British Politics
Been on holiday for a few weeks, surprised to find no general discussion of British politics so though I'd kick one off.
Tory leadership contest is quickly turning into farce. Trump has backed Boris, which should be reason enough for anyone with half a brain to exclude him.
Of the other candidates Rory Stewart looks the best of the outsiders. Surprised to see Cleverly and Javid not further up the betting, but not sure the Tory membership are ready for a brown PM.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri...
Regarding the LD leadership contest, Jo Swinson is miles ahead of any other candidate (and indeed any of the Tory lot). Should be a shoe in.
Finally, it's Groundhog Day in Labour - the more serious the anti-Semitism claims get, the more Corbyn's cronies write their own obituary by blaming it on outlandish conspiracy theories - this week, it's apparently the Jewish Embassy's fault...
No. I think things could get a lot better if we try. Otherwise they will almost certainly get worse - a lot worse.
The defeatism is the disaster. People are desperate for real change, left wing ideas are incredibly popular. But we give up.
It's also very easy to stick to your ideological guns, refuse to compromise, and lose every god damn election ever because you're so out of kilter with public opinion.
As chez pointed out, left wing policies are very popular now. I wonder why you think adopting them would put Labour out of kilter with public opinion.
As chez pointed out, left wing policies are very popular now. I wonder why you think adopting them would put Labour out of kilter with public opinion.
Left-wing policies tend to be popular with the demographic that thinks someone else will pay for them. Opinion polls have always tended to show a notional support for left policies that dries up when it comes to an election and the bill might fall due. (This doesn't matter for the next election, because the Tories are doomed anyway, as the public is understandably in 'Give the other bloke a chance' mode.) In Attlee's day, the average person didn't pay income tax, which was an overpowering factor. These days, left policies poll best with the young, who face awful problems with housing costs but are still the least taxed, and who may be saddled with student debt but imagine that Red Santa will make it go away (which he won't). It also remains the case that the working classes tend to be socially conservative, which led to the Fall of the Red Wall and could eventually present a problem for a Labour Party rooted in North London ideology.
It's a massive topic and there are so many possibilites because there is so much to do and it can't all be done.
Personally I'd focus on Housing, Health, Energy/Environment, Education and Social care with a framework of social ownership and vitally building a high tech future that belongs to us all rather than some small rich group. That in itself is a massive project and inevitably there are lots of other issues that will have to be addressed.
The housing issue can be solved really easily. I was stunned this number was so high, but over 2m people in the UK own a second house. This is a disgrace when so many people can't afford a home. Just tax this to the hilt so the majority are forced to sell their second house and the housing crisis will largely be solved.
English Housing Survey 2021 to 2022: sec...
I agree with the other aspects to varying degrees. The only things I'm lukewarm on are the environment and education. I'm a bit despondent about the environment. It's clear that whatever we do or however much we spend, it's not going to move the needle. Even Greta now seems to be more concerned about Jews than global warming...
The main threat to Labour retaining power is migration. This is at least partly one of optics, but nonetheless it's an argument that is being lost by the left across Europe. Labour will have to do something different to European left-wing parties in the next 5 years, so what should it be?
Most of those homes are let out. Only the unrented proportion helps with the demand/supply problem and they should definitely be addressed - they particulary blight holiday destinations. Preventing rentals can also make it worse though as rentals have a higher people/space ratio. There aren't any easy solutions - we need adjustment in current use but fundamentally we have to build council housing, plan new towns and properly link places people work with available housing.
57 on red talks about who pays but the failures on housing, energy, health etc policies hold back growth. Instead of starmer talking nonsense about how he is getting to great growth witdout doing anyhting radical, he could be explaining how good policies will be paid for with the resulting growth. Far from being expensive, it's doing nothing that has been so expensive.
I agree migration is a big political problem but mostly because we have pandered to the right for too long and had such a lack of policies on housing, health etc. We need migration, we need the workers, the skills and the vitality. It can't just be rich Londoner and a few others that reap the bulk of the economic benefits - that will never work.
... There aren't any easy solutions - we need adjustment in current use but fundamentally we have to build council housing...
That is the easy solution. Basically all you need to do is have central government incentivise councils to build social housing by providing grants and the councils fund the rest from long term borrowing, which is paid back from rental income. It's that straightforward. Obviously there could be issues around where to build but that just needs the political will to at a central and local level to push on and do the right thing.
