Post Match Thread: Election 2017

[Chippy_boy]

Blair was to the right of some Tory leaders let alone Labour ones, particularly late-period Heath.

But I'll make the point again that "centrist" in the Thatcher/Blair era meant a less extreme version of the right-wing, free-market philosophy that Thatcher introduced. In other words, the concept of 'the market' was accepted as part of the consensus but Blair tempered it with an element of social justice. But there's no centre in the scenario we have now. It's either-or. Public services have been cut to the bone with more to come. What is the "centre position" in this situation?

The only alternative is to reverse it, not temper it a bit.

Cutting public services to thread-bare levels is not a fundamental tennet of Conservative policy though. It's simply that Conservatives believe fiscal prudence. I do accept that there is some ideological divide, with Labour favouring a larger public sector and the Conservatives a smaller one. But I do not accept that it is fundamental to Conservatives to have our public services on their knees: it isn't.

I'd like excellent public services for all, and every Tory I know wants the same. Your criticism simply ignores the economic climate we've had to operate in (and indeed that which Margaret Thatcher inherited in 1979).

A huge failing of the Tory campaigns of late have been a failure to explain to the public WHY austerity was needed, and what the vision is for once austerity is over. If people were offered a bright future, they might be more accepting of the pain on the road to get there. And we are nearly there; the deficit already down to more manageable levels. May completely lost the plot in so many ways, but forgetting to mention this at all, was one of the biggest sins.

 

[sir baconface]

The in-fighting in both major parties will rumble on. In particular:

1) At what point in the near future will they turn off Mother Theresa's life support and elect a new leader?
2) Are Jezza's non-Tory-lite policies the future or the past?

Interesting times.

 

[blue cigar]

Doesn't seems to be a problem in Canterbury and Kensington plus others which were won.
Fortunately we are moving away from the back end of the middle of the road Labour guff that Tony Blair was pushing,
He was good at the start and stuck to the core Labour policy but slowly his Thatcher wet dream emerged and damaged the party for a long time.

No you are not, far from it but you are so far detached from the core Labour policies you have no idea what you are spouting. Why exactly are you in the Labour party? What you have written would see someone opposed to the currently useless NEC banned from the party as was seen by many people who were barred from voting in that leadership campaign. That by way, was the most vicious and counter-effective campaign against one person seen anywhere for a long long time. The absolute shite them and the PLP pulled made this campaign as difficult as anything the press pulled. It was a horrendous attack on any form of a fair election. The fact that Owen Smith was blown out of the water showed the NEC and PLP are as removed from reality as they are from the membership. You think for half a second Owen Smith would have won this election? Dont make me laugh. With friends like you nobody needs enemies, whoever they are. Blairism is firmly dead.
Then a couple of paragraphs of bollocks to try and justified such as misshaped view.



Never believe your own shite, you are nothing to do with left and are fucking useless.
If you want to be involved in some party that wants to ver from left to right go and form one, dont worry, you will be leader and it will be you in it.



Without a shadow of a doubt by the end he was. As has been said many times



You forgot number 1 by a mile, the needless waste of a year by fuckwits who didn't their own way and actively tried to sabotage Corbyn and directly shell the party and put them on the lowest ratings ever. Something the media have been happy to exploit ever since. To come back from that back stabbing, of which Tom Watson is one of the king snakes, was a superb effort and it is that, that people are pleased about. Once Corbyn could get on with doing what was needed to shred this weak and terrorist loving government, the figure show he had a better swing in voting than Tony Thatcher. You only have to watch this video to see that the rank and file middle of the roaders, literally have no idea what is going on and more than a few need to publically apologise. Fair play to Owen Smith for doing that.

[MEDIA]=facebook541542416236667[/MEDIA]


There would be far far less than 200 seats for Labour if they had not fought back on the social media.

You are clearly upset that Labour lost the election we all are, however, you seemed twice as pained to see Labour (or rather more specifically Corbyn) have come out of the campaign on a far stronger footing. Always remember, once a scab, always a scab ;)



It has been a hard week for him realising all that he thought was right about the Labour has been pulled apart, both within and without of the party.

Correct. 100%

 

[Magicpole]

I can that many people think like you do. Not enough however, clearly.

Yet

 

[remember arthur mann]

Old news but !

https://www.rt.com/uk/390648-maybot-polls-election-popularity/

 

[sir baconface]

Cutting public services to thread-bare levels is not a fundamental tennet of Conservative policy though. It's simply that Conservatives believe fiscal prudence. I do accept that there is some ideological divide, with Labour favouring a larger public sector and the Conservatives a smaller one. But I do not accept that it is fundamental to Conservatives to have our public services on their knees: it isn't.

I'd like excellent public services for all, and every Tory I know wants the same. Your criticism simply ignores the economic climate we've had to operate in (and indeed that which Margaret Thatcher inherited in 1979).

