An Evening With... Jeremy Corbyn

ruggedtoast

cells wrote: »

we already have a social democracy in the uk one that works quite well

the rich pay a lot of the taxes the poor pay little to none, the old, children, the disabled, the sick are cared for and the country obeys the rules of law and order. Crime is fairly low and education fairly good and opportunity to live a free and fulfilling life is high. job opportunities are good with long term unemployment at ~1%

so as I keep saying the picture the hard left try to paint of a dire country in dire circumstances and on the edge of poverty does not exist.

the biggest problems households face in this social democracy is not lack of more state spending but their own internal problems. things like gambling alcohol drug addictions that destroy households and make people miserable and those problems dont just hit the poor but often they do lead to making people poor.

And this is the issue in a nutshell.

The working and lower middle classes have been hollowed out by neoliberalism. Jobs have been outsourced, zero hours contracts abound and people rely on debt to live month to month.

Then if anyone dares to complain about this system : "The rich pay all the taxes" - of course they do. They've created a society where only they have any money.

setmefree2

ruggedtoast wrote: »

And this is the issue in a nutshell.

The working and lower middle classes have been hollowed out by neoliberalism. Jobs have been outsourced, zero hours contracts abound and people rely on debt to live month to month.

Then if anyone dares to complain about this system : "The rich pay all the taxes" - of course they do. They've created a society where only they have any money.

Whilst it seems to be news to you, I can reliably inform you that all LP members know there is inequality in the world. However, if you "really" want to do something about inequality you have to win power....

....Blair and Brown did something to help the worse off....Corbyn never will....in fact, he will only ever make their plight worse....

westernpromise

ruggedtoast wrote: »

And this is the issue in a nutshell.

The working and lower middle classes have been hollowed out by neoliberalism. Jobs have been outsourced, zero hours contracts abound and people rely on debt to live month to month.

Then if anyone dares to complain about this system : "The rich pay all the taxes" - of course they do. They've created a society where only they have any money.

None of that's true; you just need to tell yourself that it is, to justify helping yourself to the fruits of other people's efforts.

If two people earn the same and A spends the lot while B saves, sooner or later A - if he's like you - will demand wealth taxes on B. B's still got some money, so obviously A wants it. Because B is "rich" - A has to dehumanise B as "the rich" because it's easier to rob people when you hate them, and it makes A sound like a victim rather than a spendthrift parasite.

Most people see through all this and recognise that, very conveniently, what you insist is the moral and right thing to do always just happens to coincide exactly with your own personal economic interests. It's almost as though you want other people's money without having to work, take risks, relocate etc. Perish the thought!

cells

ruggedtoast wrote: »

And this is the issue in a nutshell.

The working and lower middle classes have been hollowed out by neoliberalism. Jobs have been outsourced, zero hours contracts abound and people rely on debt to live month to month.

Then if anyone dares to complain about this system : "The rich pay all the taxes" - of course they do. They've created a society where only they have any money.

can you actually tell me what your complaint is rather than nonsense propaganda?

the best hard left wingers come up with is 'the rich get richer and the poor get poorer' by which most of the time they actually mean 'i'm not rich yet so this system must be to blame'

for the 10th time. there are many wealthy households in the uk. it isnt just the 1% doing well its probably closer to the 25% and with the next 25% still in a good position. That you ignore this with 'only they have money' nonsense means come election times you will scratch your head and wonder why it is that the public isn't voting for higher taxes on [strike]1/3rd[/strike] 'the 1%'

cells

westernpromise wrote: »

None of that's true; you just need to tell yourself that it is, to justify helping yourself to the fruits of other people's efforts.

If two people earn the same and A spends the lot while B saves, sooner or later A - if he's like you - will demand wealth taxes on B. B's still got some money, so obviously A wants it. Because B is "rich" - A has to dehumanise B as "the rich" because it's easier to rob people when you hate them, and it makes A sound like a victim rather than a spendthrift parasite.

Most people see through all this and recognise that, very conveniently, what you insist is the moral and right thing to do always just happens to coincide exactly with your own personal economic interests. It's almost as though you want other people's money without having to work, take risks, relocate etc. Perish the thought!

the counter to that argument is that

1: luck and fortune plays a big (likely the biggest) part in the equation for most people

2: there would be no rich without the poor and middle

therefore higher taxes are justified on wealthier people (as opposed to a flat tax) as they are primarily a luck tax and a society tax.

westernpromise

cells wrote: »

the counter to that argument is that

1: luck and fortune plays a big (likely the biggest) part in the equation for most people

2: there would be no rich without the poor and middle

therefore higher taxes are justified on wealthier people (as opposed to a flat tax) as they are primarily a luck tax and a society tax.

