Labour Leadership

[Otta]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It?s a forum Blah, people who have been here long

> enough know my style so sorry if you find it

> annoying, but the reason I tend to oppose the

> ?left? on here is based on my intellectual

> interpretation on the outcomes of left wing

> economic ideas, for society as a whole rather than

> the absolutely meaningless emotional stuff hinged

> on such nebulous concepts as ?conscience? ?what?s

> right? ?from the heart?. This emotional stuff

> leads many on the left to really believe that they

> are right and ultimately ?good? that all who

> oppose, or even question their ?ideals? are

> operating either entirely out of self-interest and

> are ?bad? or are mindless proles acting on false

> consciousness persuades so by the ?corporate

> media? etc, etc. Tedious, unthinking,

> unintellectual, dogmatic.

>

> Of course these beliefs are largely held my

> middle-class metropolitan types.

>

> I like outcomes not ideals.

> I?ll reiterate, I never ever voted conservative; I

> have impeccable liberal views on the death penalty

> and racism for example. I just don?t believe in

> left wing economics very much - and socialism not

> at all - as I think they result in outcomes that

> are bad for us all ? inefficient industry, stifled

> innovation/enterprise, reduced tax takes, higher

> unemployment, reduction in freedom; sure,

> eventually some equality but a lower common

> denominator one and I don?t support the nebulous

> concept of ?equality? either. My beliefs are based

> on thinking about it myself, not self-interest,

> and I may be wrong.

>

> I?m very uncomfortable about how and where the

> conservatives are imposing some of the spending

> cuts and sharing the burden out ? but generally I

> think cuts are needed; I?d rather middleclass

> pensioners has lost some benefits rather than

> working families ; I think a govt that lies about

> the outcome of its work program, needs bringing

> to account. All these need a strong opposition. I

> don?t believe Corybn is it or ever will be, I get

> the sense his support is largely Union and

> metropolitan younger age groups and the 'howlers'

> on social media ? both pretty middleclass

> nowadays. (just anectdotally I?ve not seen any

> support for Corbyn on my working class social

> media but plenty on the middleclass bits) And 10

> years of Tory rule, which I think is a given with

> Corbyn, will not hurt these middleclass types much

> but more likely the poorest 10%. But, hey, it?s a

> vote from the heart??

>

> I?d consider voting Labour (again) with another

> leader but just felt Ed was actually nearer to

> Corbyn but without the balls to say so. I?d vote

> Conservative to keep Corbyn out because I think

> he?d be a disaster for us all.

Best post on this thread.

I'm voting Cooper because she is the one that I think will best stand and fight with Cameron, and show this government's less fair actions up for what they are. So not so much that I really like Cooper, but more that she'll make them uncomfortable and she's not an apologist.

Although I still expect Corbyn to win by a country mile, and part of me is quite excited to watch it all unfold.

[DaveR]

"Let's talk about Sweden instead eh? With it's high taxes and great social care. A failed state? I don't think so."

Would that be the same Sweden that faced a public debt crisis in the late 90s, largely due to its bloated welfare spending? That got rid of defined benefit public pensions 20 odd years ago? That has an essentially free market approach to healthcare, with private, for profit providers competing with public ones? That pioneered free schools?

Or do you not know what you're talking about?

Edited to add:

On a serious note, all the Nordic nations, not just Sweden, recognised during the 90s that the welfare model they had been operating was unaffordable even with the high taxes that their populations were willing to pay. It is instructive to look at the various responses between different countries, although there are some common themes - wholesale reform of pensions and benefit systems, and an approach to public services based on outcomes rather than a specific form or source of provider. Closer to G Osborne than J Corbyn though.

[Blah Blah]

I knew you'd come back with that (my wife is Swedish btw). Sweden found a more cost effective way to stick by it's principles, that's my point. Denmark is a sucessful example of socialism at work. Even Cuba has no homelessness, and better healthcare and literacy than the USA. Are they perfect systems? Of course not, no system is. But the idea that the free market takes care of all is an equally ridiculous idea not born out in practise. Just as the idea that the best way to live is in a world driven by market forces is also now shown for the myth it is. There was a time when people lived just fine growing their own food and living off the land. Anxiety, stress, depression, people are being driven to an early grave trying to function just to pay tax and bills. What is the point of any of it?

