Can the Labour party re-invent Socialism ?

[alexaherself]

The reality, as we've all been discovering for month after month, is that under no circumstances are the words "Sorry: I may have made a mistake" ever in your vocabulary.

 

[Pat Riley]

Bush on a jury selection list yesterday, but was rejected......can't think why.......

He's a nut, and the city has limits for his type.

 

[Pat Riley]

Alexa, Mr. Charts - why? Not worthy of your time. He's a dipstick.

 

[Pat494]

Is Jeremy Corbyn really the Monster from the red lagoon ?

1. “Corbynomics is deficit denial”

I was a bit surprised last week to be accused of wanting to run “a deficit in perpetuity”. After all, in my economic speech I criticised George Osborne's Budget for not doing enough. What responsible government committed to closing the deficit would give a tax break to the richest 4 per cent of households through an inheritance tax cut?

More concretely I have pledged that, if the deficit has been closed by 2020 and the economy is growing (as Osborne forecasts), then Labour should not run a current budget deficit – but we should borrow to invest in our future prosperity. Far from denying the deficit, we must tackle it – but I do dispute that you best close it by cutting the public services, benefits and tax credits, or squeezing spending out of the economy so that growth is slowed down.

But if there is still a deficit in 2020, then I think you don’t set an arbitrary deadline, you have a strategy to grow the economy, increase tax revenues, and – if necessary – ask the most fortunate to contribute a little more. If anyone is in denial it is those who deny the true economic crisis – the crisis of rising poverty and homelessness, and falling productivity.

2. “You're unelectable”

I think I do OK. I have been elected eight times, the last time on a high turnout, with the highest ever vote with the highest ever majority. I think that compares favourably.

Labour has to become a movement again to win in 2020. A movement mobilises people and the part of the electorate who we most need to speak to is those who didn’t vote – 34 per cent at the last election. They are more likely to be young, from an ethnic minority background and to be working class, as are the hundreds of thousands who weren’t registered to vote at all. These are the people who would benefit most from a Labour government that stands up against discrimination, reduces inequality and poverty, creates a fairer society for all.

If we had won the support of just one in five of those who didn’t vote, then today we might have a Labour government. I think an honest, straight-talking politics can win back support from the Conservatives, Ukip, the Greens and SNP.

3. “He's anti-business and hates the rich”

Well that will come as news to my lovely local coffee shop. I work with local businesses in my constituency, including some very promising high-tech businesses. My local authority is a living wage employer and extends that to all contractors – which is good for whole economy, boosting spending in other local businesses.

But I’m absolutely not relaxed about a few people being filthy rich while others are destitute. I detest inequality and injustice. We should not ignore the exploitation of workers, the degradation of our environment – or tax dodging by multinationals, which creates an unfair advantage over local businesses. Demanding tax justice is actually a moderate pro-business campaign: it seeks a level playing field for all.

Many well-off people I speak to, in Islington and around the country, would be quite happy to pay more tax to fund better public services or to pay down our debts. Opinion polls bear this out: better off people are no less likely to support higher taxes. A more equal society is better for us all. We all do better with good public services and when we all care for each other.

4. “No one will work with you”

There is a long way to go in this leadership contest, but – whoever wins – we shouldn’t want a Shadow Cabinet who all come from exactly the same political background. We need a democratic party that involves all MPs and party members. In addition to the appointed members of the Shadow Cabinet, every Labour MP should have a role to play – working to assist on each departmental policy area.

I recently spent a long weekend in Washington with Conservative MPs David Davis and Andrew Mitchell, and my Labour colleague Andy Slaughter, lobbying for the release of Shaker Aamer from Guantanamo Bay. They can see the greater good in working together, and I’m sure all Labour colleagues will too. Some of the things said in the heat of the campaign will doubtless be left there. I don’t do personal abuse – I want to lead a more inclusive and united party. After all, when the dust settles we are all still Labour.

 

[tomorton]

Jeremy Corbyn as leader seems like a guarantee Labour will not be re-elected.

 

[alexaherself]

What responsible government committed to closing the deficit would give a tax break to the richest 4 per cent of households through an inheritance tax cut?

Superficially a nice point, and one that appeals to his electorate, but there are answers to it, too: for example, doing things like that can avoid losing non-dom billionaires whose contributions to the economic recovery (in spite of their not paying UK income tax on their overseas earnings) are pretty significant.

I have been elected eight times, the last time on a high turnout, with the highest ever vote with the highest ever majority.

Again, easily answerable: it's because of his personal following in his constituency (not in the country). He's a very nice fellow, and very popular locally. That doesn't win a general election.

Blair won 3 general elections because he looked "Prime Ministerial" (even though, like Corbyn, he had no ministerial experience when elected).

Nobody can seriously suggest that Corbyn "looks Prime Ministerial", compared with his probable opponent (Osborne) in a 2020 election. That matters enormously.

the part of the electorate who we most need to speak to is those who didn’t vote – 34 per cent at the last election. They are more likely to be young, from an ethnic minority background and to be working class, as are the hundreds of thousands who weren’t registered to vote at all.

Here, he makes a good point.

If we had won the support of just one in five of those who didn’t vote, then today we might have a Labour government.

And here. They need to stop blaming Scotland. If in May 2015 every person in Scotland who voted for the SNP had voted Labour instead, we'd still have a Conservative majority government today.

I’m absolutely not relaxed about a few people being filthy rich while others are destitute.

Neither is Cameron. The Right is increasingly aware, following the publication of the work of James, Piketty and others, of the downside of grotesque inequality. He's right to say that, of course (and/because nobody can seriously question that it's true), but it's not really that much of a point, in these circumstances, is it?

I recently spent a long weekend in Washington with Conservative MPs David Davis and Andrew Mitchell, and my Labour colleague Andy Slaughter, lobbying for the release of Shaker Aamer from Guantanamo Bay. They can see the greater good in working together, and I’m sure all Labour colleagues will too.

Here he makes an interesting point.

Who'd have thought that David Davis and Shami Chakrabarty would be such good political friends, and that their "interests" would so often run so closely together?

I still think that in order to have a prayer of winning a general election in 2020, they needed Chuka Umunna (who apparently hadn't quite "thought it through"), possibly Tristram Hunt (who is perhaps too busy being a history professor and author), or David Miliband. Even the hugely popular Alan Johnson would be a "luxury", compared with the shower currently on offer, but he'll be 70 at the next election.

They shot themselves in the foot, last time, by electing "the wrong Miliband", and they're still paying for that.

Interestingly, David Miliband never publicly denies that he might be interested in returning to the UK and leading the Labour party. That would move the goalposts. And a Corbyn leadership in 2015 followed by another electoral disaster in 2020 could be just the opportunity he needs?

 

[Pat494]

Superficially a nice point, and one that appeals to his electorate, but there are answers to it, too: for example, doing things like that can avoid losing non-dom billionaires whose contributions to the economic recovery (in spite of their not paying UK income tax on their overseas earnings) are pretty significant.



Again, easily answerable: it's because of his personal following in his constituency (not in the country). He's a very nice fellow, and very popular locally. That doesn't win a general election.

Blair won 3 general elections because he looked "Prime Ministerial" (even though, like Corbyn, he had no ministerial experience when elected).

Nobody can seriously suggest that Corbyn "looks Prime Ministerial", compared with his probable opponent (Osborne) in a 2020 election. That matters enormously.



Here, he makes a good point.



And here. They need to stop blaming Scotland. If in May 2015 every person in Scotland who voted for the SNP had voted Labour instead, we'd still have a Conservative majority government today.



Neither is Cameron. The Right is increasingly aware, following the publication of the work of James, Piketty and others, of the downside of grotesque inequality. He's right to say that, of course (and/because nobody can seriously question that it's true), but it's not really that much of a point, in these circumstances, is it?



Here he makes an interesting point.

Who'd have thought that David Davis and Shami Chakrabarty would be such good political friends, and that their "interests" would so often run so closely together?

I still think that in order to have a prayer of winning a general election in 2020, they needed Chuka Umunna (who apparently hadn't quite "thought it through"), possibly Tristram Hunt (who is perhaps too busy being a history professor and author), or David Miliband. Even the hugely popular Alan Johnson would be a "luxury", compared with the shower currently on offer, but he'll be 70 at the next election.

They shot themselves in the foot, last time, by electing "the wrong Miliband", and they're still paying for that.

Interestingly, David Miliband never publicly denies that he might be interested in returning to the UK and leading the Labour party. That would move the goalposts. And a Corbyn leadership in 2015 followed by another electoral disaster in 2020 could be just the opportunity he needs?

