What is the point of labour ?

[sophia]

1 minute ago, Jedi said:

The thread is 'all about me', when I post abut past political experience, in reply to several others who had done the same, only about Labour in their case (on a thread about the Labour Party no less).

'Obviously daft arguments' (ie don't fit with the gallery)

'Refuse to debate them'.....despite trying to reply to every question raised/posed...(which you automatically write off as copy and paste)

Today you posted about the Scottish Government and it's budget.

(their legal duty is to balance the budget)

The money that is being reallocated to pay for inflation driven higher bills and higher wages is not a worthwhile debating issue as all serious commentators agree, why even political opponents think that this is the best of a bad situation, yet you think think it is political. 

It doesn't feel to me like you are being particularly serious so I'm afraid that is where we birfurcate.

 

[Clown Job]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

[scottsdad]

I have said it before and will say it again. 

Folk on the Left hate Labour far, far more than they hate the Tories. 

[Granny Danger]

4 hours ago, scottsdad said:

I have said it before and will say it again. 

Folk on the Left hate Labour far, far more than they hate the Tories. 

Not sure if that’s true (that’s a diplomatic way of saying it’s a stupid generalisation that’s without foundation).  I think people on the left, of which I count myself as one, feel betrayed by Labour.  Particularly those of us who were active in trying to democratise the Labour Party only to see egotistical leaders (like Kinnock), pretendy socialist leaders (like Smith) and self interested/corrupt leaders (like Blair) drag it back to right-of-centre politics that betray the people it is supposed to serve.

 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

As O'Kelly suggests above, 2003 killed the Labour party stone dead for many of us, once again I don't think that's an unreasonable position. Personally, I didn't become convinced that indy was for me until I realised, in the light of Iraq and all it entailed, that the UK was also stone dead, and beyond redemption.

My disillusionment started in 1994 when they elected Blair.

I left the Labour Party as soon as that happened.

[JOEY VIMSANTE]

Starmer is a good sensible human rights respecting, compassionate leader. I think he will make a good PM. 

[Bad Wolf]

2 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

Not sure if that’s true (that’s a diplomatic way of saying it’s a stupid generalisation that’s without foundation).  I think people on the left, of which I count myself as one, feel betrayed by Labour.  Particularly those of us who were active in trying to democratise the Labour Party only to see egotistical leaders (like Kinnock), pretendy socialist leaders (like Smith) and self interested/corrupt leaders (like Blair) drag it back to right-of-centre politics that betray the people it is supposed to serve.

 

My views on Blair are so predictable they don't need to be posted, but I'm glad to see someone else sharing my views on Smith. An upper-middle class Edinburgh lawyer who couldn't send his kids to the jolly old Academy, as that wouldn't have played well with the peasantry, but made damn sure they went to Boroughmuir. One who furthermore did precisely f**k all to clean up the brown envelope-friendly, sectarian cesspool of west central belt Labour politics, as it benefited him personally. I despised him.

[Clown Job]

 

[JOEY VIMSANTE]

Granny Danger The far left will not be elected. We need vote winning centre left parties. There is no point in going far left and ending up with the far right in charge of the country. 

I am centre-left. but most people will not support a far-left government. You have to win over the population. If Labour elects far-left leaders we will end up with far-right governments. 

The SNP are not far left. They are centre left. They do not nationalise the means of productions, or bring in far left policies. The far left does not work anymore in winning elections if it ever did.  

I am centre-left,. but I know most people are quite right wing. We are not going to win elections with unpopular policies. 

If we had a Tony Blair without the Iraq War I would be happy. 

Tony Blair domestically was OK. But his foreign policy was not.

If Starmer is like Blair without the Iraq War, I will be happy.

Blair brought in with Brown, tax credits, increased spending on health and education, the mini wage, peace in Northern Ireland, devolution, increased foreign aid.   

It was just his War on Iraq that ruined it for me. 

[Bad Wolf]

17 hours ago, Jedi said:

When you are called a moron, a puddle drinker, a fuc*wit, clearly lacking in any intelligence, an idiot.....just a few of the epitaphs from different political 'discussions' on here, it rather comes across as being 'shouted down'. When you don't fit into a 'majority', you are never going to 'win friends and influence people' in any case.

