2019 General Election Poll and Discussion

[Rick]

After posting that, I saw the labour manifesto and decided that it would make for a more interesting and useful debate, sorry...

No worries, ready when you are.

@bluesonichd Except it's not that, is it. They're wanting to nationalise very specific industries, many with barriers to entry for the bulk of private enterprise, look at rail, for example.

They're not planning on nationalising Pret a Manger or our vast services industry.

 

[Britford]

I have just read through (only some of) the Poverty and Equality section of the labour manifesto and here are (only) some of the things I find objectinal about it(I'm sure there is much more horror hiding in the rest of this and other sections though)
Heres the full manifesto, I would reccomend reading it for yourself.
://labour.org.uk/manifesto/

They say

We will rapidly introduce a Real Living Wage of at least £10 per hour for all workers aged 16 and over, and use savings to public finances to help small businesses manage the extra cost

So they are going to make hiring staff more expensive across the board...what do you think Merlin (for example) would do, accept that they have to pay more now?...or cut costs, staff and shorten the hours of all staff across the board? Remember that it's only small business that are getting state help.
I can't see how that's not going to just increase unemployment?

We will give workers a stake in the companies they work for – and a share of the profits they help create – by requiring large companies to set up Inclusive Ownership Funds (IOFs). Up to 10% of a company will be owned collectively by employees, with dividend payments distributed equally among all, capped at £500 a year, and the rest being used to top up the Climate Apprenticeship Fund. The cap will rise to ensure that no more than 25% of dividends raised by IOFs are redistributed in this way.

Let's just assume the companies will be fine with this and not...say, become hesitant to hire more that the absolute bare minimum leading to more unemployment!

We will make sure people are treated equally at work by:

• Requiring employers to devise and implement plans to eradicate the gender pay gap – and pay inequalities underpinned by race and/or disability – or face fines

The Gender pay gap is utter BS, women receive equal pay for equal work...this "pay gap" is actually an "earnings gap"
This is because more women, through personal choice, are choosing to either not work, or choosing to work in lower paying jobs...
Since no actual inequalities are taking place, the only ways to "fix" it is to either...

(1) Force employers to hire more women for being born correctly/hire less men for being born wrong...sooo, open sex based state-sanctiond oppression!

Or (2) Pay women more for being born correctly/pay men less for being born wrong...sooo, open sex based state-sanctioned oppression!

I find both of those options simply immoral and think that no one should vote labour simply for that alone...but I'm just an EVIL WHITE MALE so what do I matter?

Anyway,

We will make sure people are treated equally at work by:

• Requiring employers to maintain workplaces free of harassment, including harassment by third parties.

What? 3rd parties...you mean people outside the company with no connection to said company? I don't see how that can be dealt with anymore than the current method of the victim privately reporting the offending party...there is no other way to "fix" that.(at least not without breaking human rights anyway)

Labour will tackle excessive working hours. Within a decade we will reduce average full-time weekly working hours to 32 across the economy, with no loss of pay, funded by productivity increases.

We will meet this target by:

• Ending the opt-out provision for the EU Working Time Directive and enforcing working-time regulations.
• Setting up an independent Working Time Commission to advise on raising minimum holiday entitlements and reducing maximum weekly working time.
• Mandating bargaining councils to negotiate reductions in working time.
• Investing to increase productivity and making sure workers share the benefits.
• We will keep restrictions on Sunday trading in place and review unpaid overtime.

Umm...what about that prevents the loss of pay from working less hours?

Also , note the top point, I'm sure that's just an unfortunate slip of the tounge and labour still fully intend to let us leave to EU!

Women and Equalities
Labour is the party of equality, committed to achieving a world free from all forms of bigotry and discrimination.

Unless your a jew!(...that was a joke)

Labour will create a new Department for Women and Equalities, with a full-time Secretary of State, responsible for ensuring all our policies and laws are equality-impact assessed in order to deliver a fairer society for women and all under-represented groups.

note the absence of men or white people on here...hmm

We will establish a modernised National Women’s Commission as an independent advisory body to contribute to a Labour government.

