Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Jeremy Corbyn- Britain under his leadership

Options
24

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,770 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    I'd be more wary of the sinister John McDonnell and the scarily stupid Diane Abbott and Emily Thornberry if I'm honest.


  • Registered Users Posts: 625 ✭✭✭dd973


    He's only a 'dangerous Marxist loony leftist' set against the socio-political paradigm of the UK (the most neoliberal and unequal society in Europe) over the last 40 years, in Scandinavia he'd just be a middle of the road social democrat.

    There's an interesting Oxford lecturer called Danny Dorling worth checking out on You Tube, basically the nub of his views is that eventually the UK's future, or it's component parts if it splits, is going to be that of a second tier Euro nation that looks after it's citizens, no more Iraq's and Afghanistan's and all the other geopolitical preening and posturing it's so fond of.

    Getting rid of the nukes and spending the billions used on them on social housing, hospitals and teaching it's youngsters how to read and write would go a long way towards civilising them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭BakeMeACake


    I dont like him ..but he's still better than boris and the tories.


    Really? You like a politician who sits on the fence. You like a politician who rewards unemployment. Well go you


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭KyussB


    Corbyn's position on Brexit has been incoherent, and he has utterly failed to take advantage of the incredible shitshow the Tories have been putting on the last few years - which makes him incredibly dangerous to the UK.

    The UK's future rests on Brexit, not on Labour vs Tories. Corbyn's economics within the EU can be a boon. Anyone's economics under a Post-Brexit UK will be a failure, because the economics will be dominated by the breakup of the UK.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,018 ✭✭✭✭Tom Mann Centuria


    KyussB wrote: »
    Corbyn's position on Brexit has been incoherent, and he has utterly failed to take advantage of the incredible shitshow the Tories have been putting on the last few years - which makes him incredibly dangerous to the UK.

    The UK's future rests on Brexit, not on Labour vs Tories. Corbyn's economics within the EU can be a boon. Anyone's economics under a Post-Brexit UK will be a failure, because the economics will be dominated by the breakup of the UK.

    He's dozens of MPs in the Midlands and North of England who's constituents voted strongly to leave and just as many in London who voted the direct opposite. Labour would make zero gains on a wholly pro or anti Brexit message. I think the message now is clear, respectful of the way everyone voted the last time, and about as good as he could do for his MPs. Yes It was a blurred picture to start with, by necessity.

    The only party that could possibly stop Brexit is Labour, but I think the brainwashing by the old media is such, I actually believe the UK would vote leave again in any subsequent referendum.

    Oh well, give me an easy life and a peaceful death.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 29,567 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    It's hard to know really, but I suspect re nationalisation could fail spectacularly, the world has moved on from our state protectionism past, and has entered the world of plutocratic/oligopoly/financialisation, we could be untangling this one forever, with dreadful effects


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,018 ✭✭✭✭Tom Mann Centuria


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    It's hard to know really, but I suspect re nationalisation could fail spectacularly, the world has moved on from our state protectionism past, and has entered the world of plutocratic/oligopoly/financialisation, we could be untangling this one forever, with dreadful effects

    Now we have protectionism from multinationals, and those looking to make profit, id rather see the power back in elected officials hands, who's motivation is quality of life of it's people, not bonuses . Britain is a grim place the last few years, not a country I'd want to move home to, so taking a chance on progressive* re nationalisation really isn't a worry to me, it's exciting.

    Otherwise it's (every post needs a Simpsons quote) Flanders parents idea "We've tried nothing, and we're all out of ideas".



    *progressive as in staged, slowly progress, they aren't going to hit the nationalise button for everything in one day.



    I'll step out of the thread now, as Boards is one of the few bits of my Internet that isn't swarming with politics and is a nice escape from it all.

    But if you have a vote in the UK, VOTE LABOUR! :pac:

    Oh well, give me an easy life and a peaceful death.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,130 ✭✭✭Rodin


    Any man who can't even fix his crooked glasses, has no business trying to fix a country.


