How thick is Starmer

[srb7677]

Allvery humorous Borky but when automation increasingly takes jobs away they better have a good plan because unlike the past the plebs will not be crapped on.

This is all the more relevant since our economy is utterly dependent upon consumer spending. If all the jobs are going to be taken by robots how will consumers earn any money to spend? This would inevitably lead to economic collapse unless other radical solutions are found. The only one I can see that can begin to square the circle is most of us working fewer hours whilst the robots are taxed to finance a Universal Basic Income top up.

Anyone who doesnt like that idea needs to come up with some alrenative means of avoiding economic collapse due to a collapse in consumer spending resulting from declining employment opportunities, as AI increasingly comes on grid.

[Good old]

In which case you are wrong.

All the CEOs and bankers need do is wave a few extra pounds in the air and half the world will cross continents and the Channel in pedal boats to fill any vacancies. Or they will get someone to automate the more basic jobs.

Socialism is fun when you are marching down through Hyde Park and screaming whatever ill thought out bollocks that is currently in fashion, but no way to run a country

Greatest problem we have is anyone actually believing anymore that ,just shouting conservative , is any way to run a modern first world  country. Only England seems to believe it anyway.
Socialism as we know  in other parts of Europe, works well enough to not be rejected.
The rest of the world has found ways to catch up with us ,one way of another ,that will not change, it's us that need to change if we will ever deal with it.

[cromwell]

In which case you are wrong.

All the CEOs and bankers need do is wave a few extra pounds in the air and half the world will cross continents and the Channel in pedal boats to fill any vacancies. Or they will get someone to automate the more basic jobs.

Socialism is fun when you are marching down through Hyde Park and screaming whatever ill thought out bollocks that is currently in fashion, but no way to run a country

Allvery humorous Borky but when automation increasingly takes jobs away they better have a good plan because unlike the past the plebs will not be crapped on.

[Borchester]

The recent pandemic showed who the real keyworkers were, keeping the country going. And guess what? It didn't include most landlords, CEOs, and bankers.

In which case you are wrong.

All the CEOs and bankers need do is wave a few extra pounds in the air and half the world will cross continents and the Channel in pedal boats to fill any vacancies. Or they will get someone to automate the more basic jobs.

Socialism is fun when you are marching down through Hyde Park and screaming whatever ill thought out bollocks that is currently in fashion, but no way to run a country

[srb7677]

Correction - I am no longer a member of the Conservatives. I was once for a few years but simply got too busy giving others employment! 

Oh okay, thanks for the clarification. I am no longer Labour either.

I always assumed you had a vote in the current leadership contest. I guess not.

[Borchester]

Do you think perhaps we should halt this? I am beginning to feel a bit irritated by your constant referral to 'your lot'. I have your message that you would prefer Labour to be farther left and perhaps since we are so far apart in how best to improve the lot of those less able than either of us we should take a breather before it gets personal. Thanks for the discussions though. 

Steve is alright and is actually doing the Tories a bit of good. He is hawking his conscience around the left and thereby splitting the vote.

Tory Central Office probably send him birthday cards

[T00ts]

because you are actually a Tory party member

Correction - I am no longer a member of the Conservatives. I was once for a few years but simply got too busy giving others employment! 

[srb7677]

Do you think perhaps we should halt this? I am beginning to feel a bit irritated by your constant referral to 'your lot'. I have your message that you would prefer Labour to be farther left and perhaps since we are so far apart in how best to improve the lot of those less able than either of us we should take a breather before it gets personal. Thanks for the discussions though. 

I am not trying to be personal. I refer to "your lot" because you are actually a Tory party member so that in a very real sense they are your lot.

But yes since I am a socialist we are unlikely to agree on many things very often, especially when it comes to socio-economics. We can agree to differ if you like but please understand I have no personal animosity towards you.

This may sound a bit incongruous from me but one of my very best friends is actually a wealthy millionairess who works at a top level in the pharmaceutical industry. She and I often disagree on politics but we remain friends. So although my style might be combattive and robust it is not personal.

As for Labour, I don't want it to be anything anymore. I have given up on it. I feel it has been stolen from us by thatcherite establishmentarians and is a lost cause. I want to see it die as the essential prerequisite for something better to replace it.

And politics forums such as this are only interesting because people disagree with each other and then seek to hammer it out. I don't think you should find the fact that I disagree with you so profoundly so often as a source of irritation, but as a challenge.

[T00ts]

I wouldn't mistake me for Labour anything if I were you. I reject the thatcherite b team in red rossettes as much as I reject your lot.

I left Labour a long while ago now.

Do you think perhaps we should halt this? I am beginning to feel a bit irritated by your constant referral to 'your lot'. I have your message that you would prefer Labour to be farther left and perhaps since we are so far apart in how best to improve the lot of those less able than either of us we should take a breather before it gets personal. Thanks for the discussions though.  

[srb7677]

And that is why Labour left will never take control of this country.

