All things Labour Party

[Doctoroncall]

Good f*cking riddance. Blairite new labour is now officially dead, it's time we actually had a choice come the election.

 

Well Said. Nice to have a choice across the political spectrum.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

I have little doubt that Jeremy Corbyn is a principled, humane and unusually honest man. His heart is in the right place I think. Above all he is certainly NOT your usual Westminster politician. All those things will no doubt make him popular with many on the left, perhaps also among certain other sections of the electorate who are looking for something different after so many years of professional 'career' politicians being in charge. Unfortunately for Labour, and more importantly for this great nation, he is also wrong about just about everything.

 

Dreamers are the most dangerous of all politicians because the road to hell is paved with their good (or otherwise) intentions.

 

I started this thread some weeks ago asking the question whether his (then potential) leadership would result in the 'death' of the Labour Party as we know it. In all honesty tonight I still can't answer my own question because the British public are obviously a capricious bunch, and after this stunning result who would dare predict with any degree of certainty how they will vote at the next election?

 

What I will say is that moderation is not a 'virus' that needs to be eradicated and that one of our great political parties lurching this far to the extreme left is I think a profoundly dangerous development that could one day damage this nation in ways that many of Corbyns young supporters are too politically immature to possibly understand. It may be that you have to be old enough to really remember what happened to this nation back the 1970's before you fully realise the dangerous waters we may be heading into ...

[sadoldgit]

Death of New Labour maybe? I am not a Labour supporter but I do believe that the position parties should be strong. Sadly (for me) the LibDems seem shot but maybe now we shall at last see some real alternative policies and a more robust opposition. I for one are sick of everyone fighting over the middle ground.

[solentstars]

Good. Bunch of self-serving careerist politicians the lot of them. If they can't stomach being in a party that aims to reign in the violent excesses of the free market and champion social justice then maybe they shouldn't have joined Labour in the first place.

 

Obviously I have no idea how the future of the party will pan out. I have never actually voted Labour myself, but as somebody who would sooner put a bullet through my own head than vote Tory, I'm glad that the opposition now have a leader that will challenge the government properly and provide a coherent voice for the left in the commons. That is something that has been missing from British politics for far too long now.

 

FWIW - I like Corbyn. I like the fact that he stands out against the Westminster establishment that have turned off so many voters in recent years. I like the fact that he is able to debate with common sense and facts rather than resorting to mud-slinging and point-scoring, and that he is very good at shutting down anybody who he feels is doing that to him. I like the fact that he doesn't feel the need to wear a tie, because he recognises that it is substance that counts, rather than image.

 

Despite the best efforts of the right-wing media channels to discredit him and assassinate his character, he has won the leadership election with more support from within the party than even Tony Blair got in 1994. I look forward to seeing him go head-to-head with Cameron at PMQs, because they are such different characters.

 

Finally, here is a comment I just found posted elsewhere online which I found very interesting...

agree what a bunch of lightweights,they should have stayed and fight there corner.

[solentstars]

Death of New Labour maybe? I am not a Labour supporter but I do believe that the position parties should be strong. Sadly (for me) the LibDems seem shot but maybe now we shall at last see some real alternative policies and a more robust opposition. I for one are sick of everyone fighting over the middle ground.

i,m with you,we need alternatives views and ideas,i,m sick off everyone being the same .

[Wes Tender]

 

Despite the best efforts of the right-wing media channels to discredit him and assassinate his character, he has won the leadership election with more support from within the party than even Tony Blair got in 1994. I look forward to seeing him go head-to-head with Cameron at PMQs, because they are such different characters.

 

 

I suspect that quite a significant percentage of votes for Corby as leader didn't actually come from within the party, unless of course you are prepared to accept that the definition of "from within the party" included thousands who probably paid their £3 just so that they could join the Labour Party entitling them then to vote for him. At least Blair's votes would have been because those who voted him as leader considered that he stood a reasonable chance of success in a General Election.

 

I'm also impatient to see how he fares during Prime Minister's Question Time. I suspect that Cameron will walk all over him.

