Labour policies

[wilts rover]

Go tell that to Macron then. This is what he is talking about:

https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/11/07/emmanuel-macron-warns-europe-nato-is-becoming-brain-dead

https://www.politico.eu/article/annegret-kramp-karrenbauer-emmanuel-macron-german-defense-minister-hits-back-nato-criticism/

A NATO member is currently committing a war crime. The main power behind NATO has threatened to pull out of it unless other countries does at it says. A futher power wants to create a rival to NATO.

You might like the world to be as you see it. Unfortunately that is not the world as it is - or is likely to be in the near future.

Corbyn sees NATO as a vehicle for keeping the peace. You appear to see it as a vehicle for waging war.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Wilts.

That final paragraph is utterly outrageous.

1) It shows that you have no knowledge whatsoever of what Corbyn has said throughout his career about NATO. You make a fool of yourself when you pontificate from a position of such ignorance. Do you want some evidence of Corbyn's lifelong opinion of NATO? Do you?

2) Your comment on my opinion of NATO is simply stupid and you will not find anything I have ever said in here to support that. What you are doing is what the Far Left has always done on this subject. Infantilise it to "Ooh, ooh! You don't agree with us! You must want WAR then!"

I've heard that for years. It is f**king idiotic but it refuses to die. Because it allows a group of people to convince themselves that they are right, without the difficult bit of engaging with facts and critique.

[bpoolrover]

Macron wants a European army thou so don’t know if that’s the reason he saying this?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Well. No need for anyone to ask how Labour will pay for their policies.

It's all here. 44 pages of detail and analysis.

https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Funding-Real-Change.pdf

I'm sure the Tories will be producing a similarly comprehensive document just like they *checks notes* errr...didn't do in 2017.

[BillyStubbsTears]

By the way. Those of you concerned (as I have been) about Corbyn's foreign and defence policy, need to see Labour's manifesto.

Quotes from it.
"We will maintain our committment to NATO."

"Labour supports the renewal of the Trident nuclear deterrent."

"Labour's committment to spend at least 2% (NATO target, which few countries match) of GDP on defence..."

That is a manifesto on defence that could have come from Blair, or Wilson or Attlee.

[selby]

  Billy, and it boils down to procuring land from land owners at prices before planning permission is granted, and higher taxes for the middle classes, borrowing money which will put up interest rates, and crushing anyones aspirations for a better life.
  Meanwhile your leader, who is a millionaire himself will no doubt rent his ex council house out while living the high life at No 10 surrounded by all his devoted socialist friends with their snout in the trough raising a glass to the workers revolution.

[Filo]

Whats not to like about that manifesto?

[SydneyRover]

"'and crushing anyones aspirations for a better life''

Everyone? Why? Selby

[BillyStubbsTears]

Go on Selby.

Where in the document does it say any of that?

I'm not in the slightest bit interested in your unsupported assertions. Heard plenty of those and they've never yet been backed up by facts. I want to see your analysis of what is in Labour's costing document that supports what you've just claimed.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Meanwhile, that Kitson Cummings is at it again.

https://www.labourmanifesto.co.uk/#

You can see the guiding hand of Steve Bannon all over this. Our politics didn't used to be like this, but these f**king vermin are killing it.

[DonnyOsmond]

Go on Selby.

Where in the document does it say any of that?

I'm not in the slightest bit interested in your unsupported assertions. Heard plenty of those and they've never yet been backed up by facts. I want to see your analysis of what is in Labour's costing document that supports what you've just claimed.

He's probably been told by the right wing media that the ideas are hard Communist ideas without even looking at them.

[selby]

  Billy, the first thing big business will do is pay their taxes off shore in other countries, which means that if a labour government carry out their policies, the tax burden will fall on the working population. You know they will not win, against big business, it will cost jobs, which will be transferred abroad, wealth will be transferred abroad, and interest rates will go up because of the borrowing.

[SydneyRover]

Absolute b*llocks Selby

[albie]

Selby,

Why will interest rates go up because of Labour borrowing?

Genuine question.....I really don't see why you think that!
Is there any evidence on which you make that claim?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Selby.

Changes of behaviour to avoid tax are built into the calculations of how much money will be raised.

Albie. Good point. See, this current Govt has borrowed more than all the previous Govts in history put together. And interest rates haven't gone up.

