Momentum finally takes control of Labour

[crankedup]

Dr Jekyll said:

crankedup said:

Yes more tax for Government to distribute into Society is definitely a good thing.

Not necessarily.

crankedup said:

But this does not excuse the excess bonus culture at the top.

Calling it 'excess' is begging the question. And if the shareholders are happy for their money to be spent in this way, why should anyone else argue?

When you say ‘not necessarilly’ do you mean that you have an improved system of distribution of tax revenues into Society?

The current activity and growth of top remnumeration has seen an increase of investor concern. Persimmon example being the most decent, it follows that continued acceleration of the growth in remnumeration will lead to continued growth of investor concern leading to the inevitable situation of those investors disagreeing with pay board recommendations. It is not simply a matter of cash at stake though, the real problem is the growing disquiet in the public areana imo.

[crankedup]

Yipper said:

crankedup said:

sidicks said:

crankedup said:

Based upon averages that may be the case, however what I am talking about is the ftse Board pay differentials. These have increased hugely above the average worker pay, this against a background of pay stagnation in the worker pay packet. The differential used to be something like x20 of the average worker pay, now it’s more like x250. Happy to be corrected on the numbers but in a nutshell that is the problem. Add to that the fact that these huge payments attract National media attention which stirs people like me up and you have a recipe for growing problems.
The wealth gap may have shrunk in recent times owing to the generosity of benefits and the shrinkage of middle market pay.

Hasn’t the world changed a lot with globalisation, making the job of a FTSE CEO more complicated than it used to be?

Why was 20x the right number?

Surely more tax for the government is a good thing, as it can be used to support the poorest in society?

Agreed the World has changed since globalisation, trick now is to make it work better for more of us.

Like I said, happy to be corrected on the numbers.

Yes more tax for Government to distribute into Society is definitely a good thing. But this does not excuse the excess bonus culture at the top.

Globalisation has been incredible for a billion people in emerging Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe and South America since the 1990s. We've lived through the greatest and fastest expansion of wealth in human history.

Globalisation has not been so good for roughly half a billion people in North America, Western Europe and developed Asia. A large chunk of their jobs and wealth have moved to (cheaper) Asia etc.

Fifty years ago, someone working in a clothing factory in the UK would only have been competing with companies from about 5 countries in the world, like Italy. Today, they are competing with about 50 countries, like China, Vietnam, etc.

Yes I would agree with the sentiment, haven’t checked your numbers but that is unimportant. As you correctly point out globalisation has not been so good for western europe. But I fail to recognise that globalisation has been good for the working population of our country, sure we have enjoyed. heap imports but we are now paying the price of cheap labour imports.

[The Surveyor]

crankedup said:

Yipper said:

crankedup said:

sidicks said:

crankedup said:

Based upon averages that may be the case, however what I am talking about is the ftse Board pay differentials. These have increased hugely above the average worker pay, this against a background of pay stagnation in the worker pay packet. The differential used to be something like x20 of the average worker pay, now it’s more like x250. Happy to be corrected on the numbers but in a nutshell that is the problem. Add to that the fact that these huge payments attract National media attention which stirs people like me up and you have a recipe for growing problems.
The wealth gap may have shrunk in recent times owing to the generosity of benefits and the shrinkage of middle market pay.

Hasn’t the world changed a lot with globalisation, making the job of a FTSE CEO more complicated than it used to be?

Why was 20x the right number?

Surely more tax for the government is a good thing, as it can be used to support the poorest in society?

Agreed the World has changed since globalisation, trick now is to make it work better for more of us.

Like I said, happy to be corrected on the numbers.

Yes more tax for Government to distribute into Society is definitely a good thing. But this does not excuse the excess bonus culture at the top.

Globalisation has been incredible for a billion people in emerging Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe and South America since the 1990s. We've lived through the greatest and fastest expansion of wealth in human history.

Globalisation has not been so good for roughly half a billion people in North America, Western Europe and developed Asia. A large chunk of their jobs and wealth have moved to (cheaper) Asia etc.

