| Rayner going in… 22:12 - Nov 15 with 3987 views | SitfcB |
[Post edited 15 Nov 22:12]
|  |
| |  |
| Rayner going in… on 10:09 - Nov 16 with 773 views | StokieBlue |
I think it's all pretty irrelevant now.
It's going to be hard for any new leader to make the wholesale changes required in the time left this parliament whilst also trying to get the Reform voters to see the changes have worked.
For many, their minds are made up. It's likely to be Reform and if not then it's going to be a coalition with Reform+Tories and Labour+Others fighting it out for majority.
Fake news, sound bites and national popularism has already won the day.
SB [Post edited 16 Nov 10:09]
|  | | |
| Rayner going in… on 10:09 - Nov 16 with 768 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Rayner going in… on 10:07 - Nov 16 by lowhouseblue |
yes a variety of serious options. the problem they have, and the reason why they are floating so many things as possibilities, is that they need to establish what the back benches will put up with. the issue with the income tax rise is not that it failed the obr test but it was clear it would cause serious trouble in the parliamentary party. the same goes for the stuff mahmood is discussing today - will labour mps vote for it? (if it can only be got through with support from the tories that is suicide for starmer). |
Isn't that normal for politics? It isn't just about determining what's the best option but the option that will gain sufficient support to get approved. Of course, the knack for effective government is persuading those that approve it to support the best option. Clearly, the promise of no tax rises pre-election was a poor choice. |  |
| |
| Rayner going in… on 10:11 - Nov 16 with 743 views | lowhouseblue |
| Rayner going in… on 10:09 - Nov 16 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Isn't that normal for politics? It isn't just about determining what's the best option but the option that will gain sufficient support to get approved. Of course, the knack for effective government is persuading those that approve it to support the best option. Clearly, the promise of no tax rises pre-election was a poor choice. |
i don't think pre-budget musing has ever been this long, this public, and this chaotic before. i say that as a strong supporter of starmer and the government. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Rayner going in… on 10:14 - Nov 16 with 732 views | Mullet |
Would be more believable if it wasn’t the Traitorgraph putting this out there |  |
| |
| Rayner going in… on 10:22 - Nov 16 with 719 views | jasondozzell |
| Rayner going in… on 09:59 - Nov 16 by Churchman |
I think that slightly misses the point. The elephant in the room is immigration. Nobody in politics mainstream parties wants to talk about it do anything about it for lots of reasons. They haven’t done ever since Blair/Brown’s open door policy started in the 90s. It is a political career ender for them.
Yet tackle it and Reform is finished instantly. Reform cannot do anything about Brexit. Everyone knows that’s a complete disaster so it’s one platform is ending unlimited migration to this country probably in a stupid and cruel a way as they can devise.
Labour still tacitly support unlimited immigration and the tories have no problem with it otherwise it’d have taken steps to do something about it years ago beyond idiotic token schemes like Ruanda. It hardly affects them in their millionaire residences and villas abroad.
The Home Office Minister is talking about it on BBC today and they’ll be talking about it until hell freezes over or until they announce a review. They’ve been in power 18 months now and saw what was happening many years before that and wanted nothing to do with it. But for the threat of Reform, they wouldn’t be interested in gassing on about schemes like Denmark’s now.
If they translate the talk into action and people see that, Reform will disappear overnight back under the mossy rocks they came from - and good riddance. Carry on trying to make the elephant go away with talk and a tea towel and the nightmare you present of the bonkers brigade getting in will happen.
There is nothing wrong with the moderate middle ground. I confess that I by nature am ‘centre left’ if I’m to be pigeon holed. Is that a failed position? Possibly, but aren’t they all? Alastair Darling’s proposals as Chancellor were by far the most sensible for the 2010 - control of public finances plus investment. I’d define them as centre left, but by then Labour were played out so allowed that oily fraud Cameron in.
