A Political Thread pt. 2

[Ragey Erasmus]

Tories tripping over themselves to offer the biggest bribe. There i was thinking the tax rises and spending cuts recently implemented were to get in top of the deficit and this was very important. Or perhaps how your average person should not all for pay rises as it will drive inflation...

Now it's just tax cuts for all! They flip flop on their economic priories almost every quarter. If the British people can't see this for the blatant bribe it is that will definitely not be fulfilled or at least come off the back of cuts elsewhere then more fool them. We already have services on the edge of complete failure due to lack of funding, this could be the final nail they need to kill off and sell off more public services to their wealthy mates. British people are due to be fleeced even more.

 

[Reiser99]

At the moment they aren't bribing the general population, they are just bribing Tory members and almost all of them wouldn't be a Tory member if they weren't already blind to how the party operates.

 

[Which Tyler]

Tories tripping over themselves to offer the biggest bribe. There i was thinking the tax rises and spending cuts recently implemented were to get in top of the deficit and this was very important. Or perhaps how your average person should not all for pay rises as it will drive inflation...

Now it's just tax cuts for all! They flip flop on their economic priories almost every quarter. If the British people can't see this for the blatant bribe it is that will definitely not be fulfilled or at least come off the back of cuts elsewhere then more fool them. We already have services on the edge of complete failure due to lack of funding, this could be the final nail they need to kill off and sell off more public services to their wealthy mates. British people are due to be fleeced even more.

Erm... The British People don't get a say in the matter.
It's Tory party members, who don't even need to have any link with Britain or her people (beyond the capacity to transfer money into sterling)

 

[General Melchett]

The most laughable thing for me was Tom Tugenhadt who when campaigning to be leader was saying how it was time for a clean slate and a fresh start - is now backing the continuity candidate Truss who is backed by Rees Mogg, Dorries etc. He showed his true colours in the end - guess he was promised a cabinet job.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Erm... The British People don't get a say in the matter.
It's Tory party members, who don't even need to have any link with Britain or her people (beyond the capacity to transfer money into sterling)

I meant in general come the next election. Both candidates are offering basically the same so it makes no difference as far as this leadership election is concerned other than who feels the need to offer the bigger bribe.

 

[Which Tyler]

I meant in general come the next election. Both candidates are offering basically the same so it makes no difference as far as this leadership election is concerned other than who feels the need to offer the bigger bribe.

Oh, I know you knew (or at least, I assumed you did) - it's juts apoint worth making again, and again, and again.

Besides, I like pedantry

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Oh, I know you knew (or at least, I assumed you did) - it's juts apoint worth making again, and again, and again.

Besides, I like pedantry

Well, if we are going for pedantry, I noticed you capitalised both words in British People as if it is a proper noun so...

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Unite threatens to withdraw Labour funding over Sir Keir Starmer action on strikes

Labour’s biggest union has threatened to stop funding the party over Sir Keir Starmer’s refusal to back strike action. Sharon Graham, general secretary of Uni

www.thetimes.co.uk

Another reason why the 2 party system is shite/why the general election can't come soon enough - Labour, under Starmer, don't support the unions half as much as they should, but feel entitled to their money and support.
Unite are kinda obligated to support Labour because any alternative is, realistically, helping the Tories - but being obligated to publicly support someone who publicly denigrates your cause is lame as ****

They're not going to withdraw support, they've threatened this a number of times before, but it does shine the light on the issue

 

[ncurd]

Unite threatens to withdraw Labour funding over Sir Keir Starmer action on strikes

Labour’s biggest union has threatened to stop funding the party over Sir Keir Starmer’s refusal to back strike action. Sharon Graham, general secretary of Uni

www.thetimes.co.uk

Another reason why the 2 party system is shite/why the general election can't come soon enough - Labour, under Starmer, don't support the unions half as much as they should, but feel entitled to their money and support.
Unite are kinda obligated to support Labour because any alternative is, realistically, helping the Tories - but being obligated to publicly support someone who publicly denigrates your cause is lame as ****

They're not going to withdraw support, they've threatened this a number of times before, but it does shine the light on the issue

Yeah the unions threaten this all the bloody time plus lets not forget the guys in upper echelons tend to be hardcore union people voted on my a small amount of their members who are also hardcore. They're never going to happy with anything other than full throated support (and why shouldn't they for their money).

