Author Topic: Do you support the strikes?  (Read 74489 times)

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Batshit fucker and Chief Yuletide Porcine Voyeur
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 10,044
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #520 on: July 28, 2022, 05:48:59 pm »
He's back, now we're talking Labour again. With his carefully crafted posts.
;D
would rather have a wank wearing a barb wire glove
If you're chasing thrills, try a bit of auto-asphyxiation with a poppers-soaked orange in your gob.

Offline TipTopKop

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,106
  • Call Meeeeeee The Splund
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #521 on: July 28, 2022, 05:55:57 pm »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgNtlcILEmw&ab_channel=LBC

If you have a spare 10 minutes, this conversation on LBC is fantastic.
An eye opener, thanks for sharing. Sad state, and as gazzalfc said it's an indicator of where we are.

Online oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,448
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #522 on: July 28, 2022, 07:03:58 pm »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgNtlcILEmw&ab_channel=LBC

If you have a spare 10 minutes, this conversation on LBC is fantastic.
Caller must have held these opinions for years but blinded by the same old race to the bottom bitterness.
He does raise a very important problem though that needs to be accepted and solved. the right for our NHS to go on strike. the callers attitude is the reason why this has never been sorted properly in the first place.
His points to argue why vital industries that hurt millions shouldn't be allowed to resort to strike action are decent enough it's his response when he's told the realty, he then blames the people taking the only option left open to them (strikers) while not laying any blame on the Government for creating this realty.

It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline Yorkykopite

  • Misses Danny Boy with a passion. Phil's Official Biographer, dontcherknow...it's all true. Honestly.
  • RAWK Writer
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 34,484
  • The first five yards........
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #523 on: July 28, 2022, 07:10:38 pm »
Caller must have held these opinions for years but blinded by the same old race to the bottom bitterness.
He does raise a very important problem though that needs to be accepted and solved. the right for our NHS to go on strike. the callers attitude is the reason why this has never been sorted properly in the first place.
His points to argue why vital industries that hurt millions shouldn't be allowed to resort to strike action are decent enough it's his response when he's told the realty, he then blames the people taking the only option left open to them (strikers) while not laying any blame on the Government for creating this realty.



What's depressing is him being walked through the argument, clearly seeing its illogicality and still sticking to his guns.
"If you want the world to love you don't discuss Middle Eastern politics" Saul Bellow.

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Batshit fucker and Chief Yuletide Porcine Voyeur
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 10,044
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #524 on: July 28, 2022, 07:16:13 pm »
What's depressing is him being walked through the argument, clearly seeing its illogicality and still sticking to his guns.
The guy had twenty years of justifying and rationalising the treatment meted out to him. A ten minute chat with O'Brien was probably never going to through to him. But maybe, just maybe, O'Brien opened a crack. Or with some of the listeners. We can only hope.
would rather have a wank wearing a barb wire glove
If you're chasing thrills, try a bit of auto-asphyxiation with a poppers-soaked orange in your gob.

Offline Snail

  • Disgusted by you. Snail murdering S h e e p. Ms Soppy Twat Potty Mouth. The Annabel Chong of RAWK's X-Factor. Likes giving Sir Cliff of Richard one.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 24,954
  • How are we
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #525 on: July 28, 2022, 07:27:51 pm »
Apologies for lack of reply - don't get to reply often.

Don't know if you realised, but Blair was pretty centrist and he did well...

And have you seen the Tory party recently?? They are being dominated by the far right element and dragged into supporting awful policies.

For those asking what Starmer would do differently, I'd imagine Rwanda and the immigration policies would be the first to change.

Fuck, is it 1997? Thank fuck for that, time to buy a house!

Oh wait. Nah.

Online oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,448
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #526 on: July 28, 2022, 07:39:53 pm »
What's depressing is him being walked through the argument, clearly seeing its illogicality and still sticking to his guns.
Yeah. it's not as if this is something sprung on him. he's obviously thought this way for years, how the government should basically set up a fair system for wage and conditions disputes so industrial action isn't needed. fair enough but if he believes this is the best way to avoid strike action then why isn't he blaming the government for refusing to bring in a system like this instead of blaming the strikers who have no other way of defending themselves.
It's as if the whole thought process breaks down after he's told the realty and to be honest he shouldn't have needed to be told. his race to the bottom bitterness blinded him.
It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline Andy

  • short fingered vulgarian
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,269
  • Form is temporary, class is permanent.
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #527 on: July 28, 2022, 07:48:36 pm »
Fuck, is it 1997? Thank fuck for that, time to buy a house!

Oh wait. Nah.

When did I say that? I'm saying by being more centrist, Starmer is more likely to win a general election and then be able to start making changes.

And 'more centrist' than an increasingly right wing Tory party.

