Corbyn announces Your Party

[noblegiraffe]

His new political party with Zarah Sultana.

Except it doesn't appear to even have a name and now Zarah Sultana is having to go around twitter correcting journalists saying it's not called Your Party, while not actually clarifying what it is called.

I'm sure it will be extremely well organised.

It doesn't specify which men, in which roles, could reach that figure.

The point was, by virtue of being in a "men's" job they were more than likely, almost guaranteed to get take home pay of upto £50k in a way that they couldn't if they were in care work, etc, which was a job of a comparable skill level, and this was known about at the time these parities were realised and the unions opted to keep the (mainly women) cleaners care workers etc in the dark. It's ironic really as the great anti capitalist organisations of the unions were applying free market levels of leverage to extract these advantages.

The refuse collecting game is also developing into a long running feud in Brighton, progressive green inclusive Brighton, where death threats and slashed tyres are happening in a dispute between a clique of bin collectors that seem to be under the GMB

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/29/brighton-bins-dispute-council-gmb-union-missed-collections

It's all a bit Labor Aristocracy

At the risk of a whole rerun of the "garden tax" that we know nobody will vote for because they didn't when Labour "tried it before", that time when they DIDN'T try it they just vaguely talked about it as a possibility so it was never actually put to a vote and that's how we know noone will vote for it . . .

Which part of the post you quoted is not true?

Props to this new party if they function as some sort of think tank to propose the unsayable, not on the usual stuff like Palestine but on the need to raise taxes. Not just on The Rich, but on ppl who don't currently think of themselves as The Rich, like proposing to let councils introduce comprehensive revaluing of council tax bands and introducing higher bands, or restricting the triple lock to say the over 75s or those born before 1940.

They won't, though,

"Oh I am sure that there was a campaign of vilification against him from a press who didn't want him elected." @noblegiraffe

So we agree that there was a campaign of vilification by the press. A press that in reality is an extension of business, so it doesn't take a genius to work out what their agenda was and the reasons for it..

I guess the difference between us is how much you and I believe was real and how much was a confection of extrapolation and exaggeration. Looking at a mural, using the word "friends" to describe Hamas and visiting the cemetery, for me don't cut it when compared to the scores of times he has actually done something in support of Jews in this country. Corbyn's grievance is with Israel. not Jews.

House prices have completely skewed the CT bands, which are based on historical values.

Where did i say some one in Surrey pays 4 x as much as someone in Yorkshire?

Its relative, done on county level as per now, the 2m house owner in Surrey pays 4x as much as a 500k house owner in Surrey pays.

I used to live fairly near to a Premier football managers 2nd or 3rd home, worth about 4m, he paid 3x what i paid in CT for house worth 300k, in fact he once commented on it, saying how unfair it was.

But Labour have ruled any of this out, so rest easy, the m/c and poorer earner can put up with terrible public services instead.

Here's Starmer's latest statement.

@Lalgarh

It doesn't specify which men, in which roles, could reach that figure.

The point was, by virtue of being in a "men's" job they were more than likely, almost guaranteed to get take home pay of upto £50k in a way that they couldn't if they were in care work, etc, which was a job of a comparable skill level, and this was known about at the time these parities were realised and the unions opted to keep the (mainly women) cleaners care workers etc in the dark. It's ironic really as the great anti capitalist organisations of the unions were applying free market levels of leverage to extract these advantages.

I'm not arguing with that general point of the article, or with the fact that it's right and proper to resolve the discrepancy.

But the article doesn't say that being in a men's job meant people were "more than likely, almost guaranteed" to take home £50K. It simply says that SOME men were able to do that. It doesn't say how many, or in what jobs.

What you actually said was that "BinMen... could take home salaries with bonuses of upto £50k". The article which you linked to, apparently to demonstrate that, doesn't in fact say anything of the sort.

I'm not talking about murals or describing Hamas as friends or laying a wreath for terrorists, although I suspect Corbyn's problem there is that he hangs around with antisemites so much he wouldn't know it if it bit him on the arse

I'm talking about how he completely failed to deal with the widespread problem of antisemitism in the Labour Party and then said that the report that detailed this failure was overblown.