Good points Alexa.
But I think the Labour party and the country as a whole would be better off leaving an old man of the 70s in his own little bubble and out of the way. Like it or not the world has discovered capitalism and business. The downside is that they only care for the money gained and not if they have to trash the planet to get some more money out of it. Very short sighted. The electorate are left with poor choices imho

 

[Pat494]

Tony Blair should stand trial on charges of war crimes if the evidence suggests he broke international law over the “illegal” Iraq war in 2003, the Labour leadership frontrunner Jeremy Corbyn has said.








Iraq inquiry: Cameron to demand Chilcot name publication date








Corbyn called on the former prime minister to “confess” the understandings he reached with George W Bush in the run up to the invasion.


Asked on BBC Newsnight whether Blair should stand trial on war crimes charges, Corbyn said: “If he has committed a war crime, yes. Everybody who has committed a war crime should be.”


The veteran MP for Islington North was a high-profile opponent of the war and became a leading member of the Stop the War coalition. He said: “It was an illegal war. I am confident about that. Indeed Kofi Annan [UN secretary general at the time of the war] confirmed it was an illegal war and therefore [Tony Blair] has to explain to that. Is he going to be tried for it? I don’t know. Could he be tried for it? Possibly.”


Corbyn said he expects the eventual publication of the Chilcot report will force Blair to explain his discussions with President Bush in the runup to the war.

He said: “The Chilcot report is going to come out sometime. I hope it comes out soon. I think there are some decisions Tony Blair has got to confess or tell us what actually happened. What happened in Crawford, Texas, in 2002 in his private meetings with George [W] Bush. Why has the Chilcot report still not come out because – apparently there is still debate about the release of information on one side or the other of the Atlantic. At that point Tony Blair and the others that have made the decisions are then going to have to deal with the consequences of it.”







The Guardian briefing: Publication of the long-awaited official investigation into the Iraq war will now be delayed until after the general election. Why?






On Newsnight, Corbyn made clear that he is opposed to British involvement in air strikes against Islamic State forces in Iraq and Syria. Prime minister David Cameron is hoping to win parliamentary support to extend Britain’s involvement in the aerial bombing of Isis targets from Iraq to Syria.

Corbyn said: “I would want to isolate Isis. I don’t think going on a bombing campaign in Syria is going to bring about their defeat. I think it would make them stronger. I am not a supporter of military intervention. I am a supporter of isolating Isis and bringing about a coalition of the region against them.”

 

[hhiusa]

The war was not illegal. Blair did not do anything wrong nor did he act on his own.

What is with the excessive spacing between paragraphs? You only need one. :smart:

 

[Pat494]

The war was not illegal. Blair did not do anything wrong nor did he act on his own.

What is with the excessive spacing between paragraphs? You only need one. :smart:

Over 100,000 deaths and nothing wrong ?
A stupid war that cost trillions and nothing wrong ?

Are you some sort of neo-Nazi monster ?

The spacing occurred because the inbedded photos don't copy.

 

[hhiusa]

Over 100,000 deaths and nothing wrong ?
A stupid war that cost trillions and nothing wrong ?

Are you some sort of neo-Nazi monster ?

The spacing occurred because the inbedded photos don't copy.

Argument from consequences again!

He went to war to support his allies. Yes, wars costs money. The war was still not illegal. Blair could not mobilize the British military all by himself.

The queen could not allow that.

 

[Atilla]

Over 100,000 deaths and nothing wrong ?
A stupid war that cost trillions and nothing wrong ?

It's much worse than that I think. No account of deaths due to war, deprivation, shortage of weapons, handicapped babies born due to plutonium tipped weapons or still suffering from amputations. OR homeless with refugee status. Or those dying from factional fighting.

The catalogue of coincidental events that led to the Iraq war is beyond comprehension imo.


