Jeremy Corbyn, thoughts?

[Thom]

Corbyn would reduce the UK to the worse days of the late 1970's

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_Discontent

[VERYSTORMY]

Corbyn would reduce the UK to the worse days of the late 1970's

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_Discontent

 

I agree, and a lot worse!!!

 

He has said he would renationalise the rail and utility companies and scrap most of the union legislation.

 

He is spouting lots of things, but has very little idea of how to pay for it. He does mention stopping tax evasion, but, all governments want to stop tax evasion, but it is incredibly hard / near impossible without broad international agreement. So, cant rely on that.

 

Anyone only has to look at the very left wing councils to see what is likely to result.

[newjez]

Corbyn would reduce the UK to the worse days of the late 1970's

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_Discontent

 

 

We will never have another labour govt in the UK. The only thing that can get elected is blue labour. The best we can hope for is strong opposition.

[Quinkla]

I have learned two important messages in politics:

 

1) In a two party system, people at the extremes have little option but to vote for their side of politics. You can almost take their support for granted: it is the floating voters in the middle you need to fight for. When your party loses an election, there is a temptation to elect a leader who goes back to core principles (i.e. towards the extreme). But this didn't work for Labour with Michael Foot, and it didn't work for the Tories with William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith. In the case of Labour, they recovered very slowly, thanks chiefly to Neil Kinnock, a candidate of the left, moving the party substantially towards the centre. And the Tories recovered by electing a leader who sounds centrist even though he probably isn't.

 

2) A party that adopts its opponents colours just lends credibility to the opponents. This happened to both the SDLP and the UUP, who were battling more extreme opponents and tried to out-extreme them. It just increased support for the extremes, with the centrist parties suffering bad losses.

 

I have known of Jeremy Corbyn for a long tme - primarily from CND and Stop The War. He has always been the darling of stuadnt lefties. He will claim to be the man who can deal with the SNP, but why would the SNP want to deal with Labour? He will claim to be the man who can reach out to disenfranchised minorities, but the reality is that Labour needs someone who can reach out to those who voted Tory in May. Whilst I am sympathetic to Mr Corbyn's views, now is not the time to try another Michael Foot - and I doubt it ever will be.

[Guest]

I think if Labour can win back the ukip voters they could easily be re elected. I know the student/green left don't like it but if Labour tried to protect workers wages by reducing unskilled immigration they would win a lot of support back.

[flag of convenience]

What substance? Went to Grammar School but now wants to deny others the same opportunity he had. Dropped out of further education. Hasn't any real serious experience in running anything. Been sat in Parliament for 30 years but never been in a cabinet and most people haven't even heard of him, so not really getting his voice out there.

 

I like some of what he says but really he offers you nothing more than a Uni Student protester.

 

His substance lay in his beliefs and apparent wiliness to challenge the status quo. Not in his presentation and model looks. A breath of fresh air in all likelihood after the politics of both sides during recent decades.

Dropped out? So what? No experience of running anything? Really and those that do are doing a good job are they? He's perhaps kept his powder dry. We certainly need new ideas from the same old that go nowhere beyond enriching a few. Kids on the block may well endorse a change in direction from what has been dished up over recent decades with worse yet to come.

You seem to consider it in the main uni students protesting. Funny the protests I've witnessed tend to have been a cross section of the population. In countries like Spain and Greece just as many old.

[flag of convenience]

I think if Labour can win back the ukip voters they could easily be re elected. I know the student/green left don't like it but if Labour tried to protect workers wages by reducing unskilled immigration they would win a lot of support back.

 

Not sure you are in the know. Greens are not for big population increases. Labour/ (especially under Blair)Tories certainly are in favour and doing the bidding for business.

[Quinkla]

I think if Labour can win back the ukip voters they could easily be re elected. I know the student/green left don't like it but if Labour tried to protect workers wages by reducing unskilled immigration they would win a lot of support back.

First off, if Labour adopted this policy, it would just persuade everyone that UKIP were right all along (see my example of SDLP and UUP above).

 

Secondly, I don't think UKIP has been taking voters away from Labour - I suspect mostly they are fishing in the same pond as the Tories, BNP and other right wing parties.

