she's gone way up in my estimation for saying what bluntly needs saying. Corbyn is becoming as bad as the last lot just before the general election, making up policies on the back of a fag packet, only in his case it's more due to an exploding ego that his promises are becoming more and more ridiculous.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33884836

 

Robert Peston knows a thing or two about economics, and frankly I'm convinced when he points out that turning the Bank Of England into a glorified Offshore Banking Business for buying back privatised companies is not going to be healthy, nor is it logical, and it comes over as an attempt to pretend your not using taxpayers money to bring them back into public ownership (which it is) and putting the core purpose of the Bank Of England (to safeguard the economy) in conflict with it's new purpose (to spend taxpayer money, or else become profit-making just like all the other reckless bankers still out there).

 

Cooper's done what needs doing as everyone is getting swept up in a wave of hysteria for someone who has only proposals and no clear way of paying for them. It's a bit like Greece, and a government which couldnt deliver any of it's promises, and made things worse. Not that Labour will get elected if Corbyn wins, 4 years of close scrutiny after the event will see to that...

Call me a naive youngster but I feel like the tide may be coming back in for a Cooper/Burnham victory now (more likely the former but not 100% certain), similar in a way to that one poll in the Scottish Referendum that caused all the panic.

 

Also, as improbable as it would be to implement, this in the Guardian is brilliant.

Eh?

 

1. "We agree that we need an alternative to George Osborne’s austerity ideology."

 

2. Burnham's 'Corbyn's right - don't vote for him!' statement is more well-judged?

 

One passage aside (you know the one I mean), I'm not really sure which part of this could be taken as tone deaf rather than a coherent and principled critique of what Corbyn claims the solutions are. The bold bits in particular I think come across really good.

 

Does this mean you now think Labour going into elections with a message of "the Tories are right, don't vote for them" is similarly doomed? :P

 

It was the facile "spending billions we haven't got" line that made me raise my eyebrows the most. But anywho, I might be going to see her in Connah's Quay tomorrow (because my Friday nights are just that wild) so will be asking her if she's going to carry on with this "balance the books" nonsense.

Edited August 13, 20159 yr by Danny

Well I think the difference between Labour and Andy Burnham is that Labour at least go for 'competent economic management but we won't leave people behind', whereas currently Andy Burnham literally isn't providing any other extras on top of 'I'm well radical like Corbyn too!' other than 'I'm more electable!', rather than an actual substantive difference in policy or approach to Corbyn as Yvette's done.

Unless you have an opposition party that opposes - what's the point? Before Jeremy came along I was behind Burnham (he's a local lad) but I've gone right off him lately (the letter to Prince Charles didn't help). Burnham and the other three aren't labour - they're faux-Conservative ... so you may as well have the real thing.

 

Besides - no matter who is leader - Labour won't get in for another 10 years at least anyway.

 

I do hope Obi-Wan gets it!

Edited August 14, 20159 yr by Kath

Another thing - if the other three are saying - vote anyone but Corbyn - why don't two of them withdraw (I'm assuming it is their right to do so) so that one of them will definitely stand a chance against Obi- Wan? I'm assuming its because they're too vain and they're really saying 'vote anyone other than Corbyn ... as long as its ME'.

Edited August 14, 20159 yr by Kath

Another thing - if the other three are saying - vote anyone but Corbyn - why don't two of them withdraw (I'm assuming it is their right to do so) so that one of them will definitely stand a chance against Obi- Wan? I'm assuming its because they're too vain and they're really saying 'vote anyone other than Corbyn ... as long as its ME'.

Erm, because it's AV?

It's somewhat dispiriting that in so many people's eyes 'real Labour' = paying for your policies by printing money.

It's somewhat dispiriting that in so many people's eyes 'real Labour' = paying for your policies by printing money.

 

yes, it's nigh on suicidal in terms of electability.

 

The UK not just been through all that and people have forgotten already? We the taxpayer still owe the Bank Of England 375 squillions. I don't feel better off for it, quite the reverse.

 

Frankly, I want a government that's going to tell me how they are going to re-open all the closed dementia centres (there are now ZERO in my Borough) and day care and all of the quiet crisis policies that have been quietly adopted by Councils up and down the country while paying lip-service to "hard-working families".

 

I don't give a toss about spending squillions of tax payers money to get marginally cheaper electricity or trains arriving on time or subsidised by the taxpayer. I, literally, don't give a f*ck about Corbyn's stupid schemes like these when there are far more important and desperate issues he should be ranting about, and explaining what he's going to do about it, and how he's going to cost it if he gets into power. Would I like the trains renationalising? Wouldn't mind, but it's not an important issue, it's not life or death, it doesn't affect quality of life of millions. Corbyn needs to get a grip on reality on what is and isn't important.

yes, it's nigh on suicidal in terms of electability.

 

The UK not just been through all that and people have forgotten already? We the taxpayer still owe the Bank Of England 375 squillions. I don't feel better off for it, quite the reverse.

 

Frankly, I want a government that's going to tell me how they are going to re-open all the closed dementia centres (there are now ZERO in my Borough) and day care and all of the quiet crisis policies that have been quietly adopted by Councils up and down the country while paying lip-service to "hard-working families".

 

I don't give a toss about spending squillions of tax payers money to get marginally cheaper electricity or trains arriving on time or subsidised by the taxpayer. I, literally, don't give a f*ck about Corbyn's stupid schemes like these when there are far more important and desperate issues he should be ranting about, and explaining what he's going to do about it, and how he's going to cost it if he gets into power. Would I like the trains renationalising? Wouldn't mind, but it's not an important issue, it's not life or death, it doesn't affect quality of life of millions. Corbyn needs to get a grip on reality on what is and isn't important.

