Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[Captain Turdseye]

Clueless, unelectable, anti-Semitic, terrorist supporting dinosaur that’ll take this country back to the 70’s. 

[TheHowieLama]

THE BENCH!!

[Captain Turdseye]

47 minutes ago, Lizzie Birdsworths Wrinkled Chopper said:

Wow, he’s talking about Orkambi.

 

Goosebumps here. 

 

I was reading about that last week. £100k a year per person they’re charging, is that right? It made me think how much the NHS gets charged for my meds so I checked online. One tablet in the morning, one at night. £18,000 a year. And that’s for a drug originally meant for psoriasis, a fucking common skin condition and one which they somehow stumbled upon it doing what it does for MS. You’d have to think that that’s when the price of it shot right up. Horrible, horrible bastards. 

[SilverSong]

8 hours ago, A Red said:

You have to look at your constituency and its history when deciding what to vote if you want to leave. Yes, overall Lib Dems wont win power but in Ricos area e.g. they are 2nd with nearly 2 x the labour vote. Clearly they are the party of choice to remain in that constituency.

 

It is mental because its a confusing policy that, as i pointed out, even AoT didnt understand it. Far better would have been for Labour to come out as a remain party that would hold another referendum.

Anti-tory tactical voting. Works for me.

[SilverSong]

1 hour ago, Mudface said:

I'm just finishing off Bad Pharma. If he takes on the pharmaceutical companies he'll go down as a God.

I work for a generics pharma company. Cheaper generics and a state ran generics company would likely threaten my livelihood. Its not about me. We need a socialist government, we need a Labour government. JC4PM.

[Dr Nowt]

36 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:

 

I was reading about that last week. £100k a year per person they’re charging, is that right? It made me think how much the NHS gets charged for my meds so I checked online. One tablet in the morning, one at night. £18,000 a year. And that’s for a drug originally meant for psoriasis, a fucking common skin condition and one which they somehow stumbled upon it doing what it does for MS. You’d have to think that that’s when the price of it shot right up. Horrible, horrible bastards. 

Pretty much mate, it’s £105k-£110k per patient per year, I believe. Apparently its £280k equivalent in the States, as per a comparison table I was looking at a few weeks back showing the vastly increased prices US health insurance companies pay for the same drugs over there. Separate conversation, but a paranoia I have of any trade deal with the US. Trump has been saying for years he wants the prices other countries pay for medications brought in line with the States, and I read a comment attributed to Johnson recently saying our NHS wouldn’t become an insurance-based service like theirs, but pharmaceuticals could theoretically be on the table in negotiations. Seen nowt more than that, but I just have a sense of dread they may agree to more comparable pricing and the cost of meds to the NHS could even increase, with inevitable knock-on effects. It strikes me as exactly the sort of mealy-mouthed thing that shaved honey monster in a shit suit-looking cunt would do while claiming to have preserved the sanctity of our health service.

 

Back on topic, Orkambi is to all intents and purposes already obsolete, it’s more the ongoing argument over what happens regarding it’s successors (future advancements in medication by the same drug company being included or not in the deal cost has been one of the big sticking points I keep seeing mentioned). Vertex who produce it are already multiple iterations in to that research and currently pressing ahead with a new triple combination drug (Orkambi is only 2) which has far outperformed it in Stage 3 trials. I was only talking to my consultant about it at length yesterday afternoon. Vertex are seeking a US licence and a European licence for the new drug next year. Then it would be for funding bodies such as NICE to agree a deal in a way they’ve been unable to for Orkambi. I believe the reason this new drug (which I don’t think even has a name yet) may be funded where Orkambi wasn’t, is because the objective improvement in things like lung function brings it much closer to the level of clinical improvement the NHS are prepared to pay per what they call “quali-years”, where Orkambi wasn’t and came with far more negative side effects.

 

I’m sure this is going on across the board with many meds, I just obviously know a bit more about this one because, realistically, had I been given access to it 3-4 years ago, it would still have been in good time to make a significant difference for me and thousands like me. Ironically, if we now deteriorate to a level where it’s highly likely it will be of no use as too late, we’ll be given access to it on compassionate grounds! Sometimes you just have to come to the conclusion there is indeed a god and he’s quite reasonably come to the decision that you’re a complete cunt, so is playing with your entrails like a cat does a dead mouse.

 

Just read that back and can confirm I’m really, really boring. Apologies.

[Dr Nowt]

1 minute ago, SilverSong said:

I work for a generics pharma company. Cheaper generics and a state ran generics company would likely threaten my livelihood. Its not about me. We need a socialist government, we need a Labour government. JC4PM.

Bless you, SilverSong.

 

Respect mate.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 hours ago, TheHowieLama said:

@AngryofTuebrook - what is your position? Leave?

No, of course not. I voted Remain and I will again. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 hours ago, A Red said:

Ok, I'm a troll and a bit thick 

 

Me -

 

Labour should state it is a remain party and go into the election on that basis, have another referendum and campaign for it or against it however individuals feel but the party line to be remain.

 

Unison -

 

Labour should state it is a remain party and go into the election on that basis, have another referendum and campaign for it or against it however individuals feel but the party line to be remain

 

I understand a few on here are Unison members, do they consider their union to be thick and trolling conference?

 

 

I consider my union's General Secretary to be a gobshite. 

 

I hope that helps. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 hours ago, A Red said:

Again, you dont seem to understand what Corbyns policy is. It is to pick a side after the deal at a conference before the referendum. You have stated that this plan is the best and now you are arguing against it.

 

To be fair, if you dont understand it what chance the rest of us?

Has Corbyn really said he wants the party to pick a side after the election?

 

If he has, I think he's wrong. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

3 hours ago, A Red said:

 When the special conference vote happens, after the deal and before the referendum, it will come out full on remain, it has to, there is no other way it could go. 

