Labour Conference....total maddness or even possable ?

[t1grm]

desolate said:

On a presentational level I don't think it can be denied that Corbyn is improving. As his supporters start exerting more control the Labour party will appear much more unified to the casual observer, which is what the vast majority of voters are.


If they keep on message and don't implode over Brexit then they definitely have a chave IF the Tories don't get their act together over Brexit.


I never thought I would think it was possible.

Maybe but they still have to get the early election first. No good having a lead in the polls if you can't use it.

[edh]

Amusing to see the level of panic & hyperventilation on this thread... There would be much less of an attempt to write him off if Corbyn didn't have a real chance of being the next PM (currently the favourite on Betfair btw..)

- on why Corbyn / McDonnell's proposals aren't Marxist..
http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_...

The Labour Party now has a set of popular policies and is the only national party with a growing mass membership & an effective ground operation. I'm not keen on the adulation of Corbyn that's going on - let's keep a sense of proportion please - but it's mirrored by the hyperbole on here.

The party conference is aimed at a very specific audience - delegates & party members who are just delighted to be rid of New Labour.

Marina Hyde was very good today - most amusing
Oh, Jeremy Corbyn! I bet you think this song is about you: my week at Labour’s love-in
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/27/l...

As for PFI - are we saying
a. It was a very bad thing
and also
b. We shouldn't try to do anything about it?

I think you'll find the final policy / proposals are a long way short of McDonnell's rhetoric, but I would hope that even our outgunned govt lawyers would have managed to insert some reasonable termination clauses occasionally (unless the weird machinations of previous govts preferred poison pills)

[dazwalsh]

desolate said:

On a presentational level I don't think it can be denied that Corbyn is improving. As his supporters start exerting more control the Labour party will appear much more unified to the casual observer, which is what the vast majority of voters are.


If they keep on message and don't implode over Brexit then they definitely have a chave IF the Tories don't get their act together over Brexit.


I never thought I would think it was possible.

I agree, he has gone from a blithering idiot into a confident leader intront of camera and that for a lot of people if enough to swing a vote.

However it's apparent yet again during the conference that it's more of the same, loads of free st, tax the rich and businesses to drag them downwards without any details as to how they are going to pay for it. There's only so much milking the teet of business you can do before they get pissed off and go elsewhere.

If they had a credible plan on how to pay for their ludicrous handouts then they would be a party to be reckoned with. As it stands they are dangerous and the thoughts of them winning the next election fills me with fear. It's a shame people can't see past the ends of their noses, behind the whooping and hollering of Corbyn to see that his manifesto is not costed and at worst irresponsible

And just to be clear I am no theresa may fan, and the tories are making a hash out of it at the moment but at least they retain an air of responsibility about how they run the country.

[edh]

dazwalsh said:

I agree, he has gone from a blithering idiot into a confident leader intront of camera and that for a lot of people if enough to swing a vote.

However it's apparent yet again during the conference that it's more of the same, loads of free st, tax the rich and businesses to drag them downwards without any details as to how they are going to pay for it. There's only so much milking the teet of business you can do before they get pissed off and go elsewhere.

If they had a credible plan on how to pay for their ludicrous handouts then they would be a party to be reckoned with. As it stands they are dangerous and the thoughts of them winning the next election fills me with fear. It's a shame people can't see past the ends of their noses, behind the whooping and hollering of Corbyn to see that his manifesto is not costed and at worst irresponsible

And just to be clear I am no theresa may fan, and the tories are making a hash out of it at the moment but at least they retain an air of responsibility about how they run the country.

Interesting... The only manifesto that was "costed" was Labour's. Very detailed costings, even though you may well want to take issue with the detail. Tories? nothing.

So much talk of "bribes" and "student vote". Labour won a greater vote share in every age group up to 45.

Every party proposes policies that involve spending or taxation that will benefit certain people and not others. Which ones are "bribes"?
Is higher rate pension relief a "bribe" for example?