...why not have a mens commission aswell...I mean, it's the equal thing to do right?
Unless it's not really about equality...
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

Women
Labour will put women at the heart of our government and programme. Next year marks the 50th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act, yet women still earn 13% less than men. Labour will take action to close the gender pay gap by 2030.

We will also:

• Deliver gender pay equality by making the state responsible for enforcing equal pay legislation for the first time. The new Workers’ Protection Agency working with HMRC will ensure that employers take equal pay seriously and take positive action to close the gender pay gap. Women will no longer be left to take enforcement action by themselves through the courts.

Any legal action taken due to the "gender pay gap" is 100% a knowing malicious attempt to take more money or force a promotion. Any actual case, would come under (the already illegal) sexism...where she is literaly being paid less because of her gender...which is illegal...

• Require all employers with over 250 employees to obtain government certification on gender equality or face further auditing and fines. By the end of 2020, we will lower the threshold to workplaces with 50 employees, whilst providing the necessary additional support for small businesses.

how can anyone be ok with this? They are literally forcing them to hire based on sex/skin colour ect...UNDER THREAT OF GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION...what? Isn't that currently illegal?
And what happens if literally not enough of 1 identity even apply for the job? Do they have to fire a load of innocent employees or face being fined? Isn't that wrongful termination? Do they get driven out of business by fines for simply not winning the ethnic lottery?

Seriously the implications of something like this are truly disturbing on all grounds
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's late, I will leave it here for now but I will try and find time to post some more.

 

[Plastic Person]

It is surely impossible to explain the inherited social nuances and stigma that have historically lead to gender or racial pay gap to anybody who is upset at the lack of white men on a proposed board for equality... But out of interest @Britford, what would you like a men's commission to deal with, were Corbyn to introduce one (right after nationalising Pret a Manger)?

 

[speedy]

I have just read through (only some of) the Poverty and Equality section of the labour manifesto and here are (only) some of the things I find objectinal about it(I'm sure there is much more horror hiding in the rest of this and other sections though)
Heres the full manifesto, I would reccomend reading it for yourself.
://labour.org.uk/manifesto/

They say

So they are going to make hiring staff more expensive across the board...what do you think Merlin (for example) would do, accept that they have to pay more now?...or cut costs, staff and shorten the hours of all staff across the board? Remember that it's only small business that are getting state help.
I can't see how that's not going to just increase unemployment?

Let's just assume the companies will be fine with this and not...say, become hesitant to hire more that the absolute bare minimum leading to more unemployment!


The Gender pay gap is utter BS, women receive equal pay for equal work...this "pay gap" is actually an "earnings gap"
This is because more women, through personal choice, are choosing to either not work, or choosing to work in lower paying jobs...
Since no actual inequalities are taking place, the only ways to "fix" it is to either...

(1) Force employers to hire more women for being born correctly/hire less men for being born wrong...sooo, open sex based state-sanctiond oppression!

Or (2) Pay women more for being born correctly/pay men less for being born wrong...sooo, open sex based state-sanctioned oppression!

I find both of those options simply immoral and think that no one should vote labour simply for that alone...but I'm just an EVIL WHITE MALE so what do I matter?

Anyway,

What? 3rd parties...you mean people outside the company with no connection to said company? I don't see how that can be dealt with anymore than the current method of the victim privately reporting the offending party...there is no other way to "fix" that.(at least not without breaking human rights anyway)

Umm...what about that prevents the loss of pay from working less hours?

Also , note the top point, I'm sure that's just an unfortunate slip of the tounge and labour still fully intend to let us leave to EU!


Unless your a jew!(...that was a joke)
note the absence of men or white people on here...hmm
...why not have a mens commission aswell...I mean, it's the equal thing to do right?
Unless it's not really about equality...
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

Any legal action taken due to the "gender pay gap" is 100% a knowing malicious attempt to take more money or force a promotion. Any actual case, would come under (the already illegal) sexism...where she is literaly being paid less because of her gender...which is illegal...
how can anyone be ok with this? They are literally forcing them to hire based on sex/skin colour ect...UNDER THREAT OF GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION...what? Isn't that currently illegal?
And what happens if literally not enough of 1 identity even apply for the job? Do they have to fire a load of innocent employees or face being fined? Isn't that wrongful termination? Do they get driven out of business by fines for simply not winning the ethnic lottery?

