Support NeoGAF

[King_Moc]

Hobnob or Jammie Dodger man myself.

Oh and tunnocks tea cakes because it's the law scots must love them.

Well, you know what they say. If you live by the hobnob, you die by the hobnob.

I've had to ban myself from buying the chocolate ones. Never ends well. Ends too quickly, actually.

AFAIK the 20 year thing is just for finding housing via the local housing association or renting via sites like this: http://www.bostaddirekt.com/Private/default.aspx?custType=0

I think it's because house building is decreased when rent is below market rates. There's also too much regulations on where you can build and private housing companies don't want to build a lot of new homes because it's too expensive and not worth it.

Oh, so less houses being built as renting them out is less profitable. So it becomes more sensible to sell rather than rent.

Still, as someone that doesn't own a house just yet, having a bit of a collapse in the market isn't all that unappealing an idea to me.

 

[w1ck3dn1nj4]

I don't want to sound rude, but as soon as you use a credit card metaphor you show that you have absolutely zero understanding of government finance how how our economy works. Zero.

Cuts during a recession is bad. You need to make the cuts when shrinking the public sector won't compound private sector woes.

Alright I see your point how the cc metaphor is a bit silly and crude to the point of being off the mark, but thanks anyway for the benefit of doubt.

Yes of course in the short term, deficit spending does help to stabilise and provide the stimulus of 'crowding in' as you said, but isn't it the long term that's the worry when deficits go unchecked for far too long, it inevitably leads to higher interest rates, causing investments to fall, to lower output and slower economic growth? Seems to me the game they're keen on playing is to avoid 'crowding out' as they see the private sector to be more efficient? Do you have a different theory why they're so keen on going down this route?

 

[cartesian]

Policy wonk is the lamest term going. Paul Ryan calls himself that and he is a fucking moron.

There are literally inexhaustible supplies of Civil Servants who specialise in writing and implementing policy. It isn't actually that hard. Believing Ed Milliband is smarter than Jeremy Corbyn doesn't make a difference when it comes to headline issues like tax rates and re-nationalising trains.

I agree with you only in so far as anyone can and will call themselves a policy wonk, regardless of knowledge or talent. There are no real qualifications for policy work and no standardised performance metrics to enable reliable comparison of candidates, so mere interest in politics coupled with reading a newspaper can give a person the impression that they know a lot about policy.

But being a good policy-maker isn't really that simple. It can be quite complex - more so than basic level of political analysis on a internet message board. Identification of problems, identification and evaluation and synthesis of evidence, development of options, argument for preferred option, development of realistic delivery plan, consultation, design of legislation, implementation, evaluation. Working with local authorities, arms length bodies, private sector organisations. Ensuring compliance with relevant legislation and policies. Being aware of flaws or gaps in evidence. Admitting failure.

Intelligence and competence are important factors. Ability to work with numbers, work with evidence, interpret statistical data, make rational judgements on incomplete information, avoid fallacies or biases in interpretation or judgement, etc. It's not quantum physics and I don't pretend that I'm a great mind. But this doesn't come instinctively to a lot of people - just look at the course of the public debate on issues like Brexit. Reasom subordinated to emotion. Evidence subordinated to narrative. Brilliant political work. Disastrous policy work.

So if, hypothetically, Ed Miliband wanted to renationalise the railways because he's evaluated the industry and the evidence and concluded that nationalisation is the most cost-effective way to meet his policy goals, and Jeremy Corbyn wants to renationalise the railways because the fares are too high and fat cat private train companies are creaming off the profits, then in my book Ed Miliband would be the better policy-maker. Both might reach the same conclusion - and let's assume it's the right conclusion - but I would still be wary about trusting Jeremy Corbyn because he reached the right answer essentially by accident, using a dodgy method.

Of course, that is all hypothetical as I don't know the motives for each candidate's policy choices. But Corbyn gives the impression that his policies are driven largely or entirely by ideology rather than by evidence.

I have really very little enthusiasm for ideology. I am human, and I have my beliefs and prejudices, but I always aim to look past my personal feelings and understand the cold reality. Good policy is ruthlessly pragmatic - as scientific as possible in its approach to evidence and logic. Corbyn is simply not a pragmatist and therefore I cannot see how he can govern as a policy-maker.

 

[travisbickle]

Not being funny guys but renationalising a bunch of shit that were nationalised industries in the 70s kinda is taking us back to the 70s. If that's what he wants to do, he should own it.