  • Registered Users Posts: 29,567 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Now we have protectionism from multinationals, and those looking to make profit, id rather see the power back in elected officials hands, who's motivation is quality of life of it's people, not bonuses . Britain is a grim place the last few years, not a country I'd want to move home to, so taking a chance on progressive* re nationalisation really isn't a worry to me, it's exciting.


    Oh I completely agree, we now have protectionism for everything bare the average citizen now, something has to give, and the fact that Ireland is a tax haven for mnc's, leaves me wondering, irish folks must really love paying taxes. It ll be interesting to see is re nationalism will take off in Britain, but my gut tells me, this will be extremely complicated, and some major failures will occur


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,170 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    I've seen a clip from Question Time about how only 5% of the UK earn over £80k and that Labour makes no bones about the fact they want to tax them more on their earnings.
    Whatever about exactly how many people this affects but surely anybody who's put in the hard time and money to obtain the masters degrees, promotions and hard work to earn, and I stress the word earn, good money you'd want to protect your money and not give it away without seeing any benefit from it.
    In my view it removes incentive to work hard towards the good jobs if the reward is the government taking most of your salary increase.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,130 ✭✭✭Rodin


    flazio wrote: »
    I've seen a clip from Question Time about how only 5% of the UK earn over £80k and that Labour makes no bones about the fact they want to tax them more on their earnings.
    Whatever about exactly how many people this affects but surely anybody who's put in the hard time and money to obtain the masters degrees, promotions and hard work to earn, and I stress the word earn, good money you'd want to protect your money and not give it away without seeing any benefit from it.
    In my view it removes incentive to work hard towards the good jobs if the reward is the government taking most of your salary increase.

    Those on better salaries are already paying for everything already and now he wants to tax them more.
    I can't stand the man


  • Registered Users Posts: 29,567 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    flazio wrote:
    I've seen a clip from Question Time about how only 5% of the UK earn over £80k and that Labour makes no bones about the fact they want to tax them more on their earnings. Whatever about exactly how many people this affects but surely anybody who's put in the hard time and money to obtain the masters degrees, promotions and hard work to earn, and I stress the word earn, good money you'd want to protect your money and not give it away without seeing any benefit from it. In my view it removes incentive to work hard towards the good jobs if the reward is the government taking most of your salary increase.


    Seen that, it's a difficult one, I'd imagine it's difficult enough to live in a major city such as London on £80k, but I will agree, large amounts of wealth are probably not that hard earned, some would simply be born into it, then sat back, and through policies that encouraged asset price inflation, everybody wins, or not, labour have a battle on their hands, which I suspect will lose.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 321 ✭✭171170


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Seen that, it's a difficult one, I'd imagine it's difficult enough to live in a major city such as London on £80k, but I will agree, large amounts of wealth are probably not that hard earned, some would simply be born into it, then sat back, and through policies that encouraged asset price inflation, everybody wins, or not, labour have a battle on their hands, which I suspect will lose.

    It's hard to win any battle when one has a witless pacifist as one's leader.


  • Registered Users Posts: 29,567 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    171170 wrote:
    It's hard to win any battle when one has a witless pacifist as one's leader.


    Yea he's a poor leader, its why i cant see him winning, they probably should have john mcdonnel, or someone like that in there


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭KyussB


    He's dozens of MPs in the Midlands and North of England who's constituents voted strongly to leave and just as many in London who voted the direct opposite. Labour would make zero gains on a wholly pro or anti Brexit message. I think the message now is clear, respectful of the way everyone voted the last time, and about as good as he could do for his MPs. Yes It was a blurred picture to start with, by necessity.

    The only party that could possibly stop Brexit is Labour, but I think the brainwashing by the old media is such, I actually believe the UK would vote leave again in any subsequent referendum.
    They don't have a clear message. Any message other than a strong rejection of Brexit, means the breakup of the UK - and definite economic limbo.


