BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 08:49 AM

And that's the way WE want it to stay, if it's all the same to you!

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 08:48 AM

Like I said Jim. Armchair socialists.

I know of another poverty stricken shit hole Jim. Like us, it has the odd economic migrant sponging off it 🍀

It's a bit disturbing reading on here comments about the "danger" of "liberals." If I want to read that nonsense, I might pick up some Murdoch toilet paper or listen to the silly end of the American republican bun fight. Mind you, looking at the source of it, monkey read, monkey repeat.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 08:31 AM

"Not really Bonzo. It is about the future direction of the Labour party."
Exactly - it's about giving the electorate the choice.
At present Britain has Conservative Conservatism, Labour Conservatism or Liberal Democrat Conservatism, which is why it has become the increasingly poverty-stricken shit-hole it has.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 07:45 AM

Not really Bonzo. It is about the future direction of the Labour party. Individual candidates are of little importance compared to that. And anyone who is interested in the good of the country should want to ensure the democratic system is healthy whoever they support.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 07:04 AM

All this just for a leader of ........what is it??? the opposition.......beaten in the general election!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 06:49 AM

" 2 million out of work"
A little shgort of that today - and we're now sending them to Boot Camps
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 06:36 AM

terrorist atrocities inflicted by rogue Israeli governments

The only ones who make such outrageous statements are those who wish to demonize and delegitimize the only truly open, free and democratic country in the Middle East. They are recognized for what they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 06:34 AM

The important point, is that there are too many people in this country who are not making a contribution to society and this is because it is cheaper and easier to keep them on derisory benefits than to revamp the education system, encourage contribution through manual work( everyone is not academically minded), give everyone a stake in creating a better society.

Through the EU we have the availability of cheap labour from Eastern Europe, but no infrastructure to support the hundreds of thousands of economic migrants who are arriving. Meanwhile our own people are being squeezed by low wages, zero hours contracts, sky high rents and a shortage of jobs in construction etc.
The whole scenario points to a short term rat race, the economic system is in decline and the time is right to make a change in our values. Only an ignorant fool would think that the wealth differentials we see around us are right or moral.

Has everyone lost all sense of proportion. I have no real faith that Jeremy can defeat the media or convince the Facebook generation, but his real enemies are the "liberals", the myth promoters, the "freedom and democracy" bringers, the sad evolutionists who would preside over the "Decline and Fall".....Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 05:52 AM

Jim in 1929 - 1934 2 million out of work (It actually reached 2.5 million but never mind detail was never your strong point - 20% of the insured workorce were unemployed - it was 50% in Glasgow)

The population of the UK today is somewhere in the region of 63 million - So not the same thing at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 05:50 AM

"I possibly did more politically in an hour than you did in your life but I have no evidence to prove it,"
And you have no basis for claiming it - you have no idea who I am or what I have been involved in - so why not just accept that fact instead of using fatuous phrases like 'armchair socialist'?
"Cardboard box" - you were lucky!! belongs with Monty Python, it serves only to detract from these discussions
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 05:32 AM

Apologies correction "92% of those who voted in that referendum agreed that guns and bombs have place in the politics of Ireland"

SHOULD HAVE COURSE HAVE READ:

"92% of those who voted in that referendum agreed that guns and bombs have NO place in the politics of Ireland"

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 17 Aug 15 - 03:17 AM

A pity that a thread about UK politics is being polluted by a Canadian who has nothing in common with, has never visited and from his posts fails to understand The Middle East he keeps embarrassing himself by waffling on about.

Corbyn may rightly make reference to the terrorist atrocities inflicted by rogue Israeli governments but by not condemning Hamas and their intransigence cum philosophical aims, his credentials for the world stage are flaky to say the least.