Starmer appears all wind and p£ss to me. I agree with Ben Elton. Thatcher might have been beyond loathsome, but she had principles you could identify, however wrong they were (and boy were they wrong). What does Starmer offer? No idea. Does he have any beliefs or principles? Has he ever done anything beyond waffle? I heard he was useless at CPS - but a legal dude will confirm or refute that.
Burnham appears more pragmatic to me and from afar seems to offer far more clarity and leadership skills than Starmer. Are you right in saying that’s irrelevant? Possibly, but a half way decent leader might be a start. |
Interesting points. I'm not sure that's it's true to say this version of Labour haven't wanted to talk about immigration. They've been doing the Reform tribute act for the whole of their term so far. Tackling it might well take some of the wind out of Reform's sails but I don't think they can for various reasons. It's also horrific to see them reduced to the 'deport them all' type of schtick. A Labour government!
I agree though about Labour and globalisation re immigration.
The entire state has been eroded and run only with the bottom line in mind for 15 years now. Healthcare, prisons, water, transport, immigration - they need investment, end out sourcing and pride restored. This government isn't interested in that - they are here to keep the neoiberal show on the road. They think it's the only show in town but we are in a different world now.
My feeling is the veneration of the 'centre ground' has been extremely damaging in British politics. Paradoxically, the centre is the most extreme.
We needed an anti austerity correction and the centre wouldn't allow it.
You're right about Thatcher. A disaster for this country but she did have a vision and principles.
Burnham will just be the next vain hope for someone 'sensible' to fix it all. Won't work.
Reform majority has been nailed on for a while. I am now of the opinion that the Labour party need to be destroyed and we might have to go through the pain of Reform to get to something on the other side of it. Something or someone who can imagine a future which current political parties are unable to do.
The other thing that I think is important is that Thatcher achieved her aim of 'changing the soul' through economics. Collectivism is dying and we have become a petit Bourgeoisie nation. Dan Evans book on this is excellent! We look after ourselves, we value money and status and we see consumerism as the natural state. The hustle and grind, 'I've worked hard for this', 'Dream believe achieve ' thing is in everyone's heads. I don't know how you get it out. |  | | |
| Rayner going in… on 11:12 - Nov 16 with 666 views | nrb1985 |
| Rayner going in… on 08:22 - Nov 16 by Churchman |
I guess it depends on your definition of bright. Rayner left school at 16 with no qualifications and subsequently gained a vocational one in social care. Rees-Mogg gained a first class degree in history at Trinity Oxford. I wouldn’t trust that creature JRM as far as could kick him.
I also came across Chris Grayling when he was in Dept of Transport and whilst he too gained a history degree (Cambridge), he’s possibly the most stupid man I’ve ever clapped eyes on. Finding the handle on his coffee cup seemed to be a real challenge. A real idiot.
In other words, qualifications do not determine whether or not somebody is bright enough or good enough to do the job. Nor should gender, race, class, age, background or anything else like that. Is somebody able? It’s all that matters.
Is Rayner good enough? Don’t know her but she appears a smooth operator from afar. I suspect it’s actually her politics that’ll determine that. If Labour move to the left, which it probably will, I think it’ll put itself at more risk than it already is. [Post edited 16 Nov 8:27]
|
Don’t disagree with much of this but the handling of her property debacle didn’t paint her in a very good light in the “brightness” stakes.
If your whole stick is bashing the tories for being grubby back hand takers then you better make damn sure your affairs are in order.
I stand to be corrected but I believe her solicitors said it’s a complex case and to take further advice to which she never did and her defense seemed to be that “she asked some other people”.
HOWEVER - if we stop people who do silly things from having political careers then there would be nobody in parliament. And the tories were/are grubby back hand takers imo fwiw. |  | | |
| Rayner going in… on 11:18 - Nov 16 with 659 views | Meadowlark |
| Rayner going in… on 22:54 - Nov 15 by redrickstuhaart |
She has certain qualities. And the forced resignation was absurd.
