Who to vote for?

[Blah Blah]

Except that isn't true Mahoody. That is not how national debt works. Nor are comparisons to Greece relevant either as she was failing to effectively collect tax at all and had much deeper fundamental economic issues.

Labour governments actually have a better record on debt repayment and deficits than Tory ones. There are so many links to this online, and you can google the data for yourself, but the thing to consider is what fuels the debt. Infrastructure and investment is good. Consumer credit is bad. There was a very good explanation of this by Economist Mariana Mazzucato on Thursday's Newsnight.

http://www.primeeconomics.org/articles/conservative-budget-deficits-on-average-theyre-twice-the-size-of-labours

Having said all of that though, Corbyn's spending spree is going to depend on a number of things going right to even begin to be deliverable. And the danger of it also is that it makes the Tories look relatively prudent, even though they too are promising massive investment through borrowing. The difference is of course, that Corbyn is promising a radical change that breaks the ownership of the economy by a few privileged wealthy barons, and Boris is promising to change nothing. Take your pick which serves you best.

[Blah Blah]

Nope, pension funds invest in the markets, and can and do change where they put their money (part of the game of turning a profit in fact). Most companies do not float most of their shares out to external investors. This is to prevent takeovers. Stop embarrassing yourself, seriously.

As for Chavez, is Corbyn proposing to remove diversity from our economy and rely only on the profits of one resource? No he isn't. But what a surprise that you seem to know very little about exactly just what went wrong in Venezeula. A bit like your non existent understaning of the economy of Greece.

[Blah Blah]

No Mahoody, how about you list companies that have given a majority of their share holdings (and therefore ownership) to external investors. How about you also cite the estimated trillions of pounds lost through tax avoidance every year from the moving of profit to the offshore interests of the top earning individuals and corporations. You think the public are idiots clearly.

As for your silly 'message' comment, you are in a public forum posting childish hysterical rubbish about a party leader, and others have every right to challenge you on that. You have not started from any position of sensible debate, looking at say the details of any manifesto, so why should anyone treat you like an adult?

The UK economy bears no resemblance to that of Venezuela or Greece whatsoever. Any economist would tell you that. Also, plenty of strong economies have nationalised sectors that work very well. You could cite half a dozen countries within the EU alone on that. This addiction to privatisation has been detrimental to certain areas of the UK economy. It has led to price fixing in the energy sector (and bear in mind one of the big six is the FRENCH STATE OWNED energy company) and sectors like transport are still heavily subsidised by the tax payer while those franchisees are making huge profits. This is not a good deal for the public.

There is nothing wrong with nationalisation, it is how the sector is run that matters, and in some cases, those foreign state owned energy and transport companies do very nicely exporting their services. Why are we giving contracts to French state owned energy companies? Or Dutch state owned transport companies? We can do that for ourselves surely?

[Jules-and-Boo]

We give contracts to other countries eg trains/France because we are in the EU and EU countries are allowed to bid

[Spartacus]

Don't know about anyone else but the exchange between blah blah and Mahoody on this and other threads makes me want to crowd around the pair of them and slowly chant

"Fight fight fight" till teacher comes and breaks it up

[diable rouge]

Jules-and-Boo Wrote:

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

> We give contracts to other countries eg

> trains/France because we are in the EU and EU

> countries are allowed to bid

There's nothing about being in the EU that says we have to give them the contracts, instead they are winning them fairly and squarely in open, competitive tenders against UK privately owned companies. So in fact it confirms that state ownership can be more competitive than private ownership. Also, non-EU countries win these sort of contracts, Hinkley Point power station is being funded and built by the French EDF and Chinese CGN, who also happen to be both state-owned.

So not being in the EU wouldn't mean that EU companies wouldn't suddenly be able to bid for future contracts. We will have to negotiate new trade deals with them and part of those deals will be to allow them to bid along with lots of other concessions such immigration quotas. Same applies to any new trade deals outside the EU, the big US pharmas are already licking their lips and waiting to pounce on the NHS...

[cella]

Mahoody Wrote:

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

> @ Blah Blah

>

> You said that "Corbyn is promising a radical

> change that breaks the ownership of the economy by

> a few privileged wealthy barons"

>

> I would be intrigued if you could name say a dozen

> of these demonic barons.

>

> I'm still gagging to see your list of names!

Not sure the pest control empire is down for nationalisation - now there's an idea. Guess that's a great paying business but possibly not quite the wealthy baron arena yet so you're safe for the moment maybe?

[Blah Blah]

Spartacus Wrote:

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

> Don't know about anyone else but the exchange

> between blah blah and Mahoody on this and other

> threads makes me want to crowd around the pair of

> them and slowly chant

> "Fight fight fight" till teacher comes and breaks

> it up

LOL, not the fighting type I'm afraid and I quite like rats too ;)

[Blah Blah]

Exactly diable. There are so many good examples of state owned companies successfully competing in the open marketplace and doing very well. That is profit that goes back into the state sector. Instead, we have an economy that sheds profit into offshore accounts, with no returned investment. For an economy to feel the benefit of growth, profit needs to remain within that economy as much as possible. This is why things like raising minimum wage and tax on fixed assets are more effective than tax on profits, that can be manipulated by creative accounting. Economies that regulate to both keep and incentivise investment of profit onshore do better than those who don't.

[Captain Marvel]

Blah Blah Wrote:

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

> Exactly diable. There are so many good examples of

> state owned companies successfully competing in

> the open marketplace and doing very well.

