Should Corbyn remain as Labour leader?

[SasaS]

13 minutes ago, Brownie said:

Have you seen the rate of rail fare increases over the last 10-15 years, compared to inflation etc? Have you seen how old the trains are that are being used? Have you seen how much profit these companies make?

 

Of course anything ran by the state needs to break even or make money but when it does that money is being reinvested back into the government pot which you’d expect to be redirected for running, maintenance, innovation etc.

 

Governments have shown time and time again that any regulations or controls they put in do not always work, so bring it back in house.

I must admit I never did understand the problem with railways in the UK, there must be something structural, because the thing didn't seem to work properly when it was government owned as it doesn't seem to work now when it is privately or foreign government owned.

[Brownie]

12 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

I never use the rail network and haven’t done so for many many years , I did regularly use British Rail back then and it was an absolute disaster, it was fair to say it was a running joke, if it was re-nationalised it would have to be run far better than when I used it. That said whether the privatised version is as bad or worse I’ve no idea as I’ve never used it.

There are all kinds of variables involved in running a railway company i’d assume; technology, stability of the lines provided by Network Rail, investment etc.

 

The only recent example we can look at is East Coast Rail which was nationalised between 2009-2015 and did really well, so it shows that it can be done.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

21 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Yes.  I’ve spoken to people at BEIS and Ofgem who think it was a terrible idea. You?

I think tinkering with privatised utilities isn't worth it.  Far, far better to take the whole lot back in-house and organise essential public utilities for the public good.

[Captain Turdseye]

5 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

As for the list there is some good stuff on it but like A Red whilst I’m no economist or accountant it looks incredibly expensive, I would be surprised if we didn’t run into trouble trying to pay for it.

 

There’s a debate there to be had but there was at least an attempt to have it fully costed in the last manifesto. The Tories didn’t bother, did they? They just shake the magic money tree as and when. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

14 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

I never use the rail network and haven’t done so for many many years , I did regularly use British Rail back then and it was an absolute disaster, it was fair to say it was a running joke, if it was re-nationalised it would have to be run far better than when I used it. That said whether the privatised version is as bad or worse I’ve no idea as I’ve never used it.

They did to British Rail what they always do pre-privatisation - what they're doing to the NHS now - underfund it and fuck it around, to the point where people think "maybe the privateers couldn't do any worse".

 

The best modern example of rail nationalisation in this country is the East Coast Mainline, where the private operator failed (twice!) leaving the DfT to step in and run it, resulting (both times) in better performance in terms of punctuality, reliability, customer satisfaction and cost efficiency.

[Pureblood]

2 hours ago, A Red said:

I think theres some good stuff in that wish list, but does seem quite expensive. To nationalise Steel, water, energy, Probabtion, Royal Mail, Rail and the National Grid whilst promising all sorts of investment banks and schemes is a bit hard left I reckon.

 

My concerns are increasing inheritance tax (not that i would benefit from it), votes for 16 year olds, ban on new grammar schools and increasing capital gains tax. Mo mention of overhauling council tax or mansion/garden tax or Northern Ireland. 

This is all code for "I vote Tory". 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

11 minutes ago, A Red said:

I dont think I saw anything in that list about unions. Will it be compulsory or will there be incentives (other than the obvious ones) to join a union? Could there be competing unions in one workplace?

The list mentions something about a "20-point plan" (or something) for workers' rights.

 

It won't be compulsory to join one (that would be "hard left") and there's nothing to stop different unions in one workplace.  (After all, there are often workers from different sectors and different trades in the same workplace - e.g. teachers and dinnerladies.)  

[AngryOfTuebrook]

17 minutes ago, A Red said:

£35K is the worth of my garden, hardly makes me a landowner. It is a nice garden though

And your fellow veg grower has no intention of taxing it.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

15 minutes ago, Captain Howdy said:

As for the list there is some good stuff on it but like A Red whilst I’m no economist or accountant it looks incredibly expensive, I would be surprised if we didn’t run into trouble trying to pay for it.

The kind of trouble that could lead to, say, people sleeping rough and people relying on foodbanks in every town and city in the country?

 

We're the 5th or 6th richest country in the world.  We can afford this.

[A Red]

5 minutes ago, TK421 said:

This is all code for "I vote Tory". 

This is code for "I have no clue as to how to defend/explain Labours plans"

[A Red]

Just now, AngryofTuebrook said:

The kind of trouble that could lead to, say, people sleeping rough and people relying on foodbanks in every town and city in the country?

 

We're the 5th or 6th richest country in the world.  We can afford this.