But she isnt bright enough to be electable. |
Not like Johnson, Sunak and Truss...... |  | | |
| Rayner going in… on 11:21 - Nov 16 with 653 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Rayner going in… on 11:12 - Nov 16 by nrb1985 |
Don’t disagree with much of this but the handling of her property debacle didn’t paint her in a very good light in the “brightness” stakes.
If your whole stick is bashing the tories for being grubby back hand takers then you better make damn sure your affairs are in order.
I stand to be corrected but I believe her solicitors said it’s a complex case and to take further advice to which she never did and her defense seemed to be that “she asked some other people”.
HOWEVER - if we stop people who do silly things from having political careers then there would be nobody in parliament. And the tories were/are grubby back hand takers imo fwiw. |
The solicitors more likely put in the generic and obligatory, "we are not tax specialists, you should consider taking further advice". As they always do, to cover themselves. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Rayner going in… on 11:32 - Nov 16 with 619 views | Churchman |
| Rayner going in… on 10:22 - Nov 16 by jasondozzell |
Interesting points. I'm not sure that's it's true to say this version of Labour haven't wanted to talk about immigration. They've been doing the Reform tribute act for the whole of their term so far. Tackling it might well take some of the wind out of Reform's sails but I don't think they can for various reasons. It's also horrific to see them reduced to the 'deport them all' type of schtick. A Labour government!
I agree though about Labour and globalisation re immigration.
The entire state has been eroded and run only with the bottom line in mind for 15 years now. Healthcare, prisons, water, transport, immigration - they need investment, end out sourcing and pride restored. This government isn't interested in that - they are here to keep the neoiberal show on the road. They think it's the only show in town but we are in a different world now.
My feeling is the veneration of the 'centre ground' has been extremely damaging in British politics. Paradoxically, the centre is the most extreme.
We needed an anti austerity correction and the centre wouldn't allow it.
You're right about Thatcher. A disaster for this country but she did have a vision and principles.
Burnham will just be the next vain hope for someone 'sensible' to fix it all. Won't work.
Reform majority has been nailed on for a while. I am now of the opinion that the Labour party need to be destroyed and we might have to go through the pain of Reform to get to something on the other side of it. Something or someone who can imagine a future which current political parties are unable to do.
The other thing that I think is important is that Thatcher achieved her aim of 'changing the soul' through economics. Collectivism is dying and we have become a petit Bourgeoisie nation. Dan Evans book on this is excellent! We look after ourselves, we value money and status and we see consumerism as the natural state. The hustle and grind, 'I've worked hard for this', 'Dream believe achieve ' thing is in everyone's heads. I don't know how you get it out. |
Reform has forced Labour to talk about it (tories too, but nobody cares about them). They wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole otherwise. They’re able to debate it because as long as they take a less extreme position than Reform, they feel they can. But that’s talk and response. There is no true will or recognition of a perceived problem underpinning it which is why they’re vulnerable.
Reform’s position is simple and crystal clear and that’s what’ll appeal to so many. Labour? We’ll have a look, see a few options (which they could have done two years ago had they been interested), have a review, talk a bit more and hope Farage and his lot blow away. Inertia.
Your third paragraph looks right to me. Interestingly investment has been a dirty word in this country since the Victorian era. Thatcher didn’t believe in things like investment in infrastructure or anything else, yet for me it is key to everything.
With regard to Centre Ground I don’t see that as necessarily damaging. Churchill saw Attlee and creation of the welfare state in the face of a war wrecked economy as something akin to Stalin’s communism. But then he was an old Victorian, totally out of step with what the postwar generation wanted. But by today’s standards Attlee’s govt was very centrist and look what they achieved?
The austerity plan of Cameron’s was well and truly right wing dressed up in a manufactured crisis. Darling’s policy was centrist. Tories hailed back to thatcher’s look after no 1 principle. You don’t need services and state. Useless mouths, get rid. That was Cameron’s policy and the Liberals, happy with crumbs from the table, to their eternal shame allowed it.
