BS: Labour party discussion

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 08:53 AM

Since most Tories voted for Brexit and most Labour supporters voted against it, it,s a bit much for Teribus to say the victory for Brexit was down to Labour voters bolting. If it had gone the other way I suppose he'd blame the minority pf Tories who voted for Remain...

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 06:46 AM

For the record Keith
"Full Definition of anti–Semitism
Hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious, ethnic, or racial group
Merriam Dictionary
It does not include criticism of Israeli terrorism
It does not include suggesting that Israeli good are boycotted because of their acts of mass murder and persecution
It does not even include suggesting that Gypsies and Jehovah's witnesses be actively acknowledged and remembered during Holocaust day
It is directly aimed at the denigration and persecution of the Jewish People as a whole.
You wouldn't describe exposing a Jewish pedophile, rapist or mass murderer as "antisemitism" - or would you?
Exposing the Israeli regime for the criminals they are and seeking to make them stop economically is not "antisemitism" - yet the Isreali regime and its supporters claim it is
To the Israeli Justice Minister, all criticism of Israel is Santisemitic - she said so publicly.
The Israeli fanatics are the biggest antisemites around - the describe their own crimes as being committed by the Jewish People and claim to be carrying them out on behalf of the Jewish People - that is antisemitism on a world-wide scale.
They describe Jews, in Israel and outside who criticise their policies as "self-hating Jews" - that is no different that the Nazis who tortured, gassed and shot German opponents of their political policies.
Even an Israeli high ranking General and an ex head of Mossad was brave enough to state that.
The hundreds of Holocaust survivors and their relatives who signed a petition comparing the Israeli regime to the Nazis said the same thing.
Now - what is this Labour Party Antisemitism, if it isn't criticism of Israel?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 06:13 AM

"I am not a Labour insider. I just quote them"
No you don't - you just illude to what the por-Israelis claim
If you are going to accuse anybody of Antisemitism you need to tell us what they are guilty of not what somebody else has said
You've done this before, with cultural implants and your ****** historians
I don't know about Antisemitism - you have no idea of baic British justice works
MAKE YOUR ACCUSATION - EVERYTHING ELSE IS HEARSAY
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 05:28 AM

Huh. "I'd love that to be..."

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 05:26 AM

You are trolling because we have done this death, we get nowhere with the likes of you even after months of squabble, you had your toxic thread closed and now you're trying to bring it over here. You have an agenda and have no intention of debating this issue fairly. All you're doing is trying to get a reaction, and you're hoping that your non-debating sidekick will chime in. That is the very definition of trolling. That is not name-calling. It is an accurate description of you and your disreputable behaviour. If you manage to stoke that fire all over again in this thread it will be closed. Now you really don't deserve that explanation, but there you have it. That I'd love that to wbe the last word on it really, but we all know you and we all know it won't be.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 05:25 AM

And you apparently are incapable of describing it - you haven't so far

I am not a Labour insider. I just quote them. They should know enough about it, and certainly more than us.
Likewise the Jewish people who are at the sharp end of the abuse, who you just dismiss as part of a conspiracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 05:21 AM

BBC just 15 hours ago,

"Ms Butler (the new shadow minister for diverse communities,) was later asked on BBC Radio 5 live whether her diverse communities brief included the Jewish community.
She said: "Yes, I hope so," adding: "As you know, it's a new brief, so we are still kind of looking at what it will include in its entirety."
Later she said she would be talking to the Jewish community about their concerns about anti-Semitism in the party.

"But the decision to promote Baroness Chakrabarti, who became a Labour peer shortly after holding an inquiry into anti-Semitism in the Labour Party and concluding that it was "not overrun" by racism, was met with some criticism from Jewish groups.
Board of Deputies Vice President Marie van der Zyl said: "We are disappointed, but sadly unsurprised, that once again Shami Chakrabarti and Jeremy Corbyn have spectacularly undermined her so-called 'independent' report. We hoped her report would be a potent weapon in the fight against anti-Semitism. It now looks increasingly like the whitewash was a job application." "
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37584531

