What is the point of Labour ?

[Freedom Farter]

This has probably been brought up before in this thread but I just came across it now. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2218872/Gary-McKinnon-extradition-US-outrage-hacker-wont-American-authorities.html

 

The Tory home secretary at the time had to step in to stop a maniacal Starmer getting his way.

Edited April 11 by Freedom Farter

[doulikefish]

Raynor getting investigated by the Electoral Commission 

[AndyM]

23 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

I can't see her feed as she blocked me for the temerity of questioning the veracity of one of her posts.

An absolute illiterate who doesn't have an original thought in the vacuum between her ears.

She's an absolute numpty and a complete fraud. Claiming she got lost finding a town with one road running through it . 

I also managed to upset ex school friends who alarmingly seem to revere her when I pointed out that she was full of shite.

[Freedom Farter]

Are we sure that Effie Deans account is a she? It links to a blog which I looked at now and its a very suspicious background of Cambridge University PhDs and fancy global travel. If you were creating a profile to match a stupid person's idea of what a clever person is, you'd create that one. Regardless, we'll go with she/her.

She explains in her latest blog entry that she's happy the Tories are facing a rout in the upcoming election because it'll snuff out the remaining one nation conservative strand in the party, leaving only the Thatcherites. She thinks Thatcherite economics are optimum. She's also happy Labour are going to win with Blairism because she thinks Blairism is the most leftwards the Overton window should ever be allowed to move. 

Followers of hers should stop and think on that. A reminder of what Blairism was:

Only two months into his reign, Blair began the privatisation of the NHS, something his Tory forerunners hadn't managed. Blair could sneak that in early because Labour voters were too busy basking in the glow of Tory defeat to notice. Starmer could do similar, hopefully not but we'll see.

I'm interested in how Wilma Brown got sucked into the Effie Deans orbit. A trade unionist and NHS nurse loving the tweets of a Thatcherite. I mentioned in a previous comment that many of the accusations against Yousaf by the Effie Deans account were also made against Corbyn, something Wilma Brown failed to notice. When being anti-SNP takes over all other considerations for these folk, it leads them to a very self-defeating place. They should realise that Effie Deans and those other accounts are anti-SNP, sure, but they're also anti-many-of-the-things-you-probably-like. Such as public services. Effie Deans also in that blog entry states her desire to see Holyrood abolished. Well it was Holyrood that protected us from the worst of Tory austerity in the 2010s. You can even accept this one while keeping your anti-SNP stance intact because I assume Scottish Labour would've adequately done that job too had they instead been in power at Holyrood.

There's a degree of pick n' mix to politics. You can to some extent support the NHS but secretly enjoy reading the tweets of Effie Deans ripping into the trans, the Muslims, and the immigrants. That only goes so far, though, as politics is ultimately all interconnected. If Wilma Brown is representative of many Effie Deans fans then those folk are going to get an unexpected boot to the face when Effie Deans' ilk get the power to cut their public services.

[BFTD]

3 hours ago, Freedom Farter said:

Are we sure that Effie Deans account is a she? It links to a blog which I looked at now and its a very suspicious background of Cambridge University PhDs and fancy global travel. If you were creating a profile to match a stupid person's idea of what a clever person is, you'd create that one. Regardless, we'll go with she/her.

She explains in her latest blog entry that she's happy the Tories are facing a rout in the upcoming election because it'll snuff out the remaining one nation conservative strand in the party, leaving only the Thatcherites. She thinks Thatcherite economics are optimum. She's also happy Labour are going to win with Blairism because she thinks Blairism is the most leftwards the Overton window should ever be allowed to move. 

Followers of hers should stop and think on that. A reminder of what Blairism was:

Only two months into his reign, Blair began the privatisation of the NHS, something his Tory forerunners hadn't managed. Blair could sneak that in early because Labour voters were too busy basking in the glow of Tory defeat to notice. Starmer could do similar, hopefully not but we'll see.

