The Corbyn is feeling the water?

[Nick]

And that is the usual right wing response to say that nothing can be done, usually uttered by beneficiaries of the status quo.

Take that old canard about pay increases for the low paid being wiped out by the resultant price increases. For one thing, for anyone with an understanding of mathematics, this is nonsense. Because any pay increases for the poorest minority will be born by the entire population and not just that minority, and thus will nowhere near be enough on it's own to cancel out their pay rises. It will mean people like you paying slightly more for your groceries so that the low paid can be paid a living wage. If you cannot undersatand the maths whereby the costs of an increase in pay for a minority being born by everyone, spreads that cost so that the low paid are still substantially better off. It's simple maths. If you cannot grasp that, nothing I say will help. You will need a maths teacher, 😂. 

As for rent control, it would indeed reduce the gross profiteering occurring at the moment, but what do you think would happen if landlords stopped letting out their properties? They'd get no income from them at all, . And if they all sold up, they would flood the market with cheap housing presenting opportunities for home buyers. [highlight]And some of this could easily be mandated to accommodate tenants if left empty for too long.[/highlight]

Are you actually a home owner? I'm guessing not as you use the term cheap housing!! What are you smoking? The housing market has increased 20 odd percentage in the last 18 months, and based on an average house price of £250K you're looking £40K to £50K markup. 

Your best comment of all time 😂. [highlight]They could be mandated to provide cheap rental properties. 😆 [/highlight]
This is the ranting's of a mad man: you're saying the government will make a private house owner rent it out when he doesn't want to. Lunacy!!

Is the government going to make someone with an £80K Mercedes rent it out to someone if they don't drive it often enough? 😆 

And the Scots have managed to abolish tuition fees, simply by voting for parties promising to deliver that. If universities struggle without them, that is purely due to a lack of sufficient funding from the government, which is the problem that should be addressed.

This just shows your utter misunderstanding of the situation. Scotland has abolished tuition fees for Scots. If your a foreign student you pay, and guess what? Foreigners are the preferred choice. 

Tuition fees at present serve as a substantial extra tax on income for many younger people, and the decision to charge commercial rates of interest on that debt ensures that many of them will be paying this extra tax throughout their working lives. Of course, the politicians who imposed this additional extra tax burden on them are not paying it themselves. Of course they aren't. Nor are most of it's other defenders. Including you, probably. You often accuse the left of forever wanting to put up taxes for other people and not themselves, but you are in effect doing exactly that yourself for defending an additional de facto income tax for others that you yourself do not have to pay.

Again more rubbish. 75% of tuition fees are never repaid, of the 25%, 17% are never fully repaid. 
Guess what! It's your beloved rich that are once again the pay master generals. 

You clearly have a chip on your shoulder about salaries. You do know there is nothing stopping you improving your lot instead of bitching about those that have done better than you. 

[Borchester]

As for rent control, it would indeed reduce the gross profiteering occurring at the moment, but what do you think would happen if landlords stopped letting out their properties? They'd get no income from them at all, . And if they all sold up, they would flood the market with cheap housing presenting opportunities for home buyers. And some of this could easily be mandated to accommodate tenants if left empty for too long.

'ere no, the landlords will sell up and invest in something different. The only way to get cheap housing is to get Streetwalker and his mates on the tools to work for nothing. They are good hearted lads and will no doubt agree, but I am not too sure that Mrs Streetwalker and the rest of the WAGs will go along with the notion.

As far as I can see, the left believes that

(a) the poor are deserving and should have cheap housing and mega payrises.

(b) it won't cost them anything because

(c) the rich will pay

(a) may well be true (b) is yet further evidence that the old lies are the best (c) is total bollocks because the rich are masters at tax avoidance which is one of the reasons they are rich. Still, Steve's lot will put all three into their manifestos because it is one of those traditions that are pointless, but fun.

[srb7677]

These are the usual left wing policies that ultimately end up destroying the UK economy.

And that is the usual right wing response to say that nothing can be done, usually uttered by beneficiaries of the status quo.

Take that old canard about pay increases for the low paid being wiped out by the resultant price increases. For one thing, for anyone with an understanding of mathematics, this is nonsense. Because any pay increases for the poorest minority will be born by the entire population and not just that minority, and thus will nowhere near be enough on it's own to cancel out their pay rises. It will mean people like you paying slightly more for your groceries so that the low paid can be paid a living wage. If you cannot undersatand the maths whereby the costs of an increase in pay for a minority being born by everyone, spreads that cost so that the low paid are still substantially better off. It's simple maths. If you cannot grasp that, nothing I say will help. You will need a maths teacher,

As for rent control, it would indeed reduce the gross profiteering occurring at the moment, but what do you think would happen if landlords stopped letting out their properties? They'd get no income from them at all, . And if they all sold up, they would flood the market with cheap housing presenting opportunities for home buyers. And some of this could easily be mandated to accommodate tenants if left empty for too long.