 

I find it amusing that Maggie Thatcher's election as leader of the Conservative Party can possibly be compared to the election of Corbyn by the Labour Party. Having lost an election because their leader was perceived to be too left-wing, what is the solution? Oh, yes; elect one who is substantially much further to the left. Genius.

[doddisalegend]

I'm actually quite pleased about this not because I particularly like or agree with Jeremy Corbyn but because I'm fed up with the three major parties all trying occupy the middle ground the only thing different about them was the colour of their ties in the last decade. At least this way the electorate will have some real choice about were to cast their vote.

[doddisalegend]

I suspect that quite a significant percentage of votes for Corby as leader didn't actually come from within the party, unless of course you are prepared to accept that the definition of "from within the party" included thousands who probably paid their £3 just so that they could join the Labour Party entitling them then to vote for him. At least Blair's votes would have been because those who voted him as leader considered that he stood a reasonable chance of success in a General Election.

 

I'm also impatient to see how he fares during Prime Minister's Question Time. I suspect that Cameron will walk all over him.

 

I find it amusing that Maggie Thatcher's election as leader of the Conservative Party can possibly be compared to the election of Corbyn by the Labour Party. Having lost an election because their leader was perceived to be too left-wing, what is the solution? Oh, yes; elect one who is substantially much further to the left. Genius.

 

On the other hand the Labour party will at least represent the working class socialists it is supposed to. Most Blairites could just join the Liberals and feel right at home. I like the ide of the main parties being very different from each other to give me real choice during an election. Though in truth my leanings probably aren't far enough left to vote for a Corbyn Labour party it's nice to have the option.

[Shandy_Top_89]

I think this is a good thing for political choice within the country and I think he is the best candidate to hold the current government to account, however I wouldn't be too keen to actually see him end up as PM.

 

A bit lost as to who I vote for in future as a Pro-EU, Pro-Trident, Pro-electoral reform, Pro-strong economic policy, Pro-refugee support, Anti-education reform voter (well at least the reforms initiated by Gove). Maybe I want too much

[CB Fry]

I have little doubt that Jeremy Corbyn is a principled, humane and unusually honest man. His heart is in the right place I think. Above all he is certainly NOT your usual Westminster politician. All those things will no doubt make him popular with many on the left, perhaps also among certain other sections of the electorate who are looking for something different after so many years of professional 'career' politicians being in charge. Unfortunately for Labour, and more importantly for this great nation, he is also wrong about just about everything.

 

Dreamers are the most dangerous of all politicians because the road to hell is paved with their good (or otherwise) intentions.

 

I started this thread some weeks ago asking the question whether his (then potential) leadership would result in the 'death' of the Labour Party as we know it. In all honesty tonight I still can't answer my own question because the British public are obviously a capricious bunch, and after this stunning result who would dare predict with any degree of certainty how they will vote at the next election?

 

What I will say is that moderation is not a 'virus' that needs to be eradicated and that one of our great political parties lurching this far to the extreme left is I think a profoundly dangerous development that could one day damage this nation in ways that many of Corbyns young supporters are too politically immature to possibly understand. It may be that you have to be old enough to really remember what happened to this nation back the 1970's before you fully realise the dangerous waters we may be heading into ...

 

He clearly is a typical Westminster politician, a typical extreme back bench complainer, there's plenty of them on both sides of the house.

 

And I notice a couple sneering references to "career" politicians. Well, if anyone can let me know what Jeremy Corbyn's career was or is then please do. It's pretty politician-y as far as I can see.

 

Either way, his career will finish in about two years time.

[Colinjb]

I have a theory.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34232177/jeremy-corbyn-young-people-have-to-be-heard

 

I do not believe that Corbyn is expecting to win the next election. I think he is playing a longer game, planting a seed that may grow.

 

He is looking to empower those that he can, reach out to those he has always sought to help and establish a young empowered and active socialist base to continue his ideology and drive Labour in the future.

 

He will not compromise his principles to do something as vulgar as win popular favour, indeed, he is no idiot and will be aware that in the current political climate he couldn't possibly win an election, He will however have belief that a longer term revolution, beginning now can spring from his leadership. It plays to his strengths as an idealist, as a lifelong martyr to his own principles. It also explains why he is so willing to go against political convention with the media and things such as PMQ's. He doesn't care for the frills, his endgame vision is that of a socialist Britain, embraced by the young all buying into his ideals who make it happen later.

Edited 12 September, 2015 by Colinjb

[Sour Mash]

I'd love it to be the end of the Labour Party but it's not.

 

He's rejuvenated their core support, brought in younger activists and engaged a lot of their support. Given Labour a great chance to get it all out of their system, play far left politics for a couple of years and feel great about themselves.

 

What will happen in the next general election will probably be something quite different.

[Sheaf Saint]

I find it amusing that Maggie Thatcher's election as leader of the Conservative Party can possibly be compared to the election of Corbyn by the Labour Party. Having lost an election because their leader was perceived to be too left-wing, what is the solution? Oh, yes; elect one who is substantially much further to the left. Genius.

 

That's just nonsense put out by the right-wing press in an attempt to shift the Overton window even further to the right. Miliband didn't lose the election because he was too left wing. He lost it because he was a pathetic, directionless weakling who had no real idea what his principles were. Seriously, how can a man who fully supported the Tories' austerity plans be considered too left wing?

[Sheaf Saint]

He clearly is a typical Westminster politician, a typical extreme back bench complainer, there's plenty of them on both sides of the house.

 

And I notice a couple sneering references to "career" politicians. Well, if anyone can let me know what Jeremy Corbyn's career was or is then please do. It's pretty politician-y as far as I can see.

 

Either way, his career will finish in about two years time.

 

You generally come across as fairly intelligent and articulate CB, so do you really need to have the difference between a career politician and a conviction politician explained to you?

[CB Fry]

I have a theory.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34232177/jeremy-corbyn-young-people-have-to-be-heard

 

I do not believe that Corbyn is expecting to win the next election. I think he is playing a longer game, planting a seed that may grow.

 

He is looking to empower those that he can, reach out to those he has always sought to help and establish a young empowered and active socialist base to continue his ideology and drive Labour in the future.

 

He is not a fool, he will not compromise his principles to do something as vulgar as win popular favour, indeed, he is no idiot and will be aware that in the current political climate he couldn't possibly win an election, He will however have belief that a longer term revolution, beginning now can spring from his leadership. It plays to his strengths as an idealist, as a lifelong martyr to his own principles. It also explains why he is so willing to go against political convention with the media and things such as PMQ's. He doesn't care for the frills, his endgame vision of a socialist britain, embraced by the young all buying into his ideals who make it happen later.

That might be in his head now. But events will overwhelm him before he gets anywhere near that.

 

You need to remember he joined the contest to "broaden the debate" and have a nice chat, not to win, and certainly not to become Prime Minister. What's happened since June was no masterplan that's for sure.

[Colinjb]

That might be in his head now. But events will overwhelm him before he gets anywhere near that.

 

You need to remember he joined the contest to "broaden the debate" and have a nice chat, not to win, and certainly not to become Prime Minister. What's happened since June was no masterplan that's for sure.

 

It was no masterplan, as an 'idealist' he will not care. He will be overwhelmed, it will be carnage..... but as a politician who believes in something he is a rare breed, he may, just may be able to inspire or reignite an idea. Those are trickier to get rid of, even if the core idea is crap.

[Wes Tender]

On the other hand the Labour party will at least represent the working class socialists it is supposed to. Most Blairites could just join the Liberals and feel right at home. I like the ide of the main parties being very different from each other to give me real choice during an election. Though in truth my leanings probably aren't far enough left to vote for a Corbyn Labour party it's nice to have the option.

