Current Affairs The Labour Party

[catcherintherye]

Well when there's talk of policies about a 32-hour working week I think it's fair people start to question where the money's gonna come from.

Especially since I'm pretty sure a policy from a few weeks back which got leaked (IIRC) was a high tax rate of 52%.

Fifty-two per cent.

I'm sorry, I don't care how much you earn. No government should have the right to take more than half of it. It's not right.

the tax rate was higher under Thatcher. I don't want the government to take any of my money in an ideal world, but I also want good schools, hospitals, children not starving in poverty, good trains/infastructure, the elderly being treated with dignity etc. You can't have both. I know what my priority would be.

 

[catcherintherye]

Again, it has absolutely nothing to do with the party membership - they're talking about the ideology Labour have undertaken and the public perception of it.

And they are 100% correct and, unfortunately, I think it'll be proven so at a General Election, when the Momentum bubble is ruthlessly exposed.

Well who is he talking about then? The leadership? The positions taken by the members at conference?

We will see, I think the motions are very popular. If they are so certain they are unpopular why not put them to the test, via a bi-election? Have a bit of integrity.

 

[Tubey]

Well who is he talking about then? The leadership? The positions taken by the members at conference?

We will see, I think the motions are very popular. If they are so certain they are unpopular why not put them to the test, via a bi-election? Have a bit of integrity.

I've said what they are talking about around five times now! It's not about people; it's about ideology and electoral perception.

You support it so you can't see it, I get that, to an extent you're very much in the bubble - so I understand why what they have said here makes no sense to you. But what he's said corresponds exactly to what I and many people I've spoken to feel about Corbyn's Labour. Indeed, I'm a Kirkby lad - a Labour stronghold - and I've yet to talk to one person who supports Corbyn and Momentum. You get the obvious people who will vote Labour regardless - it is Kirkby after all - but they'll be holding their nose to do so.

Outside Kirkby, when I speak to people it's even worse. They'll vote for anyone but Corbyn at an election, absolutely anyone.

But hey, who knows - maybe I'm the one in a bubble. We'll see.

 

[catcherintherye]

I've said what they are talking about around five times now! It's not about people; it's about ideology and electoral perception.

You support it so you can't see it, I get that, to an extent you're very much in the bubble - so I understand why what they have said here makes no sense to you. But what he's said corresponds exactly to what I and many people I've spoken to feel about Corbyn's Labour. Indeed, I'm a Kirkby lad - a Labour stronghold - and I've yet to talk to one person who supports Corbyn and Momentum. You get the obvious people who will vote Labour regardless - it is Kirkby after all - but they'll be holding their nose to do so.

Outside Kirkby, when I speak to people it's even worse. They'll vote for anyone but Corbyn at an election, absolutely anyone.

But hey, who knows - maybe I'm the one in a bubble. We'll see.

I feel like I'm having a pop at you which is not my intention, the frustration I have is really with the MP.

I have lots of issues with Corbyn, and even more with Momentum. I try to be as balanced as I can with things though. I just don't see what the MP is reporting and frankly expect a bit of a higher level of discipline from them than to go running to the Sun (I believe) with complaints.

It might be different at the next election, but I remember this same outlook in 2016. I knocked plenty of doors for Labour and in honesty it wasn't what I found. I met 2 people who didn't like Corbyn. I appreciate when you knock doors you are not often contacting people who are from other parties, but that was my perception. It might eb different for you though or in other parts of the country.

 

[dannyboy]

I've said what they are talking about around five times now! It's not about people; it's about ideology and electoral perception.

You support it so you can't see it, I get that, to an extent you're very much in the bubble - so I understand why what they have said here makes no sense to you. But what he's said corresponds exactly to what I and many people I've spoken to feel about Corbyn's Labour. Indeed, I'm a Kirkby lad - a Labour stronghold - and I've yet to talk to one person who supports Corbyn and Momentum. You get the obvious people who will vote Labour regardless - it is Kirkby after all - but they'll be holding their nose to do so.

Outside Kirkby, when I speak to people it's even worse. They'll vote for anyone but Corbyn at an election, absolutely anyone.

But hey, who knows - maybe I'm the one in a bubble. We'll see.

Corbyn's highest approval rating came during the last election campaign when people took more interest in politics and actually got to see a lot more of him other than the constant negativity he receives in the press.

That might not happen this time of course. Just a possibility that people think he's not as bad as the Daily Mail headlines make him out to be.

 

[Tubey]

I feel like I'm having a pop at you which is not my intention, the frustration I have is really with the MP.

I have lots of issues with Corbyn, and even more with Momentum. I try to be as balanced as I can with things though. I just don't see what the MP is reporting and frankly expect a bit of a higher level of discipline from them than to go running to the Sun (I believe) with complaints.

It might be different at the next election, but I remember this same outlook in 2016. I knocked plenty of doors for Labour and in honesty it wasn't what I found. I met 2 people who didn't like Corbyn. I appreciate when you knock doors you are not often contacting people who are from other parties, but that was my perception. It might eb different for you though or in other parts of the country.