Have never at any point suggested that some SNP voters are not reasonable people, many of them indeed are, and having spent so much time with so many of them over the years, it would be strange if I didn't acknowledge that. A lot of folk seem keen to point out their 'previous' Labour allegiance, so mine is the same sort of experience, just in a different party

I find myself guilty of moral cowardice, to an extent, in the sense that I know the kind of folk you refer to exist (according to my Tweeting brother, some of the pro-Indy types on Twitter are a nightmare, for example); and for that reason I didn't even look at this thread until page 400 and something. So if you say you've had that treatment here in the past, I believe you, but I'm not going to seek it out for myself as it serves no purpose. But I honestly don't see it over the last few days or pages here.

[Guest Jedi]

26 minutes ago, JOEY VIMSANTE said:

Granny Danger The far left will not be elected. We need vote winning centre left parties. There is no point in going far left and ending up with the far right in charge of the country. 

I am centre-left. but most people will not support a far-left government. You have to win over the population. If Labour elects far-left leaders we will end up with far-right governments. 

The SNP are not far left. They are centre left. They do not nationalise the means of productions, or bring in far left policies. The far left does not work anymore in winning elections if it ever did.  

I am centre-left,. but I know most people are quite right wing. We are not going to win elections with unpopular policies. 

If we had a Tony Blair without the Iraq War I would be happy. 

Tony Blair domestically was OK. But his foreign policy was not.

If Starmer is like Blair without the Iraq War, I will be happy.

Blair brought in with Brown, tax credits, increased spending on health and education, the mini wage, peace in Northern Ireland, devolution, increased foreign aid.   

It was just his War on Iraq that ruined it for me. 

Excellent post..and totally agree about Blair. To be in hoc with the Bush administration over Iraq despite the rest of the world it seemed in the other camp and so many major demos against it should never be forgotten. Domestically they did achieve a lot of good though, and had a very positive first term in particular.

Some of the great 'what if's moments of politics in there, ie what if they had stayed clear of Iraq, Blair would probably now be remembered as a positive PM. Similarly in Scotland 'what if' Labour had run their own No campaign in 2014..and stayed apart from the Tories...the landscape would look different now.SNP would still be ahead, but we would have much closer elections 

[Brother Blades]

3 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Excellent post..and totally agree about Blair. To be in hoc with the Bush administration over Iraq despite the rest of the world it seemed in the other camp and so many major demos against it should never be forgotten. Domestically they did achieve a lot of good though, and had a very positive first term in particular.

Some of the great 'what if's moments of politics in there, ie what if they had stayed clear of Iraq, Blair would probably now be remembered as a positive PM. Similarly in Scotland 'what if' Labour had run their own No campaign in 2014..and stayed apart from the Tories...the landscape would look different now.SNP would still be ahead, but we would have much closer elections 

What if…. Just like your current campaign for Starmer, what if he wasn’t Tory Lite? What if he wasn’t an appeaser for racists, what if he didn’t expel people from the shadow cabinet for standing up for the exact people that the Labour Party was created for, what if he hadn’t accepted a knighthood that exemplifies the class system in the UK, what if what if what if…. I’m at the point where I hate Labour more than the Tories, at least the scumbag Tories stand up & defend their abysmal principles, Keith isn’t brave enough to admit that power is the goal, what if they hadn’t lost any morals & principles? I might vote for that party. But it’s lost now. 

[Guest Jedi]

2 minutes ago, Brother Blades said:

What if…. Just like your current campaign for Starmer, what if he wasn’t Tory Lite? What if he wasn’t an appeaser for racists, what if he didn’t expel people from the shadow cabinet for standing up for the exact people that the Labour Party was created for, what if he hadn’t accepted a knighthood that exemplifies the class system in the UK, what if what if what if…. I’m at the point where I hate Labour more than the Tories, at least the scumbag Tories stand up & defend their abysmal principles, Keith isn’t brave enough to admit that power is the goal, what if they hadn’t lost any morals & principles? I might vote for that party. But it’s lost now. 