Better than the early 20th century Conservatism we have now with heavy doses of nationalist pride, imperialism, chauvinism, protestant work ethic, handouts to the rich and a steady chokehold on the working class.

 

[RenditMan]

I've always been a big fan of the chocolate digestive. Dark or milk, I'm not bothered. None of that caramel nonsense though.



I'm curious as to how this works. I can't think of what the problem would be off the top of my head.

Supply and demand, the basic forces of which cannot be circumvented.

The lower the price of something the higher the demand.

 

[Randy Lanzarote]

BBC had a run down of Labour manifesto policies in their live election coverage page. Copying and pasting here:

Workers Rights

Give all workers equal rights from day one, whether part-time or full-time, temporary or permanent – so that working conditions are not driven down
Ban zero hours contracts – so that every worker gets a guaranteed number of hours each week
Ensure that any employer wishing to recruit labour from abroad does not undercut workers at home - because it causes divisions when one workforce is used against another
Repeal the Trade Union Act and roll out sectoral collective bargaining – because the most effective way to maintain good rights at work is collectively through a union
Guarantee trade unions a right to access workplaces – so that unions can speak to members and potential members
Introduce four new public holidays – bringing our country together to mark our four national patron saints’ days, so that workers in Britain get the same proper breaks as in other countries
Raise the minimum wage to the level of the living wage (expected to be at least £10 per hour by 2020) – so that work pays
End the public sector pay cap – because public sector workers deserve a pay rise after years of falling wages
Amend the takeover code to ensure every takeover proposal has a clear plan in place to protect workers and pensioners – because workers shouldn’t suffer when a company is sold
Roll out maximum pay ratios of 20:1 in the public sector and companies bidding for public contracts - because it cannot be right that wages at the top keep rising while everyone else’s stagnates
Ban unpaid internships – because it’s not fair for some to get a leg up when others can’t afford to
Enforce all workers’ rights to trade union representation at work – so that all workers can be supported when negotiating with their employer
Abolish employment tribunal fees – so that people have access to justice
Double paid paternity leave to four weeks and increase paternity pay – because fathers are parents too and deserve to spend more time with their new babies
Strengthen protections for women against unfair redundancy – because no one should be penalised for having children
Hold a public inquiry into blacklisting – to ensure that blacklisting truly becomes and remains a thing of the past
Give equalities reps statutory rights – so they have time to protect workers from discrimination
Reinstate protection against third party harassment – because everyone deserves to be safe at work
Use public spending power to drive up standards, including only awarding public contracts to companies which recognise trade unions
Introduce a civil enforcement system to ensure compliance with gender pay auditing – so that all workers have fair access to employment and promotion opportunities and are treated fairly at work

Railways

A Labour government will prioritise public service over private profit. And we will start by bringing our railways back into public ownership, as franchises expire.

A Labour government will introduce a Public Ownership of the Railways Bill to repeal the Railways Act 1993 under which the Conservatives privatised our railways.

In public ownership, we will deliver real improvements for passengers by freezing fares, introducing free wi-fi across the network, ensuring safe staffing levels and ending driver-only operation, and by improving accessibility for disabled people.

A publicly owned railway system can be the backbone of our plans for integrated transport. It will be built on the platform of Network Rail, already in public ownership, and consider establishing a new public rolling stock company.

A Labour government will complete the HS2 high speed rail line from London through Birmingham to Leeds and Manchester, and then into Scotland, consulting with communities affected about the optimal route.

Postal Services

Labour will end the closure of Crown Post Office branches which play a major role in serving their communities. We will also setup a commission to establish a Post Bank, owned by the Post Office and providing a full range of banking services in every community.

Labour will give communities more power to shape their town centres, by strengthening powers to protect Post Offices, community pharmacies, high street banks, local pubs and independent shops, and promote measures to decrease high street vacancies.

The Conservative government’s privatisation of Royal Mail was a historic mistake, selling off another national asset on the cheap.

Labour will reverse this privatisation at the earliest opportunity, because it is a profitable company that should still be giving a return to the many not the few, and because key national infrastructure like a postal system is best delivered in public ownership.

Housing

Home is at the heart of all of our lives. It’s the foundation on which we raise our families, the bedrock for our dreams and aspirations. But for too many people, the housing pressures they face are getting worse not better. Britain has a housing crisis – a crisis of supply and a crisis of affordability.

