Is Corbyn the reason you won't vote Labour? Is Corbyn the reason you won't vote Labour? - Page 4

View Poll Results: If Corbyn wasn't leader, would you consider voting Labour on 12th Dec?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • No

    18 46.15%
  • Yes

    12 30.77%
  • I will be voting Labour

    5 12.82%
  • You, with your dumb ass polls, are even more of a cretin than AndyW!

    4 10.26%
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Posts 31 to 40 of 56
  1. #31

    TykeLike

    SimonMac is a fount of knowledge

    SimonMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    God's Own Republic Of Yorkshire
    Posts
    23,481

    Default

    Yes, as much as I like a lot of their policies I can't vote to make him PM for his views on a United Ireland
    “Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

    ― Marcus Aurelius

  2. #32

    Double Godlike!

    original PM is a fount of knowledge

    original PM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    12,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meridian View Post
    Don’t be ridiculous, nobody’s suggesting that power will stop.

    My question is that there are certain things within a country - strategic infrastructure - that the entire country is dependent on; are you happy for that infrastructure to be owned by an overseas holding company?

    If so, and you are happy for that to happen, does it then matter where the overseas holding company is based? (EU, Switzerland, Panama, China, Iran, etc...)
    I understand where you are coming from and agree to an extent.

    However it is the 21st Century we need to move towards a more global society.

    Biggest problem is that half of the words net worth belongs to 1% of the population so it is those people who really dictate who gets what and who does not..

  3. #33

    Super poster

    meridian - scorchio!

    meridian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SimonMac View Post
    Yes, as much as I like a lot of their policies I can't vote to make him PM for his views on a United Ireland
    Is that a rational argument? His views on whether Ireland should be united or not is largely irrelevant - the only views that count in that regard are those of the people on the island of Ireland, as laid out in the GFA.

  4. #34

    TykeLike

    SimonMac is a fount of knowledge

    SimonMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    God's Own Republic Of Yorkshire
    Posts
    23,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meridian View Post
    Is that a rational argument? His views on whether Ireland should be united or not is largely irrelevant - the only views that count in that regard are those of the people on the island of Ireland, as laid out in the GFA.
    And when push comes to shove do you want a man who will "fight" to keep the union (Scotland as well) or one who will surrender to the SF or SNP and back the breakup

    Broadly I'm a centrist, I like little bits of both sides, BoJo is a moron, but at least he is committed to what he wants while Komrade Korbyn wants to sit on the fence.
    “Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

    ― Marcus Aurelius

  5. #35

    Contractor Among Contractors

    tomtomagain 's job has never been outsourced


    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,892

    Default

    Corbyn is not the only reason I won't vote Labour. Although he is at least 50% of the reason.

    The other problem is their policies. The aims I can broadly agree with, it's the proposed implementation that suck. Take the one on worker ownership for example:

    We will give workers a stake in the companies they work for – and a share
    of the profits they help create – by requiring large companies to set up
    Inclusive Ownership Funds (IOFs). Up to 10% of a company will be owned
    collectively by employees, with dividend payments distributed equally
    among all, capped at £500 a year, and the rest being used to top up the Climate Apprenticeship Fund.
    Wider share-ownership of companies is a good thing but this is a sham-policy. It's not really designed to give much control or extra funds to the workers ... it's a way of pumping private money into HMRC without saying "We've raised corp. tax".

    Some of the flaws in this policy as I see them are:

    It applies to workers of "large" companies only. So a teacher, nurse, council worker or any public sector worker get nothing out of it.

    Most people actually work for small companies. In fact around 80% of private-sector workers. So again, the majority of people will get zero from it.

    Big companies come in different shapes and sizes. Tesco is a big PLC. It could be forced to push 10% of its shares into a fund. Aldi ( and Lidl ) are big companies ... both are privately held by rich German families. They don't have publicly tradeable shares. Can the UK government really force foreign, privately-owned companies to give up 10%? Not without a big fight, I'd say.


    So basically it is a catchy sounding policy but would in reality only benefit a very small percentage of the workforce, put UK listed companies at a potential disadvantage and probably be illegal if it was rolled out wider.

    A simpler method would be to extend the existing incentives around share-ownership that already exist and/or give all workers the chance to push money into a generic FTSE350 tracker that they could build up over their working lives and access the income & capital from that as required.

