Current Affairs The Labour Party

[zzr45]

lol

Meltdowns from people who are raging about a policy that doesn´t affect them and won´t decide the next election. It´ll be a footnote in the manifesto.

Not really. It’s sets a bit of a worrying precedent that Labour think they can take private property and redistribute it how they see fit.

 

[tsubaki]

When was the scholarship established though? All I'm saying is most of the historic ones have long since beem changed

It doesn't matter when it was established - it still, to this day, carries a reduction in fees. It is also a part of the justification that school has for being a charity.

 

[dannyboy]

Why do people think higher rate taxes are unfair when they won't be affected?

Aspiration and perceived fairness

Polling shows people support a higher rate of tax. It´s a big vote winner. Like a lot of Labour´s policies.

 

[Charlie Sweet]

It doesn't matter when it was established - it still, to this day, carries a reduction in fees. It is also a part of the justification that school has for being a charity.

Ffs! I'm really not wanting to have to spend a moment looking into that horrible family's details but you're pushing me there.

He will have got it for some kind of achievement. The school will do other stuff to help poor kids.

 

[tsubaki]

Why do people think higher rate taxes are unfair when they won't be affected?

Aspiration and perceived fairness

That is a good point, because it is exactly the same phenomenon I am trying to point out to you.

People who would be affected by a policy use their increased visibility in politics and the media to make other people think they will be affected by it too, even when they either wouldn't be affected or would actually benefit from it. When challenged, they do use words like aspiration and fairness, even though there is nothing fair about the rate at which they pay tax, or the fact that they enjoy an ability to avoid tax that very few of us have, or even that the money would be spent on maintaining the things they use.

 

[tsubaki]

Ffs! I'm really not wanting to have to spend a moment looking into that horrible family's details but you're pushing me there.

He will have got it for some kind of achievement. The school will do other stuff to help poor kids.

Not having a go here, but the disconnect there is remarkable. I have no idea how Dacre Jnr got that scholarship, though I'd question why he needed one in the first place given how wealthy his dad is, how clever he is and whether that scholarship might have been better given to some rather poorer boy.

 

[Charlie Sweet]

Not having a go here, but the disconnect there is remarkable. I have no idea how Dacre Jnr got that scholarship, though I'd question why he needed one in the first place given how wealthy his dad is, how clever he is and whether that scholarship might have been better given to some rather poorer boy.

Mate all public schools give out scholarships. It might be for maths, art, cricket I dont know but it's been happening for centuries. There will be other ones for poor kids.

 

[tsubaki]

Mate all public schools give out scholarships. It might be for maths, art, cricket I dont know but it's been happening for centuries. There will be other ones for poor kids.

I know they give scholarships; the thing I find fascinating is how much faith is put into the belief that the system must be fair somewhere along the line.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Why do people think higher rate taxes are unfair when they won't be affected?

Aspiration and perceived fairness

Sounds like the start of the revolution, seeing it is almost October it is quite poetic, 102 years after the one in Russia. Purge the upper classes, give back to the people....for sure nothing can go wrong with that plan.

 

[Seanjd]

Are private schools unfair? Yes, but they’re only a symptom of an unjust society. Banning them won’t change anything apart from the house prices in the areas which have ‘the best’ state schools. The rich will occupy the most powerful positions in the country regardless of whether they go to private school. We need to look at a broader range of inequality before focusing on that issue in particular.

 

[The binman chronicles]

The problem with this analysis is that Blair, Brown and Mandelson did get and stay in power and we all saw what happened - huge bonuses, huge profits, huge amounts of tax avoidance and eventually a huge collapse.

I absolutely agree that we should be trying to base any solution on the needs and circumstances of today, though at some point people, especially those from what they think is the centre, should really be asking themselves whether the people making the vast amounts of money - who are actively avoiding tax and who are funding the vast majority of the politicians in the UK - are really the people that they want to trust that they'll tone it down a bit in return for them continuing to be "successful". Why would anyone expect people who are raking it in, who are clearly in charge and who are enjoying life immensely to change their ways?