It won't be the extreme changes that a lot of more left wingers would like, but then a lot of other people don't want more the extreme stuff. They want a responsible government with the wider community's aims at it's heart.

Offline killer-heels

  • Hates everyone and everything. Including YOU! Negativity not just for Christmas. Thinks 'irony' means 'metallic'......
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 76,610
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #528 on: July 28, 2022, 09:52:26 pm »
Any more strikes and we should bring in the army……

….is what I would say if I was a Lib Dem.

Offline Gerry Attrick

  • Sancho's dad. Tight-arse, non-jackpot-sharing get :)
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 49,527
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #529 on: July 28, 2022, 10:11:33 pm »
Any more strikes and we should bring in the army……

….is what I would say if I was a Lib Dem.

Would be a good idea if we still had an army.

Offline Andy

  • short fingered vulgarian
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,269
  • Form is temporary, class is permanent.
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #530 on: July 28, 2022, 10:34:55 pm »
Any more strikes and we should bring in the army……

….is what I would say if I was a Lib Dem.

Yeah Lib Dems are the REAL enemy here.

Offline RainbowFlick

  • The Test Ticket Tout. Head of the RAWK Vice Squad.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,452
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #531 on: July 28, 2022, 10:59:17 pm »
Yeah Lib Dems are the REAL enemy here.

politics should not simply be "get the tories out".

you say centrist when in the past week all indications suggest they're flanking closer to Tory policy than even center. at what point do you get angry at that? or is it simply 'get the tories out'? genuinely curious cos to me, if that's the only end game, that is also bleak.
YNWA.

Offline ToneLa

  • you know the rules but I make the game.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,827
  • I AM FURIOUS, RED (STILL)
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #532 on: July 28, 2022, 11:03:04 pm »
politics should not simply be "get the tories out".

you say centrist when in the past week all indications suggest they're flanking closer to Tory policy than even center. at what point do you get angry at that? or is it simply 'get the tories out'? genuinely curious cos to me, if that's the only end game, that is also bleak.

Surely there is a point they can reach where one can conclude they are not fit to serve the people of our kingdom. You may not agree we are there already, but there is a point of validity - however awful - where the blank nothingness of political chaos is better.

I think a lot of us would cope. It depends.

Offline TipTopKop

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,106
  • Call Meeeeeee The Splund
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #533 on: July 29, 2022, 12:13:53 am »
politics should not simply be "get the tories out".

you say centrist when in the past week all indications suggest they're flanking closer to Tory policy than even center. at what point do you get angry at that? or is it simply 'get the tories out'? genuinely curious cos to me, if that's the only end game, that is also bleak.
Yep, good points. Unfortunately it does seem to some that the end game is simply having their party in, regardless of what policies are implemented.

Online oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,448
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #534 on: July 29, 2022, 12:41:18 am »
politics should not simply be "get the tories out".

you say centrist when in the past week all indications suggest they're flanking closer to Tory policy than even center. at what point do you get angry at that? or is it simply 'get the tories out'? genuinely curious cos to me, if that's the only end game, that is also bleak.
Do you want the Torys to change course?
That won't be achieved with strikes and protests. it will only be achieved by teaching them a lesson they will not forget for many years. that means a hammering at the election. the Torys will not loose all their seats to Labour, let the Lib Dems win the seats Labour will never win.
The best election result would be a Labour majority with the Lib Dems also taking many Tory seats, that would make the Torys shit themselves. that would bring change.

It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline stoa

  • way. Daydream. Quite partial to a good plonking.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,455
  • Five+One Times, Baby...
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #535 on: July 29, 2022, 12:52:34 am »
What's depressing is him being walked through the argument, clearly seeing its illogicality and still sticking to his guns.

Not saying the guy was right in sticking to his guns, but the clip also shows what I think is James O'Brien's biggest weakness at times. He talks to the guy and leads him all the way to the point he's trying to make, but when he reaches the "house" he fails to point him to the door, but suddenly starts showing him the property next doors which is a different point to what he's trying to get across.

He had the caller at a place where he admitted that not talking to the unions is the wrong thing to do and that he thinks there should be some higher arbitration panel for cases like that and laws should be put in place to install such a panel. What O'Brien should then have done was make it clear to him, that the unions don't have the power to do that, so their only way to make their disapproval known is industrial action. Instead, he took it a step further and pointed to Liz Truss and the tories trying to erode workers' rights even more. Of course that's a legitimate point, but that's not really the one O'Brien needed to make at that time. He needed to show the guy that industrial action is the only way for unions to get the other side to move or to get things to change. By taking it a step further, he lost the other guy again and the caller went back to his initial story and stuck with it.

Offline Billy Elliot

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,870
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #536 on: July 29, 2022, 12:59:06 am »
Richard Murphy can sum up how I feel, far better than I can myself:

Starmer’s mess
Posted on July 28 2022

There are occasions when politicians baffle me. I will exclude Tories from that comment: their very existence is hard to explain. I refer instead to those from other parties. Like Keir Starmer, in particular.