 

I'm happy that the working class socialists are now to be represented by a Labour Party led by an extreme left-winger, as it means that they will never hold power again in England. As you say, there isn't that much distance between the Blairite Labour Party and the Lib Dems, so perhaps the best chance of them being elected to govern this country is to form another party as the SDP did when the more moderate faction of the then Labpur Party wished to remain in Europe and keep our nuclear deterrent. They need to get Alastair Campbell on board to come up with a smart new logo and name, something containing the word "new" in it and featuring some red and yellow flowers. It could be intertwined red and yellow roses perhaps, or the Lib Dem sh*tehawk carrying a red rose in its beak..

 

As for what would then become the rump of the former Old Labour, its core base of working class soclialists has eroded somewhat over the past few decades, as industries like coal mining, shipbuilding, train building, etc have gone to other countries where the labour costs are lower and the work force more subservient. It is the middle classes that are now the dominant force in the electorate and Labour under Blair only managed to get themselves elected by having policies that appealed to them, whilst hoovering up the traditional working class votes because they had always voted Labour and had no viable alternative party on the left.

 

In the immediate aftermath of Corbyn's victory, there is an element of euphoria from those who voice their satisfaction that there is now a more clearly defined choice in the political sphere on the one hand, and dark mutterings on the other hand about how Corbyn will have to be deposed a couple of years before the next election if Labour are to stand a chance of being electable.

 

When Red Ed Milliband revealed his tablet of policies set in a giant tombstone, it was described by some wags as the longest suicide note in history, but by electing Corbyn, Labour has surpassed itself and lurched alarmingly even further to the left, travelling back in a time warp to the days of that other scruffy but strangely likeable leftie Michael Foot.

Edited 12 September, 2015 by Wes Tender

[CB Fry]

You generally come across as fairly intelligent and articulate CB, so do you really need to have the difference between a career politician and a conviction politician explained to you?

I might need explaining why I see lots seeming to portray Corbyn as having a monopoly on "conviction" or values, just because he's managed to avoid actually doing anything for thirty years, except exist in the cosy world of preaching to the converted, back bench rebellion and never actually having drive through any of his actual "convictions" through the levers of government he could have worked in if he wanted to.

 

There are plenty of conviction politicians in the House Of Commons. Many of them seize the chance to apply those convictions to changing people's lives. Others sit on their convictions.

 

Corbyn is now the leader. He has to deal with the convictions of others for the first time in his very long and entirely political career. Let's see how he does.

Edited 12 September, 2015 by CB Fry

[Wes Tender]

That's just nonsense put out by the right-wing press in an attempt to shift the Overton window even further to the right. Miliband didn't lose the election because he was too left wing. He lost it because he was a pathetic, directionless weakling who had no real idea what his principles were. Seriously, how can a man who fully supported the Tories' austerity plans be considered too left wing?

 

So the Labour Party's last elected leader was a pathetic, directionless weakling and this latest one is pretty well a relatively unknown back bench time-server who is their most left-wing leader since the unfortunate Michael Foot.

 

Not very good at this leadership election thing, are they?

 

But still, Maggie Thatcher was apparently considered unelectable by some when she was chosen by the Conservatives, so there is hope for Corbyn yet, eh?

[Wade Garrett]

The delight in the Corbyn camp at the result is a fraction of the delight of the Tories.

 

I've voted Labour all my life, but that man, and his pie in the sky policies will not get my vote. As a Unite member, I would like the opportunity to rid my Union of the odious, clueless, Len Mccluskey. The best friend the Tories will ever have. F*cking idiot.

[Wade Garrett]

I might need explaining why I see lots seeming to portray Corbyn as having a monopoly on "conviction" or values, just because he's managed to avoid actually doing anything for thirty years, except exist in the cosy world of preaching to the converted, back bench rebellion and never actually having drive through any of his actual "convictions" through the levers of government he could have worked in if he wanted to.

 

There are plenty of conviction politicians in the House Of Commons. Many of them seize the chance to apply those convictions to changing people's lives. Others sit on their convictions.