Fifty years ago, someone working in a clothing factory in the UK would only have been competing with companies from about 5 countries in the world, like Italy. Today, they are competing with about 50 countries, like China, Vietnam, etc.

Yes I would agree with the sentiment, haven’t checked your numbers but that is unimportant. As you correctly point out globalisation has not been so good for western europe. But I fail to recognise that globalisation has been good for the working population of our country, sure we have enjoyed. heap imports but we are now paying the price of cheap labour imports.

So the Torys can't be blamed for the global economic changes yet have done so well managing the counties economy that we still need to import cheap labour because of the continuous low unemployment levels, yet Momentum gain popularity by presenting a message of economic mismanagement. Goes to show politics is all about PR rather than policies IMHO.

[B'stard Child]

Gaz. said:

mx5nut said:

Project fear in full swing.

Would it be better if we lived in a one party state and didn't let people vote in case they voted the wrong way?

Do you ever have anything to add to a thread? I don't read much of NPE anymore but every time I see you post, it's normally the same bullst quip.

I think it requires a few more reports of his "lyrical prose" before the Moderators will silence him just on the volume basis

Bye bye Jawknee MKII

[Dr Jekyll]

crankedup said:

When you say ‘not necessarilly’ do you mean that you have an improved system of distribution of tax revenues into Society?

The current activity and growth of top remnumeration has seen an increase of investor concern. Persimmon example being the most decent, it follows that continued acceleration of the growth in remnumeration will lead to continued growth of investor concern leading to the inevitable situation of those investors disagreeing with pay board recommendations. It is not simply a matter of cash at stake though, the real problem is the growing disquiet in the public areana imo.

Tax is taken from 'society' in the first place, that's why it tends to inhibit economic activity.

If investors are unhappy with remuneration, they'll stop investing. No need for the government to interfere.

[JagLover]

NRS said:

I know, but here in Norway they certainly do so. Also remember that young people have been having the message of equality, environment etc all the time since they were young.

Sorry, income should have been in relation to wages stagnating (in the middle class western world) while the top ones rise. Combine that with wealth inequality (houses and assets massively increasing) it results in a lot of issues and people viewing it as a problem. I don't think it's much to do with the Conservatives to be honest, but that's what a lot of people will think. Although of course a lot have put it down to globalisation too, which is a bigger impact - and one of the major reasons for Brexit IMO.

Very little to do with the Conservatives and if you look at the Labour manifesto there were lots of handouts promised for favoured groups but very little that would tackle some of the deep seated causes of wealth inequality. Their private house building target as one example was actually lower than that of the Conservatives.

However the Conservatives, as the government in power, are going to get the blame. The fundamental problem is that they are merely, barely, capable managers of the state and are trying to avoid any radical "ideas", which May in particular regards with suspicion. In good times that might be enough, when compared to a group now controlled by Marxists.

These are not normal times however and not only is the economy fundamentally broken, but the economic models to understand that economy are also broken. As a starting point to understand this I would recommend "the end of alchemy" by Mervyn King. The financial crises was a symptom of the underlying problem, just as the next one will be.

it is time for a radical rethink on the economy, a Thatcher for these very different times with different requirements. The Conservatives however seem to have no-one capable of taking up the challenge and plod on under May, as they once plodded on under Heath.

[irocfan]

B'stard Child said:

I think it requires a few more reports of his "lyrical prose" before the Moderators will silence him just on the volume basis

Bye bye Jawknee MKII VI

FTFY - I'm sure we're up to this by now aren't we? In fairness though, the Jaw incarnation was waaaay more irritating

[98elise]

amgmcqueen said:

mx5nut said:

amgmcqueen said:

If Corbyn and Labour came into power, the UK would be fked into oblivion. Small businesses...the backbone of the British economy would be decimated.

Project fear in full swing.

Would it be better if we lived in a one party state and didn't let people vote in case they voted the wrong way?