 

Thirdly, reducing competition is not a way to make an economy successful. The MAC report on unskilled migration concluded that the success of EU migrants in finding unskilled work in the UK was because they were generally bette qualified, better skilled, had a better work ethic and were more flexible than the UK nationals against whom they were competing. Forcing companies to employ inferior staff would just cause the economy to contract, meaning fewer jobs, meaning the workers you are trying to protect would be out of work anyway.

[flag of convenience]

I have learned two important messages in politics:

 

1) In a two party system, people at the extremes have little option but to vote for their side of politics. You can almost take their support for granted: it is the floating voters in the middle you need to fight for. When your party loses an election, there is a temptation to elect a leader who goes back to core principles (i.e. towards the extreme). But this didn't work for Labour with Michael Foot, and it didn't work for the Tories with William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith. In the case of Labour, they recovered very slowly, thanks chiefly to Neil Kinnock, a candidate of the left, moving the party substantially towards the centre. And the Tories recovered by electing a leader who sounds centrist even though he probably isn't.

 

2) A party that adopts its opponents colours just lends credibility to the opponents. This happened to both the SDLP and the UUP, who were battling more extreme opponents and tried to out-extreme them. It just increased support for the extremes, with the centrist parties suffering bad losses.

 

I have known of Jeremy Corbyn for a long tme - primarily from CND and Stop The War. He has always been the darling of stuadnt lefties. He will claim to be the man who can deal with the SNP, but why would the SNP want to deal with Labour? He will claim to be the man who can reach out to disenfranchised minorities, but the reality is that Labour needs someone who can reach out to those who voted Tory in May. Whilst I am sympathetic to Mr Corbyn's views, now is not the time to try another Michael Foot - and I doubt it ever will be.

 

Bedfellows come in unlikely places. I would fully anticipate SNP forming an understanding with Corbyn as leader, but expect it will be prevented from happening from within. Labour appears to be running scared of being different and returning traditional policy. I doubt that he would be as subversive as Foot, whose time has most likely moved on in what has become even more in appearance a very conservative country.

[flag of convenience]

We will never have another labour govt in the UK. The only thing that can get elected is blue labour. The best we can hope for is strong opposition.

 

I wouldn't say that. Blue politics has hardly been a raging success now. It may go more right wing/left wing at both ends of the spectrum while middling parties flounder to gain support from factions within as well as parties at both ends.

[flag of convenience]

I agree, and a lot worse!!!

 

He has said he would renationalise the rail and utility companies and scrap most of the union legislation.

 

He is spouting lots of things, but has very little idea of how to pay for it. He does mention stopping tax evasion, but, all governments want to stop tax evasion, but it is incredibly hard / near impossible without broad international agreement. So, cant rely on that.

 

Anyone only has to look at the very left wing councils to see what is likely to result.

 

And the problem being nationalising the railways and having a system that is affordable and further reaching being? Utility companies owned by foreign companies benefits exactly how?

No not all governments are willing to put into place the necessary procedures to put a stop to corporate 'creative accounting '. (Some would term cheating) At least be good to hear him out and examine policy. May well be the breath of fresh air needed. May just be another phoney as well.

[flag of convenience]

Corbyn would reduce the UK to the worse days of the late 1970's

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_of_Discontent

 

Really. And socialising bank losses was a good thing was it? Some pretty bad days had in recent years like the collapse of Capitalism as we know it during the 08 GFC.

[Thom]

I think if Labour can win back the ukip voters they could easily be re elected. I know the student/green left don't like it but if Labour tried to protect workers wages by reducing unskilled immigration they would win a lot of support back.

 

 

No way would Corbyn take Labour in an anti-EU or anti-immigration direction, (more's the pity.) Corbyn would take us back to the days when the country was under the thumb of the unions. I remember the days when the nationalised car industry lost 15 million quid when the unions stopped all production at UK car plants in a "demarcation" dispute over who should press the buttons on a control panel.

 

I worked, abet briefly, for the Railways when they were nationalised, it was a flaming shambles.

 

Read Bill Bryson's "Notes from a small Island" on how the print unions ran UK newspapers.

[flag of convenience]

And somehow todays economic jumble is better? The cost to the British tax payer being how much to save the banks and lost council revenue and other monies lost in the Icelandic banking fiasco?

[Guest]

His substance lay in his beliefs and apparent wiliness to challenge the status quo. Not in his presentation and model looks. A breath of fresh air in all likelihood after the politics of both sides during recent decades.