 

Corbyn is now the leader. He has to deal with the convictions of others for the first time in his very long and entirely political career. Let's see how he does.

 

Agreed. He is all fart and no sh*t.

[CB Fry]

Agreed. He is all fart and no sh*t.

 

Already bottled out of Andrew Marr in the morning, an interview in the diary for months for whoever the leader was going to be.

 

Now talk of him bottling out of Prime Ministers Questions with him turning it into some #askcameron computer game for the twitterverse. The leader of her majesty's opposition already hiding away.

 

One day Jeremy you'll be asked to state your convictions to people who won't agree with you. That day is coming. You're the leader now. Step up.

[View From The Top]

I'm torn here as I like a lot of what he has to say as I'm anti-Trident & pro renationalisation of the railways etc and my lefty mates are certainly re-invigorated but he strikes me as unelectable by the wider populace.

[Sheaf Saint]

But still, Maggie Thatcher was apparently considered unelectable by some when she was chosen by the Conservatives, so there is hope for Corbyn yet, eh?

 

Hey, I'm not suggesting for a second that he will go on to taste the same success in the ballots that Thatcher did, as The quote was not originally mine, after all. A lot of her ideas were considered too extreme even for the Conservatives when she was elected, but she managed to win over public opinion and get herself into a position where she could implement those ideas, and many communities up and down the country are still suffering the effects of them nearly 40 years later.

 

I just think the sneering from the Tories, and their belief that Corbyn is a joke figure to be easily dismissed, may well backfire on them. I think he may well prove to be more of a threat to them and their grand plan to privatise the entire nation than they realise. I could, of course, be wrong. We shall see.

[Trader]

i,m with you,we need alternatives views and ideas,i,m sick off everyone being the same .

 

You're certainly different.

[shurlock]

My money's on there being a nasty economic event in the next five years - let's see how Corbo benefits.

[badgerx16]

... the odious, clueless, Len Mccluskey. The best friend the Tories will ever have. F*cking idiot.

 

True dat !

[BlakeySFC]

Fantastic that Jeremy got in, viva la revolucion!

[hutch]

I have a theory.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34232177/jeremy-corbyn-young-people-have-to-be-heard

 

I do not believe that Corbyn is expecting to win the next election. I think he is playing a longer game, planting a seed that may grow.

 

He is looking to empower those that he can, reach out to those he has always sought to help and establish a young empowered and active socialist base to continue his ideology and drive Labour in the future.

 

He will not compromise his principles to do something as vulgar as win popular favour, indeed, he is no idiot and will be aware that in the current political climate he couldn't possibly win an election, He will however have belief that a longer term revolution, beginning now can spring from his leadership. It plays to his strengths as an idealist, as a lifelong martyr to his own principles. It also explains why he is so willing to go against political convention with the media and things such as PMQ's. He doesn't care for the frills, his endgame vision is that of a socialist Britain, embraced by the young all buying into his ideals who make it happen later.

Do you think he'll relocate to Tooting?

[OldNick]

Jeremy and Piers the names of typical working class brothers from a struggling family, have they a brother called Rupert as well?. I have not bothered to read about their background but I never knew many lads of that name when I was kicking a ball around Shirley Rec.

My father used to say ' only the rich can afford to look poor'

[CB Fry]

Jeremy and Piers the names of typical working class brothers from a struggling family, have they a brother called Rupert as well?. I have not bothered to read about their background but I never knew many lads of that name when I was kicking a ball around Shirley Rec.

My father used to say ' only the rich can afford to look poor'

He's never claimed to be a working class person from a struggling family.

[Wes Tender]

Hey, I'm not suggesting for a second that he will go on to taste the same success in the ballots that Thatcher did, as The quote was not originally mine, after all. A lot of her ideas were considered too extreme even for the Conservatives when she was elected, but she managed to win over public opinion and get herself into a position where she could implement those ideas, and many communities up and down the country are still suffering the effects of them nearly 40 years later.