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 05:19 AM

"Again you just demonstrate that you, like Steve, are incapable of recognising antisemitism."
And you apparently are incapable of describing it - you haven't so far
Until you do 'nuff said, I think
"Or is that what you "know"?"
What I know, of course _ I may o longer live in Britain but I have family there
Of course I know how pensions are paid - what an incredibly condescending and stupid question
I wpaid into on for half a century and am the recipient of a Britishj one, as meagre as it is.
Your ory idiocy apparently knows no bounds
You have yet to address on single relevant point - uneployment, incrasing inequality, th rise in racism - all carefuly skated around - as you people always do with your support of the better off ad the establishment
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 05:05 AM

Steve, I am discussing the labour Party as per the thread title.
You respond by calling me names. "Troll" this time.
Just rant. No reason.
Jim,
What is this Antisemitism these people are banging on about, and who are the lorra-lorra people who are involved in it?
no crime - no criminal
No attacks on the Jewish People as an ethnic or cultural group - no Antisemitism.

Again you just demonstrate that you, like Steve, are incapable of recognising antisemitism.
You claimed that Shah had not made antisemitic comments.
Her antisemitism was recognised by the NEC, the Party leadership, Corbyn and Shah herself, but denied by you two.

You just do not see it even when your faces are rubbed in it.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 04:48 AM

"Which benefits only the wealthy of Britain and leaves the rest of us in the shit" - Jim Carroll

Is that what you "feel" Jim? Or is that what you "think"? Or is that what you "know"?

Any idea how pensions get paid Jim? Not state pensions but ones companies and their employees pay into. The money goes into a company pension fund and that gets invested, if they didn't do this then the pension scheme is unsustainable. So tell me Jim taking into account the vast sums invested by those pension funds and Insurance Companies who then pay out to the likes of you and me do they fit into your category of "only the wealthy"?

The Government doesn't have to do that because it has the tax payer to rely on and fund them. Besides they can always "rob Peter to pay Paul" if in trouble knowing that they then enact legislation to raise more revenue. Unfortunately their easiest way of doing this is by increasing what they call "indirect" taxation as "direct" taxation in the form of income tax accounts for only a minute percentage of the money Government needs and by increasing "indirect" taxation everybody gets nailed.

"For this, you would happily deprive the unemployed of European jobs."


Actually I don't employ anybody and I am not depriving anybody of anything - happily or otherwise.

But here a couple of "facts" should be tossed into the ring.

More people from the EU work in the UK than UK nationals work in the EU. The figures according to the BBC are as follows:

UK nationals working in the EU = 1.33 million
Nationals from EU living and working in the UK = 2.9 million

That last figure has more than doubled in the last 10 years having gone up from 758,000 in 2006 to 2,900,000 today.

Figures for those from overseas and not from EU countries has remained fairly steady over the same period.

As to depriving the UK's unemployed of jobs in Europe - Sounds very much like you are advocating a "get on your bike" solution there Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 03:54 AM

"Same therefore applies to British foreign investments then doesn't it Raggy,"
Which benefits only the wealthy of Britain and leaves the rest of us in the shit
Your personal attitude sums up the "ding-ding, I'm on the bus" society we live in perfectly - which is why it needs changing - it is designed for the wealthy at the expense of the less well off.
For this, you would happily deprive the unemployed of European jobs.
Brexit was pushed through on a racist ticket - foreigners taking British jobs - little wonder that it won some of the less caring 'traditional Labour Votes" when you consider what the Right has done to the Labour Party in making it a part of Britain' "me-me-me" society.
As good a reason as any that Labour needs changing and disinfecting - hopefully Corbyn has the conscience and the balls to clean up that particular Augean Stable.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Oct 16 - 02:58 AM

Raggytash - 07 Oct 16 - 03:34 PM

"Chin Up Steve !

Some of us, the lucky one's, have made a killing."

Same therefore applies to British foreign investments then doesn't it Raggy, which are a damned sight more "liquid" than your house in Ireland, which Raggy is only actually worth what someone is prepared to pay you for it if and when you come to sell, having sold, if you want to remain in Ireland, you have to buy into the same market that you sold to.

I've got my chin up too Raggy, my two foreign pensions have increased in value by 25% as well.

Currency fluctuates, but as someone else has pointed out, our growth indicators are all much healthier than those of the Eurozone and no Kevin the £ Sterling will never be a version of anything, because it is an independent currency, we are not shackled to "What is right for Germany, is right for Europe" - The Greeks were and look what happened to them, had they still retained the Drachma their "crisis" would never have been so painful.

