Labour Watch

Chat about Leyton Orient (or anything else)

Moderator: Long slender neck

George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

Max B Gold wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 11:00 am
George M wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 8:57 am Labour to nationalise British steel despite it losing £700,000 a day. Not great business.
Good news for the workers.

Another failed Thatcherite privatisation. Let's hope its water next then the trains and then another 200 top companies.
How is losing £700,000 a year good news. It was privatised because it was a drain on public funds. It’s still a drain.
User avatar
Dunners
Boardin' 24/7
Boardin' 24/7
Posts: 9926
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:21 pm
Has thanked: 1219 times
Been thanked: 2739 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by Dunners »

It's not a drain. We need steel. It's of strategic national interest. So if it costs us just £700K a year to not be dependent on risky and increasingly expensive global supply chains, it's a bargain. Plus, we print the money anyway.

We should have done it for Port Talbot too.
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

Dunners wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 5:29 pm It's not a drain. We need steel. It's of strategic national interest. So if it costs us just £700K a year to not be dependent on risky and increasingly expensive global supply chains, it's a bargain. Plus, we print the money anyway.

We should have done it for Port Talbot too.
Sorry , as my first post £700k a day. Still a bargain
User avatar
Father Ted Crilly
Fresh Alias
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 11:17 am
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by Father Ted Crilly »

£700k per day = £255.5M Pa. In terms of our economy it’s a tiny amount to retain the crucial ability to produce steel.
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

Father Ted Crilly wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 8:48 pm £700k per day = £255.5M Pa. In terms of our economy it’s a tiny amount to retain the crucial ability to produce steel.
It isn’t. How about all of our other businesses that struggle or fail because of cheaper imports. Shall we subsidise them all. We have tried all that before. It doesn’t work
User avatar
Father Ted Crilly
Fresh Alias
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 11:17 am
Has thanked: 31 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by Father Ted Crilly »

George M wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 8:54 pm
Father Ted Crilly wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 8:48 pm £700k per day = £255.5M Pa. In terms of our economy it’s a tiny amount to retain the crucial ability to produce steel.
It isn’t. How about all of our other businesses that struggle or fail because of cheaper imports. Shall we subsidise them all. We have tried all that before. It doesn’t work
Read dunners post above. Not sure why you’re going on about subsidising other industries.
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

Because there are other important industries that need support . Therefore, if you support one , support them all. Our steel industry has been inefficient and loss making for decades. We rely on the rest of the world for most things now. Why not steel.
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

Coking coal and iron ore is being imported from the USA and Australia. Do you still think it’s a good deal for the UKs limited funds to keep a loss making business running. I’m sure the Yanks and Aussies will be delighted with such stupidity
CEB2ElectricBoogaloo
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1283
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2024 12:08 pm
Has thanked: 299 times
Been thanked: 396 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by CEB2ElectricBoogaloo »

George M wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 10:22 am Because there are other important industries that need support . Therefore, if you support one , support them all. Our steel industry has been inefficient and loss making for decades. We rely on the rest of the world for most things now. Why not steel.
The “therefore” doesn’t make sense in that post
Proposition Joe
Boardin' 24/7
Boardin' 24/7
Posts: 5469
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:48 pm
Has thanked: 2463 times
Been thanked: 1930 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by Proposition Joe »

George M wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 10:22 am Because there are other important industries that need support . Therefore, if you support one , support them all. Our steel industry has been inefficient and loss making for decades. We rely on the rest of the world for most things now. Why not steel.
So it's bad that we rely on the rest of the world for most things, but we should add something else to the list? Not sure I understand.
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

Proposition Joe wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 9:22 am
George M wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 10:22 am Because there are other important industries that need support . Therefore, if you support one , support them all. Our steel industry has been inefficient and loss making for decades. We rely on the rest of the world for most things now. Why not steel.
So it's bad that we rely on the rest of the world for most things, but we should add something else to the list? Not sure I understand.
Who said it’s bad ?
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 8:55 am
George M wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 10:22 am Because there are other important industries that need support . Therefore, if you support one , support them all. Our steel industry has been inefficient and loss making for decades. We rely on the rest of the world for most things now. Why not steel.
The “therefore” doesn’t make sense in that post
Ignore it then
Proposition Joe
Boardin' 24/7
Boardin' 24/7
Posts: 5469
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:48 pm
Has thanked: 2463 times
Been thanked: 1930 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by Proposition Joe »

George M wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 9:53 am
Proposition Joe wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 9:22 am
George M wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 10:22 am Because there are other important industries that need support . Therefore, if you support one , support them all. Our steel industry has been inefficient and loss making for decades. We rely on the rest of the world for most things now. Why not steel.
So it's bad that we rely on the rest of the world for most things, but we should add something else to the list? Not sure I understand.
Who said it’s bad ?
Y....you did?
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

Where did I use the word bad or infer that it was bad
RedDwarf 1881
MB Legend
MB Legend
Posts: 13405
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:06 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 2730 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by RedDwarf 1881 »

George M wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 7:54 am Coking coal and iron ore is being imported from the USA and Australia. Do you still think it’s a good deal for the UKs limited funds to keep a loss making business running. I’m sure the Yanks and Aussies will be delighted with such stupidity
It would be cheaper and better for the environment if we reopened one of our coal mines and used our own coal instead of importing it from the other side of the world
Proposition Joe
Boardin' 24/7
Boardin' 24/7
Posts: 5469
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 8:48 pm
Has thanked: 2463 times
Been thanked: 1930 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by Proposition Joe »

George M wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 12:47 pm Where did I use the word bad or infer that it was bad
Ah, I see we're playing this game.
BoniO
Regular
Regular
Posts: 4955
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2019 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1227 times
Been thanked: 854 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by BoniO »

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 1:04 pm
George M wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 7:54 am Coking coal and iron ore is being imported from the USA and Australia. Do you still think it’s a good deal for the UKs limited funds to keep a loss making business running. I’m sure the Yanks and Aussies will be delighted with such stupidity
It would be cheaper and better for the environment if we reopened one of our coal mines and used our own coal instead of importing it from the other side of the world
You reckon? I think you need to consider how much it would take to "re-open" a coal mine as most have been flattened and/or built over by now.
User avatar
Dunners
Boardin' 24/7
Boardin' 24/7
Posts: 9926
Joined: Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:21 pm
Has thanked: 1219 times
Been thanked: 2739 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by Dunners »

Can't we just invade some third-world failed state, shoot the locals, and then steal their oil? And sink a few Spanish galleons on the way home just for good measure.
RedDwarf 1881
MB Legend
MB Legend
Posts: 13405
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 12:06 am
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 2730 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by RedDwarf 1881 »

BoniO wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 3:07 pm
RedDwarf 1881 wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 1:04 pm
George M wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 7:54 am Coking coal and iron ore is being imported from the USA and Australia. Do you still think it’s a good deal for the UKs limited funds to keep a loss making business running. I’m sure the Yanks and Aussies will be delighted with such stupidity
It would be cheaper and better for the environment if we reopened one of our coal mines and used our own coal instead of importing it from the other side of the world
You reckon? I think you need to consider how much it would take to "re-open" a coal mine as most have been flattened and/or built over by now.
I didn't know they were all built over or flattened . Short sighted if they are .
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

Father Ted Crilly wrote: Sun Apr 13, 2025 9:26 am
George M wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 8:54 pm
Father Ted Crilly wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 8:48 pm £700k per day = £255.5M Pa. In terms of our economy it’s a tiny amount to retain the crucial ability to produce steel.
It isn’t. How about all of our other businesses that struggle or fail because of cheaper imports. Shall we subsidise them all. We have tried all that before. It doesn’t work
Read dunners post above. Not sure why you’re going on about subsidising other industries.
Read Dunners post and it doesn’t hold water. If we have to import the raw materials to produce steel then we don’t have national security anyway. And , by the way , we don’t have it with food either
User avatar
Long slender neck
MB Legend
MB Legend
Posts: 15184
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:13 am
Has thanked: 2692 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by Long slender neck »

Just don't bother with anything then?
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

With food in particular, we can’t do much about it. We cannot produce enough at home to feed 80 million mouths
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg7q0e77exo

To all those who foolishly believed that we were already protected from migrants with criminal intent
User avatar
Long slender neck
MB Legend
MB Legend
Posts: 15184
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:13 am
Has thanked: 2692 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by Long slender neck »

Criminal intent?

Article clearly says

Terrorists, war criminals and any other criminals whose offences carry a sentence of one year or more can already be refused asylum under the Refugee Convention
George M
Tiresome troll
Tiresome troll
Posts: 1825
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2019 7:43 pm
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Labour Watch

Post by George M »

Long slender neck wrote: Tue Apr 29, 2025 7:38 am Criminal intent?

Article clearly says

Terrorists, war criminals and any other criminals whose offences carry a sentence of one year or more can already be refused asylum under the Refugee Convention
And sex offenders .And if they don’t have passports they don’t have history !
Post Reply