Current Affairs The Labour Party

[hullefc]

You friend walks up to someone and bullies them to give him £50 on the proviso he’s giving it to you, otherwise worse will happen. He gives you a fiver and pockets the rest.

You’re okay with this?

Wouldn't have such a friend.

 

[edge]

Emily Thornberry tipped to be the next leader lol
A real working class hero hey ho.....
The white van fiasco they forget things!

that is a step to far for me, I will not vote labour in an election, local or GE if she is leader.

 

[Number_25]

What is a ‘devolution’ tax ?......

Localised politics. Increased funding and powers for local authorities.

 

[roydo]

'Under Labour's "inclusive ownership fund" proposal, Mr McDonnell said workers would be given a financial stake in their employers and more say over how companies are run.

Firms would have to put 1% of their shares into the fund every year up to a maximum of 10%.

The amount of share capital available to workers would be capped at £500, with the rest - estimated at £2.1bn a year by the end of a five-year Parliamentary term - going into a fund to pay for public services and welfare".

McDonell is proposing that my company put 1% per year into a fund that is not currently there. How can it be my money - 1% of their shares - when I don't have any shares. Neither do my fellow workers. Sounds good to me and the rest is going into the governments kitty to be distributed to the NHS, education, health care etc. Sounds like a win/win to me. Bring it on John.

Or, he is forcing your company to give 10% of the company away, in return for £0.00, to be held in a trust that no one can sell "their" part of. He then caps the amount of earnings that "members" can get, (money that the company pays from your hard work) and pockets the rest.

How would you feel if the Tories tried that, to fund a tax cut? Because once it is done, you can bet a pretty penny it wont be undone.

 

[edge]

Back to the Labour Party.

I've voted Labour all my life.

I've just watched Starmer on the 1 o'clock news, as well as others, speaking at the Conference.

I am dismayed that the apparent way forward appears to be to stymie any kind of deal with the EU. In fact, it appears that those in responsible positions at the top of the Party are now actively and publicly moving to destroy Brexit. It was telling that Dennis Skinner stayed seated when others around him stood to applaud Starmer. I wonder why the Beeb didn't interview him...

It is one thing to be a party of opposition. It is something else altogether to be a party that has a 'dog in the manger' attitude simply for the sake of it.

I am no fan of Norman Smith, the assistant political editor of the Beeb. However, he stated things quite clearly in his summing-up of the present Labour position, particularly that their stance could lose a swathe of votes among those Labour supporters/voters who voted Leave. At the moment, it appears to me that all the Tories need to do is pull up a deckchair, get the cigar out, and watch Labour (once again) tear itself apart. It disappoints me greatly.

The Labour Party head honchos might think that forcing a General Election would give them a good chance of returning to power. If they do think that, I believe they are deluded. What I saw from this morning's Conference leads me to believe they would be slaughtered if another election took place any time soon. But that's just my own view.

The above saddens me, but I think it is hard, cold, reality...

There were a few others after Starmer spokei warning about just what you have said, the UNITE union fella for one.
If the put a in a manifesto out vote to on the table they have lost any election hopes they might have held, Tories will just dress it up as they are going against the will of the people in places like Sunderland ect its the London elite ect and spin it to there own ends, bad mistake if they do that alienate a third of your own votes when you are already a minority is plain suicidal.

 

[hullefc]

Or, he is forcing your company to give 10% of the company away, in return for £0.00, to be held in a trust that no one can sell "their" part of. He then caps the amount of earnings that "members" can get, (money that the company pays from your hard work) and pockets the rest.

How would you feel if the Tories tried that, to fund a tax cut? Because once it is done, you can bet a pretty penny it wont be undone.

But you said it was my money. So it is the companies?The £0.00 return? "They will be eligible to receive dividends on the shares up to a value of £500 per worker per year. The government gets the rest". Dividend. That is money in my pocket and the rest to the government coffers. Win/win from where I work. Bring it on John. Except I probably wont be in work then and wont be able to get back some of the £6 grand stolen from me by the Tories/Libdems. So the Tories could fund a tax cut for their friends. But at least my fellow workers will benefit and the NHS, Education, health care etc.