Brexit was carried by "Traditional Labour Votes" get used to it, and both sides massaged their figures in presenting their argument to the British electorate, but the arguments put forward by the "leave" campaign were obviously more telling. By the way I voted for membership of the EEC in both 1973 and 1975 foolishly believing we were securing the country's place in a trading partnership. I most certainly would have voted no had it been put to me that 60% of our laws would be dictated to us by an unelected, unaccountable, corrupt and hopelessly inefficient bureaucracy, that for some reason to do with placating the French has to shift offices continually between Strasbourg and Brussels for four days every month at tremendous and totally unnecessary cost. The MEPs have voted to shut it down, but all national governments have to agree, so the French have vetoed the action voted for by the European Parliament.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 09:55 PM

It'll be ironic if Brexit means that our currency in effect becomes a version of the Euro...

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 08:13 PM

At the start of this week I could get my euros through Caxton at nearly 1.13. Today it's 1.08. I was buying them at 1.40 a few short months ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 08:06 PM

By December there will be parity, or near as dammit. The pound will recover slightly in the New Year. Possibly to the level it is now.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 05:17 PM

Or this time next month.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 05:08 PM

What sort of odds do you think you could get on the pound being the same value as the euro by this time next year?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 04:28 PM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 02:02 PM

Troll.


Nothing at all trollish about Keith's post of the comments made by Board of Deputies Vice President Marie van der Zyl. You just don't like to hear anything that refutes your biased position - it's the la-la-la-fingers-in-the-ears syndrome, trying to silence someone with whom you disagree. This is what those of your politic stripe do. You are the troll.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:34 PM

Chin Up Steve !

Some of us, the lucky one's, have made a killing.

In the past 3 months the value of my recently purchased property in Ireland has increased in Sterling value by about 25% added to this is the increase in property values in Ireland as a result of Brexit.

I'm looking at a 30% profit if I choose to sell.

It's the old story ........... I'm alright Jack F**k you.

Except that some of us don't see things like that. I'd much rather to have made no increase if the general population where better off.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:25 PM

The fall in the pound is just one sign that the world has no confidence in the disastrous decision we've just taken (well, a decision that less than 38% of the electorate took anyway). Yes I find it hard to take and I'm going to have to put up with it. Not like the Teribus/proto-UKIP axis, who never accepted the far more decisive 1975 vote, eh? Never stopped carping and briefing against it ever since. Yep, we were lied to then. Of course, no-one lied to us this time, did they? 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:17 PM

He's baiting us, Jim. Can't let it drop. We've done it to death. We know what kinds of "sources" he throws up that he must spend all day desperately fishing around for. I can't bear this constant demonisation of Shami Chakrabarti. She has more integrity, proven down the years, in her little finger than Keith, bobad and the whole dishonest and disreputable criticising-Israel-is-automatically-antisemitic brigade rolled up together. I think it's great that a person of her sinew has made a rapid rise in the party. They don't criticise John Major, do they, who was Tory prime minister in no time after doing next to bugger all.   I'm sick of discussing it, frankly, and they've had their moment (months actually) in the sun in that now-extinguished toxic thread that Keith started with malevolent intent. I know it's tempting to keep wading in, but there are plenty of other facets of the Labour Party we could be discussing without constantly being hijacked back to that dead duck. Just my take, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:13 PM

I am also bemused that someone who purports to be intelligent can have so little knowledge of the financial markets.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:05 PM

I am bemused, to say the least, to think that anyone can consider a fall in the value of the pound of 15% is anything but drastic.

The forecast is that the pound will drop even further perhaps to parity with the Euro.

This of course will eventually effect everyone.

