn't go his way- especially if it is likely to lead to a crisis of any magnitude- we'd really hate him for it (history books would be relentlessly unforgiving).

Is this all about immigration? Or is it a large-state vs. small state issues? Or is it about tracing national heritage back two thousand years (European national identities perplex Americans- mostly because our own national identity is tied to the current government).

[Mr Mystery]

Oop....looks like Osborne doesn't want the poison chalice of Tory Leader....

This is all getting very interesting...

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13516647_1210956798944611_6034059161789509917_n.jp g?oh=fd711864fe69ca36ab05dd11511d4778&oe=57F8D744

[Psychosplodge]

Farage doesn't have one. He's not an MP and hasn't got a ghost of a chance of getting Prime Minister. His political future isn't as lucrative as being a scapegoat for Leave.



Theoretically the entire party is defunct.



Odin'sGrandson, there are many suggested reasons why the PM stepped down, the actions of an honourable man who failed to defend his position, to cowardice after he found himself cornered in a position he never expected to find himself, to an unwillingness to be the one negotiating a withdrawal he doesn't believe in. Personally I learn towards the third one. But I've heard plenty of people calling him a coward.
There's certainly an identity element, but it is in part a backlash by the working class against the middle/political class.

[Mr Mystery]

I think Cameron ultimately did the right thing.


You want out do you? Want to invoke Article 50 eh? Alright, BoJo. In your own time. Mate.


Gosh! Crikey! Blimey!........but mostly 'dammit'

[Al Shut]

I think Cameron ultimately did the right thing.

Without a doubt. If one person thinks he can't get a good deal and one that a good deal is possible it's clear who should be in charge.

[grimmas]

Jeremy Hunt seemed keen as mustard on the tellie this morning, for the leaders job anyway. Very slow Brexit vision. Suggested a General election focusing on a Brexit plan needs to happen before we leave the EU. Also wants to push for a Norway style deal but without full freedom of movement, which at the moment doesn't seem like somthing the EU would go for. But hell at least he's coming out with an idea. It's a sobering thought that Leave doesn't seem to have any plan even in draft form for Brexit.

Cammeron had to go shown to be ineffectual on both a Domestic and International stage.

[Psychosplodge]

FFS anyone but hunt(maybe not gove). Has Teresa may quietly withdrawn her name? as she was the "unity" candidate news were talking about at the weekend.

[grimmas]

Not heard much from her tbh seems like she was taking a back seat waiting to see which way the wind blew. Not really the time for that sort of thing, she needs to come striding out with a bold plan if she wants to take control. Not keen on her either (or any of them tbh) she's shown a disturbing desire to sell off as much of the emergency services to her husband sorry G4S as she can get away woth b

[Psychosplodge]

It would be nice to have a honest politician wouldn't it?

[grimmas]

So very nice.

[odinsgrandson]

I think Cameron ultimately did the right thing.

How so?

And I don't mean that sarcastically (I know how the internet is). I mean, it isn't as if he or his party just lost an actual election. So wouldn't his replacement be just as unlikely to believe in "leave" as he did? And someone has to negotiate the leave- or declare that they aren't going to do it.

It looks to me like he was paralyzed to act- he either could do something he feels is poor for the country (and the immediate economic downturns seem to verify that) or he could ignore the voice of the people (which is very undemocratic of him- and cannot be popular from any side).

As I understand the rules here:

The EU only respects the decisions of the supreme executive (Prime Minister) on this matter. So there needs to be a PM who invokes article 50. The EU rules don't acknowledge any other method of leaving.

The Parliament has supreme power and with a majority vote can force the Prime Minister to act one way or another (so if they vote to leave, it is binding).

The populous have no defined power. Their vote does not count for anything official, except in as much as people believe that democratically their voice should matter. Everyone beforehand said that the popular vote would matter, so they're having trouble because they also feel that leaving the EU is the wrong choice.



Now, on my side of the pond, our people resign pretty much after some sort of personal scandal (ie, they've accepted bribes, committed crimes, abuse of power etc). They don't resign when they are required to enforce things they do not agree with- generally the thought is that they can minimize the damage. If they do a poor enough job of it, they can be forced out of office, but generally they'll only resign when it is clear that they will be forced out of office. Oh, and there was Sarah Palin who left office because she wanted to be a pundit and not a politician.

Having to negotiate terms they aren't very into is actually a reason someone would stay in office around here.