I thought we did away with "my enemies enemy" after Churchill admitted that an alliance with Stalin was a way to end a war, not suck up to criminals.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 08:17 PM

"no such thing except in the minds of those who wish to demonize Israel."
Yeah sure Bruce 2000 plus dead Palestinians who died in Gaza last year, 1492 of them were civilians - 551 children and 259 women) last year will vouch for that.
It is somewhat disingenuous to bring up Corbyn's so called friendship with Hamas or the IRA.
At the present time, the British Air Force are carrying out bombing raids in support of a president who has been jailing, torturing and 'disappearing' his opponents, whose men were shooting down women and children on the streets of Homs (and offering prizes to any sniper who could kill a woman and child in arms with a single bullet) and who used chemicals (sold by Britain) on the Syrian people.
Any politician who refuses to negotiate with all sides in such a situation should leave politics and take up macrame
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 07:11 PM

no mention of terrorist activity on the part of the Israeli regime

Of course not because there is no such thing except in the minds of those who wish to demonize Israel. The terrorism that is acknowledged by most democratic countries is that being perpetrated against Israel by such recognized terrorist groups as Hamas and Hezbollah which are funded and supplied with weapons by the terrorist regime of Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 06:44 PM

"but their leaders have let them down very badly to make political points.."
Sure they have - no mention of terrorist activity on the part of the Israeli regime, of course - which would make the right of the Labour Party (not to mention the British Government)Complicit in terrorism.
Why take this discussion there Ake - it really is far too complicated to sandwich in here
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 05:25 PM

Did anyone see Gordon (clunking fist) Brown attempt to connect with a right hook on oor Jeremy's chin?

The guy is beyond belief, apparently Jeremy wants to build alliances with, left wing regimes like Venezuela, Cuba and ......RUSSIA!!!

Oh my god.....not many "liberals" there....:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 05:19 PM

Yes Peter, I am totally against the continuous expansion and building of settlements.
This issue should have been dealt with years ago, the US is primarily to blame today, but it was the British who oversaw the granting of land which constituted the borders.
I knew a man who was involved in this operation, a Major in the British Army. He told me that on granting many Israelis land, he would return a week later to discover that they had taken ten times the amount granted.

The Palestinian refugees are of course the real victims, but their leaders have let them down very badly to make political points...and line their own pockets.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 03:15 PM

Gosh. A so called member of SNP (he isn't really) is so embarrassed by telling us he is a member, he can't even name their policies and achievements. He has to use abbreviations.

By the way worm, it's HM. Not H"M". You disgusting creep. HM means HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE. Are you so scarred by experience you can't even acknowledge decent normal people and their right to happiness? (Are you reading Joe?)

Oy Jim. I lost my house and had a bailiff make us decide whether to keep the pram or cot through being on strike so a bit less of accusing me of not having done anything. I possibly did more politically in an hour than you did in your life but I have no evidence to prove it, as you can't substantiate your dig either. Anyway, I don't laugh at fingers in ears, I laugh at trousers up to yer tits.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 02:56 PM

Correction to the blatantly false and laughable propaganda maps linked to in the post of 16 Aug 15 - 01:09 PM CLICK

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 01:09 PM

McGrath makes a crucial point: Corbyn will be arguing for his policies within a Labour Party that is much more democratic than it has been in years. He is disposed to listen, more so than any leading politician in recent times. He has not delivered a Burnham-style top-down "manifesto," he has floated options.

A large part of his appeal to Labour's constituency parties is that it is not in his nature to impose faceless candidates whose only credentials are that they are on-message. It cannot be wondered that New Labour's elite, and their paid apparatchiks, are alarmed by the winds of change now blowing.

[Diversion: Akenaton claims there is right on both sides on the Palestine-Israel question. Even if there is, it is not equally distributed. These maps show the extent to which parity is reflected on the ground.]

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 10:00 AM

I suspect the Jewish Chronicle no more speaks for the British Jew than the Daily Mail, or the Guardian, or the Telegraph or the Sun speaks for other Britons. A section, certainly, and maybe even a substantial one but that's all.

I happen to be Catholic, but please don't assume the newpapers in the back of the Church represent my views!

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 09:34 AM

The Palestinian Problem is an open sore which has been allowed to fester for over half a century, chiefly by Western nations, for purely political reasons.

