You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
NOpe - I think thats a bit of futile debate and I wanted this thread to move on. I suggest to you like I did with OOB that you read up on the policy to understand it.
There are multiple ways that the shares to workers can be done. Companies will be able to chose whichever method makes the most sense to them
I admire the certainty of tj’s belief in Labour, but question the reality of it
If voting LD would hand victory to the Tories, why don’t Labour stand for Remain?
Is it because a large swathe of the blue collar ground in support they rely on are strongly pro-Brexit?
Is that the skeleton in the cupboard that Corb’s vacillating is hiding?
There are multiple ways that the shares to workers can be done.
The way you suggested was with a 'buy back'.
Bazzer was asking: Where would the money for this buyback come from then?
It's a reasonable question you could answer with a one word answer. Quicker to answer it than to duck it.
Why would it be moronic for a Remainer to vote for the only remain party on offer?
It's been said quite a bit on here, but I really think it's so important it can't be said enough. Tactical voting is the only way Brexit is going to be stopped. The only way.
LD will only revoke if they get a majority government. This is incredibly unlikely.
In 2017 the split was:
Conservative 42.4%
Labour 40.0%
LD 7.4%
I know things have changed in the last 2 years, but a LD majority is very very far fetched. Coalition however is much more likely, but then LD won't revoke.
The best bet is Labour getting in in some form or other. That way a 2nd referendum can happen, as they have stated.
This may not be ideal, but this is the way the system works, and this is how the dice have fallen. There's no 2nd chance at this.
If Labour are the only true competition to the Torys in your constituency, if you want to remain, you have to vote Labour.
Is it because a large swathe of the blue collar ground in support they rely on are strongly pro-Brexit?
IMHO, it's that.
Plus the fact the leadership are life long brexiteers.
Plus the fact at least one of their policies will cause capital flight which Labour have said they will prevent with restrictions on movement of capital. ...and you can't be in the EU and have restrictions on movement of capital.
Why would a second referendum have a different result?
Because the prospect of being governed by Europe is much more attractive than leaving these clowns in charge?
Coalition however is much more likely, but then LD won’t revoke.
...but they would support a second ref. So the worst case scenaro voting Libdem if they get balance of power is the same as the best case scenario voting Labour. (From a Remainer POV.)
If voting LD would hand victory to the Tories, why don’t Labour stand for Remain?
What on earth do those two sentences have to do with each other?
boomerlives - the polls all show now a majority for remain
The lies of the leave campaign have been exposed as lies ( easiest negotiation ever / we hold all the cards / they need us more than we need them etc)
Demographic change
Is it because a large swathe of the blue collar ground in support they rely on are strongly pro-Brexit?
Corbyn is just doing what Cameron did in 2015… and it worked* for him. Promise a referendum to win over voters who don’t actually agree with your policy direction… ‘vote for me and then I’ll give you a chance to vote against my policy on Europe’.
(*he got to play at being PM of a majority government for a year, not sure the rest of us benefited so much)
(If you’re in a Tory/Lab marginal, vote Labour, and then vote against a Labour Brexit next year… please.)
What about that clip from Sky?
I’m thinking Cleverly must have done something more than refuse to be interviewed… KB sounds like she is properly pissed at his attitude after talking to him off set.
So the worst case scenaro voting Libdem if they get balance of power is the same as the best case scenario voting Labour. (From a Remainer POV.)
No the worse case voting Libdem is a hard brexit because you split the vote by not selecting the party most likely to win.
OOB - the worst case scenario with voting lib dem in seats they have no chance of winning ie the vast majority of seats ( If I lived in a tory / lib dem marginal I would vote lib dem without hesitation) is that it leads to a try government by splitting the anti tory vote.
Why would a second referendum have a different result?
It may not but the vote would be directly for a Labour deal (i.e probably close to Tory deal but keeping those pesky employment rights and stuff like that in place) or Remain.
If Leave wins then the Labour deal gets implemented a week later. No need to debate/vote in parliament and so on.