After seven years of failure, the Conservatives have no plan to fix the housing crisis. Since 2010, housebuilding has fallen to its lowest level since the 1920s, rough sleeping has risen every year, rents have risen faster than incomes, there are almost 200,000 fewer home-owners, and new affordable housebuilding is at a 24-year low.

It doesn’t have to be like this. Labour will invest to build over a million new homes. By the end of the next Parliament we will be building at least 100,000 council and housing association homes a year for genuinely affordable rent or sale.

Labour will establish a new Department for Housing to focus on tackling the crisis and ensure housing is about homes for the many, not investment opportunities for the few. Labour’s new housing ministry will be tasked with improving the number, standards and affordability of homes. We will overhaul the Homes and Communities Agency to be Labour’s housing delivery body and give councils new powers to build the homes local communities need.

We will prioritise brownfield sites, and protect the green belt. We will start work on a new generation of New Towns to build the homes we need and avoid urban sprawl.

We will make the building of new homes, including council homes, a priority through our [national infrastructure fund], as part of a joined up industrial and skills strategy that ensures a vibrant construction sector with a skilled workforce and rights at work.

Labour will not only build more, we will build better. We will insulate more homes to help people manage the cost of energy bills, reduce preventable winter deaths, and to meet our climate change targets. We will consult on new rules to prevent "rabbit hutch" homes.

Whether for rent or to buy, Labour will implement minimum space standards for new developments.

We will ensure that local plans address the need for older people’s housing, ensuring that choice and downsizing options are readily available.

NHS

Labour will commit to over £6 billion extra in annual funding through increasing income tax for the highest 5% of earners, by increasing tax on private medical insurance, and we will free up resources by halving the fees paid to management consultants.

Labour will give boost capital funding for the NHS, to ensure that patients are cared for in buildings and equipment which are fit for the 21st Century. And we will introduce a new OBR for Health body to oversee health spending and scrutinize how it is spent.

Labour will halt the NHS “Sustainability and Transformation Plans” which are looking at closing health services across England and ask local health groups to redraw the plans with a focus on patient need rather than available finances. We will create a new quality, safety and excellence regulator - to be called "NHS Excellence".

The next Labour government will reverse privatisation of our NHS and return our health service into expert public control. Labour will repeal the Health & Social Care Act that puts profits before patients. We will reinstate the powers of the Secretary of State for Health to have overall responsibility for the NHS. We will introduce a new legal duty on the Secretary of State and on NHS England to ensure that excess private profits are not made out of the NHS at the expense of patient care.

Self Employed Workers

There is mounting evidence that workers are being forced into self-employment by unscrupulous employers to avoid costs and their duties to workers. Labour will down on bogus self-employment by:

Shifting the burden of proof, so that the law assumes a worker is an employee unless the employer can prove otherwise.
Imposing punitive fines on employers not meeting their responsibilities, helping to deter others from doing the same
Involving trade unions in enforcement, eg by giving them a seat on the executive board of the new Ministry of Labour
Giving the Ministry of Labour the resources to enforce workers’ rights
Banning payroll companies, sometimes known as umbrella companies, which create a false structure to limit employers’ tax liabilities and limit workers’ rights
Giving employment agencies and end-users joint responsibility for ensuring that the rights of agency workers are enforced
Rolling out sectoral collective bargaining and strengthen trade union rights, because empowering people to claim their own rights in the workplace is the most effective means of enforcement.
We would also extend the rights of employees to all workers – something that will make a substantial and immediate difference to the quality of life of people in insecure work. But there are real concerns that rapid changes to the world of work are rendering existing employment categories outdated.

Labour recognises that the law often struggles to keep up with the ever-changing new forms of employment and work, so will set up a dedicated commission to modernise the law around employment status. New statutory definitions of employment status would reduce the need for litigation and make improve compliance.

The commission will be led by legal and academic experts with representation from industry and trade unions.

Energy Policy

Labour’s energy policy is built on three simple principles:

To ensure security of energy supply and "keep the lights on"
To ensure energy costs are affordable for consumers and businesses
To ensure we meet our climate change targets and transition to a low carbon economy
The UK energy system is outdated, expensive and polluting. Privatisation has failed to deliver an energy system that delivers for people, businesses or our environment.

