Corbynomics: A Dystopia

steampowered

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Socialism never worked unless it's a facade built upon a free market capitalist society where some are poor and some are rich but most are ok. Anything other than this facade and the system comes crashing down. Every time it's been attempted the system either collapses or makes everyone but a select few poor.

Take a look at a country like Singapore - a country which was dirt poor in 1960, yet now has a higher GDP per person and higher living standards than the UK. Despite having no significant national resources.

In Singapore, people are essentially given a flat when they come of age. Utilities are state owned. All public transport is state run and highly subsidised. The government owns most of the land, and most housing is built by the government run housing corporation. State education and health are fully funded and top quality.

Yet, Singapore has been one of the most successful states anywhere in the world during the past few decades and is typically held out as a free market success story. Why? Because free markets work better when there is a functional society underneath.

One of the issues in the UK is that we have made such a mess of building houses and infrastructure through the private sector, that you need an enormous welfare budget to try and fix it.

Cakeguts

steampowered wrote: »

The level of hyperbole and exaggeration in your post is just ridiculous. You
need to apply a bit of common sense.

You could apply your reasoning to pretty much anything done by any government anywhere in the world. For example compulsory purchase orders were used to acquire land for HS2, and some time ago to acquire land to build the motorways and railways. By your logic that could be extended and we end up in communism.

Do you really believe that other countries which sit slightly to the left of the UK (such as Germany, France, Spain, Sweden, Denmark, Japan etc. etc.) are all one step away from communism?

There is a sensible place somewhere in the middle somewhere between "totalitarian state" and "libertarian state".

I don't remember anything about CPOs in regards to the "luxury" flats that were suitable for siezing I seem to remember that the owners were not going to be given any choice? When did Corbyn say that he was suggesting to the local council that they used a CPO order?

TrickyTree83

steampowered wrote: »

Take a look at a country like Singapore - a country which was dirt poor in 1960, yet now has a higher GDP per person and higher living standards than the UK. Despite having no significant national resources.

In Singapore, people are essentially given a flat when they come of age. Utilities are state owned. All public transport is state run and highly subsidised. The government owns most of the land, and most housing is built by the government run housing corporation. State education and health are fully funded and top quality.

Yet, Singapore has been one of the most successful states anywhere in the world during the past few decades and is typically held out as a free market success story. Why? Because free markets work better when there is a functional society underneath.

One of the issues in the UK is that we have made such a mess of building houses and infrastructure through the private sector, that you need an enormous welfare budget to try and fix it.

Did you miss the part about the facade of socialism? Are you going to claim there are no super rich and no poor by comparison in Singapore?

System

I find the criticism of Corbyn to be a little over the top. Seems like a student activist who never grew up to me. If he'd ever expected to be leader of the labour party I'm sure he would've been more careful in window dressing his career.

If the Tories can hang on until 2022 then there's no need to worry anyway as he'll be 73.

Cakeguts

ilovehouses wrote: »

I find the criticism of Corbyn to be a little over the top. Seems like a student activist who never grew up to me. If he'd ever expected to be leader of the labour party I'm sure he would've been more careful in window dressing his career.

If the Tories can hang on until 2022 then there's no need to worry anyway as he'll be 73.

I don't think his age will make any difference to his thirst for power. That is one of the problems with him. He really doesn't care about anyone else. He is only ever going to look out for himself that is why he can say that he is helping the poor without a) knowing who the poor are and b) then going ahead with bribes to the middle classes. He will use anything and anyone to give him what he wants.

The Glastonbury thing is a very good example of someone who wants admiration all the time. So in the last week or so it has gone from using victims of a serious fire as publicity (photos of him with the victims) and then using working musicians to give him publicity. It was the bands that people went to Glastonbury to hear not him. Can you imagine all those audience members going to Glastonbury just to see Corbyn for a whole week without the bands being there?

The Glastonbury thing just shows how completely pathetic he is. I am so glad that he isn't doing the Brexit negotiations. I can only guess at who he would try to get into photos with? Basically anything will do.

Fella

Cakeguts wrote: »

The Glastonbury thing is a very good example of someone who wants admiration all the time.

Spot on. The High Sparrow only goes to events where he know he'll receive fawning adulation. He did it when he ran for leadership. He did it throughout the election campaign (it was commented on numerous times that he would only go to places such as constituencies in the NE where they can feed images of him addressing a large crowd. He avoided campaigning anywhere he'd face a hostile crowd).

He's obsessed with being fawned over (something which we see the flipside of often too, when we witness his instant rage when he's questioned by journalists or interviewers on any topic he doesn't want to discuss).

And then again yesterday, he was at Glastonbury when any opposition leader worth his salt might have gone to observe Armed Forces Day.

Note, not only did he refuse the invite, he slyly posted a picture of himself alongside veterans taken on Remembrance Sunday in 2015 on his Twitter feed, to allow the impression he was actually marking the occasion yesterday. This certainly fooled some of his more stupid followers as I've seen it posted on other social media today how he "did go to support the veterans but the papers deliberately didn't cover it".

Moby

https://youtu.be/rN07fnvGomo
What a wonderful day it was. Young people are our future.

economic

Moby wrote: »

[URL="http://https://www.facebook.com/JeremyCorbyn4PM/videos/1715414025419336/"[/URL]
What a wonderful day it was. Young people are our future.

if it is really these ignorant young people who are our future - the future looks very bleak.

GreatApe

Don't bet on it, the young go from voting left to voting right once they receive a share of the annual £200 billion transfer from old to young.

economic

GreatApe wrote: »

Don't bet on it, the young go from voting left to voting right once they receive a share of the annual £200 billion transfer from old to young.

it all comes down to timing/cycles.

in 5 years time, if the economy/jobs/wages havent picked up in a meaningful way, then there will be a lot of disgruntled young people in their 20s and 30s voting for labour, which of course would be a very stupid thing to do under current leadership.