Corbynomics: A Dystopia

Mistermeaner

Southend1 wrote: »

I think the key thing is whether a company engages positively with suppliers, governments, trade unions etc to ensure their supply chain is managed in an ethical way.

That's twice you've given us the answer. As an end consumer you are the final key step in said supply chain. If it wasn't for you noone else would bother.

Pray tell - are you engaging positively with your suppliers, government and trade unions?

Southend1

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Are you proposing that the UK tells China how to run it's economy?

I'm more concerned with a Union Rep in our organisation who does very little. Complete waste of space and taxpayers money. Being the quasi public sector there's an untouchable status attached to the role for some reason. Fortunately change is on the way.

My proposal would be for all governments to work together with other relevant organisations in a spirit of cooperation to ensure that workers rights are respected wherever they happen to live.

You're concerned about a particular union rep. Your colleagues must have voted her in for a reason so perhaps they don't share your opinion, or maybe they are just waiting for some one like you who can represent them more effectively. Why not stand against her at the next election?

Southend1

Mistermeaner wrote: »

That's twice you've given us the answer. As an end consumer you are the final key step in said supply chain. If it wasn't for you noone else would bother.

Pray tell - are you engaging positively with your suppliers, government and trade unions?

Of course consumers share a responsibility to ensure the supply chain is ethical. But consumers are not the be all and end all of it. They cannot hope to be as effective alone as they can be with cooperation from all stakeholders.

And yes, I do think carefully about my own purchasing decisions and consider environment, labour standards, corporate citizenship etc when deciding where to spend my money. I also engage with my MP and local councillors on this kind of issue, for example we have recently discussed with councillors and the local trades union council how to make our town a living wage town. And as you can probably tell (!), I am of course a trade unionist and I support campaigns to improve poor pay and working conditions wherever they exist.

michaels

Southend1 wrote: »

Nobody (on this thread at least) is suggesting we stop buying products produced in the developing world. However we shouldn't accept that those who produce things abroad are made to work in conditions that we would never put up with ourselves.

International cooperation between governments, trade unions and corporations is likely to achieve a far better outcome.

But if you impose all our 'essential' standards such as taxes, wages, h&S etc on them then they can not produce any cheaper than here and given shipping costs have thus priced themselves out of a job....typical double standards argument

Southend1

michaels wrote: »

But if you impose all our 'essential' standards such as taxes, wages, h&S etc on them then they can not produce any cheaper than here and given shipping costs have thus priced themselves out of a job....typical double standards argument

Not quite. For example, they could stimulate demand at home and produce for local consumers rather than export- this is a policy China is actively pursuing as a result of global trade imbalances right now. Or they could compete globally on something other than price e.g. Quality or innovative product features. There are other factors at play too, e.g. The value of the currencies used in the transactions.

CLAPTON

Southend1 wrote: »

I think people are overlooking the fact that Corbyn did put forward some policy proposals as part of the leadership campaign but he always made it clear these were only proposals and that actual party policies would be decided democratically by the party, not dictated by the leader.

His style of leadership is certainly different to what has gone before but many people find it refreshing for the leader to listen and consult party members rather than dictating policy from on high. Whether that style impresses enough of an electorate who are used to the polished stage managed politics we have had since 1997 to win in 2020 remains to be seen.

Certainly true that Corbyn has a different style to previous Labour party leaders.
We haven't had one before that has been a long term supporter of the IRA although now he refuses to discuss his 40 years of continuous support.
One wonders if he has consulted party members on the matter?

Some people may find this refreshing but the others find it totally unethical.
But that's the difficulty with ethics; one person's freedom fighter is another's terrorist.

Generali

Southend1 wrote: »

I think people are overlooking the fact that Corbyn did put forward some policy proposals as part of the leadership campaign but he always made it clear these were only proposals and that actual party policies would be decided democratically by the party, not dictated by the leader.

His style of leadership is certainly different to what has gone before but many people find it refreshing for the leader to listen and consult party members rather than dictating policy from on high. Whether that style impresses enough of an electorate who are used to the polished stage managed politics we have had since 1997 to win in 2020 remains to be seen.

So which of these policies did the party democratically decide:

a. Vote for the Fiscal Charter
b. Vote against the Fiscal Charter
c. Vote for Trident
d. Vote against Trident
e. Vote for Trident but never fire it

?

IIRC, the conference was prevented from voicing an opinion on Trident in case they voiced the wrong one. Although given that the policy has been both to vote for and against Trident as well as for a Trident but not using it, they might have been well advised to avoid the added confusion of a 4th nuclear defence policy in 2 months.

Apologies if any of these policies I'm discussing have changed. I looked at the UK news websites about lunchtime your time but pretty much anything could have happened since then.

gadgetmind

Southend1 wrote: »

Apple as far as I am aware makes huge profits mainly by subcontracting its manufacturing to firms such as Foxconn

That's part of it. As it happens, I do guest lectures at universities on the modern semiconductor and consumer electronics design cycle and supply chain, and as part of this give the break down of cost and profit on a iPhone, so could bore for hours on the detail.

I'm also tangentially involved with some mass production in China, and as part of subcontracting in China you have to keep auditing your suppliers to ensure that they aren't employing under-age workers (difficult as they measure age a different way) and that their working conditions conform to what we'd regards as acceptable in the West. Again, this is difficult as it's very hard to get some of these concepts across to them, but we're making progress.

gadgetmind

Southend1 wrote: »

My proposal would be for all governments to work together with other relevant organisations in a spirit of cooperation to ensure that workers rights are respected wherever they happen to live.

And I want world peace and a unicorn, but perhaps it's better to concentrate on achievable things that actually will improve the quality of life for everyone?

setmefree2

wotsthat wrote: »

I don't know where they get their advice from but it's idiotic being caught in a policy U turn when they didn't need a policy in the first place.

They have to take a position because The Budget Surplus Act / Charter for Budget Responsibility is to being debated today????