Especially the less well off who will still have buy imported products such as food.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 02:48 PM

"Marie van der Zyl"
There goes that Israel/BDS/"Antisemitism link again!!
"Speaking following the event, which was attended by councillors and council chief executives from across the country and political spectrum, van der Zyl said: "Last summer was a real wake up call to the community establishment when it comes to the link between rising antisemitism and delegitimisation of Israel. I'm delighted to be part of the Board at a time when it's repositioning itself as being as the forefront in the fight against BDS on a national and local level. With the best public affairs team in the community and our unique reach with our deputies, we are well placed to ensure that the Jewish community's voice on these crucial issues does not go unheard."
So far, none of these people have described anything that faintly resembles Antisemitism - everything is directly traceable back to Israeli propaganda to stop the Boycott pf Israeli goods.
The latest stunt in suggesting that other victims of the Holcaust should be remembers is "Antisemitic" just about scraped the bottle of the barrel - except for those who support Israel's becoming a fully fledged Apartheid state, of course.
What is this Antisemitism these people are banging on about, and who are the lorra-lorra people who are involved in it?
no crime - no criminal
No attacks on the Jewish People as an ethnic or cultural group - no Antisemitism.
Doesn't get more simple than that.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 02:02 PM

Troll.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 01:50 PM

"So a drop of 15% in the value of the pound must be OK then

No, but higher growth than any other G7 member, and record low unemployment is.

Re Chakrabarti's new job, a Jewish view,

Board of Deputies Vice President Marie van der Zyl ,
"We are disappointed, but sadly unsurprised, that once again Shami Chakrabarti and Jeremy Corbyn have spectacularly undermined her so-called 'independent' report.

"We hoped her report would be a potent weapon in the fight against antisemitism.

"It now looks increasingly like the whitewash was a job application.

"She has sold out the Jewish community".

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 08:45 AM

Too many noises off... While we might not admire Ukip's roughhousing, the reported words of Mr Woolfe "Right you, outside now" might perhaps be a better way of acting out than carrying on in-house.
.................

Whatever Len McCluskey might say, the MPs sponsored by Trades Unions are not "owned" by Trades Unions, and don't follow their orders - as was demonstrated when MPs sponsored by unions backing Jeremy Corbyn (in keeping with the way TU rank and file members voted in the selection ballot) joined in the unsuccessful coup.

British Trades Unions do not have the built in safeguards for their members which German Trades Unions have, thanks to the impact of British Trades Unions on the constitutional rebuilding of Germany. So called "reforms" of the law over the years relating to Trades Unions have overwhelmingly been hostile to unions. Increasingly governments have seen unions as enemies, to be ground down and excluded from any role as partners.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 08:27 AM

"Free vote insisted upon by Wilson in the 1975 first ever UK wide referendum, the constitutional precedent of abandoning collective cabinet responsibility."

Well I agree absolutely. Your last phrase also perfectly describes the recent one too, doesn't it?

"Let's twist again..." 😂

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 07:52 AM

"So a drop of 15% in the value of the pound must be OK then
And the closure to traffic across Europe and slamming the employment door on British people unable to find work back home, ad the economic uncertainty that is predicted to last for a decade (just what the economy needs) - not to mention the large increase in RACIST HATE CRIMES
Icebrg - what iceberg?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 07:48 AM

On forum behaviour, the two people making the most noise are almost always the authors of spittle flecked diatribes containing the usual charges of bigotry xenophobia and racism.

Hear! Hear!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 07:26 AM

So a drop of 15% in the value of the pound must be OK then.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 07:19 AM

Free vote insisted upon by Wilson in the 1975 first ever UK wide referendum, the constitutional precedent of abandoning collective cabinet responsibility. The referendum was only held because with the free vote in the House of Commons Wilson got it through because of Conservative votes. The vote by the electorate went the way it did was because of repetition of the same lies told in 1973 coupled with scare stories of "doom'n'gloom" that the country would be ruined if we left the EEC that was a lie then as it was a lie when similar predictions were made earlier this year in the run up to the 2016 Referendum.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 06:24 AM

Sorry should have added "You want to dispute it by justifying your racism, feel free to do so" BUT NOT HERE
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 05:55 AM

"Just one of the latest offerings from Jim......to your taste?"
I've given my opinion of the racists on this forum among whom you feature and I've said why I believe you are what I think you are.
You want to dispute it by justifying your racism, feel free to do so, otherwise, stop trying to make this another on- to-one
You are doing exactly what you have accused others of doing
Pack it in unless you intend to deliberately wreck this thread
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 05:35 AM

"whereas here in the UK we have UNITE Boss Len McCluskey "
The employers federation is made up exclusively of Conservatives
How independent can you get?
The Labour party was created by the trades Union movement to represent workers interests
The problems have arisen when both of them were bought over and ceased to represent the people who created them
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 05:34 AM

