The General Election Thread

[Ancient Citizen]

Your example of the railways, whist correct (and I include myself in that grouping) is more an example of the pragmatic nature of the English electorate. Many people who are right wing believe that the railways should be nationalised because it would work better, not because they are socialists or would want wholesale nationalisation of other, large institutions.

I agree with what you say about needing and deserving a proper socialist electoral option, but that isn't going to happen under our current wholly unrepresentative and inequitable electoral system.

fwiw id expect it to garner similar support as UKIP, with ultimately about as much chance of electoral success, and would, as I've previously indicted, split the left of centre vote and weaken Labour; therefore strengthening the Tories.

No nirvana anytime soon, I'm afraid.

If politics continues to fragment as it is then after this election i also see the Tories splitting into the One nation small C and far right pro UKIP wings. Labour could well fragment into whats left of its pale imitation and a new further left Green/Socialist alliance.

No Government under the FPTP system would ever have a majority again and coalition would be the norm. Im sure as a wishy washy Lib Dem that appeals to you. Permanent power for the most non descript party in UK politics.

If this did occur at least we would all have a choice of party rather than vote as i do now which is always to stop the Tories rather than follow what i believe.

This is also a good point, you could be right about the Tories and Lib Dems.

 

[Damocles]

Your example of the railways, whist correct (and I include myself in that grouping) is more an example of the pragmatic nature of the English electorate. Many people who are right wing believe that the railways should be nationalised because it would work better, not because they are socialists or would want wholesale nationalisation of other, large institutions.

I agree with what you say about needing and deserving a proper socialist electoral option, but that isn't going to happen under our current wholly unrepresentative and inequitable electoral system.

fwiw id expect it to garner similar support as UKIP, with ultimately about as much chance of electoral success, and would, as I've previously indicted, split the left of centre vote and weaken Labour; therefore strengthening the Tories.

No nirvana anytime soon, I'm afraid.

If politics continues to fragment as it is then after this election i also see the Tories splitting into the One nation small C and far right pro UKIP wings. Labour could well fragment into whats left of its pale imitation and a new further left Green/Socialist alliance.

No Government under the FPTP system would ever have a majority again and coalition would be the norm. Im sure as a wishy washy Lib Dem that appeals to you. Permanent power for the most non descript party in UK politics.

If this did occur at least we would all have a choice of party rather than vote as i do now which is always to stop the Tories rather than follow what i believe.

Yeah, those permanent coalition Governments in places like Germany have wrecked their country economically and socially.

 

[M18CTID]

Yes, but the point is that the vast majority of people who are active politically and who consider themselves to be 'socialists' presently vote Lavour, albeit reluctantly. Some will abstain, but not in meaningful numbers, I reckon. Many others who currently do vote Labour, or are considering doing so, emphatically would not if the party shifted discernibly to the left, especially in marginal constituencies where general elections are won and lost.

There simply aren't enough people, or anything like, to support such an outcome, irrespective of what your close circle of friends think; not the most scientific of surveys, it should be said.

My unscientific survey regardless, an overwhelming majority of UK citizens would like the railways to be renationalised for instance, but Labour refuses.

Until we have a proper Socialist party to vote for we cannot even begin to speculate on what level of support it may garner.

I happen to think a majority of the UK populace lean towards Social Democrat as is shown by the support for the treasured national institutions we have left. We need the Social Democratic concensus reinstating for the good of the nation as a whole.

Your example of the railways, whist correct (and I include myself in that grouping) is more an example of the pragmatic nature of the English electorate. Many people who are right wing believe that the railways should be nationalised because it would work better, not because they are socialists or would want wholesale nationalisation of other, large institutions.

I agree with what you say about needing and deserving a proper socialist electoral option, but that isn't going to happen under our current wholly unrepresentative and inequitable electoral system.

fwiw id expect it to garner similar support as UKIP, with ultimately about as much chance of electoral success, and would, as I've previously indicted, split the left of centre vote and weaken Labour; therefore strengthening the Tories.