 

[roydo]

But you said it was my money. So it is the companies?The £0.00 return? "They will be eligible to receive dividends on the shares up to a value of £500 per worker per year. The government gets the rest". Dividend. That is money in my pocket and the rest to the government coffers. Win/win from where I work. Bring it on John. Except I probably wont be in work then and wont be able to get back some of the £6 grand stolen from me by the Tories/Libdems. But at least my fellow workers will benefit and the NHS, Education, health care etc.

The £0.00 return is what your company will get for giving away 10% of the company. If you are a shareholder, which notionally you will be, the law says all shareholders should be treated equally. If one shareholder gets £1000, then you should as well. But no, you will pay £500 to your new best pal.

Great news.

 

[zzr45]

Wouldn't have such a friend.

Yet you’d vote somebody into political office to do exactly that. Bit hypocritical that like.

 

[hullefc]

The £0.00 return is what your company will get for giving away 10% of the company. If you are a shareholder, which notionally you will be, the law says all shareholders should be treated equally. If one shareholder gets £1000, then you should as well. But no, you will pay £500 to your new best pal.

Great news.

I repeat. £500 that I would not have had and the rest going to the government. Win/win for me and my fellow workers. Win/win.
So you're saying that all shareholders have to be treated the same and therefore will be limited to £500 because of the law. Maybe that extra money, the difference between the £500 and £1000 that goes to shareholders, will go into increasing my wages above minimum wage or to the government. Win/win. I can hear the rumblings of complaints by the CEO of my company. Mind, he did say the same about putting company money into the pension scheme.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I repeat. £500 that I would not have had and the rest going to the government. Win/win for me and my fellow workers. Win/win.
So you're saying that all shareholders have to be treated the same and therefore will be limited to £500 because of the law. Maybe that extra money, the difference between the £500 and £1000 that goes to shareholders, will go into increasing my wages above minimum wage or to the government. Win/win. I can hear the rumblings of complaints by the CEO of my company. Mind, he did say the same about putting company money into the pension scheme.

You sound pretty selfish. All about you isn't it?

 

[hullefc]

Yet you’d vote somebody into political office to do exactly that. Bit hypocritical that like.

So John McDonell is a bully. Is that just him or all politicians? A bit like Osbourne that stole £6 grand from million of workers, like myself, due their pension at 65 but raised to 66. That sort of bully you mean?

 

[hullefc]

You sound pretty selfish. All about you isn't it?

Oh dear.

"Or the pensioner with 10% less in their pension? As a freelancer, my savings are largely invested in shares for my retirement. Or in other words, doing what most politicians would recommend. Being frugal, saving for rainy days etc. yet Labour would snatch 10% from my savings just like that. Nice". Altruism goes a long way.

 

[roydo]

So John McDonell is a bully. Is that just him or all politicians? A bit like Osbourne that stole £6 grand from million of workers, like myself, due their pension at 65 but raised to 66. That sort of bully you mean?

That legislation was put in place like 30 years ago mate.

 

[roydo]

I repeat. £500 that I would not have had and the rest going to the government. Win/win for me and my fellow workers. Win/win.
So you're saying that all shareholders have to be treated the same and therefore will be limited to £500 because of the law. Maybe that extra money, the difference between the £500 and £1000 that goes to shareholders, will go into increasing my wages above minimum wage or to the government. Win/win. I can hear the rumblings of complaints by the CEO of my company. Mind, he did say the same about putting company money into the pension scheme.

I give up mate. Enjoy your £500.

 

[hullefc]

That legislation was put in place like 30 years ago mate.

2007 - further rises in pension age to 66, 67, and then 68 introduced
The Labour Government passed a new law to raise state pension age to 66 between April 2024 and April 2026, then to 67 between April 2034 and April 2036 and to 68 between April 2044 and April 2046.

It was brought forward to 2020 by the Tories/Libdems. Brown gave those working near 20 years notice of the change - which never should have been changed, the Tories/Libdems gave us twenty minutes.