Seanm
pfm Member
This is good from Frances Ryan:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-money-tree-tory-line-labour-keir-starmer-tax
tl;dr: Even if using this attack line brings short-term tactical gains, it is strategically disastrous to the prospects for progressive change.
Incidentally, this is a good illustration of why it's essential to promote better understanding of the economy in terms of MMT (or even bog-standard Keynesianism would be a huge leap forward for many).
Yeah I don’t think any of this makes even tactical sense. It’s really not popular. It’s a matter of pure dogma: they really like limited public spending and they really don’t like unions.Meanwhile, is the Labour Party about to change its name...
https://twitter.com/patrickkmaguire/status/1555821162722197505
... to the High Net Worth Donor Party?
Not sure that has quite the same ring but I'm sure the grown-ups who are back in charge know what they're doing.
Although in fairness it does suit the long term strategic interests *of this particular faction* for the party to be tied to low spending and billionaires, even if that’s a suboptimal electoral strategy. As ever it’s not just that these people are thick and unpleasant: they’re pursuing their particular interests. It’s sometimes hard to recognise that because the popular critical *and* positive take on Blairites is that they want to win power at any cost. They don’t really: they want to consolidate their power within the party and being in government is a secondary concern.
I know you know all this by the way it’s just a general rant.