Hockey_saint

So how do you explain almost all the financial savings introduced by this government in the name of austerity seemingly being targeted at those with the least whilst, on the fact of it, those with the most appear to be getting tax breaks?

Yeah, they're all jealous.....Also, are you seriously suggesting that Tony Blair is left wing? because that's kinda the reason behind the reason for this thread?

Oh, I've read what you've posted....sweetheart. But as Aintforver says, I find that greed is essentially at the heart of all right-wing thinking and policy so I just find it completely abhorrent and the fact they try to hide this truth with nonsense, out of of touch thinking, damning people before they even get a chance (like the title of this thread) and just general insults makes it a bit well, just 1980's

"class prejudice" pretty sure that's currently governmental policy.

Again, no actual answer just an insult (albeit minor). I know, I know, all the usual right wing drivel "I don't want my taxes being taken away and....oh heaven forbid....go into the pockets of those less off" or some other nonsense like that because that's all you right wingers ever spout. No actual decent reply on why being left is a bad thing or why it's so wonderful to be a right winger.

Here they are for a more balanced argument. I know what political discourse is by the way, I also know what an insult is. My essential view is that we crapped on the world for a long time; we try to change that with some socialist values and now they are slowly being taken away by the right and people that support them like the little clique here. Also, I know what I'm saying and obviously my views are diametrically opposed to what has been said here, does it make them wrong? no, but they'll be shot down with belittling or snarky comments by the right wingers but then, that's how they've always been isn't it. Ignore the actual problems in this country and focus on how well they might be doing.

A lot of people share them, just not this little group of right wingers (and so called former Labour supporters) you have surrounding you on this forum. This is supposed to be neutral forum not one for a bunch of tory bully boys who's views completely do not represent the world I or a lot of other people live in. This article sums up my views pretty well and they appear to be shared by a lot of people.... http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/24/why-labour-voters-are-turning-towards-jeremy-corbyn

Well those ideas actually make sense I must admit. I do not however like this demonisation of the Unions, maybe some of the people running them.

Come on, Ted Heath was, as had been pointed out a number of times, more left wing than most in Labour today so I don't actually believe that. Also Batman, or should I say how a fellow calling himself "Batman" has the audacity to call anyone else "odd" . What with your odd Tory boy ideas. Or do you really want me to start insulting you like you have just me? Either way, here's the blog I speak of (Most people I know think it's spot on...just not odd right wingers): https://acsdawson.wordpress.com/2015/07/23/an-open-letter-to-labour-party-members-supporters-affiliates/

It certainly doesn't seem that fair to a lot of people. Ok, if we compare it to, say, India then yes, we live in a reasonably comfortable society but unless you do that, then it's not that particularly comfortable. Either way, I think Corbyn or Burnham should be leader. I think Labour supporters would prefer to just have Labour back as it were. There is a good blog where someone suggest that the 1997 Tory party were not "particularly good" Tories (namely, they were kinda headed by the people who ousted the arch tory, Maggie) and that they just weren't...well....c%ntish enough....so when a Labour party parading as a bunch of Tory-wannabes tried, they got in. But now, since we've a league of Maggie Thatcher's "lovely" boys, who are superb products of her teachings, total tories as it were who know how to use their mates in the media to their advantage.....why would labour ever want to go back to trying to be them? They'd lose and I agree with it that this is probably their only option. (as for the ex-labour supporter on here who says he was once one and left.....then you weren't a very good one were you?)

Ah trying to belittle to win a point "your rambling son so you can't possibly have a point" I would say "what Blakey up there said". Corbyn views are very popular with large sways of the public so I think it's fair to call them popularist. Either way, the tories should know about being in the wilderness after: William Hauge, Michael Howard and IDS for almost a decade and a half, they should know what being in the political wilderness is like! And the ironic thing is, is that a fair reason why a lot of them didn't get in was because of their right wing views, which, are probably less right wing than today's party. Either way, I can't take most of the comments on here seriously either because if you think everything is great and we're having such a wonderful time with this government you are in cloud flippin cuckoo land. But as Blakey says, they may even lose but like what a lot of my conservative-voting friends say also, Labour NEED this, the need it to understand where they come from, to get back their and not try to be something they are not (namely a tory-wannabe party)

Ah the trickle down effect....it's a nice fantasy. Non-entity eh CB? Ok then, and really Boris? "big society inspired me to do charity work" hahahaha all the while voting for big society to take away your NHS, safety net in case you become sick as well as any other country-owned asset they can sell on the cheap to their mates. I would also say calling for the execution of Nelson Mandela was a pretty extreme right wing thing to do. Yes, they are very far to the right, make up all the nonsense you want but there have been Tory leaders more left than the current Labour party and god knows what that says about the current leader who attained 20% of 40% and still thinks it's a vast majority.

