Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
They're Nu-Tory
What do you think about Labour's industrial strategy, and their ideas about reforming banking, introducing democracy into corporations, setting up a national care service and so on?Indeed. All the parties appear to have abandoned as irrelevant any notions of technical competence in the day-to-day management of the country. Perhaps they are correct in that it simply doesn't sell to the voters but it is getting more and more urgent for the interests of the majority that some technical competence is brought to bear to adjust how wealth is currently flowing, to slow and reverse the destruction of our social infrastructure and to start removing some wealth from the excessively wealthy in a manner they are prepared to accept. Until one of the political parties starts doing this our current downwards trajectory for the majority is going to continue with more and more expressions of social instability like the self harm of brexit, growing faith in extremism on the left and right, etc...
They are some of the things that need doing if part of a coherent integrated package and lead by a rational group that both capital and labour can trust. The faith based faction controlling the labour party are so far from this that currently stated labour party policy is all but irrelevant. If the faction were ever to reach power the expectation by many is that they would then implement a range of policies that form part of their faith and would try to dig in in the way they have always done. Trust matters and the faction controlling the labour are probably not trusted by most of the people voting labour never mind those voting for other parties.What do you think about Labour's industrial strategy, and their ideas about reforming banking, introducing democracy into corporations, setting up a national care service and so on?
Quite simply: we would not be in this mess now if they hadn't enabled it. And I don't just mean 'Brexit'.
Dubious. Blair's relaxation in 2004 of freedom of movement is probably a substantial contributor, amongst other things.
Dubious. Blair's relaxation in 2004 of freedom of movement is probably a substantial contributor, amongst other things.
The Tories played their part when Cameron announced a Brexit referendum to try to placate nationalists within his own party and stop Ukip gaining Tory seats.
The electorate (those who voted) then enabled it by voting for it.
I don't see how Labour has enabled it. Can you explain?
Pretty sure Corbyn voted against.The referendum bill was supported by all parties in the House apart from the SNP. It had overwhelming support at the second reading, including from >200 Labour MPs. The 3rd reading vote had a much smaller turnout but it was obvious by then it was going through.
I realise Labour didn't have the numbers to prevent it, but that doesn't mean they were obliged to vote in favour.
My recollection is that he abstained, but I've lost the will to check.Pretty sure Corbyn voted against.
Zarniwoop is right. He mostly ducked it but he voted for the Ref in 2011, when the ball was set rolling. Thereafter, he abstained.Pretty sure Corbyn voted against.
And, as a point of information, the ten current Lib-Dems who were MPs at the time all voted *for* a referendum:Zarniwoop is right. He mostly ducked it but he voted for the Ref in 2011, when the ball was set rolling. Thereafter, he abstained.
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/10133/jeremy_corbyn/islington_north/divisions?policy=1027
Ha, so Corbyn’s Parliamentary voting record makes him less culpable for Brexit than any LibDems! HilariousAnd, as a point of information, the ten current Lib-Dems who were MPs at the time all voted *for* a referendum:
https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1174099554846826498
Note that this was after the 2015 GE, so they were not in coalition at the time.
Yup. Swinson's in the clear though (defeated in 2015 GE).Ha, so Corbyn’s Parliamentary voting record makes him less culpable for Brexit than any LibDems! Hilarious
What's irrational about the current leadership? They're at least partly responsible for the policies after all. And I may have asked this before: where does faith come into it? The policies or...what?They are some of the things that need doing if part of a coherent integrated package and lead by a rational group that both capital and labour can trust. The faith based faction controlling the labour party are so far from this that currently stated labour party policy is all but irrelevant.[snip]
SNP and Greens have completely repudiated the LDs' position. Lib Dems are way out on a limb, and if I had more faith in their acumen or integrity I'd say they were deliberately falling on their sword for the good of the remain alliance.I'm very disappointed with the LD position. If we win, revoke - fine. If we go into coalition we will negotiate - shit.
It should be under every and all circumstances - revoke if you want our help. Also, you will pass a proper PR bill that we will dictate the white paper for, no referendum - you whip all your members to do it or no support. First two items would have to be revoke and PR. Then we can talk about your social reform policies which we're probably going to agree with anyway.
Similarly the SNP can have revoke and and a referendum north of the border at a time of their choosing.
The Greens can have revoke and their energy policy, set out just like a white paper just copy this.
Then when Labour are a few seats short. Maybe ten. Maybe a hundred. They can see what combination of the three centre parties gets them enough votes.
It also has the elegance of people actually setting out what they want to do, not what they think they need to say to get people to vote for them so they can do something else. And everyone is clear on where they stand on Brexit. I believe the LD, SNP and Greens have all said revoke?
I'm very disappointed with the LD position. If we win, revoke - fine. If we go into coalition we will negotiate - shit.
It should be under every and all circumstances - revoke if you want our help. Also, you will pass a proper PR bill that we will dictate the white paper for, no referendum - you whip all your members to do it or no support. First two items would have to be revoke and PR. Then we can talk about your social reform policies which we're probably going to agree with anyway.
Similarly the SNP can have revoke and and a referendum north of the border at a time of their choosing.
The Greens can have revoke and their energy policy, set out just like a white paper just copy this.
Then when Labour are a few seats short. Maybe ten. Maybe a hundred. They can see what combination of the three centre parties gets them enough seats.
It also has the elegance of people actually setting out what they want to do, not what they think they need to say to get people to vote for them so they can do something else. And everyone is clear on where they stand on Brexit. I believe the LD, SNP and Greens have all said revoke?
Caroline Lucas says the Lib-Dem position is "arrogant, self-indulgent, cynical and very dangerous". I'd take that as a NO, if I were Swinson.