Well yes, Ted Heath lied. As we know, politicos of all persuasions lied in their teeth this time round too. Plus ça change, eh? But let's look at the confirmation referendum in 1975 (under Harold, not Ted). 17,378,581 votes to stay, fewer than half of that number to leave. You want us to accept the latest neck-and-neck result now, claiming that the "people have spoken" (less than 38% of registered electors, but hey ho) but you and your ilk never accepted that incredibly decisive result and have been briefing and organising against the EU/EC ever since. What was that about sauce for geese and ganders...?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 04:54 AM

While Nigel Farage was the man solely responsible for getting the notion of the UK leaving the EU firmly on the agenda. When it came to the run up to the actual referendum itself, neither he nor his Political Party formed any part of the "Official" Leave Campaign.

And just for the record it was 17,410,742 votes cast by the electorate of the United Kingdom that will take us out of the EU. The lies told that brought about that result, for many, were the lies told 43 years previously by Ted Heath in 1973 when he conned the British people into believing that we were becoming members of a "trading organisation", when he knew perfectly well it was not.

Back to Trades Union comparison:

McGrath of Harlow - 06 Oct 16 - 03:16 PM

You forgot to add in that post that what you were describing was the situation that has pertained post-Thatcher.

The German Trades Unions totally independent from all political parties that decision having been made by the people, whereas here in the UK we have UNITE Boss Len McCluskey boasting about how many Labour MPs "HIS" Union OWNS.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 04:09 AM

Just one of the latest offerings from Jim......to your taste?
Perhaps just one little fleck too many?

"So the immigrants are all potential criminals and the non British employees are all criminals or potential criminals?
***** foreigners eh!!
Has this site finally fallen into the hands of the B.N.P. - it certainly seems like it, reading the racist bile of our three caped crusaders.
The most law-abiding, industrious and ambitious section of the population are the million or so Asians who have moved to Britain to better their lot, more often often than not to be greeted by racist filth such as that being vomited here by our three resident 'Christian humanitarians'"

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:57 AM

Strange...I always thought "wildcat strikes" were those which had not been authorised by the appropriate union?
But what do I know, Jim is the real socialist.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:52 AM

Whoops another prem. ejac.
Link to above MODEL FOR BRITAIN
As usual, Teribus gives us only half the story - the bit that suits him.
German Trades Unions are part of the decision making of the companies - they are the workers voice in decision making.
British workers have no such voice leaving them with no negotiation power other than the withdrawal of their labour - the end result being a SHARP DECREASE IN LIVING STANDARDS, zero contracts and a widening gap between haves and have-nots.
Whatever the shortcomings, German workers have a built-in say in their lives, we have not.
Workers do not go on strike without thinking hard first - they do so to maintain a living standard and improve bad conditions - the alternative is to do nothing and watch their working lives deteriorate.
I know from experience (twice in 50 years) that taking industial action is frightening and costly.
The two occasions I was involved were both to prevent the conditions I was employed under being worsened - to prevent apprentices being used as tea-boys and then to prevent tradesmen from being used as pack-mules when our employer halted the practice of transporting tools and heavy equipment to our work-sites.
Much thought and debate went into those decisions.
"Wildcat Strikes" is a term invented by the pro-Tory gutter press.   
Jim Carroll
"spittle flecked diatribes"
Please leave it out Ake - especially when you appear to be handing out exactly the abuse you appear to be complaining of - the 'Grass Houses' syndrome again

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:51 AM

Jim,
David Ben Gurion's ''taken their land' statement, "Benny Morris's' admitting to burying the massacre victim, 'Self-Hating Jews'..... are the ones that spring to mind

You accused me of making up the phrase, "Self-Hating Jews."
That was not true.

Neither of us has read Benny Morris' book, so you are relying on what propagandists have told you.
I should have a copy soon and am confident they lied.

You did completely misrepresent what Ben Gurion said, and "muppets" are amusing puppet characters popular with children, and in no way a term of abuse.

"Ignoramous" or o nothing is also another of your stock phrases.
Then why can't you find a single example? Because I have never used it.

I do not do abuse and name calling.
Why can't you and Steve stop?

