Jeremy Corbyn Vol. 2
Discussion
As I woke 20 mins before normal I looked into the claims that one party has performed better or worse than another.
I think it is almost impossible to say, there is never an even playing field or start/end position.
If you start off in debt, you need to borrow heavily, cut spending and investment, which creates issues.
If you start of with a surplus, life should be a little easier, but turning a surplus into a deficit is always going to be questioned.
Governments tend to change when a crisis arises, we assume that the incoming will be able to sort out the crisis better than the incumbent.
Nobody was prepared to give Labour a chance to sort out the current mess, would they have done a better / worse job ? We will never know.
I think it is almost impossible to say, there is never an even playing field or start/end position.
If you start off in debt, you need to borrow heavily, cut spending and investment, which creates issues.
If you start of with a surplus, life should be a little easier, but turning a surplus into a deficit is always going to be questioned.
Governments tend to change when a crisis arises, we assume that the incoming will be able to sort out the crisis better than the incumbent.
Nobody was prepared to give Labour a chance to sort out the current mess, would they have done a better / worse job ? We will never know.
del mar said:
Nobody was prepared to give Labour a chance to sort out the current mess, would they have done a better / worse job ? We will never know.
The mess was caused by excessive borrowing both public and private. Their stated solution was to borrow more to spend their way out. Even the public aren't so stupid that they don't realise that if you're stuck in a hole it's best to stop digging. Timmy40 said:
del mar said:
Nobody was prepared to give Labour a chance to sort out the current mess, would they have done a better / worse job ? We will never know.
The mess was caused by excessive borrowing both public and private. Their stated solution was to borrow more to spend their way out. Even the public aren't so stupid that they don't realise that if you're stuck in a hole it's best to stop digging. Not sure there was a "right" answer. Lots of downsides to all approaches. Given Labour's mismanagement of the economy over history and their inability to cut spending at any time (Keynes was clear that spending to maintain economic activity in bad times had to be reversed in good times), I think I'd trust them least with the levers of power. But I'm not sure the Tories or Coalition are exactly going to win Nobel prizes for Economics any time soon.
del mar said:
....
I think it is almost impossible to say, there is never an even playing field or start/end position...
On the whole this is true but... 1997 was as gentle a pass, economically, as any new government will ever have with the budget balanced, a decade of solid manufacturing and industrial production growth, a trade surplus, low inflation, low unemployment, vast private sector pension assets, majority funded public sector pension liabilities, affordable house prices...I think it is almost impossible to say, there is never an even playing field or start/end position...
Johnnytheboy said:
Surely no one who isn't at least a bit bat s
t mental thinks Corbyn and McDonnell's policies would not end up in economic catastrophe?
You would hope so.t mental thinks Corbyn and McDonnell's policies would not end up in economic catastrophe? It's odd that some people just don't get it. Clear skies in daytime are blue. Rosso Corsa Ferraris are red. Labour fksup the economy.
Corbyn&Co are a notch or three worse than previous experience of Labour "talent" so heaven only knows how much worse it would be compared to the Labour fkups between ca 1965-2010.
Maybe there are more and more dreamers with less and less experience of the above.
I do wonder a bit whether Corbyn actually wants to be PM. It's far more fun being in opposition and being able to say you'd do all sorts of popular things without having to deliver, and you can more or less make it up as you go along. With Brexit rumbling on would he really want to be in TM's seat? I wouldn't.
Edited by Timmy40 on Tuesday 8th May 13:47
Timmy40 said:
I do wonder a bit whether Corbyn actually wants to be PM.
According to the odious Lansman he does, but only 'for a bit'..https://news.sky.com/story/momentum-boss-jon-lansm...
telford_mike said:
Timmy40 said:
I do wonder a bit whether Corbyn actually wants to be PM.
According to the odious Lansman he does, but only 'for a bit'..https://news.sky.com/story/momentum-boss-jon-lansm...
Timmy40 said:
Also for a job in central London £60k ( or whatever it is now ) is peanuts wage wise, there are contracting nurses getting more than that.
LIAR!!!!! Nurses are paid like paupers and the NHS is being privatised tomorrow! Only saint jezza and his economically astute shadow chancellor can save us with economics from the school of abbott and raynerjmorgan said:
telford_mike said:
Timmy40 said:
I do wonder a bit whether Corbyn actually wants to be PM.
According to the odious Lansman he does, but only 'for a bit'..https://news.sky.com/story/momentum-boss-jon-lansm...
amgmcqueen said:
The government needs a strong opposition to hold them to account.
How do we get rid of this shower of ste and offer an alternative party to vote for?
It's interesting isn't it, a lot of people seem to want two parties that have basically the same socially liberal, economically conservative values. You can then easily swap your vote based on competence or drifting too far from the centre. I don't know if any country has achieved this?How do we get rid of this shower of s
te and offer an alternative party to vote for? grantone said:
amgmcqueen said:
The government needs a strong opposition to hold them to account.
How do we get rid of this shower of ste and offer an alternative party to vote for?
It's interesting isn't it, a lot of people seem to want two parties that have basically the same socially liberal, economically conservative values. You can then easily swap your vote based on competence or drifting too far from the centre. I don't know if any country has achieved this?How do we get rid of this shower of s
te and offer an alternative party to vote for? 
Cameron or Farage seem to be the only options acceptable on here
Russian Troll Bot said:
Just like Lenin was only temporarily in charge of the USSR until it transited to true Communism?
The powers behind the throne, they are investing a lot to get labour there, Corbyn is there for now at the top..... he will probably be out at the next general election if they do not get in or come close. Who could be a successor?jmorgan said:
Russian Troll Bot said:
Just like Lenin was only temporarily in charge of the USSR until it transited to true Communism?
The powers behind the throne, they are investing a lot to get labour there, Corbyn is there for now at the top..... he will probably be out at the next general election if they do not get in or come close. Who could be a successor?jmorgan said:
Russian Troll Bot said:
Just like Lenin was only temporarily in charge of the USSR until it transited to true Communism?
The powers behind the throne, they are investing a lot to get labour there, Corbyn is there for now at the top..... he will probably be out at the next general election if they do not get in or come close. Who could be a successor?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff