Jeremy Corbyn wins economists’ backing for anti-austerity policies

Shakethedisease

michaels wrote: »

Are those the aims and values as espoused by Jeremy Corbyn or those espoused by the other candidates?

How can anyone possibly know what aims and values I support, even if I have in the past told a canvasser that I did or didn't support labour I might have lied or have changed my mind since.

Or is it only true that people who have supported labour all their lives and published their ballots (an offence?) are welcome in the party and anyone who has ever supported another party is not welcome?

'Aims and values'... hmmm obviously not Trade Union leaders then.

Trade union leader Mark Serwotka banned from voting in Labour leadership election

Mark Serwotka, the general secretary of the PCS union, which represents civil servants, had his ballot retroactively revoked after having voted online earlier this month...
..Mr Serwotka sits on the general council of the Trades Union Congress (TUC). He has previously voted for other parties and expressed support for other left-wing groups. His exclusion is likely to be controversial because trade unions have long been considered part of the core values of Labourism...


..But after Mr Corbyn announced his candidacy, Mr Serwoka said he would consider advocating affiliating Britain’s sixth biggest union to Labour.
“If Jeremy Corbyn wins, that would change everything"….

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/trade-union-leader-mark-serwotka-banned-from-voting-in-labour-leadership-election-10471851.html

Shakethedisease

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I voted Labour last time, for the first time. Not that it made any difference, its all Tory / UKIP voting well off pensioners and Tory / UKIP voting white van men around my way so it was Con for the 7000th election running in my ward.

If Corbyn isn't gerrymandered out of his place next month I will join Labour and will probably actually support them properly, at least to volunteer my time. If they cheat him, and everyone else, from being elected I will never vote for them again.

Ah rugged. Now you see what turned thousands and thousands of ex-Labour voters into SNP voters over the last few years. Galvanising them into actual action and getting out there. Overturning seemingly massive unsurmountable ( according to all the talking heads ) Labour majorities in the process.

It was simple hope, and voting for change. The party offering it were the SNP.

Corbyn, imo is now waking up those very same voters in England. For the first time in decades. And for young voters, the first time at all. We quite like him up here too. And like you say, he's the only one with any chance of turning things round in Scotland at the moment ( depending ). He has a real chance of gathering lots of momentum over the next few years. And I think the Tories are starting to realise just how much damage someone like Corbyn could do week after week at PM's Question Time. Most especially if it's being pumped out to millions of younger voters via social media. (Blair did the same with young voters, then lost them. See below ).

21% of 18 to 24 year olds voted at 2001 general election
68% of 18 to 24 year olds voted in 1997 general election
.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2966275.stm

They've certainly changed the tune from 'LOL vote Corbyn' to 'Corbyn must be stopped' over the last few weeks. Like Nicola Sturgeon whenever the press are throwing muck.. it's only building his support further.

The voters I think, are listening... most of the Labour party, however, do NOT want to hear it. We'll have to see which wins out.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

'Aims and values'... hmmm obviously not Trade Union leaders then.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/trade-union-leader-mark-serwotka-banned-from-voting-in-labour-leadership-election-10471851.html

one supposes that trade unionists who are Trots and supporters of Respect Party would find a warm welcome from Nicola
shame he's welsh but then no-one is perfect

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

one supposes that trade unionists who are Trots and supporters of Respect Party would find a warm welcome from Nicola
shame he's welsh but then no-one is perfect

Votes and new members are always welcome to any political party. And lots of people change their votes over their lifetime. The Labour party seem to want to 'define' people for life in terms of how they may have voted, or expressed disappointment in Labour in the past.. as 'not reflecting their current ( vague ) aims and values'. Or even taken into account that the prospect of Corbyn leading the party may have caused many to change their views. In turn potentially leading to increased Labour votes in the future. I think they're even going through mass canvassing lists, tweets and facebook posts in order to cancel votes.

Lets face it. These 'concerns' are simply a way to get rid of a lot of votes for Corbyn. If Burnham or Cooper had been blazing a trail, they'd have been no end of crowing over 'new supporters' and Labour's 'inclusiveness'.

*ps

Membership of the SNP’s Trade Union Group has increased to more than 15,000 – meaning that it now has more members than the Scottish Labour party.

http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2015/may/snp-tug-has-more-members-scottish-labour

Yes Nicola welcomes the trade unions too.;)

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Votes and new members are always welcome to any political party. And lots of people change their votes over their lifetime. The Labour party seem to want to 'define' people for life in terms of how they may have voted, or expressed disappointment in Labour in the past.. as 'not reflecting their current ( vague ) aims and values'. Or even taken into account that the prospect of Corbyn leading the party may have caused many to change their views. In turn potentially leading to increased Labour votes in the future. I think they're even going through mass canvassing lists, tweets and facebook posts in order to cancel votes.