Starting from 9/11
- Holding a simulation exercise - with aircraft flying into sky scrapers on the same day as some hair brain terrorists flying aircraft flying into sky scrapers is - let's say coincidental.
- Even 30 year experienced pilots would have trouble turning and banking, hitting a sky scraper at an angle, yet not one but two terrorist were able to do so with minimal training on light aircraft.
- In the history of the World no sky scraper ever collapsed in model fashion from fire or aircraft hit and and yet on one day we have three.
- Building 7 wasn't even hit by a plane but totally disintegrated in model fashion.
- MODEL demolitions of 3 buildings in one day
- A disintegrating aircraft into the Pentagon leaving no trace but visible books on a seat where the hole in the wall resides.
- David Kelly's supposedly suicide with few drops of blood
- CIA agent being outed by Libby for denying nuclear weapons exchange in Africa.
- An intelligence dossier written by a university pleb and passed on as MI6 intel
- No collaboration of any evidence
- Richard Wright's book who served three US presidents trying to speak to Bush Jnr who was out playing golf for the best part of 3 months.
- Osama Bin Laden being a CIA agent for many years

We haven't even come to the WMDs yet...

- None found by UN inspector Hans Blinx
- Rumsfeld stating they knew where they were and not telling Hans Blinx but giving him clues about them being North, South, East and West of Baghdad
- How about the bit about, things we know, things we know we don't know and things we don't know we don't know. What a load of total rubbish.
- No WMD found by US army
- Blair's account of a WMD launch from Iraq within 45 minutes might be credible if they had WMDs.
- David Kelly knew even if they had, 45 minutes launch was a load of b0ll0cks.
- Even Secretary of State Colin Powell was duped by FBI slam dunk confirmation existence of WMDs and later resigned and even said he was badly misled and regretted his UN presentation.
- Condelleca Rice claiming on Fox TV "Nobody could have even dream of such an event" yet somehow had no idea of Dick Chenney's test scenario of aeroplanes flying into sky scrapers.

I did say at the time those planes could have been taken over and remotely flown into the sky scrapers but many laughed. Now it is known the technology is available and planes can be remotely controlled from the ground.

I do recall lot of doubters that our governments were just too straight and wouldn't do this kind of stuff...

They'll do worse in the name of national interest.

Many people made millions and billions and so call patriots went to war killing innocent civilians, torturing them and destroying their homes. Then going back to the US of A with arms and legs missing ending the rest of their miserable lives out on the streets.


Bush, Chaney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were the architects of the war and Bliar their little puddle.


Now we don't hear much about Al-Qaeda but we do have ISIS. Who created ISIS to fight in Syria for Western interests?


Gotta laff. I feel a weekend rant thread developing.


I'm outta here.

 

[hhiusa]

It's much worse than that I think. No account of deaths due to war, deprivation, shortage of weapons, handicapped babies born due to plutonium tipped weapons or still suffering from amputations. OR homeless with refugee status. Or those dying from factional fighting.

The catalogue of coincidental events that led to the Iraq war is beyond comprehension imo.


Starting from 9/11
- Holding a simulation exercise - with aircraft flying into sky scrapers on the same day as some hair brain terrorists flying aircraft flying into sky scrapers is - let's say coincidental.
- Even 30 year experienced pilots would have trouble turning and banking, hitting a sky scraper at an angle, yet not one but two terrorist were able to do so with minimal training on light aircraft.
- In the history of the World no sky scraper ever collapsed in model fashion from fire or aircraft hit and and yet on one day we have three.
- Building 7 wasn't even hit by a plane but totally disintegrated in model fashion.
- MODEL demolitions of 3 buildings in one day
- A disintegrating aircraft into the Pentagon leaving no trace but visible books on a seat where the hole in the wall resides.
- David Kelly's supposedly suicide with few drops of blood
- CIA agent being outed by Libby for denying nuclear weapons exchange in Africa.
- An intelligence dossier written by a university pleb and passed on as MI6 intel
- No collaboration of any evidence
- Richard Wright's book who served three US presidents trying to speak to Bush Jnr who was out playing golf for the best part of 3 months.
- Osama Bin Laden being a CIA agent for many years

We haven't even come to the WMDs yet...

- None found by UN inspector Hans Blinx
- Rumsfeld stating they knew where they were and not telling Hans Blinx but giving him clues about them being North, South, East and West of Baghdad
- How about the bit about, things we know, things we know we don't know and things we don't know we don't know. What a load of total rubbish.
- No WMD found by US army
- Blair's account of a WMD launch from Iraq within 45 minutes might be credible if they had WMDs.
- David Kelly knew even if they had, 45 minutes launch was a load of b0ll0cks.
- Even Secretary of State Colin Powell was duped by FBI slam dunk confirmation existence of WMDs and later resigned and even said he was badly misled and regretted his UN presentation.
- Condelleca Rice claiming on Fox TV "Nobody could have even dream of such an event" yet somehow had no idea of Dick Chenney's test scenario of aeroplanes flying into sky scrapers.

