Jeremy Corbyn & Tom Watson elected leader and deputy leader of the Labour Party

[Harbornite]

Apparently it's a thing that left wing politicians drift towards the right as they got older and more mature. Wilson once remarked that Tony Benn was one of the few politicians to immature with age, most likely because he went further left as he got older.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would say it certainly shouldn't have. When you consider we were at the forefront of new reactor designs (Magnox/Advanced Gas Cooled reactors) only a few decades ago, it's incredibly depressing to resort to buying inferior designs from abroad.

I do believe in capitalism and the free market to an extent because it encourages competition and innovation, but some things of national strategic importance, like power generation, should be kept in State hands. It's not as I'd the Chinese are our best friends and their track record isn't great.

 

[yorksrob]

Apparently it's a thing that left wing politicians drift towards the right as they got older and more mature. Wilson once remarked that Tony Benn was one of the few politicians to immature with age, most likely because he went further left as he got older.

Wasn't it Tony Benn who got Concorde and the PO tower signed off ? Not bad for a leftie.

 

[Harbornite]

Wasn't it Tony Benn who got Concorde and the PO tower signed off ? Not bad for a leftie.

He also supported the nationalization of BL. Look how that turned out.

 

[yorksrob]

He also supported the nationalization of BL. Look how that turned out.

Hey, I'm travelling on one of their trains right now. Still going strong.

At least Tony Benn wouldn't have flogged everything off that wasn't nailed down.

 

[Harbornite]

Hey, I'm travelling on one of their trains right now. Still going strong.

At least Tony Benn wouldn't have flogged everything off that wasn't nailed down.

The train you're travelling was built after BL was flogged off. Sadly BL isn't going strong, most of its constituents are dead and as Evey year goes by, more of its products are scrapped.

Instead, Benn created a nice little drain on the taxpayer and the company. A massive conglomerate that didn't seek to improve productivity or industrial relations, but was content with churning out crap because at the end of the day, they'd get a nice subsidy from the taxpayer. Good old socialism, no wonder everyone started buying West German and Japanese cars.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Wasn't it Tony Benn who got Concorde and the PO tower signed off ? Not bad for a leftie.

Concorde was more the achievement of BAC and Aérospatiale. The PO tower was a decent achievement.

 

[yorksrob]

The train you're rravelling was built after BL was flogged off.

Instead, Benn created a nice little drain on the taxpayer and the company. A massive conglomerate that didn't seek to improve productivity or industrial relations, but was content with churning out crap.because at the end if the day, they'd get a nice subsidy from the taxpayer. Good old socialism.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Concorde was more the achievement of BAC and Aérospatiale. The PO tower was a decent achievement.

If my train was built after BL was sold off, there must at least have been something left to sell.

Good as BAC and Aerospatiale were, they couldn't have built Concorde without Government support. It simply wouldn't have happened without socialism.

Instead we now have massive drains on the British taxpayer because we have to buy everything from abroad at a massive premium. And a greater proportion of the capital goes abroad, rather than feeding into the British economy through jobs.

Good old laissez faire economics.

 

[Harbornite]

One of the issues was that British management was often crap. I don't think you'd be complaining about laissez faire if more of our industrial concerns were still British owned. I take it that you are against any form of foreign ownership so in that case, Rolls Royce should sell off MTU and we should stop trading with everyone.

 

[yorksrob]

One of the issues was that British management was often crap. I don't think you'd be complaining about laissez faire if more of our industrial concerns were still British owned. I take it that you are against any form of foreign ownership so in that case, Rolls Royce should sell off MTU and we should stop trading with everyone.

I'm not against any foreign ownership. I just believe that the pendulum has swung far too much in that direction over the years. And I would support the French approach of not allowing some key industries to fall into foreign hands.

I am probably a something more akin to a British Gaullist, only without the Euro-federalist tendencies.

Similarly, I believe in a sensibly mixed economy, although in this era of lunacy, that would no doubt be seen as rampant socialism.

 

[Harbornite]

I'm not against any foreign ownership. I just believe that the pendulum has swung far too much in that direction over the years. And I would support the French approach of not allowing some key industries to fall into foreign hands.