  • Posts: 11,614 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    tuxy wrote: »
    If he was a competent leader that wasn't so polarizing labour would be ahead not behind after the way the tories have acted the last few years.

    After all the tories have done the leader of the opposition should be a shoe in, but the entire country is unsure of him. Not least because the worst kept secret is that he's a leaver.

    "He's better than Boris" should not be the reason anyone votes for him.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 321 ✭✭171170


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Yea he's a poor leader, its why i cant see him winning, they probably should have john mcdonnel, or someone like that in there

    Sir Keir Starmer every time - the thinking leftie's ideal leader.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,205 ✭✭✭Gringo180


    Blanco100 wrote: »
    What about Northern Ireland? We all know his history and rep as an paramilitary sympathizer, but what happens to Northern Ireland under Corbyns hand?

    Paramilitary sympathizer is a bit disingenuous. He was an advocate for bringing peace to Northern Ireland when the British establishment refused to engage in talks with Sinn Fein with regards to bringing some sort of peace up north. Dont believe everything your read in the tabloids.


  • Registered Users Posts: 41,080 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    flazio wrote: »
    I've seen a clip from Question Time about how only 5% of the UK earn over £80k and that Labour makes no bones about the fact they want to tax them more on their earnings.
    Whatever about exactly how many people this affects but surely anybody who's put in the hard time and money to obtain the masters degrees, promotions and hard work to earn, and I stress the word earn, good money you'd want to protect your money and not give it away without seeing any benefit from it.
    In my view it removes incentive to work hard towards the good jobs if the reward is the government taking most of your salary increase.

    Without seeing any benefit from it?

    Thats simply not true. You get benefits in healthcare, education, public transport

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,170 ✭✭✭✭flazio


    Without seeing any benefit from it?

    Thats simply not true. You get benefits in healthcare, education, public transport

    Higher earners pay for all of that themselves. (well, private transport instead of public)


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    markodaly wrote: »
    He plans to renationalise the following industries:

    Broadband
    Energy
    Mail
    Water
    Rail
    Bus

    The majority of this would fall foul of EU State aid rules and competition law. Make no mistake about it, Corbyn is a leaver at heart.

    Ireland has nationalised:
    Mail
    Water
    Rail
    Bus

    Broadband is on the way. Do we fall foul of EU State aid rules and competition law?


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,272 ✭✭✭✭Fr Tod Umptious


    Ireland has nationalised:
    Mail
    Water
    Rail
    Bus

    Broadband is on the way. Do we fall foul of EU State aid rules and competition law?

    Well it's not that we nationalised them it's just that we never denationalised them.

    I don't get the premis of nationalisation falling foul of EU rules either.

    But what they would do is remind British people of the 70s when a lot more was nationalised and things ended up going to hell in a hand basket.

    Strikes
    Inflation
    Etc etc

    What you didn't include in your list and what the poster you quoted did was Energy.

    Would Irish people be happy going back to a single state owned supplier for gas and electricity instead of the choice they have now ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,969 ✭✭✭✭alchemist33


    Everything nationalised
    Wages rise exponentially
    Massive currency inflation
    Importers struggle with poor exchange rates
    Food shortages
    People unhappy
    Nobody willing to export to the UK due to poor credit rating
    More inflation
    Massive protests
    Protestors portrayed as fascist sabateurs
    Violent crackdowns
    More protests
    Nationalised Internet is shut down to stop protests.
    Foreign country (Russia or the US) blamed for all woes
    More protests.
    Police and Armed forces turn on leadership.
    Leadership arrested on corruption

    The usual.

    Add a sympathetic main character and I'll read this book!


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,280 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    The markets are more scared of what corbyn would do to the value of the pound than what a no deal crash out brexit would do.

    Corbyn is the opposite reality to the terrible picture the left has concocted of thatcher in their heads.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Well it's not that we nationalised them it's just that we never denationalised them.

    I don't get the premis of nationalisation falling foul of EU rules either.

    But what they would do is remind British people of the 70s when a lot more was nationalised and things ended up going to hell in a hand basket.

    Strikes
    Inflation
    Etc etc

    I lived in the UK during the Thatcher years and I distinctly remember not just strikes but riot police charging strikers - (Miners/Printworkers), Poll Tax riots, general riots, 2 recessions, and large increases in unemployment. Not to mention the damage done at a local level by ratecapping.

    There is a concerted effort to 'remind' British people about the 'bad days of 70s socialism' and a deafening silence on the bad days of Thatcher's 'trickle down' economics, rush to sell off LA housing, and general mania for privatisation.

    IMO all of this 'look how awful it was in the 70s' trope not only ignores the fact that there was a global recession by trying to lay it all at the feet of socialism when in reality US involvement in Vietnam, Fall-out from Nixon, the oil crises, stockmarket crash etc etc were the causes, it also tries to deflect from the effects of Tory Austerity.

    So yeah, the 70s were tough. They were tough across the West. They were tough in Ireland too. We had an oil crises. We had strikes. We did not have a socialist govt.
    The 80s were no picnic either but where are the cries of "OMG the Tories want to bring us back to the days of decimating the North of England, riot police charging picket lines, etc etc" ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Better than the elitist, racist Tories. Simple as that.
    how are they racist? they're no more racist than Labour are anti-semitic.

    in any case, he simply cant nationalise all those industries, that ship has sailed


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,280 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    how are they racist? they're no more racist than Labour are anti-semitic.

    in any case, he simply cant nationalise all those industries, that ship has sailed

    Its just the buzz word they throw around , like the lefties in their late 20s calling them ‘gammon’ and the lefties in their early 20s keep using ‘boomer’ as an insult.

    Everyone who believes in not giving away everything for ‘free’ is a racist homophobic climate denying transphobic christian these days don’t you know.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 248 ✭✭Berserker5


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I lived in the UK during the Thatcher years and I distinctly remember not just strikes but riot police charging strikers - (Miners/Printworkers), Poll Tax riots, general riots, 2 recessions, and large increases in unemployment. Not to mention the damage done at a local level by ratecapping.

    There is a concerted effort to 'remind' British people about the 'bad days of 70s socialism' and a deafening silence on the bad days of Thatcher's 'trickle down' economics, rush to sell off LA housing, and general mania for privatisation.

    IMO all of this 'look how awful it was in the 70s' trope not only ignores the fact that there was a global recession by trying to lay it all at the feet of socialism when in reality US involvement in Vietnam, Fall-out from Nixon, the oil crises, stockmarket crash etc etc were the causes, it also tries to deflect from the effects of Tory Austerity.

    So yeah, the 70s were tough. They were tough across the West. They were tough in Ireland too. We had an oil crises. We had strikes. We did not have a socialist govt.
    The 80s were no picnic either but where are the cries of "OMG the Tories want to bring us back to the days of decimating the North of England, riot police charging picket lines, etc etc" ?

    Ya the strikes were sandwiched between the inflation/payfreezes of the70s and Thatcherism of the 80s

    The unions had too much overall control

    There's a huge underclass now in the UK


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,503 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    Blanco100 wrote: »
    Nicola Sturgeon tonight has claimed he is willing to sacrifice the union in a bid to secure the support of the SNP to prop up his Labour government.

    But the price will be he gets to deliver his radical manifesto.

    Can anyone tell me what is so radical about Corbyn's manifesto. What would Britain look like under his leadership?

    Genuinely curious to know peoples thoughts. Apologies for not giving my own thoughts, I don't know enough, hence i'm looking for opinions of your good selves

    Thanks a million in advance

    Slightly less socialist than Ireland


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,503 ✭✭✭✭Mad_maxx


    tuxy wrote: »
    If he was a competent leader that wasn't so polarizing labour would be ahead not behind after the way the tories have acted the last few years.

    The media have trashed him daily for four years straight, same media love Borris as he's a clown


Advertisement