A good system will have an economic model at it's core that works by delivering a healthy quality of life for all. And to make that happen means not letting corporate interests have it all their own way. It means changing our attitudes to a whole range of things.

Where I do agree is in the realisation that the nicely worked out pyramid that made sense in the post war regeneration no longer applied by the 90s. We seem to have no solutions for that beyond going back to the set up of before, where a few at the top do very well and everyone else becomes enslaved to the system, or dies (with charity being the provider of any lifelines). I don't think Corbyn has any answers to that either (because too much is outside of our control). Those paying the 40% tax rate are just 10% of the population, but they pay 53% of all income tax collected. Our economic system itself isn't working in so many ways anymore. We can't compete with the labour costs of Asia so what do we do? And yet, our policy makers are desperately trying to regain what we had pre 2008 because this time, they won't mess up will they!

I can understand why people want to keep hold of their promised pensions. I can understand why people want to strike and unions want to fight for jobs and pay. I can understand why genuinely disabled and unemployed people feel victimised. On the other hand, I can't understand why children think it's the states responsibility to take care of their parents when they become ill. I can't understand why multi-millionaires seek to make more and more for themselves. I can't understand why someone wants the best for their kids but doesn't care if the kids next door get the best too. Winners never want anything to change.

[Otta]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> On the other hand, I can't understand why children

think it's the states responsibility to take care

> of their parents when they become ill.

Could you explain what you mean by that?

[Blah Blah]

Yeah sure. For example, there are many people who choose to put a parent into a care home, over having them at their home simply because they don't want to clean up after them for example. I'm not talking about situations where people have illness requiring specialist care but more the aspect of our culture where grandparents don't live with children under any circumstances, because we think we hold no responsibility for looking after or helping other members of our family. I am of course generalising and know that there are many individual reasons for everything etc etc. But it strikes me that if we had a culture of resposibility, like that found in Asian culture for example, we'd be better off in many ways.

I don't know if anyone watched the Chinese school docs on BBC recently, but one of the things the Chinese teachers said about the difference between the attitude and work ethic between Chinese children and British children is that in China, education is the only way out of poverty. There is no welfare safety net. Children know this and work as hard as they can at studies. But in the UK children don't have to work if they don't want to. Obviously I am a supporter of a welfare system for obvious reasons but the comment did strike a chord with me.

What I am saying is that we have broken down family connections. And dependency has shifted from other family members, to the state, in matters that could be taken care of within families (and in many other cultures are). Here's a simple example. If an elderly person is living alone and not eating properly, and a family member lives nearby, or even not so nearby, many people would take care of their elderly relative, either by visiting daily to make sure they eat or by moving them closer to them. In some cultures they would move in with adult children. But you would be amazed by the cost to the nation of NHS care and health visitors to make sure that person eats daily whilst family members nearby do nothing.

[DaveR]

"Sweden found a more cost effective way to stick by it's principles, that's my point"

And the outcome was policies that are closer to those of the UK conservative govt than those proposed by Jeremy Corbyn - that's my point.

[Otta]

You make good points, and of course ideally families would care for each other in old age, but it's more complicated than that. With various factors such as people being priced out of the areas their parents live in, or moving far away from work. Plus people are struggling so much to pay mortgages that for many couples both adults have to work and are simply not able to act as carer for their elderly parents.

Also lots of people have kids later than in the past, so it used to be that kids were grown up a bit before their grandparents got too old, but often now people have parents in their 70s and 80s whilst also having young children demanding a lot of their time and attention.

[Jeremy]

I don't consider the Nordics to be socialist. They are free market, capitalist economies with high taxation and public spending.

This "culture of responsibility" in many Asian countries is a separate subject really, but something I do know a little about. The closeness of the family unit is deeply cultural and not something easily transplanted to other countries. Saying that, moving an elderly relative into your home becomes a much more realistic prospect when you can pay a Filipino ?90 a month to look after them full time. As for education - I think that the highly competitive (and materialistic) culture are more of a factor than the lack of a social safety net. The kids study for crazy hours and are sometimes put under tremendous pressure.