Without causing massive inflation, how?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

13 minutes ago, SasaS said:

I must admit I never did understand the problem with railways in the UK, there must be something structural, because the thing didn't seem to work properly when it was government owned as it doesn't seem to work now when it is privately or foreign government owned.

If I had to boil the problems down to one word, I'd say - Pre-privatisation: Under-investment.  Post-privatisation: fragmentation.

[A Red]

3 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

And your fellow veg grower has no intention of taxing it.

 

I dont grow veg!

[AngryOfTuebrook]

21 minutes ago, SasaS said:

 

How would I know? I can only speculate there would be a lot more of QE.

Based on the assumption that (because you haven't looked for/at any of the numbers behind any of the points on that list) there must be a gap in the funding.

 

If I understand it correctly, QE tends to funnel more public money into the pockets of the rich, so I doubt that's the go-to remedy for McDonnell or Corbyn.

[Rico1304]

14 minutes ago, TK421 said:

This is all code for "I vote Tory". 

Early bid for lefty of the day, soon to be followed with;

“I have no Tory friends” and a variation of “I couldn’t drink with a Tory.”

[Pureblood]

10 minutes ago, A Red said:

This is code for "I have no clue as to how to defend/explain Labours plans"

Yes, they're terrible plans clearly targeted at you personally.  You should definitely vote for the other lot. 

[aRdja]

6 minutes ago, A Red said:

Without causing massive inflation, how?

Preparation for no deal is costing the state £6bn. Johnson’a proposed tax cut is going to cost the state £10bn a year. The UK is pretty fucking rich. Some people just want to spread the wealth more evenly. 

[Pureblood]

Just now, viRdjil said:

Some people just want to spread the wealth more evenly. 

Cunts.

[aRdja]

17 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Early bid for lefty of the day, soon to be followed with;

“I have no Tory friends” and a variation of “I couldn’t drink with a Tory.”

I’ve always voted Labour. Back in Australia most of my mates went to private school and were prosecco centrists; socially left and economically right. I honestly believe I deserve the Lefty of the Year award, because I’ve stayed good despite growing up with cunts.

[Rico1304]

Just now, viRdjil said:

I’ve always voted Labour, back in Australia most of my mates went to private school and were prosecco centrists; socially left and economically right. I honestly believe think I deserve the Lefty of the Year award, because I’ve stayed good despite growing up with cunts.

Typical fucking lefty, this was years ago and you want it every fucking year!  

[Boss]

38 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Based on the assumption that (because you haven't looked for/at any of the numbers behind any of the points on that list) there must be a gap in the funding.

 

If I understand it correctly, QE tends to funnel more public money into the pockets of the rich, so I doubt that's the go-to remedy for McDonnell or Corbyn.

 

Quantitative Easing is done to boost the economy and create economic growth. Those Labour nationalisation plans will cost hundreds of billions. The country does not have that kind of money to fritter away on superfluous things. The only way it could be done is by printing money, which will cause inflation, devaluing the currency and making poor people poorer. 

[aRdja]

1 minute ago, Boss said:

 

Quantitative Easing is done to boost the economy and create economic growth. Those Labour nationalisation plans will cost hundreds of billions. The government do not have that kind of money available to fritter away on superfluous things. The only way it could be done is by printing money, which will cause inflation, devaluing the currency and ironically making poor people poorer. 

 

19 minutes ago, viRdjil said:

Preparation for no deal is costing the state £6bn. Johnson’a proposed tax cut is going to cost the state £10bn a year. The UK is pretty fucking rich. Some people just want to spread the wealth more evenly. 

 

[SasaS]

25 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Based on the assumption that (because you haven't looked for/at any of the numbers behind any of the points on that list) there must be a gap in the funding.

 

If I understand it correctly, QE tends to funnel more public money into the pockets of the rich, so I doubt that's the go-to remedy for McDonnell or Corbyn.

 

It tends to funnel more made-up money into companies (which may eventually end up in the pockets of the rich). I doubt they can debt-finance, so the usual go to would be printing money.

You are right about the assumption, there usually is a gap in funding, but I really have no idea, they may have painstakingly costed all the measures for all I know.

 

[Brownie]

I’ve just realised that it’s actually pointless trying to have these debates as people are so entrenched that they won’t change their view.

 

It’s like the EU thread, the same people just arguing the same stuff over and over and over again.

[Captain Howdy]

11 minutes ago, Brownie said:

I’ve just realised that it’s actually pointless trying to have these debates as people are so entrenched that they won’t change their view.

 

It’s like the EU thread, the same people just arguing the same stuff over and over and over again.

I don’t know, I don’t vote but Im open to persuasion, I enjoy reading the different viewpoints