Seriously the implications of something like this are truly disturbing on all grounds
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it's late, I will leave it here for now but I will try and find time to post some more.

I may write a longer reply to this when I'm not at work. But re gender pay gap, there are cases where women and men are paid differently for doing exactly the same work. I think we need to break from the idea that men bring in the cash while women take time off to care for their children. It needs to be easier for men and women to reduce their hours and share the duty of caring for their children.

Re wages, corporations already employ as little staff as they can get away with. Perhaps some businesses that aren't profitable now will go bust were staff wages to increase. However I reckon most profitable businesses will not reduce staff numbers, as they wouldn't be able to operate with fewer staff. Look at a Lidl store for example, they already open the bare minimum of tills and move their staff on and off them constantly. They can't operate with fewer staff, so if wages increase, they'll have to suck it up. "But then, prices will go up" I hear you say. Perhaps, but then people will buy less and they'll make less profit. So I don't think prices would go up.

 

[bluesonichd]

Jeremy Corbyn has defended his decision to adopt a neutral stance in a future Brexit referendum as "a sign of strength" and "maturity".



He will negotiate an new deal with the EU, a better deal...
yet gives no fks about staying or leaving...
but that fine as it will be a better deal
even though he gives no toss either way

and this is the person people want as PM !

 

[Lurker]

How can you decide how you'd vote on something when you've not yet read the full text of the agreements?

He's been pretty awful at answering this question to be fair. Seems like a better answer might be : "When we've agreed a deal which adheres to Labours red lines and is better for the country than our current membership is I will of course vote for Brexit and do my best to convince everyone else to."

Which is my personal position, I'll vote for Brexit the second I see a benefit for myself. Right now Brexit only amounts to my rights being taken away and an ongoing crisis for the next 5 years at absolute minimum.

 

[D4n]

Your trolling of this thread is getting a little bit tiresome now @bluesonichd , just so you know.

 

[bluesonichd]

Your trolling of this thread is getting a little bit tiresome now @bluesonichd , just so you know.

Thank you for you input. I will take note.

 

[speedy]

Jeremy Corbyn has defended his decision to adopt a neutral stance in a future Brexit referendum as "a sign of strength" and "maturity".



He will negotiate an new deal with the EU, a better deal...
yet gives no fks about staying or leaving...
but that fine as it will be a better deal
even though he gives no toss either way

and this is the person people want as PM !

Negotiate a deal and put it to a referendum. Pretty strightorward really.

 

[bluesonichd]

Negotiate a deal and put it to a referendum. Pretty strightorward really.

How can you negotiate something when you do t know what you want.
It’s like going to the shop to negotiate for some fruit but you don’t know if you want an apple or an orange so end up walking away with a bag of bananas

 

[speedy]

How can you negotiate something when you do t know what you want.
It’s like going to the shop to negotiate for some fruit but you don’t know if you want an apple or an orange so end up walking away with a bag of bananas

No it's not. It's like going to the shop not sure if you're going to buy an apple or not. Negotiate, bargain with the shopkeeper to find the best deal. Then decide (ask the public) whether you still want to purchase the apple.

 

[Matt N]

Out of interest, what are everyone's thoughts on the manifestos now they've been released? My personal favourite ones were those of the Labour Party and the Green Party; both sound fantastic!

 

[Dar]

The easiest answer to the minimum wage problem is to pay the people at the top less to cover the shortfall, but that would never happen because, for some reason, people think the rich need them to protect them and their wealth.

Never forget that a minimum wage wouldn't be necessary if we could trust people/companies to pay people enough money to live on.

 

[grrrr]

How can you negotiate something when you do t know what you want.
It’s like going to the shop to negotiate for some fruit but you don’t know if you want an apple or an orange so end up walking away with a bag of bananas

It's like agreeing as a group of friends that you'd like to go to the shop to buy an apple. Some people in the group wanted an orange, but more people voted for the apple because they don't like the peel. Fair enough.

