What exactly is Jeremy Corbyn's plan?

Sporky

jpfamps said:

It's impossible for that graph to be meaningful as there is no linear scale of liberalism for example. The problem is that the social "scientist" who compose these graph don't understand maths enough to appreciate this.

There is more to life than maths, or we'd have no art, no buildings, no food, no hats...

The political compass gives a visual indication of the relative stances of various political ideologies, individuals and parties. It resolves uncertainty and thus has informational content. Graphs are used to depict qualitative data as well as quantitative - mathematicians do not have sole rights to their use.

jpfamps

mellowsun said:

I dislike the Tories but it has to be said, under Thatcher:
- I had free higher education, plus a maintenance grant
- I could claim income support during the summer holidays if I couldn't find a student job
This all disappeared under New Labour. Blair was all about courting the rich. He wanted the country to move to a more US style neoliberal model. Which is what we have ended up with now.

House prices tripled under New Labour also. Which is great if you are a homeowner, which is why boomers loved Blair, but is the reason why the current generation of 20/30-somethings are screwed (on top of their tuition fees).

The reason why the wealthy Islington set are so into Corbyn is because they are pro unlimited immigration. High immigration is great for house prices and BTL rental yields, you have a constant stream of tenants.

Blair wanted 50% of people to go to university (a suspiciously round number) and so needed to find some way of paying for it. 

I went to University with a full grant in the mid 80s. At that time University participation was around 10%, and had been pretty much the same since the late 60s.

At the time I went to Uni when working during the summer holidays I noticed there was a certain animosity towards students from what you would describe as "traditional Labour supporters", as we were given grants and didn't pay tax on our earnings.

The massive rise in house prices was, in my opinion, the great failure of New Labour as it caused a huge redistribution in wealth, which was not only undeserved but also often tax free.

CabbageCat

Sporky said:

There is more to life than maths, or we'd have no art....

Apart from Only The Best Art EVER!!!

I can play on this all day: http://tilde.club/~david/m/

Sporky

I was about to say "But is that really art?", then realised that if I did, it would be.

CabbageCat

Sporky said:

I was about to say "But is that really art?", then realised that if I did, it would be.

Art wins again!!! (But only because maths let it)

impmann

Wow... lots of lefty bashing here.


OK a few things:

Blair was seen by me and a lot of others as a *great* idea when he swept to power - and yes some of the things on his early agenda were great. However, it was just a front...

He let all of us with even the vaguest of socialist leaning down when he continued the dismantling of the education system with the tuition fees, his policies bent on "saving the NHS" had the opposite effect and the borrowing (admittedly some of which was due to the outgoing administration's screw ups) went stupid. As a result of this, and the fact he didn't keep a check on what the financial sector were up to - and he insisted on trusting that baboon Brown with the purse strings - we all ended up *worse* off. Couple that to dodgy dealings with the US and a war that he needs to stand trial for, he had to go. Brown was just a disaster - we would have done better putting Prescott up as a PM... and he can be an arse too.

So back to where we find ourselves now. The common working man does not align him or herself with the party of the working man, Labour, because of distrust, the media's demonisation of the Unions (thank that bitch Thatcher for that) and so your average working man has started voting Conservative because they *are better off* financially under them. Try explaining that its just short-termism and its just trickle-down bollocks they won't listen.

Corbyn is a good man. A VERY good man. Is he a leader...? Well, lets give him a chance to lead... and when we do, can we have unbiased reporting. Perfect example: trident vote... yes he voted differently to a large proportion of the rest of his party but he gave them free vote on the subject because he believes (rightly) it should be a vote of conscience. But no, the BBC et al reported it as a "crushing defeat"... he knew the vote wouldn't go his way, and it was just a Tory ruse to undermine him just before the recess (power games) because the decision had already been taken!!

As for him having a plan... well, yes he does. Look it up rather than bitching on here, repeating stuff you've seen on social media and in the gutter tabloids. Listen to the man - you may be surprised. He has been campaigning for a better world since before a lot of you were born...

<sits back and waits for the deluge>

randella

impmann said:

repeating stuff you've seen on social media and in the gutter tabloids

No repeating of anything from the press, gutter or otherwise, and my social media is probably overall just about pro-Corbyn.  I just don't like him or what he's doing to the party - I arrived at that conclusion all by myself

impmann

What is he doing to the party? And why is it his fault?

Evilmags

Corbyn is NOT a very good man, he is a bigoted, incompetent, useless, jew hating waste of space. Being hard left hardly gives you the right to call yourself a "good person".  The bearded fuckwit supported the IRA while they were bombing his own country. He is a marxist throwback whose views are so full of contradictions they prove he lacks the wit and logic to run a whorehouse, far less a country. 

When May has a 150 MP majority and the opposition roles have to be split between UKIP, the SNP and Labour I'll be laughing my tits off.

TheBigDipper

Sporky said:

I tend to agree with randella there - I want a party that matches my views, not one that changes its policies to get elected according to the whim of the electorate. We've ended up with four main parties that are all in the same quadrant of the political compass; where is the choice?

I also want a party that comes closest to my views PLUS has a chance of affecting things. Under First-Past-The-Post, that would only be possible if I was closest to the Conservatives (and I'm not). None of the other parties can win enough seats to be able to affect what the government does under this system, which is why 65% of us feel disenfranchised. 

Evilmags

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/euan-mccolm-labour-meltdown-couldn-t-have-happened-to-a-nicer-man-1-4168030

Cultisim....

randella

impmann said:

What is he doing to the party? And why is it his fault?

Making it unelectable.  The party's polling has been dismal since the start of his leadership.  If you don't think that's his fault then I'm lost for words.