I am very sure that he would not have done this if it were about any other type of racism but is an absolute failure as a leader when it comes to dealing with antisemitism.

Labour don't need anyone to vote for it, they are in power and can just introduce a land tax for non agri properties and changes to council tax bandings.

Its actually quite funny because if he did so, he'd boost his popularity.... money raised could be ring fenced to provide NHS dentistry for all.

So where there does he say he will not continue to arm Israel, or "condemn" the bombings and withholding of aid?

He mentions the need for both things to stop, but pointedly refrains from placing any blame or judgment upon Israel for doing them.

It's just going to be constant moaning about JC again on here isn't it?

Much easier to be a protest vote than actually in power and have to achieve things, right?

He is indeed the gift that keeps on giving.

Be interesting to see what their immigration policy will be.

His constituents would agree with you. Those who have perhaps greater contact with him have consistently given him a sizeable majority, even when up against Labour. So yes, he gives his time and his voters remain pretty faithful.
Can they judge the man fairly or are they all just antisemites themselves, or possibly just antisemite-deniers ?

People vote for all sorts of weirdos and undesirables so the existence of people willing to vote for him is hardly an exoneration is it?

2017 election

73% of his constituency voted for him. Are you suggesting that, whilst believing him to be either a "weirdo and undesirable ", they were all still happy to vote for him ? I think the truth may be that they regarded him as their best representative.

12.9 million voted for his labour party (13.6 million for the Conservatives.)
Were those 12.9 million also voting for what they saw as a "weirdo" or an "undesirable" ?

But the article doesn't say that being in a men's job meant people were "more than likely, almost guaranteed" to take home £50K. It simply says that SOME men were able to do that. It doesn't say how many, or in what jobs.
There was a radio 4 programme about this a few months ago that was interesting. Basically, its about getting rid on one layer of bin men (a small group of people in a role no other council uses) because the council were warned that that partilcular level breached equality legislation. The Union refused to allow that layer of management to be removed and those people to be redistributed so the council was then sued into bankrupcy. Now, these same group are striking because a bankrupt council has to try and get rid of them again. So UNITE, when they aren't defrauding their members by paying over the odds for conference suites are fighting against equality legislation designed to protect poorly paid women ( where have we heard that before?) and for well paid men.

He's very popular with the Kurdish community in Islington apparently. I know a guy from that community and they do rate how he will always turn up at the community centre and the taxi drivers there think a lot of him

He lost those general elections to Theresa May and Boris Johnson who, by your logic must be even better people than him because more people were willing to vote for their parties?

Or do you not see votes for Boris Johnson and his party as a ringing endorsement of Boris Johnson personally?

Amusing.

I am personally keen that Labour tax the granny out of everyone - I mean everyone. Bring it on.

The sooner this shower of shit go down, the better.

That’s a non statement if ever I read one. He’s not stated the UK will stop arming Israel or any consequences for not allowing aid through.

Personally I’ll agree with the person condemning genocide and killing/starvation of children.

Ah, my post detailing how antisemitism in the Labour Party was not a tactic of lies but in fact something I witnessed myself has been deleted.

So I will reiterate that Corbyn presided over a Labour Party where antisemitism was allowed to run riot and I saw this play out with my own eyes and it sickened me to my stomach.

It's not a fucking tactic of lies, it's the truth. And Corbyn, who claims to be antiracist said that the report was overblown. What a hero.

It’s also worth noting that Labour won the last general election under Starmer with 9,708,000 votes - 3 million fewer than Corbyn got in 2017.

I've googled, by the way, because I couldn't believe that you were referring to the same priest who wasn't arrested for protesting a genocide but in fact for expressing support for a proscribed terrorist organisation, which is obviously illegal.

The priest who has had her permission to officiate rejected she awaits trial for a hammer attack on a rare copy of Magna Carta.

Is that the priest you are referring to?