Starmer has three jobs. He has to lead the Labour Party. If he has not noticed it, this was and is rooted in the labour movement, as represented by trade unions. As such it is his job to represent the political interests of working people.

Second, he has to oppose the government. This is a necessary part of holding the title of Leader of the Opposition - for which he does receive an official salary. The key to this role is also in the name: the job is to oppose the government by pointing out its failing.

Third, and to fulfil the objectives of the first two roles, has job is to win the next general election and then form a government. Again, without wishing to point out the obvious, this requires that in a two party system he wins mass popular support.

Right now Keir Starmer is being assisted by three things. The first is that working people are united in their concern about a cost of living crisis that can only be addressed through fair pay rises to ensure that people can continue to pay their bills as they fall due. There is nothing especially difficult to understand about this. If costs rise - as energy will - by more than £2,000 in a year and many other expenses, such of those on food, are also rising rapidly then either people without savings (which is most people in the country) get a fair pay rise or they will fall into debt, go hungry, go cold or go bankrupt and lose their homes. This is the reality of life. There is no avoiding it. That is what is going to happen. As a result there is an extraordinary unity amongst working people demanding action, including now a call for a general strike.

Second, the Tories are in total disarray, with the two leadership election candidates suggesting that their task is to get the country out of the mess that the governments of which they were members have gotten us into.

Third, as a result getting people to agree that we need a different government should be easy.

But then we have to take the Starmer factor into account. Let’s just look at yesterday. The rail unions are on strike, led by the extraordinary Mick Lynch, who has an innate ability to explain economics (and other realities) which almost no interviewer knows how to handle. That is helped by the fact that his case is a simple one. He is saying a 4% pay rise is inadequate when the cost of living is increasing by 10% or more, and prices will not go down again even if inflation does sometime in 2023. And he is right, of course.

Lynch is also right to ask questions about why it is that working people are being picked on when rents, profits and interest are all still being paid, without question arising as to why they too should not be squeezed.

If Starmer was seeking to represent labour as leader of the Labour Party you would have thought these might be positions that he should support. But no. He says it’s his job as prime minister in waiting to support the management in disputes and not to side with labour, because he will be the manager if he (ever) secures office.

It’s a crass argument. Firstly, that ignores the fact that he has to win office. At this moment that means he has to show he is on the side of those who are going to be crushed by the coming winter. They are his voter base. He cannot afford to alienate them.

Second, it’s a crass argument because part of his pitch should be that the current management have got their negotiating position wrong and that he would not in any way have supported the offer now being made to the rail workers, which is so obviously unfair. Saying so is exactly what his job should involve.

And third, what this reveals is a man who thinks he can only become prime minister by appealing to small-minded right-wingers. He is indifferent about representing anyone from the left, or what they stand for. Maybe, as a lot of Labour MPs and some Labour peers are saying, that is because he really does not know what life is like for anyone but those who are on the right wing of politics. Or maybe it’s because he really does think that all politics is now on the right anyway, and the left does not matter. And maybe it is because he just does not care as he wants to govern from the right, come what may. To be honest, I can’t tell.

But what I do know is that a leader of the Labour Party who has forgotten what the party is meant to represent, just as he has forgotten that it is his job to oppose. He also seems intent on alienating a great many of those who might support him. That makes him look a pretty dismal failure at his job.

No wonder the Labour Party has no one out on the morning media round as I write this. Starmer’s actions are indefensible. I suspect his shadow cabinet know it. It’s hard to see how he can continue like this.

What a mess.
With me 3 star jumper half way up me back!

Offline John C

  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 42,262
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #537 on: July 29, 2022, 06:51:51 am »
politics should not simply be "get the tories out".

you say centrist when in the past week all indications suggest they're flanking closer to Tory policy than even center. at what point do you get angry at that? or is it simply 'get the tories out'? genuinely curious cos to me, if that's the only end game, that is also bleak.

No wonder the Labour Party has no one out on the morning media round as I write this. Starmer’s actions are indefensible. I suspect his shadow cabinet know it. It’s hard to see how he can continue like this.

What a mess.
That is a good article Billy mate. Whenever I read some thing like that I always come back to the bare facts of the electorate of this country though. They are a basket-case. Living through those long days of 1979 to 1997 in which they wouldn't put a decent politician like Neil Kinnock in to Office, and then the abysmal and disgraceful disrespect the Tories have shown this country from 2010 to date which could be capped with Liz Truss as the PM, I'm left wondering what does the Labour Party need to do to achieve Government.
Because I'm convinced those shysters will vote for Truss based on any excuse about Labour - which is always self inflicted by its own voters who always shout about the worst, not the best of it and are continuing to do so now.

