Corbynomics: A Dystopia

CLAPTON

ruggedtoast wrote: »

And again, someone else spouting off about politics who doesn't understand that socialists aren't averse to capitalism because...

Capitalism is not a political ideology

capitalism is both a economic and political system
broadly speaking it expounds the merits of private ownership of businesses and of the virtues of private property.
This is in contrast to those that believe in the state ownership of industry and the abolish of private property.

Jason74

westernpromise wrote: »

The fact is that what you've characterised as "a long way to the right of centre" is mainstream opinion and very well supported as such. Here, for example, is an article from 2006 about Gordon Brown's client state:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1511253/Labours-bulging-client-state-now-employs-44pc-of-people.html

The state-dependency research...showed that more than 60 per cent of people work for or live off the State in some of Britain's poorer areas. The highest was the Labour-held constituency of Cynon Valley in South Wales where 70.8 per cent of local adults were heavily dependent on the public sector in one way or another. The lowest is Conservative-held Horsham in West Sussex where the proportion was 35.8 per cent. Of the 10 constituencies with the highest level of state dependency, scattered across Wales, the North-West and the West Midlands, nine were Labour

It is thus objectively true that Labour supporters generally live off the state and demand even more of other people's money. The safer the Labour seat, the likelier this is to be so. To call this parasitism is quite reasonable in that it meets the definition: https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define%3A%20parasite

If parasites aren't happy about being called out as such they can always try not being one.

It is also objectively true that most people object to others leeching off the state. Here is an Ipsos-MORI poll of 2013 which found that the benefit cap had over 6 times as many supporters as opponents:
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3194/Benefit-Cap-popular-with-public-but-what-impact-is-it-having-preimplementation.aspx

there is strong popular support for the Benefit Cap, and ... many of those who were notified that they would be affected by the cap found work after receiving this notification.
...a national poll ...found that the Benefit Cap receives wide public support, even when it is framed in different ways; nearly three quarters of the British public support it in principle (73%), with just 12% opposed ...The strength of support for the Cap across these measures indicates a popular policy at a time when the benefits system in Britain is considered too generous (by 50%) rather than not generous enough (20%).

I did not suggest "that Universal suffrage was a bad idea as it would result in the rich paying more tax." I quoted Lord Salisbury who pointed out that universal suffrage would enable people to vote themselves other people's money. Are you suggesting he was wrong? Pretty much every post by, say, ruggedtoast is a shrill demand for other people's money.

You've also asserted that "The idea that tax pays for essential public services, and that many people (myself included) actively support higher taxes that they would / do lose out from due to the wider benefits to society seems to be something you refuse to even acknowledge." but this is a/ nonsense, I have never said any such thing and b/ just a typical Labour Party football chant. As a matter of policy Labour always overspends, so they can cast elections as a choice between Labour spending (and taxes on other people) or Tory cuts to rebalance the budget.

Everyone gets that taxes pay for essential public services. But the centrist POV, which is also mine, is that the state should not spend like a drunken sailor and raise taxes on people it hates to fund it all.. The Labour voter's mentality is usually that high earners should be expropriated by the state to fund it all because impoverishing them is a worthwhile end in itself.

I have noticed that the further left somebody is, the more likely they are to see anyone to their right as extreme right, even if they're still on the left. Hence we have the splendid spectacle of Labour supporters calling other Labour supporters "right wing" and "Tories" because they are centre-left Blairites.

The right-wing version of this is the UKIPper loony who insists that Labour, the Liberals and the Conservatives are identical. This view can only form if you're so far off the reservation everyone else is close together, in the same way that Pluto, Saturn and the sun look close together when seen from Alpha Centauri.

So no. I'm centre right and most of the country is of the right.

I really can't be bothered to get into a big debate with you on this, but can't let this one go without pointing out that I think this post is in itself further evidence that you are a lot further to the right than you acknowledge. You are right in that people at the margins tend to misunderstand where others sit on the spectrum, but as a centre - left person myself (and to bring the thread back on topic, this is demonstrated by my clear opposition to Corbyn on this thread), I don't think this is relevant in your case. There's also the issue as to why the figures are as they are, and it's a hell of a lot more complex than people being "parasites"

The description of large sections of the population as parasites is simply unacceptable imho, and the paragraph I've put in bold is a good example of where your own bias clouds your judgement. I also wouldn't set much store by your "political compass" result, as it is easy enough to answer questions in a test like that to get the result to suit you.

