What a mess Red Ed has left behind! The public must be sighing with relief that they got the general election right. The Labour is in shambles and are demonstrating that not only are they not fit for office but they now are not fit for HM opposition.

The rules of their leadership election were so full of holes that it has been exploited by fraudsters to such an extent that they are considering calling the whole thing off. Another fine mess Stanley....!

"they are considering calling the whole thing off"

They are?

Where's that guff come from then?

When's the next plane due on your Fantasy Island?

Your last sentence sums it all up.

So when you refered to "the rich" in the context of raising taxes to the higher earners you weren't talking of the usuall guff that puffs out from bankers and the like every time that a hike in income tax is mooted but have switched tack to Corporation Tax now ?

I haven't noticed the likes of Starbucks pulling up sticks in the UK after they were shamed publicly into "having another look" at their tax avoidance schemes in the UK last year, have you ?

As for the rest of your post - congratulations, you're starting to sound like Tony Blair.

He also conveniently forgets 3 million on the dole, depressed wage rates and mortgage interest rates of 17% - all courtesy of the Thatcher administration

JC turned water into wine... right!

The new messiah (also JC) is friends with Hamas/Hezbollah who don't drink

Hence the other way round wine into water

Sorry too convoluted

You must have heard the many calls to cancel this election and start again because of fraudulent registrations

Here we go again with the smelly fish version of history. We were talking about leaving the country in 1977 because of the Labour inspired recession.

Mrs Thatcher did not come to power until May 1979 in the wake of the terrible "winter of discontent" recession.

The terrible figures you mention were the result of the Labour Callaghan government who mismanaged/destroyed the economy to such an extent that Mrs T won the next three elections which enabled her to turn the country around. History is just repeating itself come to think of it.

Do you deliberately twist the facts or are you just ignorant of them?

All of this boils down to two things: Wealth generation and an equitable divide up of that wealth. You need to have the right people doing the right job. The idea that increasing the state is somehow going to encourage wealth generation is madness as is letting the private sector divide up the spoils.

Speaking of an over-burdened public service can I throw this into the mix before this thread goes stale ?

rlhttps://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/famished-woman-fined-330-for-stealing-a-75p-pack-of-mars-bars-after-benefits-stopped-10455635.htmlrl


At what point in this dash to privatise and profit-ize every public service was it decided that our court system should pay for itself ? I have actually read comments from "a spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice", in other words a politician who doesn't want to make his/her name known, that "Its right for criminals to pay for the courts time".

So a woman who steals a 75p Mars Bar because she says that she had no money and needed to eat something is fined £73 plus £0.75 compensation to the shop, which then increases to £328 after civil service fees are levied, and yet no-one stops to ask the blindingly obvious question "If she can't pay 75p for a Mars Bar then..." (complete the sentence yourself if you have more brains than whoever decided that court fees were equitable).

At what point do we close down the whole of government and tax collection because every civil service department now pays for itself by charging fees instead of being paid for by taxation as it has been for centuries.

PS - the introduction of the court charge has seen an ever increasing number of magistrates resigning their voluntary roles in protest as they see the issues stood ten feet in front of them rather than looking at numbers on a balance sheet in a hidden office in Whitehall and being able to hide behind "a government spokesperson" statement.

The subject of Court fines and costs has always been a joke. Magistrates are told that someone paying fines/costs should be able to clear them in two years. That means for someone on benefits paying fines at £5 pw they should be capped at £520. Hence defendants are continually picking up fines (usually fixed penalty charges), not paying them and then going to court to have them remitted

Whilst you mentioning that. A mate dropped some orange peel in town and was given an on-the-spot fine of £80. He picked up the peel and refused to pay the fine. The council or whoever took him to court at an overall cost to taxpayers of £20,000. Judge ends up ruling in his favour. It'd be great if our government gave customs and excise that kind of money and tenacity to chase tax-dodging multinationals. That's how Corbyn can fund his social initiatives. Employ more tax chasers and stop having corporate tax lawyers, who work for these companies, from making our tax laws, as actually happens.

Interesting article in the Sunday Times about pro-Corbyn supporters abusing anyone who dares to criticise the man. The 'tolerant left' at its finest.

There's one of those hated foodbanks in Kidderminster that would happily have given her 3 days food. For no cost whatsoever. Still let's all feel sorry for the petty thief, after all once you need financial assistance then other people's property is fair game.