Jeremy Corbyn's time is up

[Streathamite]

I turned 47 last week and it definitely hasn't fucking happened to me

It's a (very rough) average. I am 51 and likewise

 

[Happy Larry]

No wonder the Tories are doing badly.

Yes, so badly that they've received more votes than any other party in the last three elections. Have 60 seats more than Labour and are currently running the country.

Labour would love to be doing just as badly.

 

[Happy Larry]

That'd be the speech he actually starts with "my fellow Americans", wouldn't it?

Absolutely. It's great advice no matter which country you live in.

America is the worlds richest and most powerful country and is filled with people with a great work ethic and love of their country. The same can be said for other economic powerhouses like Japan and Germany. Unfortunately, Britain has far too many people with a massive sense of entitlement and little work ethic who constantly whinge that their country is not doing enough for them. Kennedy obviously despised such people, and rightly so.

 

[NoXion]

Yes, so badly that they've received more votes than any other party in the last three elections. Have 60 seats more than Labour and are currently running the country.

Labour would love to be doing just as badly.

Theresa May called an early election because she shared the same delusion that you did, and the electorate rewarded her and her party with an even slimmer majority. Given the Tories are fucking up Brexit, I don't rate their chances next election.

Also, you're a dirty stinking fucking liar, no sign of those scholarly articles that you mentioned.

 

[Happy Larry]

no sign of those scholarly articles that you mentioned.

I'm not here to wipe your bum. If you Google "myths of socialism" your page will fill up with interesting and well informed articles setting out why socialism just doesn't work. If you are really interested (which you probably aren't as you're just being a troll) if you Google "the myth of Scandinavian Socialism" you will find a whole lot more interesting articles on that part of the world often referred to by socialists desperate to find somewhere where socialism may be argued to have worked.

 

[NoXion]

I'm not here to wipe your bum. If you Google "myths of socialism" your page will fill up with interesting and well informed articles setting out why socialism just doesn't work. If you are really interested (which you probably aren't as you're just being a troll) if you Google "the myth of Scandinavian Socialism" you will find a whole lot more interesting articles on that part of the world often referred to by socialists desperate to find somewhere where socialism may be argued to have worked.

You made the claim. It's *your* job to support your assertions, not mine. So until you produce those scholarly articles, I'm going to call you fucking lying little shit. Want me to stop?

Link the articles and I will.

 

[Happy Larry]

Want me to stop?

You seem to mistake me for someone who gives a shit what you think.

If you want to continue being abusive, then that's your choice. I've pointed you in the right direction. If you don't want to do anything for yourself, then that fits right in with the type of person you obviously are.

 

[NoXion]

You seem to mistake me for someone who gives a shit what you think.

If you want to continue being abusive, then that's your choice. I've pointed you in the right direction. If you don't want to do anything for yourself, then that fits right in with the type of person you obviously are.

So you're refusing to support your claims. Typical lying right wing sack of shit.

 

[Happy Larry]

I like to read what lefties think, and why.

Yes. Me too.

The "why" part is not often intelligently or eloquently explained here though. Many just seem enraged that an alternative viewpoint is held and find it challenging that one should be expressed on these pages, which they appear to feel should be devoted to their political opinions.

 

[NoXion]

Yes. Me too.

The "why" part is not often intelligently or eloquently explained here though. Many just seem enraged that an alternative viewpoint is held and find it challenging that one should be expressed on these pages, which they appear to feel should be devoted to their political opinions.

Maybe you could try actually engaging rather than wheeling out tired old crap that's been addressed a thousand times before.

For example, you could provide a link to those articles that you mentioned.

 

[Happy Larry]

On the (probably incorrect) assumption that you are really interested in intelligently formed arguments as to why socialism sounds great in theory but always fails in reality, I suggest you read "The Problem with Socialism" by Thomas Di Lorenzo, and particularly the following chapters :

2. Why Socialism is Always and Everywhere an Economic Disaster

5. Why “The Worst” Rise to the Top Under Socialism

6. The Socialist Roots of Fascism

7. The Myth of Successful Scandinavian Socialism

8. How Welfare Harms the Poor

12. Minimum Wage, Maximum Folly

 

[Bernie Gunther]

They don't exist. Expect links to newspaper articles by the likes of Roger Scrotum, Simon Heffer, Andrew Roberts, Daniel Hannan and a host of other mad-eyed screamers, possibly even some Yank neoconservative crap.

I gather Urban still awaits even that sort of ‘evidence’ from our new playmates?

