|
I thought pensions took up about 70% of the welfare budget? From those figures it looks more like 1/3
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 12:27 |
|
|
ShaneMacGowansTeeth posted:Matalan do jeans for a tenner, and they're good quality jeans Their sizes are also all over the place. Top Tip: If ever buying from Matalan, try on the jeans.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/175845 Petition to request the debate that the "will of the people has changed since the Brexit vote"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 15:03
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I want a Labour government. Who would you like to lead that government?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Obama promised solutions, delivered a comprehennsive healthcare plan, then like turkeys voting for christmas, dumb fucks across America voted for Trump because he promised to repeal it, whilst not being aware that this OMBUMMERCARE thing they hated so much because Fox told them to was actually the ACA that provided their insurance. Now that's not entirely fair, there's a great number of things wrong with the ACA. Now, of course, most of the issues are due to Obama having to make compromises to get it past the Republican controlled houses.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/827312590359519233 In b4 "this is bad for Corbyn"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Only 1 Tory rebelled on the first vote. There was a theory in this thread that with Labour whipping to vote for it, it meant Tory rebels could vote how the liked with no repercussions, since Labour would help it pass. This has been shown not to be true. Labour are legitimately worried about how they would appear to the public in the press, since we already saw how the press treated those who voted against in the last vote.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
YouGov have specifically asked Labour voters what they want on Brexit, and the results are as spread as we've all been saying for months: https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/828907418692284416 42% for 2nd Referendum vs. 37% against 45% for No Brexit vs. 35% against 28% for Hard Brexit vs. 35% against 36% for Soft Brexit vs. 31% against Don't care or don't know at least 20% in each question, up to as much as 37% when talking about Hard Brexit.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 11:51
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:so more people against a second referendum than against a hard brexit. and more people who vehemently feel that way in the no second Ref side too, compared to Hard Brexit.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 11:57
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:It is easy. They're the opposition. Oppose, don't enable. Okay, so Labour should oppose any of the measures the Tories are currently considering to make life a bit easier on those renting? You can't say "They're in opposition, so their job is to oppose everything the government do", because then the government has no reason to reach across the hall to come to an agreement, or seek any wider input on anything, since the Opposition would just oppose it anyway, since it isn't being proposed by them. There's no 100% right course of action to take that can be replicated over and over. Countries are nuanced things which require some amount of consideration, including if what you might prefer is what your supporters consider to be beneficial. e: Pissflaps posted:I'm positive it is. He included why the devolved parliament/assemblies instead of local counties in the bit of his post you didn't quote mehall fucked around with this message at 12:16 on Feb 7, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 12:14
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:If the Tories come up with something that Labour thinks is a good idea then sure, support it. First, Labour are a wide platform, who encourage everyone who works for a living to vote for them. There are plenty of people who meet that criteria who voted Leave when given the opportunity, so there's a reasonable argument to be made that if Labour had been in power and had the ability to shape the argument around a potential EU referendum, there would have been plenty of support for it from their supporters. Nobody voted for Labour to take the UK out of the EU because that wasn't a policy they advertised, but now that it's an option, a roughly even %age of labour voters would be appalled as pleased if Labour stopped Brexit, so it'c clearly not as simple as you state. (as usual.) Secondly, surely the NHS Scotland should be managed/funded/governed by a level of representation of an equal size to the size of the NHS Scotland? And before you state that does his mean every single NHS trust etc should have it's own parliament/assembly, firstly they do in the form of local counties. (There's a chance it's not 1:1 in terms of area covered, but it'll be close enough) and secondly, to counter the follow-up argument of "shouldn't the local counties just manage their local NHS bits", the answer is there are already NHS boards for relevant areas, such as NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, which roughly speaking matches the area covered by Glasgow City Council, plus renfrewshire, and other bits THe point is there's already smaller sub-divisions.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 12:24
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:Probably because of that local government duty not to lose public money in the courts. Not as good as having a loving home though