And just to contextualise that, Neil Kinnock rightfully took on and defeated a Labour Council that I striked frequently to support because of it local policies. I was gutted for Kinnock.

But back to the final line about the strikes and to consider Rainbows point, having considered what I've just wrote, surely the shadow cabinet know all that, surely they've devised a solid strategy of togetherness and a plan to close ranks just to get a Labour government over the line? Which in some cases may be at a unpalatable cost. And if so which one has broke ranks.

Not everyone can have a Labour party that's shaped in their own ideology, not right now. This era may actually be an opportunity to have an alternative to those absolute fucking c*nts. I'm trying to see it through that lens rather than a Starmer is shite lens (not your words). If those red-wall fuckwits and the rest of the country can't be made to see that we really are fucked as a nation for another decade.

Offline killer-heels

  • Hates everyone and everything. Including YOU! Negativity not just for Christmas. Thinks 'irony' means 'metallic'......
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 76,610
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #538 on: July 29, 2022, 08:59:48 am »
Starmer at the moment is the right person for the job and we all want the Tories out. There is no doubt Ill be voting Labour but we absolutely should be questioning the party and their intent in government.

Its all good claiming that they are just taking a back seat and when in power they would then make a difference but to be honest I dont trust them. Starmer doesnt seem to stand for anything and Reeves seems to be lurching right.

Offline killer-heels

  • Hates everyone and everything. Including YOU! Negativity not just for Christmas. Thinks 'irony' means 'metallic'......
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 76,610
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #539 on: July 29, 2022, 09:00:58 am »
Yeah Lib Dems are the REAL enemy here.

They are not, but they are still a gang of c*nts.

Offline Fromola

  • For the love of god please shut the fuck up. Lomola... “The sky is falling and I’m off to tell the King!...” Places stock in the wrong opinions. Miserable F*cker! Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 31,273
  • Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #540 on: July 29, 2022, 09:04:19 am »
Fuck, is it 1997? Thank fuck for that, time to buy a house!

Oh wait. Nah.

The New Labour lot are as stuck in the past as they always claim the left to be. The 90s are a different time and incomparable to the challenges facing us now.

If they'd dealt with some of the issues then we might be in a better place now. Voting reform (rather than jibbing it due to winning a landslide), reforming the Lords (rather than filling it with cronies and donors like the Tories do), press reform (rather than getting into bed with Rupert Murdoch), changing the economy (rather than being 'extremely comfortable with people getting filthy rich' and carrying on with the neoliberal nightmare and privatisation failures), PFI's, house prices exploding on their watch while the Blairs started amassing their property fortune.

Of course they did some good things and were better than the Tories but that's not going to be enough now. Nobody in power here ever actually wants to change the way things are actually done. At least Milliband and Corbyn did but that's why the press and establishment went kicking and screaming to stop them (whether you like them or not). Starmer did pledge to carry on with much of the policy agenda but without the toxicity and divisiveness of the Corbyn period within Labour. He's dropped the lot, seemingly for a New Labour nostalgia act with Mandelson still pulling the strings.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2022, 09:22:28 am by Fromola »
Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season

Online kopite77

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,132
  • In Jurgen we trust!
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #541 on: July 29, 2022, 09:44:10 am »
The New Labour lot are as stuck in the past as they always claim the left to be. The 90s are a different time and incomparable to the challenges facing us now.

If they'd dealt with some of the issues then we might be in a better place now. Voting reform (rather than jibbing it due to winning a landslide), reforming the Lords (rather than filling it with cronies and donors like the Tories do), press reform (rather than getting into bed with Rupert Murdoch), changing the economy (rather than being 'extremely comfortable with people getting filthy rich' and carrying on with the neoliberal nightmare and privatisation failures), PFI's, house prices exploding on their watch while the Blairs started amassing their property fortune.

Of course they did some good things and were better than the Tories but that's not going to be enough now. Nobody in power here ever actually wants to change the way things are actually done. At least Milliband and Corbyn did but that's why the press and establishment went kicking and screaming to stop them (whether you like them or not). Starmer did pledge to carry on with much of the policy agenda but without the toxicity and divisiveness of the Corbyn period within Labour. He's dropped the lot, seemingly for a New Labour nostalgia act with Mandelson still pulling the strings.
Excellent post, nail on head mate.
HARRY HARRIS, MARK LAWRENSON, JOSE MOURIHNO,PETER KENYON, ROMAN ABRAMOVICH, ALAN HANSEN, YOU GUY'S TOOK ONE HELL OF A BEATING

AND Mr KENWRIGHT YOU CAN STICK YOUR FUCKING GROUNDSHARE UP YOUR ARSE!

Hicks and Gillett, Game Over, thanks for Fuck All Fuckfaces, Internet Terrorist and Proud!