The whole idea of a homeland for Jews was ill thought out and did not take into account the various races and tribes affected, but we are where we are and there is right on both sides.
Israel must have the right to protect its integrity and the Palestinians need to be compensated for the years of incarceration and ill treatment....the guilty people are those who cynically used a bad situation in their own interests.....on both sides, the Palestinian leaders have been just as self serving as the successive presidents of the US and Prime Ministers of the UK.

If Jeremy is taking the simplistic view on this issue then he is wrong.....but that should not stop socialist voting for him in this leadership election. I dislike some policies of the SNP, like remaining in the EU, but that does not stop me voting for them to secure the wider agenda.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 08:49 AM

The Jewish Chronicle Online has some questions for Jeremy Corbyn: The JC.com

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 06:51 AM

" Unless you can persuade people to vote on genuine policies and not on vacuous promises that are never fulfilled, parliamentary 'democracy' will continue to earn its inverted commas"

I'm with you there Jim.........The oft quoted slogan(by TM) "Prosperity through equality", is one of the most vacuous and misleading, that I have ever encountered, given the methodology of the capitalist system.

Although an SNP member, I dislike their blatant sloganizing, aimed at capturing the votes of the young and impressionable inhabitants of facebook.

In reality there are many more important issues to address than H "M".

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 05:48 AM

"You offer your vision but you govern on behalf of all. "
As should all Governments in a democracy - nothing new there Muskie.
It is the vision that is important - not the act of getting elected, which has become meaningless to the electorate as things stand.
Unless you can persuade people to vote on genuine policies and not on vacuous promises that are never fulfilled, parliamentary 'democracy' will continue to earn its inverted commas.
I often wonder how many people who fling about 'armchair socialist' have ever participated in genuine, long-term political activity - it's a term that has become as insultingly meaningless to politics as has 'purist' and 'finger-in-ear' to folk song.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 05:25 AM

Guessing games about what will happen in an election five years down the road are a bit pointless. Opinion polls, for what they are worth don't give Labour much chance, whoever is leader, but than they aren't really measuring anything real. In fact even on those Corbyn scores better than the others - only 21% predict him winning in 2020, but that's better than the predictions for the others, with 19% for Burnham, 15% for Cooper and 11% for KendLl.

And the truth is, nobody knows. When the Tories picked Margaret Thatcher as leader that was generally seen as disastrous for them.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 05:23 AM

Jim as ever misses the point.

You offer your vision but you govern on behalf of all.

I notice Corbyn gave a pro business speech the other day, supporting enterprise and acknowledging the message CBI and others shout.

I suppose that alone shatters the vision for our armchair socialists whilst giving Corbyn a smatter of credibility with normal people.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 05:08 AM

If the figures on this website are to believed, I'd better retract what I said about the lack of evidence of Labour being able to win in England without Scotland. It would take a little time to work through them so I haven't bothered, but they all claim to be based on published official data.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 04:15 AM

"Being electable is all. "
That has been the approach of the Liberal Democrats for years, and look what happened to them - no policies and no credibility.
Labour in Ireland has thrown in their lot with Fine Gael the dominant shower of shit, by forming a coalition with them, and guess what - they are now an enthusiastic part of the process of throwing water-tax protesters in jail - in doing go, they have lost all their traditional support and I doubt if they will ever win it back.
Blair became "electable" and turned into and international criminal with his "weapons of mass-destruction".
Being electable means S.F.A if you don't have the principles and policy to back it up and if you are prepared to water down your real intentions in order to fool the electorate into voting for you it is a pretty fair indication you have neither.
Politics has now become a game of win-at-all-costs by people who don't give a fuck, and the results on the country are to be seen in increasing poverty and homelessness and an employment figure approaching that of the Depression.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 04:09 AM

(The real me). Bloody shame that the fight isn't between Chuka Umunna and Stella Creasy. Now that would have call-me Dave sweating. Now where's me cookie...

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 02:23 AM

I mentioned elsewhere that Andy Burnham's promotional video disappeared for a while. It is back and can be seen at www.andy4labour.co.uk

While I think the actual manifesto is quite good, I am afraid the video he put with it will do him no favours. He does not come across well, in my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 02:08 AM

Being electable is all. It means you have policies and a philosophy that appeals to voters.

