PowerSwitch

Hes like a stuck record

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13971770

I gave up before I got to the end. He's like one of those teddy bears that have a cord that you pull to make them speak .

He always looks to me like a man trying to play the part of a leader.

He's exactly the right man at the moment - I expect a new leader to be in place 12 months before the next election though.

God it's so sad.

Why can't he just chat to the interviewer and talk about what he believes rather than just parroting out the same policy statement.

That's truly awful to watch. Toe curlingly bad.

Why can't he just chat to the interviewer and talk about what he believes rather than just parroting out the same policy statement.

Because what he believes is not what stands a chance at the next election.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ia ... r-pension/

A pensions paying out £24,000 index linked from 60 till death costs about £500,000 at the moment.

A Teacher works 38 years.
Assuming your pension pot performs poorly, and manages to match inflation (LMAO, mine hasnt managed that!!) you would need to pay £1096 A MONTH into your pension, thats 80% of what a newly qualified teacher earns
Even if you average a laughable 6% return, you would have to contribute £600 per month, half take home pay and 29% of total pay, and you would have to keep that up throughout your career, every month, for 38 years.

In reality, teachers contribute 6.4% of earnings, however the teachers pension pot is long empty, the pensions of toddays retired teachers drain it every month, and the government throws in an addtional 14.1%.
Thats just enough to meet the payouts every month.

I'd love 'Ed' to go on TV and explain why every teacher deserves a £500,000 pension pot, when anyone else making the same contributions would get a £56,000 pot.

lurker wrote:Hes like a stuck record

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13971770

And yet he urges others to "put aside the rhetoric"? He says this about four times, whilst doing nothing other than repeating the same meaningless one-line soundbite.

He has no idea where the Labour party should be heading, that much is clear.

clv101 wrote:He's exactly the right man at the moment - I expect a new leader to be in place 12 months before the next election though.

I agree. The labour party needs to go through a process of rediscovering why it exists and what it is supposed to be for, and it is extremely unclear when the next election might be or what state the country will be in when it happens. Having a strong leader with a major personal agenda would probably not be so good in this situation.

caspian wrote:That's truly awful to watch. Toe curlingly bad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KHMO14KuJk

And the "corrected" version:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ApIC3x3kk8

The guys a weirdo - amazing that anybody can bring themselves to vote for him.

Biff...ehem...biff

Lord Beria3 wrote:The guys a weirdo - amazing that anybody can bring themselves to vote for him.

Biff...ehem...biff

He won because his brother made the wrong call regarding the Iraq war. Invading Iraq was the single biggest political error made by New Labour, Ed disowned it and apologised, David did not, and this was just enough to tip the balance. IMO....

UE
Dave won the Membership and MP votes, just about.
Ed won the Union votes by a clear margin.

Add them up, and you get the union man in charge.

DominicJ wrote:UE
Dave won the Membership and MP votes, just about.
Ed won the Union votes by a clear margin.

Add them up, and you get the union man in charge.

David would still have won if he'd done a U-turn on his position on Iraq, I think. He would have won far more membership votes than he actually did. The grass roots of the Labour party was never supportive of invading Iraq, and much of the parliamentary party was also deeply skeptical. It really was only the Blairite leadership which supported it.

DominicJ wrote:

Why can't he just chat to the interviewer and talk about what he believes rather than just parroting out the same policy statement.

Because what he believes is not what stands a chance at the next election.

I understand the pensions shortfall. That has been well known for over 25 years. Un-funded pensions were an evil when they were introduced. Just another pyramid scheme a lot like rocketing house prices - completely unsustainable.

But he's in opposition with no chance of a timely election. He could lie through his teeth like Tony used to do and not have to deal with it for years.