Absolutely, and it's very difficult to put the message across. Console yourself with the thought that, while the Left tend to win this propaganda war in public, large parts of the electorate are able see through it when it comes to voting.

I don't see it as the pivotal factor in May's dismal performance.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Cutting public services to thread-bare levels is not a fundamental tennet of Conservative policy though. It's simply that Conservatives believe fiscal prudence. I do accept that there is some ideological divide, with Labour favouring a larger public sector and the Conservatives a smaller one. But I do not accept that it is fundamental to Conservatives to have our public services on their knees: it isn't.

I'd like excellent public services for all, and every Tory I know wants the same. Your criticism simply ignores the economic climate we've had to operate in (and indeed that which Margaret Thatcher inherited in 1979).

A huge failing of the Tory campaigns of late have been a failure to explain to the public WHY austerity was needed, and what the vision is for once austerity is over. If people were offered a bright future, they might be more accepting of the pain on the road to get there. And we are nearly there; the deficit already down to more manageable levels. May completely lost the plot in so many ways, but forgetting to mention this at all, was one of the biggest sins.

Good post mate. However I think Conservative administrations have historically run bigger deficits than Labour ones but that doesn't really help us in this situation. The point I think I'm trying to make is that austerity probably wasn't needed to the level it has been imposed. Even Osborne realised he'd got it badly wrong. Classic Keynesian theory would have seen an increase in net debt but with the money going into the public sector. Instead it mainly went into propping up the banks and has come out of public services.

I think the public did accept the concept of austerity (wrongly) so they did get the message across. But as you say there's been no vision about what post-austerity will look like or even when it will happen. Even if we achieve a balanced budget then debt is still way above the 40% of GDP that is considered the acceptable level these days and growth is slowing down dramatically and is now the weakest in the EU, whatever SWP's Back may say. So the only alternative is not a more centrist view of austerity but an alternative view of where society is going.

 

[jonmcity]

Absolutely, and it's very difficult to put the message across. Console yourself with the thought that, while the Left tend to win this propaganda war in public, large parts of the electorate are able see through it when it comes to voting.

I don't see it as the pivotal factor in May's dismal performance.

If you want good public services you have to pay for it. Increased taxation for the rich, and companies is required. The conservatives spend money in the wrong places, i.e. privatising services that ends up costing the tax payer more.

 

[robbieh]

Blair was to the right of some Tory leaders let alone Labour ones, particularly late-period Heath.

But I'll make the point again that "centrist" in the Thatcher/Blair era meant a less extreme version of the right-wing, free-market philosophy that Thatcher introduced. In other words, the concept of 'the market' was accepted as part of the consensus but Blair tempered it with an element of social justice. But there's no centre in the scenario we have now. It's either-or. Public services have been cut to the bone with more to come. What is the "centre position" in this situation?

The only alternative is to reverse it, not temper it a bit.

Totally correct on all points.

In your view when do we get a chance to reverse it?

 

[jonmcity]

Lots of the public now work for large companies that are swimming in cash, due to inflating prices while deflating wages. The large corporates have been ripping the general public off for years. This wealth needs to be shared more equally.

 

[blueinsa]

Lots of the public now work for large companies that are swimming in cash, due to inflating prices while deflating wages. The large corporates have been ripping the general public off for years. This wealth needs to be shared more equally.

Spot on.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Totally correct on all points.

In your view when do we get a chance to reverse it?

It originally took about 50-60 years to first get from the level of debt v GDP we had after WW1 (c180%) to a similar level we have now (c80%). Debt as a percentage of GDP was already going swiftly down when Thatcher came to power, albeit as a result of measures imposed by the IMF. Her government took it to historically low levels but even under Brown, who was criticised for spending too much, it barely got above 40%. The only way we get to reverse it is via strong, long-term growth that drives up GDP but we aren't going to get that where real wage growth is negative and productivity isn't growing.

 

[urban genie]

It's revenge of the cast offs today as Morgan, osbourne and soubry sticking it to may, she is a dead duck, even with the DUP suppprt there will be enough tory rebels at times to stifle her gevernment.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Lots of the public now work for large companies that are swimming in cash, due to inflating prices while deflating wages. The large corporates have been ripping the general public off for years. This wealth needs to be shared more equally.

I said something similar a while ago. Companies are hoarding cash instead of investing it in new projects, wage increases and increasing productivity.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Surely anyone voting Labour must have known they were voting for a coalition of chaos?

This more than anything won Cameron the previous election and did for Ed. This time round May was just so bad she could appeal to Unionist voters in England - unlike Ruth Davison. If someone like her had been Tory leader to mobilise this vote, we would be looking at a further 1.5% Tory vote and a 40 seat+ majority.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Good post mate. However I think Conservative administrations have historically run bigger deficits than Labour ones but that doesn't really help us in this situation. The point I think I'm trying to make is that austerity probably wasn't needed to the level it has been imposed. Even Osborne realised he'd got it badly wrong. Classic Keynesian theory would have seen an increase in net debt but with the money going into the public sector. Instead it mainly went into propping up the banks and has come out of public services.

