Would you give Labour a chance in 2020?

Oh thought you were a Tory from your screen name but then when I started reading your posts I realised that you didn't come across as a Tory supporter haha

Same XD

Reply 121

Rakas21

21

Original post by viddy9

They aren't pretty much identical to Ed Balls' policies. Firstly, Labour under Corbyn isn't going to make spending cuts that harm low and middle-income people, which Labour were going to do. So, the fact that they don't accept that they ought to make any spending cuts is a clear difference between Labour under Miliband and Labour under Corbyn (and a good improvement, given that, as economists have been trying to inform us for six years now, we don't need to make spending cuts).

Secondly, as an article in the New Statesman points out:

Are the cuts really relevant here? There's a probable chance that by 2020 no cuts will be made by anybody.

Those fighting cuts backed the party 5 years too late.

Reply 122

viddy9

16

Original post by Rakas21

Are the cuts really relevant here? There's a probable chance that by 2020 no cuts will be made by anybody.

Those fighting cuts backed the party 5 years too late.

Obviously, from my perspective, I wouldn't be surprised if the Conservatives come up with reasons to shrink the state even further in 2020, but your point is most likely true.

Nevertheless, the point is that Labour's opposition policy today is distinct from the policy under Miliband and Balls. I would also disagree that those fighting spending cuts backed the party five years too late. I'm fairly confident that the majority of Labour members opposed austerity throughout Miliband's time in charge - as someone who opposed cuts, I backed Labour throughout Miliband's time in charge.

The reality is that, on policy, there is a significant gap between the Parliamentary Labour Party and its membership.

Reply 123

Davij038

13

Original post by viddy9

They aren't pretty much identical to Ed Balls' policies. Firstly, Labour under Corbyn isn't going to make spending cuts that harm low and middle-income people, which Labour were going to do. So, the fact that they don't accept that they ought to make any spending cuts is a clear difference between Labour under Miliband and Labour under Corbyn (and a good improvement, given that, as economists have been trying to inform us for six years now, we don't need to make spending cuts).

Secondly, as an article in the New Statesman points out:

The new statesman article that first came up was this:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/03/john-mcdonnell-committed-borrowing-ed-balls-and-ed-miliband

What cuts would Miliband have made?

Reply 124

IAmNero

2

Labour would rather drag us into massive debt by spending massive amounts of money, thus raising taxes.

Reply 125

abitpissy

14

Anything but UKIP and Conservitives tbh. I don't think Labour has a chance, Sad really.

Reply 126

viddy9

16

Original post by Davij038

The new statesman article that first came up was this:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/03/john-mcdonnell-committed-borrowing-ed-balls-and-ed-miliband

What cuts would Miliband have made?

I was referring to this article. http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2016/03/thinking-behind-john-mcdonnell-s-new-fiscal-credibility-rule

Miliband would have essentially made the same cuts as the Conservatives - to welfare and other public services - but just with less ferocity. See here, for instance. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30417955

Miliband's agenda was austerity-lite. McDonnell's agenda is to use investment and growth to reduce the deficit-to-GDP ratio, which is, as the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen points out, the tried and tested method of reducing deficits and debts. On top of that, he plans to raise more money through taxation, which will in turn reduce the deficit.

So, therein lies one of the two key differences between McDonnell and Balls: McDonnell does not accept that those who had nothing to do with the financial crisis should have to pay for the mistakes of those who had everything to do with it. The second is, as the New Statesman article points out, the recognition, finally, that monetary and fiscal policy become fused during a downturn, and the recognition that contingency plans need to be in place in the event of a downturn.

I also read your article earlier today. George Eaton, who wrote it, should perhaps read the article I cited. But, Eaton is a journalist who has long been hostile to Jeremy Corbyn, so he's not going to be interested.

Original post by IAmNero

Labour would rather drag us into massive debt by spending massive amounts of money, thus raising taxes.

Governments have always spent in debt, and always will. You'll find that, for low and middle-income people, Labour aren't interested in raising taxes, and they're not even concerned too much with income tax. They're looking to work with the European Union on corporation tax and the financial transactions tax, as well as on tackling tax avoidance and tax evasion. They may possibly include a Land Value Tax, which is neutral or positive for economic growth and which has been universally endorsed by economists on both the Left and the Right, in their policy agenda too.

You'll find that the Labour record on budget surpluses is much better than the Conservatives, incidentally, and that the debt-to-GDP ratio was lower in 2007 than it was when Labour inherited the economy from the Conservatives in 1997, despite the largely mythical claims of "Labour overspending".

