Jeremy Corbyn to be elected Labour Leader?
- This topic has 621 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
An interesting comment from a Facebook thread about Corbyn's strong showing:" Having been out canvassing this evening for the Lib Dems in the rural New Forest for a low key Council seat, won by a UKIP candidate last time around who then failed to sign by the correct time, Jeremy's name came up a number of times. 'A real politician', 'not fake like the others', 'a man with principles – even though I disagree' were some of those comments from people who just wanted to chat on the doorstep in the warm evening about politics in general.."
May raise a wry smile of amusement this articlehttp://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2015/07/29/dangerous-radicalisation/
If Corbyn had any ' principles' he shouldn't be a Labour Party Member/MP! He has the stench of rotting human flesh up his nostrils, and blood on his hands!
Email received at Head Office (don't know why) under the subject "Who is Liz Kendall" (good question):
Quote:She's just one of the flock of Blairite apparatchiks who've infested the Labour party ever since Tory Blair inflected his 'winner-take-all ' sentiment on the party ! If Labour is NOT a socialist party then IT DOESN'T DESERVE TO WIN ! Blairites are just pink conservatives …petty bourgeois chancers ! Who needs them ? Not working people ! Me? I'm for Corbyn and Eagle !Nothing to do with us of course (and the Labour Party isn't and never has been a socialist party) but some indication of what some in the Labour Party are thinking.
Corbyn has now hitched his way onto the Robin Hood Tax:http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-robin-hood-tax-is-a-more-sensible-and-fairer-way-of-helping-our-economy-to-recover-10429501.htmlStandard criticisms apply, taking that tax out of profits hits investment and dents recovery, so it can't be used to directly fund consumption.
Easington Labour Party is supporting Corbyn. An indication perhaps of why we do well up here.
So, battle is properly joined, and the current shadow chancellor of the Labour party has been saying that Corbyns economic policies would hit the poorest hardest. His economist inspiration has come out to defend himself: http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015/08/03/chris-leslie-has-got-corbynomics-wrong/
Quote:People’s quantitative easing is instead a highly directed process where the debt that is repurchased has been deliberately created and issued either by a green investment bank or by local authorities, health trusts and other such agencies for the specific purpose of funding new investment in the economy at the time when big business and financial markets are completely failing to deliver the scale of investment that is needed to get the UK working again and to restore our financial prosperity. There is no chance whatsoever that people’s quantitative easing funds will leak into asset speculation, and so generate inflation, precisely because to the greatest extent possible banks will be kept out of this loop for the good reason that they have proved themselves unable to manage this type of socially beneficial investment activity.Quote:Third, printing money is not inflationary when there is a shortage of money in the economy. If Chris Leslie is not aware of it, and I suspect he is not, all money that exists in our economy is created either by bank lending or by the government printing it. Those are the only options that are available. And, when there is too little money we risk getting deflation, which is pretty universally recognised as posing a threat to economic well-being because of the risk that it creates that people will stop spending, whether on business investment, or on household goods. Right across Europe, including in the UK, this is the big risk right now. Many European countries already have deflation whilst we have zero inflation, and quite appropriately the target for inflation is at least 2% per annum.In the comments he says it is a mvoe to money creation by banks to money creation by government. Oh, dear. Still, the point remains basically sound that juduiciously printing money through buying back the debt of public bodies could generate growth, and unlock investment in some areas (although debt is deferred taxation, so unless the plan is to never pay back that interest free debt there will be a bite on the bum later). Fundamentally, this plan only works if sufficient profit can be generated through growth to pay for the imaginary spending retrospectively.
Quote:There is nothing very odd about this money creation process that the Bank of England would use. All money, barring notes and coins, is created by banks (including all those familiar names on the High Street) when they make loans. The process is very simple. When you ask for a loan from a bank you do not get given somebody else’s money, although that is the common understanding of the process. Instead the bank simply creates two accounts for you. One is a current account into which they put the money you want to spend, and the other is a loan account, which is the amount that you owe back to them.The important point to note is that there was no money in either account before you asked for the loan, and if you immediately repaid it after the loan was granted, then there would be no new money either because both accounts would be cancelled. It’s the fact that people believe that they can spend the money in the current account that’s been created by the loan that, quite literally, means that banks can creates money out of thin air.Quote:We reiterate: this whole process can be undertaken without creating new debt that will have to be repaid in future. It is instead paid for by creating new money, which is a total different process.Hmm, where's Major Douglas when you need him?The only way in which this works is by denuding existing assets of value, it might be at a time of real falling investment and prices that the inflation is invisible, and prices don't change, but speaking as someone who has been robbed by inflation over the last couple of years, he's wrong, it is inflationary, the question is the degree of control over inflation: also, the scale of impact it could have, used strategically to clear a few logjams it could create sustained growth, but general pump priming the economy, that is risky.
Interview with him in today's London Evening Standard where he sets out his reformist programme:http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/full-interview-jeremy-corbyn-corybnmania-its-odd-im-a-normal-person-10439717.html
interesting bit from mshttps://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-7dd3-Who-are-the-real-entryists#.VcMuT2eTV6b
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/07/labour-leadership-election-260-former-candidates-and-members-rival-parties-apply-voteAs i have suggested a good excuse for th Media Committee to issue a press release on why we will not be recommending joining the Labour Party so to vote for Corbyn.
http://www.islingtontribune.com/letters/2015/aug/letters-passage-marx-jeremy-missedWell, I suppose I had to do it…
Which issue?Today's Times has a front page article "exposing" TUSC candidates and Left Unity members of signing up to vote for Corbyn. I don't think they understand TUSC, the main group behind which is SPEW which is opposed to Labour and sees it as a deadly rival for the leadership of the working class. I doubt if any of their members have signed up. It will be the non-party leftists and trade unionists they conned into standing as TUSC candidates and who think that TUSC really is what it appears to be, i.e Old Labour. Though I see Lewisham ex-Labour councillor Chris Flood is among those named and he's a SPEW member. Maybe if Corbyn wins the ex-Laborites in TUSC like him will begin to drift back to the Labour Party.. Another reason why SPEW won't be supporting him. Peter Taaffeand the rest of SPEW's trotkyist leadership must be worried sick at the prospect of a Corbyn win. As to LU, that's not a sirprise as if Cotbyn wins they can go back to the Labour Party. Surprising, though, that prominent LU members like Liz Davies and Tom Watson as well as some members of its national council thought they could get away with it.
alanjjohnstone wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/07/labour-leadership-election-260-former-candidates-and-members-rival-parties-apply-voteAs i have suggested a good excuse for th Media Committee to issue a press release on why we will not be recommending joining the Labour Party so to vote for Corbyn.Good idea, Alan, but as I've said before someone will need to contact the Media Committee via the usual email alias as I'm fairly certain that only very occasionally does one of its members visit this forum.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.