If you knock on doors, people will be polite. They'll say what they feel you want them to say. It's a basic psychological human response to be eager to please. It's why we had the 'Shy Tory' phenomenon, for example.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I'm pretty much 99.9% sure that Labour have no chance of a majority at the next election, precisely because of Corbyn/Momentum. Indeed, the only reason they won't get pretty much wipes out is because the Tories are a disaster themselves.

 

[abelard]

It's normally the same people who told us, if only he'd commit to a 2nd referendum he'd be miles ahead in the polls. These people haven't got a clue about politics, how to win an election in 2019 or how the public feel. They take no responsibility for the continual nonsense policy directions they are taking. They have the best job in the world really, make suggestions, when they go well claim all the credit (which is rare) and when they go badly blame someone else. It's not serious politics.

Yes. For many people, Remain has become a question of identity and emotion rather than policy - which is exactly the same accusation they raise against Brexiters.

Labour is now fully committed to second referendum, which is exactly what the #peoplesvote has spent three years demanding. Only now it isn't good enough or pure enough, because just like the Leavers said of May, 'Corbyn's heart isn't in it, he's a closet Leaver!'. Or because the Lib Dems are now offering an even more extreme and less democratic form of Remain, which will only accelerate the breakdown of trust in politics. But who cares about the long-term fate of political legitimacy in this country, so long as it's my feelings which get indulged.

Again, exactly the same accusations leveled against Leave voters.

Many of them now apparently prefer a virtue-signalling vote for the Lib Dems, which in many places amounts to a vote for Boris Johnson and No Deal Brexit. But just like the ERG voting against May, it won't even really matter to many them, as they'll have proved that they themselves are pure of heart, entitled to eternal wallowing in nostalgia for the nineties and in the honour of a glorious defeat.

Again, exactly the sort of thing they say about Leavers (and, to be fair, not without reason in many cases).

I think this article sums it up quite well: https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-remainers-can-no-longer-take-yes-for-an-answer-11790224

It is instructive how many of the allegations against Labour are actually the exact opposite of what the Party is doing.

Appealing to the narrow interests of a membership faction at the expense of the broader voting base? Instead, members have voted against Labour's ultra-Remain minority, in the hopes of appealing to the much broader group of Labour Leavers outside London and the university towns.

Seeking ideological purity at the expense of a sensible centre-ground compromise? Instead, Labour is now the only party that isn't explicitly hostile to half the population.

So many of the accusations hurled against Labour here are contradictory, which suggests that what people really want is an idle moan rather than having to grapple with the challenge of figuring how to take power in spite of Brexit. Or with the lessons which Labour has had to absorb in defeat. It's as though they only started paying attention politics the day after Milliband lost Scotland forever, and gave that same horrendous and competent Tory government its majority.

 

[catcherintherye]

If you knock on doors, people will be polite. They'll say what they feel you want them to say. It's a basic psychological human response to be eager to please. It's why we had the 'Shy Tory' phenomenon, for example.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I'm pretty much 99.9% sure that Labour have no chance of a majority at the next election, precisely because of Corbyn/Momentum. Indeed, the only reason they won't get pretty much wipes out is because the Tories are a disaster themselves.

I think we have a shy Corbyn factor now. Thats my gut feeling. It's why the polling has been continually out. He is slated and at times people are ashamed to say they like him. Thats my theory anyway. In more complex terms, he does very well amongst groups/people that are not taken very seriously via polling companies.

 

[Black Belt Jones]

Corbyn's highest approval rating came during the last election campaign when people took more interest in politics and actually got to see a lot more of him other than the constant negativity he receives in the press.

That might not happen this time of course. Just a possibility that people think he's not as bad as the Daily Mail headlines make him out to be.

Reckon they'll have learnt their lesson this time round - they thought it was cow's arse with a banjo stuff and they could write whatever absurd, anti-Corbyn nonsense they wanted, but miscalculated badly.
Saying that, they have even more ammunition this time round so maybe they'll double down, rather than go for the slow poison approach.

 

[zzr45]

Reckon they'll have learnt their lesson this time round - they thought it was cow's arse with a banjo stuff and they could write whatever absurd, anti-Corbyn nonsense they wanted, but miscalculated badly.
Saying that, they have even more ammunition this time round so maybe they'll double down, rather than go for the slow poison approach.

In reality, the decision last night was exactly the wrong one - there's so many people now saying they want Brexit over either way. Corbyn's wait and see, we'll try again strategy just doesn't marry up with what people want. Elements such as the pound losing value etc. will be dumped on Corbyn as a reason not to vote for him.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Considering the last three Tory leaders have been unqualified failures it's probably time Labour had a bash at it. Whether the voting populace will see it that way is another question

 

[dwightschrute]

Corbyn's big conference speech tonight.. speech writers got a massive rewrite on their hands with todays events

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Corbyn's big conference speech tonight.. speech writers got a massive rewrite on their hands with todays events

Now all I can think off is the episode of The Thick of It when they're at the party conference lol

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Ah yes, the Swabian housewife fallacy: https://drodrik.scholar.harvard.edu...es/the_political_economy_of_ideas.pdf#page=31
(aka the idea that governments should behave like ordinary households and at all times balance their books).