I'm interested in how Wilma Brown got sucked into the Effie Deans orbit. A trade unionist and NHS nurse loving the tweets of a Thatcherite. I mentioned in a previous comment that many of the accusations against Yousaf by the Effie Deans account were also made against Corbyn, something Wilma Brown failed to notice. When being anti-SNP takes over all other considerations for these folk, it leads them to a very self-defeating place. They should realise that Effie Deans and those other accounts are anti-SNP, sure, but they're also anti-many-of-the-things-you-probably-like. Such as public services. Effie Deans also in that blog entry states her desire to see Holyrood abolished. Well it was Holyrood that protected us from the worst of Tory austerity in the 2010s. You can even accept this one while keeping your anti-SNP stance intact because I assume Scottish Labour would've adequately done that job too had they instead been in power at Holyrood.

There's a degree of pick n' mix to politics. You can to some extent support the NHS but secretly enjoy reading the tweets of Effie Deans ripping into the trans, the Muslims, and the immigrants. That only goes so far, though, as politics is ultimately all interconnected. If Wilma Brown is representative of many Effie Deans fans then those folk are going to get an unexpected boot to the face when Effie Deans' ilk get the power to cut their public services.

To their supporters, the actions of fascists will always, always, always be the fault of THEM.

There are still plenty of folk to this day who claim the Jews, homosexuals, lefties, Slavs, disabled, and all the other persecuted groups were at least partially to blame for being murdered in death camps by the Nazis. For some people, the only important thing is to have someone telling them they're better, smarter, more important than experience has taught them that they are.

[Theroadlesstravelled]

8 hours ago, Freedom Farter said:

Are we sure that Effie Deans account is a she? It links to a blog which I looked at now and its a very suspicious background of Cambridge University PhDs and fancy global travel. If you were creating a profile to match a stupid person's idea of what a clever person is, you'd create that one. Regardless, we'll go with she/her.

She explains in her latest blog entry that she's happy the Tories are facing a rout in the upcoming election because it'll snuff out the remaining one nation conservative strand in the party, leaving only the Thatcherites. She thinks Thatcherite economics are optimum. She's also happy Labour are going to win with Blairism because she thinks Blairism is the most leftwards the Overton window should ever be allowed to move. 

Followers of hers should stop and think on that. A reminder of what Blairism was:

Only two months into his reign, Blair began the privatisation of the NHS, something his Tory forerunners hadn't managed. Blair could sneak that in early because Labour voters were too busy basking in the glow of Tory defeat to notice. Starmer could do similar, hopefully not but we'll see.

I'm interested in how Wilma Brown got sucked into the Effie Deans orbit. A trade unionist and NHS nurse loving the tweets of a Thatcherite. I mentioned in a previous comment that many of the accusations against Yousaf by the Effie Deans account were also made against Corbyn, something Wilma Brown failed to notice. When being anti-SNP takes over all other considerations for these folk, it leads them to a very self-defeating place. They should realise that Effie Deans and those other accounts are anti-SNP, sure, but they're also anti-many-of-the-things-you-probably-like. Such as public services. Effie Deans also in that blog entry states her desire to see Holyrood abolished. Well it was Holyrood that protected us from the worst of Tory austerity in the 2010s. You can even accept this one while keeping your anti-SNP stance intact because I assume Scottish Labour would've adequately done that job too had they instead been in power at Holyrood.

There's a degree of pick n' mix to politics. You can to some extent support the NHS but secretly enjoy reading the tweets of Effie Deans ripping into the trans, the Muslims, and the immigrants. That only goes so far, though, as politics is ultimately all interconnected. If Wilma Brown is representative of many Effie Deans fans then those folk are going to get an unexpected boot to the face when Effie Deans' ilk get the power to cut their public services.

Is Effie Deans a woman?

"I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK?"

[scottsdad]

15 hours ago, Freedom Farter said:

Are we sure that Effie Deans account is a she? It links to a blog which I looked at now and its a very suspicious background of Cambridge University PhDs and fancy global travel. If you were creating a profile to match a stupid person's idea of what a clever person is, you'd create that one. Regardless, we'll go with she/her.

She explains in her latest blog entry that she's happy the Tories are facing a rout in the upcoming election because it'll snuff out the remaining one nation conservative strand in the party, leaving only the Thatcherites. She thinks Thatcherite economics are optimum. She's also happy Labour are going to win with Blairism because she thinks Blairism is the most leftwards the Overton window should ever be allowed to move. 