Offline PatriotScouser

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,103
  • I could agree with you but then we’d both be wrong
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #542 on: July 29, 2022, 11:15:58 am »
I didn't see Diane Abbott, John McDonnell and Owen Jones chomping at the bit to get in the airwaves when Starmer announced Labour would end charity status for private schools. Or that we would ban fire and rehire. Just when there's an opportunity to bash Keir.

Cost of nationalising rail, energy & water was estimated at £196bn by CBI. Labour under Corbyn didn’t want to pay market value for the assets, forcing shareholders to lose most of the value of their investment which would have been a multi pronged economic shock. Rachel Reeves is correct to reject nationalisation of energy & water as a priority. Market value would have to be paid & shareholder model retained to be successful.

£196 billion is a very large investment & where it would be best spent to deliver real improvements to day to day lives is absolutely a conversation Labour should be having. Arguing nationalisation is “popular” so Labour should stick with it is a zombie argument which really needs to die.

I can see why its opponents would want to push Labour into hard policy positions now, but it really would be madness at this point.

The problem for Labour is it doesn’t yet have a coherent sense of purpose for when it does need to develop detailed solutions. Voters will be put off from voting for a party due to a particular single policy far more easily than they can be won over by a single policy.

This is the story of 2019 Labour: individual policies polling really well, but almost everybody able to find something they hated. But you need a clear and consistent sense of who you are generally that you’re messaging to the public consistently over the couple of years leading up to an election. If your policies then easily align with that then the public have a sense of a party that knows what it wants and is suitable to govern, even if they don’t agree with everything it proposes.

Online oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,448
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #543 on: July 29, 2022, 11:54:51 am »
Richard Murphy can sum up how I feel, far better than I can myself:

Starmer’s mess
Posted on July 28 2022

There are occasions when politicians baffle me. I will exclude Tories from that comment: their very existence is hard to explain. I refer instead to those from other parties. Like Keir Starmer, in particular.

Starmer has three jobs. He has to lead the Labour Party. If he has not noticed it, this was and is rooted in the labour movement, as represented by trade unions. As such it is his job to represent the political interests of working people.

Second, he has to oppose the government. This is a necessary part of holding the title of Leader of the Opposition - for which he does receive an official salary. The key to this role is also in the name: the job is to oppose the government by pointing out its failing.

Third, and to fulfil the objectives of the first two roles, has job is to win the next general election and then form a government. Again, without wishing to point out the obvious, this requires that in a two party system he wins mass popular support.

Right now Keir Starmer is being assisted by three things. The first is that working people are united in their concern about a cost of living crisis that can only be addressed through fair pay rises to ensure that people can continue to pay their bills as they fall due. There is nothing especially difficult to understand about this. If costs rise - as energy will - by more than £2,000 in a year and many other expenses, such of those on food, are also rising rapidly then either people without savings (which is most people in the country) get a fair pay rise or they will fall into debt, go hungry, go cold or go bankrupt and lose their homes. This is the reality of life. There is no avoiding it. That is what is going to happen. As a result there is an extraordinary unity amongst working people demanding action, including now a call for a general strike.

Second, the Tories are in total disarray, with the two leadership election candidates suggesting that their task is to get the country out of the mess that the governments of which they were members have gotten us into.

Third, as a result getting people to agree that we need a different government should be easy.

But then we have to take the Starmer factor into account. Let’s just look at yesterday. The rail unions are on strike, led by the extraordinary Mick Lynch, who has an innate ability to explain economics (and other realities) which almost no interviewer knows how to handle. That is helped by the fact that his case is a simple one. He is saying a 4% pay rise is inadequate when the cost of living is increasing by 10% or more, and prices will not go down again even if inflation does sometime in 2023. And he is right, of course.

Lynch is also right to ask questions about why it is that working people are being picked on when rents, profits and interest are all still being paid, without question arising as to why they too should not be squeezed.

If Starmer was seeking to represent labour as leader of the Labour Party you would have thought these might be positions that he should support. But no. He says it’s his job as prime minister in waiting to support the management in disputes and not to side with labour, because he will be the manager if he (ever) secures office.

It’s a crass argument. Firstly, that ignores the fact that he has to win office. At this moment that means he has to show he is on the side of those who are going to be crushed by the coming winter. They are his voter base. He cannot afford to alienate them.

Second, it’s a crass argument because part of his pitch should be that the current management have got their negotiating position wrong and that he would not in any way have supported the offer now being made to the rail workers, which is so obviously unfair. Saying so is exactly what his job should involve.

And third, what this reveals is a man who thinks he can only become prime minister by appealing to small-minded right-wingers. He is indifferent about representing anyone from the left, or what they stand for. Maybe, as a lot of Labour MPs and some Labour peers are saying, that is because he really does not know what life is like for anyone but those who are on the right wing of politics. Or maybe it’s because he really does think that all politics is now on the right anyway, and the left does not matter. And maybe it is because he just does not care as he wants to govern from the right, come what may. To be honest, I can’t tell.

