This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
fed up eagle Between Horley, Surrey and Preston... 22 Jul 15 7.51pm | |
---|---|
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.27pm
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 7.03pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 6.34pm
Quote fed up eagle at 22 Jul 2015 6.23pm
Quote beagle at 22 Jul 2015 5.56pm
Loads of callers on 5 live this morning talking about how he would represent 'the working class'. I'm not sure I know exactly who 'the working class' are.
Spot on Fed Up Eagle, the Labour Party has not represented the interests of the people whose forbears formed it for a long time now. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 6.34pm) On what principles was the Labour party formed? Notice any similarities? You bemoan Corbyn, then say that what they need is someone like him. Priceless. Corbyn believes in higher Government spending, higher taxes, wants nuclear disarmament, more environment spending and sees no downside to mass immigration. He should be in the Green party, his ideas do not serve the ordinary working person.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 22 Jul 15 7.56pm | |
---|---|
Quote fed up eagle at 22 Jul 2015 7.51pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 7.27pm
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 7.03pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 6.34pm
Quote fed up eagle at 22 Jul 2015 6.23pm
Quote beagle at 22 Jul 2015 5.56pm
Loads of callers on 5 live this morning talking about how he would represent 'the working class'. I'm not sure I know exactly who 'the working class' are.
Spot on Fed Up Eagle, the Labour Party has not represented the interests of the people whose forbears formed it for a long time now. Edited by leggedstruggle (22 Jul 2015 6.34pm) On what principles was the Labour party formed? Notice any similarities? You bemoan Corbyn, then say that what they need is someone like him. Priceless. Corbyn believes in higher Government spending, higher taxes, wants nuclear disarmament, more environment spending and sees no downside to mass immigration. He should be in the Green party, his ideas do not serve the ordinary working person.
Quelle surprise!
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
leggedstruggle Croydon 22 Jul 15 9.32pm | |
---|---|
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 7.50pm
What is he going to spend higher taxes on? as for green energy. You think that throwing money at the NHS and education will solve all the problems. Money has been thrown at both for years with little effect. What solar and wind power have in common is that they can only produce a fraction of the power needed and cost a great deal to build.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
beagle pom tiddly om pom pom 23 Jul 15 8.00am | |
---|---|
Quote ghosteagle at 22 Jul 2015 6.42pm
Quote beagle at 22 Jul 2015 5.56pm
Loads of callers on 5 live this morning talking about how he would represent 'the working class'. I'm not sure I know exactly who 'the working class' are. That would seem to indicate that you are not a member. One isn't, you know.
When the time comes, I want die just like my Dad - at peace and asleep. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
palace_in_frogland In a broken dream 23 Jul 15 8.28am | |
---|---|
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 9.32pm
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 7.50pm
What is he going to spend higher taxes on? as for green energy. You think that throwing money at the NHS and education will solve all the problems. Money has been thrown at both for years with little effect. What solar and wind power have in common is that they can only produce a fraction of the power needed and cost a great deal to build.
Rare earth metals are extracted using dangerous and environmentally damaging mining techniques. Plundering the earth's resources, if you will.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
npn Crowborough 23 Jul 15 8.41am | |
---|---|
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 7.50pm
What is he going to spend higher taxes on? as for green energy.
Yet the Labour party as it stands doesn't appeal to me in the slightest. Maybe Corbyn would attract some Tory voters after all (I'm not ruling it out until I see what he proposes)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 23 Jul 15 9.31am | |
---|---|
Corbyn is as far left as Nick Griffin is right. I would love it if he got control of the labour party, as that would be the final nail in the coffin for what is now a joke party. The labour party members have basically turned the party into a parody of itself.
"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 23 Jul 15 9.37am | |
---|---|
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 9.32pm
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 7.50pm
What is he going to spend higher taxes on? as for green energy. You think that throwing money at the NHS and education will solve all the problems. Money has been thrown at both for years with little effect. What solar and wind power have in common is that they can only produce a fraction of the power needed and cost a great deal to build. Do you think that just cutting spending will provide a solution. Of course Solar and Wind power are less efficient and will cost more. That isn't the real issue, the real issue lies with the actual environmental consequences of oil and fossil fuels, and the socio-political impact of fossil fuel dependency. Only idiots believe alternative fuels are ever going to be cheaper. The difference of course, is that at source they have minimal environmental impact, don't cost lives to dig out the ground, or wars to secure, they don't occasionally spill out the side of tankers, they won't run out or get affected by supply factors and the pollution factor is negligible. Its not an economic argument, its an environmental one. Easily accessed oil is slowly being tapped out.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 23 Jul 15 9.42am | |
---|---|
Quote palace_in_frogland at 23 Jul 2015 8.28am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 9.32pm
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 7.50pm
What is he going to spend higher taxes on? as for green energy. You think that throwing money at the NHS and education will solve all the problems. Money has been thrown at both for years with little effect. What solar and wind power have in common is that they can only produce a fraction of the power needed and cost a great deal to build.
Rare earth metals are extracted using dangerous and environmentally damaging mining techniques. Plundering the earth's resources, if you will. True, but as we're digging them out of the ground for all manner of machinery anyhow, that factor is limited. Of course Oil Refineries and Power Plants, along with fuel distribution systems and storage system pretty much use rare earth mentals extracted using dangerous and environmentally damaging mining techniques. Plus occasionally have exploded or spilled out into the oceans and land, and when burned produce pollution emissions. Its really about the lesser environmental impact, not being the magic bean. The primary problem is the increasing population that industrial society has spammed into overdrive, and the increasing demand that places on fuel sources and resources.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
leggedstruggle Croydon 23 Jul 15 9.49am | |
---|---|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 23 Jul 2015 9.37am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 9.32pm
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 7.50pm
What is he going to spend higher taxes on? as for green energy. You think that throwing money at the NHS and education will solve all the problems. Money has been thrown at both for years with little effect. What solar and wind power have in common is that they can only produce a fraction of the power needed and cost a great deal to build. Do you think that just cutting spending will provide a solution. Of course Solar and Wind power are less efficient and will cost more. That isn't the real issue, the real issue lies with the actual environmental consequences of oil and fossil fuels, and the socio-political impact of fossil fuel dependency. Only idiots believe alternative fuels are ever going to be cheaper. The difference of course, is that at source they have minimal environmental impact, don't cost lives to dig out the ground, or wars to secure, they don't occasionally spill out the side of tankers, they won't run out or get affected by supply factors and the pollution factor is negligible. Its not an economic argument, its an environmental one. Easily accessed oil is slowly being tapped out. Wind and solar output contributes a tiny fraction of our needs. We would need to cover the entire country in wind-turbines and solar panels which might have 'actual environmental consequences'. Cutting cots in the NHS will indeed improve things, I know two people working in the NHS as PAs who do almost nothing - a bloated, inefficent, over-staffed money drain.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 23 Jul 15 10.01am | |
---|---|
Quote leggedstruggle at 23 Jul 2015 9.49am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 23 Jul 2015 9.37am
Quote leggedstruggle at 22 Jul 2015 9.32pm
Quote nickgusset at 22 Jul 2015 7.50pm
What is he going to spend higher taxes on? as for green energy. You think that throwing money at the NHS and education will solve all the problems. Money has been thrown at both for years with little effect. What solar and wind power have in common is that they can only produce a fraction of the power needed and cost a great deal to build. Do you think that just cutting spending will provide a solution. Of course Solar and Wind power are less efficient and will cost more. That isn't the real issue, the real issue lies with the actual environmental consequences of oil and fossil fuels, and the socio-political impact of fossil fuel dependency. Only idiots believe alternative fuels are ever going to be cheaper. The difference of course, is that at source they have minimal environmental impact, don't cost lives to dig out the ground, or wars to secure, they don't occasionally spill out the side of tankers, they won't run out or get affected by supply factors and the pollution factor is negligible. Its not an economic argument, its an environmental one. Easily accessed oil is slowly being tapped out. Wind and solar output contributes a tiny fraction of our needs. We would need to cover the entire country in wind-turbines and solar panels which might have 'actual environmental consequences'. Cutting cots in the NHS will indeed improve things, I know two people working in the NHS as PAs who do almost nothing - a bloated, inefficent, over-staffed money drain. I think the idea is that by investing in 'environmentally' better fuel sources, that ultimately the technology and efficiency will likely improve and that it would be a contributory system of power generation that reduced the dependency on fossil fuels. The simple fact is that fossil fuel dependency has a 'COB date' measured in generations, and will become an increasing problem in terms of pollution as populations increase, especially given the industrialization of countries like India, where increasing car ownership will be a problem. Electric cars were s**t 10 years ago, but now the Prius Hybrid can hold its own against traditional fuel motor cars. Of course my personal view is that I don't really care that much, as I'll be dead and buried by the time its a problem and I have no kids. So it is hard for me to get behind the cause, but I do understand where they are coming from.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hoof Hearted 23 Jul 15 10.15am | |
---|---|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 22 Jul 2015 12.01pm
If Labour had won the Scottish seats, no one would have won the election.
The Conservatives won an electable majority on their own to govern. Giving Labour another 51 seats would change nothing.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.