ShipOfTheseus
Clint Dempsey
How old are you? Most Corbynites would point to Michael Foot.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Politics, politics, politics
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
How old are you? Most Corbynites would point to Michael Foot.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
I'm not sure. I find there's a toleration of an aggressive boorishness around the party. I think it's still moderately misogynist for instance. Compare it to say other progressives like Trudeau's Liberal Party (50% female cabinet), and it does really look 40-50 years behind the times. Focus on building the state as a powerbase, rather than directly tackling inequality, is another 70s hangover they've not shaken off.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
I was born during Callaghan, but Kinnock was the first one I remember
Tony Benn is one of my political heroes, but I only saw him (several times) as an old man speaking in the hippy fields at Glastonbury
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Being honest I am not sure I could vote at all given the options
ShipOfTheseus
Clint Dempsey
I have no time at all for Viscount Stansgate, as you'd imagine, but he was certainly a more impressive figure in his day than Corbyn could ever hope to be.
ShipOfTheseus
Clint Dempsey
Agree with this bit. It doesn't help that a lot of what you're identifying here has moved to Twitter and so is more visible than ever.
That's your opinion but it doesn't have much to do with my response to your previous point.
In any case, shadow cabinet positions for the 4 great offices of state, 2 of the 4 are occupied by women.
13 out of 27 in the shadow cabinet are women (I think that's about half but I'm not a maths surgeon). 9 additional shadow ministers also attend shadow cabinet meetings, 4 of them women.
Fair enough.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Like I say been labour all my life but didnt vote in last election because of Corbyn and doubt I would now
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
It has got better in the last couple of years. Actually maybe too quickly, as incompetents like Rayner and Abbot have got top jobs. I was thinking more about the lack of success someone like Harriet Harman had compared to less capable males around at the time.
" I think it's still moderately misogynist for instance. Compare it to say other progressives like Trudeau's Liberal Party (50% female cabinet), and it does really look 40-50 years behind the times."
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
It's a longer process. Attracting talented people to be candidates in the first place, supporting career development etc. You still want a meritocracy, just with an even playing field/supportive environment from the start. If Rayner is Shadow Education Minister on merit, I should be Head of the IMF
so isn't favouring poor women candidates the opposite of misogynist
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Perhaps. Fair play to Corbyn then
I have particular issues with Rayner. I've heard her speak several times and it's clear she doesn't actually understand the basics of the tuition fees issue, which should be a central part of her brief. She's up there with Chris Grayling for me (though obviously less evil)
Danishfurniturelover
the prettiest spice girl
Recently went to the postal museum in London and the was a big bit on him as he was there leader. Interesting chap, proudly anti the EU as well.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
did you do the mail rail?
For me, I agree with the broad policies that Corbyn pushes. I think countries like Germany and France have it right when their public utilities are mainly owned by the public, for their benefit. Everyone always says how much better and cheaper rail travel is across Europe, why can their state run their railways but we can't do it here? It's at the absurd point where some of their state run railways have bought some of our rail franchises here, making a profit that benefits the citizens of those other countries instead of our own. I disagree with that for rail, likewise water and energy and Corbyn wants to change it.
Then I agree with Corbyn's Labour on University tuition. I think it's a good aspiration for society to be able to educate the people who want it, free at the point of use (not free, just free at the point of use, we still pay for it as a country).
Finally, I want a government to do something about the very poor and vulnerable in this country. I'm on a low income myself, but I'm not really talking about that, I more mean the homeless etc. Homelessness has risen a lot in the last 8 years and it's not right that one of the richest countries in the world has had a sustained period of rising homelessness.
Corbyn has baggage and is sh1t at certain things. But there's nothing he's said or done that makes me disagree with those broad policies, and there's nothing he's said or done that makes me think he won't at least attempt to carry them out. We've had nigh on 40 years of Thatcher/Reagan just carried on by whoever followed, I think it's time for the pendulum to swing back the other way for a bit now.
Being a Czech spy, shaking hands with Gerry Adams, laying a wreath on the grave of Jimmy Saville (ok, maybe not that one) -- I just don't give a phuck anymore. I'm tired of this country being sold down the river by spivs. I don't think Corbyn is the messiah who is going to usher in a utopia, but I do think his government would attempt to make some long term decisions for the overall public good.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
Taking university fees back into general taxation is actually regressive - you are making the poor pay for the rich. The current system sucks because it hammers the lower middle classes, while the rich invest their loans and make on the interest. A graduate tax is the way to do it - all new graduates pay say 7% of their income over £25k for 25 years. That means no personal debt for anyone and people paying fairly based on how well they do out of their education.
The danger of Labour's approach is that the sector will have to be cut at least in half (back to 80s levels), and that HE will become the preserve of the elite again.
The danger of Labour's approach is that the sector will have to be cut at least in half (back to 80s levels), and that HE will become the preserve of the elite again.
For me, education should be like healthcare. If a rich person has a massive heart-attack, they still end up in an ambulance and in hospital for emergency treatment. The poor (or lower middle-classes if you like) are paying for them. IMO, that doesn't matter, whoever you are if you get sick you should be able to get treatment. I think society would be a better place if education worked along similar lines -- in fairness, it does up until higher education.
ShipOfTheseus
Clint Dempsey
If we were starting from scratch, I don't think we'd insist that young adults spend three years drinking themselves silly and going to the occasional lecture, then cramming like bastards and scraping a 2:1, before they are allowed to get sales and admin jobs.
Very few careers need professional qualifications as a precursor to work experience: medicine and law, maybe. University is largely wasted on the young. So let the poor buggers start earning at eighteen, with apprenticeships the default option.
Then we can make higher education freely available to anyone who has racked up ten years NI contributions, has developed an intellectual interest, and wants a sabbatical from wage slavery. Then we could afford to go back to grants.