Reform is easy to get rid of. All Labour has to do is recognise what’s bothering people and do something about it. This actually goes beyond immigration, of course.
This leads to your final paragraph. Human beings have always looked after themselves and wanted to do better than their neighbour since cavemen were clobbering Mammoths. Look at what happened and still happens in Russia with their versions of communism and you’ll see that. Human nature won’t change.
Despite that, humans are social creatures, which is one of many reasons why thatcher was so wrong. Given her attempts on ‘every man is an island’ I don’t see a happier society. I see a more intolerant one. However, if you take the medical profession, I’ve seen first hand people doing extraordinary stuff, coordinating and working together. Things way beyond what I could do.
Maybe they and everyone else needs a better platform, including a bit of infrastructure to do it. If that means borrowing to invest, challenging the rotten people, including the scourge of privilege, spell it out and do it. It’ll get my support. |  | | |
| Rayner going in… on 11:33 - Nov 16 with 619 views | mellowblue |
| Rayner going in… on 22:25 - Nov 15 by WD19 |
Someone needs to remind her that she was the one that resigned and her stuff up wasn’t Starmers fault. He does his own. |
Relegates resigning to mere vice-signalling if you can consider comng back into a more senior position within a couple of months or so. It is amazing that she would even think it acceptable and says plenty about her personal standards. | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 11:44 - Nov 16 with 597 views | nrb1985 |
| Rayner going in… on 11:21 - Nov 16 by redrickstuhaart |
The solicitors more likely put in the generic and obligatory, "we are not tax specialists, you should consider taking further advice". As they always do, to cover themselves. |
Well they’re not and she should have taken tax advice considering her position. Ignorance is not an excuse.
I commend her for resigning though which is more than some of tory grifters did in similar positions. | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 11:50 - Nov 16 with 586 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Rayner going in… on 09:59 - Nov 16 by Churchman |
I think that slightly misses the point. The elephant in the room is immigration. Nobody in politics mainstream parties wants to talk about it do anything about it for lots of reasons. They haven’t done ever since Blair/Brown’s open door policy started in the 90s. It is a political career ender for them.
Yet tackle it and Reform is finished instantly. Reform cannot do anything about Brexit. Everyone knows that’s a complete disaster so it’s one platform is ending unlimited migration to this country probably in a stupid and cruel a way as they can devise.
Labour still tacitly support unlimited immigration and the tories have no problem with it otherwise it’d have taken steps to do something about it years ago beyond idiotic token schemes like Ruanda. It hardly affects them in their millionaire residences and villas abroad.
The Home Office Minister is talking about it on BBC today and they’ll be talking about it until hell freezes over or until they announce a review. They’ve been in power 18 months now and saw what was happening many years before that and wanted nothing to do with it. But for the threat of Reform, they wouldn’t be interested in gassing on about schemes like Denmark’s now.
If they translate the talk into action and people see that, Reform will disappear overnight back under the mossy rocks they came from - and good riddance. Carry on trying to make the elephant go away with talk and a tea towel and the nightmare you present of the bonkers brigade getting in will happen.
There is nothing wrong with the moderate middle ground. I confess that I by nature am ‘centre left’ if I’m to be pigeon holed. Is that a failed position? Possibly, but aren’t they all? Alastair Darling’s proposals as Chancellor were by far the most sensible for the 2010 - control of public finances plus investment. I’d define them as centre left, but by then Labour were played out so allowed that oily fraud Cameron in.
Starmer appears all wind and p£ss to me. I agree with Ben Elton. Thatcher might have been beyond loathsome, but she had principles you could identify, however wrong they were (and boy were they wrong). What does Starmer offer? No idea. Does he have any beliefs or principles? Has he ever done anything beyond waffle? I heard he was useless at CPS - but a legal dude will confirm or refute that.