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 14:27
|
|
|
Paxman posted:As I said, even when prices are much lower than London that doesn't mean people can afford to buy a home. Therefore, the answer is to find other ways of providing housing (eg social housing), not to think you'll solve the problem by somehow reducing the cost of buying a home. First, more people buying means less renting means less demand for the supply, meaning the rental prices drop. Secondly, the main point being made about house building is that the councils aren't doing it anymore. Council built houses are typically built for social housing, with perhaps some percentage sold off in the short term. So if we encourage more house building, we will attack both aspects.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:
First off, sample size of the non-white portions of that survey is awful. Secondly, those communities were hopeful ahead of Brexit that it may improve relations with their countries of origin, or by the lies told about the NHS (and before anyone steps in
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/829129993984888835 On the topic, multiple people have said lately that an IndyRef campaign needs to really be tight on the economic stance. Whether or not it's true, or could happen, any time any trade amount with England is brought up, Sturgeon should just point out the FTA May wants with the EU and just say if that is May's stance, I'm sure we could work out the same for Scotland. Boom, no more Little Englanders talking about how much Scotland relies on English trade, because if they dismiss the possibility, they'll need to admit May's hope of FTA with other countries is similarly ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 12:08
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Well, the stance is that Scotland would seek membership of the EU and would therefore be in the single market - and trade with the rest of the UK on whatever Brexit terms are arranged. Scotland massively voted to remain in the EU, and direct control over things like this is definitely a case for national government. I never meant that Scotland didn't have massive trade with England, what I meant was that the Little Englanders as I put it are throwing it in the face when there is real discussion. And Scotland aiming to be in the EU, and May insisting she will get a FTA with the EU means, as I said, that there would be no impact to English trade.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
Even if Corbyn is working a 4 day week, there's a decent chance he does so with extreme hours for those 4 days, due to the hours that parliament keeps. Very good chance Corbyn is working around 10-12 hours on a given weekday.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
My work is mulling over moving me to a 4 day week, working 8am to 6pm, with 2 15minute breaks and a 45minute lunch each day, for a total of 37.5 hours per week. It's not inconceivable for the leader of the opposition to work, say, 10am until 8pm.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 14:46
|
|
|
Paxman posted:The fact that the Tories are going to win the vote anyway isn't an argument for voting with the Tories. Oppositions routinely vote against the government, knowing full well they are going to lose the vote. They don't routinely vote against a measure the public directly had a hand in saying they wanted.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:I have also just resigned my labour membership. Why? Do you not agree with your CLP choice of who to stand for election in your area?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Quite. Brexit is very unpopular with a lot of Corbyn's support. This will hurt his support in the party. All thibs poo poo about it just being rhetoric, it misses the point. We voted for him to make rhetorical arguments in favour of the NHS, public transport being taken back to public ownership, anti-union laws being replaced with pro-worker legislation, mass building of social housing to end the housing market bubble and the fetishisation of home ownership. Not pretending to differ between Tory Brexit and a mythical Brexit which isn't a slow suicide of the British economy. And maybe, just maybe, if Labour aren't being dragged through the loving mud by the press for "opposing the will of the people", he can get back to parking on that. E; poo poo, double post.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:This isn't what happened though. Here's what Labour did: Thank you for this effort post, and for articulating the thoughts I haven't been able to make as clear as this.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
Damning evidence indeed.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
Parliament Petition to request reasoning for why there was no threshold on the referendum. https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/164999 quote:TU strike ballots and countries voting on constitutional matters set a 2/3 majority for change. It's inconceivable this didn't have one.Was it because it was advisory, a purely consultative exercise not binding on this or any other government or was it just a careless,omission?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
Ultimate test of Labour centrist policy http://labourlist.org/2017/02/kezia-dugdale-we-need-to-create-a-federalised-britain/ Not picking a side, trying to find something in the middle in the hopes it might come together in enough of the minds of the electorate