- - - Updated - - -


It's a sobering thought that Leave doesn't seem to have any plan even in draft form for Brexit.


This is the sort of thing I'm talking about. When Colorado legalized pot for recreational purposes, the politicians drafting the laws were also people who opposed the movement in the first place. Also, they had the bill ready to go before the vote happened.

This thing that's happening in Britain right now looks sort of like Hot Potato to me, only the stakes are very high.

[Kirsten]

Well Cameron was going to resign this term anyway, he wasn't going to lead the Conservatives in to the next election. and it is possible that the next election will come sooner than 2020. He is not obliged to do something he doesn't believe in, I don't think there would be anything good or clever about staying on to oversee something he thinks is wrong, that would seem the opposite to me.

[Al Shut]

If Cameron stayed the Leave campaign would blame him for the negative effects, accusing him of not negotiating hard enough. No way he wants to expose himself to that.

And I don't think he such a master tactician and diplomat that he would do much better than somebody else.

[Mr Mystery]

So, I just joined the Labour Party, in a sign of support for Jeremy Corbyn

[Psychosplodge]

Are you trying to make it easy for the tories?

[Mr Mystery]

No.

I'm making it more difficult. The media constantly rip into Corbyn for good reason - they've not spent decades trying to bribe and control him.

He's the man for me, and it's time the Blairites moved on - and they might as well join the Tory party to be a balancing force there, rather than dragging Labour to the Right.

I really don't think Corbyn is going anywhere. He's right not to resign - his mandate is more than the MPs. If the party as a whole vote against him, then so be it. But that's no reason to allow Blairites to confuse themselves with the electorate and the wider party.

[Psychosplodge]

Remember when I said the traditional labour voting working class was pissed off and were voting leave? The same people are vocally anti corbyn. Mostly this appears to mean weighing up a UKIP protest vote or not voting because many will not vote conservative because of Thatcher.
If you think he can win a national election without the core support, and win over the floating voters you're having a laugh.

[Mr Mystery]

Labour polling at 32%. Tories polling at 32%. UKIP? Prior to the idiotic Leave vote? 16% on a good day.

Labour have nothing to worry about from the swivel eyed racist party.

[Psychosplodge]

They are the second party in just about every constituency round here. If Labour voters stay at home they risk losing their heartlands. Don't dismiss it to quickly. Obviously thats assuming they still stand in the future. Who knows what will happen at the next election?

[Mr Mystery]

It's not the Labour voters of old that he holds appeal with.

It's students. It's the currently disenfranchised who see little point voting when the sole choice is ultimately Tory or Diet Tory.

You know, all those who rarely vote? UKIP can have those too wrapped up in propaganda to tell the very people they're now voting for are the ones most likely to turn on them whilst blaming it on immigration and the EU. Corbyn has an appeal nowhere else in politics.

They've not lost a seat since he came in - so he can't be doing much wrong at all. 68% of Labour voters in the General Election voted Remain - that's nothing to sniff at.

But most of all? I want a PM who will be more than happy to tell Murdoch to sod off. We need that. We need to break the connection between the media and government for the sake of democracy and rational, informed debate.

[Psychosplodge]

They've not had a by-election in a non-"safe" seat though have they? And the Brightside constituency used to poll upto 30k votes under David Blunkett, the current holder barely got 14k.

- - - Updated - - -



They've not lost a seat since he came in - so he can't be doing much wrong at all. 68% of Labour voters in the General Election voted Remain - that's nothing to sniff at.


If that was accurate we wouldn't have the result we got.

[Mr Mystery]

I see no reason for them to lie about it, considering that was info gleaned from the electorate.

If he was really driving away 'loyal voters' then safe seats wouldn't be safe.

We need him in UK politics. He's about as close to an honest politician as you're ever going to find, and history has shown him to have been on the right side every time, even if it took others a while to catch up with him (negotiated peace in Northern Ireland. Apartheid etc)

[Psychosplodge]

Ok Theory advanced on the radio.

Jeremy Corbyn, the most selfish man in parliament.
Spent thirty years as a labour party MP despite taking the whip and consistently voting against the parliamentary party.
If he had the principles people attribute to him why didn't he join a party he agreed with or stand as an independent? Because then he wouldn't get elected and wouldn't get his £70k a year.

....but that's just a theory.

[Mr Mystery]

Nah. That's nonsense. He votes for what he believes in - and I've always felt the Whip was inherently undemocratic, especially when there's a landslide victory and precious little opposition.