One in ten households are in fuel poverty, yet according to the Competition Markets Authority customers are overcharged an enormous £2bn every year.

Labour understands that many people don’t have time to shop around, they just want reliable and affordable energy. So the next Labour government will:

Introduce an immediate emergency price cap to ensure that the average duel fuel household energy bill remains below £1,000 per year, while we transition to a fairer system for bill payers.
Take energy back into public ownership to deliver renewable energy, affordability for consumers, and democratic control.
The new public system will include three key elements:

Central government control of the natural monopolies of the transmission and distribution grids, and of responsibility for the policy and information functions of the regulator.
At least one publicly owned energy company in every region of the UK, that is a locally run, democratically accountable energy supplier, working to tackle fuel poverty, return profits to customers via reduced tariffs, support community energy projects and drive larger energy companies to lower their prices in the area.
A new Local Energy Task Force will provide help and advice for local people and businesses to start up Community Energy Cooperatives.

Brexit

Labour accepts the referendum result and a Labour government will put the national interest first. We will prioritise jobs and living standards, build a close new relationship with the EU, protect workers’ rights and environmental standards, provide certainty to EU nationals and give a meaningful role to Parliament throughout negotiations.

We will end Theresa May’s reckless approach to Brexit, and seek to unite the country around a Brexit deal that works for every community in Britain.

We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first.

A Labour government will immediately guarantee existing rights for all EU nationals living in Britain and secure reciprocal rights for UK citizens who have chosen to make their lives in EU countries. EU nationals do not just contribute to our society: they are our society. And they should not be used as bargaining chips.

Labour recognises that leaving the EU with "no deal" is the worst possible deal for Britain and that it would do damage to our economy and trade. We will reject "no deal" as a viable and negotiate transitional arrangements to avoid a cliff-edge for the UK economy.

We will drop the Conservatives’ Great Repeal Bill, replacing it with an EU Rights and Protections Bill that will ensure there is no detrimental change to workers’ rights, equality law, consumer rights or environmental protections as a result of Brexit.

Tax

Taxation is what underpins our prosperity. All of us, including business, benefit from a healthy, educated and skilled population with access to basic services and secure housing.

We believe in the obligation to contribute to a fair taxation scheme – and will come down hard on those who seek to avoid their responsibilities.

A Labour government will guarantee to rule out rises in income tax for those earning below £80,000 a year, on personal National Insurance Contributions, and on VAT.

Under Labour’s plans 95% of taxpayers will be guaranteed no increase in their income tax contributions and everyone will be protected from any increase in personal National Insurance contributions and VAT.

Only the highest 5% of earners will be asked to contribute more in tax to help fund our public services that have suffered at the hands of seven years of Tory austerity.

To date too many cuts have fallen on those with least – and we have seen child poverty rise to over 4 million, homelessness rise, and the queues grow at food banks. This cannot continue.

Corporation tax in the UK is the lowest of any major developed economy, and so we will ask large corporations to pay a little more while still keeping UK corporation tax among the lowest of the major economies.

Businesses tell us that they need a more skilled workforce to boost productivity and growth – and so extra corporate tax revenues will contribute to education and skills budgets.

We will also protect small businesses by reintroducing the lower small profit rate of corporation tax. We will also exclude small businesses from costly plans to introduce quarterly reporting – and take action on late payments.

Tuition Fees

Labour believes education should be free, and we will restore this principle. No one should be put off educating themselves for lack of money or through fear of debt.

There is a real fear that students are being priced out of university education. Last year saw the steepest fall in university applications for 30 years.

Since the Conservatives came to power, university tuition fees have been trebled to over £9,000 a year, and maintenance grants have been abolished and replaced with loans.

The average student now graduates from university, and starts their working life, with debts of £44,000.

Labour will reintroduce maintenance grants for university students and we will abolish university tuition fees.

University tuition is free in many northern European countries, and under a Labour government it will be free in Britain too.

Others not covered above;
Reduce voting age to 16
Ban on fracking
Renew Trident
Ban on arms sales to Saudi Arabia

I might have missed one or two, but copy/paste on mobile is hard.

 

[Ghost]

Can't wait to see the Tory manifesto...

 

[f0rk]

Glad they're committing to HS2, but the railways section really should be talking about more investment rather than free wifi. Overcrowding is the biggest problem, which they should be able to help through national rail.