 

 

There is another way it could go: for the party to remain neutral and allow members to vote and campaign as they see fit.

[Tj hooker]

Hell of a lot to like in that speech taking it to the corrupt Tories I like it 

[Tj hooker]

Hell of a lot to like in that speech taking it to the corrupt Tories I like it 

[A Red]

13 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Has Corbyn really said he wants the party to pick a side after the election?

 

If he has, I think he's wrong. 

You have said that the policy was quite clear and have rubbished others that have said it wasn't. Seeing as you obviously didnt understand it, do you still think that way?

 

 

[A Red]

17 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

There is another way it could go: for the party to remain neutral and allow members to vote and campaign as they see fit.

So you dont agree with labours policy on brexit?

[TheHowieLama]

The party that is looking to take control of a country should remain neutral on that nation's biggest issue in recent history?

[Barrington Womble]

22 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Has Corbyn really said he wants the party to pick a side after the election?

 

If he has, I think he's wrong. 

I've not heard the speech yet. But he did say over the weekend his plan was not to pick a side until he had a deal and then I think convene a special conference prior to the referendum to pick a side. When we were discussing the other day, this is what I meant about his continued fence sitting. 

[Evelyn Tentions]

3 hours ago, A Red said:

Labour will be lying to half the electorate.

As opposed to the usual Tory lying to the entire electorate.

[Red Shift]

Cant see Johnson resigning after the supreme court ruling, but how can a returned parliament do anything to stop an NDGB*

*No Deal Great Brexit

[Dr Nowt]

3 minutes ago, Red Shift said:

Cant see Johnson resigning after the supreme court ruling, but how can a returned parliament do anything to stop a Red White and Blue Clusterfuck.

 

[Skidfingers McGonical]

5 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Whether we stay or leave, irrespective of the mechanism for doing so, half the electorate will be "fucked off".

 

Most Leavers don't want a second referendum, so just by advocating for one, you're pissing them off.

 

The country is irrevocably divided and there is NO stance a person can take which is not divisive.

I disagree. If you are putting a deal to leave to vote alongside an option to Remain it is still giving the leavers an option to choose what they want and the remainers an option to choose what they want. 

 

 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Christ. 

 

This Andrew Neill thing on BBC 1 is ridiculous. The commenteriat can't really expect the public to believe that they don't understand why Labour haven't called for a general election yet. Their insistence on repeatedly asking that question is pathetic. 

 

After 31st October. When it's clear that no deal is off the the table. As they've said from day 1. 

[Barrington Womble]

1 minute ago, Nelly-Torres said:

Christ. 

 

This Andrew Neill thing on BBC 1 is ridiculous. The commenteriat can't really expect the public to believe that they don't understand why Labour haven't called for a general election yet. Their insistence on repeatedly asking that question is pathetic. 

 

After 31st October. When it's clear that no deal is off the the table. As they've said from day 1. 

I don't know why the opposition parties can't work something out to pull together a government to get no deal off the table, then call the election. That would show more than anything labour and the other opposition parties are not fearful of an election. 

[aRdja]

2 hours ago, Lizzie Birdsworths Wrinkled Chopper said:

Pretty much mate, it’s £105k-£110k per patient per year, I believe. Apparently its £280k equivalent in the States, as per a comparison table I was looking at a few weeks back showing the vastly increased prices US health insurance companies pay for the same drugs over there. Separate conversation, but a paranoia I have of any trade deal with the US. Trump has been saying for years he wants the prices other countries pay for medications brought in line with the States, and I read a comment attributed to Johnson recently saying our NHS wouldn’t become an insurance-based service like theirs, but pharmaceuticals could theoretically be on the table in negotiations. Seen nowt more than that, but I just have a sense of dread they may agree to more comparable pricing and the cost of meds to the NHS could even increase, with inevitable knock-on effects. It strikes me as exactly the sort of mealy-mouthed thing that shaved honey monster in a shit suit-looking cunt would do while claiming to have preserved the sanctity of our health service.

 

Back on topic, Orkambi is to all intents and purposes already obsolete, it’s more the ongoing argument over what happens regarding it’s successors (future advancements in medication by the same drug company being included or not in the deal cost has been one of the big sticking points I keep seeing mentioned). Vertex who produce it are already multiple iterations in to that research and currently pressing ahead with a new triple combination drug (Orkambi is only 2) which has far outperformed it in Stage 3 trials. I was only talking to my consultant about it at length yesterday afternoon. Vertex are seeking a US licence and a European licence for the new drug next year. Then it would be for funding bodies such as NICE to agree a deal in a way they’ve been unable to for Orkambi. I believe the reason this new drug (which I don’t think even has a name yet) may be funded where Orkambi wasn’t, is because the objective improvement in things like lung function brings it much closer to the level of clinical improvement the NHS are prepared to pay per what they call “quali-years”, where Orkambi wasn’t and came with far more negative side effects.

 

I’m sure this is going on across the board with many meds, I just obviously know a bit more about this one because, realistically, had I been given access to it 3-4 years ago, it would still have been in good time to make a significant difference for me and thousands like me. Ironically, if we now deteriorate to a level where it’s highly likely it will be of no use as too late, we’ll be given access to it on compassionate grounds! Sometimes you just have to come to the conclusion there is indeed a god and he’s quite reasonably come to the decision that you’re a complete cunt, so is playing with your entrails like a cat does a dead mouse.

 

Just read that back and can confirm I’m really, really boring. Apologies.

Okay that’s well and good mate, Orkambi seems important and all that... but erm.. what about inflation?

[Dr Nowt]

1 minute ago, viRdjil said:

Okay that’s well and good mate, Orkambi seems important and all that... but erm.. what about inflation?

How do you mean?