But what I do know is that a leader of the Labour Party who has forgotten what the party is meant to represent, just as he has forgotten that it is his job to oppose. He also seems intent on alienating a great many of those who might support him. That makes him look a pretty dismal failure at his job.

No wonder the Labour Party has no one out on the morning media round as I write this. Starmer’s actions are indefensible. I suspect his shadow cabinet know it. It’s hard to see how he can continue like this.

What a mess.
It's what I was saying yesterday, the left are using the strikes to attack Labour.
Murphy was a part of Corbyns leadership.
He loves his firstly. secondly, thirdly paragraphs when he is not really making a point, just stating the obvious. Playing to the gallery, dramatics to try and impress people.
Unions fight for wages and conditions and Lynch does make some good points on wage rises. he also touches on companies being allowed to make massive profits etc while refusing to pay employees decent wage rises matching inflation. point I tried to make many years ago but the problem I had then was the 5% wage cap to try and bring down inflation after years of high inflation, the fight for a decent wages rise to match inflation is the unions job, the majority of people aren't in unions. millions of pensioners will not get any income rise anywhere near inflation. no mention of their problems by Murphy at all. you can see where we are going and it's not good. people are demanding Labour put themselves in a impossible position. they are asking Labour to attach themselves to one of the causes of rising inflation rather than the solutions to fight it. the Torys get out of jail card.  has Starmer said I don't support Unions. I support the Management as that's what Murphys saying.
The left are using the cost of living crisis to attack Labour. the same people who are now talking in support of unions had other priorities back in 2016. bit sick to hear them trying to preach to anyone.
One of the main attacks on Starmer is this nobody knows what he stands for, nobody knows his policy's. Rwanda and tax were mentioned as examples the other day, sad. they mustn't be taking any notice of what Labour have been saying on these issues over the last few weeks alone. it's like listening to Johnson when Starmer ripped him apart every week telling him what he's doing wrong and what he has to do then Johnson telling him he has no policys or solutions. Starmer had spent the last 10min ramming them home.

 
« Last Edit: July 29, 2022, 12:00:03 pm by oldfordie »
It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Online Kenny's Jacket

  • Kenny's Vegan Jacket Potato. Talks more sense than me.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,663
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #544 on: July 29, 2022, 12:01:59 pm »
I didn't see Diane Abbott, John McDonnell and Owen Jones chomping at the bit to get in the airwaves when Starmer announced Labour would end charity status for private schools. Or that we would ban fire and rehire. Just when there's an opportunity to bash Keir.


Actions speak louder than words.  Praising the Shadow Cabinet for its opposition to Fire and rehire will look daft under the circumstances. 

Here is Lammys response to Btitish Airways staff, alsdo facing Fire and Rehire. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgZx5Hb3Oc8

Quite upsetting footage

Then there is the issue of Labour themselves making redundancies within governance and compliance departments and hiring people on temporary contracts.

Even Abbott isnt daft enough to get caught up in this hypocrisy
As I've said before, the Full English is just the base upon which the Scots/Welsh/NI have improved upon. Sorry but the Full English is the worst of the British breakfasts.

Offline killer-heels

  • Hates everyone and everything. Including YOU! Negativity not just for Christmas. Thinks 'irony' means 'metallic'......
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 76,610
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #545 on: July 29, 2022, 12:20:16 pm »
Lammy is shite. Him and Streeting are so Lib Dem its unreal.

Offline killer-heels

  • Hates everyone and everything. Including YOU! Negativity not just for Christmas. Thinks 'irony' means 'metallic'......
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 76,610
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #546 on: July 29, 2022, 12:22:46 pm »
I didn't see Diane Abbott, John McDonnell and Owen Jones chomping at the bit to get in the airwaves when Starmer announced Labour would end charity status for private schools. Or that we would ban fire and rehire. Just when there's an opportunity to bash Keir.

Cost of nationalising rail, energy & water was estimated at £196bn by CBI. Labour under Corbyn didn’t want to pay market value for the assets, forcing shareholders to lose most of the value of their investment which would have been a multi pronged economic shock. Rachel Reeves is correct to reject nationalisation of energy & water as a priority. Market value would have to be paid & shareholder model retained to be successful.

£196 billion is a very large investment & where it would be best spent to deliver real improvements to day to day lives is absolutely a conversation Labour should be having. Arguing nationalisation is “popular” so Labour should stick with it is a zombie argument which really needs to die.

I can see why its opponents would want to push Labour into hard policy positions now, but it really would be madness at this point.

The problem for Labour is it doesn’t yet have a coherent sense of purpose for when it does need to develop detailed solutions. Voters will be put off from voting for a party due to a particular single policy far more easily than they can be won over by a single policy.

