The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[gomgeg]

which one's are up for election?

 

---------- Post added 17-09-2015 at 20:34 ----------

 

 

i'm struggling to see how the libdems are more left wing than corbyn. they aren't the ones toting the idea of nationalisation without compensation. i'm pretty happy to take the risk with the libdems.

 

blair only got elected by promising to keep to tory spending limits. it was when labour started on their own agenda that the wheels came off their wagon, as usual.

You're quite right, that is when the wheels came off. That was the point I was making. And I'm also not for nationalisation again, but to nationalise the railways wouldn't wouldn't need compensation the infrastructure is already owned by rail track and he would just need to wait until franchises ran out then not renew them. As for the Libdems they went in to coalition to get in power then followed in the main Tory policies, in sole power I think we would have seen quite a different agenda.

[RonJeremy]

Compared with John Major and Edwina Currie I am not sure which pair would be better.

 

Awful. Just awful.

[drummonds]

You're quite right, that is when the wheels came off. That was the point I was making. And I'm also not for nationalisation again, but to nationalise the railways wouldn't wouldn't need compensation the infrastructure is already owned by rail track and he would just need to wait until franchises ran out then not renew them. As for the Libdems they went in to coalition to get in power then followed in the main Tory policies, in sole power I think we would have seen quite a different agenda.

 

undoubtably we could nationalise railways. however as a non train user i don't see why i need to pay half of the fare of someone who commutes. would you pay 50% of my football season ticket?

 

but of course labour are now wanting to nationalise gas, water, electricity etc. that's starting to put politicians in charge of things they don't need to control. its back to big government, inefficiency and big bills. remember british leyland.

 

hey lets dig a coal mine. these guys are nutters.

[I1L2T3]

undoubtably we could nationalise railways. however as a non train user i don't see why i need to pay half of the fare of someone who commutes. would you pay 50% of my football season ticket?

 

but of course labour are now wanting to nationalise gas, water, electricity etc. that's starting to put politicians in charge of things they don't need to control. its back to big government, inefficiency and big bills. remember british leyland.

 

hey lets dig a coal mine. these guys are nutters.

 

Investment in railways fuels the economy. It gets people to and from work, to and from their leisure activities, and facilitates the movement of freight around the country.

 

Next you'll be telling us we should shut down the roads and airports you don't use.

[drummonds]

Investment in railways fuels the economy. It gets people to and from work, to and from their leisure activities, and facilitates the movement of freight around the country.

 

Next you'll be telling us we should shut down the roads and airports you don't use.

 

i didn't say anything about shutting things down. i just said we don't need the government running them. they'll want to nationalise the airlines next.

 

the railways were nationalised for about 40 years. it was 40 years of under-investment, scruffy trains and falling passenger numbers. the coal mines were nationalised for about 40 years and the same happened. not a lot of new pits opened.

Edited September 17, 2015 by drummonds

[I1L2T3]

i didn't say anything about shutting things down. i just said we don't need the government running them. they'll want to nationalise the airlines next.

 

the railways were nationalised for about 40 years. it was 40 years of under-investment, scruffy trains and falling passenger numbers. the coal mines were nationalised for about 40 years and the same happened. not a lot of new pits opened.

 

You do realise the level of subsidy the 'private' railway companies get don't you?

[drummonds]

You do realise the level of subsidy the 'private' railway companies get don't you?

 

i do and i think we should keep working to eliminate it not nationalising them so that we can hide the subsidy.

[gomgeg]

undoubtably we could nationalise railways. however as a non train user i don't see why i need to pay half of the fare of someone who commutes. would you pay 50% of my football season ticket?

 

but of course labour are now wanting to nationalise gas, water, electricity etc. that's starting to put politicians in charge of things they don't need to control. its back to big government, inefficiency and big bills. remember british leyland.

 

hey lets dig a coal mine. these guys are nutters.

Totally agree, that's why I said I wouldn't vote for labour in its present form,

Anyway I've got to go now and make the storm trooper a cuppa or she'll impose martial law and not let me have the last pint.

[I1L2T3]

i do and i think we should keep working to eliminate it not nationalising them so that we can hide the subsidy.

 

Nobody is working to eliminate it because the fact is the subsidy enables vast sums to be siphoned off and paid out as dividends to shareholders.

 

To rub salt in the wounds the foreign owners of our train companies siphon off profit, divert it to their countries of origin and use it to subsidise train fares in those countries.

 

None of that nonsense would happen with state owned railways.

[the_bloke]

More apologies from New Old Labour:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34285308