Yes and no, Musket. There are two ways you can do that; either trim your policies so that you are electable or convince the electorate that the policies you have are ones they should vote for. The Blairite approach was very much the former. Corbyn is attempting the latter, and while he very much wants to win in 2020, I suspect that when it comes down to it he would feel that convincing people of the rightness of his policies is more important, and if that took longer than five years, well, it does.

And we must not leave time out of the equation. There is always the pressure for a change just because the government is getting tired.

But I think McGrath makes an excellent point. The changes in Scotland probably do make it essential that Labour wins in England if it is to have any chance of future power, and the evidence for that is very scarce indeed, both recently and historically.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 01:45 AM

I also think a split is unlikely, but I can't say the reasons are especially cheering. Let's look at the position of deputy, for a start. They are all saying they will work with whoever the voters pick as leader. Now, democratically speaking that's all very laudable, but it does mean they are happy to make the case that privatising the power companies is essential or absolutely insane, depending who gets picked. Which rather smacks of an attitude that getting the job is more important than anything else.

And I suspect we will find the same in the lower ranks. To split, you need a set of principles that you think your party has turned against and that you believe the populous will support. If the vote turns out anything like the predictions - and it may not - I can't see how a potential splitter would think there was a groundswell for Blairism, for example.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 16 Aug 15 - 01:18 AM

Being called Socialist or otherwise is irrelevant. Being electable is all. It means you have policies and a philosophy that appeals to voters.

We have a word for it. The word is democracy.

Corbyn and his ideas are a welcome shake up to the system in the same way SNP are with their "prosperity through equality" tag, but like SNP, he carries a political overview that would be disastrous if allowed to happen. Luckily, in Scotland, the majority of people clipped their wings in the referendum. Corbyn would have to wait for the next election to see how deluded he is.

And frankly, the Tories put ideology before pragmatism every single day. A further term of them at the next election? Under Boris or Osborn?

Support Corbyn and find out.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 06:40 PM

Without electoral reform Labour's future is pretty dire. One way and another the Scots aren't going to avaiable to even the balance, wther as Labour or as SNP. Either Scotland will be independant, or the Tories will have pushed through changes which will neuter their effective. Influence in Westminster.

With electoral reform we'd see a realignment of politics, so that the coalitions would between smaller parties rather than within big parties.

I suspect a rerun of the referendum on the Alternative Vote might produce a very different result. People always talk about that as a massive vote of confidence in FPTP, but in fact the turnout was only 42%, which meant that only one in four people voted that way.

I can't see an SDP type split - but if Corbyn wins there probably will be an organised right-wing Labour group within parliament, an opposition within the opposition. And of course they'll accuse the left of being splitters...

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 05:55 PM

The "Blairites" have nothing in common with Jeremy or socialism, no matter how electable they may be.
To progress, the party must split and the socialist wing start changing peoples minds.....it is perfectly possible, but will take time and patience and I don't suppose many of us will see it.

Under this system, Labour will always be a party of opposition no matter how many MP's they have.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 04:27 PM

The essential difference with Corbyn is that he appears genuinely to believe in a more open and democratic way of shaping the policies of the Labour Party. The actual solutions he favours will have to make their way within that kind of process, not laid down on high and presented to the party as fixed dogma to which they are committed come what may.

It is likely enough that not all the things he'd like to see the party adopt will be adopted, but they will be argued, along with the other ideas and policies.

The same goes for his actual job as leader.. A democratised Labour Party would not feel obliged to stick to a leader set to lose, as the election approached, in the same way as last time. And it seems pretty likely that Jeremy Corbyn would be quite open to stepping aside if that was how it looked.

Concentrating all the attention on an election that is five years away is not too bright. There is important work to be done right now, to build a movement with the same kind of energy and confidence that the SNP has demonstrated in Scotland - and the indications are that Corbyn is the only candidate with any hope of enabling that to happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 12:39 PM

I thought I did but using a mirror to see the scars down my back, I sometimes wonder.

Economists are of course the types of people who see something working in practice and wonder if it can work in theory.