Burnham appears more pragmatic to me and from afar seems to offer far more clarity and leadership skills than Starmer. Are you right in saying that’s irrelevant? Possibly, but a half way decent leader might be a start. |
I’m not sure where you’re getting this idea that we have unlimited migration and Labour aren’t prepared to talk about it. It’s one of the things they talk about the most and have been going further with punitive immigration laws than even the last iteration of the Tories. And that’s before we ask what the wrong with immigrants anyway? Every country has big inflows and outflows - we move around a lot.
We need to start challenging the widely held belief that immigration is bad and that it’s spiralling out of control. Neither are true. |  |
| |
| Rayner going in… on 11:57 - Nov 16 with 582 views | StokieBlue |
| Rayner going in… on 11:50 - Nov 16 by Swansea_Blue |
I’m not sure where you’re getting this idea that we have unlimited migration and Labour aren’t prepared to talk about it. It’s one of the things they talk about the most and have been going further with punitive immigration laws than even the last iteration of the Tories. And that’s before we ask what the wrong with immigrants anyway? Every country has big inflows and outflows - we move around a lot.
We need to start challenging the widely held belief that immigration is bad and that it’s spiralling out of control. Neither are true. |
Could even make a case that they talk about it too much as it's not as big an issue as many other things facing the country.
It is very reactionary from Labour, always on the back foot trying to relate to the last Reform soundbite rather than pushing forward with their own policies and views and hoping the public sees those to have been the right call 4 years later.
SB | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 12:02 - Nov 16 with 572 views | nrb1985 |
| Rayner going in… on 11:18 - Nov 16 by Meadowlark |
Not like Johnson, Sunak and Truss...... |
I couldn’t stand the bloke but not sure you can’t say Sunak wasn’t smart.
Perhaps the mirror reverse image of somebody like Rayner - ie incredibly well educated, top performer in private sector roles but less than zero in terms of emotional intelligence and questionable motives given he really didn’t need the money. I see he’s now back at Goldman too… | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 12:23 - Nov 16 with 531 views | StokieBlue |
| Rayner going in… on 12:02 - Nov 16 by nrb1985 |
I couldn’t stand the bloke but not sure you can’t say Sunak wasn’t smart.
Perhaps the mirror reverse image of somebody like Rayner - ie incredibly well educated, top performer in private sector roles but less than zero in terms of emotional intelligence and questionable motives given he really didn’t need the money. I see he’s now back at Goldman too… |
To be fair to him (and I'm not a fan), his salary for his role at GS goes to his charity to promote literacy in the UK.
SB | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 12:25 - Nov 16 with 529 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Rayner going in… on 11:57 - Nov 16 by StokieBlue |
Could even make a case that they talk about it too much as it's not as big an issue as many other things facing the country.
It is very reactionary from Labour, always on the back foot trying to relate to the last Reform soundbite rather than pushing forward with their own policies and views and hoping the public sees those to have been the right call 4 years later.
SB |
Immigration, as a whole, isn’t the problem. It is a problem that the focus is on the relatively small number arriving by boats. A problem that can only be resolved by stopping them from leaving foreign shores, something we have no control over.
We should be hearing about concentrated efforts to clear the backlog of asylum seekers.
Starmer needs to forget about May elections, accept they are going to be a disaster, and concentrate on policies which, come the next general election, will achieve a result.
If he isn’t prepared to do that he should step down. |  |
| |
| Rayner going in… on 12:37 - Nov 16 with 511 views | Plums |
| Rayner going in… on 11:57 - Nov 16 by StokieBlue |
Could even make a case that they talk about it too much as it's not as big an issue as many other things facing the country.
It is very reactionary from Labour, always on the back foot trying to relate to the last Reform soundbite rather than pushing forward with their own policies and views and hoping the public sees those to have been the right call 4 years later.