[Blah Blah]

I agree with all of that Otta except to say that there are currently thousands of children in the UK who are full time carers for a parent and have no choice but to be so.

'I don't consider the Nordics to be socialist. They are free market, capitalist economies with high taxation and public spending. '

I agree with this but we seem to be locked into a pattern of calling any increase in taxation and public spending the march of a socialist movement.

You do hit on a interesting conundrum. The care sector creates jobs but it's also expensive because we have to pay people wages. But it is one of those areas were if relatives helped out more, demand could be eased. That's kind of where I'm going with collective responsibility.

[bodsier]

???

"If he gets elected, oh boy will they come. He's going to have to address - support for paedos"

Please explain, I seem to have missed this somehow....

[miga]

My twitter feed is ablaze with talk of people (Lewisham East) being de-registered from voting in the Labour leadership elections...bizzarre.

[Blah Blah]

As I bite into my lunch, might take a look at twitter. Labour kind of shot themselves in the foot with this ?3 to vote without being a true believer/ member nonsense.

[peckham_ryu]

Do we have any entryist vote saboteurs willing to admit as much on the forum, out of interest? Or anyone (whether 'entryist' or genuine) who has been declined voting rights?

[Jeremy]

I have an ex-colleague who was bragging on Facebook about joining Labour to vote Corbyn in an act of sabbotage. Was surprised that he'd openly shown such disrespect towards the democratic process. But it all seems a little irrelevant now, as whatever I may think about his policies, he's genuinely popular and has struck a chord with the public.

[miga]

I'm sure there's a bit of entryism, the Telegraph was telling its readers to do as much some weeks ago, but it looks like they've thrown out the baby with the bathwater....what a mess.

[Jeremy]

I'm sure the saboteurs are a tiny minority.

I don't like the sight of the party desperately trying to squirm out of this or rig the voting. It seems incredibly sneaky and dishonest.

[Jah Lush]

All this backstabbing shows what a mess they've become and why people were so reluctant to vote for them at the last election.

[Otta]

Indeed, it stinks. The utter arrogance of the rest of them is pretty shocking. They really don't seem to get it.

[Blah Blah]

Totally agree guys. They've made a right royal mess of things and seem incapable of seeing that.

[JohnL]

It's #LabourPurge

[Otta]

Just reading through profiles again.

Shame Carotene Flint isn't running for leader.

[Jah Lush]

The Gandhi Foundation International Peace Award for 2013 was awarded to Jeremy Corbyn, MP.

Hmm... I wonder why the press has chosen to suppress this information.

http://gandhifoundation.org/2014/01/09/the-gandhi-foundation-international-peace-award-2013/

[david_carnell]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just reading through profiles again.

>

> Shame Carotene Flint isn't running for leader.

Why? Awful woman and utterly useless in the ministerial briefs she was given under Blair/Brown. I don't know a single civil servant with a good word to say about her.

[Otta]

Really?

Bugger, can't say as I know too much about her, just liked the sound of her spiel. Especially A grassroots movement ? not a Westminster elite."

What do you think of Stella Creasy DC? In FA t, if you don't mind saying, who are you intending to vote for (assuming you are) and why?

I am really struggling, and every time I think maybe I've decided, I read something which puts right off.

[david_carnell]

I like Stella C v much. She's personable, energetic, has a great social media presence. She's my second choice. For deputy I'm going to vote for Angela Eagle. I like her, her parliamentary performances and her politics. She also has a gravitas that perhaps Creasy is missing.

I'm voting Corbyn. For a number of reasons, including but not limited to:

None of the other candidates inspire me.

I don't believe any could win in 2020 to even have that in their favour and me to hold my nose.

I identify with many, though not all, of Corbyn's policies.

I've never previously voted FOR and always felt I was voting against.

I think he will provide effective opposition.

I believe he can drag the political debate to the left and give airtime to many arguments that for too long have been subject to a centre-right consensus.

He has reinvigorated the Labour grass roots and brought thousands back to the party - without whom the endless legwork of electioneering does not take place and something Blair and Brown eroded massively.