But again, the media are desperate to slay him for reasons known (Murdoch) and unknown.

[Psychosplodge]

BBC...
But whatever.

It does make sense when you think about it. But as xkcd said - correlation/causation and all that

[Mr Mystery]

Yet he's been consistently re-elected?

All just attempts to tar him, and by association any kind of rising socialist movement.

Remember - 10,000 activists assembled within 24 hours to support Jeremy Corbyn. He's not going anywhere, and I think he's got as much of a shot at winning the next election as anyone. Except Farage. Who has no chance whatsoever.

[Psychosplodge]

Of course he has. People generally vote for the party not the MP

No they didn't. I'd be surprised if there was 3k.

It'll be whichever tory gets in if the Scottish(are still here and) vote SNP again.

[grimmas]

Safe seats aren't the issue its the marginal ones that do. Also in many areas on the North that are Tory seats the party in second place is UKIP not Labour. UKIP got 3 times as many votes as SNP. Think abou that for a second. They can not be ignored. Also Corbyn is supported by hardliners and the intellectual left it's more that support that is causing be issue people aren't going to vote for him if his major support base is treating them with utter contempt.

Yes they are worse than the Tories (who treat them with indifference) they are actually going out of there way to abuse them (just look are the Guardian and social media). It isn't working they need to be courted by Labour not shamed and brow beaten. Christ UKIP has been doing it and they've got practically the square root of **** all to offer other than a notion of a better life (untruth and manipulation of the facts don't matter people listen to the tone not the words) It's no good asking people to stay with the status quo when they don't believe in it.

Remember I actually think Jeremy Crobyn has comported him self quite well since the Referendum but he need to change his tact or get out if Labour is going to be in with a chance.

[Kirsten]

Corbyn is the only chance Labour has of winning the next election. he won the vote overwhelmingly, and has done well throughout his tenure so far. If he gets replaced, support is going to fall dramatically. Labour has added an enormous number of members since he took over. If they kick him out and put somebody else in, against the will of the electorate who voted for him, then clearly they are not going to get anywhere.

[Psychosplodge]

He won the vote amongst people politically motivated enough to pay to join a party. Not the same as the wider electorate by a long shot

[Mr Mystery]

Yup.

And all those who stood down? Abstained during the vote to foist £12,000,000,000 of cuts on the disabled. Corbyn voted against it.

He's a man of principle, and that I can support.

[Psychosplodge]

He's a clever man without a mortgage :D

[grimmas]

He won an internal vote, based on people who already voted labour he need to appeal to a wider audience without of course alienating current Labour voters. He could do it but he needs to make some strong moves.

[Mr Mystery]

Again, since he became Labour Leader, the number of party members has surged.

That's a positive outlook right there - and to be honest, I can only see the popularity of the Tories plunging in the face of the current debacle.

[Psychosplodge]

*shrugs* we'll see.
I can't vote Labour while my sitting MP is still there(never forgive him for tuition fees), and while Corbyn is setting defence/foreign policy.
There's no real alternatives for me either. It might be the first general election where I don't actually bother.

[Mr Mystery]

Yet Corbyn stands for free University....

Defence/Foreign Policy - no point in us having Nukes, because we're not going to fire them in anger, and if you're not going to do that, all they're for is tit-for-tat genocide, which isn't something I can ever endorse - not only because it's the mass murder of complete innocents, but it's also utterly pointless.

Foreign Policy? Hey, let's not intentionally destabilise entire regions with shonky, possibly illegal wars.

Pretty straight up for me - Corbyn stance most closely matches my own. And again - he's not owned by the media!

[Psychosplodge]

Never say never. If you think Brexit is a reduction in our international presence what do you think giving up the big stick that got us a seat on the Security council would do?
Having them gives us diplomatic clout we wouldn't otherwise have. Even if theres no intention to ever use them.
It's not like they're hydrogen bombs is it?

No but lets try and talk to groups that are fundamentally opposed to the western way of life. Loads of point there, and does nothing but suggest they're legitimate to negotiate with.

[Kirsten]

talking to other people is the only way these problems ever get resolved

nukes have always been, and will always be, morally indefensible.

[Mr Mystery]

Why do we need it? Who exactly are we at war with? Do you really think anyone who would actually trigger a nuclear war would be put off doing so by our stockpile?