  6. #36

    Double Godlike!

    original PM is a fount of knowledge

    original PM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    12,472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tomtomagain View Post



    Wider share-ownership of companies is a good thing but this is a sham-policy. It's not really designed to give much control or extra funds to the workers ... it's a way of pumping private money into HMRC without saying "We've raised corp. tax".
    The biggest flaw in the policy is that instead of 'money' in return for my services I now get a piece of paper potentially entitling me to some 'money' at an undetermined future date - assuming the muppet at the top does not piss it all against a wall and a few hookers, bankrupting the company and making my 'pieces of paper instead of money' absolutely worthless.

    Seriously how labour can see this as anything other than a way to pay a 'worker' less is beyond me.

    The concept that it will make people loyal is also an absolute joke - because no company is loyal to anything but their own bottom line.

  7. #37

    Super poster

    Zigenare is a fount of knowledge

    Zigenare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    4,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by original PM View Post
    The biggest flaw in the policy is that instead of 'money' in return for my services I now get a piece of paper potentially entitling me to some 'money' at an undetermined future date - assuming the muppet at the top does not piss it all against a wall and a few hookers, bankrupting the company and making my 'pieces of paper instead of money' absolutely worthless.

    Seriously how labour can see this as anything other than a way to pay a 'worker' less is beyond me.

    The concept that it will make people loyal is also an absolute joke - because no company is loyal to anything but their own bottom line.
    Burn the nonbeliever!
    Old Greg - In search of acceptance since Mar 2007. Hoping each leap will be his last.

  8. #38

    Super poster

    meridian - scorchio!

    meridian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SimonMac View Post
    And when push comes to shove do you want a man who will "fight" to keep the union (Scotland as well) or one who will surrender to the SF or SNP and back the breakup

    Broadly I'm a centrist, I like little bits of both sides, BoJo is a moron, but at least he is committed to what he wants while Komrade Korbyn wants to sit on the fence.
    The only way that a PM can “fight” to keep the Union is to provide political support to the regions (I’m assuming that sending tanks in to Edinburgh or Belfast isn’t what you mean). Of those regions decide that they want to be fully independent from Westminster then that is their choice to make.

    Your position appears to be that those regions cannot make their own minds about whether they want to continue to be part of the Union or not. Slightly patronising, no?

  9. #39

    Contractor Among Contractors

    JohntheBike is NOT a disguised employee


    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,589

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SimonMac View Post
    Yes, as much as I like a lot of their policies I can't vote to make him PM for his views on a United Ireland
    once again, the political dogma of nationalisation stands in the way of a sensible approach to benefiting the populace. And the Tories introduce ideology like the universal credit which p*ssess off the less well off. They never learn do they?

    My father remembered the time when families of two adults and one child were told by Tory governments to sell the fourth chair in the dining room suite before they could claim benefits. The bedroom tax is just a different example of this. Tories are generally not compassionate and Labour try to be, but make the mistake of taxing ordinary people too much to fund their dogma.

  10. #40

    Contractor Among Contractors

    JohntheBike is NOT a disguised employee


    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    1,589

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tomtomagain View Post
    Corbyn is not the only reason I won't vote Labour. Although he is at least 50% of the reason.

    The other problem is their policies. The aims I can broadly agree with, it's the proposed implementation that suck. Take the one on worker ownership for example:



    Wider share-ownership of companies is a good thing but this is a sham-policy. It's not really designed to give much control or extra funds to the workers ... it's a way of pumping private money into HMRC without saying "We've raised corp. tax".

    Some of the flaws in this policy as I see them are:

    It applies to workers of "large" companies only. So a teacher, nurse, council worker or any public sector worker get nothing out of it.

    Most people actually work for small companies. In fact around 80% of private-sector workers. So again, the majority of people will get zero from it.

    Big companies come in different shapes and sizes. Tesco is a big PLC. It could be forced to push 10% of its shares into a fund. Aldi ( and Lidl ) are big companies ... both are privately held by rich German families. They don't have publicly tradeable shares. Can the UK government really force foreign, privately-owned companies to give up 10%? Not without a big fight, I'd say.


    So basically it is a catchy sounding policy but would in reality only benefit a very small percentage of the workforce, put UK listed companies at a potential disadvantage and probably be illegal if it was rolled out wider.

    A simpler method would be to extend the existing incentives around share-ownership that already exist and/or give all workers the chance to push money into a generic FTSE350 tracker that they could build up over their working lives and access the income & capital from that as required.
    the problem with share ownership by the wider population is that at some point, most will cash in their shares because they need the money. How many private individuals still retain any of the shares that they received when the building societies demutualised? Not many I bet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •