Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour joy and Tory gloom
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour joy and Tory gloom
A few weeks ago I was helping a front bencher prepare for a TV appearance and we guessed that one of the questions might be “Do you agree with Laura Pidcock?” She is the newbie MP who declared she wouldn’t hang out with Tory women because she regards them as “enemy”.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Perhaps true, but no one really understands this, let alone has policies to address it, least of all Corbyn.
Comments on “Tory borrowing” I’m afraid are completely disingenuous- borrowing is only what it is today because Gordon Brown left Office with a £166,000,000,000 black hole in the public finances. Despite what some have called a “Decade Of Austerity” we’re still £50bn a year short of balancing the books.
And at that point, I swear I saw a shark fin under the words and gave up....
Ta! Very much, May has just wiped out the relevancy of the Tories in Scotland.
Many people voted in the referendum having weighed up the arguments, pro and anti, with their hearts and minds, So, while Tory, Labour, LibDems could have been considered natural No's, many voted Yes, while many in the SNP voted No. The question of Independence had been argued for years, especially since 2007 when the SNP came to power, the clue being in the name and the realisation that the leadership of the party would be demanding a referendum at some point.
That many in Scotland now look at Brexit and see what a near miss the result of iRef was, has even many in the SNP questioning the relevance of the Party to Scotland. The Leadership were expected to announce next week, at their conference, that they will now concentrate on the bread and butter issues of running Scotland and put the arguments for iRef2 on the back burner until Brexit had been sorted (which, brings to mind, what on earth have they been doing since '07).
So thanks Theresa, for nothing, your presence was non existent in the run up to iRef, and Ruthie, poncing around in her little white tank doing Thatcher impressions was mostly ignored. And May, in her ignorance of how her speech will play, has virtually killed off Ruthie's chances - unless, of course, that was what was intended.....
After all, when Corbyn's friend McDonnell had an open influential job position, Corbyn's son got it. Of the many people out there, Seb was the ideal candidate. Obviously. Of all the young men and women who could perform the taxpayer-funded job, Seb was, by chance, the best candidate. No nepotism was involved.
As is often the case, it became: "For the many, not the few - except when the few includes me and my family."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/02/las-vegas-strip-shooting-multiple-casualties-reported-near-mandalay/
There was nothing in McDonnell's speech or Corbyn's that suggests that they have the first clue how to remedy the problems which led to the GFC, let alone fashion an economy fit for the 21st century.
Don is right that neither Labour nor Tories have a monopoly on economic mismanagement. Prudent of course means much more than just how much you borrow - but i suppose labour have to start somewhere in combatting Tory myths...
One of the criticisms often levelled at Corbyn is that all his ideas are from the 1970s.
Actually he has created space for a lot of new ideas - peoples qe, land value tax, lifelong learning from national education service...
Are the British people ready to trust this geography teacher lookalike with the economy? I still have my doubts - but if he creates space for new ideas and emboldens the Labour Party to be more radical - I think that's an excellent legacy.
For me it's a shame that Ed M. wasn't bolder... I think he could have run on a 2017 style manifesto and maybe done a lot better.
It’s often a good idea for a child to go for a different career to their parents, but what if that’s what they want to do?
And why does this site need your contributions?
How about you show a bit of respect?
"I believe that Labour is developing an industrial strategy that will deal with both the opportunities and threats created by the digital revolution. An interesting meeting organised by Labour Business and Fujitsu was addressed by two of the smartest people on Corbyn’s front bench, Chi Onwurah and Liam Byrne. "
One would have thought the piece might then spell out the strategy, or at least give some ideas as to what Liam and Chi said that caused Brind's belief that a strategy was under construction.
No. The next sentence just chips ahead with "They are people to watch". That's it. No evidence, no ideas.
Whatever happened to Henry G Manson? His pieces as a Labour insider were always thoughtful and interesting.
Fresh and radical thinking is certainly needed. Spending money you haven't earned is neither fresh nor radical and is likely to end in the same mess the last time it was tried.
Centrist Dads are the new Mondeo Man or Worcester Woman.
But the conclusion that he shouldn't write leaders on the UK's top political blog is wrong-headed. His view needs hearing---not because he is right, but because he explains an increasingly widely held view.
As too often with Labour, their words are one thing, their actions another.
Being the child of an MP, yet alone the Labour leader, already gives you many advantages in the form of people you know and our experience of the political world. There's little need for such an obvious and egregious taxpayer-funded leg-up. Corbyn also apparently employs McCluskey’s daughter, who coincidentally was also the best person for the job.
Imagine if one of your grandchildren had wanted to get the job, and despite being a better fit for the role, was beaten by a child of the boss's friend.
Corbyn's hypocrisy is profound: apparently nepotism is bad for Tories, but good for Labour.
He did abolish the boom part.
https://twitter.com/TheMossadIL/status/898342663899852800
(Assuming that is a genuine Mossad feed ...)
Nepotism a much more potent allegation on how he was working for his dad in the first place - but I suspect the queue for Corbyns leadership campaign back then was not long...
It's like saying that I'm an Olympic 10,000 metre champion in waiting because the only other competitor has broken both her legs.
One consequence of which is that the UK had a current account deficit of £115bn in 2016:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/hbop/pnbp
You could build a lot of houses and fund a lot of students and social care with that.
Labour wants to take the credit for all the good things that happened when it was in power but none of the bad things.
Either nepotism in public life is fine and accepted, or it is not. If this is fine in Corbyn's book, then so is a Conservative MP employing children or spouses.
By all means, tax the mills. But that technology won't be uninvented, however much socialists stamp their little feet.
There's a genuine challenge about facing the way technological innovation is changing the economic picture. Pretending you can wind back the clock isn't the way to do it.
Is this correct?
If you look at Labour. If you atribute blame, you have to accept that they did some good, especially once the storm hit. And again NHS spending was not the cause.
I think that Richard Murphy's expertise is fairly widely disputed.
"Ministers will today face down Tory rebels and announce that they will push ahead with the continued rollout of Universal Credit."
...and so they head to yet another self-imposed cliff.
The Big Lie is the straw man you and other Labour figures put up to try and wriggle off the hook.
The Tories argued that you were responsible for the UK's complete lack of preparedness to handle to consequences of the crash, not that you started it.
But his CV is pretty much as I would expect for someone in that position.
Indeed it looks similar to Nick Timothy when he became TM chief of staff at HO.
Interest rates at all but zero. QE maxed out. Deficit still an issue.
If there is a severe downturn what are policy makers going to do? Japanese style QE?
We will have more jobs in manufacturing if British firms make things that people want to buy at a price they can afford. Punishing innovation is never the answer.
A better reform would be to start to bear down on employer national insurance, to make it easier for firms to give pay rises (particularly at a time when pension costs are going up). The tragedy is that Corbyn's Labour Party won't even consider this because they like the idea of taxes on business (even if they fall effecitvely on employees) and Osborne helped legitimise this nonsense with his payroll levy for apprenticeships.
Concepts such as wealth creation and living within your means are pretty rare among modern politicians and especially so in the Labour party.
The fact he has had a massive leg-up is still relevant.
@david_herdson is an active Tory but his headers are balanced and thought provoking
@donbrind is just a partisan hack. His headers are just about the only ones I don't bother with - they are rarely insightful and just regurgitate the latest Labour attack lines
So why not Corbyn?
"Do as I say not as I do"
Oh, and
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/3214999/Financial-crisis-David-Cameron-blames-Gordon-Brown-for-Britains-broken-economy.html
To say that other parties agreed with the general economic policies followed is a cop out. Labour were in government. They had responsibility for what they did and did not do. They need to take responsibility not claim that somehow because others would have done the same Labour are not responsible for their own actions.
I can see the point of arguing this if you had some solid facts.
Can you supply them ? What did Corbyn's son read at Cambridge, & what class degree did he get ?
"But his CV is pretty much as I would expect for someone in that position."
What else is in his CV, as you have apparently seen it?
But, genuine question this: hasn't the deficit come down since 2010?
The falls in relative western wage rates since the early noughties have complex and multifaceted roots. Folk are searching for simple stories and solutions. Unfortunately Brexit validated one of those simple stories on pay. Why is a Robot Tax worse ? We are where we are and will probably have to return to our senses the hard way.
But that's nothing to do with my point
I think you overestimate the power of the UK govt in the economy and the prevailing political/economic culture does shape and constrain what you can do and we're all culpable for that. One political party is not responsible for our credit culture.
FWIW I think Labour can be heavily criticised, but not on the terms most people make.
https://monarch.caa.co.uk <<<— CAA information website for those affected.
The economy is not in great shape now, but it's a lot better than it was.
I'm sorry - you lost me at that.
If the Tories were so rubbish & Labour so wonderful, it would be Labour inheriting deficits and the Tories inheriting surpluses from their predecessors, not the other way round......as Mrs T said, the trouble with Socialists is they always run out of other people's money.....
If you compare the economic performance of the current government and the last Labour government, I think the blues would be quite happy with that.
Nor do robots claim benefits, require housing, use public services or add to pressure on transport and the environment.
And I have never seen a robot begging on the street.
I do know many people who have worked as researchers for Labour MPs having come down from Oxbridge with good degrees. I do know the jobs are very, very competitive and will generate a very strong shortlist.
I also think that, in a political job, you might place heavy emphasis on hiring someone you trust who shares your commitment & ideology.
So they vow to make the tough decisions. They cut a leg off. The weight is lost. And then they go for a run. It does not work out.
Meanwhile, bored with austerity they have a moment of madness do a Brexit and eat a massive cream cake.
If her Christmas trip is a package sold through an ABTA agent then ABTA will make her good, if she booked a flight only then she’ll need to rely on whatever insurance she has.
https://monarch.caa.co.uk/customers/i-have-a-future-booking-and-have-not-travelled-yet/
I'd add that having worked for McDonnell before - you would be at an advantage.
Edit: and read the link, the one that shows Conservatives borrowed most, even before the financial crisis.
It's the sheer hypocrisy of it that's so hilarious.
They live in the cloud and will instantly financially restructure themselves to benefit from the most favourable tax treatment at any given time.
They need to be taxed if they want to access our markets and compete with yours and my labour.
Gordon left office in 2010 with the government borrowing £166,000,000,000 a year, that’s around five hundred million pounds a day. Are you saying that the Tories should have got the deficit down faster?