I'll tell you what though, regarding the international picture. I used to find it easier to safeguard British jobs as Euro harmonisation increased. It isn't a level playing field but it is more level than when I became a director of a company in the '80s. The jobs we created came with confidence in our markets.

Conversely, when interfering in The NHS in more recent years, national politics have been a huge factor but my concern isn't MPs kissing babies, it's wondering where The NHS is going to meet demand in the light of promises successive governments have failed to deliver.

I genuinely see no answers in Corbyn. To be fair, Cooper isn't impressing me with her health plans either and she was the then junior minister who appointed me to chair a board spending half a billion of their cash..

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 12:24 PM

Very flattering, ake, but you know I wouldn't rate anything I posted as much above average, never mind that significant.

There is another branch of economics dealing with the rather oddly named hedonistic models, (because that's not people usually imagine hedonism to denote). These also attempt to include more quality of life factors, even though they remain at heart financial [I think: I am no expert].

But even if you only think about classical economics, there is a great deal of scope for getting different answers depending what you do and don't include. For example, when considering whether to close a local hospital you may well get a different answer if to take into account travelling time of patients and relatives to the next nearest hospital accounting for their additional travelling time at say, minimum wage; or adding the impact of any deterioration in the travel times on nearby motorways on the businesses that use them. Musket may well know how much such things are taken into account, I don't. But I can certainly see how what you choose to count and ignore could be very influential on the conclusion you come to, even with 'text book' economics.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 11:08 AM

"As a society over the last seventy years we have become, in general terms better off financially.."
Superficially - and even then, only some of of society.
After the war the Labour Government embarked on a programme of improvements for working people - largely opposed by the Tories - National Health, Social housing and a massive programme of slum clearance
In 1946, Social Security was developed to cover unemployment and old age pensions at a survival level
During that period, the Trades Union movement was able to win better conditions for working people and more security of employment.
The Thatcher regime put a stop to most of that - it silenced any say the worker had in his job, undermined security of employment, whittled away unemployment benefit and virtually destroyed social housing by turning homes into commodities, conning council tenants into believing that by owning their own homes meant that had a potential profit-making commodity - "we were all capitalists now".
During the Depression, 2 million people were unemployed, the Government has recently announced that unemployment in Britain has NOW DROPPED TO 1.9 MILLION, THE LOWEST IN SIX YEARS some "better off financially"!!
The choice of policies between the various political parties has virtually disappeared - not only are they different shades of the same, but Governments are now based on compromise rather than policies of improvement and genuine change, largely via coalitions.
The gap between rich and poor has widened enormously, homelessness has increased and workers no longer have any security of tenure - this is how prosperity should be judged - not by the superficiality of televisions or mobile phones or holidays abroad - whether you can feed, clothe and educate your family and keep them in reasonable health.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 05:28 AM

DMcG 15 August 4:06 am.......One of the best posts I've ever seen on this forum, and very, very important if we wish to change society.

Just what I've been trying to promote in my own clumsy way.

As a society over the last seventy years we have become, in general terms better off financially......but the "happiness quotient" has diminished as we gained self reliance through relative prosperity.

It's a case of "what we have been encouraged to want, is not always good for us.".....People require a purpose in life to be really happy.

There is talk this morning of Blair or his acolyte D Milliband returning to save the Labour Party, or rebrand it as the "gang of four" did to set up the SDP.

I don't think this will happen as an outright victory for any single Party in the next election, looks unlikely.
I think the party will split into smaller groupings and with proportional representation, socialism may gain a small voice.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 04:58 AM

" It is not antisemetic to criticise Israel's policies"
It miost certainly is not, in fact, the European definition of antisemitism states clearly that it is Antisemitic to identify Ireal's actions to the Jewish people - making those who accuse critics of Israel of being Antisemitic - Antisemitic.
As the British Government not only friendly with States with Antisemitic policies such as Saudi Arabia, but sells weapons to them - the logic of this nonsense is that Briish people have nobody to vote for.
These twots simply don't think through their stupidly cowardly claims.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 04:24 AM

There was also an article in The Guardian which made similar assertions of anti-sematism, but the copy editor decided to make the subtitle "Corbyn may not have an antisemitic bone in his body, but he does share platforms with people who do".