Sounds like a fair democratic process to me and I would rather have whatever deal Labour gets than any deal the Tories get as their intentions are very different (I would actually vote remain)
Coalition however is much more likely, but then LD won’t revoke.
…but they would support a second ref. So the worst case scenaro voting Libdem if they get balance of power is the same as the best case scenario voting Labour. (From a Remainer POV.)
Because with FPTP second place means nothing.
The focus has to be on winning seats, not getting votes spread across the country.
Does anyone listen to Fighting Talk on Five Live on Saturday morning? They have a round called ‘Defend the Indefensible’ where you have to just that for 2 minutes
That’s now James Cleverly’s life for the next month... 24/7
He was taken apart on the Today programme, having to defend Rees Mogg’s enormously callous superiority complex, rapey Tory candidates and why poor people deserve ‘putting down’
Disonnance- seriously?
LD are Remain, so appealing to Remainers
Tory are Brexit
Labour are “vote for us, and then we’ll decide what we are”
Labour’s wishy washy stance is not definite enough for a roving vote. They could hoover them all up and be an actual opposition party for the first time in years
Binners - James Cleverley is (one of) the indefensible.
No boomer lives.
Labour are " we will try to negotiate a sensible leave deal and then it will go to the public to decide withing 6 months"
Now you and i may think this a daft idea but thats what it is. clear, concise and nothing like the tory press portray it as or what you claim it is
Labour are “vote for us, and then we’ll decide what we are”
Labour’s wishy washy stance is not definite enough
Not true.
New Deal in 3 months, Referendum in 6 months (between the new deal or remain).
Pretty clear and simple to understand.
LD are Remain, so appealing to Remainers
Not really. Outside of their yellow unicorn their referendum options arent defined. So not overly useful.
Labour are “vote for us, and then we’ll decide what we are”
No they are not. Its a clear referendum with a viable leave option vs remain.
They could hoover them all up and be an actual opposition party for the first time in years
You seem confused about what an opposition party actually means. Its not to blindly opposed but to represent their voters. This may or may not match the governing party.
It may not but the vote would be directly for a Labour deal (i.e probably close to Tory deal but keeping those pesky employment rights and stuff like that in place)
Which makes a very big assumption about (a) the EU willing to restart negotiations and (b) such a deal being possible, taking into account NI etc.
New Deal in 3 months? Three years of pissing about got us exactly here.
Don’t make me laugh.
‘Vote for us now to pursue our own Brexit policy, but we’ll give you a chance next year to stop us implementing it’, is a ‘clear’ policy, the argument is that it isn’t appealing to enough voters. We’ll find out next month I suppose. It’s enough for me to vote Labour in my seat, and it might ‘work’ for Corbyn as it did for Cameron, but I fear otherwise.
Which makes a very big assumption about (a) the EU willing to restart negotiations and (b) such a deal being possible, taking into account NI etc.
Considering it most likely would be closer to what the EU would want then it is likely it would work. If it doesnt then can use either Maybots or Johnsons deals.
Either way it will be a clear leave option as opposed to the fantasy leave options offered last time vs remain.
You seem confused about what an opposition party means
Bet I’m not.
a clear leave option
Do you really believe that’s what that looks like to folk who didn’t grow up in the shadow of Kier Hardie’s cap?
Scotroutes - its a constantly moving target but the EU have made it clear in the past that different red lines mean a different deal is possible ie if labour become a majority and want to negotiate a deal based around a much closer relationship then they would be willing to do so.
Labours starting position removes almost all of the issues around NI because labour want to remain in the customs union and in alignment with EU standards
Its not the position I would like - but its not impossible
But thats the promise from labour - a second ref withing 6 months. On a renegotiated deal if possible, on the existing deal if not
It’s been said quite a bit on here, but I really think it’s so important it can’t be said enough. Tactical voting is the only way Brexit is going to be stopped. The only way.
please, unless you want a hard brexit...vote tactically to remove the tory's.
It's that simple.
A new deal, if possible?
You are already back pedalling
New Deal in 3 months? Three years of pissing about got us exactly here.
The pissing about was getting deals and then having to get them through parliament. The referendum removes the parliament bit
New deal obtained (which is definitely possible in 3 months as proved by Johnson) and then put out to referendum.
