War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
To be fair he does know what he's talking about when it comes to video games, he's not doing it for popularity.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF |OT2| - We Blue Ourselves
- Thread starter Jezbollah
- Start date
- Status
Official PlayStation Magazine UK interviewed him a few years ago, and he said that he (at the time at least) ran a secret society for politician gamers who swore that they wouldn't leak who played video games to other MPs because they were so embarrassed about it. They had Guitar Hero, Call of Duty and Street Fighter meetups if I remember correctly.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
oh my
I bet Jeremy Corbyn plays Rapelay and Hatsune Miku. Plus Rise is his Persona 4 waifu
I had to google that stuff, pls don't judge
Right, now he's unelectable.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
He and Chie divorced because she wanted to send their child to Gekkoukan High School.
I'm so sorry. New lows.
Hahaha, seeing what you bolded out of the three options made me laugh.
Edit: I know when the election results came out a lot of people were saying "now are NHS is going to dissapear!" sarcastically while rolling their eyes.
But between what's happening to Junior Doctors, what the CQC is doing, huge budget cuts to social care services and extensive privatisation. The NHS is being so badly gutted that within the next few years, unless you have private health care insurance, the quality of care you receive in the UK will be woeful.
Jezbollah
Member
Interesting developments out of the Labour conference with the Trident issue not even reaching the point of debate, and now John McDonnell pushing for the financial transaction tax.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34375702
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34375702
PJV3
Member
The modern wing of the party is still behaving like babies, how many times is Falconer going to talk about resigning?, can't bring themselves to say he could possibly be a good PM and still moaning about a lack of women in the top jobs after refusing to take part.
They go on about winning but they can't even get the basics of being in the same party right.
They go on about winning but they can't even get the basics of being in the same party right.
Newspaper headlines: Labour conference dominates front pages - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-34376522
It's sad to see the Telegraph sinking lower than most of the tabloids.
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/8203960
The blairites are also sniping as much as they can.
It's sad to see the Telegraph sinking lower than most of the tabloids.
http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/8203960
The blairites are also sniping as much as they can.
CyclopsRock
Member
My boy GO does a good job of explaining it here.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/8878738/George-Osborne-attacks-Tobin-tax.html
Has there been extensive privatisation since the election? I haven't been following but I know that during the coalition, the levels of privatisation were pretty small - certainly, about half the rate as during the Labour years.
Jezbollah
Member
Pretty much hits the nail on the head there. Banks CAN leave - see HSBC. Financial organisations will just leave to base their transactions from territories that do not have such a tax.
CyclopsRock
Member
There are other reasons, too, that he didn't really go into there (because, I guess, he was talking specifically about that EU-wide version) such as the fact that it basically increases volatility, as it discourages making lots of trades based on quick market data (since you pay tax on each trade, not profit earned) so you're more likely to lump on and hope for the best. As someone who frequently gambles four, sometimes five figures a month on sports betting, I know that I'd have a far riskier approach if I had to pay a percentage or flat fee per bet (rather than simply on the profit, which is how it works).
It's not just the PLP. The unions have basically said that they won't support dropping trident. There is nothing Corbyn can do in the face of that.
All his talk "New politics" is bollocks. He can't do anything without union backing.
PJV3
Member
I'm not talking about policy differences, that's fair enough. It's the sulky tone and general attitude.
As for Trident, I don't think anyone wanted to talk about it, I'm with Chris Bryant on that one. It needs more discussion than a few hours at conference, all the options besides just getting rid of it need to be looked at.
The Unions win some and lose some, I don't think they will get what they want on the EU for example.
CyclopsRock
Member
Corbyn wasn't exactly great at the "being in the same party" lark either.
Not since the election. The privatization that is already in place is still doing damage and not being reversed though. I am of the opinion that the last Labour government were awful in many expects so don't expect to find me defending much of what they did.
CyclopsRock
Member
Not since the election. The privatization that is already in place is still doing damage and not being reversed though. I am of the opinion that the last Labour government were awful in many expects so don't expect to find me defending much of what they did.
Sure, sure, but to be fair, you're the one that mentioned "after the election" and "extensive privatisation" so I sorta wondered what you meant.
Yeah that's fair enough. I didn't phrase what I meant in the best way.
