Rayvin

How is that clear? I remember what he was saying in the run up and it was pro-Remain with touches of 'we should push for democratic reform within the EU itself. If you're basing it on his position following the referendum, most of Labour has gone with him on that. Were they all closet leavers?

What can the Tories offer that will appeal to anyone once Brexit is out of the way? More of the same?

Well, I think zerosum might be a Tory. He waded into the politics threads on the EU debate but didn't get as embroiled as you (he's pro-Brexit). We don't get that many though, and it really is important to work out whether they're wumming or not.

Sane.

Then I humbly submit that Renton is no longer a socialist He's a Blairite ffs, and while I will accept readily that he is socialist in some ways, he's clearly a proponent of the centre more than the left. Although tbh, I agree with every word of that quoted post.

Tbh I don't really agree with the Lords having any real power except as a sense check for Parliament. If you'd asked me pre-Brexit I would have said it needs to go. But that was before I realised collective insanity was a viable government policy. Now I think as a check and balance it could be valuable. It could even reign in a "socialist" government, were we ever to have one.

You mean because it's politically convenient for your side? No. Let's wait until they're blocking something left wing and then abolish it.

Yep, quite possibly true. Still though, Labour can't be allowed to go back to the centre without reform first.

All that's going to happen is that Labour will do less well than whatever anyone thought they should, and we'll descend into distraction from Tory incompetence once again.

It's a local election, just vote for whoever is likely to do the best job.

I can see them lacking the competence to avoid such a thing, yes.

Has to be a wind up. Has to be.

Are you still confident it'll be "brino"..?

So it's good news then.

Renton isn't a socialist man Why does the right think that anyone left of Thatcher is a socialist? As far as I know, no one on here is a socialist. Not even me Also, wait, are you claiming that Neoliberalism hasn't been royally fucked in the past few years? With idk, Brexit for instance? Neoliberalism being the ideology of Thatcher.

Is that good news or bad news? I get that it's been thwarted by the psychos, but have they made it a more even run between sanity and lunacy now?

Why would you get banned for this? I recall us having banned some heavily pro-Thatcher guy some years back but it was all he talked about and came up across the forum, so that the whole general chat section was arguing with him. He got about 200 posts in 48 hours.

Venezuela The strawman resorted to by the internet right wing 'thinkers' who can't actually challenge Labour's current policy direction with anything of substance.

I would like Alex's response to CT a thousand times if I could. I didn't have it in me to reference Scandinavia for the nth time.

...

The IQ bit? I guess maybe.

They do have a Boris Johnson though. An openly racist foreign secretary with an IQ of about 10.

And yet we are entering into an age where automation and robotics will make job creation for the individual even more difficult. Surely in the end, we need some kind of universal income or we will simply have to start a cull. I was also under the impression that claiming benefits was such a degrading and inhumane process now that very few who are capable of getting a job would actually want to go through with it.

How about thinking of society this way - by giving poor people welfare, you are in effect paying them not to kill you and take everything you own by force. So I could argue that the rich are being allowed to keep the manmade concept of wealth under a system they do very well within, on the proviso that they give those at the bottom enough to justify their continued apathy to the concept of change. So they're being 'handed' stability in which to make money and enjoy their lives, by paying out welfare. The lower the welfare payment, the lower the stability.

What if reducing tax for businesses comes at the cost of reducing spending on welfare? There's an argument that reducing tax on business allows for more job creation, but at the same time surely you would accept that a lot of this will also just be pocketed by those who are already extremely wealthy. Why do they deserve to be given handouts and not those at the bottom?