I think the public did accept the concept of austerity (wrongly) so they did get the message across. But as you say there's been no vision about what post-austerity will look like or even when it will happen. Even if we achieve a balanced budget then debt is still way above the 40% of GDP that is considered the acceptable level these days and growth is slowing down dramatically and is now the weakest in the EU, whatever SWP's Back may say. So the only alternative is not a more centrist view of austerity but an alternative view of where society is going.

I can understand that point of view, and indeed have some sympathy with it. But I don't accept that austerity was completely unnecessary (not sure you meant to say that, but your 2nd paragraph ("wrongly") implies it). The vast amount of money splurged on propping up the banks was totally unavoidable: there was no alternative, since the big banks going under would have had devastating consequences for all of us. And that having added to the deficit that Brown had already created pre 2008, put us into a position where we simply could not at the time just borrow even more and carry on regardless. That said, I have some room for debate about whether the cuts were too hard and too deep and whether it's time to ease off now.

Incidentally, I am pretty sure in my own mind that the reason our growth has dropped back recently is simply because of Brexit. Businesses are sitting on the fence and not investing until they know how the land lies. That's something I've noticed from a very personal perspective in my job hunting: the jobs market in my sector is very quiet indeed - more so than I can remember in a couple of decades in fact.

This in itself probably adds to the argument that now is the time to start to inject some more public funding into infrastructure and public services.

In terms of where we go from here, I think there's 3 things the Tories can do, two of which scare me.

1. Pretend nothing's happened and carry on regardless.
2. Reflect on the wave of resentment regarding the state of our public services and make tangible policy changes to address the concerns of those moderate voters who were tempted by the Corbyn message.
3. Allow the far right in the party to take the party even further right.

Imo, 1 would be completely wrong and would inevitably lead to an early election and a probably defeat.

3. would be an unmitigated disaster and leave the Tories in opposition for a decade or more. It's an unthinkable option, but one that some idiots on the right of the party will be angling for: "We need to show clear blue water and a return to core Conservative values. Margaret Thatcher won 3 elections and look at us now...", type bollocks.

2. is the overwhelmingly sensible option. Listen to the people for they have spoken. I don't believe all of those who swung towards Labour, did so without reservations about just how left wing Corbyn is. And I think the Conservatives should try to win those votes back.

 

[BlueAnorak]

The hypocrisy of Labour and Alistair Campbell is beyond contempt . Apparently, the Tories are playing with fire with the peace process in Norn Ireland by partnering with the DUP. If that's the case, how precisely would electing an IRA sympathiser as PM have helped the peace process?

You're not wrong. Then in my experience most politicians middle name is Hypocrit.

 

[jonmcity]

I said something similar a while ago. Companies are hoarding cash instead of investing it in new projects, wage increases and increasing productivity.

Agreed, The CEO's are reluctant to take risks, as they are on wages that they are to scared to loose. If they invest but do not get the return expected they are toast, and 6M a year is a lot to risk.

 

[Chippy_boy]

If you want good public services you have to pay for it. Increased taxation for the rich, and companies is required. The conservatives spend money in the wrong places, i.e. privatising services that ends up costing the tax payer more.

This is to ignore the fundamental question as to how do you most effectively raise the amount of tax revenue to spend on public services?

Do you simply raise tax rates? Or do you reduce rates? You're assuming the answer is obviously the former, but that is not necessarily the case. We cut the top rate of tax: Tax receipts went up. We cut the rate of corporation tax: tax receipts went up.

I am not saying this is always the case. Some tax increases (such as 1p on the basic rate of income tax, or perhaps a VAT rate increase) definitely raise money. But these are nasty taxes that hit the least well off the worst and therefore not desirable. I do not subscibe to the Gordon Brown model of taking more money off poor people, only to give it back to them on benefits. That's just a silly idea and inherently inefficient and wasteful.

But the problem with taxes in general is that they act as a brake on the economy. They slow growth and investment since businesses have less money to invest and grow. And with slower growth and lower profits, there's less money for pay rises and less money is collected in taxes. The tax burden on employers is when you think about it, enormous. Employers' NI is already a huge strain, and if you imagine that in order to pay a sales rep in IT £60k, the employer probably has to pay about £120k since half of it goes on TAX and NI, then you realise what a strain it is.

Imagine how much more competitive, how much more stuff that business could sell, if it only cost say £100k to pay that employee the same amount? The business would boom, creating jobs and wealth and more tax revenues.

I am not suggesting this is all black and white. But to say "increased taxation for the rich and for companies is required" is a point worth debating.

 

[Ban-jani]

Worst election campaign of all time? Cannot think of a worse one considering how dead Labour were until these last 3 weeks.

I know technically the Tories have still won but Christ she's disappointed me as a leader.