SB |
Agree, they also seem to have fallen into the trap of trying to appeal to the small number die hard Reform voters, many of whom appear to be people who previously didn't vote at all. Farage et al have been very good at mobilising and amplifying them in the same way Trump has.
The two main parties (Labour and Lib Dems as the Tories have made themselves irrelevant by their surrogacy of Reform) need to appeal to those who have always voted but who are turning away. A majority of the UK will reject the far right given a little bit of hope and innovative thinking. |  |
| |
| Rayner going in… on 12:44 - Nov 16 with 491 views | nrb1985 |
| Rayner going in… on 12:23 - Nov 16 by StokieBlue |
To be fair to him (and I'm not a fan), his salary for his role at GS goes to his charity to promote literacy in the UK.
SB |
He's still a cnt. | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 12:56 - Nov 16 with 459 views | Churchman |
| Rayner going in… on 11:50 - Nov 16 by Swansea_Blue |
I’m not sure where you’re getting this idea that we have unlimited migration and Labour aren’t prepared to talk about it. It’s one of the things they talk about the most and have been going further with punitive immigration laws than even the last iteration of the Tories. And that’s before we ask what the wrong with immigrants anyway? Every country has big inflows and outflows - we move around a lot.
We need to start challenging the widely held belief that immigration is bad and that it’s spiralling out of control. Neither are true. |
They are now because they are scared to death of Reform. They weren’t prior to that.
The article at the end of this is interesting. It’s 10 years old but still relevant. What actions has anybody actually taken? Well the Danes have changed their rules clearly, hence they’re in the news. The fact that despite ‘every country has big inflows and out flows’ does not disguise that each country is approaching it differently.
To my knowledge, you might get a visa to work in Germany, but you can never be a German citizen. We know what happens in France - there’s a reason why people climb aboard a dingy at the cost of all their money and it’s not the weather here.
This thread is not about the merits, benefits or dis benefits of immigration. That’s another discussion and even if I was prepared to get involved with it, I’d need to do a lot more research than is possibly even out there beyond rhetoric, anecdotes and pure racism.
This thread is really about perceptions and when it really comes down to it whether or can Labour deal with what I see as the threat from Fascists. And for all intents and purposes Reform are Fascists. A conversation with two reform supporting chums of mine only supports my view.
It worries me far more than whether Rayner, Starmer or Captain Pugwash are in No 10, not least because it’s a threat I thought I’d never see in my lifetime that is underpinned by immigration and what people see - or think they see. If there is no problem, great. Explain it and Reform disappear. If there is, do something.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/mar/24/how-immigration-came-to-haunt-labou | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 12:57 - Nov 16 with 451 views | The_Major |
Sunak - clever but weak
Truss - Dumb as a box of dirt
Johnson - very clever, and knew exactly what he was doing and the effect it would have, but didn't give a rats ass about anyone else but himself.
And that's why Johnson is the worse of the lot. A miserable cowardly inadequate treacherous creature who should be banished to hang out with the former prince in penury in a tent on Dartmoor. Or failing that the nearby prison. |  | | |
| Rayner going in… on 13:01 - Nov 16 with 432 views | Churchman |
| Rayner going in… on 12:02 - Nov 16 by nrb1985 |
I couldn’t stand the bloke but not sure you can’t say Sunak wasn’t smart.
Perhaps the mirror reverse image of somebody like Rayner - ie incredibly well educated, top performer in private sector roles but less than zero in terms of emotional intelligence and questionable motives given he really didn’t need the money. I see he’s now back at Goldman too… |
A chap I worked for 10 years ago was one of the cleverest I’ve ever known. Oxford, more than one MBA, post grad you name it - more qualifications than you could shake a stick at. Yet in some ways he was as daft as a brush.
Intelligence and ‘smart’ takes many forms - thank goodness. | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 13:07 - Nov 16 with 399 views | lowhouseblue |
| Rayner going in… on 12:56 - Nov 16 by Churchman |
They are now because they are scared to death of Reform. They weren’t prior to that.
