Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

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

fru-gal

Poll - Would You Consider Voting For Labour In The Next Ge If Corbyn Is Elected Leader?

Recommended Posts

This is obviously a totally theoretical poll but if Corbyn becomes Labour leader and he manages to form a shadow cabinet, would you consider voting for Labour in the next GE (assuming Osborne is Tory leader in 2020 and nothing else really changes)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've answered 'Yes' as the question is 'Would you consider..'

I'd first need to re-engage with politics and actually read a bit more about him and what he actually proposes.

As it stands, the whiff of a 50p tax rate would rule it out. You simply cannot help yourself to half of someone's earnings under any circumstances except possibly, say, fighting an alien invasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never voted Labour.....but fed up with the status quo......there has to be an alternative for those in society that are not at the moment represented......always keep an open mind. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt anything would change - I've not heard anything to suggest that he's any different from any of the others in the "We're going to continue to ruin the country because we're a bunch of blind, careless idiots who don't appear to value the things in it most worth valuing" stakes.

So no, I doubt he'd add a choice that wouldn't make me ill at the thought of supporting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. I like his ideas about nationalising trains and utilities and his ideas about a national money printing bank are potentially good, but ditching nukes, leaving NATO, opening coal mines etc. are just nuts.

So no. Would not consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never.

Edit to say: I lived through the 1970s, gave birth in the dark because of power cuts and would never wish to see the unions so powerful again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. I like his ideas about nationalising trains and utilities and his ideas about a national money printing bank are potentially good, but ditching nukes, leaving NATO, opening coal mines etc. are just nuts.

So no. Would not consider.

The things that do not effect most peoples day to day living.......anyway having nukes if there is another world war will not save any of us. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might be in the interests of some of the younger generation to vote Corbyn in and a few older voters too that have took out a short on UK plc in gold etc. and are up to mischief.

The guy is going to wreck Uk plc , but a long awaited asset reset would be more likely. Probably get a reversal of immigration as unemployment rise and a flight of capital and emigration of the rich, mass inflation and a bombed out economy would quickly follow. Welfare would be suddenly unaffordable so boomers better get ready for Greece style welfare haircuts in retirement. Don't you just love socialist governments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might be in the interests of some of the younger generation to vote Corbyn in and a few older voters too that have took out a short on UK plc in gold etc. and are up to mischief.

The guy is going to wreck Uk plc , but a long awaited asset reset would be more likely. Probably get a reversal of immigration as unemployment rise and a flight of capital and emigration of the rich, mass inflation and a bombed out economy would quickly follow. Welfare would be suddenly unaffordable so boomers better get ready for Greece style welfare haircuts in retirement. Don't you just love socialist governments.

If that all happens then yes, I do. If losing my livelihood is the price to watch the wealth-over-everything-obsessed cry and squeal then it'll be a price worth paying, and a bankrupt country at least wouldn't be able to afford to spend lots of money further effing it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might be in the interests of some of the younger generation to vote Corbyn in and a few older voters too that have took out a short on UK plc in gold etc. and are up to mischief.

The guy is going to wreck Uk plc , but a long awaited asset reset would be more likely. Probably get a reversal of immigration as unemployment rise and a flight of capital and emigration of the rich, mass inflation and a bombed out economy would quickly follow. Welfare would be suddenly unaffordable so boomers better get ready for Greece style welfare haircuts in retirement. Don't you just love socialist governments.

No government is all things to all people.....but in a democracy it is healthy to have a choice, at the moment there is no real choice.....why should people feel threatened by Corbyn if they thought he had no chance? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are certain things which would interest me if a politician were to say them.

For instance, the staged withdrawal of most of the Welfare State perhaps over the next ten years, including all forms of housing benefit predicated on the assumption that once State support to prop up property prices is removed, those will fall so people can afford them by themselves.

Only being able to collect child benefits if you can clearly show that you were able to support the children yourself originally and your circumstances have changed, and even then, like other benefits, only in the very short term.

The removal of the banks' ability to create money (though nobody has AFAIK come up with a workable perfect solution).

Constitutional change which limits what a government can do in a whole range of areas.

Renationalising certain utilities/the trains.

Having a private company-esque set of standards for State services and actually enforcing it with realistic penalties for failure which would necessarily have to fall on the individual. After all council leaders can earn private style money and so should be able to deliver private style standards, that being the justification for the salary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would depend on what he was actually proposing. Some ideas are OK others just seem bat 5h1t mental. If some ideas are simply thinking aloud and having a discussion fine, however ditching the nukes etc... I'm not comfortable with especially as the hornets nest that is the middle east has been well and truly kicked.

Being a leader means compromising on ideals to what will work in reality. Whether he could do that we'd have to see. From now to the next election is a long time, if he wants to get elected he'd need to find solutions that would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if they supported the full withdrawal of the U.K from the E.U. I won't be holding my breath. I do however agree with the policy of re-nationalising the utilities and railways, again which I believe is difficult under current E.U laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if they supported the full withdrawal of the U.K from the E.U. I won't be holding my breath. I do however agree with the policy of re-nationalising the utilities and railways, again which I believe is difficult under current E.U laws.

Interestingly, the "privatisation" of these utilities did not seem to save money, by promoting competition. :o In fact my water is now French.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if they supported the full withdrawal of the U.K from the E.U. I won't be holding my breath. I do however agree with the policy of re-nationalising the utilities and railways, again which I believe is difficult under current E.U laws.