[Digga]

edh said:

Interesting... The only manifesto that was "costed" was Labour's. Very detailed costings, even though you may well want to take issue with the detail. Tories? nothing.

Was this the one that was 'costed' as in “We can borrow it. And if we can’t borrow it we’ll print it”?

There, in a nutshell, is the chief drawback of socialism.

[KTF]

I cant find it on youtube but if you are on facebook the the Labour party released a new video yesterday with some interviews with people who voted for them and why:

https://www.facebook.com/labourparty/videos/101549...

Backs up a lot of the comments people have been saying about the electorate being 'tired' of the same old yet terrifying at the same time.

Edited by KTF on Thursday 28th September 11:56

[motco]

Costing is one thing, but funding is something else entirely.

[Ali G]

Lest we forget an earlier derranged version of Labour which required Healey going to the IMF with begging bowl...


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/1976/oct/01/l...

[t1grm]

edh said:

Amusing to see the level of panic & hyperventilation on this thread... There would be much less of an attempt to write him off if Corbyn didn't have a real chance of being the next PM (currently the favourite on Betfair btw..)

How is he going to become the next PM?

[anonymous-user]

chris watton said:

Can you list any country/society that have got 'Marxism' right, as you see it as your definition, and if not, why not?

Marxism is daft. Why would anyone get it right? My point is that calling Corbynism Marxism is daft. Corbynism is rubbish, and so is Marxism, but they are not the same rubbish. My definition of Marxism, by the way, is not mine, but Marx's.

[Digga]

KTF said:

I cant find it on youtube but if you are on facebook the the Labour party released a new video yesterday with some interviews with people who voted for them and why:

https://www.facebook.com/labourparty/videos/101549...

Backs up a lot of the comments people have been saying here.

Usual perennials;

• chippy working class bloke to talk about "the workers" and etc
• comfortably retired (I'd bet my bks on a nice public sector final-salary scheme) couple
• token mother to bleat platitudes about caring for children
• ditto above to blame Tories for her lack of a pay rise in 5 years, rather than a.) her lack of performance or b.) absence of ambition to switch jobs
• woman with both; guilt (about her daughter's student debt); and fear (of same daughter stuffing her in a granny farm)

As per with Labour, a total absence of ordinary (actually) working people, let alone anyone who might be termed a wealth creator.

[Smiler.]

Breadvan72 said:

chris watton said:

Can you list any country/society that have got 'Marxism' right, as you see it as your definition, and if not, why not?

Marxism is daft. Why would anyone get it right? My point is that calling Corbynism Marxism is daft. Corbynism is rubbish, and so is Marxism, but they are not the same rubbish. My definition of Marxism, by the way, is not mine, but Marx's.

Marx is all down to those "classic" skinny tyres

[anonymous-user]

dazwalsh said:

...
And just to be clear I am no theresa may fan, and the tories are making a hash out of it at the moment but at least they retain an air of responsibility about how they run the country.

I seriously question that point. The Tories have placed internal party disputes above national interest. This has led to Brexit, something that only the deeply ill informed and some well informed but rather crazed ideologues can regard as anything other than an incipient clusterfk (even if Brexit is a good idea, it is being clusterfked by the Government). We have a non-Government riddled by partisan infighting. How is this responsible behaviour?

Corbyn would behave irresponsibly in a different way, so we are caught between a rocky rock and a hard hard place.

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 28th September 12:21

[anonymous-user]

Ali G said:

Lest we forget an earlier derranged version of Labour which required Healey going to the IMF with begging bowl...


https://www.theguardian.com/politics/1976/oct/01/l...

I think that your take on the 1970s might require some more nuance. The UK Government was to some extent being blown around by some Global winds, although it did make some big errors. The Labour Givernments of the 40s and 60s were in many ways successful and not deranged. That of the 70s was not successful, but wasn't anything like the Corbyn model.

