Thread: Is Miliband Rightwing?

Takes these examples

• Cut VAT
• Private schools OK
• No to trade union strikes
• No to cartels, e.g. our energy cartel
• No to asset stripping
• Rolls Royce is an excellent company
• Labour got it wrong on too much government spending & borrowing
• Real jobs that produce real things.

The Telegraph has been saying that it is classic textbook Marxism. We know the Milibands are from a Marxist family and even fought in the Red Army, but none of the above is anything to do with Marxism, indeed I would place it right of the Tory Party as it currently stands. Now I know a lot of you will say Labour blar blar is like an incarnation of the devil himself, but what this man is saying does not fit the picture at all. I’d even go as far as to say he could be classed as a free thinker, as opposed to an ideological one that has characterised Labour for as long as we have ever known. To add one final thing to the list, which I think speaks volumes, it transpires that the media icons have said, “He doesn’t have the X-Factor” and “He looks weird” etc. A Labour leader that doesn’t spin! What is the world coming to? It seems like the Twilight Zone.

The counter argument to Rolls Royce was Fred the Shred. While Fred's company might have had HUGE losses and caused a lot of problems, it shouldn't be forgotten that this situation arose under Labour's watch and that it was a private company where the shareholders could have vetoed the wages. I am not a great fan of politicians (and they all seem to be at it) who interfere with the wage structures of private companies, as that really should be left to the board and shareholders. Now that HMG has taken a large shareholding in some of these banks, they can dictate what the CEO gets paid. How often did Labour exercise that power when they had the chance?

Anyway, he is making his first speech as leader of the party while in opposition, with an election in 3.5 years time. Therefore he can say pretty much anything meaningless, so long as it doesn't come back to haunt him. For example, asset stripping companies - he was asked which companies he was referring to and he couldn't or wouldn't come up with any other than Southern Cross care homes. I don't think that Southern Cross' existence and practices are going to make much difference to the economy.

VAT cut - very popular no doubt, but where is the Treasury going to get the short fall from? Is Milliband thinking that there will be an uptake in spending so the increased spend will cover the "cost" of a VAT drop? I can't see that being the case. People would save money, but not go on spending sprees. Maybe they would use the savings to pay their increased utility and fuel bills.

Originally Posted by angelman

The counter argument to Rolls Royce was Fred the Shred. While Fred's company might have had HUGE losses and caused a lot of problems, it shouldn't be forgotten that this situation arose under Labour's watch and that it was a private company where the shareholders could have vetoed the wages. I am not a great fan of politicians (and they all seem to be at it) who interfere with the wage structures of private companies, as that really should be left to the board and shareholders. Now that HMG has taken a large shareholding in some of these banks, they can dictate what the CEO gets paid. How often did Labour exercise that power when they had the chance?

Anyway, he is making his first speech as leader of the party while in opposition, with an election in 3.5 years time. Therefore he can say pretty much anything meaningless, so long as it doesn't come back to haunt him. For example, asset stripping companies - he was asked which companies he was referring to and he couldn't or wouldn't come up with any other than Southern Cross care homes. I don't think that Southern Cross' existence and practices are going to make much difference to the economy.

VAT cut - very popular no doubt, but where is the Treasury going to get the short fall from? Is Milliband thinking that there will be an uptake in spending so the increased spend will cover the "cost" of a VAT drop? I can't see that being the case. People would save money, but not go on spending sprees. Maybe they would use the savings to pay their increased utility and fuel bills.

VAT used to be half what it is now and we were not suffering poverty in the state sector. The Telegraph (Jeremy Warner I think) has said that VAT is the wrong tax to cut and it should be tax on employing people that should be cut first. Now I agree with this because if you cut VAT you simply subsidise imports, so the main beneficiary would be China. It's a bit like the government subsidising tourism, because the effect is to lower the cost to foreigners so they get cheaper holidays. Anyhow the mere fact he is talking about tax cuts of any description does make him Right as opposed to Left. He has also said he wants to encourage industry to offer apprenticeships, and that also puts him on the Right because it is a case of private as opposed to state education.