Followers of hers should stop and think on that. A reminder of what Blairism was:

Only two months into his reign, Blair began the privatisation of the NHS, something his Tory forerunners hadn't managed. Blair could sneak that in early because Labour voters were too busy basking in the glow of Tory defeat to notice. Starmer could do similar, hopefully not but we'll see.

I'm interested in how Wilma Brown got sucked into the Effie Deans orbit. A trade unionist and NHS nurse loving the tweets of a Thatcherite. I mentioned in a previous comment that many of the accusations against Yousaf by the Effie Deans account were also made against Corbyn, something Wilma Brown failed to notice. When being anti-SNP takes over all other considerations for these folk, it leads them to a very self-defeating place. They should realise that Effie Deans and those other accounts are anti-SNP, sure, but they're also anti-many-of-the-things-you-probably-like. Such as public services. Effie Deans also in that blog entry states her desire to see Holyrood abolished. Well it was Holyrood that protected us from the worst of Tory austerity in the 2010s. You can even accept this one while keeping your anti-SNP stance intact because I assume Scottish Labour would've adequately done that job too had they instead been in power at Holyrood.

There's a degree of pick n' mix to politics. You can to some extent support the NHS but secretly enjoy reading the tweets of Effie Deans ripping into the trans, the Muslims, and the immigrants. That only goes so far, though, as politics is ultimately all interconnected. If Wilma Brown is representative of many Effie Deans fans then those folk are going to get an unexpected boot to the face when Effie Deans' ilk get the power to cut their public services.

PFI/PPP isn't privatisation.

It is a form of contract where a private consortium will design, build and manage a building (school or hospital). The government pays no big capital costs up front but rather pays a fixed cost over, say, 25 years.

Labour coming into power in the 90s saw that they needed a huge building programme, as the tories had run everything down. The capital cost to build everything that was needed was high, so they went down the PFI route. Hey presto, loads of shiny new buildings.

The problems with PFI contracts arrived about 10 years later. They had signed so many, that by the late 2000s the taxpayer was paying huge sums to these contracts. Other issues came up also: there are various PFI types (BOO, BOOT, etc) and folk signing a contract in, say, 1999 weren't too fussed about what would happen 25 years later. So when the PFI contracts end, some buildings become government property, but others stay with private companies meaning new negotiations, or buying a now-oldish building.

Also, there isn't much flexibility in them. A PFI school in Newcastle closed in 2010 or thereabouts due to lack of pupils, but the council must keep paying for the upkeep of an empty school. If changes to the building are needed (as will often happen) then this is hugely difficult and expensive. 

In the UK we no longer use PFI but these are still very common for infrastructure projects (civil engineering and power plants) across the world.

[sophia]

11 hours ago, scottsdad said:

PFI/PPP isn't privatisation.

It is a form of contract where a private consortium will design, build and manage a building (school or hospital). The government pays no big capital costs up front but rather pays a fixed cost over, say, 25 years.

Labour coming into power in the 90s saw that they needed a huge building programme, as the tories had run everything down. The capital cost to build everything that was needed was high, so they went down the PFI route. Hey presto, loads of shiny new buildings.

The problems with PFI contracts arrived about 10 years later. They had signed so many, that by the late 2000s the taxpayer was paying huge sums to these contracts. Other issues came up also: there are various PFI types (BOO, BOOT, etc) and folk signing a contract in, say, 1999 weren't too fussed about what would happen 25 years later. So when the PFI contracts end, some buildings become government property, but others stay with private companies meaning new negotiations, or buying a now-oldish building.

Also, there isn't much flexibility in them. A PFI school in Newcastle closed in 2010 or thereabouts due to lack of pupils, but the council must keep paying for the upkeep of an empty school. If changes to the building are needed (as will often happen) then this is hugely difficult and expensive. 

In the UK we no longer use PFI but these are still very common for infrastructure projects (civil engineering and power plants) across the world.

Facilities management is a scam of an industry serving idiot entities who have no appreciation of risk, whose middle managers have no incentive to do anything other than dole out contracts to chancer companies that have diversified from old rope. 

