The end of the Labour party

[Hairyloon]

Why should labour MP's back Corbyn ? He rebelled so many times against his leaders therefore he cannot expect them to follow him.

 

They should back him because he makes the right choice... or not when he doesn't.

Rather than do what they have been doing, which is to back him when he's made the wrong choices and oppose him at every other opportunity.

[Anna B]

Why should labour MP's back Corbyn ? He rebelled so many times against his leaders therefore he cannot expect them to follow him.

 

He's rebelled quietly, in the ballot box when it's been appropriate. Not in the full glare of publicity in the run up to an election.

 

And he's been returned continuously by his constituents in Islington for 35 years, so they obviously approve.

Edited May 7, 2017 by Anna B

[Hairyloon]

And he's been returned continuously by his constituents in Islington for 35 years, so they obviously approve.

 

That is not necessarily saying a lot: there are constituencies that would return a goat continuously, if it wore the right rosette.

 

He's rebelled quietly, in the ballot box when it's been appropriate. Not in the full glare of publicity in the run up to an election.

 

And in many (maybe most) cases, history has shown that he was right to rebel.

Edited May 7, 2017 by Hairyloon

[hobinfoot]

They should back him because he makes the right choice... or not when he doesn't.

Rather than do what they have been doing, which is to back him when he's made the wrong choices and oppose him at every other opportunity.

 

So it was alright for him to rebel against his party but it's their duty to follow him now. Most of the labour MP's and the voting public come from the centre left or right not the extremes. Any party that drifts to far left or right never get elected.

[Hairyloon]

So it was alright for him to rebel against his party but it's their duty to follow him now...

 

Exactly so. Are you having difficulty in understanding why so?

[Penistone999]

you serious? you honestly believe that?

he has fought the Tories in front of him in the commons, whilst he had the Blairites stabbing him in the back, shouting for him to resign, and you say he has no back bone, love him or loathe him, saying he has no backbone is a really inaccurate description of the man

 

So has that mad fool Skinner, but he would never be prime minister. Just because you can shout in the commons and be a general pain in the rear to the opposition dosnt mean you can lead the party. This weeks local elections provided further proof that Corbyn hasnt got a clue .

[ECCOnoob]

Im sure Compo and Co know what they are doing. After all they are the party of the civil service. They are the party of the great overprotected never ending pit known as the NHS. They are the puppets of the Unions.

 

It can only be correct surely that all those Senior GPs, Consultants, Surgons, Clinical Directors, Head Civil Servants, Chief Superintendents and Chief Constables, Heads of Council Services, Union Leaders, Judges and Crown Prosecutors are absolutely delighted to be threatened with a tax hike on thier salaries to pay for, errrrm, themselves.

 

Well done Corbyn another winner.

 

The "rich" are not people earning £80k. That is a good salary no doubt. That is top of the tree in many aspects of the global system. But go tell someone on £80k in London who still cannot afford anything more than a shoe box in the city limits that they are "rich" and should be taxed more.

 

Those people earning £80k now already lose £26k in tax an NI. How much more of their hard earned salary does Compo want to take off?

 

Remember that word. SALARY.

 

These are not billionaires sitting in their mansions spending Daddy's inherited money. These are not reality TV stars or footballers earning millions of pounds from lucrative sponsorship deals or agencies. These are people doing a day to day job. Many of which are still working for the civil service that Corbyn is supposed to be the champion for.

 

Its disgusting. Its robbing Peter to pay Paul. Its actions of a incompetent leader surrounded by yes men and bullies with a single nasty anti-weath, anti-commerce agenda.

Edited May 7, 2017 by ECCOnoob

[Anna B]

 

The "rich" are not people earning £80k. That is a good salary no doubt. That is top of the tree in many aspects of the global system. But go tell someone on £80k in London who still cannot afford anything more than a shoe box in the city limits that they are "rich" and should be taxed more.

 

Its disgusting. Its robbing Peter to pay Paul. Its actions of a incompetent leader surrounded by yes men and bullies with a single nasty anti-weath, anti-commerce agenda.

__________________________________________________________________

 

What is a lot more disgusting is taking money off the poorest, the disabled and the like. For them it can be the difference between having any roof over their heads or sleeping in a shop doorway.

 

Those on 80K will still have plenty to live on, and will still be able to afford a very nice lifestyle. Besides, at that level, I expect the extra tax will be relatively small, it's the really wealthy tax dodgers he's after.

 

Infrastructure and services have to be paid for. Whichever party wins they will need to generate more income, they just aren't being honest if they say otherwise. Who do you think should pay the most tax?

[JNewton69]

__________________________________________________________________

 

What is a lot more disgusting is taking money off the poorest, the disabled and the like. For them it can be the difference between having any roof over their heads or sleeping in a shop doorway.

 

Those on 80K will still have plenty to live on, and will still be able to afford a very nice lifestyle. Besides, at that level, I expect the extra tax will be relatively small, it's the really wealthy tax dodgers he's after.

 

Infrastructure and services have to be paid for. Whichever party wins they will need to generate more income, they just aren't being honest if they say otherwise. Who do you think should pay the most tax?

 

Hear, hear!

[ECCOnoob]

__________________________________________________________________

 

What is a lot more disgusting is taking money off the poorest, the disabled and the like. For them it can be the difference between having any roof over their heads or sleeping in a shop doorway.

 

Those on 80K will still have plenty to live on, and will still be able to afford a very nice lifestyle. Besides, at that level, I expect the extra tax will be relatively small, it's the really wealthy tax dodgers he's after.

 

Infrastructure and services have to be paid for. Whichever party wins they will need to generate more income, they just aren't being honest if they say otherwise. Who do you think should pay the most tax?

 

Equality is what its supposedly about right Anna?

 

So everyone should be paying the same rate of tax.

 

Its the additional punishment for having a better job and better salary that gets me angry.

 

A % tax rate for all. A % NI rate for all is what should happen.

 

The result will be the same. If you earn the least you pay the least tax. If you earn the most you pay the most tax.

 

On the current average tax rate of 20% those who earn £15k a year pay £3k tax and those who earn £90k a year pay £18000 tax.

 

What could be fairer than that?

 

Tell me a good reason why someone who works starting on the shop floor and then get up to a mangement or even company director level in their career should be "punished" by having to pay a increased tax rate on part of their earnings which is double or more the rate paid by the lower earners?

 

---------- Post added 07-05-2017 at 13:51 ----------

 

 

Those on 80K will still have plenty to live on

 

Oh well that's alright then. As long as they have plenty to live on.

 

Tell you what Anna. Those so called poverty stricken minimum wage earners have "plenty to live on" compared to a starving African child or an India street worker. Pehaps they should put up and shut up right?

 

Equality is all well and good as long as it only applies to lower earners I guess.