Except, when you get to the shop, it turns out that there are several different kinds of apples: cooking apples, crab apples, and golden delicious. The group now starts arguing about which kind of apple to get. There's no consensus about what kind of apple was voted for.

And on closer inspection, all of the apples have maggots in them. Some of them look pretty rotten and will make whoever eats them ill, as verified by the CBI. The shop does sell oranges, and the oranges look pretty much fine. Maybe we'll have to peel the oranges to enjoy them, but they won't make us ill.

But you, bluesonichd, are screaming WE VOTED FOR APPLES SO WE'RE HAVING APPLES, even though it's clear that the understanding of what kind of apples were on offer was wrong and demonstrably manipulated by liars, and there's not even a majority for the kind of apple the group should get.

If it were me, I'd just ask everyone if they wanted to change their minds...

 

[Rick]

How can you negotiate something when you do t know what you want.

What he wants to negotiate is in the manifesto in black and white. Whether he'll get that or not is unclear, but it seems a fair possibility given its closer to our current relationship than the current offer.

@Britford let's talk NHS and migration and then come back to everything you posted before. Some interesting points.

My old grandad used to say "Look at the manifestos and see which appeals to you. Then look at who supports and funds said party and that really tells you who is going to do well out of them winning". I think there's some truth in that.

 

[Britford]

It is surely impossible to explain the inherited social nuances and stigma that have historically lead to gender or racial pay gap to anybody who is upset at the lack of white men on a proposed board for equality...

what? Why?

But out of interest @Britford, what would you like a men's commission to deal with, were Corbyn to introduce one (right after nationalising Pret a Manger)?

Nothing, I don't think there is any good reason for a mens commission to exist...just like I don't think there's any good reason for a women's commission to exist!

I may write a longer reply to this when I'm not at work. But re gender pay gap, there are cases where women and men are paid differently for doing exactly the same work. I think we need to break from the idea that men bring in the cash while women take time off to care for their children. It needs to be easier for men and women to reduce their hours and share the duty of caring for their children.

if someone is receiving unequal pay for the same work, that is illegal and should be reported...what more would you propose?

@Britford let's talk NHS and migration and then come back to everything you posted before. Some interesting points.

I intended to carry on that debate but absent mindedly posted about labour and by the time I realized, it had already started a new discussion.

Since the Brexit thread is currently inactive and I feel that this issue is sufficiently related to Brexit, think it might be better to have that debate there? (Just to prevent having 2 arguments happening over each other)

That said, it's nearly 2AM so I don't have time to start at the moment, again, sorry...

 

[Benzin]

Imagine going into a major negotiation that will change the country's future with an actual set out plan... God Labour are such IDIOTS...

 

[IanSR]

Corbyn's nuteral stance is just code for "I want the opposite of my puppet masters but won't openly oppose them".

 

[Stuie]

It's like agreeing as a group of friends that you'd like to go to the shop to buy an apple. Some people in the group wanted an orange, but more people voted for the apple because they don't like the peel. Fair enough.

Except, when you get to the shop, it turns out that there are several different kinds of apples: cooking apples, crab apples, and golden delicious. The group now starts arguing about which kind of apple to get. There's no consensus about what kind of apple was voted for.

And on closer inspection, all of the apples have maggots in them. Some of them look pretty rotten and will make whoever eats them ill, as verified by the CBI. The shop does sell oranges, and the oranges look pretty much fine. Maybe we'll have to peel the oranges to enjoy them, but they won't make us ill.

But you, bluesonichd, are screaming WE VOTED FOR APPLES SO WE'RE HAVING APPLES, even though it's clear that the understanding of what kind of apples were on offer was wrong and demonstrably manipulated by liars, and there's not even a majority for the kind of apple the group should get.

If it were me, I'd just ask everyone if they wanted to change their minds...

Brilliant. Would like this post x10 if I could.

 

[GaryH]

I bet Corbyn has someone to dress him in the mornings given he can never make a decision on anything. Hmm, white shirt, grey shirt, white shirt, grey shirt, hmmm I'll stay neutral and go out without a top on.

Seriously, between him and Dianne abbot, god help us if this comedy act got in to power. Imagine there was a national crisis or war, something needing quick decisive action!