And the Scots have managed to abolish tuition fees, simply by voting for parties promising to deliver that. If universities struggle without them, that is purely due to a lack of sufficient funding from the government, which is the problem that should be addressed.

Tuition fees at present serve as a substantial extra tax on income for many younger people, and the decision to charge commercial rates of interest on that debt ensures that many of them will be paying this extra tax throughout their working lives. Of course, the politicians who imposed this additional extra tax burden on them are not paying it themselves. Of course they aren't. Nor are most of it's other defenders. Including you, probably. You often accuse the left of forever wanting to put up taxes for other people and not themselves, but you are in effect doing exactly that yourself for defending an additional de facto income tax for others that you yourself do not have to pay.

[Nick]

Real change for tenants

Real change as in cheaper rents? Its a nonsense: If they cap rents, the landlords will just stop renting them out as it will not be profitable and most likely be sold, reducing the amount of rental properties.

Real change for students.

Again, reducing or abolishing tuition fees will destroy the universities again. Oxford and Cambridge were almost out of the top 20 universities in the word before tuition fees, that's how bad it was. Oxford is now back to second in the world with Cambridge joint third, due to tuition fees.

Real change for the young.

I suppose you mean higher / living wages for the young? Prices in the shops will simply go up and the wage / price gap will just be the same.



These are the usual left wing policies that ultimately end up destroying the UK economy.

[Good old]

Most of the policies of 2017 which were hugely pololar when polled. Real change for tenants. Real change for students. Real change for workers. Real change for the young. As 2017 proved, there are several millions who have given up on your shower of shite who are prepared to vote for that.

So what happened in 2019? Look those were good policy. But once the Tories, realised how good , they set out to rip him and his inner circle to bits, and very successfully . It wasn't hard to do. Anti Semitism , terrorist supporter, Marxist. Every Labour, supporter Of long standing I know, believed all of that, whether true or not.
There is no real reason a good percentage of those policies , can and will not be promoted by Labour in future. And that's what Corbyn, supporters would best be promoting, not sulking because Jeremy, hasn't worked out exactly as they would want.

[srb7677]

What would Corbyn, be dangling other than his dick?

Most of the policies of 2017 which were hugely pololar when polled. Real change for tenants. Real change for students. Real change for workers. Real change for the young. As 2017 proved, there are several millions who have given up on your shower of shite who are prepared to vote for that.

[Good old]

With hundreds of thousands of members it can build support amongst the millions. That's how parties work. They don't rely on their own members electing them. They rely on their members to help spread the message to a wider electoral base.

As Thomas has said to me before, the SNP managed to do it in Scotland.

The Labour Party in any shape or form can only hope to be elected if it can turn ,liberal  Tories, and Lib Dems. The very people that will never turn for Corbyn, on his own.
The SNP, dangle an independence from English politics carrot. What would Corbyn, be dangling other than his dick?
It is Tory rags making mischief.  Deflecting attention from the ,(party going party.)
If Corbyn, feels he can hurt the party by starting one in competition for votes that do nothing other than split the existing vote , then he only keeps the Tories in power for the foreseeable future.This would be bowing to their most cherished wishes, and the real reason for this kind of report.  Only his ego forces him to do that no one else.

[srb7677]

but this comes from the Daily Mail, so it's probably crap.

I read the headline about it in the Telegraph, but yes it could just be Tory rags making mischief. Doesn't alter the fact that Starmer is doing all he can to force Corbyn to do it.

[srb7677]

The problem is that to get elected the Labour (or any other party for that matter) doesn't need hundreds of thousands of supporters, it needs millions.

With hundreds of thousands of members it can build support amongst the millions. That's how parties work. They don't rely on their own members electing them. They rely on their members to help spread the message to a wider electoral base.

As Thomas has said to me before, the SNP managed to do it in Scotland.

[Sheepy]

One day we all say no together, and then what.? Find someone or something else to oppose.

Like I am going to be telling the Westminster party what is in the pipeline so they can jump on the bandwagon and stop it in its tracks again. Like many things wait and see. We are building a consensus it matters not to us if you are left or right or whatever the Westminster party tells you are.  