I suggest you look at Labour's tax policies....

Indeed...how many prospective governments have admitted they are planning for capital flight and a run on the banks.

[mx5nut]

amgmcqueen said:

I suggest you look at Labour's tax policies....

Relax, we've survived without the Conservatives in power before, the sky won't fall Democracy isn't as scary as some make it out to be.

[mx5nut]

98elise said:

Indeed...how many prospective governments have admitted they are planning for capital flight and a run on the banks.

NP&E: The government preparing for a worst case vote for Brexit (emergency budget etc) was project fear scaremongering. Nothing bad ever happens because of a democratic vote. Everyone who voted for Brexit knew exactly what they were voting for.

Also NP&E: Labour preparing for some dummy spitting if they win is because it's guaranteed to be a worst case scenario. The country will be doomed and the sky will fall on day one. People should not be allowed to democratically vote for them because they do not understand what they're voting for.

[sidicks]

mx5nut said:

NP&E: The government preparing for a worst case vote for Brexit (emergency budget etc) was project fear scaremongering. Nothing bad ever happens because of a democratic vote. Everyone who voted for Brexit knew exactly what they were voting for.

Also NP&E: Labour preparing for some dummy spitting if they win is because it's guaranteed to be a worst case scenario. The country will be doomed and the sky will fall on day one. People should not be allowed to democratically vote for them because they do not understand what they're voting for.

More ignorant strawman nonsense from mx5nut?

[BOR]

mx5nut said:

NP&E: The government preparing for a worst case vote for Brexit (emergency budget etc) was project fear scaremongering. Nothing bad ever happens because of a democratic vote. Everyone who voted for Brexit knew exactly what they were voting for.

Also NP&E: Labour preparing for some dummy spitting if they win is because it's guaranteed to be a worst case scenario. The country will be doomed and the sky will fall on day one. People should not be allowed to democratically vote for them because they do not understand what they're voting for.

Children. Children will die. On day one, children will die. Because of Labour.

[otolith]

There are some really quite bizarre posts here. I'm not sure how the opinion that "Party X winning will be a disaster" maps to "People shouldn't be allowed to vote for Party X", nor how "I think their economic policies are damaging and that they will make me poorer" means "Babies will die on day one".

[JagLover]

otolith said:

There are some really quite bizarre posts here. I'm not sure how the opinion that "Party X winning will be a disaster" maps to "People shouldn't be allowed to vote for Party X", nor how "I think their economic policies are damaging and that they will make me poorer" means "Babies will die on day one".

Just MX5Nut being his usual self

[BigMon]

If Labour get in I would just shrug my shoulders and get on with it. I think it would be a mistake (as I think Brexit is a mistake) but there's no point bleating on about it, just have to get on with it.

I wonder how many people on this thread prophesying the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah if Labour get in are the same people who boasted about joining Labour just to vote in Corbyn to make Labour 'unelectable for generations'? Wonder how they feel about that now?

[crankedup]

The Surveyor said:

crankedup said:

Yipper said:

crankedup said:

sidicks said:

crankedup said:

Based upon averages that may be the case, however what I am talking about is the ftse Board pay differentials. These have increased hugely above the average worker pay, this against a background of pay stagnation in the worker pay packet. The differential used to be something like x20 of the average worker pay, now it’s more like x250. Happy to be corrected on the numbers but in a nutshell that is the problem. Add to that the fact that these huge payments attract National media attention which stirs people like me up and you have a recipe for growing problems.
The wealth gap may have shrunk in recent times owing to the generosity of benefits and the shrinkage of middle market pay.

Hasn’t the world changed a lot with globalisation, making the job of a FTSE CEO more complicated than it used to be?

Why was 20x the right number?

Surely more tax for the government is a good thing, as it can be used to support the poorest in society?

Agreed the World has changed since globalisation, trick now is to make it work better for more of us.

Like I said, happy to be corrected on the numbers.