No nirvana anytime soon, I'm afraid.

Good post. The idea of re-nationalising the railways appeals to me and I'm no socialist. The East Coast mainline was re-nationalised a few years ago (privatised again now I think) and by all accounts was a success insofar it was both efficient and profitable.

As for whether a socialist party could gain power in this country, I agree that it's nigh on impossible to envisage happening in the foreseeable future.

 

[M18CTID]

Labour might be many things, but neo-liberal isn't one of them.

Maybe not to you. But to me any Labour party that does not call for renationalisation, supports austerity, courts big business and refuses to repeal anti democratic union laws is neo-liberal.

That is not Neo-liberalism that is just realism If they don't move to the centre of British politics they have about as much chance of gaining power as the Monster raving looney party

Despite what a few left wing activists say there is no appetite from Voters in Britain for left wing policies

Correct. Simply put, there are nowhere near enough socialists in the country to vote in a socialist government. Rascal can dream as much as he wants but the vast majority of voters in this country are either moderately left of centre or moderately right of centre. It's why Blair won a landslide election because whatever you say about him, he made Labour electable again.

 

[Rascal]

Your example of the railways, whist correct (and I include myself in that grouping) is more an example of the pragmatic nature of the English electorate. Many people who are right wing believe that the railways should be nationalised because it would work better, not because they are socialists or would want wholesale nationalisation of other, large institutions.

I agree with what you say about needing and deserving a proper socialist electoral option, but that isn't going to happen under our current wholly unrepresentative and inequitable electoral system.

fwiw id expect it to garner similar support as UKIP, with ultimately about as much chance of electoral success, and would, as I've previously indicted, split the left of centre vote and weaken Labour; therefore strengthening the Tories.

No nirvana anytime soon, I'm afraid.

If politics continues to fragment as it is then after this election i also see the Tories splitting into the One nation small C and far right pro UKIP wings. Labour could well fragment into whats left of its pale imitation and a new further left Green/Socialist alliance.

No Government under the FPTP system would ever have a majority again and coalition would be the norm. Im sure as a wishy washy Lib Dem that appeals to you. Permanent power for the most non descript party in UK politics.

If this did occur at least we would all have a choice of party rather than vote as i do now which is always to stop the Tories rather than follow what i believe.

Yeah, those permanent coalition Governments in places like Germany have wrecked their country economically and socially.

Woah!!! I never said it was a bad thing.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

My unscientific survey regardless, an overwhelming majority of UK citizens would like the railways to be renationalised for instance, but Labour refuses.

Until we have a proper Socialist party to vote for we cannot even begin to speculate on what level of support it may garner.

I happen to think a majority of the UK populace lean towards Social Democrat as is shown by the support for the treasured national institutions we have left. We need the Social Democratic concensus reinstating for the good of the nation as a whole.

Your example of the railways, whist correct (and I include myself in that grouping) is more an example of the pragmatic nature of the English electorate. Many people who are right wing believe that the railways should be nationalised because it would work better, not because they are socialists or would want wholesale nationalisation of other, large institutions.

I agree with what you say about needing and deserving a proper socialist electoral option, but that isn't going to happen under our current wholly unrepresentative and inequitable electoral system.

fwiw id expect it to garner similar support as UKIP, with ultimately about as much chance of electoral success, and would, as I've previously indicted, split the left of centre vote and weaken Labour; therefore strengthening the Tories.

No nirvana anytime soon, I'm afraid.

Good post. The idea of re-nationalising the railways appeals to me and I'm no socialist. The East Coast mainline was re-nationalised a few years ago (privatised again now I think) and by all accounts was a success insofar it was both efficient and profitable.

As for whether a socialist party could gain power in this country, I agree that it's nigh on impossible to envisage happening in the foreseeable future.