[Borchester]

The simple answer is yes. Hundreds of thousands of genuine left wingers have either already left the party or are teetering on the edge.

The problem is that to get elected the Labour (or any other party for that matter) doesn't need hundreds of thousands of supporters, it needs millions. So Steve and Co can run around demanding an end to capitalism and the opening of the second front now!! and tell the plebs what they should want rather than listening to their genuine concerns and sod all will happen, but that won't get the left into Number 10

Currently Labour has a 3% lead over the Tories, which is good but not as good as the 8% it had a few weeks back. So between Boris' rat like cunning and the Brothers and Sisters genius for doing something absolutely stupid, anything could happen

[Good old]

Just biding our time, we know it is coming.

One day we all say no together, and then what.? Find someone or something else to oppose.

[Thomas]

The simple answer is yes. Hundreds of thousands of genuine left wingers have either already left the party or are teetering on the edge. We all communicate with each other and stay in touch, but are reduced to voting for whomever the most progressive candidates are in our local areas. In most cases that would not be Labour. I would probably vote Green. There is a massive desire to unite behind a genuine alternative, but we need leaders around which to rally. Corbyn could act as that rallying point, and socialist members of the Labour party would probably defect to it. There are hundreds of thousands who have left the Labour party or are just barely hanging on who would flock to it and provide a mass membership. And we are the ones who used to do most of the footwork and campaigning for Labour.

The idiots running the party have no sense at all. Corbyn is hugely popular on the left still and many would rally to him. Corbyn is potentially far more dangerous to Labour outside the party than inside. Didn't some American dude once say that it was better to have potentially dangerous opponents inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in? The greatest hope we on the left have is to have a prominent figure or group of figures we can all rally round. And no one could better serve that purpose than Corbyn. And Labour seem to be driving him to it when he'd probably prefer to remain a Labour MP.  They are stupid because as a Labour MP he is no threat to them, just a maverick voice. But outside the party, acting as a rallying point for the left, he potentially poses an existential threat to the party.

I communicate with a great many on the left, most of us now outside the party, a few still inside. And the almost unanimous opinion amongst all of us is that the best thing that could happen is for Corbyn to leave Labour or be ejected so he can act as a rallying point for a new force on the left.Everyone I communicate with on the left, everywhere in the country - including those still in Labour - are unanimous in the opinion that were a new party to form with Corbyn as a prominent figure, we'd all join within days, if not hours. Whatever his unpopularity amongst some sections of the electorate, he is, and always was, a hugely popular figure on the left.

What would result would be a new party with hundreds of thousands of new members, including in all likelihood defecting socialist Labour MPs giving it parliamentary representation, and a far bigger threat to Labour than any other splinter group on the left has ever been. And Starmer is a bloody idiot for doing his damndest to make it happen.

Good for you steve. Why should you be coerced into supproting a party you clearly dont hold any truck for , by the same blairites like good old squealing about fptp and the two horse race?

I have said this time and again , clearly the system that is stitched up in favour of the two cheeks of the same arse can be broken , as the snp have proved. Farage nearly managed a breakthrough in england in terms of votes and seats , and that only stopped when the tories caved in in terror at the groing ukip votes , offered the referendum and the rest is history.

Dont be put off by the likes of good old the blairte puttin a dampener on your aspirations. Quite clearly the old two party politics is no longer viable in the modern age , and as you say , millions appear to feel the same way .

If at first you dont succeed , try , try again.

Status quoers like good old are the ones who are the enemy of progression and much needed change. I dont know how anyone who calls themself a prgressive socialist could possibly vote for or inhabit starmers new labour.

[Thomas]

It's been said elsewhere , but this comes from the Daily Mail, so it's probably crap.
There would be very little point in Corbyn, setting up another party. Other than ego,.
He will probably get elected in Islington, anyway. Whatever  else  he achieved  it wouldn't be becoming PM, and if he couldn't expect power, why would the vast majority of Labour MP, want to get involved?  In most cases Labour MPs know their only chance of power is to stay United. It's not fashionable it seems , unless your Tory, but it's the reality.

Somebody is worried.

[Good old]

It's been said elsewhere , but this comes from the Daily Mail, so it's probably crap.
There would be very little point in Corbyn, setting up another party. Other than ego,.
He will probably get elected in Islington, anyway. Whatever  else  he achieved  it wouldn't be becoming PM, and if he couldn't expect power, why would the vast majority of Labour MP, want to get involved?   In most cases Labour MPs know their only chance of power is to stay United. It's not fashionable it seems , unless your Tory, but it's the reality.