I commend Andrew Marr and Dominic Sandbrooke as the go to historians for that period.

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 28th September 12:12

[98elise]

BOR said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

Hopefully all these lovely young people who voted Labour will be 4 or 5 years older come the next election as will Corbyn and McDonnel then the stark reality of life will be more pressing.

4 or 5 more years of the stark reality of existing hand-to-mouth on zero hours contracts.
4 or 5 more years of the stark reality of seeing their wages flat line at 26k GBP while equity markets and boardroom pay continue to soar.
4 or 5 more years of the stark reality of taking on more personal debt simply to maintain a normal lifestyle.
4 or 5 more years of the stark reality of having no chance to get on the housing ladder due to asset inflation.

Yes, I hope the stark reality of life will have fully sunk in.

So how will Corbyn change all that?

I'm on a ZHC and I'm happy, as are the majority of people on ZHC (from actual surveys).
Average wages are 26k, so even if everyone is equal they they will still be on 26k. Who will be running those boardrooms and equity markets when they can only be paid a fraction of what they used to?
How will personal debt be less when the economy tanks, taxes are up. Do you think peoples lives are better under a Marxist version of socialism.
The answer to the housing problem is to build more houses, not just add more laws and taxes.


There is a reason Labor are planning for a run on the banks and a capital flight.

Honest question for you, how well do you think the economy will do when Larbour curb capitalism?

[Sway]

Digga said:

edh said:

Interesting... The only manifesto that was "costed" was Labour's. Very detailed costings, even though you may well want to take issue with the detail. Tories? nothing.

Was this the one that was 'costed' as in “We can borrow it. And if we can’t borrow it we’ll print it”?

There, in a nutshell, is the chief drawback of socialism.

Even worse than that...

The 'very detailed' costings were a single page. On that single page, there was zero mention of the costs of the most expensive policies within the manifesto. Even where there were costs, they were wildly inaccurate and frankly a ton of bullst.

Just the number for 20k police officers was wildly out - only covering the average first year wages and pension contributions, nothing for recruitment/training, equipment, incremental pay rises, London weightings, additional support staff - the list goes on for what wasn't costed.

Plus, as said, knowing the cost of something doesn't mean you have the ability to pay for it...

What we're seeing is a very intelligent approach to policy creation, which hides the underlying intention. They are not stupid enough to release a truly Marxist manifesto, so they're releasing polices that on the surface don't appear to follow Marxist doctrine. Those willing to observe the statements, and read between the lines, can see it for what it is though.

[Wait Here Until Green Light Shows]

I had a horrible thought earlier...The Tories are going to fk up Brexit (I think that's pretty obvious), and then not long after Labour could get into power.

We're double fked.
[shudders]

[chris watton]

Wait Here Until Green Light Shows said:

I had a horrible thought earlier...The Tories are going to fk up Brexit (I think that's pretty obvious), and then not long after Labour could get into power.

We're double fked.
[shudders]

I think you may well be right. I think that things in the UK are going to get a lot worse before it gets better (assuming things do get better) in the next decade.

[BOR]

98elise said:

Honest question for you, how well do you think the economy will do when Larbour curb capitalism?

I think the economy will rocket under Corbyn.

What you persistently refuse to understand, is where these successful businesses obtain their income. Do you think there is a magic money tree ?

If the majority of people are just getting by on 26k GBP, then the services or goods that these companies supply will eventually be unaffordable for these people unless they resort to personal debt.

We are seeing this already. Personal debt is backstopping the ecomony and preventing it going into stagnation or recession.

Unless there is a fundamental redistribution of wealth, then capitalism will die.

[johnxjsc1985]

the issues with Brexit will be sorted out sooner or later and probably later. It is something that hasn't been done before and unfortunately getting Politicians to be pragmatic and apply some sort of sensible logic is difficult they always need to be shown over the cliff edge before they see sense.