Labour in general still has the same bunch of clowns it has always had, and many are still in cloud cuckoo land, e.g. Harperson, but I just feel here is a bit of light shinning through from the top. These are new ideas for Labour. The party really does need to shape up. I obviously don't want it to end up in power again, but if we had a lunatic opposition then it would just make the Tories complacent and useless, like they were during the Major years. Also we have some controvertial things that have to be done in order to get this country back on its feet. These are massive cuts to the quangos, especially the politically correct ones like the EHCR, a huge reversal of immigration, as in not just stopping further immigration but kicking out the ones let in under false pretences. Then we need to fight the EU, which is actually happening at the moment because the EU is threatening to fine Britain for not paying sufficient benefits to EU benefit tourists, and finally we need to leave that rotten institution altogether. Labour supporters are just as hostile to immigration and the EU as are the Tories. So we need a Labour leader with solutions, and a desire to do what is best for Britain and not to score cheap points when Cameron is trying to do something good. He’s got enough trouble with the nutty Lib Dems, so if Labour end up on the side of Britain then the Lib Dems will be clearly viewed as the traitors they always have been and get squeezed out.

Originally Posted by Cactus Jack

You are aware, I assume, that there is a whole ******* section dedicated to immigration and therefore little, if any, need to bring it in on every other thread

- this must be one of the most priceless posts I have read on BDF for quite some time. And yes i am aware that there is an immigration section, as having been a member for 3 years and with far too many posts, I think that I can find my away around BDF.

You might be a little simple, or then I might be (or rather, I am), but where on earth did I bring immigration into the post. I started off with companies/director's pay, then on to asset stripping and then on to VAT. All I can think of that you might associate with immigration is Southern Cross, but then that really can't be possible, as no one is really that stupid. I am though, very curious about where immigration is involved. Please could you enlighten me?

Labour in general still has the same bunch of clowns it has always had, and many are still in cloud cuckoo land, e.g. Harperson, but I just feel here is a bit of light shinning through from the top.

I really dont trust slimey Ed. He stabbed his own brother in the back, he married for ambitous reasons only, having kept his partner Justine, who clelary did want to marry, dangling for years, his very recent Jewish European Marxist ancestry and upbringing is itself cause for suspicions that his goals are globalist not to Britain.

Originally Posted by flamingreen

his very recent Jewish European Marxist ancestry and upbringing is itself cause for suspicions

why is that?

Originally Posted by angelman

- this must be one of the most priceless posts I have read on BDF for quite some time. And yes i am aware that there is an immigration section, as having been a member for 3 years and with far too many posts, I think that I can find my away around BDF.

You might be a little simple, or then I might be (or rather, I am), but where on earth did I bring immigration into the post. I started off with companies/director's pay, then on to asset stripping and then on to VAT. All I can think of that you might associate with immigration is Southern Cross, but then that really can't be possible, as no one is really that stupid. I am though, very curious about where immigration is involved. Please could you enlighten me?

We are in the Labour section remember. It's a foreign land and has strange customs and rituals.

If all our politicians were to become in appearance identical overnight then no one would be able to tell left from right as there is no left to speak of, Blair Capitalismed it till near to death and Brown poisoned the remains with blistering incompetence leaving little more than a token and useless capitalist socialist rump Labour, not deserving of government, and Cameron has a Socialismed capitalist rump propped up by traitors and turncoats. JESUS! aren't we just so lucky. KINNEL!
Capitalismed, Socialismed. Being polluted by. My inventions I think.

Originally Posted by flamingreen

I really dont trust slimey Ed. He stabbed his own brother in the back, he married for ambitous reasons only, having kept his partner Justine, who clelary did want to marry, dangling for years, his very recent Jewish European Marxist ancestry and upbringing is itself cause for suspicions that his goals are globalist not to Britain.

Yes but what he is saying is making the unions mad, the media have resorted to pathetic critique of his appearance, and I would guess the rest of the Labour Party don't consider him to be of sufficient lunatic pedigree to be one of them. If he is a Marxist he is making a pretty good job of hiding it. I mean we hear stories of people who were brought up in respectable middle class rightwing families and ended up as travellers or other lowlife. Perhaps he has rejected his past and wants something else. I mean I was brought up in a highly socialist school from an early age run by feminists and other mind benders and I lived in Manchester for 12 years which is about as Red as you can get south of the Scottish border, and all it did was to make me hate the blighters all the more. Now one other thing that I keep hearing from the Labour ranks is that he is supposed to be very intelligent. OK perhaps he is not a genius because we are talking in relative terms here, but supposing he is smart enough to detect the lies. It's still very much a mystery to me. I honestly don't know the answer.