Corbynomics: A Dystopia

bobbymotors

Let's face it....capitalism is dreadful.

Until you compare it to everything else.

Then, well, it kinda works, whereas everything else kinda doesn't work.

Cakeguts

bobbymotors wrote: »

Let's face it....capitalism is dreadful.

Until you compare it to everything else.

Then, well, it kinda works, whereas everything else kinda doesn't work.

Socialism works on paper but not in practice because human nature gets in the way.

Tromking

cogito wrote: »

Are you seriously comparing Corbyn with Roosevelt? And why pick on Roosevelt? Why not include Stalin, Mao and others whose governments directed things and made big changes? The socialist dream has hardly been a solution for peoples' problems in those countries and others that have tried it.

Why you feel the need to use examples of communist mass murdering despots as a comparator to a possible future Corbyn administration I don't know. It's a bit like using Hitler to bad mouth Cameron or Major.
State intervention was the mainstay of many an elected moderate left of centre Government in the past, it's only because the Thatcherite consensus of the last 40 years is now (for example) struggling to give the people the public services they have come to expect that the Corbyn/McDonnell credo is gaining traction with electorate.

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

it's only because the Thatcherite consensus of the last 40 years is now (for example) struggling to give the people the public services they have come to expect that the Corbyn/McDonnell credo is gaining traction with electorate.

Perhaps the public ( under the Brown years) have come to expect too much. Easy when somebody else pays. Though a rapidly growing population has stretched resources to the limit in many areas over the past decade.

LHW99

Prior to the Thatcherite consensus, we had Mr Heath (3 day week), the Lib-Lab pact (lasted unstably for 18 months) and Harold Wilson (ran down the country to the point we had to bring in the IMF and devalue sterling).
It took a long time to get over those, and returning to those policies courtesy of Corbyn et al is not a pleasant prospect IMO

Tromking

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Perhaps the public ( under the Brown years) have come to expect too much. Easy when somebody else pays. Though a rapidly growing population has stretched resources to the limit in many areas over the past decade.

Yep, that's the 40 year Thatcherite consensus right there.

Tromking

LHW99 wrote: »

Prior to the Thatcherite consensus, we had Mr Heath (3 day week), the Lib-Lab pact (lasted unstably for 18 months) and Harold Wilson (ran down the country to the point we had to bring in the IMF and devalue sterling).
It took a long time to get over those, and returning to those policies courtesy of Corbyn et al is not a pleasant prospect IMO

You forgot Atlee's formation of the NHS/welfare state and Wilson's 'White Heat of Technology'. It's not all winter of discontent stuff.
The Tories 'managed decline' of our country is going down like a lead balloon with the electorate, they need to get their thinking caps on pronto. People are looking for big ideas from their Governments again.

ukcarper

Tromking wrote: »

Yep, that's the 40 year Thatcherite consensus right there.

I think things do need rebalanced but I don't think Corbyn and McDonnell are the people to do it. Making unfulfillable promises is not the way forward, if we want better public services etc everybody will need to pay not just a select few.

cogito

Tromking wrote: »

Why you feel the need to use examples of communist mass murdering despots as a comparator to a possible future Corbyn administration I don't know. It's a bit like using Hitler to bad mouth Cameron or Major.
State intervention was the mainstay of many an elected moderate left of centre Government in the past, it's only because the Thatcherite consensus of the last 40 years is now (for example) struggling to give the people the public services they have come to expect that the Corbyn/McDonnell credo is gaining traction with electorate.

Moby used Roosevelt as an example of interventionism. Roosevelt was a Democrat at a time when the Democrats were well to the right of centre so not exactly the best example of socialism in action. His comparison was simply absurd. Perhaps mine was too but you'd struggle to find an example of a socialist government which actually succeeded in delivering better living standards long term for its people. And please don't tell me that the Scandinavian model is socialism in action because it ain't.

Tromking

cogito wrote: »

Moby used Roosevelt as an example of interventionism. Roosevelt was a Democrat at a time when the Democrats were well to the right of centre so not exactly the best example of socialism in action. His comparison was simply absurd. Perhaps mine was too but you'd struggle to find an example of a socialist government which actually succeeded in delivering better living standards long term for its people. And please don't tell me that the Scandinavian model is socialism in action because it ain't.

Clement Atlee?
You do realise what the creation of the NHS and the welfare state did for public health and ergo living standards in this country don't you?
On your former point, perhaps Moby was suggesting that interventionism has not historically been the sole preserve of Socialists.