It's not those groups you talk to. You talk to more stable regimes.

Consider the difference between Iraq and Afghanistan, and how we're handling the clusterfeth in Syria. I completely disagree with our involvement in bombing. But.....supporting and training those who would oppose IS and the other outright nutters? It's not ideal - but it's a better option. Straight off the bat you have a dialogue with them. It's not guaranteed to work out in the end, but it's better than doing nothing.

At the end of the day, I'm confident Corbyn will see of any Leadership challenge. He has the support of the party, if not the MPs. That happens? I'd expect the 'rebel' MPs to be de-selected. That would allow for Labour to become a changed party. All those Blairites who screwed the younger generations by taking away free Uni? Gone. Replaced - and most likely replaced with those who support Jeremy Corbyn and share his views.

We might, just might, then end up with a Government with the drive to seriously tackle tax evasion and avoidance.

Imagine a Government brave enough to strip back the tax rulebook. The fewer rules, the harder it is to find loopholes.

Imagine a Government brave enough to do just that, with the smarts that perhaps hiring tax lawyers to help write it might be a mistake, on account they just write in new loopholes they know are there, because they made sure they were there.

That is the UK I want to live in.

[Psychosplodge]

Literally just told you why, to keep our seat at the top table of the UN.

It's a nice dream Mystery, but I don't fancy the return of the three day week cause we decided to only build solar farms.

[grimmas]

Again, since he became Labour Leader, the number of party members has surged.

That's a positive outlook right there - and to be honest, I can only see the popularity of the Tories plunging in the face of the current debacle.

Again those people already vote Labour, they need to attract people who are voting elsewhere

[Kirsten]

we need to build solar farms, that is a rather bizarre and meaningless point

[Mr Mystery]

Literally just told you why, to keep our seat at the top table of the UN.

It's a nice dream Mystery, but I don't fancy the return of the three day week cause we decided to only build solar farms.

What do Solar Farms have to do with Nuclear Arms? Not sure I follow you there?

- - - Updated - - -


Again those people already vote Labour, they need to attract people who are voting elsewhere

No. They need to (and very much are) attracting people who traditionally don't vote at all.

To attract support from UKIP or the Tories, you need, to some degree, to ape their policies.

2015? 66.1% turnout.

If Corbyn can attract even a third of that, Labour will be in a far stronger position. Nobody, nobody else gives a fig about the disenfranchised at the moment - it's in their interests to maintain that status quo.

[Psychosplodge]

Nuclear arms are what get us a permanent seat at the UN security council with a veto. As I've said about three times :rolleyes:


They were more to do with why we'd end up with a three day week under Corbyn, lack of leccy :D

[Mr Mystery]

And why do we need to be at the top table of the UN Security Council?

Lack of lecky is scare mongering. And I'd far rather we invested in renewable forms of energy, than built stations reliant on imported fuels - better control over consumer end prices, so a more stable market right there.

Plus, Corbyn is the one Party Leader in step with public opinion about renationalising the railways. Even Das Daily Heil and Express are wanting that.

[Kirsten]

there will be plenty of electricity, renewable sources are the only way to go.

[Mr Mystery]

there will be plenty of electricity, renewable sources are the only way to go.

This.

The more they're invested in, the more efficient they'll become. That's true for any technology. We've got a massive coastline - and we're not using it. We've got large areas of undeveloped wilderness, and the only argument against wind farms? Apparently, they're eyesores (I disagree on that - personally I find the turbines serene and really quite beautiful).

Sure, they may or may not be a danger to birds. But I'm pretty sure coal fired and nuclear have far, far nastier side effects overall.

[Psychosplodge]

Because that's the one that matters on the global stage?

Nuclear is the only way to guarantee a decent longterm plentiful supply. The government should just build the damn stations rather than piss about with the third parties as they are now.

[grimmas]

What do Solar Farms have to do with Nuclear Arms? Not sure I follow you there?

- - - Updated - - -



No. They need to (and very much are) attracting people who traditionally don't vote at all.

To attract support from UKIP or the Tories, you need, to some degree, to ape their policies.

2015? 66.1% turnout.

If Corbyn can attract even a third of that, Labour will be in a far stronger position. Nobody, nobody else gives a fig about the disenfranchised at the moment - it's in their interests to maintain that status quo.

Thats a big IF. Considering the man just campaigned to maintain the Status quo. In a referendum that had a 70%+ turnout and lost.