This is the story of 2019 Labour: individual policies polling really well, but almost everybody able to find something they hated. But you need a clear and consistent sense of who you are generally that you’re messaging to the public consistently over the couple of years leading up to an election. If your policies then easily align with that then the public have a sense of a party that knows what it wants and is suitable to govern, even if they don’t agree with everything it proposes.


All the statements Reeves has put out show that her method of addressing public services is not money, but happy thoughts.

Offline Linudden

  • Twpsyn gwirion. Definitely a Ron DeSantis fanboy
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,178
  • Linudden.
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #547 on: July 29, 2022, 12:36:03 pm »
If those red-wall fuckwits and the rest of the country can't be made to see that we really are fucked as a nation for another decade.

John, isn't that phrasing part of the problem? That you're unlikely to win over people who get called names. Then they double down in what you perceive to be wrongness. Then large parts of Tees Valley and South Yorkshire go Tory again and it's a repeated cycle. To win elections, Labour need to have a positive message to win former voters back rather than having a large part of the movement speaking of them like that.

If you have a Labour party leadership perceived to be anti-worker no matter the veracity of it, surely that's a problem that needs to be addressed? The election turnout right now would be abysmal for either party. Lots of former Labour voters in small town England now choose not to vote at all because they don't feel like the politicians care about them. Lots of them don't vote Tory, they just abandoned the Labour ship.

Just my take and all...
« Last Edit: July 29, 2022, 12:40:31 pm by Linudden »
Linudden.

Online Kenny's Jacket

  • Kenny's Vegan Jacket Potato. Talks more sense than me.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,663
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #548 on: July 29, 2022, 12:43:49 pm »
John, isn't that phrasing part of the problem? That you're unlikely to win over people who get called names. Then they double down in what you perceive to be wrongness. Then large parts of Tees Valley and South Yorkshire go Tory again and it's a repeated cycle. To win elections, Labour need to have a positive message to win former voters back rather than having a large part of the movement speaking of them like that.

Just my take and all...

No issue with what you said, but I think its important to s5eperate RAWK from real life politics. If Starmer, labour MPs or even L.abour supporters was saying this about The Red Wall in real life/Twitter/Facebook  you would be 100% correct, but saying it on planet RAWK has no such effect.
As I've said before, the Full English is just the base upon which the Scots/Welsh/NI have improved upon. Sorry but the Full English is the worst of the British breakfasts.

Offline Linudden

  • Twpsyn gwirion. Definitely a Ron DeSantis fanboy
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,178
  • Linudden.
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #549 on: July 29, 2022, 12:49:20 pm »
No issue with what you said, but I think its important to s5eperate RAWK from real life politics. If Starmer, labour MPs or even L.abour supporters was saying this about The Red Wall in real life/Twitter/Facebook  you would be 100% correct, but saying it on planet RAWK has no such effect.

The issue with that is that I still remember Emily Thornberry bad-mouthing people who hoisted English flags back in 2015. Might have put the narrow Tory majority over the edge to have the Brexit referendum in the first place. Some Labour MP's and supporters can't help themselves even though Starmer obviously doesn't do this.
Linudden.

Online Kenny's Jacket

  • Kenny's Vegan Jacket Potato. Talks more sense than me.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,663
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #550 on: July 29, 2022, 01:04:47 pm »
The issue with that is that I still remember Emily Thornberry bad-mouthing people who hoisted English flags back in 2015. Might have put the narrow Tory majority over the edge to have the Brexit referendum in the first place. Some Labour MP's and supporters can't help themselves even though Starmer obviously doesn't do this.

Thats what I was saying.  Youre agreeing with me  :wave
As I've said before, the Full English is just the base upon which the Scots/Welsh/NI have improved upon. Sorry but the Full English is the worst of the British breakfasts.

Online oldfordie

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 14,448
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #551 on: July 29, 2022, 01:05:17 pm »
The issue with that is that I still remember Emily Thornberry bad-mouthing people who hoisted English flags back in 2015. Might have put the narrow Tory majority over the edge to have the Brexit referendum in the first place. Some Labour MP's and supporters can't help themselves even though Starmer obviously doesn't do this.
The biggest problem came from the fanatical Torys and people like
Anne Widecombe telling them remain are calling you idiots, how you don't know what you voted for, people accepted this gladly. never did get a answer to name any Labour MP or remain politician who ever said leave voters are idiots. they actually went out of their way to try and get people to understand just how complicated Brexit was. it's what happens today, people are given a opinion and they gladly jump at it without being able to give us some facts to support that opinion.
I wouldn't mind but it's the people who tell them this s,, who really treat them like idiots.
It might take our producers five minutes to find 60 economists who feared Brexit and five hours to find a sole voice who espoused it.
“But by the time we went on air we simply had one of each; we presented this unequal effort to our audience as balance. It wasn’t.”
               Emily Maitlis

Offline John C

  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 42,262
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #552 on: July 29, 2022, 02:32:13 pm »
John, isn't that phrasing part of the problem? That you're unlikely to win over people who get called names.
I'm 100% certain the 'fuck-wits' are not part of the RAWK community, so I won't be offending many people at all or causing a double-down.
I get what you're saying though, like I won't say to a Brexiter, "you got that one wrong you frigging moron", but rather I say "do you think you'd exercise your vote in a different way if you had your opportunity again you fuck-wit ".