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:47 AM

Whoops another prem. ejac.
Link to above MODEL FOR BRITAIN
As usual, Teribus gives us only half the story - the bit that suits him.
German Trades Unions are part of the decision making of the companies - they are the workers voice in decision making.
British workers have no such voice leaving them with no negotiation power other than the withdrawal of their labour - the end result being a SHARP DECREASE IN LIVING STANDARDS, zero contracts and a widening gap between haves and have-nots.
Whatever the shortcomings, German workers have a built-in say in their lives, we have not.
Workers do not go on strike without thinking hard first - they do so to maintain a living standard and improve bad conditions - the alternative is to do nothing and watch their working lives deteriorate.
I know from experience (twice in 50 years) that taking industial action is frightening and costly.
The two occasions I was involved were both to prevent the conditions I was employed under being worsened - to prevent apprentices being used as tea-boys and then to prevent tradesmen from being used as pack-mules when our employer halted the practice of transporting tools and heavy equipment to our work-sites.
Much thought and debate went into those decisions.
"Wildcat Strikes" is a term invented by the pro-Tory gutter press.   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:39 AM

Yes isn't it strange when human nature rears it's ugly head, Mr Prescott's clunking fist comes to mind amongst various other examples of pugilism that have occurred in politics.

Mr Mcgrath is correct to emphasis the open hater within the Labour Party at present.

On forum behaviour, the two people making the most noise are almost always the authors of spittle flecked diatribes containing the usual charges of bigotry xenophobia and racism.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Oct 16 - 03:18 AM

Seems to have been established that there was a fight, with the the name of a fellow - Kipper being mentioned as having done the dirty deed, the appropriately named Mike Hookem (you couldn't make it up).
Woolfe is said to have suffered a 'bleed on the brain', so for a Ukip member, not too serious then!
"Anybody out there with any actual experience that's relevant to that? "
I posted this above - but here 'tis again
""German workers are also envied for their corporate power. Their influence within larger companies is guaranteed by their seats on supervisory boards; this gives them a say in the hiring and firing of management and decisions over company strategy. Such a system is lauded by Ed Miliband, who is infatuated with the Rhineland model of consensual capitalism."

"Maybe a separate thread about netiquette"
Totally agree, though it was dealt with pretty well on the Trolls and Flames thread

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Oct 16 - 09:54 PM

While those qualities are most openly shown in the case of Ukip, it has to be recognised that comparable levels of fractiousness characterise both the Conservative Party and particularly the Labour Party. There don't appear to be any reports of stand-up fights so far, but plenty of talk of stabs in the back (and indeed front).

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Oct 16 - 09:26 PM

Interesting, innit, that the most shambolic political party in the nation, the one that got four million votes, the one whose leader is lauded by at least two or three posters here, is not only the one that plays leadership musical chairs/which manages to beat the shite out of each other/which has a bloke in charge of Wales who publicly hates the guts of its skinny-dipping leader and vice versa, but is also the one that dragged us out of the EU courtesy of a pack of lies. Nice one, brexit voters. You must be so happy that you're so well-led. Such profound and honest arguments from people of such integrity swayed you. Congratulations!

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Oct 16 - 08:35 PM

I was addressing my comment to anyone thinking of posting. Including me. If the need to get stuck-in gets too strong, the thing to do is write the post. Then look at it and delete it. Maybe save it to look at later. I doubt very much if you'll find yourself saying "I really wish I had posted that."

Leave the fisticuffs to Ukip...
...
Interesting to see Theresa May simultaneously channelling Ed Milliband and Margaret Thatcher.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Oct 16 - 07:57 PM

I rest my case.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: bobad
Date: 06 Oct 16 - 07:07 PM

And completely ignore any name-calling

You're addressing this to Shaw? We can only dream of rising to the level of ad hominem of the master.

Subject: RE: BS: Labour party discussion
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Oct 16 - 06:54 PM

That is true, but Corbyn and Benn are not in this forum and they are not being confronted by Keith A of Hertford and bobad. The other thread was closed, rightly, but these two have migrated here and as such I see little point in going on. They have injected the same poison into this thread as they did in the other one. Of course, we all know the answer. Unfortunately, the answer is not being achieved. Human nature I suppose. They can't debate, they are seriously and incurably bigoted, and I for one can't debate with them.