 

I just think the sneering from the Tories, and their belief that Corbyn is a joke figure to be easily dismissed, may well backfire on them. I think he may well prove to be more of a threat to them and their grand plan to privatise the entire nation than they realise. I could, of course, be wrong. We shall see.[/QUOTe]

 

I think that it is safe enough to state that the chances of Corbyn becoming PM are virtually non-existent, so it was a ridiculous statement, especially to draw comparisons with Thatcher's chances of becoming PM against the background of the political situation at the time. I would be interested to know which policies of hers you consider too extreme. As you say, unless you consider that the electorate were duped, then she achieved a solid mandate to enact those policies, including one of the main ones which was to curb the power of the Unions, which were out of control, resulting in the "winter of discontent". It was also obvious that certain industries were massively over-manned, inefficient and uncompetitive and needed to be denationalised.

 

The areas of the country that suffered the most were those with tradional heavy industries like coal mining, shipbuilding, and the motor industry where those industries would have declined and died in this country anyway because of them being uneconomical, uncompetitive, or environmentally undesirable. It didn't help that the workers in those industries were among the most bolshie when it came to strike action, so they must take a lot of the blame for their demise.

 

Successive governments have applied massive grants to those areas to encourage other manufacturing industries to locate to those areas and now areas like South Wales and Sunderland are transformed. I realise however that in those traditional Labour heartlands it is easy to demonise the Tories and Maggie Thatcher in particular for the demise of industries which would have died in time anyway. History though will credit her as being arguably the greatest post-war PM and for her governments transforming the country from the sick man of Europe needing to go cap in hand to the IMF to bale us out, into an economic and industrial force to be reckoned with once more.

 

Chapel end Charlie:It may be that you have to be old enough to really remember what happened to this nation back the 1970's before you fully realise the dangerous waters we may be heading into ...

 

Yes, it is easy to dismiss Corbyn as a joke, but there is always the possibility that those not old enough to remember our past history of damage that a left-wing Labour government caused, could turn him into a very dangerous man if he garnered enough support from the younger voters. But as I said earlier, I think that the political demographics have changed over the past few decades so that the majority block of the electorate is now firmly middle-class and parties need to occupy the middle ground to attract their votes.

[itchen]

The delight in the Corbyn camp at the result is a fraction of the delight of the Tories.

 

I've voted Labour all my life, but that man, and his pie in the sky policies will not get my vote. As a Unite member, I would like the opportunity to rid my Union of the odious, clueless, Len Mccluskey. The best friend the Tories will ever have. F*cking idiot.

 

Which pie in the sky policies? Investing in our infrastructure to provide jobs and boost the economy? Stopping the marketisation and privatisation of the NHS? Opposing the complete emasculation of the trade unions? Not sending our troops into reckless foreign wars? Taking the railways back from private companies and running an integrated rail service? I'm not sure why someone who has voted Labour all their life would oppose any of these things.

[Nolan]

Listening to danczuk on the radio this morning. Sounds like Corbyn will find it hard to get his MPs to walk through the same lobby as him when voting. They'll be voting in line with the manifesto they were elected on. They don't have a mandate to vote for Corbyn's lunatic fringe.

 

Sent from my HTC Desire 310 using Tapatalk

[hutch]

Listening to danczuk on the radio this morning. Sounds like Corbyn will find it hard to get his MPs to walk through the same lobby as him when voting. They'll be voting in line with the manifesto they were elected on. They don't have a mandate to vote for Corbyn's lunatic fringe.

 

Sent from my HTC Desire 310 using Tapatalk

Won't they be voting in line with their "principles". I thought that was what New Old Labour was founded on.

[aintforever]

My money's on there being a nasty economic event in the next five years - let's see how Corbo benefits.

 

This. He is unelectable at the moment but if the next banking crash happens before the next election there will be little appetite for the conservatives to use our money to bail the banks out again and impose more austerity.

[Wes Tender]

Which pie in the sky policies? Investing in our infrastructure to provide jobs and boost the economy? Stopping the marketisation and privatisation of the NHS? Opposing the complete emasculation of the trade unions? Not sending our troops into reckless foreign wars? Taking the railways back from private companies and running an integrated rail service? I'm not sure why someone who has voted Labour all their life would oppose any of these things.

