Re: The Blair legacy : Thu Jun 06, 2013 2:04 pm  

Dally wrote:

To avoid setting up another thread, what do we all think of today's post-Blair Labour Party? The last few days have been a revelation. First we had Ed Balls with his amazingly pathetic ideas to solve the nation's crisis, namely cut winter fuel payments to a few well-off pensioners. Wow, that'll make all the difference. Then there was his vague "policy for growth" and "jobs for our young people". It's laughable. Although is it? If they take payments away from better off pensioners that will pave the way for the better off to argue against contributing as much in future, to everyone else's detriment. If such a policy were to be introducued the sensible (not a Labour strong point) way would be to continue to make payments but subject them to tax (to the extent they are not already) and the better off will then pay back a higher percentage without feeling unfairly treated. There would be savings in administrative costs too (burden shifted to the better off pensions via self-assessment).

Now we have the second Ed (the unelectable leader himself) saying he'll cap benefits, which as Paxo said presumably means that when the cap is reached no one gets any more money?

I have to ask myself whether, after the Militant Tendency infilitrated Labour in the '70s the Tory elite have now infiltrated Labour? We saw it with tuition fees - Labour (the self-professed "people's party" *) could get away with introducing them which paved the way for the Tories to hike them up. Now Labour is talking about divisively getting rid of universal benefits, of capping welfare, not ring-fencing NHS expenditure (after started privatising things when in office), etc. Things the Tories haven't had the nerve to do but would love to. In short, Labour are paving the way for the complete dismantling of everything their party ever did or created that was good.

Even if you were not to take my cynical view, surely Labour's leadership is showing the paucity of its thought and ambition? Firstly, they rail against the Tories policies in some of these areas then because opinion polls show people overwhelming in favour (at least conceptually - until the penny drops at their own feet) Tory policy they change to be "tougher" than the Tories. They are not leaders, they are followers completely out of touch with "the people" (in the majority sense). Not only that, they are still followers of an outdated Tory ideology. Why can't they frame a vision of the UK that is different, uplifting, credible and positive? Why are they in politics at all? Certainly not to "make a difference" to anyone other than themselves.

They are wet, out of touch and third rate. The Tories are the same, but second rate in that they at least lead the way in the inept ideology that manifest itself as modern British politics.


(*) But which "people"? This is the question that I've been asking for years - who does Labour represent?

This has been alluded to in previous threads. You are basically voting for government A or government B. They are all members of the same club, they are all only in it to get an easy wage acting like school children in the playground, yet we, the public, believe that one is more worthy of our vote than the other because this is how we are supposed to think. If you don't like government A or B, you can vote for filler party 1, 2, 3, etc to make you think like you have a voice and are actually making a difference.

The model of the politics of the government is produced to create as many white collar, middle man jobs as possible forming an illusion that the phrase 'middle Britain' belongs to everyone. Everyone can afford a house in the suburbs with nice neighbours that they don't talk to, has two cars that they use to take their kids to school down the road and has all the latest technology so they don't have to leave their sofas to socialise. 'Middle Britain' bliss.

The only things we can be bothered to raise our voices about are sensational news stories inflated out of proportion, with sides usually formed by fantastical religion based ideas formed centuries ago.

Re: The Blair legacy : Fri Jun 07, 2013 6:54 pm  

Dally wrote:

To avoid setting up another thread, what do we all think of today's post-Blair Labour Party? The last few days have been a revelation. First we had Ed Balls with his amazingly pathetic ideas to solve the nation's crisis, namely cut winter fuel payments to a few well-off pensioners. Wow, that'll make all the difference. Then there was his vague "policy for growth" and "jobs for our young people". It's laughable. Although is it? If they take payments away from better off pensioners that will pave the way for the better off to argue against contributing as much in future, to everyone else's detriment. If such a policy were to be introducued the sensible (not a Labour strong point) way would be to continue to make payments but subject them to tax (to the extent they are not already) and the better off will then pay back a higher percentage without feeling unfairly treated. There would be savings in administrative costs too (burden shifted to the better off pensions via self-assessment).

Now we have the second Ed (the unelectable leader himself) saying he'll cap benefits, which as Paxo said presumably means that when the cap is reached no one gets any more money?

I have to ask myself whether, after the Militant Tendency infilitrated Labour in the '70s the Tory elite have now infiltrated Labour? We saw it with tuition fees - Labour (the self-professed "people's party" *) could get away with introducing them which paved the way for the Tories to hike them up. Now Labour is talking about divisively getting rid of universal benefits, of capping welfare, not ring-fencing NHS expenditure (after started privatising things when in office), etc. Things the Tories haven't had the nerve to do but would love to. In short, Labour are paving the way for the complete dismantling of everything their party ever did or created that was good.

