Corbyn to borrow £58 billion to repay WASPI woman.

Perhaps you did not mean for your post to sound so aggressive MaizieD but it does.

I might have answered otherwise.

Are some of the WASPI women those who don't need their £200 heating money by any chance ??

I didn't mean it to sound aggressive, Callistomen. It just seemed to me that your seeing no connection with capitalism implied some other kind of 'plundering'...

Capitalism provides many pension funds with enough to pay out private pensions to millions of people.

I am talking about criminal activity.

I agree, Dyffryn. It is not a question of finding the money - the money was paid with our NI contributions. The younger generation will pay their contributions to cover our pensions, and then theirs will be paid from the contributions of the one that comes after them.

No they wont!

Pensions were never designed to give people an income for 10/20/30 active years!

I may "retire" but my children wont! By then you will have to be signed off as no longer fit to work IMO

Just try looking at independent expert opinion on this brexit nonsense.

ifs.org.uk/publications/8411

*My sister lost her company pension, growstuff
The scheme had been plundered, some were compensated but other smaller , associated schemes were not.*

I lost a company pension too, Callistemon. It was embezzled by the trustees, who served prison terms for it. So whether this was down to capitalism, or just plain criminality, I don't know.

I would rather forego the £48,000 that I've lost "lost" in SRP as a 1954 WASPI woman, or the £31,000 Corbyn is promising as compensation, just to keep Corbyn out. I'd consider it an investment for the country's future.

Totally agree Chewbacca. I am not saying the Tories are perfect but I dread what will happen to this country if Corbyn becomes PM.

What is it that you dread, *loveOc8 and Chewbacca.

Can you give us any detail?

I don't want our country to be led by a man who has his strings pulled by a self confessed Marxist sympathiser.
I don't want our country to be led by a man who has sat on the fence about Brexit for so long he's got splinters in his backside.
I don't want our country to be led by a man who has shown no respect for our military personnel who have put their lives on the line for this country.
I don't want our country to be led by a man who is "friends" with Hezbollah, Hamas and IRA terrorists.
I don't want our country to be led by a man who thought that Venezuela was a country model to aspire to.
I don't want our country to be led by a man who reluctantly admits to anti semitism within his party. He was almost strong armed into making an apology earlier this week and, even then he tried to avoid it.
I don't want our country to be led by a man who is promising to plunge us into debt just to pay for his vanity causes.

And, for what it's worth, I don't think that Johnson is any better.

Do we want our country to be led by a man who has his strings pulled by Vladimir Putin?

If the answer is yes, be aware that that Putin sponsored candidate is Boris Johnson

You missed this bit varian

*And, for what it's worth, I don't think that Johnson is any better.*

for what it's worth, Chewbacca, I don't think that the man who opposed the Iraqi war, the man who fought for the release of the Guildford four and the man who has consistently fought racism all his political career is having his strings pulled by anyone.

I think that:

That the man who takes his time to talk to our veterans instead of rushing off to lunch is not the one who is showing disrespect to our military.

The man who apologised for anti-semitism in his party over
a year ago (the media managed to miss that, didn't they?)

news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-apologises-for-pockets-of-anti-semitism-within-labour-party-11304273

The man whose manifesto proposals are deemed feasible by many economists (and they're not vanity projects, but attempts to create a more fair, greener society)

is less to be feared than a man who cannot open his mouth without telling a lie, who fathers uncounted illegitimate children yet castigates single mothers, who makes racist remarks then calls them 'satire', who aspires to change the British constitution to keep his party in power permanently, who is backed by Russian money and who denies all responsibility of his party for the awful mess that the UK is now in.

But you've got a dilemma, haven't you? Whichever one wins out you'll lose...

He'll be glad of your vote MaisieD; judging by today's news, he's going to need all he can get.

Corbyn backs Emily Thornberry who is on record saying “I wouldn’t let my 4 yr old or my elderly mother be taught/cared for by anyone wearing a burqa”

Marxism: the government owns and controls all resources and means of production to ensure equality.

Yet again the term Marxist is used as an insult. As a (proud) Marxist I would like to know what you disagree with.

Actually, Marxism is a bit more than the above as it is also a way of looking at historical events, but I think it's the above statement that's relative here.

Chewbacca, I agree with you about Corbyn. I don’t want our country to be led by him for all the reasons you mentioned.
I do want our country to be led by BJ though. As far as I’m concerned he’s the best man for the job. If some of you want to attack me for that, go ahead, you won’t change my mind.

At least by sitting on the fence over Brexit and not forcing his opinion on us JC is surely the better politician than May who acted against her own beliefs over the EU. If she, and the other MPs who were in favour of Remain had stuck to their guns and explained why the thought staying in the EU was better, we might not be in the present situation. But no, they had to pander to the small majority that won the Referendum.

GrannyGravy13 Thornberry was talking about the communication problem for people who may be hard of hearing or very young. Is that really that contentious?
Also, Thornberry and Corbyn don't agree on everything. If you have a work colleague that you get along with are you responsible for everything they say.

I seriously do understand the concerns about Corbyn. However, I really cannot understand anybody who wants the country to be led by Johnson and his acolytes. I honestly don't. Apart from *getting Brexit done", I cannot see one advantage of having him as PM.

Somewhere within the Conservative manifesto (can't remember which page), there is a section with references about how the Conservatives will change the role of the judiciary, parliament and the constitution itself. There are no specific details (just a load of waffle and aspirations), but it's seriously worrying. It gives the government a blank cheque to do what it wants and then it will turn round and say it was in the manifesto - people voted for it.

I seriously fear for the future of this country with Johnson's government in power.

maddyone, I wouldn't want to attack anyone for their views. I'm just amazed that some people can see Boris as an appropriate leader!

growstuff That information is on Page 48 of the Tory manifesto if anyone wants to check for themselves. They have not been asked about it in one interview or debate.