To still like Jeremy Corbyn?

[malificent7]

I think it's right that he stepped down as the public clearly didn't get him...hated him even but i think he stands for the good in society. I actually think he is correctvto call out Israel for being bastards to Palestine and whilst ge apparently supports terroism ( ira), i think he is a negotiator ...the UK shafted Ireland hugely and the IRA is a consequence of that. We need people to negotiate with them.
I slso think remaining neutral on Brexit was the right thing to do but respecting the will of the people.

I don't hate Boris but he has got away with a lot. He has said many racist slurs, he hates women, he has multiple illegitimate children yet blames women, he switched sides re Brexit, oh and he's happy to trade with people like Saudi Arabia who have awful human rights. But apparently Jeremy is the bad one.

I saw a blog criticising the Labour manifesto as having no coherence, just looking like a pile of random giveaways.

It said if they’d spent the last couple of years building understanding of ‘more money in your pocket is better for the economy’ then they could have easily slotted in pay rises, cheaper train fares into that message. ‘Better productivity is better for the economy’ would be free broadband, 4 day week.

But they just came across as having no plan. For the many not the few is meaningless babble. They might as well have had ‘take from the rich and give to the poor’ because that’s what people heard.

And everybody knows what a total fuck up large scale government IT projects are. Who thinks free Labour broadband would be anything but glitchy and shit?

Point. They are almost always univerally shit.

However, these things are usually costed to see potential economic benefits in relation to spend, so I think their numbers would have had to make sense.

Not the highest priority on my list though. But there must have been a reason. Businesses do complain about inefficient broadband access. Although efficiency isn't the same as free of course.

YANBU

He’s been treated awfully. Years down the line we’ll be saying he’s the best PM we never had. (In my opinion).

To me it simply doesn't compute that such a narrow margin can translate into a major swing against one party's position on the subject

It can if the two groups have a high rate of crossover.

fascicle it's the reduction in hours of production, not the number of days. If you reduce the number of hours someone works by 20%, their output reduces. Whether they work flexibly or not is irrelevant, it's the fact they are working less and producing less . And it's the same in the service industry and public services. All of that reduction in output has to be paid for either by increasing staff to keep the output the same, or by taking on additional staff to cover the 20% gap.

Waspnest

I am aware of that, but I don’t think passing a home you paid fair money for is wrong. It’s yours, so I think you should be able to give it away without penalty.

If you reduce the number of hours someone works by 20%, their output reduces.

Fact?

workplaceinsight.net/reduced-hours-should-mean-reduced-workloads/

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/nov/09/fewer-working-hours-doctors-eu-negotiations

I don’t believe in matching my politics to the preferences of the electorate. I believe I standing up for a set of principles that work for me and that I can live with, and people can either agree or disagree with these

This ideological purity's all very well - admirable, even - but I simply don't get how it's going to help those Labour profess to be so keen to protect if it means they can't get elected

And on the subject of a 4 day week, I'm a bit surprised to see all the comments about what it would mean for industry, the NHS, etc. Of course I may be wrong, but I'd have thought it obvious that such a scheme would favour (at least initially) Labour's natural constituency of local government apparatchiks and similar

And if our own local council's anything to go by, the thought of them "increasing productivity through fewer days at work" is risible in the extreme

This ideological purity's all very well - admirable, even - but I simply don't get how it's going to help those Labour profess to be so keen to protect if it means they can't get elected*

I am not ideologically purist. I am reasonably moderate in my views. But I won’t pretend to have different views in order to get people to agree with me, and neither should anyone else.

If you can point me to some articles which shows that construction, service industries and public services can reduce the working week by 20% with no impact on cost or output, I'd love to see them.

AuntSpiker

I didn’t say no impact. Nor did I say it would work equally well in all industries, or that we wouldn’t have to factor in the fact that it might have less positive effects in some industries than in others. But it’s not a fact that a reduction in hours equals a reduction in productivity.

Him and momentum can start their own actual party. Rather than try and take over the labour party.

What about the ERG taking over the Conservative party? Everyone seems to think that's ok.

everybody knows what a total fk up large scale government IT projects are

Very true, but once again look at the demographic. Real I.T. capability is an extremely saleable asset today - some would even say a licence to print money - but it's hardly likely that the brightest and best will consider many types of government employment appealing

Church So you think that young people who may never be able to afford a house and who may inherit nothing should pay for the care of those who have assets? Wow. I'm out, if you truly represent the Labour party heaven help us.

Waspnest

I didn’t say people shouldn’t use their assets to pay for their care. I said what they have at their deaths (usually) shouldn’t be taxed.

It’s not currently my plan to lead the Labour Party. If I did want to do so, I would have to convince a large group of its members that I was the right person to do so. So I can say whatever I want and do whatever I want; the responsibility for who becomes leader is collective, not individual.

No but that's what JC did. No one said you cant personally do what you want to. But JC who feels very similarly to you did exactly that.

What about the ERG taking over the Conservative party? Everyone seems to think that's ok.

I dont. But we arent talking about the conservatives. It goes without saying that they are bunch of fuck ups as well.

This is about JC vs Boris. Its about JC. Not a comparison.

AuntSpiker
fascicle it's the reduction in hours of production, not the number of days. If you reduce the number of hours someone works by 20%, their output reduces.

Not necessarily. The construction industry (earlier example) is renowned for its inefficiencies, delays and for projects running over time. I think there's plenty of scope for efficiency improvements on projects (relating to ways of working; project management; technology; materials etc) that could allow people to work more effectively and for tasks to be completed in fewer hours/days.

that’s so funny.

Isn't it just. Let's get the brickies laying 20% more bricks shall we? A bit of project management will sort it. Those cabbages that need picking in the fens? Just do it faster. Those lorries that lay idle one day a week. Just make drivers work 4 longer days. No need to worry about the EWTD limits if we're out of Europe? Those HCAs on the ward, they just need to be more efficient.

Not a good summary of what I said AuntSpiker. I support the principle of a shorter working week which I believe could have all sorts of benefits. Finding different ways of doing things doesn't necessarily mean working harder.

Do you disagree with my comment about inefficiencies within the construction industry - do you think it's common for projects to run on time and to budget? Do you think how people work can't be varied?

The biggest reason projects do not run to time is due to the client/QS changing things mid way through. Your average brickie/electrician/pipefitter has no control over this and deserves to be paid for waiting time if its not their fault.

People like us who employ the workmen are subject to penalty clauses if we don't run to time so we arn't going to hang about.

Well said comefromaway. I am yet to come across a single person in real life who actually thinks a 30hr week is remotely doable without costing more and/or producing less. And in the NHS, where services have to be covered 168 hours a week, however smart you work, you still need x number of midwives/ radiographers/nurses/doctor's on each shift to make a service safe I've managed service redesign which involved a reduction in hours. It cost a huge amount - however smart we worked, whatever redistribution of tasks there was, whatever technology we deployed, if people worked less hours, we needed more people to cover the gaps. And people cost money.

I like JC, and will always be grateful for his contribution to the 2019 election. I assume Tory HQ will soon be recalling agent Corbyn from his undercover role sabotaging Labour's election chances.