This in itself indicates a somewhat naive, almost reflex belief that a very large number of people have that the way things are now is how they should be, how it always has been and anyone who wants to change it (even clearly in their interest) is somehow dangerous.

I mean take this motion for example, which will probably end up as one of a long list of popcorn motions passed by a Labour Conference down the years. It will probably affect no poster here in the slightest (even if it comes into being), and yet the venom that has poured forth at the suggestion that private schools might lose their status has filled three or four pages of posts, often with other posts by the same people who are outraged admitting that there is a problem with the gap between rich and poor in this country.

No government will be perfect and those at the heart of new labour will be the first to tell you they never got to carry out the more socialist policies in their plans as they ran out of time and luck (events!).

But still they gave a pathway to power and Labour are too scared of that power to use it. They are not winning elections from where they stand at the moment, just by sheer luck that the Tories happen to be self imploding has opened up a chance of a coalition, but that will come with a heavy price (Scottish independence?).

We we only find out in 5/10 years if you were right or wrong, but in my mind Labour should try to be a better version of new Labour. Redistribution of wealth is a fallacy, if they did that businesses would leave and we would all be plunged into the abyss. However capitalism can't be let to roam free and it too needs everyone to be wealthy to the point the markets and products keep rolling out. Therefore obscene profits should be ruled out and used to help everyone in society to better themselves.

 

[Seanjd]

Mate all public schools give out scholarships. It might be for maths, art, cricket I dont know but it's been happening for centuries. There will be other ones for poor kids.

Means they can claim charity status and don’t have to pay tax. They wouldn’t dream of offering places to the riff raff if they didn’t have to.

 

[Seanjd]

No government will be perfect and those at the heart of new labour will be the first to tell you they never got to carry out the more socialist policies in their plans as they ran out of time and luck (events!).

But still they gave a pathway to power and Labour are too scared of that power to use it. They are not winning elections from where they stand at the moment, just by sheer luck that the Tories happen to be self imploding has opened up a chance of a coalition, but that will come with a heavy price (Scottish independence?).

We we only find out in 5/10 years if you were right or wrong, but in my mind Labour should try to be a better version of new Labour. Redistribution of wealth is a fallacy, if they did that businesses would leave and we would all be plunged into the abyss. However capitalism can't be let to roam free and it too needs everyone to be wealthy to the point the markets and products keep rolling out. Therefore obscene profits should be ruled out and used to help everyone in society to better themselves.

So, redistribution of wealth, then?

 

[Tubey]

Are private schools unfair? Yes, but they’re only a symptom of an unjust society. Banning them won’t change anything apart from the house prices in the areas which have ‘the best’ state schools. The rich will occupy the most powerful positions in the country regardless of whether they go to private school. We need to look at a broader range of inequality before focusing on that issue in particular.

Absolutely spot on.

So the better idea would be to focus on penalising the rich for taking such advantages, and passing on the profits of that penalty to the less well off to improve the base line.

So it's a redistribution of wealth, yes, but it's not done in terms of black and white - it's shades of grey. A sliding scale - rational and achievable instead of pie in the sky nonsense, which is what banning private schools is.

 

[The binman chronicles]

So, redistribution of wealth, then?

In grand terms where Corbyn is coming from probably not. But is it something on a much smaller scale that could be realistically achieved then yes. The rich will still get richer but knowing the more wealthy the staff are the bigger market they can tap into. So for instance say any company that earns more than 5% YoY profits, 1% gets given as a bonus to non-executive staff, 1% to the government. Any further profits made go to the company so capitalism is still alive and well but the government are at least capping some of it and then able to use that pool for the greater good. It's not a revolution but a way of trying to keep business happy but not leaving them totally unchecked to gain unlimited funds that sit in the 1%'s swiss bank account. Obviously the above has to go hand in hand with companies paying their fair share of tax too.