Not at all, I personally find Corbyn completely unsuitable for the job of Prime Minister and I'm not in a small club. I'm not keen on Boris Johnson either, but of the two, I know which I'd rather have ...Imploding Turtle wrote:You're admitting your double standard. That a majority opposing Corbyn is proof of Corbyn's unsuitability, but a majority opposing Johnson is not proof of Johnson's unsuitability.
The backstop. The ******* backstop.Clarets4me wrote:Simply by insisting on terms that they know will be unacceptable, in respect of fishing rights, future role of the ECJ, the backstop, and a host of other issues. Mrs May's " withdrawal deal " was written almost entirely by the EU negotiating team, and it has been described as being something more suitable for " a Country defeated in war " . The EU team have done this to discourage others ...
Oh, and **** off yourself !
You can think Corbyn is unsuitable for the job without holding a double standard. You demonstrated a double standard when you argued that the fact that a majority of the country think Corbyn is unsuitable is evidence of his unsuitability yet refused to accept that exact same standard for Johnson.Clarets4me wrote:Not at all, I personally find Corbyn completely unsuitable for the job of Prime Minister and I'm not in a small club. I'm not keen on Boris Johnson either, but of the two, I know which I'd rather have ...
Have you read Tom Boyer's biography of Corbyn ?
No idea who Tom Boyer is, but how do I already know that this biography won't have been fair and balanced?Clarets4me wrote:Not at all, I personally find Corbyn completely unsuitable for the job of Prime Minister and I'm not in a small club. I'm not keen on Boris Johnson either, but of the two, I know which I'd rather have ...
Have you read Tom Boyer's biography of Corbyn ?
The backstop was our idea. The EU suggested the option of having the border in the Irish Sea. The Tory's refused because of them needing the DUP to cling to power. Now Johnson has sacked his majority and therefore the DUP is no longer any use his masterplan to overcome the backstop is to suggest to the EU to have the border in the Irish SeaClarets4me wrote:Simply by insisting on terms that they know will be unacceptable, in respect of fishing rights, future role of the ECJ, the backstop, and a host of other issues. Mrs May's " withdrawal deal " was written almost entirely by the EU negotiating team, and it has been described as being something more suitable for " a Country defeated in war " . The EU team have done this to discourage others ...
Oh, and **** off yourself !
The Backstop was insisted upon by the Irish Government ....Imploding Turtle wrote:The backstop. The ******* backstop.
That was our idea. You haven't got a ******* clue, have you?
Tom Bower, my apologies !fidelcastro wrote:No idea who Tom Boyer is, but how do I already know that this biography won't have been fair and balanced?
Have you being taking lessons on truthfulness from Boris the ....Clarets4me wrote:The Backstop was insisted upon by the Irish Government ....
Corbyn has been around for a long time in politics, voting against nearly every proposal brought to the house, even from Labour. He has shown great ability to say what is wrong with everything and put a spanner in the works.Imploding Turtle wrote:You can think Corbyn is unsuitable for the job without holding a double standard. You demonstrated a double standard when you argued that the fact that a majority of the country think Corbyn is unsuitable is evidence of his unsuitability yet refused to accept that exact same standard for Johnson.
I’m no Tory, even if I was why would it mean people earning less? The fact you think it doesn’t sound too bad suggest you have no clue how the economy works.fidelcastro wrote:It was an idea that, on the face of it , doesn't sound too bad, but as far as I know wasn't actually passed as Party policy at the Labour Party conference.
However, only a Tory would actually want people to be earning less!
Erm I don’t mean to be pedantic but it’s because it’s technically a minority govt in a contentious voteBurypaddy wrote:You say corbyn but how many votes will johnson lose in parliament before he gives up his job??? He hasnt won one in seven!!!
They're currently earning less than a minimum of ten pounds per hour, which is why I stated you supported them earning less than ten pounds per hour.CardyTheClaret wrote:I’m no Tory, even if I was why would it mean people earning less? The fact you think it doesn’t sound too bad suggest you have no clue how the economy works.
Or alternatively, it might be an incentive for people that age to want to find work.taio wrote:A minimum wage of £10 per hour for under 18s would be stupid.
There's a whole raft a reasons why I'd be opposed to it, such as a significant risk of increasing youth unemployment, deterring some young people from further education, that under 18s don't typically have the commitments or experience adults have, and it'd be against the advice of the low pay commission.fidelcastro wrote:Or alternatively, it might be an incentive for people that age to want to find work.
All academic anyway. I'll stand corrected, but this, as yet, isn't official policy.
The minimum wage as it is now is crippling small businesses. To pay it to that age group would make millions of kids unemployable.fidelcastro wrote:They're currently earning less than a minimum of ten pounds per hour, which is why I stated you supported them earning less than ten pounds per hour.
The old chestnut about businesses not being able to afford this is exactly the same tory mantra from 1997, when Labour wanted to bring in a minimum wage. "Businesses will go to the wall" the greedy capitalists said! If that Tory government had continued we'd still have people earning two quid an hour!
So, from that statement, can I take it that you think the minimum wage is too high?CardyTheClaret wrote:The minimum wage as it is now is crippling small businesses. To pay it to that age group would make millions of kids unemployable.
Is a new contest likely in the near future?dermotdermot wrote:Apparently a two horse race between Rebecca Long Bailey and Laura Pidcock. God help us!
Maybe none at all.Quickenthetempo wrote:How many elections will Corbyn lose before he gives his job up?
i remember the same argument from the tories in the mid nineties. it arrived and it was one of the only good things to come out of blair's premiership.CardyTheClaret wrote:The minimum wage as it is now is crippling small businesses. To pay it to that age group would make millions of kids unemployable.