I've linked to the article, so form your own opinion. However I give you mine. It is not antisemetic to criticise Israel's policies. It is not antisemetic to speak to others who oppose Israel. Antisematism is racism, and like all other forms of racism it is no more and no less than attacking a person in some form because they are Jewish, or Indian, or African ... It is completely unrelated to whether Israel is or is not in breach of UN resolutions, for example.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 04:06 AM

I realise that still sounds like I am being dismissive of economists. That's unfair: while not an economist myself I worked for years in a team where everyone else was a professional economist, as was my father-in-law, so I've been talked to a lot about it.

But there are serious alternatives to the financial economics we are used to, and even Cameron played around with it a bit, though he got soundly ridiculed for it, a little unfairly. One is 'Happiness economics' (see Wiki), which says there are other things that matter:
"The economics of happiness or happiness economics is the quantitative and theoretical study of happiness, positive and negative affect, well-being, quality of life, life satisfaction and related concepts, typically combining economics with other fields such as psychology and sociology. It typically treats such happiness-related measures, rather than wealth, income or profit, as something to be maximized. The field has grown substantially since the late 20th century, for example by the development of methods, surveys and indices to measure happiness and related concepts. Its findings have been described as a challenge to the economics profession"

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 04:06 AM

"I see no mention of Corbyn's ties to holocaust deniers, terrorists and some outright antisemites"
Is there evidence of such connections or have you been overdosing on the Daily Mail again Bruce?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 03:05 AM

Since neither you nor I are economists, Musket, I'm not sure it is valuable to debate it much further! I accept that there is a big problem with a different approach unless the G20 agree. But economics isn't science: it is opinion, based on a vastly simplified past history, with a dressing of maths in some cases to look better.   I've always liked the quotation from Galbraith, who was, as we know, an economist: "The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable."

So much of economics is no more than fashion, in my view. That's not to dismiss it by the way: fashion has a much more significant effect on life than we usually admit. But it is also the nature of fashion that it changes, often rapidly and unexpectedly. The orthodoxy that came in with Reagan and Thatcher was far from the standard view before then.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST,Musket musing
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 02:35 AM

Corbyn and his version of economics might work, but only if you persuade the rest of the G20 countries to adopt a similar strategy.

Which you can't.

So it doesn't work.

This parochial attitude to how the world works and the interdependency needed in order to even begin to fund your social programme is something Tories and UKIP don't grasp. To hear Corbyn have a similar naive outlook is both unsettling and worrying.

Yes, his priority list with what we have to play with is laudable but you have to generate it first. Go for the bankers' bonuses? That'll fund Birmingham social services for 48 hours.

After that?

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 02:22 AM

Just checked my figures: 30,607, 835 voted last election, and figures of 610,000 eligible to vote in the leadership are being bandied about, so that is 1.99% of people who voted, not those entitled to vote. And I realise while it is likely that those who were prepared to pay also actually voted, there will still be a good number who didn't.

But my point stands!

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: DMcG
Date: 15 Aug 15 - 01:56 AM

I wouldn't spend your winnings quite yet, Peter. I won't be at all surprised if Andy Burnham won, and the bookies odds seem about right to me (not that I have placed a bet)

What JC has certainly shown is a pent-up demand for traditional values, and one undoubted impact of that, in line with my opening post, is that Andy Burnham is now making much stronger left-of-centre statements than he did initially. Corbyn always said he wanted to open the debate up, and no-one can deny that he has done that. By my reckoning something like 2% of all eligible voters in the whole UK have paid money to have a say and it would take quite an ego to say, ok, you've spoken. Now I'll completely ignore you. (Most politicians, are, of course, not lacking in egotistical qualities)

But the media and everyone else is going on about economic competence. That's code, of course, for following the current fashion in economics rather that actual competence, but I could imagine a lot of people with pen in hand saying maybe not Corbyn after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Politics: UK Labour leadership election
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Aug 15 - 09:48 PM

I see no mention of Corbyn's ties to holocaust deniers, terrorists and some outright antisemites by those extolling his virtues here, not that it surprises me.