ETA - aha ... spoke too soon

 

[not-bono-ever]

On the (probably incorrect) assumption that you are really interested in intelligently formed arguments as to why socialism sounds great in theory but always fails in reality, I suggest you read "The Problem with Socialism" by Thomas Di Lorenzo, and particularly the following chapters :

2. Why Socialism is Always and Everywhere an Economic Disaster

5. Why “The Worst” Rise to the Top Under Socialism

6. The Socialist Roots of Fascism

7. The Myth of Successful Scandinavian Socialism

8. How Welfare Harms the Poor

12. Minimum Wage, Maximum Folly

Lorenzo is as credible as David Irving.

Actually, Irving did have Hint of rigour in his reputation once upon a time as strange as it seems - So maybe less credible than Irving.

Which is pretty shit tbh

 

[NoXion]

Nope, instead it's a list of chapters from a book written by a member of the Mises Institute.

 

[chilango]

On the (probably incorrect) assumption that you are really interested in intelligently formed arguments as to why socialism sounds great in theory but always fails in reality, I suggest you read "The Problem with Socialism" by Thomas Di Lorenzo, and particularly the following chapters :

2. Why Socialism is Always and Everywhere an Economic Disaster

5. Why “The Worst” Rise to the Top Under Socialism

6. The Socialist Roots of Fascism

7. The Myth of Successful Scandinavian Socialism

8. How Welfare Harms the Poor

12. Minimum Wage, Maximum Folly

Your best source is some "neo-confederate" ?

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm not here to wipe your bum.

Yeh. I'm not going to ask you to wipe my bum being as you clearly can't wipe your own. None of the searches you mention seems likely to turn up an article demonstrating socialism doesn't work, rather that in certain contexts what some people see as socialism hasn't achieved what other people see as success.

 

[NoXion]

Apparently mass market paperbacks count as scholarly articles now. I'm sure that between us we could dig out plenty of books that show how great socialism is and how much capitalism sucks big floppy donkey parts.

 

[not-bono-ever]

Nope, instead it's a list of chapters from a book written by a member of the Mises Institute.

Didn’t know that. What a sack of shit

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Interesting to see who is promoting that book online currently (besides our new chum)

Also interesting to see the common themes being promoted with it

 

[Bernie Gunther]

See also Thomas DiLorenzo - RationalWiki

 

[NoXion]

I also can't help but notice that Happy Larry didn't bother summarising Lorenzo's arguments. Maybe that's too much of a diversion for this thread, so I would be happy to start one since Larry here has clearly read the book and thus would be able to incorporate the book's arguments into his case.

You up for that Larry?

 

[Pickman's model]

On the (probably incorrect) assumption that you are really interested in intelligently formed arguments as to why socialism sounds great in theory but always fails in reality, I suggest you read "The Problem with Socialism" by Thomas Di Lorenzo, and particularly the following chapters :

2. Why Socialism is Always and Everywhere an Economic Disaster

5. Why “The Worst” Rise to the Top Under Socialism

6. The Socialist Roots of Fascism

7. The Myth of Successful Scandinavian Socialism

8. How Welfare Harms the Poor

12. Minimum Wage, Maximum Folly

This book is so well esteemed that no research library in the country has a copy of it.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Looking at di Lorenzo bio, he’s one of those right academic \ evilcorp PR crossover guys, like Fred Singer or one of those.

 

[redsquirrel]

Well, OK, but what about the age issue?
To repeat: at the last election, the Tories more or less owned the 59-75 age group, but Labour got a majority of everyone younger than that - and absolutely thumped the Tories in the 40 and under category.
Whichever way you look at it, a 39yo is probably going to be troubling the scorer for a good few years more than (say) a 69yo. So surely that's a hefty long-term problem for the Tories?
(And no, I don't accept people will automatically switch to the Tories when they hit 50. Depends how badly the Tories shafted them before that)

Well
(1) what killer b said,

(2) 15 years ago people were then talking about how the Tories were going to die out, five years ago people were insisting that Republican presidents were a thing of the past, that the demographics would kill them, simply extrapolating from present data to some future point has shown itself to be daft, parties and people change based on the material conditions the Conservative party 10 years hence might look rather different than the one today.

(3) there's a vast difference between having a long-term problem and 'haemorrhaging votes'/dying out. Would I be concerned about the ageing membership/voter base and declining number of members if I was at Tory central office? Of course I would but that's a whole different ball game to saying that they are dying. Long established parties, embedded in society, with a strong backing by capital are extremely tough and hard to kill off. In addition to which the UK has FPTP which provides further assistance to the big two.