Splodge and I both vote already have have both said we'd consider a Labour vote very strongly but won't due to a number of things including quite, heavily Jeremy, Corbyn's stance on things. Gambling on people who you claim don't even arrive most of the time seems a bit of a gamble especially at time when things are very much up for grabs.

[Kirsten]

nuclear isn't the only option though, there is no need for it. and the tories are determined to have foreign interests build them, and sell off all of Britain's infrastructure.

[Psychosplodge]

You're never going to attract the tories. You need the floating voter, the angry, and the undecided.

[grimmas]

You're never going to attract the tories. You need the floating voter, the angry, and the undecided.

Yep

The practical voter who goes with what sounds like the best deal for them. Crikey I've voted Green before purely because they were the only party who had policy's that we're going to deal with issues that were going to improve my quality of life (admittedly local)

[Mr Mystery]

And that's who Labour are going after - the disenfranchised. Basically? The Yoof vote.

75% percent of the yoof voted Remain. Couple that with their standing share - and we very much could be seeing Prime Minister Corbyn, because the other parties have either very recently betrayed that bloc (£9k Uni fees....), or aren't bothered about them.

Get them engaged, and politics could be turned on it's head in the UK.

[Psychosplodge]

No they didn't. 65% of the yoof stayed at home cause they couldn't give a ****.

[grimmas]

Also those angry students have always voted, voted labour and soon change their minds once they have jobs, children and mortgages and tax to pay, suddenly "the poor and oppressed" don't seem so important.

[Psychosplodge]

A lot vote green now as well.

[grimmas]

And SNP in Scotland I suspect (not that I blame them bloody good choice for a Scot)

[Psychosplodge]

ffs the new shadow education secretary has resigned. I assume they've been in the job at most three days?

Come on Labour sort yourselves out we need something approaching a credible opposition.

[grimmas]

I think you've joined at the right time Mystery, seems like a job in the shadow cabinet might be up for grabs.

[Al Shut]

The only thing worse than not listening to people is asking for their opinion and then declaring you don't give a **** and do the opposite. Getting rid of Corbyn before he had a chance to screw up an election would be a big mistake. But who knows, looking at the Tories right now Labour might just get away with it but I wouldn't bet on it.


By the way Psychosplodge, the biggest problem with the UN security council is that you can't loose your top place unless you agree to it.

[Psychosplodge]

Interesting.

[odinsgrandson]

If Cameron stayed the Leave campaign would blame him for the negative effects, accusing him of not negotiating hard enough. No way he wants to expose himself to that.

And I don't think he such a master tactician and diplomat that he would do much better than somebody else.

If I'm understanding this, this is his way of saying "You guys are just f...ed and there's nothing me or anyone can do about it."


I mean, I cannot see any way that politicians can come out of this looking like they did the right thing.

But isn't a resignation from office at a time like this akin to a resignation from all politics? Are they euthanizing their political careers so that they don't have to watch them die?

Things can work pretty differently over there, so I don't know if this is the case.

[Psychosplodge]

Cameron was standing down at the end of this term anyway.
He'll either have some lucrative directorship lined up, a seat in the lords possibly, or end up on the speaking circuit.

[grimmas]

He did reportably say "I'm not doing all the hard **** for someone else"

[Psychosplodge]

lmao, well thats one option as well.

[Mr Mystery]

Dude's got a point though.

Boris prepped The Big Red Button, and Cameron has effectively said 'K, off you go then, 'mate'. In your own time'. No doubts to calls of 'gosh! blimey! crikey! Didn't really expect any responsibility from this! Crikey! Wiff-Waff!'

[grimmas]

Boris has withdrawn from the Leadrship race ??????????? Then why bother run the leave campaign

It's down to Gove and May, everyone hates Gove, even I have it on good authority his own mum.. Holy ****. It'll be Theresa May then because it won't be the slimy backstabber (he's done both Cammeron and Boris ) who spent the Leave campaign following Boris around nodding.

[Psychosplodge]

My ickle bro who's heavily into following politics and such was considering putting money on Andrea Leadsom last night. He reckons the tories never back the obvious candidate.

Gove and Hunt are too divisive, and hated among the public at large.

[Mr Mystery]

Yup.

Gove is just a wee chancer, and needs removing from politics entirely.

[grimmas]

Hunt has withdrawn as well but yeah not a popular man.

That's a very reassuringly British response, stick a bet on. I approve.