What do people think about the court levy? It seems really counter-productive.
http://i100.independent.co.uk/artic...tting-to-crimes-they-didnt-commit--Z1hwqydyre
http://i100.independent.co.uk/artic...cause-they-cant-afford-court-fees--ZkfO1lPsUx
CyclopsRock
Member
The examples don't really seem to tally up with the headline on that first one. It claims to explain why poor people are admitting to crimes they didn't commit but then lists examples of people who did commit the crimes they were sentenced for. Re: the actual headline, this would only be a "problem" if people are being incorrectly found guilty for crimes they didn't commit - is there any evidence that this is occuring, generally?
You're right on that. I was just interested what opinions were on the levy in general. I just stumbled across these articles and hadn't heard of the levy before so just shared them as they still had some interesting info.
I do really think that a progressive fining system is overdue (similar to Norway). Because fining any crime a fixed amount does create two tiers of law for those crimes and disproportionately always affects the poorest.
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
This levy is wrong. This increase in charges for the civil courts is even worse.
(Luckily, Gove seems to be doing a sort-of-reasonable job in undoing some of the worst things Grayling put in - but he hasn't tackled these yet.)
EDIT: We actually *do* have a progressive fine system - rather loosely - as magistrates are required to take into account the means to pay. But these charges are outside the fines system, and are fixed, making them severely regressive.
Also the rich have it even worse. If they fund their own defense (which likely they will have to in the absence of legal aid) they are unlikely to be able to recover the cost from the prosecution even if they are found not guilty.
I don't really see why. It's the same as increasing the fines across the board, and then earmarking part of the fine for the costs to the criminal justice system.
Now whether the fines should be increased is a question worth looking at I, but I don't morally or practically see an issue with part of a fine going towards the CJS costs.
anonymous_abc
Member
It increases pressure to find (more) people guilty...
As someone working in that field, I have to say I have never encountered a magistrate or court official who gives one flying fuck about the cost of running the CJS. Civil servants at Whitehall yes, but judges are incredibly isolated from the running and costs of courts. Plus the way the funding works the court issuing the fine doesn't see it directly anyway - it goes to the central government funding pot as part of the wider income for the CJS.
It's a fair point though.
It's a fair point though.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
Agreed. I still don't see why we can't just invest in the French M51 system. Why does it have to be trident or nothing whenever it's discussed.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
Renationalising is popular almost everywhere - even though a lot of tories don't like it, conservative voters are in favour.
The rail service was pretty awful before privatisation, though a lot cheaper.
Hopefully a happy medium can be found. If all the money currently going to shareholders goes back into the rail system efficiently, it'd be great. Hopefully they're successful in their bid to "Oppose any attempt to break up or privatise Network Rail", that happening would be a disaster.
CyclopsRock
Member
We are actually kinda lucky in the sense that the Northern Irish rail system has remained nationalised for the whole time. So we have a decent grounds for comparison.
If anyone can be arsed.
If anyone can be arsed.
Nicktendo86
Member
Apparently the labour conference voted for the full renewal of trident last night
@georgeeaton: Labour conference voted for full Trident renewal yesterday (paragraph in Britain in the World policy report).
@georgeeaton: Labour conference voted for full Trident renewal yesterday (paragraph in Britain in the World policy report).
I went on the East Coast line last week. That has been privatised for what, three months? It was a fucking disaster compared to before. Higher prices, worse loyalty rewards, no free WiFi, hadn't been cleaned properly and was horribly late.
Nationalisation is a win/win.
Just watching the BBC coverage of the speech. They are straight up lying about what Corbyn said in the speech. It's absolutely gobsmacking.
It's amazing how much the British Media are burying their head in the sand about the deficit. When globally austerity has widely been accepted as a huge dampner on growth and a complete abject failure.
It's amazing how much the British Media are burying their head in the sand about the deficit. When globally austerity has widely been accepted as a huge dampner on growth and a complete abject failure.
N7Commander95
Member
I am in like actual shock, this isnt spin, this is outright lying
What about this NEC statement?
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/sep/29/labour-promises-to-renationalise-english-railways
Where are these numbers coming from?
Jezbollah
Member
I'm guessing here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa.../441862/july-2015-rail-franchise-schedule.pdf
I'll have to look into this more.
Do you have any examples?
EDIT: I should say I've been getting more and more annoyed with Radio 4's commentary on all this. There was an interview with some Labour guy last night on my way home which was pathetic, went basically like this:
"We don't think there should be cuts, the public perception that there have to be cuts is an atifice, we will be looking at other ways without cuts"
"So, where will you make the cuts then?"
