sign the petition

[millmoormagic]

Youre being rude now calling him a troll...

A few snowflakes about if that's the case gm.....

[CASPER-64-FRANK]

Don't get me wrong. I am not unsympathetic to your aims, but you appear to want easy answers when they are simply not available. The bigotry of the likes of Roly and MMM, who seem to believe that anyone who does not support current Labour policies is a dyed in the wool supporter of feudalism and morally inferior to them, is about as far from reality as it is possible to be. I (and, I am certain, the vast majority of people in this country, whatever their politics) want to see well funded public services and a welfare system that acts as a safety net (as opposed to a life style choice for some). That' s the reason why I do oppose Labour their policies are short termist, short sighted and driven, in part, by ideology rather than reason, and would ultimately cause for more harm than good were they to be implemented.

Best Political reply I've read in 12 yrs of looking in on this site.

You're wasted on here KerrAvon, you ought to have been a Politician, Chief Whip or a Backbencher.



I take it we didn't all get the Monday after the World Cup off as a Bank Holiday then...

[rolymiller]

Kerr...😜😗 you are a card...

[millmoormagic]

So i'm a bigot now because i believe that tory policies, the ones you support Kerr, are killing people, are absolutely damaging the poorest in society and things are getting worse by the day...

I make no apology for not agreeing with those policies, and for challenging those who by the fact they vote for the tories are actively supporting those policies, shameful really.

The gap between the rich and poor has risen shockingly, in a time when the gov't, your gov't has been waging an 8 year war on the poorest in society through austerity, so in effect, the tories, your party, your gov't, has cut cut cut in the name of austerity to basically give to the richest, if you support that then you really, really don't give two hoots about folk, or about this once great country.

[rolymiller]

Ate MMM, there's none so blind as those who choose not to see...

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

Ate MMM, there's none so blind as those who choose not to see...

Yes, indoctrination to a cause can go deep and last a lifetime.

There are even people that believe the world is flat. They are so convinced that they waste their lives trying to convince everybody else.

Fortunately our (almost) round planet carries on spinning regardless.

[animallittle3]

The Great Leader has Kerr always reminds us off as according to the figures I have in front of me as increased the Labour Party membership from 190k to over half a million since he became leader of the party .

By contrast the Tory membership is below 100k , although it's difficult to get them to submit the real figure but trust me if it was a credible number you'd hear about it .

The world we live in created Corbyn , backbencher since 83 who voted as he saw it whether in government or opposition .

The way the UK is came to Corbyn , if he wasn't a credible leader of the opposition why his he probably in his strongest position yet and scaring the Tory government in to lets say unfavourable parliamentary practices .

Does he tick every box , absolutely not but he ticks enough to change this country for the better in my opinion .

The Kerr narrative to me is to keep things as they are and it will all work out well in the end .

Sometimes in life you need a shift , some friction , battles that need to be fought and won , I'm at a loss as to why Kerr can't see it , Thatcher had her view and acted accordingly and it's fairly obvious to most fair minded people that we need balance in this country and if you can't see that then you should possibly concentrate on feeding your chickens .

Your opinion Kerr is about as justified as Red Rob was in the 70's , you are actually the man trapped in the 70's and not me or MMM .

You've an historical record on the internet of defending muslim hate preacher's but I've yet to see you stick your name at the side of the working man .

Perhaps it's all about the investments with you , the tax you can avoid the finger in your ears when Amazon and Sports Direct are brought up on pages such as these .

I can only make a judgement on historical posting as you did recently in an attempt to drown out my opinion through ad hominen .

The difference between people such as us is that I'd tell you this to your face whilst you wouldn't even turn up .


Strong and Stable , aye alreight Kerr , go 12 months without pay with a new born and get back to me on strong and stable .

You know feck all fella .

[KerrAvon]

So i'm a bigot now because i believe that tory policies, the ones you support Kerr, are killing people, are absolutely damaging the poorest in society and things are getting worse by the day...

I make no apology for not agreeing with those policies, and for challenging those who by the fact they vote for the tories are actively supporting those policies, shameful really.

The gap between the rich and poor has risen shockingly, in a time when the gov't, your gov't has been waging an 8 year war on the poorest in society through austerity, so in effect, the tories, your party, your gov't, has cut cut cut in the name of austerity to basically give to the richest, if you support that then you really, really don't give two hoots about folk, or about this once great country.