Rock and a hard place for Labour and just showing how precarious their positions is. The public back the current strikes for the most part but Labour want to position themselves as a negotiator between the companies and the unions. They can't do that if they are seen to back the unions fully. There will also be a point when the public aren't on the unions side so much. Plus they are absolutely reliant on middle England votes and voters of a certain age still get past the unions of the 70's and 80's even though they much better run than they were then.

Honestly I think the unions do far better by publicly backing themselves and pushing their cause to the forefront rather than through politicians. Mick Lynch has done a far better job than any Labour politician would and I think he's cut through slightly because he isn't from political party. More of him and less Scargill's and McCluskey's and they might have a chance.

None of this is perfect Starmer/Labour should back the unions more than they have but I understand his issues with doing so. He has to be in power to repeal the Trade Union Act (2016) and he can't do that if he turn off too many voters by being too friendly with the unions.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

The public back the current strikes for the most part

I thought opinion was much more divided than that.

But as you say, rock and hard place. Fully expect a leadership challenge before too long. Whatever the answer is, it's not Starmer.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

The funny thing with the unions is they are pushing for what everyone else says they should be getting, namely long overdue pay rises. What people get angry about is when they actually do something to achieve that aim rather than going cap in hand to their betters and saying "please sir, I want some more." We will get the scraps left over and we best be damned grateful to get even that!

I don't own a car and so I get the train / bus everywhere. Has this union action mucked up my plans? Definitely. That's kinda the point though. When the bank of England said pay rises should not match inflation, most people were rightly furious that, after over a decade of incomes being eroded, we are now being told to take essentially a 10% pay cut across the board whilst those at the top aren't. I think if you were one of those people who was furious at that but now think those who are on strike should accept what you won't, you're just a huge hypocrite. I also suspect part of it comes form the fact you don't have the ability to force those at the top to the negotiating table like they do, it's take it or leave it. There is a common mentality in the USA and here of resenting those who want to better themselves if you cannot do the same, rather than trying to raise everyone up there is a desire to instead drag everyone else down with you and squabble over the scraps whilst turning a blind eye to those at the top, because they somehow "deserve" their obscene salaries but nobody else does.

 

[ncurd]

I thought opinion was much more divided than that.

But as you say, rock and hard place. Fully expect a leadership challenge before too long. Whatever the answer is, it's not Starmer.

48% agree and 36% disagree. In our politics that's a pretty solid siding with unions but its the highest its likely ever going to get.

Starmer's got a steady 7-8 point lead in the polls from being 17 points behind when he took over his height was 15 points ahead around when Johnson resigned. He ain't going any time soon, especially as he'll likely wipe the floor with Truss (anyone would).

The funny thing with the unions is they are pushing for what everyone else says they should be getting, namely long overdue pay rises. What people get angry about is when they actually do something to achieve that aim rather than going cap in hand to their betters and saying "please sir, I want some more." We will get the scraps left over and we best be damned grateful to get even that!

I don't own a car and so I get the train / bus everywhere. Has this union action mucked up my plans? Definitely. That's kinda the point though. When the bank of England said pay rises should not match inflation, most people were rightly furious that, after over a decade of incomes being eroded, we are now being told to take essentially a 10% pay cut across the board whilst those at the top aren't. I think if you were one of those people who was furious at that but now think those who are on strike should accept what you won't, you're just a huge hypocrite. I also suspect part of it comes form the fact you don't have the ability to force those at the top to the negotiating table like they do, it's take it or leave it. There is a common mentality in the USA and here of resenting those who want to better themselves if you cannot do the same, rather than trying to raise everyone up there is a desire to instead drag everyone else down with you and squabble over the scraps whilst turning a blind eye to those at the top, because they somehow "deserve" their obscene salaries but nobody else does.

Yeah there is a definite mentality of if you don't like your working conditions you have to leave. HR departments bank on it I have never had an above inflation pay rise except when it has been for promotion or I've changed companies. Even when my yearly reviews have been outstanding. This conveniently forgets people have social and logistical reasons to why they have their jobs beyond the economic.