Probably not a lot of point in taking this one further though, as we're never going to agree. Just thought it important to respond on this one.

setmefree2

'Despised' Jeremy Corbyn told to stay away from Sheffield election campaign.

The Labour leader was ordered to stay away from the campaign because they said even the mention of his name is poison on the doorstep

Jeremy Corbyn was ordered to stay away from a local election campaign, because just the mention of his name was poisonous to voters, the Mirror has learned.
The Labour Party went on to suffer a devastating loss in the by-election, despite Mr Corbyn drawing thousands of fans to a city centre rally just three weeks before the vote.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/despised-jeremy-corbyn-told-stay-8801886

westernpromise

Jason74 wrote: »

You are right in that people at the margins tend to misunderstand where others sit on the spectrum

And that's you. You airily dismiss the views of the centre right as 'at the margins' essentially because they aren't yours.

my clear opposition to Corbyn on this thread

you do realise that makes you a Tory, do you?

The description of large sections of the population as parasites is simply unacceptable imho

Which you're entitled to. However, I've documented why it's accurate.

Jason74

westernpromise wrote: »

And that's you. You airily dismiss the views of the centre right as 'at the margins' essentially because they aren't yours.

[I]Not at all. I accept there are many people to the right of me who are (to use your words) "moderate centrists". I completely understand (for example) why someone might believe that reducing tax levels and regulation might result in a better society. The fact that I disagree with them doesn't make their views extreme.

What does classify as extreme is labelling whole sections of society and parasites, and claiming that anyone who believes higher tax rates are desirable is seeking to "impoverishing them (higher earners because doing so) is a worthwhile end in itself." That language places someone a long way from he centre in much the same way as someone on the left claiming that tax cuts are stealing food from the mouths of the poor [/I]

you do realise that makes you a Tory, do you?

[I]Yes, I do. Which given I've never failed to vote against the Conservative party in an election I've been able to vote in, is quite amusing. I disagree with you on most things, but you're bang on the money in terms of how the Corbynista left view others. The irony is that some people may end up voting Tory (or at least abstaining) as a direct result of their actions[/I]

Which you're entitled to. However, I've documented why it's accurate.

[I] Your use of an innapropriate biological analogy doesn't alter the reality that language of that sort simply isn't an acceptable way to talk about people, and certainly not in terms of tarring huge swathes of the population with that brush. The use of that language in and of itself disqualifies anyone claims to the centre ground[/I]

I think the above about covers it.

Moby

westernpromise wrote: »

And it makes you very angry and you want it taken away and given to you. Am I right?

It does make me angry because it's unfair and people are being 'ripped off'. I realise you tories see someone being ripped off as an opportunity though. Different strokes, different folks.;)

Moby

gadgetmind wrote: »

For anyone prepared to actually get off their backsides and apply themselves, capitalism has worked very well.

I'm sure the employees of BHS will agree with you. Simplistic nonsense!

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

I'm sure the employees of BHS will agree with you. Simplistic nonsense!

in a socialist UK with equal opportunities for all, BHS would be nationalised?

gadgetmind

Moby wrote: »

I'm sure the employees of BHS will agree with you. Simplistic nonsense!

If you think that working in retail is applying yourself, then perhaps you need somewhat wider horizons. However, capitalism does place companies in competition with others, with the strong surviving and the weak dying. This is better for a consumer and ultimately better for those working for the companies.

Shuffling zombie nationalised (or heavily subsidised) companies, that neither die nor actually get the job done, benefit no-one.

setmefree2

This new poll shows why Jeremy Corbyn will never win a general election

New research by Opinium illustrates exactly why Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is not a viable prime minister in waiting.
The polling firm's latest publication, "Dead centre: redefining the centre of British politics", shows 45% of Brits identify with the "centre," more than any other political leaning.
In political terms, the "centre" is the ideological space occupied by people with moderate views who sit more or less equidistant between the left and right wing.
Just 10% of people described themselves as "left-wing." However, over 62% said they felt Corbyn was a left-wing candidate (excluding don't knows). The problem is clear: most people don't feel that Corbyn represents them.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/opinium-poll-jeremy-corbyn-labour-party-theresa-may-2016-9