Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Si1

Ed Milliband Might Have Decent Chance Of Winning Snap Election.

Recommended Posts

read this in the telegraph today: right wing tories may rail at electoral reform. lib-dems may get really upset. vote of no confidence succeeds. general election at low point of economic pain. Ed Milliband has appeal across whole of labour party, is distanced from Crash-Gordon. Probably would appeal to a lot of disaffected lib-dems. Before boundary reform, labour still hold numerical advantage, so could quite straightforwardly win a basic majority. Period of maximum risk is approaching - I suppose it could be worse, could be Ed Balls....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed Milliband is getting a lot of union support. Unison just backed him.

Distancing himself from Balls and his brother could get him the win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually can't think of any parallels. If strong union support and left-wing is he a bit of a Harold Wilson?

edit: ...or Neil Kinnock...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is the only politician I know who has questioned globalisations benefits for the average working person.

Globalisation is not simply an untameable force of nature to which we must adapt or die.
When competition is driving down your wages and your pension rights, saying globalisation is good for you and for the economy as a whole is an example of what I mean about becoming a technocrat. Because it is a good answer for economists but it is no answer for the people of Britain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is the only politician I know who has questioned globalisations benefits for the average working person.

There is no doubt that globalisation is bad for some specific British working people.

There is also no doubt that a unilateral withdrawl from global trade will accelerate the decrease in the average standard of living of British people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that globalisation is bad for some specific British working people.

There is also no doubt that a unilateral withdrawl from global trade will accelerate the decrease in the average standard of living of British people.

I am not advocating a withdrawal from global trade however the average working person is being screwed by globalisation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has the voice of a cartoon character though. A pre-pubescent one at that.

Didn't little Eddie say he was just a salesman? I hope he gets it. They'll be out of office for ever. That guy could sell sh1t to the Eskimos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is the only politician I know who has questioned globalisations benefits for the average working person.

Sure, but I kinda want my politicians to provide answers not questions. Otherwise it can just appear that you're angling for trade union vote without actually saying what you will do about it. Sadly, I suspect that the answer, when it comes down to it, is 'absolutely nothing'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not advocating a withdrawal from global trade however the average working person is being screwed by globalisation.

Our problem is that our cost of living is too high relative to the wages that globalisation allow us to earn.

The solution to date seems to be to use tax revenues to try to prop up our unsustainable standard of living at current prices.

The solution that I see is to allow asset prices to collapse so that our costs of living are better aligned with the wages that global markets will allow us to earn. Halving housing costs, with all else remaining constant, will massively improve everyone's standard of living.

This solution effectively forces the owners of assets to bear part of the cost of globalisation as the assets that they have acquired will be significantly marked down in value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, but I kinda want my politicians to provide answers not questions. Otherwise it can just appear that you're angling for trade union vote without actually saying what you will do about it. Sadly, I suspect that the answer, when it comes down to it, is 'absolutely nothing'.

But the attitude is very different to that of Blair, Brown and Mandelson who saw no faults in globalisation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't little Eddie say he was just a salesman? I hope he gets it. They'll be out of office for ever. That guy could sell sh1t to the Eskimos.

I couldn't sell that to them either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the attitude is very different to that of Blair, Brown and Mandelson who saw no faults in globalisation.

You may be right. But to make a fair comparison, I'd like to know what Brown and Blair said (if anything) about globalisation in 1992 (ie 5 years before fighting a general election as Labour leader).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My choice would be Burnham, largely because he is not a London centric politician.

On the other hand, Labour have to do well in London, so a Milliband speaks the language.

Of the two brothers, Ed seems to have the cajones his brother lacked when he had an opportunity to oppose Brown.

But we are doomed until the Coalition falls out.

Bring on the Conference season.

I did enjoy Jack Straw mincing up the Boy Nick at PMQs today. Foot on throat over Forgemasters. Semms the Boy Nick told porkies to Parliament..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our problem is that our cost of living is too high relative to the wages that globalisation allow us to earn.

The solution to date seems to be to use tax revenues to try to prop up our unsustainable standard of living at current prices.

The solution that I see is to allow asset prices to collapse so that our costs of living are better aligned with the wages that global markets will allow us to earn. Halving housing costs, with all else remaining constant, will massively improve everyone's standard of living.

This solution effectively forces the owners of assets to bear part of the cost of globalisation as the assets that they have acquired will be significantly marked down in value.

Sounds like a great idea but I can't see it happening quickly enough, if at all. It helps that I don't hold any assets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our problem is that our cost of living is too high relative to the wages that globalisation allow us to earn.

The solution to date seems to be to use tax revenues to try to prop up our unsustainable standard of living at current prices.

The solution that I see is to allow asset prices to collapse so that our costs of living are better aligned with the wages that global markets will allow us to earn. Halving housing costs, with all else remaining constant, will massively improve everyone's standard of living.

This solution effectively forces the owners of assets to bear part of the cost of globalisation as the assets that they have acquired will be significantly marked down in value.

I would like to agree, but given the amount of private debt sloshing about, i very much doubt it will improve everyones standard of living. Not to mention those using property as a pension. Im up for that though, would be awesome for me as an ftb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt that globalisation is bad for some specific British working people.

There is also no doubt that a unilateral withdrawl from global trade will accelerate the decrease in the average standard of living of British people.

+ 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not advocating a withdrawal from global trade however the average working person is being screwed by globalisation.

LuckyOne wrote "some specific British working people". You wrote "the average working person".

LuckyOne is right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our problem is that our cost of living is too high relative to the wages that globalisation allow us to earn.

The solution to date seems to be to use tax revenues to try to prop up our unsustainable standard of living at current prices.

The solution that I see is to allow asset prices to collapse so that our costs of living are better aligned with the wages that global markets will allow us to earn. Halving housing costs, with all else remaining constant, will massively improve everyone's standard of living.

This solution effectively forces the owners of assets to bear part of the cost of globalisation as the assets that they have acquired will be significantly marked down in value.

You are on fire today! Well done! (And much more constructive posts than me.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LuckyOne wrote "some specific British working people". You wrote "the average working person".

LuckyOne is right.

Which workers have benefited from globalisation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which workers have benefited from globalisation?

The ones who produce things which can sustain higher wages than the lowest common denominator.

A few examples might include :

- Machinists who help produce Rolls Royce jet engines

- People who work on the Mini / Porsche / Mercedes / BMW assembly lines

- People who construct and erect wind turbines

- People who construct F1 car parts

- People who build high performance gliders

Those who suffer will certainly include :

- People who become replaceable when they "demand" wages that are not sustainable relative to their contribution

- People who manufacture low cost, commoditised goods

- People who rely on income from the state rather than the private sector

No matter what we do for a living, the single most important criterion is to choose an employer which has a competitive edge in the global market

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which workers have benefited from globalisation?

As workers, the export sector, both goods and services.

But more importantly, we are not just workers, we are consumers too, and if we were not allowed to chose freely, and were forced to buy from UK producers, in many (most?) cases we would have to pay more for inferior products. Remember the case of the corn laws? You are asking to have your own freedom limited. You are asking to be a captive consumer of UK capitalists - a reserved market for them.

And we are all investors too. Your pension fund profits from market logic. If you curtail its freedom, forcing it to invest in UK companies only (yes, there could be such a protectionist law also), you would damage your future pension. The UK capitalists would monopolise even your savings! :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This solution effectively forces the owners of assets to bear part of the cost of globalisation as the assets that they have acquired will be significantly marked down in value.

That's what we prevented by bailing out the banking system. The owners of all those mortgage-backed bonds, banking sector loans, etc. were effectively shielded, by preserving the banks and the book-value of their collateral.

Now, who were the owners of those bonds, I wonder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As workers, the export sector, both goods and services.

But more importantly, we are not just workers, we are consumers too, and if we were not allowed to chose freely, and were forced to buy from UK producers, in many (most?) cases we would have to pay more for inferior products. Remember the case of the corn laws? You are asking to have your own freedom limited. You are asking to be a captive consumer of UK capitalists - a reserved market for them.

And we are all investors too. Your pension fund profits from market logic. If you curtail its freedom, forcing it to invest in UK companies only (yes, there could be such a protectionist law also), you would damage your future pension. The UK capitalists would monopolise even your savings! :(

But the market's freedom is curtailed by the Mercantilism practiced by our trading partners. All of the groups in the above posts, supposedly benefiting from "globalisation", have also suffered because of the debt bubble that's inflated up under this Globalist-Mercantilist hybrid.

Sure, we've got more, superior and cheaper products than would otherwise have been the case ... I hope it was worth it. If it's widely considered to be so, let's not hear any more about how lucky people were in the 50s and 60s because they had the OPPOSITE trade-off: no globalised supply chain; little alternative but to buy products from Britain or other similar countries (or go without); balanced trade that didn't need to be financed by ever-growing debt; and cheap houses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

read this in the telegraph today: right wing tories may rail at electoral reform. lib-dems may get really upset. vote of no confidence succeeds. general election at low point of economic pain. Ed Milliband has appeal across whole of labour party, is distanced from Crash-Gordon. Probably would appeal to a lot of disaffected lib-dems. Before boundary reform, labour still hold numerical advantage, so could quite straightforwardly win a basic majority. Period of maximum risk is approaching - I suppose it could be worse, could be Ed Balls....

Do you think Gordon will go to the party conference in the autumn? If he does, do you think anyone will speak with him, or are they all afraid of being tainted by connection? How the mediocre have fallen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 150 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.