 

[Jezbollah]

Cheers for posting that sionyboy. I would be keen to see further analysis especially on the costing. Lots of things there I like, actually (then again there's lots there that I very much doubt will happen).

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Are you Welsh?

WelshGAF are larger than you expect. There's me, and phi, and me, and phi. Dozens!!

 

[DECK'ARD]

Can't wait to see the Tory manifesto...

It will just say strong and stable leadership when you open it and fold out into a poster of Theresa May.

 

[Halph n Halph]

A fair few good policies there and a few I strongly disagree with.
I guess I will have to evaluate if the bad policies and the terrible shadow cabinet members are something I can accept before voting for my labour candidate.
That manifesto with a strong cabinet line up and a charismatic confident leader could've been a step in the right direction for the country.

 

[*Splinter]

Re nationalising postal services:

My understanding is that the previous government sold this off on the cheap and we'd be buying it back at a loss. If Labour go through with this what is there to stop the Tories selling it off again as soon as they get back into power?

And how likely is that to happen?

 

[Theonik]

Re nationalising postal services:

My understanding is that the previous government sold this off on the cheap and we'd be buying it back at a loss. If Labour go through with this what is there to stop the Tories selling it off again as soon as they get back into power?

And how likely is that to happen?

Ideally the solution to this is simply not letting the Tories into power.

 

[*Splinter]

A fair few good policies there and a few I strongly disagree with.

Care to give any examples?

I'm still working my way through those lists, I don't know if I actively dislike any of these policies yet but some of the one-line justifications raise an eyebrow.

Also "Ban zero hour contracts" sounds like a gross over-simplification? Someone please correct me if it's really that easy, but I imagine you either get "1 hour contracts!" or a jump in unemployment (which might be a necessary evil when tackling zero hour contracts?)

Ideally the solution to this is simply not letting the Tories into power.

Ideal yes, but if it's the only solution then I'm not sure if I'm in favour of nationalising.

 

[Xun]

Sounds like a good manifesto to me.

It's too bad they'll never get in.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Sounds like a good manifesto to me.

It's too bad they'll never get in.

Well the first point is kinda related to the second point.

 

[Randy Lanzarote]

I know it's still draft and subject to change, but I hope that someone in Labour HQ see that as a 45 page document it's a bit wordy.

Trim it down. Focus on key policy areas. At the moment it all feels like "Jeremy's Scrap Book On What I'd Do If I Get Into Power". Don't over commit, be realistic on what's achievable and stick to that.

And how long does Corbyn's team think it'll take to put all of this into action? He should know a thing or to about getting things through parliament, I'm sure he's helped to delay an act or two in his time given his voting record....

Be interesting to see if anything changes from now until the 'official' manifesto launch.

 

[DECK'ARD]

I haven't gone through it, if it's in there, but my instant impression as with Jeremy's speech the other day is that a populist tax on the rich isn't even going to come close to funding all this.

About the only thing missing is buy the moon and build a moonbase.

 

[Plasma]

Corbyn can promise all of that because he knows he isn't going to win, he'll never actually have to follow through on it.

 

[Mr. Sam]

To be fair, the last Conservative manifesto was predicated on the "fact" that they wouldn't get a majority - if they did form a government - and could negotiate some of the more outlandish or less implementable policies - like a referendum on EU membership - away in a coalition.

The only major changes you're likely to see between Labour's draft manifesto and the final one are the parts on defence.

 

[faridmon]

Is 500 million a year enough for rail companies nationwide? Or even £1 Billion?

I was thinking if Railway system does indeed get nationilised, I wound't mind paying £500 a year (Or even up to £700) to get unlimited pass nationwide

Corbyn can promise all of that because he knows he isn't going to win, he'll never actually have to follow through on it.

They just too good to be true. Even if he wins, I doubt all of them will come to fruition because the only plan he have in terms of raising funds for nationalising is ''Taxing the rich''

 

[TimmmV]

Right, where as you guys are all about really tackling people's posts, evidently. You can't tell me what to do, dad.

But both of those points are direct responses to posts you've made?

Not being funny guys but renationalising a bunch of shit that were nationalised industries in the 70s kinda is taking us back to the 70s. If that's what he wants to do, he should own it.