I did say at the time those planes could have been taken over and remotely flown into the sky scrapers but many laughed. Now it is known the technology is available and planes can be remotely controlled from the ground.

I do recall lot of doubters that our governments were just too straight and wouldn't do this kind of stuff...

They'll do worse in the name of national interest.

Many people made millions and billions and so call patriots went to war killing innocent civilians, torturing them and destroying their homes. Then going back to the US of A with arms and legs missing ending the rest of their miserable lives out on the streets.


Bush, Chaney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were the architects of the war and Bliar their little puddle.


Now we don't hear much about Al-Qaeda but we do have ISIS. Who created ISIS to fight in Syria for Western interests?


Gotta laff. I feel a weekend rant thread developing.


I'm outta here.

That is the epitome of "closing the barn door after the horse has bolted". You already went on a major rant.

 

[alexaherself]

First it was Bush and Blair ... next it could be Trump and Corbyn ...

 

[hhiusa]

First it was Bush and Blair ... next it could be Trump and Corbyn ...

1. You missed some people in between Bush and Blair and now.
2. Trump speaks his mind and says what most people with a brain are thinking. It is nice change from the double speak and beating around the bush that you get from most politicians.
3. Trump is not a career politician, so he is not indoctrinated in the ways of speaking out of the side of his mouth.

 

[0007]

First it was Bush and Blair ... next it could be Trump and Corbyn ...

I don't think Trump will be very helpful in persuading the IMF to bail Corbyn out of his probable Greek-type financial mess.

 

[canyon2015]

1. You missed some people in between Bush and Blair and now.
2. Trump speaks his mind and says what most people with a brain are thinking. It is nice change from the double speak and beating around the bush that you get from most politicians.
3. Trump is not a career politician, so he is not indoctrinated in the ways of speaking out of the side of his mouth.

I like Trump, too. He's taking things too far, but exaggerations are perhaps the only way to make others be more like him, i.e not being pussies controlled by other people's money. You can say that he's to politics what fashion shows are to the fashion world.

That said, I wouldn't vote for him (if I were American) - the guy is too crazy, but he's a breath of fresh air in this sea of meticulously calculated words and actions. If more politicians were like him (but more diplomatic), I'd pay more attention to this field. Right now it seems like it's a contest of hiding behind the bush when it comes to sensitive topics like immigration, religion, race, fat people, gays, etc. Speak your mind, for heaven's sake, don't be such a pussy about it. But they're politicians - people who aren't very smart, don't want to work too much, but still want to make lots of money - so you can't expect much from them.

 

[Pat494]

What would I like to hear from the US politicians if I was a US citizen is :-
How they would divert/pump water to the drought stricken regions
Put in ultra fast transport systems
Spread the high speed internet
Not waste even more money on the Middle East.
Reduce the prison population.
etc.

Can Hillary, Chump and the rest deliver ?

 

[Pat494]

I regret Corbyn is an old dinasour from decades ago. More akin to North Korea than a western state.

He used to want to get rid of the monarchy and all that lot but doesn't say so now in order not to lose votes.

Nationalise the railways, docks, business generally ?

All that Marxist cr*p was tried years ago and failed miserably. The Unions love it but Britain would soon be bankrupt.

Mr, Garbage really imho

 

[hhiusa]

What would I like to hear from the US politicians if I was a US citizen is :-
How they would divert/pump water to the drought stricken regions

You do not divert water to drought stricken areas. Water is a commodity. You have to pay for it. If you can't afford or do not have it naturally, then you don't get it. This is not socislism. It is not handed to you because you are a member state.
Some cities up "norf" have severe water rationing, whilst most cities around me are doing fine as if there was not a drought. They have a good water table.

Put in ultra fast transport systems

California already voted in a high speed bullet train from San Francisco to San Diego.

Spread the high speed internet

How fast is your internet connection?

Not waste even more money on the Middle East.

Even people who are against the war, think there are more pertinent things than this.

Reduce the prison population.
etc.

Why would we want to reduce the prison population?

Can Hillary, Chump and the rest deliver ?

Calling him chump speaks more about you than him.