The Corbynomics Thread

[crashmonitor]

Every face I have seen on TV or in the media sucking through pursed lips as they inform and "sincerely" educate the UK nation that Corbyn would a disaster for Britain have all got something to lose.

In the past few decades the have nots have grown in numbers, maybe even since Thatchers day which in my opinion we have been and still are, living under her legacy, not all bad I might add.

Even if there is a chance Corbyn could bring the UK to it's knees, there are many people who are already there and who would have nothing to lose. Hope is a big driver, more so when it is all that you have got.

The reality of living in the Uk is that the bottom are usually quite secure and have plenty to live for like lifetime social housing tenancies and a guaranteed income. It's actually the next few tiers up that actually are insecure..the market trader, white van man trying to self fund a life whilst raising a family.

It's these people who labour never support, and live poorer than the supposed bottom tier.

Edited September 19, 2015 by crashmonitor

[subspace]

Corbyn is quite capable of putting forward a budget for growth that actually decreases the overall debt. The extremists using untried economic policy are the Tories, with cuts on a scale not attempted before. Frankly the level of cuts being proposed (up to 40%) is just plain bonkers.

Assuming Corbyn does the following he already has saved a lot of money for the taxpayer :

Scrap trident - £60-£100 billion and rely on US nukes instead (as per most of the rest of Europe)

Scrap HS2 - £50 billion

Corporate tax avoidance/ higher rate of tax - £20 - £120 billion

Well scrapping the first two (HS2 and Trident) would definitely save money (unless you had to spend more on conventional weapons to make up for the loss of nukes) but I am not sure about corporate tax avoidance which would just damage the private sector and the extra taxes would most likely end up getting passed on to the consumer anyway in higher prices.

Edited September 18, 2015 by subspace

[Sawitcoming]

A lot of people would be wise not to under estimate Corbyn, many of the greatest past Labour achievements were on a left wing platform.

And no matter how right wing a person might be there is in my opinion at least one idea from Corbyn that makes you think "That is a brilliant idea" along with the fact that there are millions of people in the UK today who are struggling badly in their quality of life. What better way now to batter Cameron with a stick with a threat to turn to a REAL alternative in Corbyn.

I don't know about anyone else on this board, but I have been of the opinion for so long now that eventually the UK housing crisis will become so large a problem that it will have to be addressed. Immigration is for ever rising, rents and house prices reaching mad heights with landlords in the UK now behaving like some sinister figure from a Dickens novel. But what has just dawned on me is that this government or even if one of the Labour robots from Blairs conveyor belt had got into power nothing would have changed. There policy on housing(labour and Tory) was that if you built the homes that were needed it would cause prices to go down and become affordable, a vote loser.

I am quite a liberal sort of bloke, maybe slightly left leaning, but even I can sound quite right wing on some subjects, lazy people and immigration for example. I believe that the left to right wing agenda swings to one of the other over the decades in accordance with the mood of the nation, For so long now the pendlum has been stuck.

I can see Corbyn offering changes, big scary changes that will make the country gasp, and as with all changes there has to be a price or a little pain.

I found it interesting that Corbyn's very first question at on the front bench was about housing.

I can see Corbyn making an offer to the UK electorate to have a building revolution which gives better quality and more affordable homes, and as each week passes the numbers are growing who would find that one policy hugely attractive as well as the sizable but now shrinking selfish group who want house prices to remain sky high, for reasons I have never really understood.

+1

[goldbug9999]

How about you show us your maths to prove that austerity works then ?

The detractors on both sides are both half right: neither austerity nor ever increasing profligate government borrowing "work" because they dont address the core systemic issues being faced which is high living costs (principally housing) eroding buying power of average workers and therefore sapping general demand out of the economy. The is no fiscal or monetary solution which can provide a sustainable fix.

The only sustainable solution is to make basic life necessities such as shelter (much) cheaper and purge rentier elements from the economy so that the extra spending power recirculates into productive activities.

A publicly funded (either via borrowing or outright money printing) mass house building program would be a good step in the right direction.