Sorry to be overly pedantic here, but cant help it. (IIRC these are the areas that the Telegraph article says Corybyn wants to renationalise, but it might be slightly off, haven't reread since yesterday)

- British gas and water utilities were privatised at the end of the 80s
- British rail was privatised in the mid 90s
- Royal Mail was only in the last government

 

[Theonik]

Ideal yes, but if it's the only solution then I'm not sure if I'm in favour of nationalising.

I mean if the concern is that the Tories might eventually return in power and undo any meaningful progress *again* then sure. I don't see that as a good attitude though. Might as well as let everything rot.

 

[Ghost]

Is 500 million a year enough for rail companies nationwide? Or even £1 Billion?

I was thinking if Railway system does indeed get nationilised, I wound't mind paying £500 a year (Or even up to £700) to get unlimited pass nationwide

The rail nationalisation is actually probably the cheapest one to do because you just let the contracts lapse (and they've stated previously this is what they'd do).

 

[Spaghetti]

Can't wait to see the Tory manifesto...

One page.

Two words.

STRONG

STABLE

 

[Number45]

There's not much I disagree with in that manifesto. I have no idea whether it's all financially feasible, but in principle it looks pretty good.

Only thing I'm not sure on, and this has much to do with years of demonising them as it is with me actually knowing what the impact might be, is the significant reference to unions in there. I understand (I think) the benefits, but is there something I can read to maybe understand those better as well as the downsides? As a young person growing up with zero interest in politics (during the 80's) all I remember is strikes.

I mean if the concern is that the Tories might eventually return in power and undo any meaningful progress *again* then sure. I don't see that as a good attitude though. Might as well as let everything rot.

If the public is broadly in favour of national control on these elements, I would think that would be a massive check on the Conservatives getting back into power right? Aside from major issues that have the potential for a violent swing to the right (as the last crash proved, and Brexit is taking to extremes).

 

[PJV3]

One page.

Two words.

STRONG

STABLE

Trust Theresa.

 

[*Splinter]

I mean if the concern is that the Tories might eventually return in power and undo any meaningful progress *again* then sure. I don't see that as a good attitude though. Might as well as let everything rot.

It's not just a concern, it's an inevitability. Obviously that doesn't mean that no policy is worth implementing but in this specific instance:

Labour will reverse this privatisation at the earliest opportunity, because it is a profitable company that should still be giving a return to the many not the few

If the argument for nationalising is that it will turn a profit, then I have to ask if the profit gained under Labour governments is enough to offset the loss of rebuying after selling cheap under Tory governments (and, again, whether or not this is likely enough to be worth considering).

Edit: inevitable that Tories will return to power, not that they will undo anything

 

[Lego Boss]

I haven't gone through it, if it's in there, but my instant impression as with Jeremy's speech the other day is that a populist tax on the rich isn't even going to come close to funding all this.

About the only thing missing is buy the moon and build a moonbase.

Nazis already did that in Wolfenstein?

And that terrible/brilliant film which I can't recall the name of.

Are you saying Labour are the Nazis?

That escalated quickly.

Spoiler

jk

 

[Theonik]

If the public is broadly in favour of national control on these elements, I would think that would be a massive check on the Conservatives getting back into power right? Aside from major issues that have the potential for a violent swing to the right (as the last crash proved, and Brexit is taking to extremes).

I think the problem always tends to be that people might support *some* Tory policies but not all. At the end of the day people vote on their MPs not on individual policy so it could mean they don't feel as strongly about Royal Mail or to put this differently. Many people oppose the privatisation of the NHS, Tories are still doing it and not losing seats. Why is this?

 

[TimmmV]

One page.

Two words.

STRONG

STABLE

We mock her, but this stuff is working

I was listening to the Ashcroft Election Tour podcast (recommenced by someone in here, sorry cant remember who exactly) on my way to work this morning, and there were a decent number of people just repeating the logic that May is "strong", with absolutely no justification as to why.

It's frustrating because beyond coming up with something similar for the left, I don't see what can be done to combat it

 

[Number45]

If the argument for nationalising is that it will turn a profit, then I have to ask if the profit gained under Labour governments is enough to offset the loss of rebuying after selling cheap under Tory governments (and, again, whether or not this is likely enough to be worth considering).

But those profits will be national profits right, and can be invested back into the service and wherever else it might be required?

I think the problem always tends to be that people might support *some* Tory policies but not all. At the end of the day people vote on their MPs not on individual policy so it could mean they don't feel as strongly about Royal Mail or to put this differently. Many people oppose the privatisation of the NHS, Tories are still doing it and not losing seats. Why is this?