Re Tony Blair you forgot IrelandyTib wrote:i remember the same argument from the tories in the mid nineties. it arrived and it was one of the only good things to come out of blair's premiership.
now they're so on board with it they've even rebranded it the 'living wage'.
He's already lost two hasn't he?IanMcL wrote:Maybe none at all.
that was largely down to john major.mkmel wrote:Re Tony Blair you forgot Ireland
IF you really wanted Brexit with a deal, then you and all the tossers in Parliament should have been behind May, and behind Boris, giving them the support they deserved.Imploding Turtle wrote:Brexit hasn't been cancelled. No one is standing in the way of the will of the people. That's just bullshit that is being spread by extremists who want the most damaging form of Brexit possible, for which there is absolutely no mandate.
The will of the people is to leave the EU based on campaign promises. You have just demanded that the will of the people be enacted "as we were promised" during the campaign. You can't pick and choose what campaign promises must be followed. We were promised that there would not be a "no deal" Brexit just like you were promised Brexit.
You can have what you were promised. But I want what I was promised too. But the problem is that you and your lot seem to think that the only way you can have what you were promised is if what I was promised is denied to me. Why?
During the campaign we were promised brexit with a deal if we voted to leave. That's what I'm demanding from my politicians, why aren't you?
Taken from the Guardian site.evensteadiereddie wrote:Ballcocks, don't be a **** - you're trying to rewrite history.
Yes. In East Lancashire, it is. That’s if you’re the one paying it, of course.fidelcastro wrote:So, from that statement, can I take it that you think the minimum wage is too high?
Why is that?CardyTheClaret wrote:Yes. In East Lancashire, it is.
If you are an employer who believes £10 ph is too much for your business, can I make a couple of suggestions?CardyTheClaret wrote:Yes. In East Lancashire, it is. That’s if you’re the one paying it, of course.
Exactly right.boatshed bill wrote:If you are an employer who believes £10 ph is too much for your business, can I make a couple of suggestions?
1. Charge more for your services.
2. Cut your non-wage expenses.
Got to be right!
Was looking more at the first paragraph especially the last sentence and it was not "my" largely down to.evensteadiereddie wrote:So your "largely down to" = the Guardian's "one of the first steps", does it ?
It depends what they are doing. Now, you answer me this. Which would you prefer. The minimum wage living in London, or in Burnley?fidelcastro wrote:Exactly right.
I wonder how much old CardyTheClaret would pay his workers (you know, the ones who generate wealth!), if the minimum wage wasn't the law?
I have got over 230 happy employees who are more than happy with my rates of pay. Thanks for the business advice, boatshed.boatshed bill wrote:If you are an employer who believes £10 ph is too much for your business, can I make a couple of suggestions?
1. Charge more for your services.
2. Cut your non-wage expenses.
Got to be right!
I'm delighted for you.CardyTheClaret wrote:I have got over 230 happy employees who are more than happy with my rates of pay. Thanks for the business advice, boatshed.
I have people on minimum, I have people on 100k+ I’m also pleased that you’re delighted.boatshed bill wrote:I'm delighted for you.
And do you pay them all the minimum wage, or above?
Irrelevant. I don't and wouldn't live in London.CardyTheClaret wrote:It depends what they are doing. Now, you answer me this. Which would you prefer. The minimum wage living in London, or in Burnley?
You don’t even know me or my business, yet you assume I’m greedy.fidelcastro wrote:Irrelevant. I don't and wouldn't live in London.
It's because of greedy employers like you that the minimum wage was brought in in the first place.
(One of the few good things that Tony Blair did).
You must be if you think that the current minimum wage is in any way acceptable against the cost of living.CardyTheClaret wrote:You don’t even know me or my business, yet you assume I’m greedy.
Quickenthetempo wrote:Corbyn has been around for a long time in politics, voting against nearly every proposal brought to the house, even from Labour.
Pretty shite accusation this without knowing a single thing about his business.fidelcastro wrote:You must be if you think that the current minimum wage is in any way acceptable against the cost of living.
Not really.taio wrote:Pretty shite accusation this without knowing a single thing about his business.
In Burnley or London? let’s rest your theory that it’s irrelevant.fidelcastro wrote:You must be if you think that the current minimum wage is in any way acceptable against the cost of living.
Boris doesn't want Brexit with a deal. He wasn't a no-deal brexit so much that he's even willing ti illegally suspend parliament and illegally refuse to carry out the will of parliament to make sure it happened, so no thanks. I won't be supporting him.Colburn_Claret wrote:IF you really wanted Brexit with a deal, then you and all the tossers in Parliament should have been behind May, and behind Boris, giving them the support they deserved.
Instead they got no support, they weren't even given a free hand, they've been hindered by the House every step of the way for 3.5 years.
You say you want what was promised, and just like the arseholes in Parliament, you're a liar. You dont want a deal, you want a no deal, so they can use it as an excuse to overturn the referendum.
**** off, mate. When the other parties offered to participate in Brexit Theresa May told them to **** off. The Tories didn't want their support. That's the fault of the Tories. You're ******* delusional. Get help.Either.CardyTheClaret wrote:In Burnley or London? let’s rest your theory that it’s irrelevant.
There's nothing to think about given I know nothing about his business and the impact paying the national minimum wage has on his business. I know of businesses that don't find it easy paying the minimum wage but not because they are motivated by greed.fidelcastro wrote:Not really.
It was him that stated that the minimum wage in East Lancashire is too high!
Think about that for a moment.
You've obviously not read through this thread.taio wrote:There's nothing to think about given I know nothing about his business and the impact paying the national minimum wage has on his business. I know of businesses that don't find it easy paying the minimum wage but not because they are motivated by greed.