The article at the end of this is interesting. It’s 10 years old but still relevant. What actions has anybody actually taken? Well the Danes have changed their rules clearly, hence they’re in the news. The fact that despite ‘every country has big inflows and out flows’ does not disguise that each country is approaching it differently.
To my knowledge, you might get a visa to work in Germany, but you can never be a German citizen. We know what happens in France - there’s a reason why people climb aboard a dingy at the cost of all their money and it’s not the weather here.
This thread is not about the merits, benefits or dis benefits of immigration. That’s another discussion and even if I was prepared to get involved with it, I’d need to do a lot more research than is possibly even out there beyond rhetoric, anecdotes and pure racism.
This thread is really about perceptions and when it really comes down to it whether or can Labour deal with what I see as the threat from Fascists. And for all intents and purposes Reform are Fascists. A conversation with two reform supporting chums of mine only supports my view.
It worries me far more than whether Rayner, Starmer or Captain Pugwash are in No 10, not least because it’s a threat I thought I’d never see in my lifetime that is underpinned by immigration and what people see - or think they see. If there is no problem, great. Explain it and Reform disappear. If there is, do something.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/mar/24/how-immigration-came-to-haunt-labou |
people like swansea always try to frame this as 'you're either in favour of immigration or you're against immigration'. whereas in reality the public debate is about the level of immigration that people want.
for many years a majority of the population have considered the level of net immigration to be too high - and politicians have simply ignored them. the latest yougov figure is that 71% now think immigration has been too high.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/do-brits-think-that-immigration-ha
no party has a democratic mandate to continue with net immigration as high as it has been in recent years. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Rayner going in… on 13:08 - Nov 16 with 395 views | jasondozzell |
| Rayner going in… on 12:25 - Nov 16 by Pinewoodblue |
Immigration, as a whole, isn’t the problem. It is a problem that the focus is on the relatively small number arriving by boats. A problem that can only be resolved by stopping them from leaving foreign shores, something we have no control over.
We should be hearing about concentrated efforts to clear the backlog of asylum seekers.
Starmer needs to forget about May elections, accept they are going to be a disaster, and concentrate on policies which, come the next general election, will achieve a result.
If he isn’t prepared to do that he should step down. |
The flaw with this is the idea that Starmer is a political being with kind of control of this project. He isn't.
Mcsweeney and co have literally described him as thinking he's driving the train when he's not! That was briefed! 'We've sat him at the front of the DLR'
It's Mcsweeney project with Mandelson and Blairites pulling the strings. There's nothing else but wreck the left and keep the big jobs for ourselves.
Stepping down just means the next vehicle for it (Wes) | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 13:35 - Nov 16 with 321 views | nrb1985 |
| Rayner going in… on 13:01 - Nov 16 by Churchman |
A chap I worked for 10 years ago was one of the cleverest I’ve ever known. Oxford, more than one MBA, post grad you name it - more qualifications than you could shake a stick at. Yet in some ways he was as daft as a brush.
Intelligence and ‘smart’ takes many forms - thank goodness. |
Agreed agreed and agreed.
Having worked extensively with Goldman though throughout my career, they aren’t known for employing thick people and if they do they don’t last long. And certainly don’t go back for a second stint.
Plenty of other thickos in my world though! Dare say plenty of ppl probably think that of me too! | | | |
| Rayner going in… on 13:44 - Nov 16 with 290 views | Churchman |
| Rayner going in… on 13:35 - Nov 16 by nrb1985 |
Agreed agreed and agreed.
Having worked extensively with Goldman though throughout my career, they aren’t known for employing thick people and if they do they don’t last long. And certainly don’t go back for a second stint.
Plenty of other thickos in my world though! Dare say plenty of ppl probably think that of me too! |
There were plenty of dim bulbs in my world too - and if they thought that of me, that’s fine. Who was I to argue? Or care. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
