The Heritage Party

[El Cid]

4 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

 

As a private health company did it instead, they would have had the same costs for the procedure but must have charged the NHS far more than it cost to cover their profits and the money their shareholders get.

I work for school transport. Our management choose to mostly employ staff and buy their own vehicles, but if 100% was like that, then they would be parked in the yard when quiet.

A mix of private hire vehicles is desired.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Hecate said:

I read a report this morning on a survey of Labour voters following the 2019 election, asking why they failed to support Labour that time around.  While top of the list was a distrust of Corbyn and the opinion that he would simply not make a good leader (plus a distaste for some of his more murky associations), right up there was a belief that the party could not deliver on the promises that they'd made in the run up to the election; many believed that they'd promised the world but failed to provide evidence of the associated funding. 

I was referring to Starmer and his team accepting donations form Private Health companies and Private Health Insurance companies and what happened to Corbynn or peoples opinion of Corbyn has no bearing on that.    I only mentioned Corbyn because he promised to undo privatisation and so did Starmer.  Now Starmer is leader, he backtracks on all his promises.

Fine if you still want to vote Labour but why reply to my post if you are not interested anyway and have nothing to say except I am stuck in 1974, without any reason given.

Corbyn has long gone but why do Starmers followers keep bring him back except to try and make Starmer look better when Starmer agreed with Corbyn at the time.

I never heard Starmer admit he was mistaken back in those days.

 

9 minutes ago, El Cid said:

I work for school transport. Our management choose to mostly employ staff and buy their own vehicles, but if 100% was like that, then they would be parked in the yard when quiet.

A mix of private hire vehicles is desired.

Sorry mate, but I can't see the relevance to the bit you quoted from my post.

My point was that it would be cheaper for the NHS to do it and how do we know how much of the money involved is all above board when Ministers & MP's  are accepting money from them?  FOT WHAT?

 

 

Edited April 30, 2023 by Organgrinder

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

I was referring to Starmer and his team accepting donations form Private Health companies and Private Health Insurance companies and what happened to Corbynn or peoples opinion of Corbyn has no bearing on that.

I only mentioned Corbyn because he promised to undo privatisation and so did Starmer.  Now Starmer is leader, he backtracks on all his promises.

Fine if you still want to vote Labour but why reply to my post if you are not interested anyway and have nothing to say except I am stuck in 1974, without any reason given.

Corbyn has long gone but why do Starmers followers keep bring him back except to try and make Starmer look better when Starmer agreed with Corbyn at the time.

I never heard Starmer admit he was mistaken back in those days.

 

Stop foaming and have another look.  The post you quote wasn't in reply to you. 

 

I replied to your post elsewhere because you jumped, once again, on yet another post made in reply to someone else and called it a load of rubbish.  Funnily enough, that - plus the tangential diatribes you tend to go off on - don't provoke much of a desire to engage with you on specifics.

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Hecate said:

Stop foaming and have another look.  The post you quote wasn't in reply to you. 

 

I replied to your post elsewhere because you jumped, once again, on yet another post made in reply to someone else and called it a load of rubbish.  Funnily enough, that - plus the tangential diatribes you tend to go off on - don't provoke much of a desire to engage with you on specifics.

Quite correct that the post  was in answer to someone else but I still question your statement regarding corruption and cronyism in the Tory party,

whilst insinuating that Starmer and Labour are as clean as a whistle and you apparently care not that he and main members of his team are also accepting money from the same organisations who gave the Tories £3 million.

Not only do you not care but you don't even wonder what these payments are for whilst you call out the Tories for corruption and cronyism.

I think it's you going off at a tangent to avoid answering awkward questions regarding Starmer & Labour's acceptance of money from private Health Companies and Insurers.

If you mean that you don't mind whether Starmers bent then ok, you can say that without going around the houses (better than tangents and not trying to impress).

 

 

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

Quite correct that the post  was in answer to someone else but I still question your statement regarding corruption and cronyism in the Tory party,

Why on earth would you do that?

 

Quote

whilst insinuating that Starmer and Labour are as clean as a whistle

You really need to stop doing that.  I did nothing of the sort because I made neither comment nor insinuation about corruption or cronyism in the Labour Party.  What I did say was that Labour are imperfect.

 

Quote

and you apparently care not that he and main members of his team are also accepting money from the same organisations who gave the Tories £3 million.

Again, where did I say or allude to that?

 

Quote

Not only do you not care but you don't even wonder what these payments are for

Once again, where did I make any comment on or allusion to anything to do with this subject?

 

Quote

whilst you call out the Tories for corruption and cronyism.

I think it's you going off at a tangent to avoid answering awkward questions regarding Starmer & Labour's acceptance of money from private Health Companies and Insurers.

You jump onto a post of mine and call it rubbish and expect me to engage with you, and then when I choose not to, because of the reasons I mentioned above and which you're displaying right now, you pull something out of your arse and attribute it to me, either explicitly or indirectly, but in both cases entirely without foundation,

 

Quote

If you mean that you don't mind whether Starmers bent then ok, you can say that without going around the houses (better than tangents and not trying to impress).

Yet again, stop attributing words and views that I've neither said nor implied.

 

Starmer's bent?  Dear lord. 

 

This is quite, quite mad.  Seldom seen anything like it on here and I've been here since dinosaurs roamed the forum.

Edited April 30, 2023 by Guest

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Hecate said:

Why on earth would you do that?

 

You really need to stop doing that.  I did nothing of the sort because I made neither comment nor insinuation about corruption or cronyism in the Labour Party.  What I did say was that that Labour are imperfect.

 

Again, where did I say or allude to that?

 

Once again, where did I make any comment on or allusion to anything to do with this subject?

 

You jump onto a post of mine and call it rubbish and expect me to engage with you, and then when I choose not to, because of the reasons I mentioned above and which you're displaying right now, you pull something out of your arse and attribute it to me, either explicitly or indirectly, but in both cases entirely without foundation,

 

Yet again, stop attributing words and views that I've neither said nor implied.

 

Starmer's bent?  Dear lord. 

 

This is quite, quite mad.  Seldom seen anything like it on here and I've been here since dinosaurs roamed the forum.

So you never said anything at all regarding Starmer and refuse to commit yourself now.

The payments don't matter, the reasons don't matter.

By all means live in a Labour utopia until it all hits the fan and you can rightfully claim, I didn't know anything and I didn't say anything.

Ever heard the remark about good men doing nothing?

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Organgrinder said:

So you never said anything at all regarding Starmer and refuse to commit yourself now.

The payments don't matter, the reasons don't matter.

By all means live in a Labour utopia until it all hits the fan and you can rightfully claim, I didn't know anything and I didn't say anything.

Ever heard the remark about good men doing nothing?

 

I've commented repeatedly and at length on issues important to me concerning the Labour Party and its policies, when I've agreed with something they've done but usually when I haven't.  That you haven't read any of those comments I care not one jot, because you'd probably misrepresent my words and views, as you've done here.  But absolutely top job there showing yourself up as someone not to bother with again.  Bravo.

[Palomar]

It's always a shame when two posters who I often agree with and have respect for get into a barney, perhaps you should have a breather 

[Al Bundy]

6 minutes ago, Palomar said:

It's always a shame when two posters who I often agree with and have respect for get into a barney, perhaps you should have a breather 

Comes with the territory of being a lefty.

 

Trying to out do each other with their virtue signalling. Thing is, they are constantly moaning about anything and everything that they forget what they were angry about in the first place and it leads to barneys.

 

😉😉

 

 

 

Hopefully their attention will now turn to me.... I will take one for the sake of harmony!

Edited April 30, 2023 by Al Bundy

[Palomar]

1 minute ago, Al Bundy said:

Comes with the territory of being a lefty.

 

Trying to out do each other with their virtue signalling. Thing is, they are constantly moaning about anything and everything that they forget what they were angry about in the first place and it leads to barneys.

 

😉😉

 

 

 

Hopefully their attention will now turn to me.... I will take one for the sake of harmony!

Lol, you mistakenly think too highly of yourself, if those two were fighting in a muddy ditch they'd still be ten times better than you.