Corbyn did win, what's next?

[Francesca R]

If Corbyn can move the agenda to the left and either force the Tories to give more consideration to the people they have been shafting and less to the their schoolmates, or to raise public awareness that there is a different option, he will will do far more than the last labour opposition.

Corbyn-Labour causing the Tories to shift to the centre (which is far more sensible than the idea that they might now like to take the opportunity to shift rightwards) will hopefully be the best thing to result from this.

Unfortunately it will be to Labour's electoral cost.

 

[Francesca R]

Whether you think tuition fees are a good idea or not

They are a good idea yes, for expanding tertiary education and having those who benefit most from it pay for it.

I went to university in the 1980s. At the time if you didn't come from a wealthy family you got a full grant to cover all living expenses (tuition was paid by your local council).

The reason more people go to university is not due to tuition fees or a movement from poor to rich. It is mainly down to the supply side of the equation not the demand.

The "supply side of the equation" is significantly increased if it does not depend completely on taxation to provide it. In other words, fees help. And most people who go to university earn significantly higher incomes than those who don't. So requiring them to pay for more of it is more equitable than having all taxpayers pay it all.

 

[Lothian]

Corbyn-Labour causing the Tories to shift to the centre (which is far more sensible than the idea that they might now like to take the opportunity to shift rightwards) will hopefully be the best thing to result from this.

Unfortunately it will be to Labour's electoral cost.

Perhaps. Next election is a long time off. The public have responded quite well to the "The current Westminster set up does not represent you or your values" The the SNP or UKIP as examples. The question is whether Labour can attract voters back from those groups and pick up enough floating /non voters. That will be decided on what new policies Labour come up with not the policies Corbyn may have supported in the past (although there may be some overlap).

 

[Francesca R]

The UK government has since March 2009 printed £375,000,000,000 extra money.

Inflation was 2.2% at the start of that period, It has averaged around 2.5% since then.

In the same periods the USA (Inflation 0.2%) has printed $4,500,000,000,000 extra greenbacks*.







* obviously the money is not literally printed these days it is created electronically.

This money also did not fund any public spending. Or any spending.

 

[Francesca R]

I see no hyperinflation in the UK. Indeed the concern in the UK is that inflation may turn negative.

The UK (Bank of England) has not printed money so that government can spend.

(Well it has, in the 17th and 18th century, that's what it was originally created to do, so that Britain could fight wars. But not in the last century I think)

 

[Francesca R]

First you must tell us where the proposed procedure has resulted in hyperinflation.

Here's some past examples.

Again. The examples are not examples of Corbyn-style "People's QE". It has not been done in the UK or in Japan or in Europe or in the USA. It is different. Attaching the same name to it does not make it the same.

 

[Francesca R]

You may well know better than me, but it is my understanding that QE finished some 2 or 3 years ago. You write as though it is ongoing.

The QE that the Bank of England conducted is not the same thing as Corbyn's version. There is a fundamental difference. One cannot be predicted using evidence of the other.

 

[Lothian]

....snipped posts....

I trust your holiday was as enjoyable for you as it was for us.

 

[Craig B]

Corbyn-Labour causing the Tories to shift to the centre (which is far more sensible than the idea that they might now like to take the opportunity to shift rightwards) will hopefully be the best thing to result from this.

Unfortunately it will be to Labour's electoral cost.

Why do you perceive that to be a problem? You would prefer a Con-Lab coalition based on both parties being at the political centre. If the political centre is to rule without parliamentary opposition, how does it matter what party or parties comprise it?

 

[angrysoba]

I trust your holiday was as enjoyable for you as it was for us.

Meow!

 

[uk_dave]

I trust your holiday was as enjoyable for you as it was for us.

"Cripes Ginger, I think we've wandered into the US Politics section. We'd better head back quick so we can tell our chums of our adventures over lashings of lemonade and cake!"

 

[MikeG]

....You would prefer a Con-Lab coalition..........

There was a context to that idea, and without that context, your post might mislead some into thinking that of all the possible general election results, this was Francesca's favourite.

 

[Darat]

No, it means that you should expect your elected representatives to set a good example and not be so free with their tongues as to make themselves look stupid and raise questions about their ability to hold high office.

I once again would like to draw your attention to exhibit A : Donald Trump.