I am probably a something more akin to a British Gaullist, only without the Euro-federalist tendencies.

Similarly, I believe in a sensibly mixed economy, although in this era of lunacy, that would no doubt be seen as rampant socialism.

What I'll admit is that I believe nuclear and non nuclear power stations should be state owned. What do you define as a sensible mixed economy?

 

[yorksrob]

What I'll admit is that I believe nuclear and non nuclear power stations should be state owned. What do you define as a sensible mixed economy?

Private ownership where sensible and public ownership where sensible.

Up until recently I would have considered that the whole railway should be publically owned. Now I'm reasonably content so long as NR isn't privatised. The postal service should definitely be public.

What we have now is definitely not a sensible mixed economy.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Similarly, I believe in a sensibly mixed economy, although in this era of lunacy, that would no doubt be seen as rampant socialism.

Being unable to miss such an opportunity afforded by what you say, would the Trades Unions have the ability to wield greater power and cause more damage to the economy in situations such as this?

 

[yorksrob]

Being unable to miss such an opportunity afforded by what you say, would the Trades Unions have the ability to wield greater power and cause more damage to the economy in situations such as this?

I believe that Trades Unions are important and have their place. However some reforms over things such as wild cat strikes and minimum quorum's for strike action have been necessary. That is the same for the public and private sectors.

Barbra Castle came from the left of the party and tried to bring about reform through "In place of strife".

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The postal service should definitely be public.

Where do you stand on the subject of parcel delivery?

 

[oldman]

Where do you stand on the exploitation of workers (sorry, self-employed contractors) by parcel delivery firms, Mr S?

This from the Daily Mail:

Unlike traditional postmen, who earn a salary (so are comparatively costly to employ), ‘lifestyle couriers’ are not officially on the staff of the firms they represent. Instead, they are self-employed and largely untrained.

They provide their own vehicles, foot the bill for fuel and transport, and work unlimited hours. They get no holiday or sick pay, no pension, and can be sacked instantly. They are only paid per parcel they successfully deliver to your door, rather than per hour worked. And they typically receive nothing if they leave a ‘sorry you’re not in’ card in your letterbox.

 

[Butts]

Private ownership where sensible and public ownership where sensible.

Up until recently I would have considered that the whole railway should be publically owned. Now I'm reasonably content so long as NR isn't privatised. The postal service should definitely be public.

What we have now is definitely not a sensible mixed economy.

What is often glossed over with regards to the privatisation of the Railways is how the wages have spiraled to the benefit of most of the Employees particularly drivers - good luck to them. Had the industry not been sold off would this have happened ? If it was re-nationalised what would happen ?

My son is a Postman why do you think it should not have been sold off?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Where do you stand on the exploitation of workers (sorry, self-employed contractors) by parcel delivery firms, Mr S?

This from the Daily Mail:

Perhaps consumers are partly responsible for this wanting everything "yesterday" and not willing to pay a reasonable price for the convenience.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Where do you stand on the exploitation of workers (sorry, self-employed contractors) by parcel delivery firms, Mr S?

Rather a big difference between workers employed by a company and self-employed people, but I am sure that you knew that already...:roll:

Incidentally, the only person who can exploit self-employed people are the people themselves as they have the power to decide who they offer their self-employed service to....or have I lost my understanding of that terminology.?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Perhaps consumers are partly responsible for this wanting everything "yesterday" and not willing to pay a reasonable price for the convenience.

Could not have said it better, even if I wanted to.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Rather a big difference between workers employed by a company and self-employed people, but I am sure that you knew that already...:roll:

Incidentally, the only person who can exploit self-employed people are the people themselves as they have the power to decide who they offer their self-employed service to....or have I lost my understanding of that terminology.?

That's not entirely true. There is a growing trend for some companies - I've seen it myself in the care industry - to offer contracts to their 'employees' in which the contracts are carefully written to make the 'employee' legally self-employed, even though they are an employee in all but name - this is obviously in order to escape what you would normally consider to the usual obligations by the employer in terms of how they treat their employees.