It wouldn't do for us all to beleive the same thing.

Has the gap between rich and poor risen shockingly?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...e-pensions-ons

I have noted the comment from the Equality Trust (wonder what their agenda is?) that 'the UK remains one of the most unequal countries outside the developing world', but have not been able to find anything to support that.

Of course, the real inequality in the world is between us and the third world, but I'm really not sure how much appetite there is on the Left to address that - Roly once defined poverty as including not being able to have one good holiday per year, or similar, which suggests that he at least is more focused on 1st world problems.

No government has waged an 8-year war on the poorest in society. Why would they do that? What they have done is sought to address the huge budget deficit that the country is running, because it has to be addressed. The interest payment on the national debt this year is going to be around £50bn (some of it to the Mineworker's Pension Fund). Imagine what that sort of sum would do for the NHS (enable them to employ a new level of management and find novel ways of working inefficiently, probably). The steps to address the deficit have hit the poorest the hardest, because the poorest rely on public spending far more than the better off.

You refer to austerity killing people. I accept that possibility. The question that people have to ask, however, is what Labour would do to address the issues facing the poorest in society.

For the reasons set out within this thread -ad nauseum- a rise to Corporate Tax rates will result in job losses. That won’t help the poorest – it will just create some more.

There are various estimates about, but £7bn per year is probably about right for the cost of the tuition fee bribe (probably less as the reality is that Labour would end up cutting university funding). That sort of money would do a lot for public services. The tuition fee bribe will do nothing.

Of course, ‘doing something’ about pre-existing student debt - as hinted at, but not defined, during the election campaign - would cost a hell of a lot more. And would do nothing to help the poorest in society.

The cost of nationalising the utilities and Royal Mail – again, there are various estimates floating around. The Centre for Policy Studies puts it a minimum of £176bn - or £6500 for every household in the UK. Will that do anything for the poorest in society? No it won’t. It probably just means that their post start turning up late.

So what about benefits? I confess that I haven’t sought to analyse the Labour manifesto myself, but someone has:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ion-foundation

and

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7739471.html

So there you have it. Labour are willing to spend a fortune buying votes and pursuing ideologically driven nationalisations, but bugger all to actually directly assist the poorest in society.

[millmoormagic]

It wouldn't do for us all to beleive the same thing.

Has the gap between rich and poor risen shockingly?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...e-pensions-ons

I have noted the comment from the Equality Trust (wonder what their agenda is?) that 'the UK remains one of the most unequal countries outside the developing world', but have not been able to find anything to support that.

Of course, the real inequality in the world is between us and the third world, but I'm really not sure how much appetite there is on the Left to address that - Roly once defined poverty as including not being able to have one good holiday per year, or similar, which suggests that he at least is more focused on 1st world problems.

No government has waged an 8-year war on the poorest in society. Why would they do that? What they have done is sought to address the huge budget deficit that the country is running, because it has to be addressed. The interest payment on the national debt this year is going to be around £50bn (some of it to the Mineworker's Pension Fund). Imagine what that sort of sum would do for the NHS (enable them to employ a new level of management and find novel ways of working inefficiently, probably). The steps to address the deficit have hit the poorest the hardest, because the poorest rely on public spending far more than the better off.

You refer to austerity killing people. I accept that possibility. The question that people have to ask, however, is what Labour would do to address the issues facing the poorest in society.

For the reasons set out within this thread -ad nauseum- a rise to Corporate Tax rates will result in job losses. That won’t help the poorest – it will just create some more.

There are various estimates about, but £7bn per year is probably about right for the cost of the tuition fee bribe (probably less as the reality is that Labour would end up cutting university funding). That sort of money would do a lot for public services. The tuition fee bribe will do nothing.

Of course, ‘doing something’ about pre-existing student debt - as hinted at, but not defined, during the election campaign - would cost a hell of a lot more. And would do nothing to help the poorest in society.

The cost of nationalising the utilities and Royal Mail – again, there are various estimates floating around. The Centre for Policy Studies puts it a minimum of £176bn - or £6500 for every household in the UK. Will that do anything for the poorest in society? No it won’t. It probably just means that their post start turning up late.

So what about benefits? I confess that I haven’t sought to analyse the Labour manifesto myself, but someone has:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ion-foundation

and

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7739471.html

So there you have it. Labour are willing to spend a fortune buying votes and pursuing ideologically driven nationalisations, but bugger all to actually directly assist the poorest in society.

Same old waffle, shall we start with the rise in billionaires/millionaires since 2010, coinciding with the rise in homelessness and foodbanks, the rise in in-work poverty? hows that for a bit of inequality.

How about making the richest in society actually pay their taxes instead of dodging them, i'm sure there's a few billion right there, every year, i'll let you do the links....

Shall we get to the national debt then, following your party's unfounded skill at all things economic, why is it reaching the 2 trillion mark, more than double what it was when the tories came to power......

Labour arent willing to spend a fortune buying votes, they're willing to spend to mend, the country is rapidly dropping onto it's knees, you don't see it because you don't want to, you're alright, jack, arent you, the poorest in society are being shafted and you don't give a shyte mr lawyer, the NHS is being sold to the highest bidder, bit by bit, but you don't give a shyte mr lawyer, because you're alright jack, the welfare state and the schools are at breaking point, but geuss what mr lawyer, yeh, you're alright, jack.

One more thing we should do to get some cash to mend the country, get rid of trident, and don't spend 100b on a new trident, rather spend it on the things i care about to be honest.

[KerrAvon]

The Great Leader has Kerr always reminds us off as according to the figures I have in front of me as increased the Labour Party membership from 190k to over half a million since he became leader of the party .

By contrast the Tory membership is below 100k , although it's difficult to get them to submit the real figure but trust me if it was a credible number you'd hear about it .

The world we live in created Corbyn , backbencher since 83 who voted as he saw it whether in government or opposition .

The way the UK is came to Corbyn , if he wasn't a credible leader of the opposition why his he probably in his strongest position yet and scaring the Tory government in to lets say unfavourable parliamentary practices .

Does he tick every box , absolutely not but he ticks enough to change this country for the better in my opinion .

The Kerr narrative to me is to keep things as they are and it will all work out well in the end .

Sometimes in life you need a shift , some friction , battles that need to be fought and won , I'm at a loss as to why Kerr can't see it , Thatcher had her view and acted accordingly and it's fairly obvious to most fair minded people that we need balance in this country and if you can't see that then you should possibly concentrate on feeding your chickens .

Your opinion Kerr is about as justified as Red Rob was in the 70's , you are actually the man trapped in the 70's and not me or MMM .

You've an historical record on the internet of defending muslim hate preacher's but I've yet to see you stick your name at the side of the working man .

Perhaps it's all about the investments with you , the tax you can avoid the finger in your ears when Amazon and Sports Direct are brought up on pages such as these .

I can only make a judgement on historical posting as you did recently in an attempt to drown out my opinion through ad hominen .

The difference between people such as us is that I'd tell you this to your face whilst you wouldn't even turn up .


Strong and Stable , aye alreight Kerr , go 12 months without pay with a new born and get back to me on strong and stable .

You know feck all fella .

Blimey.

If increased party memberships won elections, Labour would have romped home last year, but they didn't.

The Tory Party membership is slowly dying. It's a bit like the Church of England congregation, they are shuffling off this mortal coil and not being replaced. But the Tories still took fifty or more seats than Labour last year, which suggests that it obvious to the fair minded people of this country that a Labour government at the moment isn’t a good idea..

Corbyn has indeed been an MP since 1983, which means that he stood for parliament on several Blairist manifestoes - happy, it seems, to go to the electorate and be voted in on the back of those policies and then work to his own agenda. That was a bit dishonest of him, don't you think? Shouldn't he have formed his own party and stood on his actual agenda? He could have called it Real Labour or Continuity Labour or something like that. He didn't because he would not have been elected.

I’ve an historical record of defending Muslim hate preachers? I can assure you that I haven’t, but would accept the gig if offered – I believe in the rule of law and that everyone is entitled to fair treatment and a defence.

Why wouldn’t I refer to a poster’s previous postings? Isn’t it informative at times to see the views that someone has expressed previously? If that person’s views have changed then that person can always choose to explain. On this thread for example, your adulation for Corbyn is plain to see, but on another thread you suggested he should resign for not being hard enough on Brexit (Roly, MMM and raging look away now):

http://boards.footymad.net/showthrea...ighlight=sithi

I hope you will note the accuracy of my predictions on Brexit...

12 months without pay with a new born? What’s that about? Are you suggesting that it a government policy?