Selby saying that they would go up because of borrowing betrays a total lack of understanding of how the bond markets work.

[selby]

 To all of you sitting with your mouths open waiting for utopia to spring up, the last Labour Party manifesto was only fit to be hung on a nail at the back of a toilet door, and this will join it.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

There's some real good bits in there and the other parties should react to some of them and at least match them.  Nobody can knock much of the healthcare points at all, though I still dispute the role private companies can play, some private element is a good thing at times, but not in large scales.  The free dental care is a major plus point.

The extension to maternity and paternity pay and some improvements to workers rights are good things, though not as strong as the Lib Dems take on this.  The Lib Dem working childcare commitments are superb.  Though I'm less convinced on the role of unions, that often leads to disruption.

The energy and environmental aspirations are good, it's vital for the future to implement these things.

However, I fail to see how they can make these grand schemes pay, how will they stop some of these things they have pledged being passed on to the consumer?

The snippet I found the most humerous was in relation to when things go bad we'll scrap the fiscal rules - just abolish them anyway then.....

A number of mentions on investment in electrical steel - what about the stronger other forms of steel and would that investment harm the major steel plants in the UK?  I would think so.  We can't rely on recycled steel solely and disappointing given the issues at British Steel and Tata of no real mention there - not surprising though it is tricky given the environmental impacts.

A pledge to make payments happen on time on public sector contracts, but no pledge for the public sector to pay on time (Labour councils, prison service and the NHS are terrible payers to private companies).

The Brexit policy is bobbins, we knew that already and my biggest bugbear is the excessive taxation, too much of it but how else could they do it?  I suspect they'd have to go further to make the whole thing work, the assumptions on some of the receipts etc are very optimistic, note the use of the words "we hope" a number of times.  I'd also be very worried about the nationalisation and use of bonds to do so, need to think more about the impact on private investors.  There is not a huge amount of evidence to show what impact nationalisation would have on the whole country, investment and end consumer.

Oh and as unfeasible as it is, if you're being consistent in being against tuition fees write off student debt aswell on the fees that your party introduced, it'd save me thousands a year in repayments (and don't blame the tories for that, i graduated a week before Cameron took power!).

Also to add, R&D tax credits, how can removing that be seen as a positive, it's a ridiculous policy and contradicts other statements in there.

[BillyStubbsTears]

BFYP

The issue about the Fiscal Rule is key! It's Economics 101. It's not a political get out, it is absolutely fundamental to rational running of the economy.

That clause on suspending the Fiscal Rule in the case of a serious recession was drawn up by a globally-renown Professor of Macroeconomics at Oxford University.

This is why it is so important.


Basic macroeconomic theory says that the most crucial lever for managing the economy is interest rates. When the economy is booming, there's a threat of inflation getting out of control, so you raise interest rates to cool down the economy. Make it less attractive to borrow and more attractive to save.

When the economy is flagging, you want the opposite. You want to discourage saving. You want to encourage consumers to spend and industry to borrow and invest to kick start the economy. So you reduce interest rates.

Problem is, in a severe recession like 2008-09, reducing interest rates isn't enough. Back then, we effectively reduced rates to zero. We made borrowing free. And it still didn't kick start the economy. You COULD try negative rates - charge people a penalty for saving and pay them to borrow, but that has all sorts of democratic problems.

So. In that situation, the economic textbook says that Govt spending on day to day stuff must increase. Cut taxes. Increase benefits and wages. Push through quick infrastructure projects. That keeps the economy turning over while the private sector recovers from the shock of the recession.

That requires Govt to borrow more than it had planned. And THAT is why the knock-out clause to the Fiscal Rule is so crucial. It is absolutely NOT a political get out. Any politician who says it is, either doesn't know basic economic theory, or is deliberately lying to you.

[BillyStubbsTears]

By the way, that issue about the Fiscal Rule is THE most important one in the entire election.

If a Govt gets macroeconomic policy wrong, nothing else really matters because the country is on a long term path to a weaker, poorer future. The Tories got this spectacularly wrong in 2010, when they obsessed about Govt debt at a time that Govt borrowing and spending was crucial. As a result of that monumental mistake, the 2010s have been the worst decade for economic growth since the 19th century.

Read that again.

The 2010s have been the worst decade for economic growth since the 19th century. And that happened because of a conscious choice of Govt policy.