What you say would arguably be correct for people who are genuinely self-employed, but that's not always the case for people who are legally self-employed.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That's not entirely true. There is a growing trend for some companies - I've seen it myself in the care industry - to offer contracts to their 'employees' in which the contracts are carefully written to make the 'employee' legally self-employed, even though they are an employee in all but name - this is obviously in order to escape what you would normally consider to the usual obligations by the employer in terms of how they treat their employees.

In cases such as this, who is responsible for matters such as Employers National Insurance Contributions. Surely that will define legally whether those staff are employed by the company or are self-employed.

 

[asylumxl]

Rather a big difference between workers employed by a company and self-employed people, but I am sure that you knew that already...:roll:

Incidentally, the only person who can exploit self-employed people are the people themselves as they have the power to decide who they offer their self-employed service to....or have I lost my understanding of that terminology.?

I'm not so sure that's completely true.

There's employers whom will only take on self-employed workers and offer comission only jobs.

This has many benefits for the employer, such as avoiding certain employment rules/rights, cutting costs and shifting financial risk or legal liability on to the employee.

These jobs may not seem particularly attractive to the majority of people, but there are many unskilled workers at the bottom end of the job market desperate for work and thus they feel they have little choice.

It may not be exploitation in the legal sense but it is exploiting the situation many such people are in.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's not entirely true. *Snip*

Got there before me!

 

[yorksrob]

What is often glossed over with regards to the privatisation of the Railways is how the wages have spiraled to the benefit of most of the Employees particularly drivers - good luck to them. Had the industry not been sold off would this have happened ? If it was re-nationalised what would happen ?

My son is a Postman why do you think it should not have been sold off?
.

I'm sorry Butts, but whilst I wish your son the best, I fail to see what relevance he has to my view on who should own the post office.

I've used the Royal Mail for decades and never once have I been asked whether I wanted it privatised. It was working fine, so why would I want it to change, not that the Establishment bothered to listen. Why should I acquiesce to a change that will bring no benefit to me ?

They didn't even bother with the waffle about how the private sector is supposedly more efficient.

We just got it imposed on us. Labour tried to do it when they were in, the and the Liberals and the Tories colluded in getting it through.

That's why the Establishment is rotten.

 

[Butts]

I'm sorry Butts, but whilst I wish your son the best, I fail to see what relevance he has to my view on who should own the post office.

I've used the Royal Mail for decades and never once have I been asked whether I wanted it privatised. It was working fine, so why would I want it to change, not that the Establishment bothered to listen. Why should I acquiesce to a change that will bring no benefit to me ?

They didn't even bother with the waffle about how the private sector is supposedly more efficient.

We just got it imposed on us. Labour tried to do it when they were in, the and the Liberals and the Tories colluded in getting it through.

That's why the Establishment is rotten.

Yorks Rob there are so many "Spanish Customs" in the Royal Mail I'm suprised it's not based in Madrid

Would it amaze you to know they still run a weekly payroll with employee numbers in the hundreds of thousands.

Good for the employees but very costly !!!

Your arguments for not privatising the RM could equally be applied to the Railways which you now seem to be in favour of

 

[yorksrob]

Yorks Rob there are so many "Spanish Customs" in the Royal Mail I'm suprised it's not based in Madrid

Would it amaze you to know they still run a weekly payroll with employee numbers in the hundreds of thousands.

Good for the employees but very costly !!!

Your arguments for not privatising the RM could equally be applied to the Railways which you now seem to be in favour of

If the royal mail was so appalling, why is it that the price of stamps seems to have gone through the roof even more than usual over the last few years ?

I'm all for "Spanish Practices" if they're cheaper. We are in Europe (for the time being) anyway.

I've seen no benefit from this privatisation whatsoever.

 

[Butts]

If the royal mail was so appalling, why is it that the price of stamps seems to have gone through the roof even more than usual over the last few years ?

I'm all for "Spanish Practices" if they're cheaper. We are in Europe (for the time being) anyway.

I've seen no benefit from this privatisation whatsoever.

The employees have through the free share allocation.

Stamps are going up because of The Universal Guarantee which ensures delivery to all over the UK normally the next day. Try and find a courier that will deliver a letter from Penzance to Lerwick for 64p.