I don't know why you're so worried though - he's nailed on to be re-elected leader and then we'll have all the time in the world to see just how good he is.

Evilmags

TheBigDipper said:

Sporky said:

I tend to agree with randella there - I want a party that matches my views, not one that changes its policies to get elected according to the whim of the electorate. We've ended up with four main parties that are all in the same quadrant of the political compass; where is the choice?

I also want a party that comes closest to my views PLUS has a chance of affecting things. Under First-Past-The-Post, that would only be possible if I was closest to the Conservatives (and I'm not). None of the other parties can win enough seats to be able to affect what the government does under this system, which is why 65% of us feel disenfranchised. 

If you look to government for anything other than hassle and pain, you´ll probably always feel that way. 

Sporky

Evilmags said:

If you look to government for anything other than hassle and pain, you´ll probably always feel that way. 

I'd just like to direct the hassle and pain away from me as much as possible.

ToneControl

impmann said:

Wow... lots of lefty bashing here.


OK a few things:

Blair was seen by me and a lot of others as a *great* idea when he swept to power - and yes some of the things on his early agenda were great. However, it was just a front...

He let all of us with even the vaguest of socialist leaning down when he continued the dismantling of the education system with the tuition fees, his policies bent on "saving the NHS" had the opposite effect and the borrowing (admittedly some of which was due to the outgoing administration's screw ups) went stupid. As a result of this, and the fact he didn't keep a check on what the financial sector were up to - and he insisted on trusting that baboon Brown with the purse strings - we all ended up *worse* off. Couple that to dodgy dealings with the US and a war that he needs to stand trial for, he had to go. Brown was just a disaster - we would have done better putting Prescott up as a PM... and he can be an arse too.

So back to where we find ourselves now. The common working man does not align him or herself with the party of the working man, Labour, because of distrust, the media's demonisation of the Unions (thank that bitch Thatcher for that) and so your average working man has started voting Conservative because they *are better off* financially under them. Try explaining that its just short-termism and its just trickle-down bollocks they won't listen.

Corbyn is a good man. A VERY good man. Is he a leader...? Well, lets give him a chance to lead... and when we do, can we have unbiased reporting. Perfect example: trident vote... yes he voted differently to a large proportion of the rest of his party but he gave them free vote on the subject because he believes (rightly) it should be a vote of conscience. But no, the BBC et al reported it as a "crushing defeat"... he knew the vote wouldn't go his way, and it was just a Tory ruse to undermine him just before the recess (power games) because the decision had already been taken!!

As for him having a plan... well, yes he does. Look it up rather than bitching on here, repeating stuff you've seen on social media and in the gutter tabloids. Listen to the man - you may be surprised. He has been campaigning for a better world since before a lot of you were born...

<sits back and waits for the deluge>

"dismantled the education system"?
"policies bent on "saving the NHS" had the opposite effect "

how can you believe that?

Corbyn is not  a good man at all, he is a nasty piece of work,  has no charisma, and is a shit leader.
You need at least 2 of those to change  to win an election

He hasn't been campaigning for a better world, he's been protesting about things that are unchangeable,  and proposing solutions that have already been proven to not work

CabbageCat

TheBigDipper said:

Sporky said:

I tend to agree with randella there - I want a party that matches my views, not one that changes its policies to get elected according to the whim of the electorate. We've ended up with four main parties that are all in the same quadrant of the political compass; where is the choice?

I also want a party that comes closest to my views PLUS has a chance of affecting things. Under First-Past-The-Post, that would only be possible if I was closest to the Conservatives (and I'm not). None of the other parties can win enough seats to be able to affect what the government does under this system, which is why 65% of us feel disenfranchised. 

Maybe we should switch to a one-party system so everyone gets to vote for the winner. Would that help?

Evilmags

For those of us who find poverty distasteful, lefty bashing has become a necessity due to the economic illiteracy of their policies. Moreover the left is now in for a serious shock. Watch today´s PM´s questions if you don´t believe me. While Cameron ( as one would expect from an old Etonian)  was always polished, he seriously held back on Corbyn to avoid Flashman accusations and being called a bully. May is a state educated female, and as such has no need to hold back. She eviscerated him today and you get the idea that half the Labour MPs , looking at losing seats, with they could find a leader who had half her ability.

The guy is an embarrassment and waste of space. A thicko who never grew out of being a (poor, heavily subsidized by hated tory governments) student.

CabbageCat

What makes a good man a good man? Doing what you think is right? If so I think that Corbyn is indeed a good man. I also think Cameron was (is) a good man and so was (is) Blair.

Evilmags

CabbageCat said:

What makes a good man a good man? Doing what you think is right? If so I think that Corbyn is indeed a good man. I also think Cameron was (is) a good man and so was (is) Blair.

On the basis of that incredibly well thought out and logical argument so is Osama Bin Laden, Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao...

mellowsun

Evilmags said:

Corbyn is NOT a very good man, he is a bigoted, incompetent, useless, jew hating waste of space. 

What really did it for me was, at the launch of his report into anti-semitism in the Labour party, he makes the most crass remark when he said 

'Our Jewish friends are no more responsible for the actions of Israel or the Netanyahu government than our Muslim friends are for those of various self-styled Islamic states or organisations' 

'The point is that you shouldn’t say to someone that just because they’re Jewish you must have an opinion on Israel, any more that you say to anyone who’s a Muslim you must have an opinion on the vile actions being taken by people misquoting the good name of Islam in what they do'

which demonstrates he really hasn't got a clue on how to be tactful or diplomatic, and can only bellow into a megaphone at a rally.