Keir Starmer

[redinblack]

14 hours ago, Creator Supreme said:

So let me get this straight, Labour whipped for its Lords to abstain on a vote to provide free school meals to pupils from poorer households?

 

Have I got that right?

I think it falls in line with what their general policy seems to be in that they didnt vote against the measure so its  "Vote For Us, We Are Like The Tories, But Not As Bad"

[Numero Veinticinco]

11 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Here's Rach with a bucketful of ice cold water. Shame see can't stay in Chelsea permanently.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/12/labour-to-pledge-ironclad-discipline-with-public-finances?s=09

 

 

So what exactly do you disagree with? 

[Creator Supreme]

7 minutes ago, redinblack said:

I think it falls in line with what their general policy seems to be in that they didnt vote against the measure so its  "Vote For Us, We Are Like The Tories, But Not As Bad"

FFS, I want the tories out and badly, I want a situation where us greens can vote tactically for Labour when required, but fuck me they make it hard to do.

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Creator Supreme said:

FFS, I want the tories out and badly

Just not badly enough to vote in the way that’s most likely to get them out. 

[Gnasher]

28 minutes ago, Hank Moody said:

So what exactly do you disagree with? 

Id suggest the country's debt is not people's most pressing concern considering the war in Ukraine and the current financial climate tbh. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

7 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Id suggest the country's debt is not people's most pressing concern considering the war in Ukraine and the current financial climate tbh. 

I’m pretty sure she didn’t say it was people’s most pressing concern. She said she would only borrow for investment. That doesn’t impact the Ukraine, and it goes towards tackling the current financial climate. Are you saying you think Labour should go with the ‘we are going to increase national debt’ line? I’m not sure they’ll get the votes they need and retain credibility that way. Or are you saying she shouldn’t have said anything at all, which seems to go against the wishes of critics who wanted them to outline everything from day one. If not, what do you think Labour should have done? I’m really looking for some detail here, because all I see is general criticism that amounts to ‘boo, you suck’, when what I really want is ‘boo, you suck because…’, after all this is a forum and it’s really difficult to respond if you don’t actually say what issue you have. 

[redinblack]

47 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

FFS, I want the tories out and badly, I want a situation where us greens can vote tactically for Labour when required, but fuck me they make it hard to do.

Thats exactly where I'm coming from and this just looks a dick move. There must be a political nuance I'm missing, but on the surface it just looks a dick move.

[Gnasher]

21 minutes ago, Hank Moody said:

I’m pretty sure she didn’t say it was people’s most pressing concern. She said she would only borrow for investment. That doesn’t impact the Ukraine, and it goes towards tackling the current financial climate. Are you saying you think Labour should go with the ‘we are going to increase national debt’ line? I’m not sure they’ll get the votes they need and retain credibility that way. Or are you saying she shouldn’t have said anything at all, which seems to go against the wishes of critics who wanted them to outline everything from day one. If not, what do you think Labour should have done? I’m really looking for some detail here, because all I see is general criticism that amounts to ‘boo, you suck’, when what I really want is ‘boo, you suck because…’, after all this is a forum and it’s really difficult to respond if you don’t actually say what issue you have. 

I've already told you. She's promised to bring down the country's debt. On the back of an uncertain economic future, especially with the fallout caused by Russia in Ukraine. No need for it, reeks of more pandering to the tory lights.

 

Anyway you crack on and enjoy yourself, or go crack one off if you want.

[Barrington Womble]

20 hours ago, Gnasher said:

 

 

 

What's the point here? She was taken, she declared it. It seems a pretty normal thing to happen. 

[Gnasher]

1 hour ago, Creator Supreme said:

FFS, I want the tories out and badly, I want a situation where us greens can vote tactically for Labour when required, but fuck me they make it hard to do.

Here's the reason given not to back free school meals for benefit claimants. You should have more aspiration and aim higher? 

 

It hasn't gone down that well tbh.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

18 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

I've already told you. She's promised to bring down the country's debt. On the back of an uncertain economic future, especially with the fallout caused by Russia in Ukraine. No need for it, reeks of more pandering to the tory lights.

 

Anyway you crack on and enjoy yourself, or go crack one off if you want.

Actually you didn’t tell me, but let’s move on to something more important. You said she promises to bring down the country’s debt. She didn’t. She said she’d reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio. You can do that whilst creating more debt. It just involves growing the economy. It’s how New Labour did so well for so many years. It’s how Corbyn would have tried to approach spending. Thanks for confirming you aren’t interested in debt, I now know what your issue is here. I didn’t before. 

[Creator Supreme]

Got a lot of time for Jack Monroe.

[Gnasher]

Just now, Creator Supreme said:

Got a lot of time for Jack Monroe.

I've got a lot more time for her than the shadow chancellor.

[Numero Veinticinco]

8 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Here's the reason given not to back free school meals for benefit claimants. You should have more aspiration and aim higher? 

 

It hasn't gone down that well tbh.

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘I want to see more money in parent’s pockets so they can choose the food and supplies that are right for their kids. I want a decent standard of living for everyone, not soup kitchens and food banks used as an excuse to keep benefits low. ’
 

Ex-Labour MP or Adolf Hitler. It’s hard to tell. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

10 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

What's the point here? She was taken, she declared it. It seems a pretty normal thing to happen. 

Gnasher gonna gnash. I mean, I’m sure he was equally gnashery over Iran paying £20,000 to certain other members. 