At the moment as I see it, it's because the last governments have been dominated by those two major incidents and that the Conservatives have been very effective at convincing the public that their solution is the only one that makes sense.

We mock her, but this stuff is working

I was listening to the Ashcroft Election Tour podcast (recommenced by someone in here, sorry cant remember who exactly) on my way to work this morning, and there were a decent number of people just repeating the logic that May is "strong", with absolutely no justification as to why.

It's frustrating because beyond coming up with something similar for the left, I don't see what can be done to combat it

Was pretty disappointed to see this parroted in the BBC list of current election pledges (here), whereas the majority of the rest of it is factual reporting on what has actually been pledged.

 

[Audioboxer]

3 vital facts for the Conservatives in Edinburgh

1. SNP
2. SNP
3. SNP

ps. We think Labour are shite.
psps. a 7.x% and a 9.x% difference look this far apart on a chart.

 

[DECK'ARD]

That barchart is really messing with my head.

 

[jem0208]

What's the idea behind banning unpaid internships?

Surely that will just lead to less internships being available? Instead of having those who can afford it having some experience you have no one with the experience. Is that really a good thing?

WelshGAF are larger than you expect. There's me, and phi, and me, and phi. Dozens!!

I'm welsh, kinda.

 

[pswii60]

Corbyn can promise all of that because he knows he isn't going to win, he'll never actually have to follow through on it.

It does read like a utopia. I'd give him a vote if it was all actually going to happen. But money doesn't grow on trees unfortunately.

And of course, Diane Abbott as our Home Secretary doesn't instil a bunch of confidence.

 

[Real Hero]

can't stand that Ruth Davidson

 

[Number45]

What's the idea behind banning unpaid internships?

Surely that will just lead to less internships being available? Instead of having those who can afford it having some experience you have no one with the experience. Is that really a good thing?

The justification suggests that unpaid internships can only be accepted by people that are financially secure already - anyone that needs money to get by can't accept and misses out on that "leg up". I understand the logic, although I'm sure it won't be popular with businesses.

Corbyn can promise all of that because he knows he isn't going to win, he'll never actually have to follow through on it.

Man, this kind of thing has been incorrectly assumed altogether too many times recently. I'm sure it's true in this case, but you never know... D:

 

[DECK'ARD]

It does read like a utopia. I'd give him a vote if it was all actually going to happen. But money doesn't grow on trees unfortunately.

Ed's tombstone with the vague promises went down like a ton of bricks.

If Jeremy hopes to pull this off he will need to part the seas at Blackpool.

 

[nitronite]

Why don't Labour try some buzzwords of their own? Like:

Compassionate Corbyn/Labour, the party of compassion

Heartless Theresa/Heartless May

Seemingly meaningless buzzwords seem to work for Brexit (take back control), Trump (Make America Great Again as well as any of the nicknames he gave his opponents), and now Theresa. Why not try some of their own? Or at least try something without blaming 'muhh MSM'.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Don't think the electorate is that keen on compassion. Not if it costs them something anyway.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Why don't Labour try some buzzwords of their own? Like:

Compassionate Corbyn/Labour, the party of compassion

Heartless Theresa/Heartless May

Seemingly meaningless buzzwords seem to work for Brexit (take back control), Trump (Make America Great Again as well as any of the nicknames he gave his opponents), and now Theresa. Why not try some of their own? Or at least try something without blaming 'muhh MSM'.

I think Labour's is "For the many, not the few" which is like a lukewarm cup of tea.

They should just go all in now, nothing to lose. "She's a cunt".

Guaranteed +5% lift in the polls, possibly more.

 

[Audioboxer]

Why don't Labour try some buzzwords of their own? Like:

Compassionate Corbyn/Labour, the party of compassion

Heartless Theresa/Heartless May

Seemingly meaningless buzzwords seem to work for Brexit (take back control), Trump (Make America Great Again as well as any of the nicknames he gave his opponents), and now Theresa. Why not try some of their own? Or at least try something without blaming 'muhh MSM'.

When your opponents are cunty with their "buzzwords" you cannot out cunt them. Especially if they are cunts themselves. Cunts do the best cuntyness.

^ My old English teacher would be proud.

The British public by large prefer to wallow in misery, so attempting something like Obama's "Hope" would probably be a mixed bag, with the masses preferring to go back to "those fucking immigrants and poor, take back control! cut the benefits! save our NHS Tories!".