To me, the rail network being privatised makes as much sense as the roads being in private hands. They are an inherent part of the national infrastructure and as such should be owned by the state, not least because I believe they would be run more properly and much more in the public interest, as any such national asset should be. I'd say the same for water. I'm undecided about gas and electric. Telecommunications definitely not. It's all a question of degree, as with anything else, I guess.

 

[Len Rum]

Saw an interesting article in the Times newspaper that the figure to be published ten days before the election for GDP growth in the first quarter is expected to be hugely disappointing , which is why Jeffrey in a little noticed headline was talking about a fragile recovery the day after the growth figure for2014 was updated by 0.2%.
It will be interesting to see how bad the figure is and what impact this could have on voting intentions.
Who knows it could be as defining a moment as the poor balance of payments figure published just before the 1970 election which some experts reckoned lost Harold Wilson and Labour that election.
There's hope for Ed yet!

 

[lloydie]

Labour might be many things, but neo-liberal isn't one of them.

Maybe not to you. But to me any Labour party that does not call for renationalisation, supports austerity, courts big business and refuses to repeal anti democratic union laws is neo-liberal.

There's never really been anything liberal, neo or otherwise, about Labour.

Like communists and other authoritarians, Labour wants a big state.

They prefer high taxes so that the state can decide how to spend everyone's money.

They don't trust the people to spend their own money in a wise manner.

They are, and have always been, illiberal.

And they've had 5 MPs jailed for stealing our money.

And the Tories give them peerages before that can happen?

 

[whp.blue]

Your example of the railways, whist correct (and I include myself in that grouping) is more an example of the pragmatic nature of the English electorate. Many people who are right wing believe that the railways should be nationalised because it would work better, not because they are socialists or would want wholesale nationalisation of other, large institutions.

I agree with what you say about needing and deserving a proper socialist electoral option, but that isn't going to happen under our current wholly unrepresentative and inequitable electoral system.

fwiw id expect it to garner similar support as UKIP, with ultimately about as much chance of electoral success, and would, as I've previously indicted, split the left of centre vote and weaken Labour; therefore strengthening the Tories.

No nirvana anytime soon, I'm afraid.

Good post. The idea of re-nationalising the railways appeals to me and I'm no socialist. The East Coast mainline was re-nationalised a few years ago (privatised again now I think) and by all accounts was a success insofar it was both efficient and profitable.

As for whether a socialist party could gain power in this country, I agree that it's nigh on impossible to envisage happening in the foreseeable future.

To me, the rail network being privatised makes as much sense as the roads being in private hands. They are an inherent part of the national infrastructure and as such should be owned by the state, not least because I believe they would be run more properly and much more in the public interest, as any such national asset should be. I'd say the same for water. I'm undecided about gas and electric. Telecommunications definitely not. It's all a question of degree, as with anything else, I guess.

I have been accused of being right wing and whilst that is probable right I happen to think all essential services like water electric gas rail and buses should be state owned and non profit making some things are beyond capitalism

 

[urmston]

Good post. The idea of re-nationalising the railways appeals to me and I'm no socialist. The East Coast mainline was re-nationalised a few years ago (privatised again now I think) and by all accounts was a success insofar it was both efficient and profitable.

As for whether a socialist party could gain power in this country, I agree that it's nigh on impossible to envisage happening in the foreseeable future.

To me, the rail network being privatised makes as much sense as the roads being in private hands. They are an inherent part of the national infrastructure and as such should be owned by the state, not least because I believe they would be run more properly and much more in the public interest, as any such national asset should be. I'd say the same for water. I'm undecided about gas and electric. Telecommunications definitely not. It's all a question of degree, as with anything else, I guess.

I have been accused of being right wing and whilst that is probable right I happen to think all essential services like water electric gas rail and buses should be state owned and non profit making some things are beyond capitalism

Cars are an essential part of life too these days.

Do you want a nationalised, huge loss making British Leyland back so you can drive a hopeless public sector made car like the Austin Allegro?

That wasn't made for profit but it was a lot worse than cars like the Ford Fiesta that were.

