https://bylinetimes.com/2023/06/06/g...eport-reveals/
https://youtu.be/CrHWoipWBuw
I now await the obligatory “yes, but no, but the Labour party” posts from the usual suspects.
Printable View
https://bylinetimes.com/2023/06/06/g...eport-reveals/
https://youtu.be/CrHWoipWBuw
I now await the obligatory “yes, but no, but the Labour party” posts from the usual suspects.
I see no difference between Labour and Conservative, and I wouldn't vote for any of them.
I see the smug and talented party are out in force tonight - why are you bothering with this thread when you’ve got so many of your own on here already to play with?
Starmer is on record saying he prefers the WEF way of doing things and Westminster is an annoyance.
A fairly typical Gluey reply with a question put to him ignored and a claim made as if it was a fact with nothing linked to back it up.
One of the reasons my opinion of Starmer is becoming less positive by the day and I'm less enthused about his party is that he'll promise all sorts of things one day and then act as if had not happened quite soon afterwards. Even if Starmer did say what you claim he did in the past, there's no guarantee that it represents his current thinking.
There was a very big poll published this week
https://pollingreport.uk/articles/wh...seat-landslide
it talks about Labour getting 470 seats in a best case scenario for them, but also remarks that support for Starmer, and his party, is "soft". It seems that people have had enough of the Tories, but they still aren't convinced about Labour - that's how I feel, but, as I feel millions of people in this country's lives will be made a bit better by the Conservatives thirteen years in power coming to an end, I'll vote Labour and would vote tactically for a different party if it meant a better chance of beating the Conservative candidate.
That's what I'm prepared to do to try to bring about a change of Government whereas you and the others in the small group on here who are always congratulating themselves for being cleverer than the rest of us will continue to carp from the sidelines about how they're all as bad as one and other and they]re all in thrall to big business anyway.
Yet, I read what you and the other members of the gifted set have to say about, say, global warming and it seems to me that your opinions are totally in favour of big business and a continuation of the policies which have caused ninety seven per cent, it's probably more now, of scientists to agree that global warming is a crisis that needs tackling urgently.
They are not blind they vote and think in hate and cannot see two sides to a story .
We have been voting for Blair Lite Tory government since Thatcher and we will continue that theme under Sir Kier therefore as socialist will vote for Sir Kier / Blair /Cameron party next year , we can only assume they do like conservativism ,just cant admit it due to their blinkered socialism , they certainly enjoy the less impoverished world Conservatism has provided for them in their later years , someone ounce said that ""socialism was the politics of envy "", that in my personal experience is sadly true .
Well they will have , as money is at a greater value now , we have had an unprecedent pandemic cost , global finance collapse , war in Europe since they been in power ,worse than WW2 .
What's your view on the SNP and Welsh Assembly Blair's waste of public money, without those impacts ?
Oh and let us not forget the applagin abuse of the ALL MP's expense scandal story investigated and broke via the Tory so called rag the Daily Telegraph , not the Morning Star or Woke Guardian, BBC
There are differences. Small but important differences. Just as in the USA there are differences between the two major parties of big business and imperialism.
In the USA the faultlines are around issues like universal health care, gun control and whether 17th century fundamentalist Christianity will dictate policy decisions.
In the UK the privatiser and war criminal Blair led governments introduced Sure Start, enabled a programme of council house improvements and through Prudence Brown a series of redistributive budgets that benefitted ordinary people.
I despise Starmer almost as much as the Tories (for some of the same reasons and some different) but in my view even a Starmer-led Labour government (or Labour majority coalition government) will be better than more of the Tories. The marginal differences count.
"Socialism is the politics of envy"! My God he's swallowed it hook, line and sinker, hasn't he? Conservative Central Office must look at him as a perfect example of how the cost and effort of brainwashing the proles actually produces results! No doubt he's in line for a pat on his dutiful head.
I'll try a rather different soundbite on him: "Capitalism is the politics of greed".
What do you call it when a government jumps into bed with big business?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvWwAjVDyF8
That is funny coming from a propagandist for Big Oil.
And the point is that global corporations don't decide all the laws. They influence (through lobbying, patronage and donations) many of the big strategic government decisions, and some of the smaller and more specific policies, but not all.
That was my point. You have not engaged with it.
To go back to my earlier post, I do not believe that Sure Start or the Decent Homes Programme were influenced in any way by the WEF, Formula One or BP. I also doubt that Big Pharma is backing Democrat plans to invent a universal health care system or severely cap the astronomic cost of prescription drugs in the USA.
I'm sure Shell and Exxon-Mobile are working out how to maximise their profits under Green Energy plans - but they have spent the last 60-70 years (like tobacco and other similar sectors) doing their best to frustrate a move to renewables. Starmer will happily get into bed with them - but clean energy and corporate profits is a better outcome than dirty energy and corporate profits.
Whilst that's going on there will be people in the global labour, anti-imperialist and environmental movements working to socialise the savings and the benefits of that change. Not you and your co-'thinkers' but millions of others. That is the hope, and that is the reason to back marginal improvements even if they don't come with a complete transformation of the political, economic and social systems that dominate the world.
I wouldn't disagree much, however, do not despise Starmer but don't like him either, and to address Saint Bob I would agree with the waste he points out by the Tories, that isn't for debate IMO, I don't have and will not spend anytime researching but i would be quite confident that the rebadged PFI's from Blair and his mates, that they were not shy in taking advantage of the money sloshing around and that the dodgy deals of this era would dwarf the Tory fraud values of the thread Title, IMO crooks the lot of them and nailing your colours to a mast is just endorsing one set of crooks over the other.
I think the party I have voted for all my life are hopeless and I think starmer is hopeless too
It's a case of getting in that polling booth and voting for a government that will make plenty of mistakes and be guilty of plenty of scandal
They are not socialist but I think to challenge the Tories and keep them from screwing the poor and less fortunate we need to at least elect someone who is not right wing
If enough people don't get out and tick the box at this election then I am done with it all and will vote for some raving loony candidate or lord buckethead
Because if after all the nonsense this conservative government has got up they end up winning another term then this country is firmly right wing and the labour party needs to disband
Vote them out.
Be wary of polls. Loads of Tories are embarrassed to be Tories( rightly so ) but come the day they will vote for them.
It's not though is it. Just like being gay isn't an evil belief that should be exposed, or being a Catholic isn't or being a social democrat isnt or anything else.
You shouldn't take pride in making people not be themselves around you. That's not a good thing. I think it's better to let people know that they can always come to me for support and would never be judged.
You are just repeating yourself.
So I will too.
Sexual orientation is not a ‘belief’. It is not a choice. There is no equivalence with a religious belief or a political conviction. You can change your belief system or voting habits, you cannot change your sexuality.
Yes Jon, I understand that. But isn't the issue whether someone should or should not be abused or not. Doesn't the issue lie with the bigot/extremist/ illiberal, whatever it may be who makes someone fear expressing what they think or feel in front of them. There are plenty of things people choose or don't choose (and some like religion that fit somewhere in between). Doesn't mean it's okay to abuse them into silence.
It say a lot about a country when the electorate have feck all to say about how the country is going. it's almost like a dictatorship.
It's only getting started and everything is pointing towards a biosecurity state where everything is going to be digitally controlled, including movement, money, consumption, inoculation & energy, etc. Some people are going to have face some hard conversations with their family and friends, including children and grandchildren, but here's the thing. The cowards amongst us will never admit that that they were warned and yet they still decided to call everything a conspiracy theory.