To be honest....I think they could be electable just on the above points........how come transport services in the EU are modern, accessible, comfortable, up to date and affordable......everything most of the UK do not have access to at the moment......and the utilities act like a cartel......would prefer not to re-nationalise, but can't see any alternative being put on the table. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if they supported the full withdrawal of the U.K from the E.U. I won't be holding my breath. I do however agree with the policy of re-nationalising the utilities and railways, again which I believe is difficult under current E.U laws.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bus service in my area (Bristol) is alright now, but I do get the impression the EU is about its core founding members ignoring or f-ing over relative late comer outsiders like Britain and even more unsuitable, recent additions like Greece (plus Franco-German mass public transport was started fresh from scratch during the 1950s to 1960s like in Japan).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbyn is certainly causing a stir at the Telegraph. Despite the fact that the left wing readership of that paper is probably nearly zero, just this morning "Corbyn will cost everyone in Britain £2,400" and "Labour will send a 'resignation letter' to Britain if Corbyn is elected leader, rivals warn"

By next week, the headline will probably be "Everyone in Britain will die if Corbyn wins".

If I look at the Guardian site and scroll through the comments, I see two sets of opinions:

1. Corbyn is a disaster and this will be the end of the Labour party. Nothing has been learned.

2. Corbyn *is* what the Labour party should be. This is "True Labour".

I have a sneaking suspicion that those who most fervently support him on there may well be of the small minded, jealous disposition who see people with money and who genuinely believe the purpose of government is to take money away from the people who have it, and give it to the people who do not - the "number 2" option above. Meritocracy is a dirty word. "True Labour". Back to the class wars, and the "them-and-us" employee relationships of the 1960s and 1970s which destroyed this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Billions of pounds must be tied up in illiquid assets.........sitting there doing nothing, no good to anybody........surely some good use could be made of them, money released to invest in the people that actually do work in our society.....not those that get rewarded for gambling on cheap debt, others money, our future generations money, to sit on their backsides gaining from the hard work and subsidies of rest of us......something doesn't add up. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's plenty that doesn't add up.

Blair and Brown's approach was Tory extreme. "Light touch regulation". A means to an end.

That if you ignore the fact that presiding over a system which encourages speculation on basic human needs will eventually warp spending in the economy such that in the end, the logical outcome is that 100% of everyone's income goes on debt repayment - repaying debt conjured out of nothing.

The lassez-faire approach with this meant that Brown just kept on collecting the eggs from the golden goose and carefully redistributing them to just about everyone - benefits aren't just for the poor, we can all have some, we're all rich.

This worked right up to the point where it didn't and the obvious consequences of exponential debt were felt.

And it places the government directly at odds with the people. Because it means that the objective of government becomes "Get as many people into as much debt as possible". At the same time, operate policies which further warp the economy towards debt (The Conservative Help to Sell scheme for the developers, for instance) to prevent asset prices falling.

I suspect a day of reckoning will come, but the plates can be made to spin for quite a bit longer. (Just how long this can be sustained is something this website didn't predict).

Either Corbyn has looked at all of this and has some principled approaches. Or, intends to operate the Blair policy of "anything goes": just increase tax rates and do more of the same while it works.

Does he have the intellect to look at these things and carefully consider the logical outcome of courses of action so as to select the one that works, or are those the sorts of principles which are so important that if the economy completely collapses then so be it?

I shall have to read more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the class wars, and the "them-and-us" employee relationships of the 1960s and 1970s which destroyed this country.

An obsession with development, economics, wealth, and "progress" has destroyed this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the causes are:

The death of meritocracy *

Previous union power

Overpopulation

Incompetent politicians

High youth unemployment

Dreadful infrastructure

* That the bank bail out was allowed to pass has effectively destroyed the notion of meritocracy and placed a wall between the public and the government/the banks who are now effectively one entity. The damage this has done to the public perception of our leaders is IMO incalculable and has set a precedent: this *will* all happen again.

I would include "self interest" but since that's a human trait and would be present everywhere I don't see why the UK would be an exception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the causes are:

The death of meritocracy *

Previous union power

Overpopulation

Incompetent politicians

High youth unemployment

Dreadful infrastructure

* That the bank bail out was allowed to pass has effectively destroyed the notion of meritocracy and placed a wall between the public and the government/the banks who are now effectively one entity. The damage this has done to the public perception of our leaders is IMO incalculable and has set a precedent: this *will* all happen again.

I would include "self interest" but since that's a human trait and would be present everywhere I don't see why the UK would be an exception.

I'd agree with some of those but not others. Unemployment of any sort being an issue is a strong sign of a fundamentally screwed up system. Dreadful infrastructure? Compared to what? What's dreadful is building more godawful crap to "improve" it, mostly to satisfy the chronically impatient and to deal with an overpopulation issue that should never have happened in the first place (and the solution should be to tackle that overpopulation). If that isn't going to happen but we just get more "improvements" - well, I hope the world burns and I'll be comforted burning with it by the screams of those who wanted that crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd agree with some of those but not others. Unemployment of any sort being an issue is a strong sign of a fundamentally screwed up system. Dreadful infrastructure? Compared to what? What's dreadful is building more godawful crap to "improve" it, mostly to satisfy the chronically impatient and to deal with an overpopulation issue that should never have happened in the first place (and the solution should be to tackle that overpopulation). If that isn't going to happen but we just get more "improvements" - well, I hope the world burns and I'll be comforted burning with it by the screams of those who wanted that crap.

Notice I wrote "overpopulation" [is the issue] and not "insufficient house building" ;)

We have phenomenally expensive trains which only run a limited number of routes. Unless the stock is brand new, they are all dirty (we don't clean stuff, we're a generally dirty country and this really notices when you come back after spending time in Europe) and often overcrowded. They are a joke.

Sadly we can't do much about them because they're in private hands. Other than keep shovelling subsidies their way.

So the notion of an integrated public transport system cannot come to bear. This country does not "do" infrastructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   32 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.