Yes more tax for Government to distribute into Society is definitely a good thing. But this does not excuse the excess bonus culture at the top.

Globalisation has been incredible for a billion people in emerging Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe and South America since the 1990s. We've lived through the greatest and fastest expansion of wealth in human history.

Globalisation has not been so good for roughly half a billion people in North America, Western Europe and developed Asia. A large chunk of their jobs and wealth have moved to (cheaper) Asia etc.

Fifty years ago, someone working in a clothing factory in the UK would only have been competing with companies from about 5 countries in the world, like Italy. Today, they are competing with about 50 countries, like China, Vietnam, etc.

Yes I would agree with the sentiment, haven’t checked your numbers but that is unimportant. As you correctly point out globalisation has not been so good for western europe. But I fail to recognise that globalisation has been good for the working population of our country, sure we have enjoyed. heap imports but we are now paying the price of cheap labour imports.

So the Torys can't be blamed for the global economic changes yet have done so well managing the counties economy that we still need to import cheap labour because of the continuous low unemployment levels, yet Momentum gain popularity by presenting a message of economic mismanagement. Goes to show politics is all about PR rather than policies IMHO.

My opinion all political parties have responsibility, not for globalisation in particular, but for policies introduced as globalisation has evolved. Globalisation is simply a manisfation if you will, a continued natural development of life. Next one coming is space travel and finding an alien or parallel World. (one for stolith to consider)
I don’t think you are that far off with your politics is PR.

[wc98]

BigMon said:

If Labour get in I would just shrug my shoulders and get on with it. I think it would be a mistake (as I think Brexit is a mistake) but there's no point bleating on about it, just have to get on with it.

I wonder how many people on this thread prophesying the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah if Labour get in are the same people who boasted about joining Labour just to vote in Corbyn to make Labour 'unelectable for generations'? Wonder how they feel about that now?

i know plenty of people that have voted labour several times in the past, including myself, that think the current labour party would turn the uk into venezuela mark two by the end of their first term. i am generally of the same mind that whoever gets in i will just get on with it. getting on with it with corbyn (really mcdonell) in charge will be a whole new ballgame.

trouble for me is i am rapidly running out of people to vote for unless the monster raving loony party decide to field a candidate in my constituency in the next election. i doubt there has ever been a time when parliament had so many incompetent light weights in situ . sad times but i have a sneaking feeling we have the politicians we deserve.

[The Surveyor]

crankedup said:

My opinion all political parties have responsibility, not for globalisation in particular, but for policies introduced as globalisation has evolved. Globalisation is simply a manisfation if you will, a continued natural development of life. Next one coming is space travel and finding an alien or parallel World. (one for stolith to consider)
I don’t think you are that far off with your politics is PR.

Agreed, especially on the need for all political parties to have responsibilities. Sadly most of them only focus on what needs to be done to win the next election.

[BigMon]

wc98 said:

i know plenty of people that have voted labour several times in the past, including myself, that think the current labour party would turn the uk into venezuela mark two by the end of their first term. i am generally of the same mind that whoever gets in i will just get on with it. getting on with it with corbyn (really mcdonell) in charge will be a whole new ballgame.

trouble for me is i am rapidly running out of people to vote for unless the monster raving loony party decide to field a candidate in my constituency in the next election. i doubt there has ever been a time when parliament had so many incompetent light weights in situ . sad times but i have a sneaking feeling we have the politicians we deserve.

I agree. I voted Conservative last time due to Corbyn and his mob but, ideally, he should have never been put into a position where he was capable of attaining power and anyone who aided that process will get their just desserts if he does ever get in.

To be honest I look more at our local MP now in terms of who to vote for. We had a Lib Dem for many years who did a lot locally, and now we have a Conservative who appears to be doing a lot locally too (so I voted for him last time again).

[Fittster]

sidicks said:

Fittster said:

Your posting history makes your position perfectly clear without you having to spell it out.

What position is that? Clearly you don’t actually want a discussion.

Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 16th January 16:41

Discuss what?