Jump to content

The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread


Demitri_C

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said:

Maybe one more time to see if it gets through

 

For clarity it might be noted that it is a privilege only enjoyed by a few industries which happen to be unionised, and are capable of inflicting sufficient pain.

It was why secondary picketing was made illegal and New Labour refused to repeal it, despite their promises.

This left workers such as those involved in the Grunwick dispute, totally at the mercy of their employers.

The opposite side of the argument was that unions who won pay-increases for their workers, caused the inflation which made workers not in unions, worse off.

 

Edited by MakemineVanilla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This could easily go in the BBC Thread but as it originates from Grant Smarmy...

Quote

Train strike: How much are rail workers paid?

[...]

There have been lots of claims about how much rail workers are paid. Let's start with the highest figure quoted.

How much are train drivers paid?

In a debate about the strikes in Parliament on 15 June, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said: "The median salary for a train driver is £59,000, compared with £31,000 for a nurse and £21,000 for a care worker." [...]

Is the median salary for rail workers £44,000?

Mr Shapps went on to say: "The median salary for the rail sector is £44,000, which is significantly above the median salary in the country."

BBC

The train drivers aren't on strike! And including them in median figures for the industry as a whole is a totally bogus argument 

But they'll continue this narrative as if they are

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MakemineVanilla said:

For clarity it might be noted that it is a privilege only enjoyed by a few industries which happen to be unionised, and are capable of inflicting sufficient pain.

It was why secondary picketing was made illegal and New Labour refused to repeal it, despite their promises.

This left workers such as those involved in the Grunwick dispute, totally at the mercy of their employers.

The opposite side of the argument was that unions who won pay-increases for their workers, caused the inflation which made workers not in unions, worse off.

 

You're right in everything you say. Millions of workers now have their balls firmly in the hands of their employers and are powerless to fight back.

Is it fair that non-unionised workers might suffer? No, but that isn't the fault of unionised workers exercising their rights.

The government's next move is to try to neuter the unions to stop rail workers striking again, and it must be stopped even if it takes widespread wildcat strikes to break them.

Edited by Davkaus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

You're right in everything you say. Millions of workers now have their balls firmly in the hands of their employers and are powerless to fight back.

Is it fair that non-unionised workers might suffer? No, but that isn't the fault of unionised workers exercising their rights.

The government's next move is to try to neuter the unions to stop rail workers striking again, and it must be stopped even if it takes widespread wildcat strikes to break them.

With left wing governments becoming increasingly authoritarian, I wouldn't even trust Labour, when it came to supporting worker's rights.

The Gate Gourmet dispute where airline catering workers were replaced with agency workers happened in 2005, after Laabour had been in power for eight years.

Their policies ensured that low-skilled workers could not even benefit from market forces, as they opened the door to EU workers, while other countries set limits and even protected certain sectors.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lynch for leader.

Though it's probably helpful for Starmer to have the unions point out why Labour is not representing their members properly. Let's hope Labour get in on a light blue ticket and go full Lynch once power is seized. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Lynch for leader.

Which version of the Communist Party are you proposing this for?

He isn't a member of the Labour Party, he's TUSC like the RMT (they set up TUSC) I think, so his individual party is probably The Socialist Party (AKA the non-entryist faction of the former Militant Tendency) but can't know for sure

Which also makes all the Tory jibes about Labour and the RMT laughably stupid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bickster said:

Which version of the Communist Party are you proposing this for?

He isn't a member of the Labour Party, he's TUSC like the RMT (they set up TUSC) I think, so his individual party is probably The Socialist Party (AKA the non-entryist faction of the former Militant Tendency) but can't know for sure

Which also makes all the Tory jibes about Labour and the RMT laughably stupid

Jeez - it was meant in the same breath as shouting Klopp for leader. Also the bloke is not wrong is he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Also the bloke is not wrong is he?

Sorry, I don't get the hard on for him. Most of his appearances preach to the converted, which is exactly the wrong audience

Though it does have to be said, in interviews this morning he started changing the emphasis away from pay and onto safety and other concerns that directly affect the public. Pay came later in his list of things they want. He should have been doing that from the start

His messaging has been very off in my opinion. You need the public onside, most of his messaging was just getting the more left wing politically active on board.

Sitting there interrupting whichever junior minister he was on Newsnight saying liar liar liar constantly made him look a right word removed to be perfectly frank and it would have won absolutely no people over to the cause, just reinforced the currently held opinion by those who already supported the strike AND reinforced the opinion of those on the soft side of not supporting the strike

I was pleased to hear he changed that this morning

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bickster said:

Sorry, I don't get the hard on for him. Most of his appearances preach to the converted, which is exactly the wrong audience

Though it does have to be said, in interviews this morning he started changing the emphasis away from pay and onto safety and other concerns that directly affect the public. Pay came later in his list of things they want. He should have been doing that from the start

His messaging has been very off in my opinion. You need the public onside, most of his messaging was just getting the more left wing politically active on board.