So let me get this straight....Being a uber right-wing, Burlington club, Thatcherite bully-boy millionaire will make you electable in this day and age but being a popularist left-winger wont....I see no sense in this unless you've been bought like the right wing media.

I visit a hydrocephalus support group on facebook the other day and was shocked to read some replies when someone mentioned they claim DLA. One said "why? can't you work?" this is supposed to be full of people experiencing such problems so you'll understand I assume most people come to the conclusion that to claim such benefits you have to be out of work. Either way, Jeremy Corbyn. Now a lot of people are saying negative things about Tony Blair but the thing people forget is that they were doing pretty darn well in the polls with John Smith before he died and he was left-wing. I seriously don't understand this hatred for the left. In my eyes they're trying to help those that need help, how is that bad? It's like the NHS, do you think we'd stop paying National Insurance if we were forced to take up private insurance? No chance. So as far as tax goes, I'd prefer it to help people who needed it and not just fat cat mates of whatever right wing government is in office. Also, have you seen this? seems like he's not so loony but rather more in tune to the public than right-wingers (inside the labour party and out) seem to think: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-jeremy-corbyn-policies-that-most-people-actually-agree-with-10407148.html I also think you right-wingers should read this blog, he sums up perfectly why Corbyn would be perfect: https://acsdawson.wordpress.com/2015/07/23/an-open-letter-to-labour-party-members-supporters-affiliates/

"Giving them money" brilliant; NO what you are doing is giving them the means to work. You have to stop thinking that every sick person on benefits is out of work. No, what happens, most of the time with this money is that it pays for things like an assistant, extra funds for transportation to and from work which an able-bodied person wouldn't require. But, go ahead, keep thinking they're all out of work cripples. Also, we pay that money in case we become sick and downtrodden ourselves. But then most people seem to forget that these days.

See, it's that mentality that everyone's a shirker that's the issue here. So you'll never believe that there are genuinely poor people that need help then? Or will you just write them off like those that actually are? because what you are saying is "sod those that actually do need help because some people don't need it and get what they don't require" What a petty excuse.

Gotta love someone using the Greece example...Remind me, what part did the Greek banks have to do with that again. If Labour can't persuade "middle England" with slightly left values then it just shows what type of country we've turned into doesn't it. As for the comment earlier about it only being the middle classes who claim DLA and that it should be taxed. I can tell you for nothing, you are talking out of your backside. I suppose it was a nice experiment for 60-odd years and it's back to screwing other people other (mostly the worse off)...shame we can't do it to the rest of the world any more? And as for Tony Blair? as Corbyn said, there's an inquiry waiting for him.

This forum has turned so blue nose it's quite sickening. What a subjective title. I totally agree Twiggy. I like how he's targetted the under 30's too, most of whom are getting slaughtered by this ideological government. Its a different world from the days of Michael Foot and we need to prove that we're not all money-hungry Thatcherite capitalists and that some of us care for those struggling to get by.

And whilst we weren't looking.....cheers guys! https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/richard-grimes/government-moves-to-consider-nhs-user-charges

The thing I don't understand is how work is going to pay now that tax credits have been removed? And the "living wage" not really being a living wage at all. I mean, the government COULD bring in a very strong and robust framework for this sort of thing with a powerful governing body but they won't do that will they? Also, since when did Georgie-boy mention during the elections that he wanted to save ANOTHER what? 40 billion from councils and pretty much everything else? Have you seen Tony Blair's video on how Corbyn's voters need to "find a heart"?....I don't think he's quite getting it; it's the point that we actually have one already. Personally I think all the Labour MPs who abstained should read the party's founding ideals.

Those 'orrible SNP'ers eh? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-mps-at-westminster-are-giving-their-7000-pay-rise-to-charity-10397476.html

I kinda agree, sod em, let us stay in the wilderness for a decade, at least we'll know who we are and probably regain a fair bit of Scottish support too: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/17/labour-realists-jeremy-corbyn-wilderness

No, I mean a great many things; an investigation into the rates of tax they pay, a feasibility study into what would and would not be better off and more profitable in public hands and what it could fund. I mean, for example, there must be several options for industries that could work as "sovereign wealth funds" which would be ploughed back into the the economy. I don't automatically mean nationalisation but investment in companies like the French do might be a good idea.

I'd like to see the trains re-nationalised and a re-examination into how big business can work for the British people, not just a few fat cats.

I would still vote Labour as opposed to abstaining. I feel, as Buctooth Tim says, it's not right to target groups of people who really can't fight back considering it was (amongst other things....but not because of the people being targeted for sure) banking corporations and one mentalist and vindictive Scotsman who got us into this. But I do agree with the Scottish girl, Harriet Harman should hang her head in shame.