Edited September 19, 2015 by goldbug9999

[Guest_northshore_*]

Frances Coppola: All QE is "people's QE" - just not the right people

[doomed]

I have a lot of issues with many of Corbyn's policies, I also am not keen with all of his entourage, Angela eagle and Diane Abbott to name two.

But like it is already been said Corbyn does have some great ideas and he is obviously has no intention of making going for growth or GDP his God where nothing else matters such as peoples quality of life, even Nigel Farage gets that.

But this morning I heard on the news that Corbyn will nationalise the railway once more if he gets a chance, great idea in my opinion for so many reasons. But now as a business man myself with a social conscience knowing that Corbyn if he goes too far with some things he could really screw this country up, I asked myself this question "Would I vote for this man if he promised a massive home building project"

The answer is yes, and if he chooses to have some kind of peoples QE to do it then I will except the risk, and a risk t will be.

This is where I am also.

I am pretty certain that his policies will end in disaster but at least we might have some infrastructure to show for it, and it would be tough to claim that the current way the country is run is not a disaster also.

We need a return to sound money but I don't think any politician will offer that.

[gf3]

Yes at least corbyn will fail trying to do the right things instead of succeed doing the wrong things. Still think we need to limit the number of people coming into the country to do it.

[Assume The Opposite]

Agree absolutely - and until that happens paying of the debt is utterly pointless. Any upturn in the economy and the debt goes up ! When money creation was discussed in parliament only 14 MP's turned up. Says it all really.

I watched that debate and the MP's seemed really engaged. If only more of them actually understood that debt=money in our financial system.

All the austerity rhetoric such as 'living within our means' and 'an economy based on savings' depends on the gullible public not asking questions.

A survey was done in Europe recently and over half the people believed the central bank/government created the money supply of that country.

Another thing worth considering is that during a so called time of austerity, the national debt has gone from £800bn to £1.4tr since 2010.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Assume The Opposite

[EUBanana]

<snip> bit late to the party

Edited September 21, 2015 by EUBanana

[wonderpup]

Yes, I would argue that British government has done nothing for decades in the way of policy to improve the well being and lives of the average working person

Both the Tories and the Labour party are united in their conviction that the only way to save the country is to sacrifice the living standards of it's people.

The fact that this is a logical absurdity does not seem to matter- they will tell you with total sincerity that the only way we can prosper is to reduce our living standards and strip away our welfare provisions and in general give up most of things that make us a first world country.

Of course this does lead to a bit of a puzzle; if the route to prosperity is for most of us to get worse off how do we know when prosperity has been achieved? I mean how can we tell if we are poor because we are poor or if we are poor because we are prosperous?

[zugzwang]

Both the Tories and the Labour party are united in their conviction that the only way to save the country is to sacrifice the living standards of it's people.

The fact that this is a logical absurdity does not seem to matter- they will tell you with total sincerity that the only way we can prosper is to reduce our living standards and strip away our welfare provisions and in general give up most of things that make us a first world country.

Of course this does lead to a bit of a puzzle; if the route to prosperity is for most of us to get worse off how do we know when prosperity has been achieved? I mean how can we tell if we are poor because we are poor or if we are poor because we are prosperous?

It's the same old neoclassical/New Keynesian socioeconomic perspective they inherited from Thatcher, but one in which nations rather individuals assume the role of blindly selfish, utility maximising agents in a global marketplace. The export of jobs and living standards to China etc. is meant to be compensated for by investment returns and cheap manufactures coming the other way.

[doomed]

How on earth did we get to the point we are relying on French and Chinese companies to build our nuclear plants. It is really depressing that we can't finance or build these things ourselves.

[tinker]

How on earth did we get to the point we are relying on French and Chinese companies to build our nuclear plants. It is really depressing that we can't finance or build these things ourselves.

Really says a lot about our fall as a nation. Shocking national strategic failure. Selling of assets and favouring a spiv culture. Who is to blame - the politicians.

[interestrateripoff]

Jeremy Corbyn is the first Labour leader to score negative debut poll rating

Left-wing firebrand scores minus three in opening Ipsos-MORI poll

It seems all the negative stories have had the desired effect.