Dropped out? So what? No experience of running anything? Really and those that do are doing a good job are they? He's perhaps kept his powder dry. We certainly need new ideas from the same old that go nowhere beyond enriching a few. Kids on the block may well endorse a change in direction from what has been dished up over recent decades with worse yet to come.

You seem to consider it in the main uni students protesting. Funny the protests I've witnessed tend to have been a cross section of the population. In countries like Spain and Greece just as many old.

 

Where did I mention presentation or model looks? I actually think he comes across pretty well and is saying some good stuff, but he's just playing to student politics. More money to everyone except the rich, more services for all, lets hit those greedy corporates, more benefits, build more houses etc etc. How could anyone argue with most of that?

 

Problem is some kind of spending super state would build up a much bigger backlog at Calais and more European immigration. Which will lead to massive demand on housing, and further rising rents. The big corporates will just settle elsewhere in Europe easily under EU rules. Ireland is a pretty good spot to do business from. Not to mention the infation that will occur under Corbyn's full employment super state. You whinge about Perth being expensive, you haven't seen anything yet under a Corbyn led UK.

 

And the bloke has no economic credentials, or any real education at all to do the role...

[flag of convenience]

Where did I mention presentation or model looks? I actually think he comes across pretty well and is saying some good stuff, but he's just playing to student politics. More money to everyone except the rich, more services for all, lets hit those greedy corporates, more benefits, build more houses etc etc. How could anyone argue with most of that?

 

Problem is some kind of spending super state would build up a much bigger backlog at Calais and more European immigration. Which will lead to massive demand on housing, and further rising rents. The big corporates will just settle elsewhere in Europe easily under EU rules. Ireland is a pretty good spot to do business from. Not to mention the infation that will occur under Corbyn's full employment super state. You whinge about Perth being expensive, you haven't seen anything yet under a Corbyn led UK.

 

And the bloke has no economic credentials, or any real education at all to do the role...

 

I lived many years in London when it was double, if not more the cost of living in Perth. I saw London prices rise as swell as drive out many of the Londoners who couldn't begin to compete with the new wonder kids working in the finance industry.

 

And those with economic credentials (alleged) have achieved exactly what? You even bring in loaded terms like 'super state' (very scary if didn't know better) So anyone not immediately at the disposal of the bankers and international business is playing student politics in your view? Let those that don't think Britain a worthy country to do business in locate to Ireland. Remind me what did Google and likewise contribute to the Irish coffers in income tax?

Hardly prevented the Celtic Dragon from crashing out spectacularly. I find it amazing such arguments are still put forward as sensible argument considering the turmoil recently experienced and largely ongoing in most part of the world.

Surely most can see a new focus is badly needed before the same thing but with worse consequences comes around again.

[Guest]

I lived many years in London when it was double, if not more the cost of living in Perth. I saw London prices rise as swell as drive out many of the Londoners who couldn't begin to compete with the new wonder kids working in the finance industry.

 

And those with economic credentials (alleged) have achieved exactly what? You even bring in loaded terms like 'super state' (very scary if didn't know better) So anyone not immediately at the disposal of the bankers and international business is playing student politics in your view? Let those that don't think Britain a worthy country to do business in locate to Ireland. Remind me what did Google and likewise contribute to the Irish coffers in income tax?

Hardly prevented the Celtic Dragon from crashing out spectacularly. I find it amazing such arguments are still put forward as sensible argument considering the turmoil recently experienced and largely ongoing in most part of the world.

Surely most can see a new focus is badly needed before the same thing but with worse consequences comes around again.

 

Saying more of everything perceived as good and none of things perceived bad with a big left wing slant is studenty politics.

 

Jeremy Corbyn's britain actually sounds pretty good pre EU. But with corporates able to operate wherever they like and free movement of people it would lead to a bit of a disaster. Unless every other country goes exactly the same.

[flag of convenience]

Saying more of everything perceived as good and none of things perceived bad with a big left wing slant is studenty politics.

 

Jeremy Corbyn's britain actually sounds pretty good pre EU. But with corporates able to operate wherever they like and free movement of people it would lead to a bit of a disaster. Unless every other country goes exactly the same.

 

And the Right somehow do it different except with a focus on big business and preserving the wealth of the richest? Sure forces within the media and politics would dearly love to promote such a line of thought on the general public. The free movement of people is hardly a primary UK thing. Much as certain press would prefer to suggest it.