[Gnasher]

3 minutes ago, Hank Moody said:

‘I want to see more money in parent’s pockets so they can choose the food and supplies that are right for their kids. I want a decent standard of living for everyone, not soup kitchens and food banks used as an excuse to keep benefits low. ’
 

Ex-Labour MP or Adolf Hitler. It’s hard to tell. 

Needs must unfortunately.

 

We'd all like foodbanks to be fucked off etc and parents to not have to rely on benefits but an awful lot of parents are on Universal Credit and that free meal would have been a godsend to a lot of children.

 

Labour's abstention looks bizarre.

[Creator Supreme]

I see where he's coming from, but you need to walk before you run.

[Gnasher]

9 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

I see where he's coming from, but you need to walk before you run.

I don't. A lot of people need handouts, are on Universal Credit and use foodbanks anyway. Thay are almost telling parents we are pulling the rug from under you as you should aspire to better. 

 

Just offer the parents and kids the fucking food. The vouchers are not compulsory, it should be up to them.

[Strontium]

25 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

What's the point here? She was taken, she declared it. It seems a pretty normal thing to happen. 

 

Flowers are the footsoldiers of the bourgeoisie.

[Numero Veinticinco]

5 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Needs must unfortunately.

 

We'd all like foodbanks to be fucked off etc and parents to not have to rely on benefits but an awful lot of parents are on Universal Credit and that free meal would have been a godsend to a lot of children.

 

Labour's abstention looks bizarre.

I don't know if you read the article, but he's not a Labour MP, it's not about the abstention and was written before the abstention. It seems a bit wild to take it as the reason for the abstention.

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

The vouchers are not compulsory, it should be up to them.

That seems like the right wing American system, which is dehumanising and actually against everything a socialist should want for people. Labour's abstention on an amendment in the Lords wasn't because 'who cares about hungry kids', it was because - apparently, as I've not read it (and would be shocked if anybody here has) - the amendment was too widely drawn and because Labour have similar, better legislation coming. 

 

My main issue here is there's a rush to just jump on to anything that could possibly land a glove on Labour. There's certain sections of the left-wing media that do this, because they know they'll get clicks; accuracy be damned. I don't hate the left, I hate people who try to grift off the back of left wing politics. They do the same things the right do in the Mail and Express. I hate those too. It's just all so dishonest, and it's trying to manipulate people. Sure, let's moan about Rachel Reeves going to a flower show (what was that about priorities?), but let's also ask questions about what others get, like when Corbyn got 20,000 from Iran. Otherwise it looks like we don't actually care about what people are receiving and why, but we are looking to score a cheap point. I'm against all of it. Second jobs, perks, all of that shit should be fucked off. 

[Gnasher]

Cost of living crisis. So in the past month or so we've had a Labour front bencher accepting a free meal from a bank that received government subsidies at the Chelsea flower show. Labour suggesting its MPs shouldn't be seen on picket lines and Labour members of the House of Lords blocking children receiving free school meals. 

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Just now, Gnasher said:

Cost of living crisis. So in the past month or so we've had a Labour front bencher accepting a free meal from a bank that received government subsidies at the Chelsea flower show. Labour suggesting its MPs shouldn't be seen on picket lines and Labour members of the House of Lords blocking children receiving free school meals. 

 

 

Labour must really hate kids, eh. Guess I'll vote for the Tories. 

[Gnasher]

10 minutes ago, Hank Moody said:

I don't know if you read the article, but he's not a Labour MP, it's not about the abstention and was written before the abstention. It seems a bit wild to take it as the reason for the abstention.

That seems like the right wing American system, which is dehumanising and actually against everything a socialist should want for people. Labour's abstention on an amendment in the Lords wasn't because 'who cares about hungry kids', it was because - apparently, as I've not read it (and would be shocked if anybody here has) - the amendment was too widely drawn and because Labour have similar, better legislation coming. 

 

My main issue here is there's a rush to just jump on to anything that could possibly land a glove on Labour. There's certain sections of the left-wing media that do this, because they know they'll get clicks; accuracy be damned. I don't hate the left, I hate people who try to grift off the back of left wing politics. They do the same things the right do in the Mail and Express. I hate those too. It's just all so dishonest, and it's trying to manipulate people. Sure, let's moan about Rachel Reeves going to a flower show (what was that about priorities?), but let's also ask questions about what others get, like when Corbyn got 20,000 from Iran. Otherwise it looks like we don't actually care about what people are receiving and why, but we are looking to score a cheap point. I'm against all of it. Second jobs, perks, all of that shit should be fucked off. 

10 bonus points for getting Corbyn into the conversation.

[Gnasher]

8 minutes ago, Hank Moody said:

Labour must really hate kids, eh. Guess I'll vote for the Tories. 

I don't know about that but I do know they don't vote to feed them. 

[Barrington Womble]

14 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Cost of living crisis. So in the past month or so we've had a Labour front bencher accepting a free meal from a bank that received government subsidies at the Chelsea flower show. Labour suggesting its MPs shouldn't be seen on picket lines and Labour members of the House of Lords blocking children receiving free school meals. 

 

 

Cost of living crisis? I don't see how this is closely relevent. Lloyds will have bought a certain point of tickets no matter who they're taking. This should be good because this helps pay for the show. Those tickets go someone..is it not the responsibility of people who expect to be forming a government to have relationships with people in the industry they're responsible.for?