[scottsdad]

6 minutes ago, sophia said:

Facilities management is a scam of an industry serving idiot entities who have no appreciation of risk, whose middle managers have no incentive to do anything other than dole out contracts to chancer companies that have diversified from old rope. 

So...nothing original to say? Just reworked old tropes you read on Twitter from someone even more clueless than you?

Standard Sophia.

[sophia]

3 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

So...nothing original to say? Just reworked old tropes you read on Twitter from someone even more clueless than you?

Standard Sophia.

Just my experience of shysters but if it's a raw nerve I apologise 

[scottsdad]

2 minutes ago, sophia said:

Just my experience of shysters but if it's a raw nerve I apologise 

Obvious and wilful ignorance is always a raw nerve.

[tamthebam]

13 hours ago, scottsdad said:

PFI/PPP isn't privatisation.

It is a form of contract where a private consortium will design, build and manage a building (school or hospital). The government pays no big capital costs up front but rather pays a fixed cost over, say, 25 years.

Labour coming into power in the 90s saw that they needed a huge building programme, as the tories had run everything down. The capital cost to build everything that was needed was high, so they went down the PFI route. Hey presto, loads of shiny new buildings.

The problems with PFI contracts arrived about 10 years later. They had signed so many, that by the late 2000s the taxpayer was paying huge sums to these contracts. Other issues came up also: there are various PFI types (BOO, BOOT, etc) and folk signing a contract in, say, 1999 weren't too fussed about what would happen 25 years later. So when the PFI contracts end, some buildings become government property, but others stay with private companies meaning new negotiations, or buying a now-oldish building.

Also, there isn't much flexibility in them. A PFI school in Newcastle closed in 2010 or thereabouts due to lack of pupils, but the council must keep paying for the upkeep of an empty school. If changes to the building are needed (as will often happen) then this is hugely difficult and expensive. 

In the UK we no longer use PFI but these are still very common for infrastructure projects (civil engineering and power plants) across the world.

PFI was thought up by some of the Conservative right wing (possibly John Redwood although I can't remember) in the early 1990s. The Major Government didn't take it up though (possibly Chancellor Fat Ken decided it was not worth the candle) 

The idea was revived by Blair and Brown and New Labour but the actual costs of PFI were kept off the balance books- Private Eye and others did reporting on what a bloody rip off PFI was. 

It amuses me sometimes to hear politicians go on about "crumbling schools" as it makes me wonder how many of those crumbling schools were jerry built by cowboys under PF a mere 25 years ago at 3 times the cost. 

[btb]

Quote

_{Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UK}

_.The prime minister declined the European Commission’s surprise proposal of a youth mobility scheme for people aged between 18 and 30 on Friday, after Labour knocked back the suggestion on Thursday night, while noting that it would “seek to improve the UK’s working relationship with the EU within our red lines”.

No surprise in Sunak running scare of his rightwingers, but I found it a bit surprising that Labour knocked it back first kinda suggesting that their red lines will still be geared at not offending the red wall post GE.

In fact knowing the GE is already lost, if Sunak had balls and a sense of humour (Yeah, OK), he missed a chance to embarrass Labour with a demographic in which they're well ahead.

[Cheese]

They chose the wrong Starmer, imagine what this man could do as PM.

[Granny Danger]

4 hours ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

They chose the wrong Starmer, imagine what this man could do as PM.

If that guy was PM lots more folk would end up fucked.

 

 

So no difference really…

[DA Baracus]

10 hours ago, D Angelo Barksdale said:

They chose the wrong Starmer, imagine what this man could do as PM.

Won't work

[TONTROOPER]

2 hours ago, DA Baracus said:

Won't work

# batteries not included.

[Highlandmagar]

Tory MP defects to Labour. He will feel right at home.

[Miguel Sanchez]

On 21/04/2024 at 22:06, D Angelo Barksdale said:

They chose the wrong Starmer, imagine what this man could do as PM.

Did he get the funding?

[Granny Danger]

55 minutes ago, Highlandmagar said:

Tory MP defects to Labour. He will feel right at home.

To paraphrase George Orwell

The creatures outside looked from Tory to Labour, and from Labour to Tory, and from Tory to Labour again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

Edited April 27 by Granny Danger