Current Affairs The Labour Party

[zzr45]

Always a sign that a policy is probably sound.

In truth though, it is a bit of an odd hill to die on, not because of the predictable quivering about Bolshevism or whatever from corporate lobbyists like the CBI, mind, but because the more likely outcome is that it won't have much effect at all. There are dozens of better ways for Labour to pursue that reforms that Britain needs. Worker representation on boards won't hurt, but probably won't change much either. Re-empowering unions would be a much more effective means to the same end.

Ah, so when the CBI's predictions on No Deal Brexit's have been used, we should of ignored those completely?

The outcome would be a shortfall in pensions. Last time that happened pensioners and those close to pensionable age went out and bought property left, right and centre to use as a way of shoring up their income. That played a part in today's housing crisis. It's why there's plenty of people 'quivering' about the economic policies being put forward - there's far too many what if's and radical changes to current policy that doesn't stack up.

The last thing this country needs is the Unions being re-empowered. If you've ever actually spoken to someone that was part of them during the 'glory days' they were, by and large, an absolute hindrance to most workers - from people within the same plants refusing to work together as they were part of different unions to absolutely ridiculously low productivity due to Union activity. They are a relic.

 

[Thomasc]

Agree really. It's why I said the other day that Labour would be much better suited in at least making an attempt to tone down the ideological insanity for this one. The base are voting for them regardless; it's the middle ground they need to convince.

But they won't. A decade of austerity and incompetence from the Tories and Labour are still massive underdogs in an election, solely because of Corbynism.

pretty convinced Andy Burnham would have won the votes of all the middle ground even by just saying the right things to get them onside.

 

[abelard]

Ah, so when the CBI's predictions on No Deal Brexit's have been used, we should of ignored those completely?

The outcome would be a shortfall in pensions. Last time that happened pensioners and those close to pensionable age went out and bought property left, right and centre to use as a way of shoring up their income. That played a part in today's housing crisis. It's why there's plenty of people 'quivering' about the economic policies being put forward - there's far too many what if's and radical changes to current policy that doesn't stack up.

The last thing this country needs is the Unions being re-empowered. If you've ever actually spoken to someone that was part of them during the 'glory days' they were, by and large, an absolute hindrance to most workers - from people within the same plants refusing to work together as they were part of different unions to absolutely ridiculously low productivity due to Union activity. They are a relic.

Life is not series of crude binaries.

The fact the CBI may be broadly correct on some issues does not mean that they are always correct on all issues - or vice versa.

Likewise, the fact that some of the more militant trade unions got a bit carried away forty years ago does not negate the many economic benefits that they bring when properly balanced, nor does it disqualify the entire concept of trade unionism forever hence.

This is why we should try to assess polices on their actual merits, and not by resorting to "oh yeah, well somebody else said such-and-such about it, so there!"

On that note, why do you think the outcome would be a shortfall in pensions?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I've seen it used to highlight the difference between Farage and the EU Commissioners.

Don't think Nigel has ever done a 'manly job' has he?

Yeah but he drinks pints doesn't he.

 

[Tubey]

pretty convinced Andy Burnham would have won the votes of all the middle ground even by just saying the right things to get them onside.

They just need to look sensible and let the Tories hang themselves with their extremism.

The way to combat extremism isn't to go as extreme in the opposite direction.

Let Rees-Mogg blame Grenfell victims for being too stupid, let Bridgen say it's fine because we need "clever" people running the country, let Johnson do his usual. And at the same time, keep Abbott off the television and don't do anything stupid.

As people like tsubaki have rightly said, Labour's policies are broadly popular - as long as they don't promise all of them at the same time, they have a chance to be the largest party in a hung parliament. They don't need to do ALL the socialism ever.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Yeah but he drinks pints doesn't he.

Pints of grease?

 

[The binman chronicles]

No offence, but this is pretty incoherent. 'Commandeering business' is a nonsense corporate talking point, as I explain in the post you quote. And asset stripping and hiding profits overseas has been the basis of British industrial policy since at least the 80s. You can't threaten something that is already standard practice.

Also, if Labour doesn't win, this is will have absolutely nothing to do with it.

They will lose because people in places like Northern Wales are reacting against everything you describe, but have become convinced that Taking Back Control Cummings-style is the only way to do it. Cosying up to the FTSE100 a la Yvette Cooper or Owen Smith would make Labour significantly less competitive in every swing constituency then they already are. The election is not going to be decided in Cambridge, or Surrey.

Ok I will explain it in sentence for you. Companies will try to negate this to the point it is not worth the paper it is written on, therefore it will just wind people up.

Plus hardly equality to the person on the street if one company have circumvented this, but his neighbour who does roughly the same sort of job for another company has got the benefit.

Please explain why 'Commandeering' is nonsense and show your workings out? Have the businesses all volunteered to do this then...?

If you look at the political map of the country the last time Labour won a GE you'll find that they won 41 seats in Scotland. In 2017 they won 7. That is 34 more seats that they have to win that isn't traditional Labour heartland. So while it may not be Cambridge and Surrey that will decide the election, they are going to have to start appealing to some constituencies that are more often than not blue at somepoint.

 

[Tubey]

Interesting London poll...