[Mr Mystery]

Leadsom currently has 11/2 odds.

But I'm not placing a bet. I try to steer clear of potentially addictive stuff!

[Kirsten]

Gove really is a catastrophic little weasel. He hasn't been able to do any of his positions so far. May would be dire though. I think Cameron resigning so quickly pulled the rug out from under Boris

[Psychosplodge]

That's a very reassuringly British response, stick a bet on. I approve.

If you knew how difficult parting him from money was...

- - - Updated - - -


Leadsom currently has 11/2 odds.


I believe they were 12/1 last night.

[Mr Mystery]

If you knew how difficult parting him from money was...

- - - Updated - - -

I believe they were 12/1 last night.


Bit rachelist :p

[Psychosplodge]

Living up to our stereotype? :D

[Mr Mystery]

Nah. I worry I have an addictive personality, so try to avoid any further potential addictions!

[Psychosplodge]

Yeah that's why I don't ebay.

[Mr Mystery]

I kind of hope Gove gets on the ticket, and is then slaughtered in the poll. I can't wait to see his political career go down in flames.

He's a nasty, incompetent little weasel.

[grimmas]

Woho there boyo

We can't go ruling them out for being incompetent we wouldn't have anyone to choose from.

[Mr Mystery]

His look-a-like Pob would be better suited - and less of a puppet to the media, which considering Pob is/was a puppet, is really saying something.

http://anglicanmemes.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/pob02.jpg

[Morgrim]

Britain's position on the Security Council was in large part to their role in the League of Nations that predated the UN. And one of the reasons they've held it so solidly is less their nukes and more that whenever the UK gets involved in a major conflict, the Queen snaps her fingers and the entire Commonwealth falls into line behind them. The Boer War, the Boxer Rebellion, both World Wars, the first Gulf War...

[Psychosplodge]

I just googled it cause I'd always assumed it was the five original nuclear armed nations, and then theres been at least two different reasons on here.
Google suggests its because the "P5" are considered the victors of WWII.
I expected it to be something more than that.

[Al Shut]

The reason they have held it so solidly is that they can veto any reform.

And who would be foolish enough to voluntarily give up such a favourable position without any need...

Forget that I asked. :p

[Psychosplodge]

Wikipedia went on to suggest that countries not invited to join in a more permanent manner are stopping more countries been added to the list.(Germany specifically being opposed by spain and italy)

[Mr Mystery]

And interesting read, irrespective of how you feel about Labour (http://www.thecanary.co/2016/06/30/not-represent-labour-movement-claim-labour-mps/)

[Psychosplodge]

I don't think the majority of corbyn supporters are actual employed people either, but yeah there's no doubt the blarites didn't represent the working class either.

[Mr Mystery]

I'm a signed up, paid up Corbyn supporter, and I have a job. Same as many of my friends.

[Psychosplodge]

You're also closer to the middleclass southern elite that supported blair than the traditional working class labour voter, or are you doing skilled manual office work? :p

[Mr Mystery]

Skilled Manual Office Work.

But I'm in it for the socialism. All joking apart, I've lived my entire life under some form of neo-liberalism - and all I've seen is stuff stripped from the yoof. It's just not good enough.

I don't care if it puts my taxes up - at least then I'll see some kind of societal return on them. Free university benefits everyone equally. Nationalised Rail prevents the naked profiteering which can put prices up so high that it limits opportunities to 'follow the work' - especially if someone has been unemployed and on benefits for a while. In short - I want to actually see my tax money improve things, rather than just prop up an increasingly tenuous status quo. Properly fund our schools, and stop interference from utterly unqualified ministers like Michael Gove. Properly fund our other public services, rather than slowly strangle their budget then claim the only way to fix it is privatisation.

And I'm also hoping for a government that has absolutely no qualms about properly tackling corporate tax dodging. Because I'm sick of the 'scroungers' rhetoric when they point blank refuse to come at the problem from both angles.

[Psychosplodge]

free university benefits everyone
Not if they're sending people for the sake of it to keep them off the jobless figures for three-five years.
We've already seen entry requirements go up for office jobs that would have previously offered on the job training to now "any degree" a job that requires "any degree" doesn't really require a degree. Obviously pay hasn't gone up either so you're doing the same job you could have previously got leaving school with a mountain of debt round your neck at the same time.