Sitting there interrupting whichever junior minister he was on Newsnight saying liar liar liar constantly made him look a right word removed to be perfectly frank and it would have won absolutely no people over to the cause, just reinforced the currently held opinion by those who already supported the strike AND reinforced the opinion of those on the soft side of not supporting the strike

I was pleased to hear he changed that this morning

Yeah fair enough. I thought he cut through quite well yesterday, took on Tory MPs, questioned Labour MPs, cut through multiple styles of news interviewer - represented his side well on a day when the issues needed to be explained clearly and without spin. An evolution of the argument in the same style is completely welcome. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I thought he was brilliant yesterday, not seen much today.

Filling the Starmer shaped hole in the media over the last couple of days and doing a decent job.

 

On Question Time this evening I believe.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Probably unpopular opinion but starmers been one of the better labour leaders in years.

I actually quite like how he conducts himself during PMQS

His biggest problem has now become one of expectation. It's not that long ago that Starmer was supposed to be the new John Smith, or even the new Neil Kinnock. 

When he first became leader, there was absolutely no talk of him winning the next election, such was the size of the Tory majority. He was supposed to get things ready for the one after him. Then events spiralled, and all of a sudden they're in a strong position to take power.  

He's always had the look of somebody who would knock the party into shape but probably wasn't going to be the one who actually won an election for them. The problem is, he still gives off that vibe even though they look like they might well win (or at least not lose) the next election.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

His biggest problem has now become one of expectation. It's not that long ago that Starmer was supposed to be the new John Smith, or even the new Neil Kinnock. 

When he first became leader, there was absolutely no talk of him winning the next election, such was the size of the Tory majority. He was supposed to get things ready for the one after him. Then events spiralled, and all of a sudden they're in a strong position to take power.  

He's always had the look of somebody who would knock the party into shape but probably wasn't going to be the one who actually won an election for them. The problem is, he still gives off that vibe even though they look like they might well win (or at least not lose) the next election.

Yeah alot of points there i agree with. I think if starmer continues as he is and doesnt do anything silly so the press influence it in boris favour i expect a labour victory. 

Boris is doing the damage himself so just leave him to it. All the corruption is slowly coming out and people are fed up of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's exactly the leader the Tories need. Sensible, smart, aligned with business and unlikely to change anything.

And I guess that's the plan, win over those floating voters that went Tory last time by being a more palatable non-dangerous leader than the shambling slag on the bench opposite. 

I think it's a bad plan, but I think Boris will make it a winner.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the danger to Labour is how much of the shit sticks to Boris, if his party kick him out. Over the last few years they've done a truly brilliant job of convincing a big chunk of the electorate that it's perfectly fine to bang on about the last Labour government 12 years ago, but that other Tory cabinet a year ago? Nothing to do with us, lads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I think the danger to Labour is how much of the shit sticks to Boris, if his party kick him out. Over the last few years they've done a truly brilliant job of convincing a big chunk of the electorate that it's perfectly fine to bang on about the last Labour government 12 years ago, but that other Tory cabinet a year ago? Nothing to do with us, lads.

I think since 2019 they have done that but I think they were almost able to as it was not just the PM who changed there was a complete overhaul of the cabinet. Likes of Rudd, Hammond, Hunt, Greening, Gauke, Clark, Liddington, Green either went back to back benches or were no longer MP's. Anyone likely to replace Johnson is going to have ties to him and the shit show he has presided over.

Edited by markavfc40
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

I think since 2019 they have done that but I think they were almost able to as it was not just the PM who changed there was a complete overhaul of the cabinet. Likes of Rudd, Hammond, Hunt, Greening, Gauke, Clark, Liddington, Green either went back to back benches or were no longer MP's. Anyone likely to replace Johnson is going to have ties to him and the shit show he has presided over.

Yep and he's deliberately made an awful lot of them stand up and be counted in his honour.

Some of them have been trying to distance themselves from his shitshow, notably Sunak, Truss and Gove. Sunak was sunk a while back but as soon as he got fined that was it, all his gloss was gone. Truss and Gove managed it for a good period but both of them have slowly been made to stand up and be supportive. He's absolutely tried to taint everyone around him with his poison and he's succeeded. If they do go down on his watch they'll have to find yet another bunch of completely different people with a different approach before they are able to climb back up. Just think how shit the next lot will be but hey watching a leadership contest between these drongos will be at least a luttle bit fun when he's eventually gone

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â