Offline thejbs

  • well-focussed, deffo not at all bias......ed
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,809
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #553 on: July 30, 2022, 06:52:42 am »
The BBC news coverage of this (web) doesn’t offer much balance, instead coming from the ‘disruption’ angle, solely.

Online PaulF

  • https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/paulfelce
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 21,861
  • Nothing feels as good as fat tastes.
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #554 on: July 30, 2022, 07:43:41 am »
The BBC news coverage of this (web) doesn’t offer much balance, instead coming from the ‘disruption’ angle, solely.
Good observation. I've not heard much coverage, they do seem to give union leaders some air time. Not going to say it's proportional, but it's not totally one sided.

I think on the whole the public back the strikes . I do wonder if perhaps the public are less affected because they are used to massive disruption after the last two years. I don't want to demean the railways, but the impact when emergency services move to strike will be telling. Teachers unions also, though again we've sort if gotten used to home schooling.
"All the lads have been talking about is walking out in front of the Kop, with 40,000 singing 'You'll Never Walk Alone'," Collins told BBC Radio Solent. "All the money in the world couldn't buy that feeling," he added.

Offline Fromola

  • For the love of god please shut the fuck up. Lomola... “The sky is falling and I’m off to tell the King!...” Places stock in the wrong opinions. Miserable F*cker! Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 31,273
  • Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #555 on: July 30, 2022, 08:39:04 am »
The BBC news coverage of this (web) doesn’t offer much balance, instead coming from the ‘disruption’ angle, solely.

When have the BBC ever been on the side of the workers? They doctored the videos during the Miner's strike which made it look like the police weren't the aggressors  which helped tilt public opinion.

It's establishment to the core. They didn't even pretend to be neutral or fair with Corbyn.
Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season

Offline ToneLa

  • you know the rules but I make the game.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,827
  • I AM FURIOUS, RED (STILL)
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #556 on: July 30, 2022, 10:35:21 am »
The BBC news coverage of this (web) doesn’t offer much balance, instead coming from the ‘disruption’ angle, solely.

The BBC have some odd establishment-leaning tending, it isn't new. Kuenssberg as good as she is has shown this also.

I mean I read Flat Earth News years ago. It's all just.... Paid by the word summarisation of approximate events

Better to get an impression from a couple good sources than worry about one being corrupt I reckon. The BBC's idea of balance is to give the strangest side equal volume, sometimes...

Offline Yorkykopite

  • Misses Danny Boy with a passion. Phil's Official Biographer, dontcherknow...it's all true. Honestly.
  • RAWK Writer
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 34,484
  • The first five yards........
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #557 on: July 30, 2022, 10:38:19 am »
When have the BBC ever been on the side of the workers? They doctored the videos during the Miner's strike which made it look like the police weren't the aggressors

At least they didn't make it sound like only one miner went on strike.
"If you want the world to love you don't discuss Middle Eastern politics" Saul Bellow.

Offline Fromola

  • For the love of god please shut the fuck up. Lomola... “The sky is falling and I’m off to tell the King!...” Places stock in the wrong opinions. Miserable F*cker! Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 31,273
  • Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #558 on: July 30, 2022, 11:33:33 am »
The BBC have some odd establishment-leaning tending, it isn't new. Kuenssberg as good as she is has shown this also.

I mean I read Flat Earth News years ago. It's all just.... Paid by the word summarisation of approximate events

Better to get an impression from a couple good sources than worry about one being corrupt I reckon. The BBC's idea of balance is to give the strangest side equal volume, sometimes...

The BBC is the establishment. Very rare they'll challenge the government on anything, or the status quo.
Could have done with Grujic and even Chirivella to tide us over this season

Offline ToneLa

  • you know the rules but I make the game.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,827
  • I AM FURIOUS, RED (STILL)
Re: Do you support the rail strikes?
« Reply #559 on: July 30, 2022, 05:37:32 pm »
The BBC news coverage of this (web) doesn’t offer much balance, instead coming from the ‘disruption’ angle, solely.

The BBC have some odd establishment-leaning tending, it isn't new. Kuenssberg as good as she is has shown this also.

I mean I read Flat Earth News years ago. It's all just.... Paid by the word summarisation of approximate events

Better to get an impression from a couple good sources than worry about one being corrupt I reckon. The BBC's idea of balance is to give the strangest side equal volume, sometimes...