Even if you were not to take my cynical view, surely Labour's leadership is showing the paucity of its thought and ambition? Firstly, they rail against the Tories policies in some of these areas then because opinion polls show people overwhelming in favour (at least conceptually - until the penny drops at their own feet) Tory policy they change to be "tougher" than the Tories. They are not leaders, they are followers completely out of touch with "the people" (in the majority sense). Not only that, they are still followers of an outdated Tory ideology. Why can't they frame a vision of the UK that is different, uplifting, credible and positive? Why are they in politics at all? Certainly not to "make a difference" to anyone other than themselves.

They are wet, out of touch and third rate. The Tories are the same, but second rate in that they at least lead the way in the inept ideology that manifest itself as modern British politics.


(*) But which "people"? This is the question that I've been asking for years - who does Labour represent?

The silence is deafening re this Milliband 'benefits cap' idea.

Re: The Blair legacy : Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:17 pm  

Ajw71 wrote:

The silence is deafening re this Milliband 'benefits cap' idea.

Are you still in mourning numpty?

Re: The Blair legacy : Sat Jun 08, 2013 6:27 am  

Ajw71 wrote:

The silence is deafening re this Milliband 'benefits cap' idea.

Try looking on a more relevant thread, soft cock. You could equally complain that there's no mention of Game of Thrones on the food & drink thread

Re: The Blair legacy : Sat Jun 08, 2013 7:49 am  

Wow two instances of abuse. I wonder if Mintball will warn posters in question as I was a few weeks ago.

Re: The Blair legacy : Sat Jun 08, 2013 8:11 am  

Ajw71 wrote:

Wow two instances of abuse. I wonder if Mintball will warn posters in question as I was a few weeks ago.

If you consider them to be abuse, you obviously need to get out more

Re: The Blair legacy : Sat Jun 08, 2013 8:19 am  

cod'ead wrote:

If you consider them to be abuse, you obviously need to get out more

Point me in the direction of the debate on Labour's proposed benefits cap please.

Re: The Blair legacy : Sat Jun 08, 2013 10:59 am  

Ajw71 wrote: Wow two instances of abuse. I wonder if Mintball will warn posters in question as I was a few weeks ago. You were warned for persistent trolling and a refusal to add anything to debate. And if you bother to look at various threads, you will see quite clear condemnation of the current Labour positions from a number of people on this forum, suggesting that you are simply trolling again. But since you're struggling, you'll find the beginning of at least one strand of criticism here.

Ajw71 wrote: Wow two instances of abuse. I wonder if Mintball will warn posters in question as I was a few weeks ago. You were warned for persistent trolling and a refusal to add anything to debate. And if you bother to look at various threads, you will see quite clear condemnation of the current Labour positions from a number of people on this forum, suggesting that you are simply trolling again. But since you're struggling, you'll find the beginning of at least one strand of criticism here.

Re: The Blair legacy : Sat Jun 08, 2013 11:01 am  

Ajw71 wrote:

Point me in the direction of the debate on Labour's proposed benefits cap please.

This isn't a daily newspaper - start one if you want some debate, just do us all a favour and don't get yourself in a foot-stomping strop when some others don't follow your line of argument though - difference of opinion is what debate is all about and opinion that is different to yours is there for balance and not instant dismissal as "opposition" or "left" or "right" despite how you have been conditioned to believe.

Re: The Blair legacy : Sat Jun 08, 2013 11:12 am  

Mintball wrote: You were warned for persistent trolling and a refusal to add anything to debate. And if you bother to look at various threads, you will see quite clear condemnation of the current Labour positions from a number of people on this forum, suggesting that you are simply trolling again. But since you're struggling, you'll find the beginning of at least one strand of criticism here. Persistent trolling. No just offering my opinion. If you don't agree fine but this is different from trolling. I have looked at the threads and cannot see any condemnation of the proposed benefits cap. Perhaps you could point me in the right direction? Perhaps you could explain how someone who asks about me being in mourning, calling me a numpty and a cock adds anything to debate whilst you are at it?

Mintball wrote: You were warned for persistent trolling and a refusal to add anything to debate. And if you bother to look at various threads, you will see quite clear condemnation of the current Labour positions from a number of people on this forum, suggesting that you are simply trolling again. But since you're struggling, you'll find the beginning of at least one strand of criticism here. Persistent trolling. No just offering my opinion. If you don't agree fine but this is different from trolling. I have looked at the threads and cannot see any condemnation of the proposed benefits cap. Perhaps you could point me in the right direction? Perhaps you could explain how someone who asks about me being in mourning, calling me a numpty and a cock adds anything to debate whilst you are at it?