No I am not. Thats exactly what I have been saying for ages.
I am 50/50 on whether a new deal could be negotiated. Its possible but not certain.
What is certain is that labour would make sure we had a second referendum in 6 months. what is not certain is what the "leave" option will be but the other option will be remain
Its not to blindly opposed but to represent their voters.
Yes it is!
So we have a tory MP saying people on benefits should be put down, Johnson comparing Corbyn to Stalin, and Rees Mogg saying the Grenfell victims deserved it because they were stupid.
And then we have Jeremy Corbyn....
https://twitter.com/ashcowburn/status/1192041175395553280?s=20
NOpe – I think thats a bit of futile debate and I wanted this thread to move on. I suggest to you like I did with OOB that you read up on the policy to understand it.
There are multiple ways that the shares to workers can be done. Companies will be able to chose whichever method makes the most sense to them
I have read it and they all end up with 10% of the value of a company removed from the owners of the companies. As we know a lot of companies are effectively owned by pension funds so this would be another raid on pensions funds. Just like the raid by removing the dividend tax credits.
Just give me one way it can be done where the value is not taken from the owners of the company.
This is not a value judgement on if the policy is right or wrong. Just we need to be clear on the maths here.
You have made an assertion without any evidence and to quote Mr Hitchens
"What is asserted without evidence can be refuted without evidence"
This is a massive policy for Labour so its important we all understand the implications.
Kimbers - your take on Peston's article is wrong; Tories not mucking up their performance on purpose.
His point is that they have been uncoordinated and lack message discipline; that is incompetence, not deliberate.
Moving on to Juncker's interview with Katya Adler - 'and he said he did not think Labour’s pledge to renegotiate the withdrawal agreement if it wins a majority in the general election was a realistic approach - although this would be an issue for his successor'.
Sure, he's on his way out but I doubt he is talking out of turn.
As we know a lot of companies are effectively owned by pension funds so this would be another raid on pensions funds. Just like the raid by removing the dividend tax credits.
Want to back that up with some facts?
Pension funds owned 3% of shares in the last ONS figurs. "our" pensions are a spit in the ocean compared to other ownership.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/investmentspensionsandtrusts/bulletins/ownershipofukquotedshares/2016
The pissing about was getting deals and then having to get them through parliament.
I thought it was doing **** all for almost 3 years because "it's going to be easy", "we hold all the cards", etc.
Want to back that up with some facts?
Pension funds owned 3% of shares in the last ONS figurs. “our” pensions are a spit in the ocean compared to other ownership.
Does not matter it will still be 10% of the value of stocks owned by pensions. Does not matter if that is 3% to 10% or 100% of the total number of stocks its still 10% stolen from the stock portion of your pension.
Correct me if I am wrong?
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1191717303915708417?s=19
I had to re read that a couple of times..
Could this possibly be the election where politicians who lie get found out?
Johnson is such a proven liar that everything he says is now fact checked - perhaps a trend thats happening because of Trump?
I have a lot of respect for Sturgeon ( despite not agreeing on all SNP policy) because she ( at least sounds like) she believes what she says and tells the truth as she sees it. I have never heard another politician who when asked an awkward question is prepared to answer: ( I paraphrase) " I am not sure. My personal instinct is "A". the party is going to produce a policy on this but has not done so yet, there are no easy answers to this issue"
I think the contrast between Corbyns thoughtful answers to questions ( see Guardianlive) compared to Johnsons bluff and bluster will become more apparent. ad the pundits seem happier to challenge the lies
Am I just being too hopeful but today seeing the tories on the defensive and reacting to issues and Corbyn giving thoughtful answers brings me hope that we might be reaching the point where thoughful and truthful politicians may trimph over bluff, bluster, lies and soundbites
From BBC political correspondent......'Jeremy Corbyn setting a high bar for future Labour government. Says it would be judged on;
- Whether in work poverty exists in 5 years
- Whether people still sleeping rough in 5 years
- Whether people still rely on food banks in 5 years
- Whether is Brexit sorted in 6 months'
Answers, in order, are - yes, yes, yes, no.