*Edit - and end Right To Buy. It's always been a stupid, incredibly short sighted policy.
cosign that 'build more houses' is the way to have more houses for people to live in
i would also humbly submit that we have a a lot of widowed 90 year olds doddering around their five bedroom house, which was purchased in 1950 for ten shillings and sixp'nce, and that this may not be the best way for a society to distribute its housing capacity
cosign that 'build more houses' is the way to have more houses for people to live in
i would also humbly submit that we have a a lot of widowed 90 year olds doddering around their five bedroom house, which was purchased in 1950 for ten shillings and sixp'nce, and that this may not be the best way for a society to distribute its housing capacity
In the very nature of things, though, those elderly persons will not be occupying those houses much longer, and the houses will soon come on to the market -- though, in a good area, they will be very expensive, and the buyer will need a large additional budget to refurbish the place.
Just like after the war, we do seem to need a lot more housing capacity, as rents and prices are stupid and the quality of life is skewed by housing costs consuming an ever-greater slice of income as if we were all living in downtown Manhattan. Unlike after the war, there's no great strategic building plan, although of course a lot of the new builds in those days were pretty awful and short-lived.
A problem with social housing is that it creates a kind of embedded privilege-group who are excused market rents for good, and therefore gain higher disposable income, because they qualify for so many points on the council's register. This is supposed to be a Marxian 'to each according to his need', but it becomes a kind of racket. And obviously private landlords don't want to see rents go down. The rest of us do, but then we don't own the properties. And new builds that might cool down the rental market are lacking, and developers of ritzy new blocks are always told to include a proportion of lower-rent flats, but they generally manage to renege on that somehow and they can afford good lawyers.
Sunak's planning more cuts to benefits. Should be right up your street because, let's face it, they're all a bunch of undeserving scroungers aren't they?
Tories have chosen Peter Bone's mistress (the woman he left his wife for) to contest his seat.
I'm tipping her as future leader
Just wondering if Starmer's going to cop any flak for being DPP for about five years during the Post Office scandal. No sign so far, except that he is interestingly silent on the issue.
Just wondering if Starmer's going to cop any flak for being DPP for about five years during the Post Office scandal. No sign so far, except that he is interestingly silent on the issue.
My phone recommended a Telegraph article that did exactly that (obviously the Google AI ****ing sucks). It's all private prosecutions though, so it would have nothing to do with him as DPP?
He's now a columnist for The National, which is the SNP's pet newspaper*, where he does the SNP's work by using it to criticise Labour. This is current SNP pre-election policy as they are terrified of a Labour government, as is Owen. He can't pretend he doesn't know why he's there and he also can't ignore that he is writing for a nationalist publication, one whose campaigns have included requesting readers contact them with details of any produce in supermarkets that has a union flag on it so they can encourage a pile on and boycott from their readers. Mental as it sounds, I have genuinely not made this up.
*It can't actually be called a newspaper as it makes The Telegraph look like a bastion of political neutrality
To be fair, times aren’t what they were for the Novara crew and we all have to eat.
I like Novara. Can't deny that things are going badly for the left and the world in general
The environment only being 16% is so depressing.
People claiming to find the lack of voter interest in climate change depressing while voting for the most climate science denying party is itself depressing.
Yes, but this is something that I think people care about but unless the US, China and India get their act together, whatever we do hardly makes a jot of difference.
That said, The Green party do have some good common sense policies that help the cost of living and the environment. For example, £1 bus fares. I think the £2 scheme has worked really well, so why not double down? Train fares should also be reduced for regular commuters. It's cheaper (and quicker) for me to drive my (diesel) car to work and park in the city centre than it is to get public transport.
They also have some good policies to support families. I've always been an advocate of free school meals, but free childcare is also a really important policy with fewer people choosing to start a family or limiting the number of children they have.
Yes, but this is something that I think people care about but unless the US, China and India get their act together, whatever we do hardly makes a jot of difference.
We can't do much in terms of volumes of emissions etc, but we can by research and, admittedly more nebulously, leading the way
Subsiding public transport significantly would be excellent.
Yeah subsidising public transport kills 2 birds with one stone. Helps the poorest who generally use it the most, and almost certainly encourages people to leave their cars at home.
Would love to know the numbers on the £2 fares. In other words to what degree has is paid for itself by encouraging bus use.