And the counter argument to that is that wealthier people already do pay more while most people either take out or net pay nothing.

ruggedtoast

westernpromise wrote: »

And the counter argument to that is that wealthier people already do pay more while most people either take out or net pay nothing.

Which is a symptom of inequality and a failure of neoliberal capitalist ideology to spread opportunity and reward investment.

One you appear to be incapable of recognising.

mwpt

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Which is a symptom of inequality and a failure of neoliberal capitalist ideology to spread opportunity and reward investment.

One you appear to be incapable of recognising.

You seem very long on rhetoric but very short on actual proposals. From what I can gather, the proposals are to just take more from the richer and distribute to the poorer. Now, personally, I think this is the way we will have to go due to the nature of how the world is changing with technology, for a period of time. And I'm ok with that.

But I don't pretend that I have the answers to address increasing inequality with a "nicer kind of politics".

So what I want to know, are you ok and on board with simply increasing taxes on wealthier people or do you guys (you and comrade Corbyn) actually have a solution to ensure everyone keeps getting better off but inequality decreases. Because it seems to me that you don't.

westernpromise

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Which is a symptom of inequality and a failure of neoliberal capitalist ideology to spread opportunity and reward investment.

One you appear to be incapable of recognising.

No, it's not. It's a symptom that we live in a social democracy in which literally everything is paid for by the wealthy. People who aren't wealthy pay nothing, but some still feel entitled to more. Tough.

BobQ

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I think our experiences of "the average person" differs by some wide margin.

Where do we go to receive the gifts inheritances, substantial sums, owned houses and pensions and savings again? That may well be the experience of older people, or you, but it is not for most who weren't born on the 50s and 60s.

The average person owns or has a mortgaged house.

When the average person dies some of their assets filter down to younger people.

Home ownership in the UK is the lowest in 30 years while rents are at their highest.

True but the average person still owns their own home.

British working households carry an average of £5000 - £6000 unsecured debt on top of their mortgage or rental payment.

Whose fault is this unsecured borrowing. What are they buying with these funds (cars, ipads, holidays ?)

Most Brits will be underwater within a couple of months if they lose their jobs, and the Tories are slashing the state safety net ever further in their ideological war on the poor.

This has always been the case if people borrow rather than save.

The Tories are nasty people I agree, but many of the people over 25 spent most of the last decade borrowing more than they could afford to spend on things they did not need.

The Tories were elected because people did not vote for Labour after Blair was hounded out of office. He may have made mistakes but Labour would have been in a stonger position today had he remained, we most likely would not have voted to leave the EU either.

The Tories were elected because of people such as yourself taking Labour further and further to the left.

Graduates will have £27k on average of loan debt.

For what reason? Because they lacked the common sense to realise that a university education does not erase student debt or guarantee a better job.

As a country we owe over £60k per household thanks to the Tories doubling the national debt during their decade of austerity.

Those with £60K of debt have it because they own a house or because they chose to borrow money rather than save up for what they want..

The only thing these discussions seem to serve on here is that wealthy people know wealthy people, and are apparently unable to understand that other people's experience of the UK isn't quite as benign.

This is nothing new!!!! In any generation/society there are those who have more money than others. They tend to leave their money to other people who may or may not have money. It is life. Everyone has to make their way in life based on what they earn and what they are given. There is no right to inherit, right to be lucky.

Meanwhile the Tories are attempting to expunge from public records the fact that they are basically owned by the 1% of people who certainly can afford to be paying a lot more in recognising that their ability to create wealth is wholly dependent on the goodwill of British workers, who are currently being cheated.

This is also not new!!!!!!! Tories have always tried to conceal the concentration of wealth through trusts and offshore tax havens. There are very few economic systems that ensure that those who create wealth benefit as much as those who own the capital assets that are used to create the wealth. They usually come at a price.

Unfortunately, but not surprisingly for the Tories, all they are recognising is payment for graft, sleaze, cheating and leg ups to pursue their interests in government.

Well spotted! This is of course new and never happened in the past century.

We need a strong opposition to win power to help the people you seem to want to help. Corbyn is unelectable.