On a different subject, Alun Cairns just resigned as Sec of State for Wales; his intention to stand as MP not yet known.
Correct me if I am wrong?
You wrong.
Firstly I was responding to your quote that pensions own the majority of companies, which is just so incredibly wrong to be an outright lie.
Secondly, as the freemarket share ownership has failed to deliver shares into the hands of the many as Thatcher era propaganda promised, this policy increases to percentage of shares owned by the many from 3 to 13%. As an average member of society you are not losing 10% of the piffling amount you have, you are gaining 10% of the whole pot. Still the vast majority will be owned by the 1%ers as now, but it will look just a little more even.
That Cairns resignation is another piece of chaos in the tory campaign. couldn't have come at a better time.
We also have the ASA banning a nine week advertising campaign about universal credit as its misleading. Now clearly that was intended as election material disguised as an information campaign but is yet another example of tory lies that has been exposed
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/nov/06/dwp-misleading-universal-credit-uncovered-ad-banned
This is not a value judgement on if the policy is right or wrong. Just we need to be clear on the maths here.
Two things would worry me though not really relevant as only the Libdems stand a chance in my constituency...
1) A lot of maths... not just this but spending our way out of a recession ...
2) Whatever Jeremy has planned it is so far left of Sweden/Denmark it can't be done in the EU
Could this possibly be the election where politicians who lie get found out?
Johnson is such a proven liar that everything he says is now fact checked – perhaps a trend thats happening because of Trump?
.... and
A high percentage of Brexiteers don't actually care if it's true or not.
The business insider ( not a publication I know but sounds like it should be a tory friend) is now leading with Russian money flowing into the tory party. this is a story that is going to keep on running I bet. Suppressing the report on Russian interference and accepting huge sums of money from Putins pals!
Boris Johnson's Conservative Party has received a surge in donations from Russians in recent months.
Donors with ties to Putin have donated hundreds of thousands of pounds to the party.
They have previously paid for meetings with senior government figures including Johnson.
The figures come as Johnson blocks publication of a report into potential Russian influence over recent UK elections.
Johnson's senior strategist Dominic Cummings is also under the spotlight following reports about time he spent in Russia in the 1990s.
Whatever Jeremy has planned it is so far left of Sweden/Denmark it can’t be done in the EU
Really? Name one such ting please.
The liars (seem to be Tories) have been getting found out since Johnson became PM. Unfortunately as stevextc points out, it doesn't matter to a lot of people. The very people they insult keep voting for them.
Very much the Trump "I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and people would still vote for me"
The liars (seem to be Tories) have been getting found out since Johnson became PM. Unfortunately as stevextc points out, it doesn’t matter to a lot of people. The very people they insult keep voting for them.
Very much the Trump “I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and people would still vote for me”
Way before that ... way before the brexit bus... he's been spouting obvious lies for decades.. "bananas" ... and when it turns out to be false ??? "oh well it could be true"
The ideological tories and breixteers are not enough to get Johnson a majority. He needs to convert people to his cause. Playing to the 30% that support anything you say is not enough. He has to gain millions of votes to get a majority. Its these swing voters that count and lying surely puts them off?
I think it is changing, and the liers are challenged and scutanised.
They got away in 2016, they won't in 2019.
Even Corbyn seems to be on the ball.
Really? Name one such ting please.
You already named one .. stealing 10% off businesses but that is not really the point I'm making.
He's an ardent Leaver because the EU is too capitalist and restrictive for his red unicorn.
As Sweden and Denmark seem to be able to exist perfectly well within the EU his red unicorn must be well left of them.
Personally I'd like to see a Swedish style socialism in the UK but whatever Corbyn has in his head is obviously not that.
NOpe – I think thats a bit of futile debate and I wanted this thread to move on.
Please everyone, respect TJ's inherent correctness on this issue and move along peaceably.
As an average member of society you are not losing 10% of the piffling amount you have, you are gaining 10% of the whole pot. Still the vast majority will be owned by the 1%ers as now, but it will look just a little more even.
