That's a sad view although I do respect you for obviously going that extra mile for your family and friends. I am totally against Corbyn's terrible idea of scrapping the benefit cap as it can never be right that someone who chooses to be out of work is paid more than someone earns after getting off their arse to get a job or where people have an endless number of kids only for the tax payer to fund their lifestyle. BUT where there is a genuine need for help our taxes should be there to help them.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
You are correct, there is litterally nothing a socialist government of any description could do to get me to vote for them.
Ive always been a "working man" , its a cliche, but i started with nothing, recieved nothing from the state, and everything ive got ive done off my own back, over years of back breaking toil.
Do i feck want some cnut like Corbyn telling me i have to give half of it back to the fecking state.
Sounds like you're a good man, but not everyone has the support network in place that your family or friends had, hence there is a need to help strangers for the good of the country.
Yes, and i dont object to paying a reasonable amount of tax to support thise people who are too old or ill to work.
I dont mind paying a reasonable amount of tax to support the NHS and the police etc.
What i object to, like yourself, is people perfectly fit to work or who are working being given benefits to "raise their standard of living".
Being poor and not having a lot of money is tough i agree, but thats your problem to deal with.
Got 4 kids you cant feed because hubby cleans floors for a living? Thats your choice so you have to make it work, not me.
Such as migrants or those with an interest in the war in Syria/Iraq? One of the most important issues at the present time and Corbyn didn't go near it.
His form of delivery was gentler in tone, yes, but ultimately these were questions put forward by the choir and chosen by a few staffers.
I think Adebesi made some good points with this post yesterday. Corbyn's been acclaimed as this breath of fresh air, a new day, but where's the actual vision?
I can see policies that don't stand up to scrutiny though, and commitments that he'll probably have to renege upon or risk further harm to the party.
Last edited:
I think his only hope is probably mobilising anti-establishment feeling and getting people out to vote who usually wouldnt. I think you are right that he isnt going to win over traditional working class folk worried about immigrants, and for me he has even less chance with centre voters - they may not like what the Tories are doing but unless there is a viable third alternative, I think they will feel safer with the devil they know. So his base is actual socialists, and I dont think there are many of them around these days, and protest votes.
But its still early days I guess, if he is still around to fight an election a lot of water will have passed under the bridge by then.
I haven't been following this thread so forgive me if it's already been posted but wtf
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Have you ever used the NHS? Your family perhaps? Have you or your kids attended a state school? Any friends or family receive counselling?
If so you didn't start with nothing. The fact that you're taking it for granted is perhaps a testament to how much we've all relied on it, but the fact is you have received state support in some way or another.
He had 6 questions. Pretty sure he'll spend plenty of time taking his case on immigration to the tories over the next 5 years. How do you know he didn't receive far more questions about the housing crisis than immigration? He did read out how many of thousands asked about each subject... Given that many must have spent years wanting to hold this government, and previous, accountable for that and that immigration is relatively new on the agenda (in it's current theme, at least) I wouldn't be surprised if he simply used the most commonly asked questions as opposed to your supposition that he had 'an agenda'.
Oh boy have we talked about that
I whipped out some early day motions and everything. But yeah, not ideal. He had another face-palm one requesting people watch Russia Today for balanced news. Just think they should delete all the old ones sharpish really.You do realize someone has to do those jobs? Ultimately there are a lot of people doing essential jobs which you or I may not want to do and they should be allowed a decent life.
Just because you've had a really shit time you shouldn't condemn the rest of the world to the same fate.
How much do you think a Corbyn government will really cost you? The redistribution of wealth won't be burdened by people earning under 40k a year.
If you don't mind me asking, have you ever voted or been tempted to vote Labour, or have you been consistently Conservative?
Russia Today is obviously propaganda, although I agree that it could potentially act as a balance to western propaganda which often goes unquestioned.Oh boy have we talked about that
Your ignorance is astounding, to the point of actually being offensive. As others have pointed out, you need a long, hard think about the health service you've almost definitely benefitted from, and state education. And that's only the tip of the iceberg. It's staggering that people continue to take public services for granted, until they or their family need them.
'Some cnut like Corbyn' doesn't want to take money from you, probably. I worked for 5 years in state education and now work in private education. You should see how 'the other half' live, and compare it to what the state is able to offer the rest. There's a desperate imbalance, and I'm absolutely with those who support Corbyn for being brave enough to stand up to it.
Can I find it in the old thread?Oh boy have we talked about that
Page one of this one. We didn't go that in depth in fairness, but yeah, he seems to be a believer.
