Corbynomics: A Dystopia

seven-day-weekend

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

I cannot read all the comments on this, but all I will say is that I sincerely hope that Corbyn is as incapable of winning an election as he appears to be. The idea of the trade unions running the country is nightmarish at best, we would be bankrupt within 6 months then everyone would go on strike because they could not have their promised utopia. then things would get worse.

And at the next GE when the Tories win, they will inherit this nightmare, put austerity measure into place to get the country solvent again, and be called the 'nasty party' and 'nazis' for trying to balance the books. :mad::mad:

Enterprise_1701C

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

And at the next GE when the Tories win, they will inherit this nightmare, put austerity measure into place to get the country solvent again, and be called the 'nasty party' and 'nazis' for trying to balance the books. :mad::mad:

Yes, it does seem to be a trend.

westernpromise

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

And at the next GE when the Tories win, they will inherit this nightmare, put austerity measure into place to get the country solvent again, and be called the 'nasty party' and 'nazis' for trying to balance the books. :mad::mad:

And once they've done that and there actually is some money, Labour will get in and wreck it all over again.

It's interesting how the left bellyaching about house prices, earnings, interest rates and so on are actually thereby expressing a wish for a return to the economic climate we enjoyed in the mid-1990s. After 15 years of Tory rule the economy was comprehensively fixed and could have been permanently so. Unfortunately a lot of mugs were taken in by Labour's lies and figured it was safe, now that the economy was fixed, to let them back in. The usual utter mayhem followed.

Every generation has to learn for itself about Labour.

gadgetmind

BobQ wrote: »

Not everyone is so ambitious that they want to have a career but they should still be treated fairly.

That covers a range of outcomes depending on how you define the word.
1) Give them pay and working conditions in line with global norms for unskilled people.
2) Pay them the same as those in the UK who can actually be bothered to learn some valuable skills.

Many people do upskill as you suggest but many employers do not make such development very easy.

"I could have been an autodidact but my employer cut back on training."

All I was asking is do you believe employees should have no rights at all?

We need a balance. Things were way out of whack in the 70s and 80s but we're starting to get where we need to be.

ruggedtoast

Mistermeaner wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36960899

nationalise the railway because of disruption caused by striking unions.....

over 500 people listened to jezzer on top of his fire engine. Twice that many inside

viva la revolution

Southern provides the worst rail service in the UK. They have now cancelled a third of their timetable.

They, under Govia Thameslink are run by Charles Horton. The director of this incompetent useless company who had plenty of experience managing Connex, the last Rail firm to be so bad it lost its contract on that line.

The unions are striking because the workers are in an intolerable position providing a substandard service for an awful employer.

Of course, Southerns numerous failure aren't without consequence, they are fined for the delays, fines which are paid for by the government. Taxpayers in other words.

This is you and your Tory friends free market.

gadgetmind

This is an interesting read.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/03/new-labour-brought-hope-jeremy-corbyn-has-brought-despair

TrickyTree83

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Southern provides the worst rail service in the UK. They have now cancelled a third of their timetable.

They, under Govia Thameslink are run by Charles Horton. The director of this incompetent useless company who had plenty of experience managing Connex, the last Rail firm to be so bad it lost its contract on that line.

The unions are striking because the workers are in an intolerable position providing a substandard service for an awful employer.

Of course, Southerns numerous failure aren't without consequence, they are fined for the delays, fines which are paid for by the government. Taxpayers in other words.

This is you and your Tory friends free market.

It's nowhere near a true free market. The left would never allow such a thing, they love regulation too much.

ruggedtoast

gadgetmind wrote: »

This is an interesting read.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/03/new-labour-brought-hope-jeremy-corbyn-has-brought-despair

Especially the comments:

Should rail privatisation be reversed? Yes. Should energy companies he brought back under public control? Yes. Are workers' rights very important? Yes. Is austerity necessary? No. Should NHS privatisation be stopped? Yes. Should all schools be secular and put under LA control? Yes. Do we need major constitutional changes to address the democratic deficit in this country? Yes.

Does New Labour offer any of the above? No.

Interestingly Luke, you cite Iraq and 'fascist dictatorships' but don't mention Saudi Arabia, which is surely a regime that deserves to be overthrown. Oh I see, Blair thought that particular fascist dictatorship was fine. That's ok, then.

mwpt

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Southern provides the worst rail service in the UK. They have now cancelled a third of their timetable.

They, under Govia Thameslink are run by Charles Horton. The director of this incompetent useless company who had plenty of experience managing Connex, the last Rail firm to be so bad it lost its contract on that line.

The unions are striking because the workers are in an intolerable position providing a substandard service for an awful employer.

Of course, Southerns numerous failure aren't without consequence, they are fined for the delays, fines which are paid for by the government. Taxpayers in other words.

This is you and your Tory friends free market.

It is almost impossible to have a free market on railways. You have a captured resource (the tracks) and a captured market (commuters). There are certain things I think a government would do better and running a rail service might be one of them.

TheNickster

westernpromise wrote: »

And once they've done that and there actually is some money, Labour will get in and wreck it all over again.

It's interesting how the left bellyaching about house prices, earnings, interest rates and so on are actually thereby expressing a wish for a return to the economic climate we enjoyed in the mid-1990s. After 15 years of Tory rule the economy was comprehensively fixed and could have been permanently so. Unfortunately a lot of mugs were taken in by Labour's lies and figured it was safe, now that the economy was fixed, to let them back in. The usual utter mayhem followed.

Every generation has to learn for itself about Labour.

Although I have yet to e convinced that Corbynomics has yet to have a viable plan I would disagree with your assetion that Labour in general is financially incompetent.

This blog that shows how wrong you are about Labour's alleged excessive borrowing. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/03/13/the-conservatives-have-been-the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/

Basically it says in overall terms and over the last 70 years including after the global financial crisis Labour both borrowed less and repaid more national debt than the Tories ever did.

The conclusion being that Labour (including Ed Balls) was was more financially competent than the Tories have ever been over the last 70 years.

Even the person doing the results was surprised because he also originally believed that Labour borrowed more than the Tories.

Many voters have been conned by Tory and Tory press propaganda.

You should read it including all the comments some of which tried and failed to discredit the research.