Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 15:49:34 GMT
Ok, i'm interested in social equality, a fairer society, I don't see anything wrong with that. The free market in the UK combined with 'austerity' since 2008 has enriched the top 1% of society at the expense of everybody else, I don't think that can be disputed. The Conservative's principle that if the rich get richer everybody else benefits just isn't happening. Yes a Labour government would seek to renationalise some industries in order to provide a better service and to stop large profits being sucked out by shareholders... often overseas hedge funds and Sovereign wealth funds. This is not a throwback to the 70's, many European countries have nationalised railways and other industries... France, Spain and Italy have had high speed rail networks for many years whilst our network could hardly be described as efficient or high speed under private ownership could it. Labour's proposal to lower the threshold for the 45p income tax band, which currently applies to people earning above £150,000, to £80,000 and introduce a new income tax rate of 50p for anyone earning more than £123,000 might be criticised by some but it isn't comparable to the 80% tax paid by high earners in the 70's either is it. I'm sure you've read coverage of this week's report by The IMF which suggests that increasing taxes for the rich will not harm economic growth... www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/inequality-imf-international-monetary-fund-high-tax-rich-jeremy-corbyn-a7995826.html Creation of wealth should be a collective endeavour between workers, entrepreneurs, investors and government. Each contributes and each must share fairly in the rewards. Labour would invest in our crumbling infrastructure... how could it be wrong to borrow money to do this with interest rates so low? The Banking sector urgently needs reform as they build yet another credit bubble, no lessons have been learned since 2008. I've been in correspondence with my MP suggesting that the Treasury Select Commitee should reopen their inquiry into the banking sector which was halted by this years General Election and hasn't been restarted by the Tories...I wonder why. Labour will transform how our financial system operates. Following the successful example of Germany and the Nordic countries, we will establish a National Investment Bank that will bring in private capital finance to deliver £250 billion of lending power. This new public institution will support a network of regional development banks that, unlike giant City of London firms, will be dedicated to supporting inclusive growth in their communities.. A bank run in the interests of our economy not for the benefit of it's shareholders. So Labour has forward looking policies for sustainable green energy, creating an economy that works for the many not the few, a fairer taxation system, better public services and widening ownership of our economy. The manifesto is fully costed, with all current spending paid for out of taxation or redirected revenue streams. Our public services must rest on the foundation of sound finances. Labour will, therefore, set the target of eliminating the government’s deficit on day-to-day spending within five years. I would argue that current Labour policy proposals don't represent a return to 'a doctrine that has failed for decades' but reflect the aspirations of a growing percentage of the electorate who are currently being let down by government, fresh thinking and policies intended to tackle today's issues. Interests rates have a habit of rising so those loans might come back and bankrupt the country Labours policy borrow borrow borrow then leave someone else to foot the huge bill!! Well the facts are that under the Conservatives the UK national debt has risen from £0.5 trillion in 2007 to £1.5 trillion in 2017 and because there has been no growth in the economy the critical debt as a percentage of GDP figure has also been rising, The Office for Budget Responsibility expects this figure to peak in the current financial year at 88%, the highest level since 1966.
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Oct 16, 2017 15:52:42 GMT
The problem with massive state borrowing is the risk is bourne not by the banks shareholders but by our children and grandchildren as they are the ones that will have to pay extra taxes to pay them off. Considering their ages, Corbyn and McDonald won’t be worrying about how to pay it back in 20 years time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 15:59:01 GMT
...and how can you say on one hand that the banks are bad guys building a credit bubble and on the other that the government should borrow vast sums while interest rates are low? Have your cake and eat it? Isn't there a substantial difference between banks building a credit bubble, the failure by consumers to pay this back resulting in government funded bailouts vs long term government borrowing for infrastrure projects which creates assets and improves the economy, no?
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Oct 16, 2017 16:00:51 GMT
Interests rates have a habit of rising so those loans might come back and bankrupt the country Labours policy borrow borrow borrow then leave someone else to foot the huge bill!! Well the facts are that under the Conservatives the UK national debt has risen from £0.5 trillion in 2007 to £1.5 trillion in 2017 and because there has been no growth in the economy the critical debt as a percentage of GDP figure has also been rising, The Office for Budget Responsibility expects this figure to p snip Then again when you arrive in office and discover that instead of the surplus handed to the last administration, it has now become ..."There's no money left" You have not been given much option have you
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 16:05:53 GMT
The problem with massive state borrowing is the risk is bourne not by the banks shareholders but by our children and grandchildren as they are the ones that will have to pay extra taxes to pay them off. Considering their ages, Corbyn and McDonald won’t be worrying about how to pay it back in 20 years time. Young people are already paying for Tory government failures, zero hours contracts, no prospect of buying their own homes, they can't save for a pension etc, can it be much worse? Capitalism doesn't work if you have no capital!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 16:09:06 GMT
Well the facts are that under the Conservatives the UK national debt has risen from £0.5 trillion in 2007 to £1.5 trillion in 2017 and because there has been no growth in the economy the critical debt as a percentage of GDP figure has also been rising, The Office for Budget Responsibility expects this figure to p snip Then again when you arrive in office and discover that instead of the surplus handed to the last administration, it has now become ..."There's no money left" You have not been given much option have you No but the figures do show the failure of 'austerity' don't they
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Oct 16, 2017 16:15:09 GMT
Then again when you arrive in office and discover that instead of the surplus handed to the last administration, it has now become ..."There's no money left" You have not been given much option have you No but the figures do show the failure of 'austerity' don't they No ........ without it the figures would have been much worse.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 16:23:35 GMT
No but the figures do show the failure of 'austerity' don't they No ........ without it the figures would have been much worse. hehe...but austerity has stalled growth in the economy!
