skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
He’s the PM not a dictator so he is not above question.
General Election 2019 thread (35 Viewers)
- Thread starter Philosoraptor
- Start date
W
westcountry_skyblue
Guest
I cannot believe some labour supporters are in denial like Richard Burgon etc.
Totally deluded still saying left wing policies are the way forward and supporting Corbyn/McDonnells ideology.
Left wing socialism is dead,People don’t want it what part do they not understand???
They need to get out of that champagne socialist London bubble and speak to the working classes they lost up north and the midlands.
Sons of miners voting Conservative I thought I’d never see it.
The Labour Party need rid of momentum just like Militant tendancy in the 80’s and ask themselves do they want to govern again?
Because if they do I’m afraid all you left wing followers are going to have to move to the centre like Blair did.
I know that will hurt you to hear but the truth hurts I’m afraid.
End of rant!!!
Totally deluded still saying left wing policies are the way forward and supporting Corbyn/McDonnells ideology.
Left wing socialism is dead,People don’t want it what part do they not understand???
They need to get out of that champagne socialist London bubble and speak to the working classes they lost up north and the midlands.
Sons of miners voting Conservative I thought I’d never see it.
The Labour Party need rid of momentum just like Militant tendancy in the 80’s and ask themselves do they want to govern again?
Because if they do I’m afraid all you left wing followers are going to have to move to the centre like Blair did.
I know that will hurt you to hear but the truth hurts I’m afraid.
End of rant!!!
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Nationalisation is not a hard left policy. I've explained why ad nauseam
See my previous posts regarding giving a percentage of private companies to employees.
I worked for a company that did it and the CEO was once American CEO of the year. Do you think he was a hard line left winger?
I think there were flaws with what Labour proposed (which I've explianed in previous posts) but the general concept is a great idea which works well.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Iy is because it’s taking control of private companies and that’s hard socialism - it sends shockwaves across the FTSE and deters private investment
Even your justification - let the profit go to the state for redistribution is the stuff of Orwellian nightmares
As I’ve said there’s arguments for each of the policies if you ignore the negative implications !
I know the potential benefits of nationalisation ...but saying you would nationalise rail and utilities and give free broadband for all and there wouldn’t be a cost to the wider public is loony left !
companies gifting employees shares or having share schemes isn’t loony left (I’m all for it as it encourages employee ‘buy in’).....the state forcing all of companies of a certain size to do this, is !
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
If you're on about nationalisation some things shouldn't be ran for private benefit and as I've said many times we've nationalised the losses anyway
New York, London, Hong Kong- hot beds of capitalism, all cities ran on nationalised transport systems. The two can work together
East coast rail was in government hands for 4 years. It was it's most successful 4 years of the last 2 decades. Not really an Orwellian nightmare that was it?
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
I've said in previous posts that Labour's broadband scheme is unachievable. I've based that on listening to experts, the same experts who've said the Tory scheme is also unrealistic.
I have also said previously that I think the Labour share scheme is a great idea but I had issues with some of their proposal and the main one was the size of the companies they wanted to include in it which was anyone with over 250 employees which in my opinion is far too small.
fatso
Well-Known Member
I doubt if the share holders would agree, but the lefties wouldn’t give a fuck.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
So take water - are you happy that your bill money is used to pay dividends to foreign investors rather than be spent on infrastructure? And if people who aren't are 'lefties' would it be fair to refer to those that are as facists?
fatso
Well-Known Member
One of the reasons we privatised the industries in the first place was because they became totally inefficient and dominated by the trade unionists who constantly used their power to push their political agenda, while starting strikes to hold the government to ransom. They were a constant drain on the tax payer, and the industries became outdated and underfunded, (in much the same way as the nhs is today)
Why would anyone want to go back to that?
fatso
Well-Known Member
Dividends are paid to investors who have invested in the infrastructure.
Hence the name INVESTORS! And where they reside is irrelevant.
tommydazzle
Well-Known Member
I see Long-Bailey being touted as next Labour Leader. That would be a big mistake imo. Lisa Nandy seems the voice of reason to me.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
The infrastructure of our water providers are renown for lack of investment.
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
I read that the Tories biggest worry is Angela Rather though I have no idea how valid that claim.is
stupot07
Well-Known Member
I agree re: Long-Bailey, anyone endorsed by Corbyn and McDonnell should be automatically written off.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
stupot07
Well-Known Member
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
Not for me but in terms of taking the party forward I think she's a good shout.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
I've heard both her and Nandy speak, a few platitudes about reconnecting with their base but absolutely no ideas as far as I can see.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
As for the rail nationalisation hysteria, the easiest argument is to ask the private companies that run the railway to run it without subsidy, if they're so averse to state interference. That'll quickly establish whether a market really exists.