[Mr Mystery]

If you're wanting to go to University, you need A-Levels. And to get A-Levels, you need some form of drive - and it's difficult to see anyone not wanting to go through that without progressing to Uni.

But it's removing that mountain of debt that's imperative. It's a restriction we as a country can well afford, both financially and socially, to do without.

[YorkNecromancer]

I'm a signed up, paid up Corbyn supporter, and I have a job. Same as many of my friends.

Same here. I like Corbyn and have a job.

I'll be honest, I've no idea how he's held on as long as he has in the face of the relentless hatred from his own party/the right-wing press. And I can't see him lasting beyond this coup.

Still, that's the majority of Labour MP's, isn't it? Their aspirations go no higher than being Diet Tory.

[Kirsten]

I know five people over here who have signed up to Labour to support him, even though they can't vote in the general elections. He has held on because of the masses of ordinary people who support him

[Mr Mystery]

Yup.

Since this coup started, 60,000 people joined Labour. I really don't see Jeremy Corbyn going anywhere any time soon.

[Psychosplodge]

Keep telling you though 60,000 isn't going to win no elections. If half a million stay home cause he's running things what's 60,000?

http://newsthump.com/2016/07/02/corbynism-recognised-as-britains-fastest-growing-religion/

[Mr Mystery]

You keep telling yourself that.

200,000 following his initial election to Leader. 60,000 since the (pretty much bodged and failed) Blairite coup began.

He's appealing to sections of the electorate that have been roundly ignored by the other parties - and Labour's performance since his election hasn't shown any signs that people have abandoned them because Socialism.

Held every seat, gained Mayors, ultimately won the local council elections.

The media really need to stop with trying to paint him as a failure when he's anything but.

[Psychosplodge]

He's the opposition he's expected to hold every seat. And while they crowed about an increased majority, that was only as a percentage, it was a decrease by numbers.
An opposition should gain hundreds of council seats, they barely held onto what they've got.

He's not a success by any stretch of the imagination.

What would be interesting would be an geographical breakdown of where these new bodies are located. But its all irrelevant anyway because unless the Scots stop voting SNP we all know who we're going to end up with running things right?

[Mr Mystery]

I disagree entirely.

There's a couple of generations worth of voters who since 1997 have only ever been shafted politically - with the latest being the outcome of the referendum - the generation savvy enough to look at what Leave were claiming, and know it was BS.

Those who had free university stripped away, have seen tuition fees only go up up up...two generations that campaigned hard enough to get Lid Dumbs into a coalition, before being, you guessed it, once again utterly shafted by them.

Had Labour bagged the seats that went to the Lib Dumbs, Tories would've lost the 2010 election.

But by all means, keep on writing off the man who is offering what those generations want - an evened out playing field.

SNP may not survive much longer - my folks North Of The Wall seem to be reporting people getting fed up with Sturgeon, and the constant 'we'll go it on our own'. Exactly how that pans out, remains to be seen - but there's every chance a more socialist Labour party can recover their electorate up there.

Corbyn offers something very different. He's not banging on and on about austerity. He's not tackling financial woes by beating up the poor and vulnerable, whilst handing out tax breaks to the rich and powerful. When he says he'll clamp down on tax evasion/avoidance, you know he actually means it.

[Psychosplodge]

Yes had labour bagged those seats they possibly would have won, but in the same way there are people round here that would never consider voting tory, I imagine there will be seats that will have people that would never vote labour.
And when these people get pissed with their MP? They vote LD, UKIP, Green.

I was there, I saw my Labour MP vote to take away my free education. But while he's pissing off the existing voters - and he is, they won't get in.

Interesting about Sturgeon. I know it took the Somme commemorations to shut her up for two minutes.

-post edit-




There's a couple of generations worth of voters who since 1997 have only ever been shafted politically - with the latest being the outcome of the referendum - the generation savvy enough to look at what Leave were claiming, and know it was BS.



It's also easy to disprove the myth that the older population stole the future away from the youth. Among 18- to 24-year-olds, voter turnout was 36 percent according to pollster Sky Data. If anyone, it was the youth who squandered their own future.

[Mr Mystery]

Ahh....but then we have the issue of Tory/Diet Tory.

Are people voting for your Labour MP, on the not entirely unreasonable assumption 'a Tory would be worse?'

This is the thing - Jeremy Corbyn is something new. He's not Diet Tory. The man himself is a pleasingly left wing Socialist - but doesn't have enough of an ego to confuse himself with his party.