To use your phraseology, so wrong its almost a lie. The £500 cap per person means that the man in the street won't get another 10% of the value of the companies, it will get a small share with the government getting the rest.
Boris is outside no10 repeating all his Vote Leave nonsense, and complaining and pointing the finger of blame at MPs voting against Withdrawal Agreements (which he did twice, and many of his government did three times).
(And now it’s all about immigration again. And pretending Brexit is put to bed this year if you vote for him.)
(He sounds a bit rubbish, doesn’t he.)
(Repeating already fully debunked lies about new hospitals, and some weird claim that the Labour’s replacement for Ofsted would mean your kids getting beaten up at school - get used to this.)
@MSP its a wealth tax nothing more and nothing less.
I am not sure what my position is on wealth tax if I am honest. I can can see the benefit to help pay for services etc. I however can also see that it could drive wealth out of the country.
that the Labour’s replacement for Ofsted would mean your kids getting beaten up at school
Well, he is somewhat of an expert in helping to get people beaten up.
https://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/1143883885547331586
Repeating already fully debunked lies about new hospitals, and some weird claim that the Labour’s replacement for Ofsted would mean your kids getting beaten up at school – get used to this.
I think the themes of the tory campaign so far are hubris, complacency and entitlement, not to mention incompetence and chaos. They really do seem to think they can win by default on account of not being Jeremy Corbyn. They're going to s*** themselves when the news starts reporting on Corbyn rallies with thousands of people. I'm trying not to be too optimistic but it's looking very much like a rerun of 2017.
Certainly the early signs look good for labour and the tories are reacting to events and having to apologise for multiple things. Tories are certainly on the back foot.
I’m trying not to be too optimistic but it’s looking very much like a rerun of 2017.
Conservatives largest party and Labour a distant second? I'd hate to see what your pessimistic outlook is!
Moving on to Juncker’s interview with Katya Adler – ‘and he said he did not think Labour’s pledge to renegotiate the withdrawal agreement if it wins a majority in the general election was a realistic approach – although this would be an issue for his successor’.
Sure, he’s on his way out but I doubt he is talking out of turn.
nah Juncker wants a brexit deal done as part of his legacy, and he doesnt speak for the council of ministers- Im sure theyd be very pleased with that
as for what a Labour brexit would look like......... a lot of fluff & drama but theyll never get to stop FOM & keep SM acces they want, so it will be a Norway deal
which could be signed off far quicker as its off the shelf
which would be an interesting referendum vs remain!
as the freemarket share ownership has failed to deliver shares into the hands of the many as Thatcher era propaganda promised, this policy increases to percentage of shares owned by the many from 3 to 13%.
So you agree they are going to sequester 10pc of all uk firms over 250fte. A policy so insane that there are people in this thread who don't even believe in it.
2) Whatever Jeremy has planned it is so far left of Sweden/Denmark it can’t be done in the EU
This. They have a policy of preventing the inevitable capital capital flight with controls which are incompatible with EU free movement of capital.
these swing voters that count and lying surely puts them off?
Yes, but not nearly as much as having 10pc of their pension confiscated.
whatever Corbyn has in his head is obviously not that.
But as we know, Labour party policy is not set by the leader...
When's the EHRC report due?
Conservatives largest party and Labour a distant second? I’d hate to see what your pessimistic outlook is!
If Labour can match their MP count from 2017, and both SNP and LibDems can increase their MP count, if only by single figures, then that is a far far better result than Johnson getting the majority he has called this election to try and get. PC, Greens and independents might also grab a few Tory seats if people get smart with their votes. This is pretty much the best result we can hope for, and currently still looking very unlikely… let’s hope the next few weeks see that change… there are nuggets of current news that you cling on to for hope at least.
But as we know, Labour party policy is not set by the leader…
TBH leader is like a sheep leading the goats in this case but not what the UK needs right now (is it?). In terms of election though he has lost millions of voters (it's a bit academic for me as LibDems are way ahead locally) but many traditional soft Labour voters (i.e. possible swing voters) have just melted away.