"There are alternatives to cuts, we are investigating them."
"Yeah, but what are you going to cut to balance the books then, people care a lot about about that."
"People care about cutting the deficit, yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean cuts."
"But where will the cuts come?!"
etc.
The main one that got me was that they said Corbyn never mentioned the deficit (he did) and that he said that he has pledged to borrow more money.
On a side note:
It's amazing how the national deficit is something that is getting such a big push by the media to turn it into something it's not when the rest of the world has largely moved on.
This is the article that convinced me of that anyway: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n04/simon-wren-lewis/the-austerity-con
If a am misinformed please tell me.
However, Labour are now trying to (rightly imo) trying to shift the narrative back toasking how the national deficit of the United Kingdom could in anyway be responsible for the Banking Crisis of 2008.
Oh good, I can't wait for the bullshit headlines tomorrow.
CORBYN VOWS TO BANKRUPT BRITAIN!!!
The other interesting side note is the concern trolling that is being pulled whenever Corbyn comprises on something, trying to pre-empt his supporters calling him a traitor or even better a 'red Tory', when (so-far) it looks like that isn't going to happen based on his open-approach to changes.
I also think it's good the Corbyn called on people to stop misogynist harrasment online and personal abuse which some of the Blairite wing of the party have been facing.
http://news.sky.com/story/1561050/sky-pulse-53-percent-can-imagine-corbyn-as-next-pm
I also think it's good the Corbyn called on people to stop misogynist harrasment online and personal abuse which some of the Blairite wing of the party have been facing.
http://news.sky.com/story/1561050/sky-pulse-53-percent-can-imagine-corbyn-as-next-pm
From what I gather, having looked at a few blogs, it's mostly to do with timing. The successor to the Vanguard SSBN's needs to be picked very soon, as the existing submarines cannot last much longer. Even with refits we'll see HMS Vanguard reach end of life at 2022, HMS Victorious by 2024, HMS Vigilant by 2026 and HMS Vengeance in 2029. So by 2024, we'd no longer have a continuous at-sea deterrent in place. Which is bad if you want to keep being a nuclear power.
So the successors need building soon. The exact decision on how many to build, and what design to go for, is due to take place in 2016, but design work has already been going on. Given this time constraint, it makes sense for the submarine designers to work with what they already know and can use, namely the Trident system. There's a whole host of co-operation with the Americans, on a range of issues, already in place to enable this to happen. Just one big example, there's co-operation on the development of a common missile compartment already going on. The M51 Missile is slightly larger than Trident, and I don't think you want to stick a nuclear missile into a launch tube that's not the right size for it. That seems like a bad idea.
There's also some legal issues to resolve. Would France be in breach of the Non-Proliferation Treaty if they sold us some M51 missiles? Maybe?
Really though, it's the time thing. If we wanted to use the M51's, we'd have had to been having discussions with the French back in the early 2000s, if not before then. Meanwhile, we've been co-operating with the Americans on nuclear issues since 1943. Makes sense to go with what you know on something this major.
You may want to edit that a bit...
Miles Quaritch
Member
This focus on mental health is very surprising, but also very very welcome.
I hope it leads somewhere, but with how the Tories are handling the NHS, I suspect any proper consideration for mental health is a long ways away.
I hope it leads somewhere, but with how the Tories are handling the NHS, I suspect any proper consideration for mental health is a long ways away.
QuicheFontaine
Member
Just miffs me that France's nukes are better than ours.
CyclopsRock
Member
I think Uzzy is right - we could explore other options if government after government didn't kick the issue into the long grass, just like power generation, runway capacity etc.
Also Corbyn himself said that he wants a balanced budget but given he wouldn't become PM until 2020, when the OBR anticipate it will be balanced, means he won't need to make that decision. But that kinda implies he's OK with the cuts. If he isn't, he'll reverse a bunch come 2020 and we'll be back into a deficit.
Also Corbyn himself said that he wants a balanced budget but given he wouldn't become PM until 2020, when the OBR anticipate it will be balanced, means he won't need to make that decision. But that kinda implies he's OK with the cuts. If he isn't, he'll reverse a bunch come 2020 and we'll be back into a deficit.
Jezbollah
Member
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked