Brixton news, rumours and general chat: Autumn 2019

[CH1]

I'm intrigued by the latest planning application for the Effra Social -which is the third attempt by the way.
19/04477/FUL | Refurbishment of 1st and 2nd floors for residential use (Use Class C3). Erection of 3 rear dormers and 1 additional front dormer. | 89 Effra Road London SW2 1DF

The design and access statement which I've added here as an attachment has an extraoerdinary photo of the rear of the premises. It almost looks like one of those medieval terrace where the windows are all lopsided - on 89 Effra Road at least.

Deadline for comments is 8th January. The Design and Access seems to be a quick knock-up. Antic have apparently forgotten to adjust the last page when cutting and pasting. It says "This scheme takes a very run-down property above a shop, comprising of inefficiently arranged spaces, to renovate it and to provide one modernized unit"

This can't be right surely?

 

[Gramsci]

I'll be very surprised if you get a credible response as some self-professed 'Labour' supporting posters here are only interested in uncritically parroting Tory bullshit or avoiding tricky questions altogether.

What surprises me is that I'm actually posting up mainstream views in Urban terms. On politics boards Im not in practise far left. But on this forum , where I started and will remain , I'm supporting "bonkers" and "insane" politics.

to take a step back it is interesting.

Basically what "some" posters want is a return to the old centre ground Labour party of the "Third Way". Which I'm sure my New Labour Cllrs want.

They will pay lip service to idea of dealing with inequality.

It could be that the Labour party could be under control of the so called New Labour centre again in future.

Coming back to Brixton a lot of people I know joined Labour party because of Corbyn. Because they wanted an end to New Labour.

They now control Chuka old seat. Which is why Chuka left.

As someone said on politics forum Chuka is probably writing to Labour party to get his job back. He should have stayed.

What I want are Labour Cllrs who are socialists.

This is not asking for the overthrow of capitalism.

Its asking for a Labour party that speaks the same language as those who are involved and care about the community in Brixton / Loughborough Junction.

For example for my own personal experience I really should not be having to argue with Cllrs and senior officers about saving an adventure playground in LJ for example. In a better world my Coldharbour Ward Labour Cllrs should be leading a campaign to save it. Residents who are campaigning and doing voluntary work to save something like that should in a better world be supported and cherished by local Labour party.

The objectionable views I've seen here on last few pages don't surprise me in the least.
Sadly.

The views expressed here are revealing . Its not really Corbyn that is the problem it is the whole move to the left ( which as I keep saying is not that out of line with other European countries. Labour party manifesto would have just "rolled back" the last decades of neo liberalism to put this country on a par with most other European countries)

So all the personal criticism of Corbyn is not the point. "Some" posters here would never stomach a socialist Labour party.

 

[editor]

I'm intrigued by the latest planning application for the Effra Social -which is the third attempt by the way.
19/04477/FUL | Refurbishment of 1st and 2nd floors for residential use (Use Class C3). Erection of 3 rear dormers and 1 additional front dormer. | 89 Effra Road London SW2 1DF

The design and access statement which I've added here as an attachment has an extraoerdinary photo of the rear of the premises. It almost looks like one of those medieval terrace where the windows are all lopsided - on 89 Effra Road at least.

Deadline for comments is 8th January. The Design and Access seems to be a quick knock-up. Antic have apparently forgotten to adjust the last page when cutting and pasting. It says "This scheme takes a very run-down property above a shop, comprising of inefficiently arranged spaces, to renovate it and to provide one modernized unit"

This can't be right surely?

Interesting stuff. And yes, that picture is very funny!

 

[nagapie]

Mr Retro does not live anywhere near South London.

Well that, at least, is some relief.

 

[alex_]

They will pay lip service to idea of dealing with inequality.

Under Blair/brown

333k extra teachers and teaching assistants
Sure start
Minimum wage
Smoking ban - protecting the health of bar/pub workers exposed to second hand smoke
Independent Bank of England
Gift aid
Benefits increases
Lots of other things.

Many of these things are still in place.

You can cane Blair/brown all you like - but in 50 years all Corbyn will be seen to have achieved is a record Tory majority, and the most right wing Tory government for decades.

Alex

 

[ChrisSouth]

W

What I want are Labour Cllrs who are socialists.

This is not asking for the overthrow of capitalism.

I often agree with things you post on here, but on the point above, you are incorrect. Socialism does call for the overthrow of capitalism. It's a perfectly vaild thing to have a point of view on. But if you have socialists and they are not calling for the overthrow of capitalism, they are not socialists.

 

[Not a Vet]

So I’ve been watching the debate on left/right views for a bit and will comment. I don’t see why if you don’t agree with corbyn’s labour it automatically means you must be a Tory. I follow (through various news feeds) people and things from all sides of the arguments as let’s be honest, it’s all been a bit polarised in the last few years.

Re the nationalisation of the railways, a lot of it is already in public hands, e.g. the infrastructure, LNER, Scot rail has just been announced. The problem for me is not the private sector running trains (the margin is just 2%) but the franchise system is broken. You get the crazy situation where you can bid for a franchise with all sort of promises and then walk away without penalty if it all goes tits up and then we the taxpayers have to step in. Also the model of buying new rolling stock is all wrong. South west trains just before they lost their franchise ordered a load of new trains but then south western railway won with a new bid but then went on to buy another load of new trains because it was cheaper to buy new then continue with the existing order. So the original order is still being built but will be replaced almost immediately by the even newer trains! What a waste of money. The last point on the trains is ticket prices. The sad fact is that they are kept artificially high because they need to control demand. If everyone started using the railway, it would grind to a halt because we haven’t got the infrastructure to cope with all the extra services that would be needed so they control demand by price. It’s wrong but you’d have to match price cuts (less revenue) with increased investment


.

 

[Crispy]

Hand In Hand looks ready to reopen. It looks like a pub and has not been trendified.

 

[Big Bertha]

I'll be very surprised if you get a credible response as some self-professed 'Labour' supporting posters here are only interested in uncritically parroting Tory bullshit or avoiding tricky questions altogether.

The ideas expressed in labours manifesto are great!

the idea that Corbyn would be able to implement them is poppycock

I would take his advice on how to when to mulch my aubergines

I would not trust him to implement a huge plan of reforms.

he’s too incompetent.

 

[teuchter]

Those of you saying that Corbyn's costings didn't add up, or that he would not be competent to implement the manifesto, what's that based on? Just saying stuff doesn't make an argument. There are a few people I've asked what their problem with Corbyn is. "the manifesto just wasn't realistic".
"have you read it?"
"no"

 

[jimbarkanoodle]

The Daily Mail, Daily Express and fucking Sun brainwashed a lot of people. Its quite sad and very disturbing.

 

[teuchter]

The Sun, Daily Express and fucking Sun brainwashed a lot of people. Its quite sad and very disturbing.

These are not Sun or Daily Express readers I'm taking about though.

 

[CH1]

The Sun, Daily Express and fucking Sun brainwashed a lot of people. Its quite sad and very disturbing.

I think the BBC have become quite partisan too. Personally I thought Sky News gave a better balance - though no doubt this is because Rupert Murdoch and his family are no longer involved in Sky. They sold their stake to Comcast Corporation of Philadelphia, who don't yet seem to have developed an appetite for editorial interference.

 

[CH1]

These are not Sun or Daily Express readers I'm taking about though.

The Times and the Telegraph did a good job too (for Boris).
BTW what are your views about "The Papers" on the news channels where typically you get polarised journalists & think tank employees ranting on?

Not only that on Question Time you now normally get two or three MPs balance by a right wing journalist and a right wing think tank member.
Then there was the Question Time Youth Special where the \adience were pre-selected to be 70% Brexiteer.

Who takes these decisions at the BBC? The BBC seems to have been infiltrated by right wingers over the last 10 years or so - and cannot be held to account.

In my day they'd have been taken out and flogged!

 

[Mr Retro]

Those of you saying that Corbyn's costings didn't add up, or that he would not be competent to implement the manifesto, what's that based on? Just saying stuff doesn't make an argument. There are a few people I've asked what their problem with Corbyn is. "the manifesto just wasn't realistic".
"have you read it?"
"no"

It was 100+ pages to be fair.

I agree with Big Bertha that the ideas are great. Some of them anyway. But I think what Angellic says earlier in the thread that it was one promise after another is correct. People then asked themselves what will this cost me and it scared them. The manifesto may have added up but there was no evidence presented that it did. Mumblings about corporation tax and Bonds but nothing solid. On top of this Corbyn didn't personally convince that he was the person to achieve something so ambitious.

 

[Mr Retro]

Rupert Murdoch and his family are no longer involved in Sky. They sold their stake to Comcast Corporation of Philadelphia, who don't yet seem to have developed an appetite for editorial interference.

I didn't know this

 

[editor]

It was 100+ pages to be fair.

I agree with Big Bertha that the ideas are great. Some of them anyway. But I think what Angellic says earlier in the thread that it was one promise after another is correct. People then asked themselves what will this cost me and it scared them. The manifesto may have added up but there was no evidence presented that it did. Mumblings about corporation tax and Bonds but nothing solid. On top of this Corbyn didn't personally convince that he was the person to achieve something so ambitious.

Not surprised that you agree with the resident Toryboy. But seeing as you're bringing up Corbyn's policies again, what's your opinion on Labour's plans to nationalise the railways?

 

[Manter]

I think the BBC have become quite partisan too. Personally I thought Sky News gave a better balance - though no doubt this is because Rupert Murdoch and his family are no longer involved in Sky. They sold their stake to Comcast Corporation of Philadelphia, who don't yet seem to have developed an appetite for editorial interference.

Was reading an interview with John Carreyrou, the journalist who investigated Theranos. Elizabeth Holmes. She was a family friend of murdoch, he invested heavily in the company and she appealed directly to him repeatedly to call Carreyrou off and he always refused. Makes me wonder what the editorial interference was/is in the stuff he owns.... seems to be entirely inconsistent.

 

[ChrisSouth]

Those of you saying that Corbyn's costings didn't add up, or that he would not be competent to implement the manifesto, what's that based on? Just saying stuff doesn't make an argument. There are a few people I've asked what their problem with Corbyn is. "the manifesto just wasn't realistic".
"have you read it?"
"no"

To be fair, I don't think reading a manifesto should be the sole defining factor in deciding whether you support or don't support a leader or a party. I didn't this time, or never have, read a Tory Party manifesto, but nor have I ever voted for them. I don't need to read their manifesto to know that they are an unpleasant bunch of fuckwit racists.

 

[editor]

To be fair, I don't think reading a manifesto should be the sole defining factor in deciding whether you support or don't support a leader or a party. I didn't this time, or never have, read a Tory Party manifesto, but nor have I ever voted for them. I don't need to read their manifesto to know that they are an unpleasant bunch of fuckwit racists.

Amen, bro.

 

[editor]

Interesting breakdown of the relentless ant-Corbyn smear campaign:

Media smear cost Labour the election, McDonnell is right to point that out

 

[CH1]

Was reading an interview with John Carreyrou, the journalist who investigated Theranos. Elizabeth Holmes. She was a family friend of murdoch, he invested heavily in the company and she appealed directly to him repeatedly to call Carreyrou off and he always refused. Makes me wonder what the editorial interference was/is in the stuff he owns.... seems to be entirely inconsistent.

Way off topic now - but I'm still waiting for blood test results from Monday. I think they've lost them.

"Viapath" as at Kings, St Thomas's, Guys & SLAM is a joint venture with SERCO - more usually associated with tagging rapists and running the Yarlswood immigration detention centre amongst many other thing. You never know who you're getting into bed with in a simple blood test on the NHS these days.

I only say this because you have associated Elizabeth Murdoch with a $9 billion blood test company - Theranos - which apparently uses dowsing!

 

[TopCat]

Fuck the tories and the horse they rode in on.

 

[Gramsci]

Under Blair/brown

333k extra teachers and teaching assistants
Sure start
Minimum wage
Smoking ban - protecting the health of bar/pub workers exposed to second hand smoke
Independent Bank of England
Gift aid
Benefits increases
Lots of other things.

Many of these things are still in place.

You can cane Blair/brown all you like - but in 50 years all Corbyn will be seen to have achieved is a record Tory majority, and the most right wing Tory government for decades.

Alex

Thought Blair legacy is Iraq.

 

[editor]

Thought Blair legacy is Iraq.

Blair should be up on criminal charges.

 

[Gramsci]

The ideas expressed in labours manifesto are great!

the idea that Corbyn would be able to implement them is poppycock

I would take his advice on how to when to mulch my aubergines

I would not trust him to implement a huge plan of reforms.

he’s too incompetent.

You previously said here the Labour party economic manifesto is:

Not believable
Certainly not economic."

And in reply to me previously you posted this:

"Quoting Corbyns economic advisor (spoiler: he thinks is a great plan) to bolster your argument that Corbyns economic (Corbynomics?) plan is fantastic is as bonkers as the plan itself."

Now you are saying the ideas are great.

 

[Big Bertha]

Interesting breakdown of the relentless ant-Corbyn smear campaign:

Media smear cost Labour the election, McDonnell is right to point that out

Analysis / Bias

In review, The London Economic has a strong left wing bias in story selection that always favors the left. They consistently use loaded headlines such as: Leaked list of Conservative Party sex pest sleaze published, shaming THIRTY SIX current Tory MPs and this Boris Johnson turns into The Joker in new artwork. While The London Economic mentions their source in articles, they do not provide hyperlinks for further verification of information, which leads to articles being spun and taken out of context.

Editorially, there is consistent liberal bias such as this The Conservatives are taking a sledge hammer to their voter base and this Labour is the only party treating both sides of the Brexit divide with respect. In general, news reporting is mostly factual, but lacks hyperlinked sourcing, while editorial positions always favor the left.

 

[editor]

Analysis / Bias

In review, The London Economic has a strong left wing bias in story selection that always favors the left. They consistently use loaded headlines such as: Leaked list of Conservative Party sex pest sleaze published, shaming THIRTY SIX current Tory MPs and this Boris Johnson turns into The Joker in new artwork. While The London Economic mentions their source in articles, they do not provide hyperlinks for further verification of information, which leads to articles being spun and taken out of context.

Editorially, there is consistent liberal bias such as this The Conservatives are taking a sledge hammer to their voter base and this Labour is the only party treating both sides of the Brexit divide with respect. In general, news reporting is mostly factual, but lacks hyperlinked sourcing, while editorial positions always favor the left.

Is there a point to this post? Whatever left-leaning attributes the London Economic possesses are completely inconsequential to the immense smear campaign launched by billionaire media companies and a provably deceitful social media campaign. The Tories pumped out lie after lie in their attempt to discredit Corbyn, and people like you swallowed it up whole.

 

[teuchter]

To be fair, I don't think reading a manifesto should be the sole defining factor in deciding whether you support or don't support a leader or a party. I didn't this time, or never have, read a Tory Party manifesto, but nor have I ever voted for them. I don't need to read their manifesto to know that they are an unpleasant bunch of fuckwit racists.

I'd say that actually reading a manifesto should be a defining factor in what you think about that manifesto.

 

[Manter]

Way off topic now - but I'm still waiting for blood test results from Monday. I think they've lost them.

"Viapath" as at Kings, St Thomas's, Guys & SLAM is a joint venture with SERCO - more usually associated with tagging rapists and running the Yarlswood immigration detention centre amongst many other thing. You never know who you're getting into bed with in a simple blood test on the NHS these days.

I only say this because you have associated Elizabeth Murdoch with a $9 billion blood test company - Theranos - which apparently uses dowsing!

Theranos is bust now. Court cases start next year. Bad blood is well worth reading- it’s about tech bubbles and power and fraud and reads like a thriller