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Oct 16, 2017 16:27:48 GMT
The problem with massive state borrowing is the risk is bourne not by the banks shareholders but by our children and grandchildren as they are the ones that will have to pay extra taxes to pay them off. Considering their ages, Corbyn and McDonald won’t be worrying about how to pay it back in 20 years time. Young people are already paying for Tory government failures, zero hours contracts, no prospect of buying their own homes, they can't save for a pension etc, can it be much worse? Capitalism doesn't work if you have no capital! I do like the zero hour contract one. I'm no fan but let's not forget that when labour came into power they absolutely rocketed and I don't believe labour did anything about them either. Interestingly, MacDonald's who I am led to believe have a high amount of staff on them and in 2016 they wanted to put them on proper contracts but 80% of the staff voted for them to remain on zero hours as it suites them.
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Oct 16, 2017 16:29:23 GMT
No ........ without it the figures would have been much worse. hehe...but austerity has stalled growth in the economy! unrestrained borrowing would have left a time bomb for the future, growth would have caused inflation, inflation would have caused interest rises, interest rises would have made people go bust ......... equals massive interest repayments on the huge loans that sounds like the past to me .... boom/crash
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 16:43:19 GMT
Young people are already paying for Tory government failures, zero hours contracts, no prospect of buying their own homes, they can't save for a pension etc, can it be much worse? Capitalism doesn't work if you have no capital! I do like the zero hour contract one. I'm no fan but let's not forget that when labour came into power they absolutely rocketed and I don't believe labour did anything about them either. Interestingly, MacDonald's who I am led to believe have a high amount of staff on them and in 2016 they wanted to put them on proper contracts but 80% of the staff voted for them to remain on zero hours as it suites them. If you're a young person trying to get a mortgage or a loan or even a phone contract it's not going to happen if you can't say how much you're going to earn next week is it. I'm sure there are folk for who like the flexibility of a zero hours contract but if it's the only way that young people can get a job I don't think that's right.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Oct 16, 2017 16:51:37 GMT
I do like the zero hour contract one. I'm no fan but let's not forget that when labour came into power they absolutely rocketed and I don't believe labour did anything about them either. Interestingly, MacDonald's who I am led to believe have a high amount of staff on them and in 2016 they wanted to put them on proper contracts but 80% of the staff voted for them to remain on zero hours as it suites them. If you're a young person trying to get a mortgage or a loan or even a phone contract it's not going to happen if you can't say how much you're going to earn next week is it. I'm sure there are folk for who like the flexibility of a zero hours contract but if it's the only way that young people can get a job I don't think that's right. I don't disagree but the main point was it is definitely not a new problem and rocketed under labour. I also agree about mortgage, but I'm 37 ha a full time job and I cannot afford one either so will ending zero hours actually get many people onto the property ladder
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 17:02:42 GMT
hehe...but austerity has stalled growth in the economy! unrestrained borrowing would have left a time bomb for the future, growth would have caused inflation, inflation would have caused interest rises, interest rises would have made people go bust ......... equals massive interest repayments on the huge loans that sounds like the past to me .... boom/crash Where do we start with this one! I don't think we've been talking about unrestrained borrowing have we, the Tories would surely argue that they've been borrowing prudently but still the national debt has continued to rise. Growth is the free markets holy grail and will only cause inflation if interest rates don't rise. Isn't it he Bank of England's primary responsibility is to use interest rates to control the rate of inflation? The free market economy has always created boom and busts, that's how it works. There's an argument that capitalism is at a crossroads and needs to reinvent itself again. In it's current form it's not really serving society well is it.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Oct 16, 2017 17:02:45 GMT
The problem with massive state borrowing is the risk is bourne not by the banks shareholders but by our children and grandchildren as they are the ones that will have to pay extra taxes to pay them off. Considering their ages, Corbyn and McDonald won’t be worrying about how to pay it back in 20 years time. The Conservatives has borrowed a Trillon and have nothing to show for it. I'm all for spending, state and individual, it makes the economy work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2017 17:06:01 GMT
If you're a young person trying to get a mortgage or a loan or even a phone contract it's not going to happen if you can't say how much you're going to earn next week is it. I'm sure there are folk for who like the flexibility of a zero hours contract but if it's the only way that young people can get a job I don't think that's right. I don't disagree but the main point was it is definitely not a new problem and rocketed under labour. I also agree about mortgage, but I'm 37 ha a full time job and I cannot afford one either so will ending zero hours actually get many people onto the property ladder Clearly housing is a complex problem but the short answer is that we simply aren't building enough homes are we. Successive governments for a variety of reasons have failed here.
|
|