eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
Yes, the aforementioned narrative. Jez thinks he's radical. Why?
Corbyn sceptics, what do you think of him now (part II)?
- Thread starter richardg
- Start date
Yes, the aforementioned narrative. Jez thinks he's radical. Why?
droodzilla
pfm Member
Dunno, you'll have to ask him. Maybe it's the fact that the Labour Party now appears to be serious about tackling the ease with which large corporations and the super-wealthy can avoid paying their fair share of tax. I say good luck to 'em (Labour, not the tax-avoiders).
The "narrative", as you call it is, demonstrably true. Thatcher was quite explicit about her desire to break up the post-war concensus about the proper role of the State. Under Blair, Labour pretty much accepted Thatcher's assumptions while trying to ameliorate its most dire consequences.
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
I did.
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
He's extremely radical. The last Labour gov to be radical was Atlee's and I have every hope that Corbyn will be as radical. When the rich are hurting I'll be smiling.
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
So, Corbyn is extremely radical, but he's not radical at all. The pfm left-wing consensus seems to be lacking consensus.
droodzilla
pfm Member
Or perhaps "the PFM concensus" is a fantasy of your own making. Merry Christmas anyway!
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
It is Corbyn's raison d'etre to make sure it is the rich that suffer... There's hundreds of years of inequality to put right. If the UK goes from 5 richest nation to 20th I couldn't care less so long as the poorest and most vulnerable in society get a big leg up in life.
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
Perhaps. I think it is more likely that there is a consensus as to what it doesn't want, but not one as to what it does (want), or even as to what it thinks it might be getting. Nothing, I guess, unusual in that, but the dichotomy, if that is what it is, doesn't gain much acknowledgement here. As in none at all.
To you (and yours) too.
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
You sound like a good, old fashioned, totally unreformed, class warrior, Jez. You can only conceive of the lot of the poor improving if the rich are also made to suffer.
I suspect that it doesn't quite add up, and the political history of the last century would strongly support that suspicion.
Tony L
Administrator
The problem is post-Tory Brexit there will be a lot less “rich” to tax, e.g. much of the financial services inductry (responsible for 11.5% of the total UK tax take) will be off, as will much of the EU-facing manufacturing industry. My personal fear is the UK is headed for bankruptcy/financial collapse, but if not we are certainly headed for the worst period of “austerity” imaginable whoever is in power. I’ve not seen any economic predictions that imply Tory Brexit will not hurt a lot and if anything the “evil” large corporations etc will be bribed to stay on the sinking ship rather than taxed more as paying the dole money for those made redundant if they go would be an even greater burden on the tax-payer. Those with money will see their savings eroded by inflation, those without will continue to be punished in an ever-shrinkng, declining and devalued employment market.
PS If Corbyn wins an election anytime soon he will be the figurehead for the economic collapse the Tories have set in motion and I suspect Labour would be in and out of power again in a single term. There is just nothing credible he can do to avert the mess that he would have the courage to do (e.g. reverse Brexit).
Joe Hutch
Mate of the bloke
Though, lest we forget, the Attlee government was responsible for the partition of India, which didn't go so well for many poor people on the sub-continet.
Arkless Electronics
Trade: Amp design and repairs.
Brexit is obviously a disaster that will "kick in" in with increasing ferocity in the next few years, but, I think that for anyone earning under say £20K or already unemployed, on disability benefits etc, NOT getting a Corbyn gov will be a much bigger disaster.
To me (and this may answer eternumviti) the biggest political and economic "crime" in existence is the way that so many people have to live such miserable lives, not knowing if they will eat two days from now, if they will have electricity and gas, whether their landlord will put up the rent in pursuit of greater profit and make them homeless, having to live of crap food and decide between even that and having heating etc etc. For some it's much worse still, the homeless for example.
God knows how many have already committed suicide after hearing their benefits have been sanctioned and they are about to become homeless...
For many of the above "get a job" doesn't really apply... whether through illness and disability or a plethora of other reasons some are basically unemployable. They are still human beings with hopes and dreams and feelings and the welfare state needs to be boosted, not cut back by austerity.
A "Robin Hood" gov seems the only answer to me... There is more than enough money out there but its in the hands of too few people and wealthy PLC's etc.
To me (and this may answer eternumviti) the biggest political and economic "crime" in existence is the way that so many people have to live such miserable lives, not knowing if they will eat two days from now, if they will have electricity and gas, whether their landlord will put up the rent in pursuit of greater profit and make them homeless, having to live of crap food and decide between even that and having heating etc etc. For some it's much worse still, the homeless for example.
God knows how many have already committed suicide after hearing their benefits have been sanctioned and they are about to become homeless...
For many of the above "get a job" doesn't really apply... whether through illness and disability or a plethora of other reasons some are basically unemployable. They are still human beings with hopes and dreams and feelings and the welfare state needs to be boosted, not cut back by austerity.
A "Robin Hood" gov seems the only answer to me... There is more than enough money out there but its in the hands of too few people and wealthy PLC's etc.
Tony L
Administrator
I agree in theory, but I suspect there will be a mass exodus post-Brexit and any Labour government needs to tread very carefully indeed as it is very easy to move money, assets and large businesses to more favourable eonomic climates, and this is where most of the tax-take lies. Without it the country sinks, it is as simple as that. The content in the current Labour manifesto is not unreasonable at all, but they need to be very careful about moving any further leftwards and certainly drop any mention of ‘Robin Hood’ taxes or similar student/militant class-warrior language if they want to remain electable or credible.
Cav
pfm Member
Depends on what the rich hurting actually means. If it means huge corporations pay an appropriate tax, if it means tax avoidance loopholes for high wealth individuals are brought under some resonable control, then the "poor" will benefit. Is there some self-interest, doctorf, in tax regimes not being reformed?
Did not go so well for them when we took their country from them in the first place!.May be that Britain was the equivalent of one of today's corporations that got rich by the exploitation of the same very poor.Philanthropy and benevolence were not part of the colonial outlook (in India or any other part of the empire).