That Starmer fella...

Posted on
Page
of 245
  • Framing using public purse to ensure better pay for service workers (and better services / infrasturcture more generally) as negative is laughably nonserious, when you conveniently fail to note the reason these workers have not received fair pay rises in recent history is chiefly due to failed privatisations / franchises and the culture of down to the bone profiteering that has been endemic in the transport industry ...

    Can't detangle that from the ideological battle the Tories wanted to wage on the public services worker class, particularly in Transport and Health, but I guess that's part of the broader breakdown in public spending over the last 15-20 years.

    Just a casual reminder to say that in this case, a sizeable (useful) amount of "other peoples money" is currently sitting snug in the bank accounts of a number of Corporate Execs and shareholders, amongst other places it shouldn't be.

  • Just a casual reminder to say that in thise case, a sizeable (useful) amount of "other peoples money" is currently sitting snug in the bank accounts of a number of Corporate Execs and shareholders, amongst other places it shouldn't be.

    https://youtu.be/mv-C9qAfdpg

    The banks are made of marble with a guard at every door, the vaults are stuffed with silver that we all sweated for

  • I thought thebig thing about the deal with the train driver is that the pay increase isn't linked to changes in working conditions. It's a pay offer. Not tied up with loads of very unfamily friendly have to work on your day off conditions.

    The strikes have always been much more about conditions, life work balance etc than wages. The fat cat commie drivers wanting a big pay rise holding the country to ransom is a right wing media tory lie line trying to demonise workers. Suprise, suprise!

    Don't fall for the bullshit.

  • I wonder how this compares to money lost to the economy because our train service is currently shit.

  • Different purpose but thereโ€™s also the north of ยฃ100M to Michelle Mone, the tip of a sizeable icebergโ€ฆ

  • Why repeat Thatcher's nonsensical jibe? If we're maligning the intentions of socialists, I'll counter with; 'the trouble with the right is that they always have a good time at other peoples' expense'.

  • Why engage with the moron troll? His infantile schtick gets a rise every fucking time.

  • Yep.

    That one's a "never regret" ignore.

  • And guess what....


    1 Attachment

    • Screenshot_20240818-092355.png
  • What? What are we supposed to guess?

  • That union leaders prioritise their members interests?

  • That it's possible for two industrial disputes to be running in parallel?

  • Nice to see the reshaping of the narrative around this. Less of the frothing about illegal immigrants:

    https://x.com/UKLabour/status/1826216958011858989

  • isn't this just the hostile environment policy but with branding targeted at guardian readers?


    1 Attachment

    • ho.JPG
  • Well the message is very much strong on the enforced of immigration, strong on the causes of illegal migration.

    But ultimately it's not ideal to have unknown people entering your country illegally, employers employing vulnerable people illegally, and providing organised crime a healthy revenue stream at a reduced risk profile compared to other import/export models.

    Idk if that makes me a hostile guardian reader or not.

  • It also depends how you're defining 'Hostile Environment'. Which (I believe) was a specific set of policies to remove services from those without sufficient documents.

  • Seems to be a lot more focus on those further up the food chain rather than demonising the immigrants themselves I'd say. Obviously others may have a different view.

  • But ultimately it's not ideal to have unknown people entering your country illegally

    For the majority of people this is the only way they can present themselves to claim aslyum. Until that changes (for which there is little political will), making it harder to enter the UK without permission will only extend the plight of those fleeing conflict and persecution etc.

  • i think peoples reaction to this only really only shows us the solidification of right wing immigration policy within center left governments. normalising the rhetoric and ideals to which the outcome will be allowing parties like reform or the tories to score further concessions on immigration narrative and policy. there isn't even token mention of safe and legal routes, support for those in what's known to be a violent immigration detention system and nothing which even so much as changes labours line that "immigration takes away from your local community and resources" they manifested in the election.

    labour extending detention facilities, expanding immigration raids and harrassing businesses over worker status's only damages communities. such expansion disproportionately targets raids in black and brown communities, often catching many citizens in the crossfire under police and immigration harrassment. anyone who's had an immigration raid in their neighbourhood will tell you this. expanding the running of detention centres, which already see high rates of abuse and violence towards assylum seekers does nothing to protect vulnerable people. this just sews the sort of tentions that saw racist rioters targetting vulnerable assylum seekers and then spilled over into racially attacking british citizens.

    labour mp asking for tamworth hotel back "for locals" and its "damaging effect on the local economy", "preventing tourism":

    https://x.com/SarahEdwardsTam/status/1818240122103484735 now deleted

    tamworth hotel being attacked by racists setting fire to it:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/c97882r2729o

    mays flagship policy was creating an environment unihabitable for those without documentation, that ended up also targetting those who had the right to be here. if your issue is undocumented people being at risk of exploitation by employers or criminals, you'd address this by giving them better rights and protection to work, housing and access health care while their claims are processed or documentation is provided. something labours race equality act proposal recieves recieved criticism for actively avoiding (https://www.voice-online.co.uk/news/uk-news/2024/02/05/labours-promised-race-equality-act-draws-scepticism-from-campaigners/). further criminalisation only stregnthens the criminals hand as well as increasing pre established structural racism in enforcement. like all criminalisation of vulnerable people it pushes them further out of mainstream life, ever more relient on criminal and exploitetive people. it is a hostile environment.

    as it stands, this policy is dissapointing and not very progressive, nor is it a large departure in approach from the tories in anything but tone. the violence it creates for those trying to immigrate, legally or illegally, remains the same. the violence it causes for those who are citizens here, remains the same.

  • The plight of having to live in France?

  • Not sure this is a bad joke but there are plenty of reasons why people have a valid right to claim aslyum in the UK and why that would be preferential to them than claiming it in France.

  • Like being indebted to gangs and having to get to the UK to be under their control? Can't see many other good reasons to chose the potential death of your family or yourself over a life in Europe.

  • I meant in broader terms, rather than the literal PoE. But absolutely.

    There needs to be a sensible route to claiming asylum. It's a shame this hasn't been addressed yet. I'm hoping as we rebuild our dialogue with Europe we end up with something as part of a more joined up programme.

  • clacton resident detected

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

That Starmer fella...

Posted by Avatar for aggi @aggi

Actions