 

Some of his policies are not only pie in the sky, but just plain barking mad and thankfully the chances of him being able to implement them are extremely remote. For example, he would apparently wish to bring back rent controls to the private sector, so that rents reflected local earnings and tenants of private properties would have the right to buy the property they rented. That will obviously have the effect of massively reducing the number of properties available to rent, when there is already a housing shortage.

 

He proposes a maximum wage to cane the high earners. So there goes any incentive for the movers and shakers to better themselves and the result would almost certainly be a brain drain similar to that caused by the punitive tax rates under Labour during the Wilson government.

 

And then where is he going to find the money to re-nationalise the unitilities and the railways as well as abolishing University fees, whilst spending on the infrastructure to create jobs? Well, he is going to print money to pay for some of it, although that will be inflationary and the rest will presumably come from every left winger's standard solution of soaking "the rich", who will either find ways to avoid paying or more likely emigrate, impoverishing the economy and the country.

 

He will allow the Argies joint administration rights to the Falklands against their will and unite Ireland against the will of the Northern Irish. So much for democracy.

 

He doesn't want us to interfere in the Middle East, except for in Israel where he will press somehow to give the Palestinian refugeees the right to return.

 

That's enough pie in the sky to be going on with.

[aintforever]

Some of his policies are not only pie in the sky, but just plain barking mad and thankfully the chances of him being able to implement them are extremely remote. For example, he would apparently wish to bring back rent controls to the private sector, so that rents reflected local earnings and tenants of private properties would have the right to buy the property they rented. That will obviously have the effect of massively reducing the number of properties available to rent, when there is already a housing shortage.

 

He proposes a maximum wage to cane the high earners. So there goes any incentive for the movers and shakers to better themselves and the result would almost certainly be a brain drain similar to that caused by the punitive tax rates under Labour during the Wilson government.

 

And then where is he going to find the money to re-nationalise the unitilities and the railways as well as abolishing University fees, whilst spending on the infrastructure to create jobs? Well, he is going to print money to pay for some of it, although that will be inflationary and the rest will presumably come from every left winger's standard solution of soaking "the rich", who will either find ways to avoid paying or more likely emigrate, impoverishing the economy and the country.

 

He will allow the Argies joint administration rights to the Falklands against their will and unite Ireland against the will of the Northern Irish. So much for democracy.

 

He doesn't want us to interfere in the Middle East, except for in Israel where he will press somehow to give the Palestinian refugeees the right to return.

 

That's enough pie in the sky to be going on with.

 

How can getting renters to buy make the housing shortage worse? It will reduce the houses available to rent but also reduce the people looking to rent at the same time.

[bridge too far]

How can getting renters to buy make the housing shortage worse? It will reduce the houses available to rent but also reduce the people looking to rent at the same time.

 

And many small buy to let investors will sell their properties meaning there will be more on the market and that will help to reduce the prices of average properties. And that will be a good thing in the main.

[hutch]

And many small buy to let investors will sell their properties meaning there will be more on the market and that will help to reduce the prices of average properties. And that will be a good thing in the main.

How will a government-engineered collapse in property prices be a good thing?

[bridge too far]

How will a government-engineered collapse in property prices be a good thing?

 

Because more younger people could get on the property ladder if they wanted to. Most young people these days are unlikely to be in a position to buy their first property until they're in their 40s and, since lenders will only lend until 65 (although the retirement age is 67), many won't even get a chance of getting a mortgage.

[hutch]

Because more younger people could get on the property ladder if they wanted to. Most young people these days are unlikely to be in a position to buy their first property until they're in their 40s and, since lenders will only lend until 65 (although the retirement age is 67), many won't even get a chance of getting a mortgage.

But it was negative equity in the residential property markets that underpinned the last global financial meltdown, wasn't it?