More people use e-mail these day's

Are Labour committed to renationalising the Royal Mail - sounds like a Jeremy type policy.

 

[asylumxl]

The employees have through the free share allocation.

Stamps are going up because of The Universal Guarantee which ensures delivery to all over the UK normally the next day. Try and find a courier that will deliver a letter from Penzance to Lerwick for 64p.

More people use e-mail these day's

Are Labour committed to renationalising the Royal Mail - sounds like a Jeremy type policy.

Wasn't the number of shares employees could buy limited?

Also, we will have to keep looking for this mythical fast delivery then, as the Royal Mail isn't capable of delivering things that are "guaranteed" next day on the next day.

 

[AlterEgo]

In cases such as this, who is responsible for matters such as Employers National Insurance Contributions. Surely that will define legally whether those staff are employed by the company or are self-employed.

That's dodging the issue of whether forcing people into self employment (as a trend), is a good thing, or is it exploitative? We live in times where to have a proper contract with good pay on a permanent basis is a rare thing indeed.

 

[Busaholic]

I can remember when Darlington had a Conservative MP 1983-1992 Michael Fallon was it not - you only scraped it by 3,000 odd at the last Election.

I can remember when Brixton had a Conservative MP, and it wasn't just when I was a youth: I believe a young man by the name of John Major, then living in Brixton, did some work in his local constituency office. Marcus Lipton was the name of the MP, and iirc it was proceeded by the title of Colonel.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That's dodging the issue of whether forcing people into self employment (as a trend), is a good thing, or is it exploitative? We live in times where to have a proper contract with good pay on a permanent basis is a rare thing indeed.

That matter you say has been "dodged" was answered quite a few posts earlier than this in respect of the queries that were being raised at that point in time, but you must have missed it.

It is you who has "dodged" the query on the payment of Employers National Insurance contributions as one way of defining if a person is an employee of a company or if they are self-employed.

 

[yorksrob]

The employees have through the free share allocation.

Stamps are going up because of The Universal Guarantee which ensures delivery to all over the UK normally the next day. Try and find a courier that will deliver a letter from Penzance to Lerwick for 64p.

More people use e-mail these day's

Are Labour committed to renationalising the Royal Mail - sounds like a Jeremy type policy.

Good for them, If the employees are going to have a free share allocation, I'd rather this was in the form of a collective, so that they could have full ownership, rather than being a sideshow to big business.

"Try and find a courier that will deliver a letter from Penzance to Lerwick for 64p" This was true of our nationalised postal system which you still haven't provided a justification to the change from the status quo.

Here's your chance. Given that we had an excellent nationalised postal service that could deliver a letter from Penzance to Pitcairn, why, pray tell, were we forced to privatise by the Establishment ?

Saying how good the service is, isn't a reason, given that we had that good service before privatisation.

 

[Harbornite]

That's not entirely true. There is a growing trend for some companies - I've seen it myself in the care industry - to offer contracts to their 'employees' in which the contracts are carefully written to make the 'employee' legally self-employed, even though they are an employee in all but name - this is obviously in order to escape what you would normally consider to the usual obligations by the employer in terms of how they treat their employees.

What you say would arguably be correct for people who are genuinely self-employed, but that's not always the case for people who are legally self-employed.

Reminds me of google. They don't actively reruit for streetciew drivers thriugh their own comoany, instead they recruit through other websites and due to the nature of the contract, the drivers can be easily dropped.

 

[AlterEgo]

That matter you say has been "dodged" was answered quite a few posts earlier than this in respect of the queries that were being raised at that point in time, but you must have missed it.

It is you who has "dodged" the query on the payment of Employers National Insurance contributions as one way of defining if a person is an employee of a company or if they are self-employed.

You weren't asking me, and you and I know full well that if you are an employee your employer pays your PAYE and NI, and not if you're self employed. What's your point?

I misread your serious post at the top of the page as you being facetious.

If you don't accept that routinely offering people traditionally considered employees contracts which make them self employed isn't exploitative, then I'm afraid that's just unreasonable. It might be legal, and above board, but it doesn't make it a good thing. There's no security with it - and often with low pay too, it's not consulting work I'm on about.