It's quite possible that the Tories will lose the next election, and the one after that, and the one after that. But the party is not going anywhere, they aren't going to be replaced as one of the big two (at Westminster) by the LibDems or anyone else anytime soon.

The other points I would add: between 2005-2015, the Labour 'brand' got thoroughly trashed, one way and another, and in 2017, I would argue that it's highly likely that the a UKIP collapse resulted in a wholesale transfer across to the Tories

Yes, so? Doesn't that rather show that the ability of the big two to ride out temporary difficulties, their longevity.

 

[Pickman's model]

Looking at di Lorenzo bio, he’s one of those right academic \ evilcorp PR crossover guys, like Fred Singer or one of those.

as far as i can see, the only citing author says 'see dilorenzo2016 on this'. which isn't a ringing endorsement.

this review off amazon doesn't make me want to buy the book

 

[Pickman's model]

from american amazon

Spoiler

etc etc

 

[Poi E]

Happy Larry, you'd be much happier on the spiked-online comments pages.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Are we all done feeding this (somehow familiar) troll yet?

 

[Nylock]

Yes, so badly that they've received more votes than any other party in the last three elections. Have 60 seats more than Labour and are currently running the country.

Labour would love to be doing just as badly.

With astonishing arrogance the tories called the election as they were sure of an absolute victory and a thorough trouncing of the labour party. "Labour to be in political wilderness for a generation" was the typical lines being brayed by the right-wing press and, I'm sure, shills like yourself down the pub. However this was not to be was it? The tories lost their majority and went from 331 seats to 318 which meant a deal had to be struck with the frothing DUP in order to maintain their (increasingly more slender) grip on power. The labour party meanwhile added 30 seats to their tally. Yes, not enough to win outright but of the seats the tories are still holding on to there is a significant amount that are now looking if not marginal then very 'wobbly'.

The wheels are spectacularly blowing off the clown-car that is the current tory administration. Labour may not be in power but they are definitely in the better position moving forward and deep down inside you know it too otherwise, why else this myopic bravado of yours?

Absolutely. It's great advice no matter which country you live in.

America is the worlds richest and most powerful country and is filled with people with a great work ethic and love of their country. The same can be said for other economic powerhouses like Japan and Germany. Unfortunately, Britain has far too many people with a massive sense of entitlement and little work ethic who constantly whinge that their country is not doing enough for them. Kennedy obviously despised such people, and rightly so.

My bold. ...and who would these people be then? Go on, be specific.

I'm not here to wipe your bum. If you Google "myths of socialism" your page will fill up with interesting and well informed articles setting out why socialism just doesn't work. If you are really interested (which you probably aren't as you're just being a troll) if you Google "the myth of Scandinavian Socialism" you will find a whole lot more interesting articles on that part of the world often referred to by socialists desperate to find somewhere where socialism may be argued to have worked.

That's not how it works. You come here and spout off a load of old guff about socialism and expect everyone else to trawl google on your behalf? Who's wiping whose arse here?

You make an assertion from some pseudo-objective position but are ill-prepared to offer your own distilled view based on what you claim to be wider reading. Googling "myths of socialism" will result in a broad spectrum of material from critical pieces from extreme left and right as well as the full spectrum in between. In order to effectively debate the issue with you (if indeed debate is what you seek and are not shit stirring for the lols) it is essential to know where you are coming from in order to properly engage. Hence the calls for you to provide your evidence. No-one expects you to do the work for them, but then again no-one wants to be doing the work for you either.

You seem to mistake me for someone who gives a shit what you think.

If you want to continue being abusive, then that's your choice. I've pointed you in the right direction. If you don't want to do anything for yourself, then that fits right in with the type of person you obviously are.

...and what type of person would he be? Go on, be specific.

On the (probably incorrect) assumption that you are really interested in intelligently formed arguments as to why socialism sounds great in theory but always fails in reality, I suggest you read "The Problem with Socialism" by Thomas Di Lorenzo, and particularly the following chapters :

2. Why Socialism is Always and Everywhere an Economic Disaster

5. Why “The Worst” Rise to the Top Under Socialism

6. The Socialist Roots of Fascism

7. The Myth of Successful Scandinavian Socialism

8. How Welfare Harms the Poor

12. Minimum Wage, Maximum Folly

Wow, out of the gate with Di Lorenzo -and a chapter list to boot. A real winner.

No analysis, no nothing. It's almost like you're trolling but no, not you surely?

 

[DotCommunist]

Yes, so badly that they've received more votes than any other party in the last three elections. Have 60 seats more than Labour and are currently running the country.

Labour would love to be doing just as badly.

your testicles are like raisins