But not British ones

[Spartacus]

Today I had a flyer from the green party shoved through my letterbox and I thought "now there's an Oxymoron if I've ever seen one"

[NewWave]

For the first time ever I'm tempted not to vote in this election.

I am usually a Labour supporter but can't abide Corbyn and consider him un electable.

Boris is a boor and His chosen gang of ministers are as vile and dishonest as he is.

Lib-dem I've voted for them since Corbyn became Labour leader but this time I'm giving them a miss because I've no idea of their manifesto and don't feel they deserve my vote.

[cella]

Exercise your vote for all the reasons specified on this site and the Brexit one. You won't forgive yourself if you don't and will have no say in any discussions with friends and family afterwards. Vote.

[Jules-and-Boo]

If you don't vote, you are basically agreeing with the manifesto of each party.

[DulwichFox]

Suggesting that People HAVE to vote is like saying that if a vegetarian is in a pub and wants to eat

they must choose a Meat option if there is No veggie option.

[Spartacus]

I understand where NewWave is coming from.

There is little confidence in my mind in any of the leaders and parties to deliver anything but debt , pain and disappointment for large sways of the population.

I will be voting as its a waste not to and I believe in democracy but I also am an ABC (Anyone But Corbyn ) as he is offering, in my opinion, poor prospects for the country and massive debt after (I've lived through too many labour governments not to spot the warning signs) but at the same time I can't honestly see a vote for anyone else jumping out at me. As a side note, if a labour government treats it's electors the same way the labour lead Southwark council have in ignoring the wishes of the many (East Dulwich parking controls for example and stealth taxes) then only the Devine being can help us get through.

So who to vote for is the big question and as said I do get NewWaves point but I guess I have a few weeks to decide which party offers the lesser path to damnation.

Is Father Christmas a contender ?

[cella]

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> Suggesting that People HAVE to vote is like saying

> that if a vegetarian is in a pub and wants to eat

> they must choose a Meat option if there is No

> veggie option.

Ridiculously simplistic.

[DulwichFox]

"If voting changed anything, they'd abolish it"

Ken Livingstone (book)

[fishbiscuits]

Blah Blah Wrote:

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

> There are so many good examples of

> state owned companies successfully competing in

> the open marketplace and doing very well. That is

> profit that goes back into the state sector.

I have nothing against state owned companies, especially when it constitutes vital infrastructure. But Labour seem rather blase when questioned on the financials. If the profits are going to be used to pay off debt, then it isn't really going back into the state, is it? And if the profits are used to reinvest in the services, then how do you pay off the debt?

In the case of BT broadband, it isn't going to make any profit at all, because the service is apparently going to become free. So surely the purchase is a one-off hit they will never recoup.

Even with something like Royal Mail, which is presumably capable or returning modest profits... how confident are we that it will ever pay for itself?

[malumbu]

NewWave Wrote:

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

> For the first time ever I'm tempted not to vote in this election.

> I am usually a Labour supporter but can't abide Corbyn and consider him un electable.

> Boris is a boor and His chosen gang of ministers are as vile and dishonest as he is.

> Lib-dem I've voted for them since Corbyn became Labour leader but this time I'm giving them a miss

> because I've no idea of their manifesto and don't feel they deserve my vote.

Don't disagree but very little sticks to BoJo and as him winning outright is very much on the cards this frightens me. The voxpops on the TV go along the lines: I've voted Labour all my life but I'm going to vote for this lovable buffoon. Lying just makes him normal. He's not like the rest.

Have we ever had a buffoon as a prime minister before? I suppose the Mayoral elections ten years ago showed how he could become 'popular' in an electorate that wouldn't usually vote this way (there was the Ken's a crook too which influenced things). Have we every had someone with so many gaffs, so many skeletons in the closet? Back to the voxpops - the bloke seems to be loved as a maverick/renegade but how much more part of the traditional political landscape can you get?

It's all worryingly simple and clever too. I need to coin a word similar to remoaner to cover my BoJo views.

Nationalisation? Whilst as a nation we have a collective view that the 70s were dreadful we forget that were world leaders in telecoms, power generation, rail and no doubt other industries too. Efficiency, competition eg Germany and America, trade relations, lack of strategy, planning and the like all came into the demise, but it wasn't as simple as the private sector doing it better.

[dbboy]

Best line to come out of yesterday was Johnson saying "lets be Corbyn neutral by Christmas", whether it was off the cuff or scripted, oh how it made me chuckle.

[Blah Blah]

But it won't be the Labour Party running those nationalised companies Fishbiscuits. It will be people who know how to run large companies and ideally keep them in the black. Some things, like transport however, will always be subsidised, but at present we are subsidising private franchises while they make good profits.

As for debt, like all borrowing, investment is a good option that ideally pays for itself over time. We are in a race to the bottom economy at the moment with a public who want tax cuts AND better public services. Sooner or later, things like adult social care are really going to bite and there will be no option but for increased borrowing for any party if they want to win elections.

[Jules-and-Boo]

Borrowing and capital investment go hand in hand - in fact, a company can have debt and not be in trouble - some companies manage like this.

It's very shortsighted to say that any as profits would be used to pay off the debt of the initial cost, it's not worth the investment.

[diable rouge]

The end of today is the deadline for registering to vote, with this link you can register, check whether you're already registered and at what address (if you've moved home you may still be registered at your old address, hence your polling card will be sent there instead of your new address), if you're going to be abroad on GE day you can arrange a proxy vote, and if you're a student you're allowed to register at both your home and term-time addresses (but only vote once - one for the tactical voters to think about)... https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

[JohnL]

Chief Rabbi warns against Corbyn again, Stormzy stands with Corbyn again