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:The D was not for Democratic you gently caress Don't you know about the anti-semitism Labour definitely have, that no other party does?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
Pantsuit posted:If UKIP somehow lose Stoke central it will cement their electoral incompetence. Yet not their irrelevancy, as the beeb and the papers will comtimue to seek out a UKIP opinion on everything aouth of Hadrian's wall, and on a few things north of it too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
The fact that one of the bottom 5 is still an increase says it all really.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
Gort posted:This isn't how taxes work. For the sake of quick arguments and math and not derailing the thread can we just pretend he sais "effective tax rate of 75%" instead?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 09:12
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Space raiders, wheat crunchies, scampi fries. These are the crisps of the proletariat. On the one hand, I have to disagree when you say Monster Munch are crap. On the other hand, I got Monster Munch in my sainsburys lunch deal yesterday, so you seem to be right about this latter point. Still great though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
awesome-express posted:It's higher than EU immigration I wish there was a way that this could have been told in the debate, without being anti-immigrant to the people outside the EU. The narrative was centred around how we can't control our immigration, but the immigration they can control was much larger, because they know we need the people coming in.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2017 09:49
|
|
|
No change on dont knows ain't great, and obviously I wish we had an opposition peformance similar to what we've seen in the past, but no politics we're dealing with is similar to brexit, in terms of what we've seen in the past. There's is a piece of ground to work on from here. Can he do it? Not without the support of the PLP.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I still don't think labour will lose either by-election but even if it were to happen, and there was to be a leadership challenge, I don't think it could happen until the same time of the year as the last one, and Corbyn's supporters will still vote for him anyway because the parliamentary fortunes of the Labour Party are a secondary concern. Secondary to actually providing a political stance that isn't "The Tories but slower", maybe. E: 1107 AD Chinese money is printed in 3 colours to stymie counterfeiting. mehall fucked around with this message at 09:08 on Feb 21, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 09:06
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:It was not some date I picked at random, it's just what the source stated. If I found data that went back to 1992 or 1902 I'd have gone and said since that date. You're seeing things that aren't there. The one brought out in the commons when discussing this was that China spoke to parliament on a recent (last few years) visit, and god knows their human rights abuses are worse. My argument is that surely we should be upholding the "Leader of the Free World" to a higher standard than a superpower we don't stand up to because it'd cripple our economy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 13:27
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I'm susceptible to wind. We know 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:The statements attributed to me in this gif are now the majority opinion of this thread. I doubt "Anyone But Corbyn" is the majority opinion in the thread.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
ukle posted:Also put a hold on all but essential immigration in a region until this metric is met. Can't do that for very important reasons. Firstly, this cedes the argument to the Tories and UKIP that immigrants have been the cause of the problems, not inadequate funding. Secondly, as a result of the first, the second you try and resume migration in the area, it will be a fight for every inch of the argument, since you already ceded the argument to the other side.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 09:07
|
|
|
The discussion about "Opposition parties don't lose seats to the government" also doesn't account for the fact that the Tories, whilst in a majority government, are in a very slim majority, meaning there are more seats that could go either way in a given political cycle. I'm not saying it's great for Labour to have lost the seat, it is very clearly a blow, but there are multiple factors across the board as to why. Does that include the leadership? yes. Does the perception of the leadership solely lay with Jeremy? No. Nuance.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
Perhaps people who believe in the aims of the Labour party but are unsatisifed with the direction it is currently taking should join the Labour party so they can be involved and try and bring about the version of the party they belueve will be best for the country.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 13:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 12:27 |
|
|
Sion posted:oooh, I'm a strong- well, certainly in the upper half. Maybe 7 or 8 out of ten. This shows that many critics of Corbyn are right when they say he needs to work on his messaging. All he needed to do was say: "I'm a 10 on keeping us in the EU. Maybe a 7 or 8 about how it is now, but it's best for us to stay in, and reform."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 17:46
|
|