I think his point was that it's our responsibility to have the size of family we can afford and not expect everyone else to fund it.
In fairness to him did he also not vote against alternative health practitioners being able to use the title "Doctor". So maybe he has more balanced view than just "homeopathy is good". Not that I think it deserves any funding.
Yes i understand that.
Someone has to do those jobs (ive done those jobs, ive made pastic bags for £2.75 an hour, ive worked nights at tescos for £3.50 an hour, ive worked in a slaughter house for a whole £4.50 an hour- all within the last 20 years).
It sucked, i worked my way out of it.
I have NO qualifications, no head start, no money behind me and i begrudge giving what i have worked for away.
I've never voted labour no. I have not voted in two general elections in the past either as nobody was worthy of it.
Why are you so sure he wants more money from you? I think his targets are corporate tax and people above a certain income threshold.
Bingo.
I dont recall objecting to paying for the health service or schools.
Can you quote those posts for me please?
Then on what grounds are you calling Corbyn a 'cnut' and objecting to him so loudly then?
this is why the conservatives peddle what they peddle, through fear, essentially; they want the middle classes to be selfish, to 'aspire' to be more rich (whilst generally being unable to do so), to hold desperately onto what they do have, even though, exactly, they wouldn't be affected by the left's economic policy. in the meantime they protect big business and the financially elite, of which they are a part of.
He's even downplaying the latter of those two groups though clearly he would raise income tax for high earners. When I have heard him he always wants to steer the conversation to taxing large multinationals, the problem is this is easier said than done. If he can find a creative way to do it without basically driving business away from the UK then fair play to him.
I believe Greece is actually trying to do the same thing, and the result is businesses are moving to Bulgaria and Cyprus where corporate tax rates are much lower.
This is very true.
With respect if thats the sort of money that you were earning you would be significantly better off under a socialist government than a conservative one.
Why does it follow that because you had a hard time everyone else should? By that logic we'd not have healthcare, schools etc. because someone would be saying 'Well we never had schools when I was a lad so why should these young'uns have them?'.
Also, just because you've made it out of the low wage cycle doesn't mean everyone can. It doesn't at all take away from your achievements, but the fact is there are millions of shit pay jobs and substantially fewer medium and high pay jobs. Regardless of how much some low-paid workers may deserve a promotion or a better job, there aren't enough. Millions of people are stuck on shit wages with no option of career advancement regardless of how hard they work, and these people are the sort of people Corbyn's policies will help. They're also exactly the sort of people who Cameron's policies are driving deeper into poverty.
Because it doesnt just come from there, it never does, we all end up paying.
No thats not what ive said.
These debates always go much better when you argue against whats actually being said rather than stuff that isnt.
I havent argued against reasonable funding of public services, I have stated that being poor sucks, i understand what its like to be poor from experience of being poor and despite that experience i STILL object to paying increased taxes to raise the standard of living of low paid workers, people with lots of kids and people who can work but choose not to.
Ive also not objected to supporting the ill and infirm, but if it makes the argument easier for you to get to grips with then feck it, you can believe all i want to do is round up all the cripples, old people and peasants and set fire to them for the sake of the argument.
That was under a labour government, three of those jobs were also more than the NMW at the time, sorry just checked, the NMW started in 1999 so yes, killing chickens in 1999 was more than minimum wage.
I had to sit on a waiting list for that job.
My son was born in 1997 and those were the jobs i had between then and when I started driving a van in 2001.
Last edited:
I forget where it is but there's some riveting stuff about auras amongst it, as a bonus.
@Ducklegs what is your view on the rapidly increasing income inequality between the top 0.1% and the bottom 50% (or the bottom 99% for that matter). I'm not referring to overall wealth here but yearly income.
Do you think the government should do anything about it? Is the "living wage" enough? I'm on the side that thinks they should do more for what it's worth.
Do you think the government should do anything about it? Is the "living wage" enough? I'm on the side that thinks they should do more for what it's worth.
So he tossed a highly pressing issue to one side for the sake of PR? How very dignified of dear Jeremy.
Hundreds of billions in increased spending, and you think he'll restrict the cost to the above two groups in society? Corbyn should be out there selling cars, not politics.
Come off it Nick this is a very poor criticism.
Huh? You've completely misread my response to you.
Maybe you need to be 'out there' reading up on stuff before you respond to it. Go read up on Corbyn's policies for creating increase means for public spending. Sorry, I really can't be arsed to argue with someone so ill-informed.
Besides anything Cameron was pressed on the migrant issue in last week's PMQs.