Corbyn's days (very) numbered?

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I agree, he's a terrible leader and leading the party in entirely the wrong direction. Archie Gemmill Goal seems to be advocating that the PLP should fall meekly into line and allow the process to continue - to do otherwise is apparently undermining the party, causing disunity and so on.

My position is they should present a better alternative approach or get on with what they have been dealt rather than moaning and being destructive. I hear nothing from these guys on policy or important issues other than the personality in charge.

They seem convinced that the style IS the substance

 

[Klimax]

It's "not equal" in some programming languages (I can't recall which, as I am about as far from an expert as it is possible to be

Just quick note: At least C, C++, Java and likely C#.

 

[ceptimus]

All the c-like languages. So yes for C# and also PHP.

Python, Perl, and Ruby also use != for not equals. No doubt their are many other languages too.

 

[jimbob]

That doesn't really relate to what I said but there are no hard left parties in the UK of any note. My complaint is with Labour adopting morally bankrupt positions because they think it will make them popular. Even if it did make them popular it would be no less morally bankrupt. Popular != Right.

Labour mightn't be hard left, but Corbyn is. Especially in his foreign policy ideas which haven't progressed beyond the West is Wrong.

He claimed that the Kosovo genocide was made up.

Unfortunately, he's deleted a lot of his Morning Star articles from his website, as has the Morning star website, so I am limited to his EDMs and one transcribed onto Reddit.

But his foreign policy is pretty left.

 

[MikeG]

Labour mightn't be hard left, but Corbyn is. Especially in his foreign policy ideas which haven't progressed beyond the West is Wrong.

He claimed that the Kosovo genocide was made up.

Unfortunately, he's deleted a lot of his Morning Star articles from his website, as has the Morning star website, so I am limited to his EDMs and one transcribed onto Reddit.

But his foreign policy is pretty left.

More importantly, their economic policy is far left. Tax, tax, tax, and spend, spend spend. That never ends well.

 

[MikeG]

The Guardian reports an exodus of Labour party members, with 26,000 leaving since mid 2016.

More than three-quarters of those to leave the party last year had joined after the 2015 general election, a period that saw membership grow rapidly under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.

Figures reported by the Times showed the number of resignations in 2016 was more than the previous six years combined, while more than 15,465 have left since mid-December.

Up to 7,000 members are said to have resigned last month following Corbyn’s three-line whip on MPs commanding them to support the triggering of Article 50.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

More importantly, their economic policy is far left. Tax, tax, tax, and spend, spend spend. That never ends well.

Unlike cut cut cut and tax breaks for the rich which always works.

 

[The Don]

Unlike cut cut cut and tax breaks for the rich which always works.

I'm not sure that MikeG advocates that. IIRC he's an old-skool Liberal which is probably a combination of higher taxes for those that can afford it and managed spending - targeted at those that need it most.

 

[MikeG]

I'm not sure that MikeG advocates that. IIRC he's an old-skool Liberal which is probably a combination of higher taxes for those that can afford it and managed spending - targeted at those that need it most.

Yep.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I'm not sure that MikeG advocates that. IIRC he's an old-skool Liberal which is probably a combination of higher taxes for those that can afford it and managed spending - targeted at those that need it most.

Sounds like hard left economics to me then. Do you think anyone on the left advocates taxing people who can't afford it and unmanaged spending?

 

[The Don]

Sounds like hard left economics to me then. Do you think anyone on the left advocates taxing people who can't afford it and unmanaged spending?

The Corbynites' shopping list is very long - and getting longer so I see little evidence of managing spend (i.e. not just saying "yes" to everything they support) - It's not clear what the Corbynites' tax plans are but proposing to publish the tax receipts of those who earn more than £1m is an insight into their approach.

 

[MikeG]

My position is fiscally conservative. I would require governments to stick to balanced budgets over the course of a 5 year parliamentary term: you can't spend more in 5 years than you bring in in taxes etc in those 5 years. I would also advocate a cap on the total tax take as a percentage of GDP. The variations between parties would then be whether they tax up to that limit, who they tax, and what their choice of spending priorities would be. I can't see the hard left subscribing to that.

 

[Tolls]

... you can't spend more in 5 years than you bring in in taxes etc in those 5 years.

I can see that being a huge straight-jacket in all but the calmest economic situations.

 

[MikeG]

I can see that being a huge straight-jacket in all but the calmest economic situations.

Yep. That's what it's supposed to be.

 

[Tolls]

Yep. That's what it's supposed to be.

That doesn't make it a good thing.

 

[MikeG]

Agreed. But it also doesn't make it a bad thing. It would force us to live within our means, to have public spending under control, and it builds in an incentive to increase the size of the economy. It would force a new consensus on pensions and social care by forcing a collision course with reality.

It's a thought exercise only, because of course there is no way of enforcing such requirements on a government. However, as a guide to where the economic side of my politics lies, it may prove useful to those who want to misconstrue me as hard-left.

 

[Tolls]

I have to say, having read a fair number of your posts over the years, I would find it hard to call you hard-left without at least smirking a bit.

 

[baron]

There isn't really a difference between wanting foreigners out and the politically correct dog whistle alternative of controlling immigration.

What a crazy thing to say. You think that inviting people to this country only to kick them out due to no fault of their own, taking away their jobs and their houses and their entire social existence, is equivalent to having a procedure that controls the flow of people who want to come here in the first place?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

What a crazy thing to say. You think that inviting people to this country only to kick them out due to no fault of their own, taking away their jobs and their houses and their entire social existence, is equivalent to having a procedure that controls the flow of people who want to come here in the first place?

No that's not what I said.

Wanting foreigners out also means keeping them out in the first place. And as I thought my reference to dogwhistle made clear the deeper issue is that by highlighting immigration controls as the main issue they are scapegoating immigrants as a problem rather than a benefit to the country.

 

[MikeG]

I have to say, having read a fair number of your posts over the years, I would find it hard to call you hard-left without at least smirking a bit.

Indeed. There is a quote in The Don's last post which suggests that someone made such a silly mistake.