Look at why he's not quite. Bunch of MPs voted 'no confidence'. Big whoop. 68% of the Party elected him to the position of Leader. It's quite simply not for the MPs (most of whom are Tories in red ties) to decide who leads. It's the whole Party's choice. Imagine how much more he could've achieved by now had he not been keeping one eye on his back?

He's right not to stand down - not with the mandate he currently commands. If he loses a fair leadership ballot? Fair enough, the Party will have spoken. But I just don't see that happening. He's brought political hope to hundreds of thousands - and that's just those who have officially joined Labour.

We need MPs like him in Parliament, lest all we end up with is varying degrees of Tory thinking across the main parties.

And if the SNP do implode (seems quite possible, no party remains popular forever, and the higher you climb, the harder and faster you tend to fall), a left wing Labour, offering much the same as the SNP (so, free Uni, yeah?) stand to gain more than the Tories.

[Kirsten]

I think Corbyn's mandate will increase with another leadership election, and the traitorous MP will be left looking incredibly stupid.

[Mr Mystery]

Yup.

There is a rising left wing movement in the UK - and that's something we've not had in a long, long time.

Older peeps may quite justifiably go on about the three day week and the idiocy of Unions grown too powerful - but you've got people grown up knowing no protection, where Union is a dirty word, rather than something to help stand up for their rights.

Basically, the way older folk look back on the 'bad old days' of Unions, is pretty much how I look at now. The system should've worked, but greed and outright stupidity broke it. So it's time to try something new.

[Psychosplodge]

Are people voting for your Labour MP, on the not entirely unreasonable assumption 'a Tory would be worse?'


I live in The socialist republic of south Yorkshire They'd vote for a donkey if you put a red rosette on it. But you still have to get more of them out than those voting elsewhere. If traditional voters stay at home, and these "new" voters don't materialise it could go horribly wrong.

[grimmas]

I'm not so sure at Corbyn's party support being translatable into General election success we know from this thread alone that some of those 60,000 extra members aren't Britsh voters so aren't going to worth anything.

Also University fees were brought in by a Labour Government, it was a Tory plan but Labour still went ahead with it. Of course the system was well f**ked by then with the University's themselves taking the piss. I was the last year of students to have tuition fees paid as a right (20yrs ago) and one university offered me a place if I got 1 D grade at A Level (I didn't go there it was obviously crap and I got much better grades than that). Also the most recent hike was done at the request of the Unis they were told less students or higher fees, guess which they chose?

[Kirsten]

I live in The socialist republic of south Yorkshire

when I move to north Yorkshire is there going to be some sort of north/south issue?

[Psychosplodge]

You must be loaded :p

Apart from you moving to the tory northern heartlands I don't see one. The North/South divide is about watford gap isn't it? and we all pretend the midlands don't exist right?

[Mr Mystery]

SINGING!

Ding-dong, Farage has gone!

He's finally quit as UKIP leader.

With any luck, that'll help them shake off the racist over and undertones. And ideally, might see them vanish entirely as a political entity.

[Kirsten]

the question is will he resign for more than a couple of days this time?

the party will get more racist with him gone, and hopefully dwindle to obscurity.

Farage I suspect will join the Tories to try and stick his oar in to Brexit.

[Psychosplodge]

Surprised it took as long as that. I half expected it the Monday after.

[Mr Mystery]

the question is will he resign for more than a couple of days this time?

the party will get more racist with him gone, and hopefully dwindle to obscurity.

Farage I suspect will join the Tories to try and stick his oar in to Brexit.

I dunno if they will get more racist though.

He faced plenty of criticism within the party for hijacking their anti-Europe stance and driving it toward jingoism and nationalism - certainly their single MP, Douglas 'Billy-No-Mates' Carswell seems happy Farage has gone.

I really, really hope this signals the beginning of the end of racism being given an even vaguely credible face and voice in UK politics.

[Kirsten]

yeah but UKIP is full of racists with or without Farage, and many people saw him as the acceptable charismatic face. without him there apologising for everything all the time, they will struggle.

[Mr Mystery]

Hopefully. We don't need that in politics.

[Kirsten]

well people hardly know any other UKIP member, I suspect they will dwindle in to obscurity.

[grimmas]

Leadsom has alluded to a Farage roll in the Tory party.

[Mr Mystery]

Oh FFS.

Just.....stop. He's a nasty piece of work. We don't need him in UK politics at all.