 

[whp.blue]

To me, the rail network being privatised makes as much sense as the roads being in private hands. They are an inherent part of the national infrastructure and as such should be owned by the state, not least because I believe they would be run more properly and much more in the public interest, as any such national asset should be. I'd say the same for water. I'm undecided about gas and electric. Telecommunications definitely not. It's all a question of degree, as with anything else, I guess.

I have been accused of being right wing and whilst that is probable right I happen to think all essential services like water electric gas rail and buses should be state owned and non profit making some things are beyond capitalism

Cars are an essential part of life too these days.

Do you want a nationalised, huge loss making British Leyland back so you can drive a hopeless public sector made car like the Austin Allegro?

That wasn't made for profit but it was a lot worse than cars like the Ford Fiesta that were.

where did that come from? car companies do not have monopoly's and cars only seem essential because the trains trams and buses are fucked so to answer your question is of course not.

British Leyland was an ill conceived disaster and it was made even worse by the left wing bolshy unions of the day.

 

[remember arthur mann]

I have been accused of being right wing and whilst that is probable right I happen to think all essential services like water electric gas rail and buses should be state owned and non profit making some things are beyond capitalism

Cars are an essential part of life too these days.

Do you want a nationalised, huge loss making British Leyland back so you can drive a hopeless public sector made car like the Austin Allegro?

That wasn't made for profit but it was a lot worse than cars like the Ford Fiesta that were.

where did that come from? car companies do not have monopoly's and cars only seem essential because the trains trams and buses are fucked so to answer your question is of course not.

British Leyland was an ill conceived disaster and it was made even worse by the left wing bolshy unions of the day.

Memories of gross incompetence in management, nothing changes !

 

[hilts]

In an ideal world the government should run lots of services and run them like a private company with profits going towards reinvestment and workers pay and conditions, unfortunately governments are pretty shit at running anything, i think where there is plenty of competition let it go private otherwise the government should run it but get someone in charge who knows how to do it properly

Public transport should be re nationalised but i would guess the cost would be huge

 

[The perfect fumble]

In an ideal world the government should run lots of services and run them like a private company with profits going towards reinvestment and workers pay and conditions, unfortunately governments are pretty shit at running anything, i think where there is plenty of competition let it go private otherwise the government should run it but get someone in charge who knows how to do it properly

Public transport should be re nationalised but i would guess the cost would be huge

The cost would be zero, at least in terms of acquiring the services back, you simply let the franchise period run out and then do not re-tender. Bingo! The service is back in public hands.

 

[malg]

[bigimg]http://www.private-eye.co.uk/pictures/covers/full/1389_big.jpg[/bigimg]

 

[The perfect fumble]

Worth a read...

Osbornia Revisited

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/20...isited/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto&_r=1

 

[inbetween]

In an ideal world the government should run lots of services and run them like a private company with profits going towards reinvestment and workers pay and conditions, unfortunately governments are pretty shit at running anything, i think where there is plenty of competition let it go private otherwise the government should run it but get someone in charge who knows how to do it properly

Public transport should be re nationalised but i would guess the cost would be huge

A government run system will rarely make any profit because in essence the only real worthwhile reason to nationalize is to bring prices down and not run for profit. There is also no real motivation to turn a profit because turning a profit requires increasing prices to pay for everything and that loses votes.

Unfortunately simple economics is always against nationalization. We all want to pay less so profits become less so then investment is less, jobs as a consequence also become less, finally service suffers. Your once good railway/gas/etc system now becomes a bad one.

As with all things you inevitably get what you pay for.

 

[Rascal]

Unfortunately simple economics is always against nationalization. .

Is that primary school economics?

Why do we have nationalised roads?

 

[Lucky13]

The Socialist hypocrisy keeps marching on.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/labours-biggest-union-donor-used-zerohour-contracts-10151441.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/l ... 51441.html</a>

 

[AZUL]

We need to make not voting a crime to actually get a true government of the people