I wouldn't mistake me for Labour anything if I were you. I reject the thatcherite b team in red rossettes as much as I reject your lot.

I left Labour a long while ago now.

[T00ts]

And your lot rarely show any respect for those who are working all the hours god sends just to survive whilst being leeched off by property investors, fat cats, and greedy shareholders.

The recent pandemic showed who the real keyworkers were, keeping the country going. And guess what? It didn't include most landlords, CEOs, and bankers.

And so what if every landlord sold up, which is hardly likely to happen. This would just flood the market with housing for sale, bringing down house prices so more people could afford to buy. It would not be in most landlords' interests to sell up, since they are often reliant on their investments in bricks and mortar for their retirement income. So the choice is do they earn an income from their portfolios even if the amount they can charge is capped? Or do they earn nothing? As for tenants from hell, I am in favour of tougher laws against them. But the bigger problem right now is often landlords from hell.

And you ought to get real. All the wealth in this country is created by working people. The few who get rich tend to do so by being the most effective at exploiting the hard work of others for as little as they can get away with paying.

And that is why Labour left will never take control of this country. If this is how those on the left feel about all those who don't agree with them it hardly bodes well for national unity. The trouble with the ethos here is that it is a rush for the bottom. We all depend on one another, those who you call the working people are as valued in the Conservative ideal as much as those who manage to create the opportunities for others. Without those who are clever, risk takers, entrepreneurs etc the chap who simply wants to go to work without risk or responsibility would have nothing at all. What Left wing hopefuls are banking on as the new way is nothing but a dream because it simply isn't practical or realistic.

[srb7677]

It all sounds great but Labour and particularly the left rarely show any respect for those who create an economy or provide jobs.

And your lot rarely show any respect for those who are working all the hours god sends just to survive whilst being leeched off by property investors, fat cats, and greedy shareholders.

The recent pandemic showed who the real keyworkers were, keeping the country going. And guess what? It didn't include most landlords, CEOs, and bankers.

And so what if every landlord sold up, which is hardly likely to happen. This would just flood the market with housing for sale, bringing down house prices so more people could afford to buy. It would not be in most landlords' interests to sell up, since they are often reliant on their investments in bricks and mortar for their retirement income. So the choice is do they earn an income from their portfolios even if the amount they can charge is capped? Or do they earn nothing? As for tenants from hell, I am in favour of tougher laws against them. But the bigger problem right now is often landlords from hell.

And you ought to get real. All the wealth in this country is created by working people. The few who get rich tend to do so by being the most effective at exploiting the hard work of others for as little as they can get away with paying.

[T00ts]

And yet quite a few of those popular policies were either cost neutral (lowering the voting age, security of tenure for private tenants, scrapping exploitative work contracts, full workers' rights from day one) or would have raised or saved money (raising the top rate of tax, closing tax loopholes, capping private rents and thus saving on housing-related welfare, increasing the minimum wage, thereby increasing the tax take whilst reducing in work welfare).

The remainder simply need to be convincingly costed.

You see I see all that as all very presentable but Labour forgets that all those landlords would simply sell up especially when saddled with tenants from hell as often happens or unable to increase rents when their mortgages on properties went up. It all sounds great but Labour and particularly the left rarely show any respect for those who create an economy or provide jobs. They always give the impression that they view them as a cash cow. Last time they tried all this we had a massive brain and wealth drain to other countries where prospects were better. I remember at one point they had to put a limit on cash going out of the country to try and stop it.  I do agree with you that the set up we have currently is not the best but sadly I see your ideas as even worse.
It was all very fine when expectations were low decades ago but those times have gone. The Left has to move with the times to get the votes. 

[srb7677]

Labour lost because Corbyn promised the world to anyone who would listen forgetting to mention just how it would be paid for. Soaking the rich and businesses doesn't fool many when it comes down to it. It all sounds great until you realise that once again Labour is buying votes with everyone's money.

And yet quite a few of those popular policies were either cost neutral (lowering the voting age, security of tenure for private tenants, scrapping exploitative work contracts, full workers' rights from day one) or would have raised or saved money (raising the top rate of tax, closing tax loopholes, capping private rents and thus saving on housing-related welfare, increasing the minimum wage, thereby increasing the tax take whilst reducing in work welfare).

The remainder simply need to be convincingly costed.

[T00ts]

Rubbish. Polling showed that the 2017 policies were themselves very popular. That Labour lost is therefore clearly in spite of them and not because of them, and for other reasons I have previously listed. Which is logically obvious. After all, things people love do not lose elections. It is other things that they don't like which do that.

All of this is logically obvious to anyone whose personal interests or ideological assumptions do not interpose blinkers.

Labour lost because Corbyn promised the world to anyone who would listen forgetting to mention just how it would be paid for. Soaking the rich and businesses doesn't fool many when it comes down to it. It all sounds great until you realise that once again Labour is buying votes with everyone's money.