It must NEVER, EVER be allowed to happen again.

[SydneyRover]

To all of you sitting with your mouths open waiting for utopia to spring up, the last Labour Party manifesto was only fit to be hung on a nail at the back of a toilet door, and this will join it.

Sitting here with mouth open, head back half asleep waiting for you to back up your statements. If you want respect then support your arguments Selby.

[Filo]

To all of you sitting with your mouths open waiting for utopia to spring up, the last Labour Party manifesto was only fit to be hung on a nail at the back of a toilet door, and this will join it.

It’s fully costed, lets see what the set of lying t**ts come up with shall wee, I’m sure they’ll bandy about any figures though

[Ldr]

The IFS has a view on that Filo mate.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/nov/21/general-election-2019-corbyn-to-launch-labours-manifesto-of-hope-live-news?page=with%3Ablock-5dd69b7d8f083aa6d5788670

[drfchound]

It might be fully costed Filo but it is very optimistic and fanciful.
Plenty of respected political observers have said as much.
That IFS piece says much about it being so too.

[Filo]

It might be fully costed Filo but it is very optimistic and fanciful.
Plenty of respected political observers have said as much.
That IFS piece says much about it being so too.

Look up Clement Attlee and the Labour manifesto of 1945, many said the same thigs then, the manifesto was deliveredin full whenthe Country was on its knees after WW2

[drfchound]

It might be fully costed Filo but it is very optimistic and fanciful.
Plenty of respected political observers have said as much.
That IFS piece says much about it being so too.

Look up Clement Attlee and the Labour manifesto of 1945, many said the same thigs then, the manifesto was deliveredin full whenthe Country was on its knees after WW2

If I suppose we will have to wait and see whether they get elected first.

[Filo]

It might be fully costed Filo but it is very optimistic and fanciful.
Plenty of respected political observers have said as much.
That IFS piece says much about it being so too.

Look up Clement Attlee and the Labour manifesto of 1945, many said the same thigs then, the manifesto was deliveredin full whenthe Country was on its knees after WW2

If I suppose we will have to wait and see whether they get elected first.

Straight question mate, ignore the costs, do you like what you see in the Labour manifesto?

[drfchound]

It might be fully costed Filo but it is very optimistic and fanciful.
Plenty of respected political observers have said as much.
That IFS piece says much about it being so too.

Look up Clement Attlee and the Labour manifesto of 1945, many said the same thigs then, the manifesto was deliveredin full whenthe Country was on its knees after WW2

If I suppose we will have to wait and see whether they get elected first.

Straight question mate, ignore the costs, do you like what you see in the Labour manifesto?

Some things, yes.
Not all of it though.

[wilts rover]

For anyone interested the manifesto apparently contains a commitment for a Labour government to review the Mineworkers Pension Scheme surplus that MP's have been asking for and the government has so far blocked.

https://twitter.com/IanLaveryMP/status/1197599881948487681

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN01189

[Filo]

It might be fully costed Filo but it is very optimistic and fanciful.
Plenty of respected political observers have said as much.
That IFS piece says much about it being so too.

Look up Clement Attlee and the Labour manifesto of 1945, many said the same thigs then, the manifesto was deliveredin full whenthe Country was on its knees after WW2

If I suppose we will have to wait and see whether they get elected first.

Straight question mate, ignore the costs, do you like what you see in the Labour manifesto?

Some things, yes.
Not all of it though.

So give it a chance, if you don’t like what happens afterwards you can vote for someone else next time

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

It might be fully costed Filo but it is very optimistic and fanciful.
Plenty of respected political observers have said as much.
That IFS piece says much about it being so too.

Look up Clement Attlee and the Labour manifesto of 1945, many said the same thigs then, the manifesto was deliveredin full whenthe Country was on its knees after WW2

If I suppose we will have to wait and see whether they get elected first.

Straight question mate, ignore the costs, do you like what you see in the Labour manifesto?

Some things, yes.
Not all of it though.

So give it a chance, if you don’t like what happens afterwards you can vote for someone else next time

5 years later, I dont think that is a risk worth taking personally.

Interesting to see McDonnell cocked up big style confirming something wont happen then it appears in the manifesto.  The funniest thing was one of the north east labour mps trying to articulate the brexit policy of which he had no idea. A somewhat hilarious interview.