[billybong]

How on earth did we get to the point we are relying on French and Chinese companies to build our nuclear plants. It is really depressing that we can't finance or build these things ourselves.

Maybe it's something to do with the UK being banker country - just print up the money and buy what you need rather than produce it yourself. Great for the bankers in banker country but for the rest it's devil take the hindmost.

What could possibly go wrong.

Edited September 24, 2015 by billybong

[billybong]

It seems all the negative stories have had the desired effect.

Farage had the same treatment and now UKIP gets about 4 million votes and trending upwards - and Corbyn is still the Labour leader by a huge majority until he's not.

Edited September 24, 2015 by billybong

[tinker]

The low opinion polling is strange given Corbyn won by something of a landslide in the leadership vote; and that he is something a bit different - something we are crying out for. However, the media have been really on one with him. Scared. Guido, where I first saw the poll ,has become more on message as the years go by. (Has he sold out?)

Time will tell; Corbyn is not in power so can't do any damage. We'll see how the ideas evolve. Maybe just a different brand of nonsense.

Pity about Farage (again, power of the media to scare the shit out of people), would have been fun having him in the House of Commons.

[BalancedBear]

The low opinion polling is strange given Corbyn won by something of a landslide in the leadership vote; and that he is something a bit different - something we are crying out for. However, the media have been really on one with him. Scared. Guido, where I first saw the poll ,has become more on message as the years go by. (Has he sold out?)

Time will tell; Corbyn is not in power so can't do any damage. We'll see how the ideas evolve. Maybe just a different brand of nonsense.

Pity about Farage (again, power of the media to scare the shit out of people), would have been fun having him in the House of Commons.

Corbyn won by a landslide within the small part of the population registered to vote in the Labour leadership election. This does not in anyway portray the desires of the wider electorate who will vote in a general election. 100% of people in the Labour party could vote for a leader. It does not mean anyone else will vote for the same person come a general election.

[doomed]

Let families claim unlimited benefits, demands Corbyn: Labour leader says curbs have caused 'social cleansing' as he calls for State control of rents

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3248322/Let-families-claim-unlimited-benefits-demands-Corbyn-Labour-leader-says-curbs-caused-social-cleansing-calls-State-control-rents.html

It is worth pointing out Corbyn is in favour of capping the overall benefit bill. Just changing how it is distributed.

[Assume The Opposite]

I don't know if this is reflective but a Tory support at work said austerity has all been for nothing. He seems to have realised about the national debt being doubled and that's it's all just been slick PR. He actually once said he admires Camoron.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Assume The Opposite

[Sawitcoming]

Jeremy Corbyn is the first Labour leader to score negative debut poll rating

Left-wing firebrand scores minus three in opening Ipsos-MORI poll

It seems all the negative stories have had the desired effect.

Sad. I have been dismayed at the bluntness of the propaganda at every turn.

[wonderpup]

If the performance of the polls during the last election are any kind of guide these results imply a Corbyn landslide at the next General election.

[scepticus]

Sad. I have been dismayed at the bluntness of the propaganda at every turn.

I would call it hysterical rather than blunt!

The Telegraph writers are in a bit of a flap.

[wonderpup]

I would call it hysterical rather than blunt!

The Telegraph writers are in a bit of a flap.

I think they see the danger of Corbyn changing the rules of engagement. Even if he is as unelectable as they claim he might still succeed in upsetting the 'Neoliberal consensus' that has been so well established for the past few decades. I watched the leadership debate and it was shocking just how purile the other three candidates looked compared to Corbyn- so much neo liberal cool aid had they consumed that it had rendered them virtually indistinguishable from both each other and their Tory opponents. No wonder Corbyn won- he was the only candidate whose speech could not have been ghost written by Tory Central Office.

[Maynardgravy]

I would call it hysterical rather than blunt!

The Telegraph writers are in a bit of a flap.

Absolutely. That bar chart comparison looks like it came straight out of the Daily Mash. Drivel.

Thing is, these sorts of article get a load of hits and it's assumed by the editors as a success, when the reality is that a great proportion are linked from sites like this or social media telling people to 'look at this rubbish'.