the snap general election thread

kabayiri

There's a difference between agreeing with some of what Arklight describes, and believing that Corbyn/Labour has the wherewithal to deliver on his many promises.

I know full well where my cynicism comes from : a long history of politicians of all colours promising much and delivering little.

It would have been hard enough to deliver the Labour program during the heady days of Blair/Brown; pre-crash and when the Bank profits were flowing in.

Now, it's even harder. So why should we trust Labour not to be over ambitious now?

Herzlos

At least Labour seem to be trying to move in the right direction. Even if they fail at most of it (and I imagine they will); I'd rather they were trying at least trying to solve the problems in the right way - making education attainable, boosting services, etc - rather than what the Tories are trying to do (of which they'll largely fail as well).

Arklight

Fella wrote: »

So you prefer to just ignore the simple question & issue a rant instead? Stuff like what I'm posting, ie how would all this fantasy stuff be PAID FOR is the reason most people don't trust Labour. If you want them to start trusting Labour, either make a coherent argument or stop backing stupid uncosted policies.

I can guarantee you that rants like yours above don't persuade a single wavering voter, they just turn them off. You get a few thanks from people who already think the same as you & everybody else just rolls their eyes.

Why don't you read the Labour manifesto, which, unlike the Tory manifesto, actually does detail how things will be costed. Then if you have a specific complaint you can come back here for help?


Currently you are ranting and wailing because a 126 page document, which has a further 8 page document specifically on costing, appended to it, isn't being explained to you in two sentences with smiley faces on MSE.


Let me get you started:


Manifesto and funding rationale: http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php/manifesto2017

Smiley faces: :-D


Now retreat to your safe space, calm down a bit, and come back when you've got something to say.

antrobus

Herzlos wrote: »

Feel free to explain why :beer:

Take the first paragraph;

Arklight wrote: »

The simple unarguable fact is that most people haven't had a pay rise for a decade, ..

That's not an "unarguable fact", it's bOllOx. Most people have had a pay rise. Whether the pay rise is sufficient to match CPI would be something else.

Arklight wrote: »

. £2 trillion of debt, more of which has been dumped on us by the Tories in a few years than Labour in 3 entire terms. ..

Our current debt has arisen as a direct result of the last Labour government blowing up the economy. And Corbyn's claim that the post 2010 governments have borrowed more money than "all Labour governments in history".

Again that is bOllOx, as the BBC's Reality Check noted;

all Labour governments borrowed about 70% of GDP while the governments since 2010 borrowed about 40% of GDP, which is a very different picture.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-3999946

Understanding the difference between real and nominal is one of the basics of economic literacy.:)

Besides, I'm not sure what point Corbyn et al are trying to make. Are they saying that a post 2010 Labour government would have imposed more austerity, in order to borrow less?

Arklight

kabayiri wrote: »

There's a difference between agreeing with some of what Arklight describes, and believing that Corbyn/Labour has the wherewithal to deliver on his many promises.

I know full well where my cynicism comes from : a long history of politicians of all colours promising much and delivering little.

It would have been hard enough to deliver the Labour program during the heady days of Blair/Brown; pre-crash and when the Bank profits were flowing in.

Now, it's even harder. So why should we trust Labour not to be over ambitious now?

Because then you have a Tory government forever.


Theresa May saying she should remain Prime Minister because she has experience of being Prime Minister makes no more sense now than when Gordon Brown said the same thing to David Cameron.


Incidentally I agree that Labour won't be able to deliver on everythiing they claim, but I believe they will try.


Conversely the Tories are only promising cuts and austerity and I am sure they will deliver on all that and more.

Herzlos

antrobus wrote: »

That's not an "unarguable fact", it's bOllOx. Most people have had a pay rise. Whether the pay rise is sufficient to match CPI would be something else.

Which is what I took it to mean; in real terms (buying power), most people are earning less than 10 years ago. Public sector staff have been capped at 1% rises for ages, with inflation being above 1% for the duration. Private sector largely using austerity as an excuse to keep pay rises down too. There are plenty of exceptions; pay rises due to change of job / promotion etc, but on the whole people seem to have less money in their pocket at the moment and that'll only get worse under the Tories continued austerity.

Conrad

CKhalvashi wrote: »

However in reality, the taxes that businesses pay are based on profit rather than turnover.

.

You've spent months posting on the dangers and doom of Brexit, and yet now all of a sudden, increasing corporate taxes on business that could relocate to low tax Dublin is nothing to worry about?

Conrad

Arklight wrote: »

Not voting Tory is a simple choice.

Voting Labour is the easiest of all political positions to adopt given the attractive silver bullet appeal of spending and taxing our way to the promised land.

kabayiri

Arklight wrote: »

Because then you have a Tory government forever.
...

China have had the same government in essence for decades.

It hasn't stopped them delivering growth that we could only dream of.

I'm not sure I get your point?

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

Which is what I took it to mean; in real terms (buying power), most people are earning less than 10 years ago. Public sector staff have been capped at 1% rises for ages, with inflation being above 1% for the duration. Private sector largely using austerity as an excuse to keep pay rises down too. There are plenty of exceptions; pay rises due to change of job / promotion etc, but on the whole people seem to have less money in their pocket at the moment and that'll only get worse under the Tories continued austerity.

Back in the recession after the crash, I had friends working in the PS who openly said "what recession?", when I saw the impact of contracts being postponed/cut back almost immediately.

It was a very uneven recession, with state intervention cushioning the impact.

That comes at a cost, and we have had one of the slowest, most drawn out recoveries.

Outside of London, some places have barely seen any growth.