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 127

username1177050

20

No chance. aside from the lunacy of corbyn, my local council, which is labour run (however we have a tory mp) keep putting the parking fees up in the town center......they dont understand about keeping business rates competitive when so many shops are closing down and loads are empty....the list goes on

Reply 128

InMemoryOf

Labour will win 2010. Mark my words

Reply 129

username878267

15

Original post by xxvine

Oh thought you were a Tory from your screen name but then when I started reading your posts I realised that you didn't come across as a Tory supporter haha

My name relates to Manchester city!
I hate the Tories 😂

Reply 130

username1148663

21

Original post by Rakas21

Are the cuts really relevant here? There's a probable chance that by 2020 no cuts will be made by anybody.

Those fighting cuts backed the party 5 years too late.

I agree without another recession in the world cuts will be done by 2020 and government spending as a percentage of gdp won't drop further at that point either

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 131

username878267

15

Original post by InMemoryOf

Labour will win 2010. Mark my words

I'm marking them.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 132

floppycatfish96

Original post by ckfeister

Conservatives were doing cuts to make it more efficient but now are just taking the pi** I'm centre-right but I think labour should have a chance in 2020, what do you all think?

No, Labour are in total denial about many issues that matter. Watching their representatives in places like QT panels is a nasty experience.

Reply 133

username1148663

21

Original post by floppycatfish96

No, Labour are in total denial about many issues that matter. Watching their representatives in places like QT panels is a nasty experience.

Labour are trying to lead the public rather than listening to what the public wants.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 134

ckfeister

OP

19

Original post by floppycatfish96

No, Labour are in total denial about many issues that matter. Watching their representatives in places like QT panels is a nasty experience.

Have you seen labour new economic policy on bbc?

Reply 135

username1148663

21

Original post by ckfeister

Have you seen labour new economic policy on bbc?

You mean old economic policy it's the same one they had in 1997-2010

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 136

Davij038

13

Original post by paul514

You mean old economic policy it's the same one they had in 1997-2010

Posted from TSR Mobile

Well technically that was Ken Clarkes (And one the Tories signed up too!)

Viddy above has outlined some differences- I'm not entirely convinced but its better than what Osbourne is offering.

Reply 137

username1148663

21

Original post by Davij038

Well technically that was Ken Clarkes (And one the Tories signed up too!)

Viddy above has outlined some differences- I'm not entirely convinced but its better than what Osbourne is offering.

Well it depends on your view of what's good really.

I'm for investment too even if it is borrowed money but only for certain types of projects like physical infrastructure that makes money or stops us losing money.

Building more hospitals on credit for example doesn't fit the bill for me but you can bet it does for them.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 138

ckfeister

OP

19

Original post by paul514

You mean old economic policy it's the same one they had in 1997-2010

Posted from TSR Mobile

Original post by paul514

Well it depends on your view of what's good really.

I'm for investment too even if it is borrowed money but only for certain types of projects like physical infrastructure that makes money or stops us losing money.

Building more hospitals on credit for example doesn't fit the bill for me but you can bet it does for them.

Posted from TSR Mobile

This is why people don't vote for labour, ignorance. ALL governments borrow and always has even the USA and always will. They made a new rule saying 3% investment from the borrowing, which will drive the economic up and with that wages will go UP meaning more TAX rather than rising the tax rate.
Also, if labour going back to Blair policy's I'm pretty sure they'll get elected as Blair was elected. Osbourne is like a lost kid, he doesn't know what his doing as he never had a proper job! So saying to sort our books out with cuts and more cuts when he hasn't experienced what its like having the cuts and more cuts than more isn't going to help out the conservatives in the next election. I predict conservatives will lose its majority and labour will mass gain and then everyone will be shocked just as shocked as what people were when new labour leader was elected.

Reply 139

username1148663

21

Original post by ckfeister

This is why people don't vote for labour, ignorance. ALL governments borrow and always has even the USA and always will. They made a new rule saying 3% investment from the borrowing, which will drive the economic up and with that wages will go UP meaning more TAX rather than rising the tax rate.
Also, if labour going back to Blair policy's I'm pretty sure they'll get elected as Blair was elected. Osbourne is like a lost kid, he doesn't know what his doing as he never had a proper job! So saying to sort our books out with cuts and more cuts when he hasn't experienced what its like having the cuts and more cuts than more isn't going to help out the conservatives in the next election. I predict conservatives will lose its majority and labour will mass gain and then everyone will be shocked just as shocked as what people were when new labour leader was elected.

You're assumption that people don't know all governments borrow money is wrong and if you think labour even has the slightest chance without a recession you are deluded

Posted from TSR Mobile

Would you give Labour a chance in 2020?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you