Mr Corbyn has the lowest satisfaction scores of the three main party leaders. Some 65 per cent say he is doing badly — including 56 per cent of people who say they intend to vote Labour — and just 20 per cent say he is doing well.

Labour’s London lead is halved as it’s all to play for in capital

Jeremy Corbyn’s lead in the vital London battleground has been halved since the general election in 2017, putting half a dozen key Labour seats at risk on December 12, an exclusive poll reveals today.

www.standard.co.uk

That is staggeringly terrible.

 

[degsy]

Always a sign that a policy is probably sound.

In truth though, it is a bit of an odd hill to die on, not because of the predictable quivering about Bolshevism or whatever from corporate lobbyists like the CBI, mind, but because the more likely outcome is that it won't have much effect at all. There are dozens of better ways for Labour to pursue that reforms that Britain needs. Worker representation on boards won't hurt, but probably won't change much either. Re-empowering Unions would be a much more effective means to the same end.

Yep that worked well in the 60s and 70s.
There is a very fine +/- limit line that both sides always seem to blunder way over in these matters. As a former AEUW member I fear any Goldilocks option is beyond both.

 

[tsubaki]

And the mental gymnastics Gold medal goes to...

He comes from a position of privilege. You cannot escape from that. I find it jarring that he’s painted as a man of the people when he’s anything but. Using your logic we could wave our hands at CEOs and forgive them for their largesse because it’s just par for the course.

Not everyone is so enamoured with Corbyn and his messages as you. Grow up.

Lol

You said he was part of the elite; on it being pointed out to you that your statement was nonsense you then accuse me of mental gymnastics whilst also changing your argument to something completely different to what you initially said.

Corbyn was born into privilege; he did go to a private prep school and a private grammar school, as a day student. That does not make him part of “the elite”.

 

[abelard]

Ok I will explain it in sentence for you. Companies will try to negate this to the point it is not worth the paper it is written on, therefore it will just wind people up.

Plus hardly equality to the person on the street if one company have circumvented this, but his neighbour who does roughly the same sort of job for another company has got the benefit.

Please explain why 'Commandeering' is nonsense and show your workings out? Have the businesses all volunteered to do this then...?

If you look at the political map of the country the last time Labour won a GE you'll find that they won 41 seats in Scotland. In 2017 they won 7. That is 34 more seats that they have to win that isn't traditional Labour heartland. So while it may not be Cambridge and Surrey that will decide the election, they are going to have to start appealing to some constituencies that are more often than not blue at somepoint.

I don't understand your second sentence.

'Commandeering' is absurd and inflammatory language. Corporations routinely employ the same process Labour proposes when awarding shares to executives, so concern about diluting share values is prima facie nonsense. Many countries which are much more successful that Britain employ the same policy. It falls entirely within the spectrum of tried-and-tested centre left and centre right European politics.

Speaking more broadly, corporations also do not volunteer to pay taxes or submit to environmental or trade or labour regulations, but that doesn't mean any of that amounts to 'commandeering' either. What Labour is proposing is a matter of regulation. As I have stated earlier, I'm not sure it will be an especially successful form of regulation. But the very least we can all do is evaluate the actual policy at hand, rather than parroting hyperbole that we've absorbed from the tabloids and from twitter.

As for Scotland, it is true that the damage that Labour centrists have wrought there via Iraq, mindless privatisation of the public services, and the financial crash is considerable. But Labour managed a qualified recovery under Corbyn precisely by challenging the 'centre', whereas the Replacement-Miliband who many think is the magical answer all the Party's problems won exactly one seat.

Yes, it is disappointing that Labour did not perform even better. But to claim that replacing Corbyn with a Blair clone is the answer, when it was Blair who more than anyone else is responsible for 'losing' Scotland, is to take leave of political history and reality altogether.

 

[tsubaki]

Interesting London poll...

Labour’s London lead is halved as it’s all to play for in capital

Jeremy Corbyn’s lead in the vital London battleground has been halved since the general election in 2017, putting half a dozen key Labour seats at risk on December 12, an exclusive poll reveals today.

www.standard.co.uk

That is staggeringly terrible.

It is, though what do people expect when the likes of you have spent four years slating him on a daily basis.

Also, it is a kind of indication how messed up the media is right now that a poll carried out by a firm part owned by senior Tories, the results of which appear in a paper edited by a senior Tory and owned by someone who has had Johnson to his private castle at least twice is just accepted.

 

[zzr45]

Lol

You said he was part of the elite; on it being pointed out to you that your statement was nonsense you then accuse me of mental gymnastics whilst also changing your argument to something completely different to what you initially said.

Corbyn was born into privilege; he did go to a private prep school and a private grammar school, as a day student. That does not make him part of “the elite”.

What’s the difference, still isn’t exactly a man of the people. You’re wrong and as ever try to claim someone’s said completely different whenever it happens..

 

[tsubaki]

What’s the difference ? You’re wrong and as ever try to claim someone’s said completely different whenever it happens.

As I say, grow up.

What is the difference between growing up in privilege and being part of the elite? Probably several million pounds, for a start.

 

[zzr45]

What is the difference between growing up in privilege and being part of the elite? Probably several million pounds, for a start.

You mean like the several million pounds he has?

Thanks for the confirmation there pal.