You have made it abundantly clear that you hate Labour more than the Tories. Presumably then your point would be that we 'might as well' re-elect the Tories at the next GE, as at least they have principles (abysmal though they may be). I certainly don't agree with re-electing the Tories, but as that is your own view, fair enough. 

Given that the points based immigration proposals are the same as the SNP's Visa plan, given that the plan is also similar in tone to the SNP (ensure asylum seekers have access to employment and benefits, are reunited with their families, that there are no detention centres), the appeasing racists is a tired trope, based, it would seem on a single statement by Rachel Reeves.

Likewise, he sidelines one single member of the Shadow Cabinet over picket lines, explains that decision as being with regards to politicians needing to support trade unions being on the side of workers, while at the same time being in the negotiator camp....then goes on to talk about how workers conditions would be improved under a Labour govt...that Tory anti-union legislation would be repealed, but like in the Rachel Reeves case we will base view entirely on one episode...

Is power a goal for the SNP or are they just playing at student politics? What is the point in being in politics if you dont want to be elected to government to try and improve people's lives? 

[Antlion]

24 minutes ago, Jedi said:

You have made it abundantly clear that you hate Labour more than the Tories. Presumably then your point would be that we 'might as well' re-elect the Tories at the next GE, as at least they have principles (abysmal though they may be). I certainly don't agree with re-electing the Tories, but as that is your own view, fair enough. 

Given that the points based immigration proposals are the same as the SNP's Visa plan, given that the plan is also similar in tone to the SNP (ensure asylum seekers have access to employment and benefits, are reunited with their families, that there are no detention centres), the appeasing racists is a tired trope, based, it would seem on a single statement by Rachel Reeves.

Likewise, he sidelines one single member of the Shadow Cabinet over picket lines, explains that decision as being with regards to politicians needing to support trade unions being on the side of workers, while at the same time being in the negotiator camp....then goes on to talk about how workers conditions would be improved under a Labour govt...that Tory anti-union legislation would be repealed, but like in the Rachel Reeves case we will base view entirely on one episode...

Is power a goal for the SNP or are they just playing at student politics? What is the point in being in politics if you dont want to be elected to government to try and improve people's lives? 

 

[Guest Jedi]

3 minutes ago, Antlion said:

 

Do you not have any other GIFS, as you seem to throw that one in on a rota.

[Antlion]

1 minute ago, Jedi said:

Do you not have any other GIFS, as you seem to throw that one in on a rota.

It seems to follow the same rota as does your trying to change the subject from “What is the point of Labour?” to “what about the SNP?”

Funny that.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

I'm old enough to remember all the promises Labour have made in the past and failed to deliver on.

For as long as I can remember the Labour leadership have habitually ignored the wishes of the Labour Party Conference and gone ahead and done what they wanted anyway.

To think that the leopard has suddenly lost his spots is incredible naivety.

And when it comes to SLab - I genuinely have utter contempt. A cabal of chancers more interested in attacking the SNP than any real care for the interests of working people.

That's not to say the SNP are perfect - far from it - I resigned from the SNP last year because I was not happy with certain issues - but they are far preferable to Labour - they are ultimately the means an end not the end itself.

[williemillersmoustache]

It may come across as a bit glib to say there is no difference between Labour and the Tories but, here we are from the horses-arses mouith on the 3 defining issues of our generation:

1) Too many furriners

2) Get Brexit Done

3) Yes it's a voluntary union, no there is no mechanism to leave ( and even if the Supreme Court rule in favour) 

Of course there are other issues but, in terms of policy and what will define who and what we are as a nation(s) and a people these 3 things, immigration, our relationship with Europe and the constituion, everything flows from this. And you can't put a fag paper between them.

c***s.  

Quote

The UK is recruiting too many people from overseas into the NHS, Sir Keir Starmer has said.

The Labour leader argued immigration was not the solution to a staffing crisis as he called for more recruitment from within the UK.

Scotland's SNP government is spending £8m on hiring 750 nurses and midwives from overseas this winter.

In England, 34% of doctors joining the health service last year came from overseas - up from 18% in 2014.

Meanwhile the biggest ever strike by nurses in the UK looks set to go ahead, after sources with the Royal College of Nursing told the BBC a large majority of members had voted in favour of action in a dispute over pay.

In a wide-ranging interview on BBC Scotland's The Sunday Show, Sir Keir also said Scottish ministers should prioritise the cost of living crisis over a second independence referendum.

And on Brexit, Sir Keir said there was "no case" for rejoining the EU.

No open borders
About 6,000 nursing and midwifery posts are unfilled in Scotland's NHS, while the English health service is said to be facing its worst-ever staffing crisis.

Labour has pledged to take on an extra 7,500 medical students every year if the party wins the next general election.

Sir Keir said those people would be trained into the NHS "from here".

Asked how many people he would be prepared to let into the country under a managed migration plan, he said: "We don't want open borders. Freedom of movement has gone and it's not coming back.

"So that means fair rules, firm rules, a points-based system.

"What I would like to see is the numbers go down in some areas. I think we're recruiting too many people from overseas into, for example, the health service.

"But on the other hand, if we need high-skilled people in innovation in tech to set up factories etc, then I would encourage that."

The Labour leader said he has daily conversations with his wife Victoria, who works in the NHS, about the health service's struggles.

Asked what she says is the problem with the NHS, Sir Keir replied: "We haven't got enough people."

On whether he believes immigration should be used to address that issue, he said: "I think that we should be training people in this country.

"Of course we need some immigration but we need to train people in this country."

Sir Keir's comments come after politicians and campaign groups criticised Home Secretary Suella Braverman's language about migrants.

Better Brexit deal
The Labour leader reiterated his stance on Brexit despite warnings about its impact on the economy.

The Office for Budget Responsibility has reported a 15% reduction in trade intensity due to Brexit and forecasts leaving the EU will reduce GDP by 4% over 15 years.

"We took a decision on leaving the EU in 2016 and we have now left," Sir Keir told the Sunday Show. "There is no case for returning to the EU.

"Now what we need to do is rather than just sticking with the deal we've got, which is not good enough, we need to make Brexit work. We need a better deal."

Sir Keir said a Labour government would aim to fix issues over the Northern Ireland Protocol, remove barriers to trade and establish closer EU co-operation on security issues

Voluntary union
The party chief went on to accept that the union between Scotland and the rest of the UK is "voluntary" and that the people of Scotland were not "stuck in it". But he did not set out a democratic route to a second independence referendum.

Will there be another Scottish independence referendum?
The Scottish and UK governments are currently locked in a Supreme Court battle over Holyrood's capability to stage a referendum.

"All the court is going to be able to rule, if it does rule in favour [of the Scottish government], is that there could or can be, it's legally permissible, to have a referendum," Sir Keir said.

"That doesn't answer the political question, which is should there be a referendum."

He argued against a second vote and said that politicians should instead prioritise the cost-of-living crisis.

Sir Keir went on to praise Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar, who he said could go on to become first minister.

He insisted Labour's route to government at Westminster "runs through Scotland".

"What we've got to do is be facing the electorate in Scotland, across the whole of the United Kingdom, and making sure that our priorities are aligned with their priorities," he said.

"We've done a huge amount of work on this. Anas Sawar has really put that focus, that determination, in here in Scotland."

Sir Keir Starmer's interview on The Sunday Show will be broadcast on BBC One Scotland and BBC Radio Scotland from 10:00.

This interview is on the one hand a fucking disgrace. Utterly disingenuous, dog whistling, econmically illiterate gratuitously offensive patroinising supercilious dismissive anglo-splaining fucking twaddle. On the other hand it proves that everything that I have said about them is right.  

Happy to admit that despite knowing the above was true for some time, this has ripped my knitting in particular:

Quote

"But on the other hand, if we need high-skilled people in innovation in tech to set up factories etc, then I would encourage that."

The position that the massive labour shortages in the UK are restircted to "tech" and that immigration should only be allowed for specialised nebulous bollocks like "innovation" is so stratospherically far from the truth it defies reason. Keir Starmer is not an idiot, so he must know that this is untrue but, for narrow political expediency he'll trot this fucking nonsense out anyway. 
The pressures on recruitment and retention right now are ludictrous, inflationary and we're now seeing the massive spike in vacancies tailing off, not because they are being filled but because they are being withdrawn due to lack of resource. This is death spiral economics.

Every level, every sector, is crying out for resource, not just manufacturing, not just tech, not just health, not just hospitality, not just education  but everywhere. The only area the UK is not needing some level of external non-domestic resource is c***s. We're demonstrably over flowing with those.

Edited November 6, 2022 by williemillersmoustache

[Brother Blades]

15 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

It may come across as a bit glib to say there is no difference between Labour and the Tories but, here we are from the horses-arses mouith on the 3 defining issues of our generation:

1) Too many furriners

2) Get Brexit Done

3) Yes it's a voluntary union, no there is no mechanism to leave ( and even if the Supreme Court rule in favour) 

Of course there are other issues but, in term of policy and what will define who and what we are a nation(s) and a people these 3 things, immigration, our relationship with Europe and the constituion, everything flows from this. And you can't put a fag paper between them.

c***s.  

This interview is on the one hand a fucking disgrace. Utterly disingenuous, dog whistling, econmically illiterate gratuitously offensive patroinising supercilious dismissive anglo-splaining fucking twaddle. On the other hand it proves that everything that I have said about them is right.  

Happy to admit that despite knowing the above was true for some time, this has ripped my knitting in particular:

The position that the massive labour shortages in the UK are restircted to "tech" and that immigration should only be allowed for specialised nebulous bollocks like "innovation" is so stratospherically far from the truth it defies reason. Keir Starmer is not an idiot, so he must know that this is position is untrue but, for narrow political expediency he'll trot this fucking nonsense out anyway. 
The pressures on recruitment and retention right now are ludictrous, inflationary and we're now seeing the massive spike in vacancies tailing off, not because they are being filled but because they are being withdrawn due to lack of resource. This is death spiral economics.

Every level, every sector, is crying out for resource, not just manufacturing, not just tech, not just health, not just hospitality, not just education  but everywhere. The only area the UK is not needing some level of external non-domestic resource is c***s. We're demonstrably over flowing with those.

Absolutely fantastic post.

I, like you, am dismayed at the level of narrow vote chasing being carried out by Keith. 
Surely when something is a disaster & has fucking zero benefit (other than the ability to erode workers rights & human rights) it’s time to look at it & try reversing at least some of the damage.

Approaching the scandal that is the Labour Party in the country is the inability of the MSM to pin accountability on these arseholes of all parties. 
Ive just watched Oliver Dowden on Kuenssberg & although she did try to pin him down on both Manston & Williamson, a lightweight like Dowden was able to duck the punches & just continue. 
 

[williemillersmoustache]

25 minutes ago, Brother Blades said:

Absolutely fantastic post.

I, like you, am dismayed at the level of narrow vote chasing being carried out by Keith. 
Surely when something is a disaster & has fucking zero benefit (other than the ability to erode workers rights & human rights) it’s time to look at it & try reversing at least some of the damage.

Approaching the scandal that is the Labour Party in the country is the inability of the MSM to pin accountability on these arseholes of all parties. 
Ive just watched Oliver Dowden on Kuenssberg & although she did try to pin him down on both Manston & Williamson, a lightweight like Dowden was able to duck the punches & just continue. 
 

Dowden is a slippery wee dangercunt. I thought Kuennsberg ducked a number of opportunities to properly put him under pressure.

As for Keith. It would almost be better if Labour policy on the migrant crisis was to round them all up and force them into some kind of indentured service picking fruit and cleaning hospitals before applying for refugee status.

It would be amoral, it would be illiberal, wrong and I'd hate it but at least it would go some way to address the reality of the crisis we face.

Instead both main Westminster parties are dead set on the worst of all outcomes.  We look like b*****ds on the world stage. We treat people both fleeing persecution and those wanting to come here to work like filth and we are doing nothing to solve the critical shortage of labour. It is.  A fucking. Disaster. Playing out in front of our eyes and its only going to get worse and not better. 

I don't think I'm being hyperbolic either. Horrific. 

Edited November 6, 2022 by williemillersmoustache