No disaster. Welfare restrictions in place as for British nationals returning for a period of time. Foreigners coming to work in UK should certainly not benefit ahead of UK nationals. With thought far from a disaster though.

[VERYSTORMY]

And the problem being nationalising the railways and having a system that is affordable and further reaching being? Utility companies owned by foreign companies benefits exactly how?

No not all governments are willing to put into place the necessary procedures to put a stop to corporate 'creative accounting '. (Some would term cheating) At least be good to hear him out and examine policy. May well be the breath of fresh air needed. May just be another phoney as well.

 

He would either have to buy them back at market value, or watch investment flee like water over a water fall from companies scared of what he would do next. Don't forget, when the utility companies were last in public hands, they were costing the tax payers HUGE sums of money to keep going. Money the country simply does not have. The rail maybe a different story as it these are receiving direct subsidy to keep going. Removing the subsidy could simply bring them back and it is probably good that they are.

[newjez]

No way would Corbyn take Labour in an anti-EU or anti-immigration direction, (more's the pity.) Corbyn would take us back to the days when the country was under the thumb of the unions. I remember the days when the nationalised car industry lost 15 million quid when the unions stopped all production at UK car plants in a "demarcation" dispute over who should press the buttons on a control panel.

 

I worked, abet briefly, for the Railways when they were nationalised, it was a flaming shambles.

 

Read Bill Bryson's "Notes from a small Island" on how the print unions ran UK newspapers.

 

40 years ago things were different. Those days will not return. But you could have a fairer society. Who ever say cronyism was efficient. Why do you think leaving Europe and destroying the economy will be a good thing?

[newjez]

He would either have to buy them back at market value, or watch investment flee like water over a water fall from companies scared of what he would do next. Don't forget, when the utility companies were last in public hands, they were costing the tax payers HUGE sums of money to keep going. Money the country simply does not have. The rail maybe a different story as it these are receiving direct subsidy to keep going. Removing the subsidy could simply bring them back and it is probably good that they are.

 

Just use subsidies to purchase shares.

 

Are you sure the utility companies were losing money? I don't know either way, but I have been told that at least some aspects were efficient and profitable. Do you have the figures?

Edited August 4, 2015 by newjez

[flag of convenience]

He would either have to buy them back at market value, or watch investment flee like water over a water fall from companies scared of what he would do next. Don't forget, when the utility companies were last in public hands, they were costing the tax payers HUGE sums of money to keep going. Money the country simply does not have. The rail maybe a different story as it these are receiving direct subsidy to keep going. Removing the subsidy could simply bring them back and it is probably good that they are.

 

Where as now what is it, Thames Water from memory is owned by the French and returns go to French share holders. Huge sums go to bail out banks as well who are not even privatised.There is a strong argument that essential services remain in the nations hands. Railways immediately came to mind. So many cutbacks over the decades with some of the most complicated ticketing found anywhere in the world.

Yes holding essential services does cost money but having a dependant and far reaching service can save in other areas. Rail for example besides the need for less road building the environmental savings generally also.

[flag of convenience]

Just use subsidies to purchase shares.

 

Are you sure the utility companies were losing money? I don't know either way, but I have been told that at least some aspects were efficient and profitable. Do you have the figures?

 

There was certainly a lot of talk about that back in the day. Of course it could in part have been more a conservative desire to rid state of such things in favour of the ideology of private ownership, by making it appear far worse than really was and only building on the negatives.

Certainly made a lot of CEO's and allied hangers on a very lot of money while charging the punters more.

[VERYSTORMY]

Just use subsidies to purchase shares.

 

Are you sure the utility companies were losing money? I don't know either way, but I have been told that at least some aspects were efficient and profitable. Do you have the figures?

 

The 1982 estimate was gas, electric and BT were costing the tax payers 2 million a week. A lot of money then.

 

As someone that has worked in BT and BG I can say that both were massively inefficient and poorly ran. I worked in one of BG's biggest call centres and probably one of the best jobs for being cushy I have ever had. Everyone had to clock on and off by putting their personal key into their personal little clock on the wall when they start work and remove at end of the shift. This would just count the hours worked. So everyone just left them run overnight and could clock up not just there full weeks work in two days, but also some nice overtime pay. Then take the rest of the week off.

[MARYROSE02]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11680098/Why-are-so-many-Tories-joining-Labour-after-Jeremy-Corbyns-leadership-announcement.html

 

Nice one!