 

[JonathanEx]

If Labour did go with coming up with some slogan to try and cut through - and I think they should - surely there's huge opportunity with something around the name Conservatives?

Now - this may sound patronising as fuck, and that's because it is, but we do know that there is a fairly low level of political literacy in this country. So my rubbish proposal is:
- When bashing them, call them the Conservative party. Not the Tories. Conservative is what appears on the ballot paper. Sure, most people associate one with the other, but you want when you see that word on the ballot paper, that slogan, criticism, that line, that's when it comes to mind. Get that Derren Brown shit on.
- This also is an opportunity because the Tories are building around Trezza May. Theresa May's Team. But her name won't appear on the ballot. She's more popular than the party, so they're not mentioning it, and hell some people won't know which party she's for really.


You might go "well that'll barely shift anything, the sort of people who'll get swayed by that would be minimal".

You're probably right.

 

[Dirtyshubb]

We mock her, but this stuff is working

I was listening to the Ashcroft Election Tour podcast (recommenced by someone in here, sorry cant remember who exactly) on my way to work this morning, and there were a decent number of people just repeating the logic that May is "strong", with absolutely no justification as to why.

It's frustrating because beyond coming up with something similar for the left, I don't see what can be done to combat it

That’s why they need to use the same tactics as the conservatives if Labour want to gain any traction.

They need to have a catchy phrase, something like “No more!” and then every time they speak in public hammer home – We want to save the NHS, we want to nationalise the railways and postal service, we want to protect workers rights, we want to tax the rich and protect the poor, we want to build loads of new and better homes for everyone and not just to rich etc.

Just become a broken record and get those ideas known by everyone, ‘we are the party of the people’ could actually mean something again.

Of course my cynicism makes me think they wont do this and will instead get their message lost.

Its so frustrating, I mean I get that im just arm chair analysing and maybe it is harder than it seems but if you have a good message, policies that are popular and just fucking argue your case you should do well. Instead though we get politicians who fight over who eats pasties and is ‘one of the people’. That crap might work with the Sun readers but if you keep coming out saying “The conservatives have done this horrible list of things to the British people. We want to do this list of popular and good things for the people” it will start to stick.

Change the damn narrative, don’t allow the Tories to frame themselves as ‘for the people’ or ‘stable and strong’. Keep rubbing their faces in the shit they have dragged in and most importantly also focus on the core proposals you stand for.

 

[nitronite]

Don't think the electorate is that keen on compassion. Not if it costs them something anyway.

I understand, but I think it would be better to have that branding or in fact any other kind of branding as opposed to 'incompetent'. And it's obvious that they can't brand themselves as strong and/or stable, so why not go with something different, that plays to their strengths (such as they are), while also highlighting their main difference with the Tories.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Senior Labour source says manifesto is what Ed Miliband would have loved to do if he'd had the nerve.

I can believe that. It's a pretty good manifesto, to be honest, and has the fingers of Milibandism all over it. Just a shame there's nobody in the party in a good position to explore its appeal.

 

[Theonik]

Why don't Labour try some buzzwords of their own? Like:

Compassionate Corbyn/Labour, the party of compassion

Heartless Theresa/Heartless May

Seemingly meaningless buzzwords seem to work for Brexit (take back control), Trump (Make America Great Again as well as any of the nicknames he gave his opponents), and now Theresa. Why not try some of their own? Or at least try something without blaming 'muhh MSM'.

The People's Corbyn. Leading the people where they deserve to be led.

The justification suggests that unpaid internships can only be accepted by people that are financially secure already - anyone that needs money to get by can't accept and misses out on that "leg up". I understand the logic, although I'm sure it won't be popular with businesses.

Reality is that meaningful internships would still be offered even as paid if companies had to pay. Think of it this way. If the profession has demand it would be quite difficult to hire people for free even as interns. Try that on a computing student and you'd be laughed at if you offered less than 18k. The market will simply realign itself.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

I understand, but I think it would be better to have that branding or in fact any other kind of branding as opposed to 'incompetent'. And it's obvious that they can't brand themselves as strong and/or stable, so why not go with something different, that plays to their strengths (such as they are), while also highlighting their main difference with the Tories.

The idea is fine I just think compassion would go down like a lead balloon. People would read it as more handouts and immigrants probably.