[Batman]

Because more younger people could get on the property ladder if they wanted to. Most young people these days are unlikely to be in a position to buy their first property until they're in their 40s and, since lenders will only lend until 65 (although the retirement age is 67), many won't even get a chance of getting a mortgage.

 

whilst we let in 300k people a year. (probably a lot more under corbyn)

I would not worry about there being loads of new homes available. There wont be

[Colinjb]

But it was negative equity in the residential property markets that underpinned the last global financial meltdown, wasn't it?

 

Very much so, the financial plans of millions of hard working families turned into tatters as their houses all of a sudden shed thousands overnight.

[bridge too far]

Very much so, the financial plans of millions of hard working families turned into tatters as their houses all of a sudden shed thousands overnight.

 

Because of the irresponsibility of the banking sector in lending them money they couldn't afford to pay back and because many in the financial sector actually hedged in favour of this happening making it a self-fulfilling prophecy. They're the ones who ruined the lives of hard working families.

[TopGun]

I'm enjoying the irony of JC asking the PLP to unify behind him.

[Colinjb]

Because of the irresponsibility of the banking sector in lending them money they couldn't afford to pay back and because many in the financial sector actually hedged in favour of this happening making it a self-fulfilling prophecy. They're the ones who ruined the lives of hard working families.

 

So, to allow for people to afford things, we must do the bankers work for them? Adopt a 'scorched earth' policy if you will?

 

And not that many repossessions happened, just a massive reduction in disposable income.

Edited 13 September, 2015 by Colinjb

[Nolan]

Because of the irresponsibility of the banking sector in lending them money they couldn't afford to pay back and because many in the financial sector actually hedged in favour of this happening making it a self-fulfilling prophecy. They're the ones who ruined the lives of hard working families.

What? People could still afford to pay mortgages, hence hardly any repossessions. Negative equity just stymied the housing market as no one could move up the ladder.

 

If banks weren't overly restricted in their lending, house building wouldn't have collapsed and there would have been more houses available today. Ie prices would not have needed to rise so much.

 

Sent from my HTC Desire 310 using Tapatalk

[Lord Duckhunter]

I'm enjoying the irony of JC asking the PLP to unify behind him.

 

This is why the people comparing his election as leader with Maggie's are deluding themselves. Thatcher won the support of her MPs and had previously had front bench positions. Jezza was gerrymandered onto the ballot , has been disloyal over and over again and people are queuing up to resign from his shadow cabinet . If people are going to compare a Tory leadership election to this one it is IDS. Although he had the support of a majority of MPs , his previous rebellions ( every bit as principled as Jezzas ) meant the whips had real problems keeping discipline and he was knifed pretty quickly.

 

I was listening to a programme on radio 4 about the '76 leadership election. Roy Jenkins, Callaghan, Tony Benn, Michael Foot, Denis Healy and Tony crossland . Contrast these big figures with Burnham & Kendall, Jezza and Mrs Balls. Where were David Blunkett, Alister Darling , Harriet Harman , Ken Livingstone Alan Johnson . These are the type of people that should still be MPs and still hold senior positions. Why are both parties obsessed with youth and " new" .

 

The greatest thing about this win is that Diane Flabbert will get a front bench position and we won't have to put up with the racist on the "This Week" sofa anymore.

[Wes Tender]

How can getting renters to buy make the housing shortage worse? It will reduce the houses available to rent but also reduce the people looking to rent at the same time.

 

Sorry, I don't follow your reasoning. Encouraging people to invest in buy to rent schemes can surely only be good in increasing the availability of rented property, which in turn will push down rents. If the government were to introduce rent controls and then allow tenants the right to buy the property they rented, the number of people investing in buying property to let would dry up. Larger properties which would have been bought to convert into flats would remain unsold or in need of repair, exacerbating the housing shortage and increasing property prices. The recent legislation allowing people to invest their pensions as they wished instead of being forced into an annuity, made buy to let an attractive proposition. Giving the tenant the right to buy that property removes the attractiveness of that investment avenue.