 

I agree with that actually, I don't really care that much about renationalising things, but the problem is the current Labour regime seem unwilling to even fight for the basic things like welfare and the health/social care stuff you talk about, because they've so internalised the Tory "economic credibility" garbage. That's what's pushing even mainstream members, who would usually baulk at someone like Corbyn, towards him.

It's somewhat dispiriting that in so many people's eyes 'real Labour' = paying for your policies by printing money.

Doesn't sound too bad to me.

Doesn't sound too bad to me.

 

That equals runaway inflation. Runaway inflation equals high mortgages and people defaulting, losing homes, wages becoming worth less as prices rise quickly, cost of producing goods goes up and buyers abroad stop buying, jobs start ending.

 

Ask anyone old who's been through it why it's not a recipe for success :(

 

Corbyn seems to be an "expert" on any number of areas he's learnt about from sitting on his a*se for the last 30 years and doing nothing. I'm not convinced he knows what he's doing, except whipping up enthusiasm among people who are pissed off and want someone to do something, anything will do, doesn't matter. Libdems didn't work, let's try extreme left or extreme right, any will do cos it's not the usual boring evasive bunch of career politicians...except so's Corbyn (bar the evasiveness). Looking forward to seeing his figures when they get published....

Doesn't sound too bad to me.

Oh come on! There's a huge difference between what speculators will do to your economy (and by extension the least well-off) if they perceive a central bank is doing QE to regulate the money supply and if they perceive a central bank is literally just creating money so the government can pay for any policy it likes. The former keeps confidence in the currency's strength. The latter...I mean for crying out loud, it's literally politics as a failed GCSE History paper.

 

Even if it did work as a policy (and it won't), it's suicidal politically. 'You're paying for it all by printing money' is one of those lines that really has the potential to fuck us over for a generation if it goes viral - it's the kind of shutdown line to which any ordinary person literally won't hear out a response to because the notion is so plainly ridiculous, fanciful and Utopian, no matter how many times they wheel out that disingenuous buffoon Richard Murphy to try and make the case for it. It'll make 'Brown sold the gold' seem like a mere week-long fever dream.

^Well you could equally argue that the Coalition have already used 'printing money' (described by Osborne as the last resort of desperate government) to help the economy along, though it has only helped the asset rich and wealthiest in society, ultimately leading to an unbalanced economy, an inflated equities market and an equally inflated asset market. That doesn't seem to have influenced inflation much (it currently sits at slightly negative) though it has meant interest rates at emergency record lows - likely to persist for a decade or more (despite what Mark Carney says).

 

I don't agree with Corbyn on a lot of things, but he does raise some interesting points that until now have not been discussed at length and I am glad he has been given a platform to debate them.

 

It would be great if rather than attack Corbyn the other candidates spoke out over the appalling right to buy policy which as printed in the Independent today which is enriching a new generation of landlords. The housing market in this country is quite frankly fucked!

^Well you could equally argue that the Coalition have already used 'printing money' (described by Osborne as the last resort of desperate government) to help the economy along, though it has only helped the asset rich and wealthiest in society, ultimately leading to an unbalanced economy, an inflated equities market and an equally inflated asset market. That doesn't seem to have influenced inflation much (it currently sits at slightly negative) though it has meant interest rates at emergency record lows - likely to persist for a decade or more (despite what Mark Carney says).

Which is why I specifically made the point that there's a difference between quantitative easing to regulate the money supply (which is the job of a central bank, hence speculators don't consider it an indictment of the currency) and quantitative easing to just pay for anything you want. If anything deflation would be even higher if we took QE out of the equation.

True, much of the negative (deflationary) pressures on the economy are due to the fall in oil prices.

 

However, Corbyn's argument that the necessary QE could have been better spent in the real economy, rather than propping up the equities market and making the rich even richer is a very pertinent point. Investment in future technologies and infrastructure that benefitted the REAL economy would have had far greater impact on GDP and the 'cost of living'.

^Well you could equally argue that the Coalition have already used 'printing money' (described by Osborne as the last resort of desperate government) to help the economy along, though it has only helped the asset rich and wealthiest in society, ultimately leading to an unbalanced economy, an inflated equities market and an equally inflated asset market. That doesn't seem to have influenced inflation much (it currently sits at slightly negative) though it has meant interest rates at emergency record lows - likely to persist for a decade or more (despite what Mark Carney says).

 

I don't agree with Corbyn on a lot of things, but he does raise some interesting points that until now have not been discussed at length and I am glad he has been given a platform to debate them.

 

It would be great if rather than attack Corbyn the other candidates spoke out over the appalling right to buy policy which as printed in the Independent today which is enriching a new generation of landlords. The housing market in this country is quite frankly fucked!

 

...and which I've been rabidly going on about for years, including on buzzjack. Right To Buy is insane economics, always has been. It should be stopped immediately and it won't cost a penny to the taxpayer, quite the reverse it'll SAVE f*cking shitloads of cash that can be spent on dying services. What's Corbyn's response to Right To Buy? He wants to extend it to the private sector giving everyone renting the right to buy someone else's house. That either means robbing property-owners or robbing the taxpayer. Someone is getting robbed. The man is a fool. Nothing left-wing about that, it's just effing stupid. Literally.

 

Or else he's been utterly misrepresented in the press and I take it all back. One or the other.

Right To Buy for private landlords is literally the joke I used to show how stupid RTB for social housing was as an 'aspirational' policy. It isn't ACTUAL FUCKING SENSIBLE POLICY. As policies that would immediately bankrupt a government go, it's difficult to think of any others.

I think he's been misrepresented. Didn't he say that as a joke to highlight how stupid right to buy as a policy is?

 

Anyway, at least he's talking about it (granted Andy did too).

I said it as a joke. I doubt he announced it as official policy for a joke!