Speak for your own values, mine include having a good sense of humour.

 

[uk_dave]

Speak for your own values, mine include having a good sense of humour.

About killing someone? Oh how we laughed!

For the record, I cheered and laughed when she left power. After that I couldn't give a toss about Thatcher.
Perhaps if labour had actually been a sensible party with sensible policies in the 80s she would never have held power for so long...

“I’ll tell you what happens with impossible promises. You start with far-fetched resolutions. They are then pickled into a rigid dogma, a code, and you go through the years sticking to that, out-dated, mis-placed, irrelevant to the real needs, and you end in the grotesque chaos of a Labour council – a Labour council - hiring taxis to scuttle round a city handing out redundancy notices to its own workers".

http://www.britishpoliticalspeech.org/speech-archive.htm?speech=191

 

[MikeG]

......Perhaps if labour had actually been a sensible party with sensible policies in the 80s she would never have held power for so long...

Go further back: it was Labour fouling up so monumentally in the 70's that was the root of Thatcherism. If they had run the country properly, rather than handing control over to trade unions, then no-one would have thought of turning to such a right wing leader. Back to my thesis of over-corrections in the British political system.

 

[uk_dave]

Go further back: it was Labour fouling up so monumentally in the 70's that was the root of Thatcherism. If they had run the country properly, rather than handing control over to trade unions, then no-one would have thought of turning to such a right wing leader. Back to my thesis of over-corrections in the British political system.

Oh I totally agree! I was a sweet, innocent child in the 70s and not really engaged in politics beyond wondering why we had to use a hurricane lamp sometimes because the lights weren't working.

My parents were fond of saying during the 80s that there'll never be another labour government (we were by most metrics, working class - semi skilled manual labour, in fact my father was a trades union official until the company subverted him and he became a hated foreman and oppressor of the working man!) and I always thought that seemed a bit over the top, until a few years ago when there was that nostalgia for the 70s brought about by the show "Life on Mars" and there were lots of programmes about the 70s.

That's when I realised just how bad things had got - parents having to care for their own kids in great ormond street hospital because the nurses went on strike! Can you imagine?

The 70s were a **** decade. No wonder everything was the colour of ****.

 

[Christian Klippel]

Here is a good article that shows what is really wrong with Corbyn being elected head of his party.

And no, it's not the actual person Corby.

But still, you surely don't have to be a hardline Corbynista - in fact, you could probably be a principled, libertarian Tory or a Westminster-hating UKIP supporter - to find the ferocity and unanimity of the attacks on Corbyn startling and just slightly terrifying.

It's been deeply unsettling - like watching a nationwide character-assassination machine grinding into gear, crushing all divergent opinions, humiliating and possibly destroying a democratically elected party leader in the name of the parliamentary status quo.

The media and the cross-party Westminster mainstream regularly wring their hands about the British population's lack of faith in politics. They should ponder the last few months - and, in particular, the last few days - and wince with embarrassment. God knows there's plenty wrong with Jeremy Corbyn. But he's really showing us something about ourselves here. Britain is many things at the moment. But a healthy and functional democracy isn't one of them.


Greetings,

Chris

 

[GlennB]

Here is a good article that shows what is really wrong with Corbyn being elected head of his party.

And no, it's not the actual person Corby.

Greetings,

Chris

Yes, it is good. Thank you. Another worthwhile snippet that highlights the sheer hypocrisy of the UK media, the press in particular:

So, this is the kind of treatment you can expect when you object to systematic lawbreaking at a media organisation. Even systematic lawbreaking that culminates in the hacking of the phone of a murdered child. Even, perish the thought, systematic lawbreaking which involved the hacking of the phones of the beloved royal family whose theme tune, we're told, has been so grievously disrespected.

 

[MCel58]

Why do you perceive that to be a problem? You would prefer a Con-Lab coalition based on both parties being at the political centre. If the political centre is to rule without parliamentary opposition, how does it matter what party or parties comprise it?

Can you explain

 

[MCel58]

There was a context to that idea, and without that context, your post might mislead some into thinking that of all the possible general election results, this was Francesca's favourite.

And could you get Francesca to comment on that rather than you. I would prefer a debate with the source rather than one of my favourite leaders of the debate