 

[ncurd]

12/13 year old me would be very depressed about Geri Horner.....first marrying Christian now this

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

The funny thing with the unions is they are pushing for what everyone else says they should be getting, namely long overdue pay rises. What people get angry about is when they actually do something to achieve that aim rather than going cap in hand to their betters and saying "please sir, I want some more." We will get the scraps left over and we best be damned grateful to get even that!

I don't own a car and so I get the train / bus everywhere. Has this union action mucked up my plans? Definitely. That's kinda the point though. When the bank of England said pay rises should not match inflation, most people were rightly furious that, after over a decade of incomes being eroded, we are now being told to take essentially a 10% pay cut across the board whilst those at the top aren't. I think if you were one of those people who was furious at that but now think those who are on strike should accept what you won't, you're just a huge hypocrite. I also suspect part of it comes form the fact you don't have the ability to force those at the top to the negotiating table like they do, it's take it or leave it. There is a common mentality in the USA and here of resenting those who want to better themselves if you cannot do the same, rather than trying to raise everyone up there is a desire to instead drag everyone else down with you and squabble over the scraps whilst turning a blind eye to those at the top, because they somehow "deserve" their obscene salaries but nobody else does.

Agree with much of that.

The train situation is also complicated by the question of changing demand. Through no fault of anyone's, post pandemic train usage is down across the board as working patterns have, permanently, changed. As with many people I only use the trains 2 days per week now - a 60% drop. With both usage and revenue dropping, something has to give in some combination of service, headcount and earnings, none of which is palatable, but all organisations have to respond to changing market places.

 

[ncurd]

Agree with much of that.

The train situation is also complicated by the question of changing demand. Through no fault of anyone's, post pandemic train usage is down across the board as working patterns have, permanently, changed. As with many people I only use the trains 2 days per week now - a 60% drop. With both usage and revenue dropping, something has to give in some combination of service, headcount and earnings, none of which is palatable, but all organisations have to respond to changing market places.

This is where the lefty in me kicks in, this is why public transport needs to be state owned as opposed to company owned. It needs to be run as service outside of market forces such as usage. Anyone who's lived moderately rurally knows public transport is a pain making it almost impossible to create a commute where you don't need a car.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

This is where the lefty in me kicks in, this is why public transport needs to be state owned as opposed to company owned. It needs to be run as service outside of market forces such as usage. Anyone who's lived moderately rurally knows public transport is a pain making it almost impossible to create a commute where you don't need a car.

Plus the argument is that private companies will invest more. I live in Birmingham and lots of operators go through New Street. Avanti and GWR tend to have pretty good trains that run on time and seem well maintained. Cross country and west midlands trains though are a whole different matter. Clattering things falling apart and frequently delayed and overcrowded. The contrast is huge and you can see which operators are clearly either fleecing their passengers because there is no alternative or are so poorly run they can't afford a proper service.

I don't mind buses being private so much as there is more scope to actually compete due to the nature of roads but trains there is no room to compete. If you cannot create a proper competitive market place then it should not be in private hands. It's what privatisation proponents love to ignore when talking about the benefits of a market. Markets only deliver benefits when there is competition, when that competition is taken away, the companies become wholly unaccountable and will fleece their customers knowing they need to continue using the service.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Really most services that are considered essential should be government run
Transport is IMO essential in these times.

A ticket to the biggest city in the North (Manchester) to the capital should not cost £100+ for a return ticket.
Yes charge first class a lot of money I get that.

******* laughable, not even like they have to fund the small local stations anymore, they cut off so many local towns from each other.

Like everything the system is focus on making sure people stay in London, cheaper train tickets and I bet more people would look to commute into london for work via train and move out to the midlands or even up to Manchester

Really
London
Birmingham
Manchester
Leeds
Newcastle
Edinburgh
Should IMO be cheap to travel between (As in no more than £50 even on a walk in on the day booking)

 

[Which Tyler]

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I like your new avatar.

 

[Which Tyler]

I like your new avatar.

Just got around to making it circular instead of square - largely because... I hadn't really noticed that they were round now (pretty sure they used to be square :s )