Lets face it. These 'concerns' are simply a way to get rid of a lot of votes for Corbyn. If Burnham or Cooper had been blazing a trail, they'd have been no end of crowing over 'new supporters' and Labour's 'inclusiveness'.

*ps http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2015/may/snp-tug-has-more-members-scottish-labour

Yes Nicola welcomes the trade unions too.;)

Well, we can both enjoy the spectacle of labour tearing itself about.

And of course it may mean that support for the loony left in Scotland will join the loony nationalists and enable the national socialists to wipe the board clean in the May election.

The Trotskyite trade unionists have a way with intimidation in Scotland (think Grangemouth) that can speed up the next successful referendum.

Generali

If anyone is interested in a little reality in this thread, Labour's values are set out in Chapter 1 of their constitution, chiefly in Clause IV:

Clause IV.
Aims and values
1.The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many not the few; where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe and where we live together freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.
2.To these ends we work for:
A. A DYNAMIC ECONOMY, serving the public interest, in which the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition are joined with the forces of partnership and co-operation to produce the wealth the nation needs and the opportunity for all to work and prosper with a thriving private sector and high-quality public services where those undertakings essential to the common good are either owned by the public or accountable to them
B. A JUST SOCIETY, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as much as the strong, provides security against fear, and justice at work; which nurtures families, promotes equality of opportunity, and delivers people from the tyranny of poverty, prejudice and the abuse of power
C. AN OPEN DEMOCRACY, in which government is held to account by the people, decisions are taken as far as practicable by the communities they affect and where fundamental human rights are guaranteed.
D. A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, which we protect, enhance and hold in trust for future generations.

It's hard to think of anything that Mr Corbyn has said which goes against those principles.

I suppose if the new supporters could be shown, for example, to believe in state ownership of industries or revolutionary socialism then that would be going against the principles of the Labour Party and their votes would be discounted.

This whole thing does seem to be pulling Labour apart:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/25/chuka-umunna_0_n_8036128.html

The Parliamentary Party seems to be splitting into three groups: Blairites, those that would have been as the left of the party 3 months ago and what we could call neo-Bennites, although I'm not sure there's anything identifiably new about them.

In terms of electability, I'm not convinced that there is some unheard, unseen hard left core of the population that would sweep Mr Corbyn to power. The policies are superficially attractive to people that don't do economics (about 99% of the population) but should be able to be knocked over by the most superficial of analysis of the cost of them.

The SNP have managed to sustain a hard left agenda in Scotland largely because the English are paying for it. Mr Corbyn will be asking voters to put their hands in their own pockets to pay for his fantasies, a very different proposition indeed. My only real fear is that people will fall for the phantom £120bn that Mr Corbyn thinks he can magic up.

ruggedtoast

Just announced. Corbyn to introduce women only carriages on the tube and provide 24 hour phone line for sexual harassment (I believe he has told Yvette Cooper that in the new structure, she will be manning it 24 hours a day herself from her new job in a call centre in Hyderabad).

Corbyn has just won the female vote.

:T:money:

ruggedtoast

Generali wrote: »

My only real fear is that people will fall for the phantom £120bn that Mr Corbyn thinks he can magic up.

We managed to find £100 billion to bail out the banks with so I am sure we can come up with another £120 billion to spend on ourselves.

More seriously, it is becoming quite difficult for politicians to justify why telephone number amounts seem to be readily available for keeping the Finance sector afloat (which we are told is indispensable to our wealth, although it never seems to do anything other than cost us money) but spending the money on schools and hospitals will lead to 1984.

I'm not saying either way as I don't pretend to understand Finance but I would like to see Corbyn standing across from Osborne and Osborne having to explain, in language that normal humans can understand, why things like handing over RBS and the Post Office for a song at a giant loss are good for Britain but, funding Sure Start is not.

Surely that is what opposition is supposed to do?

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

'Aims and values'... hmmm obviously not Trade Union leaders then.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/trade-union-leader-mark-serwotka-banned-from-voting-in-labour-leadership-election-10471851.html

I'm not at all surprised. The PCS union is not affiliated to the Labour Party, it supports the TUSC, which is a rival political party. Of course they're not going to let Mark Serwotka have a vote, even if he does support the right football team.:)

Generali

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I'm not saying either way as I don't pretend to understand Finance but I would like to see Corbyn standing across from Osborne and Osborne having to explain, in language that normal humans can understand, why things like handing over RBS and the Post Office for a song at a giant loss are good for Britain but, funding Sure Start is not.

I went to Sure Start in Wapping a few times when the Generalissimos were tiny. Despite it being a largely poor area there was a rich area by the river and it was mothers from the richer parts of the borough that were hugely over-represented and that was my understanding of how the scheme ended up working: well intentioned, aimed at the poor but actually used by the middle classes.

As for RBS? The price is what it is. You can wish for a higher price if you like, rather like those BTL LLs that seem to think that if interest rates go up they can just hike the rent, but the price is what it is.

Royal Mail was probably sold off cheap.