TBH leader is like a sheep leading the goats in this case but not what the UK needs right now (is it?)
Labour party has a democratic process. This is how it's always been isn't it? It seems reasonable to me, I'd rather that than one nutjob ruling the whole place.
Sure, momentum have dragged the party leftwards but then we're back to the problem with FPTP as most people don't have their own political home do they? We all have to house-share.
A policy so insane that there are people in this thread who don’t even believe in it.
You're determined to interpretet the reports you've read in the worst possible light. It's not even published policy yet, there isn't even a manifesto. Hold your fire.
Hold your fire.
So we ignore anything said ‘till we read the manifestos? That’ll mean no critiques of anything Brexit Party related then… as they’ll be avoiding writing anything down in a manifesto, I suspect.
oh dear despite all the talk of cleaning up politics & parliament & a new speaker etc
this election is setting a very bad tone so far
tories & their brexit have driven off many of the moderates from the Tories & many of the women that cameron made such an effort to bring on board (momemntum have done similar in Labour, but theyre just not as good at metaphorically knifing their own as tories)
Bridgen jumping to Moggs defence when he really shouldnt was a good example of this tribalism trumping compassion or indeed common sense.
Leading Welsh Tory quits for lying about his pal sabotaging a rape trial
Telegraph front page comparing Corbyn to Stalin killing 6 million Kulaks
Cleverly running away from kay burley & Tory lapdog guido immediately leaping to his defence- lying that he was at the time talking to wannabe Hopkins on LBC
Tories editing that starmer video has now seen this.....
Tories editing that starmer video has now led to parodies too
https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1192053989921173504
Labour party has a democratic process. This is how it’s always been isn’t it? It seems reasonable to me, I’d rather that than one nutjob ruling the whole place.
It's a form of democracy ... and ignoring the union block votes for now it doesn't seem supportable as a way to run a country. I'm guessing you too remember the 70's...? but equally the Soviet union or places like Cuba, Libya soon dispatched with democracy in order to get anything done.
It's perhaps sad but human nature seems to get in the way ...
You’re determined to interpretet the reports you’ve read in the worst possible light. It’s not even published policy yet, there isn’t even a manifesto. Hold your fire.
That is what most of the electorate will do....
ctually I think much of the electorate that labour are aiming at will see the policy as positive.
You’re determined to interpretet the reports you’ve read in the worst possible light. It’s not even published policy yet, there isn’t even a manifesto. Hold your fire.
I'm not talking about "reports", and I'm not interpreting anything. You can hear it yourself on the link above. It's been announced at the same time as "Warm Homes for all" and the "Nationalization at a Fair rate" policy. You can hear RLB quizzed on it so there's no room for misunderstanding.
The FT have run analysis on it.
...but let's just remember for future reference that this policy is so mental that when they first heard about it several people literally didn't even believe it.
Conservatives largest party and Labour a distant second?
In 2017 labour had a much larger majority to overhaul and were very much on the back foot at the start of the campaign. It's very different this time. Quite frankly I'm equally surprised at the slickness of labour's early campaign and the chaos of the tories. Even the media have been broadly positive about labour and scathing towards the tories and the equal coverage campaign rules haven't even kicked in yet.
OOB - yes the FT ran an analysis as have others and its nothing like what you keep on claiming.
What’s all this about?
https://twitter.com/sallygimson/status/1188507534019235845?s=21
https://twitter.com/paulbranditv/status/1192064883602395136?s=21
OOB - one thing among many you are ( deliberatly?) misunderstanding is that the Labour government will pay for these shares not simply take them. so of course that negates most of your rather hysterical argument
All we have at the moment is an outline of the plan. No details.
Labour government will pay for these shares not simply take them.
Phew, that's great news!
Linky?
OOB – one thing among many you are ( deliberatly?) misunderstanding is that the Labour government will pay for these shares not simply take them. so of course that negates most of your rather hysterical argument
All we have at the moment is an outline of the plan. No details.
Because one way or another that staggering amount of money has to come from somewhere...if its real or be magically printed if not.
The UK is one of the worlds poorest countries, our per capita debt is staggering... where will that money come from.