tweepcat

Labour describes themselves as "Britain's democratic socialist party" on their website. Do you feel that this is fair, considering that they haven't done enough to oppose the Tories ridiculous austerity measures (which is based broken economics) by providing a fair and coherent narrative that supports public spending as an effective way of boosting growth? I get the impression that defending public spending which benefits everyone in society seems like too difficult of a task, even though it really is at the heart of what a socially democratic party really should be advocating. Is it really fair for a party to describe themselves as socialist, when they won't even nationalise key natural monopolies such as energy and transport?

Sorry if these questions are somewhat loaded - please do correct me if my perception of Labour is somewhat wrong. It's just that there's a lot of people out there that like what Old Labour did, and do not feel that New Labour represent the left properly, and are turning to alternatives such as the Greens (which hurts, because some of their policies aren't exactly fantastic!).

Also, what are your thoughts on Universal Basic Income?

How on earth is this worthy of an IAmA? You've raised no money or awareness, you've only set up your organisation a few days ago (according to your facebook page, of which only 6 people have liked), and you have provided no proof. Anyone could set up an online fund-raiser which no one knows about or donates to.

If you are genuine I appreciate that you are trying to help, but this isn't the best way to go about it. Perhaps you can help locally or regionally? Although you might have an interest of amphibians and want to protect them, the vast majority of people would rather help small scale sustainable aid projects in developing countries, or work towards eradicating poverty in their own country. Sitting at a computer asking for money is a method, but I think you'll find that actually volunteering in local organisations which might involve your interests (might require some research) will actually help.

That's a fair answer. I was under no illusion that the credit crunch was Labour's fault at all, I was simply confused why Labour doesn't appear to defend it particularly well! I'm also pleased to hear that you recognise you didn't regulate the banks enough, I think that is what Labour are truly guilty of, and at least you're admitting it! I just wish that Westminster Labour could be as clear in what they stand for as you! Thanks for the reply!

edit: when I say "wasn't Labour's fault", I obviously mean apart from not regulating properly! That said, we would have ended up like Ireland with the Tories in power!

I find the same problem with seat belts.