I don’t disagree. This half in half out just isn’t working for the public. The fact that prices are increased at the max amount they can every year (even when service has been poor) has never sat well with me either.
I think because of the above, out of all potential nationalisations this is the one that would garner most public support
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Tbh with you I don't really care whether it is nationalised or not it just needs to properly integrated (infrastructure, rolling stock and operation) which it isn't at the moment.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Network Rail is another example. The sole reason that U.K. train services are rated as high as they are compared to other European countries is its safety record since being brought back into public ownership following the disastrous private ownership of Railtrack where profits went to shareholders not reinvestment in the rail infrastructure which accumulated itself in the Hatfield rail crash.
Isn’t the rolling stock also almost completely state owned? Not our state mind, I’m talking about ownership by other states.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
10% is not 'taking control of private companies'. It's providing a stake, a share of profits and a voice at decision making level.
What can you pass with a 10% shareholding. Fuck all. You can't even stop a Special Resolution.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
So you think it'd have been better if no-one had defended him? Do you think the criticism would've abated and everyone would have just turned around and said "well, that's Jeremy for you isn't it"?
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Not if you've bought it from another private investor. Then they've provided absolutely fuck all into actual company coffers - value by share price after IPO is nothing other than a number on a piece of paper that affects your ability to get credit and the terms of that credit.
Astute
Well-Known Member
So are you saying that the ideas were not wrong but agree that the ideas were wrong?
Astute
Well-Known Member
Not automatically written off. But let's say more closely looked at.
Astute
Well-Known Member
You didn't argue about Boris not getting defended.
Neither are fit to run the UK. The defending I say about was those trying to make out that one of them was.
Ian1779
Well-Known Member
Murdoch’s choice no doubt.... make of that what you will.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
In which case lets stop subsidising things. At the moment is we're caught between state owned and privately owned. Taxpayers are expected to fund the non-profit making parts of an industry while others walk off with the profits. If we're rejecting publicly owned shouldn't we see that through to its conclusion?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Shouldn't the Labour Party be left wing? Not sure many of the policies are that 'out there' compared to left wing parties in other parts of the world.
Maybe it shows a flaw in FPTP which doesn't really allow for anything more than a two party system. Or maybe it shows that everything has shifted to the right and perhaps it needs a third party to take the centre ground.
Think it does highlight a problem for Labour in so far as they need to decide what they want to be moving forward. If what the membership want is something that is deemed unelectable how do you get round that. Or should you even attempt to or just leave it as the party representing its members? After all other parties like the Greens aren't expecting to throw their beliefs out to come up with something that can win them an election.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Can you explain to me why certain parties should be left wing and right wing?
This is why we have people that will only ever vote Labour or Tories. The other parties will never get much of a chance. It is why one party overspends and the other party brings in austerity. Austerity affects less people than the side that ends austerity by spending.
What is wrong with a party closer to the middle.....similar to 'New Labour'?
Yes big mistakes were made. Like taking us to war on a lie, speeding up privatisation of the NHS or taking away decent pensions for all. But most of it worked. Labour voters had Labour in power and Tory voters had a government they could trust not to wreck the economy.
Left wing and right wing are ideals. But the most ideal is somewhere in the middle.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Lib Dems should be doing so much better.
I just wonder how much better they would have done without the stop Brexit policy.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Everyone is either right or left wing. Even centrists are just a mix of right and left wing policies. But each policy follows one of the other ideal.
You’re not in the middle, you just have a mix of policy ideas, same as everyone else.
The trick is the messaging. We’ve just elected a hard right government in centrist clothing because they knew without spending promises they wouldn’t get elected. Same as Corbyn knew without a better tax, crime and national security message than he had he wouldn’t.
What worries me is it’s not economics that’s making people decide these days. It’s social values. This country has always been socially conservative and soft left economically. Since the 80s Labour has been remaking itself as a socially liberal party first and a left wing party second, and that fell apart spectacularly last week. I’m not sure there’s a majority in England and Wales for a socially liberal party right now. But if Labour goes more socially conservative on things like immigration and political correctness, they’ll open up that flank to the Greens and Lib Dem’s in the cities. It also goes against the ethos of most of the new membership and the PLP.
I think they’ll get the economics right. They’ll tone it down and start from where the voter is next time (I hope). I’m more worried that we’ll double down on the culture wars and the demographics don’t support that.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Or jumping into bed with the Tories. My wife always voted for them until then. A vote for anyone but Tory wasn't good to help the Tories