This reasoning is often invoked by demagogues who wish to cut public spending in order to enrich their powerful friends, as in Britain. But it's nonsense, and premised on a misunderstanding of basic macroeconomics.

It does resonate, however, because it is a simple story that makes emotional sense to people forced to endure austerity. People who fancy themselves hard-headed, and moderate, and practical are also particularly susceptible, as this thread demonstrates - but a self-styled wise man such as yourself should probably be a bit more skeptical ; )

The reason why it is this incorrect is because of the principle of sectoral balances: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secto...in_the_view_of_the_sectoral_balances_approach wherein public surpluses effectively by definition result in private deficits. Or in simpler terms, when government runs a surplus, households and businesses lose out. And we can see this borne out time and again: in the Eurozone, where budget deficits are legally prohibited beyond a trivial amount, and where Germany, the Netherlands and some Nordic countries are all racking up huge surpluses, economic growth has been neglible since the crash. Germany, despite likely the largest per capita public surplus in the world, is probably already in recession, yet again. This also explains why UK austerity always failed to meet its own deficit targets, because the economy contracted from the cuts faster than the Tories and Lib Dems could cut further.

Meanwhile, in China, Australia, Japan, and to a lesser extent the US, countries which stimulated growth through deficit spending, the economy recovered far more quickly than in the UK, which famously had the worst response to a recession since Napoleon, precisely because of Tory/Lib Dem austerity.

It might sound counter-intuitive, but it's one of the most basic principles of macroeconomics: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2014/09/basics.htm and the divergent responses to the crisis once again bear it out.

Now it is true that deficits can become a problem, but usually only in developing countries which tend to borrow money in foreign currencies. It is just about unheard of, however, for countries like Britain or America, which control their own currency and which are regarded as safe by the financial community, to get into this sort of trouble. You might have missed it, but the Bloomberg post I shared describes how most Western governments can now effectively borrow at a profit!, because interest rates are lower than inflation and in some cases actually negative. As it states, there has essentially never been a better time for government to borrow, in order to pursue necessary reforms addressing poor infrastructure and public services, climate change, and inequality. Or, in other words, we can easily fund substantial and sorely-needed investment, and still be well within our means.

Labour is the only party in the UK that understands this, and its deficit spending on infrastructure is exactly what is needed, not least because the UK economy is stalled from Brexit, and likely to enter recession (and in case there has been any confusion, my support for Labour is based on this, and not any cultish love of Corbyn). That said, it is encouraging to see the Tories finally lurching toward basic economic competence, at least if the Javid budget is anything to go be.

Labour has admittedly been a bit creative in their infrastructure accounting, on the grounds that it is too important to be interrupted whenever right-wing demagogues or free market ideologues get back into power - but I'm sure a man such as yourself, who fanices himself wise and everyone around him stupid, should appreciate the logic ; )

If you don't want to take my word for it, you might give this a listen - I would be curious to know what you think. He explains all of this much more clearly than I can: https://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/threads/the-labour-party.104565/page-418#post-7302654

Thanks for the interesting and thorough reply (and I'll always have time for anyone that references Dani Rodrik). I don't doubt any of what you say, not least because Rodrik et al are far more qualified than me to hold court on macroeconomics. I do undoubtedly instinctively find it peculiar that governments can have deficit year after year and be fine with that, and I would guess that there is a limit beyond which it does become a problem, as perhaps Japan, Italy and Greece have shown. We were at a time also when the global financial system had been brought to its knees by excessive and reckless lending/borrowing, so I'm sure there was a PR element to being seen not to continue that and to live within one's means.

If anything though, the Greek situation has shown what can be achieved if structural problems are addressed, even if short-term pain was inevitably caused. That has to be far better than pretending they don't exist and printing your way out of any problems.

We've been talking a bit above this about education, and there is a huge logic in improving the flexibility of the economy, whether through labour mobility (both in terms of people being able to move physically about but also retraining should economics/technology disrupt their livelihood), local government flexibility and a reformed property market via something like the land value tax.

Had Labour spent their conference talking about these things, which are in many ways causes of the leave vote in many instances, then I'd have had very little to grumble about, but instead the 4 day week and banning public schools have been what's emerged. That may well be simply the policies that have grabbed headlines, and other things have been discussed, I accept that, but I can only go by what I see (@tsubaki has been unusually quiet so perhaps he's at the conference?).

Anyway, thanks for the considered post.

 

[BlueToff]

Is it right we have children going to food banks? Is it right the NHS struggles to cope on a daily basis? They're the things I'd get angry about. Not worrying about someone who earns a large amount of money paying 52% tax on it. That person is still going to live a better life than the majority of the population.

Of course not. But charging someone more than half of what they earn isn't the answer.

Ensure massive companies pay their fair share should be the first port of call, surely?