Any (post 2008) Economists in the house? - Inflation.

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I had to chuckle at that. That's the baseball 'World Series' viewpoint (only American teams compete, the rest of the world doesn't count).

That might arguably be true in the USA, but here, the media, especially the old print media, is almost entirely right wing. And Jacob would argue that out of the two left-leaning mainstream papers, even one of those is rabidly anti-Corbyn.

Mainstream media here is generally about 90% registered democrat, but some of those registered folks have realized that there's money to be made during the day by pretending to be less liberal.

IN the old days, it was just understood that media other than a few batty opinion writers (on both ends, but generally the straight up commie "there's no fact in the world, just people who say that their opinions are facts" types), most of the media was corporate democrat type, if a little idealistic, it was expected. They hated reagan and politicans of that type (the simple cowboy types, if you know what I mean, except reagan himself was a smooth pimp). Long story short, once a few were successful at offering limited republican curated news, then that market started to thrive, and the regular media went more overtly nasty, and now has mostly given up being objective (stating that literally as a business plan - it's more profitable. Pretty much the case that whoever is in office, the opposing cable news types will thrive).

We used to note that the news in the UK was very tabloid-y, and I guess it is (plus, we're too prudish to ever have "news" with back page girls on it here, but maybe that's me-tooed out of existence now), but our media is now something worse - attempts to claim legitimacy with nothing but negative intent from both sides.

President-wise, though, they will only turn on Biden if he does something extremely scandalous.
 
I guess that's always the problem with tax laws; simple and people will (rightly) point out that there are exceptions who are unfairly hit due to their specific circumstances. Complex and you introduce loopholes that are exploited by those with the resources to do so.

That said, I'm pretty certain I recall hearing something a few years ago about tax accountants (used by the UK government to draw up tax rules) then offering their services to companies - to explain exactly where the loopholes are in the rules they'd advised the government to run. If I were a cynic I'd wonder if said loopholes were not there by accident...

I do work that's highly involved with regulation. i watch and read draft bills from house and senate and watch as things are added and removed. Sometimes, there are oversights. The bulk of the time, it's political favors. The loopholes aren't accidental, and if they are, they are closed by a legislative fix quickly.
 
.....And Jacob would argue that out of the two left-leaning mainstream papers, even one of those is rabidly anti-Corbyn.
Guardian was leader of the whole pack ranting against Corbyn in every issue for weeks before 2019 election and hasn't really let up. Was a well respected paper before that and more influential than many.
Which was the other left leaning paper- the Mirror?

Even New Statesman was in on the ranting though they have relented a bit. Why Labour needs to contend with the successes of Corbynism as well as its failures "Though it’s rarely acknowledged, the economic policy consensus in Britain has settled somewhere strikingly close to the 2017 Corbyn programme"

Interesting comment here from 2016 Why Corbyn so terrifies the Guardian - TruePublica
The Guardian has been forced to think a bit, though they don't use the C word here: People want bold economic change – the tragedy is, Labour hasn't realised this | Rachel Shabi
 
Guardian was leader of the whole pack ranting against Corbyn in every issue for weeks before 2019 election and hasn't really let up. Was a well respected paper before that and more influential than many.
Which was the other left leaning paper- the Mirror?
Even New Statesman was in on the ranting though they have relented a bit. Why Labour needs to contend with the successes of Corbynism as well as its failures
Interesting comment here from 2016 Why Corbyn so terrifies the Guardian - TruePublica
I'm not sure I'd consider the Grauniad (sic) as a well respect paper. I mean, even as as stinkin' lefty on many issues I find it a bit over the top ;)
 
I'm not sure I'd consider the Grauniad (sic) as a well respect paper. I mean, even as as stinkin' lefty on many issues I find it a bit over the top ;)
I've been a rank and file Labour Party member for most of my life, Labour born and bred, union convener grandad from Birtley, Co Durham. You don't get more Labour than my family. I too find the old Graun a bit left field sometimes. But Jacob seems to think they're a little bit to the right of Atilla the Hun 😂
 
I've been a rank and file Labour Party member for most of my life, Labour born and bred, union convener grandad from Birtley, Co Durham. You don't get more Labour than my family. I too find the old Graun a bit left field sometimes. But Jacob seems to think they're a little bit to the right of Atilla the Hun 😂
No they are good on most issues but they did indulge in hysterical rants against Corbyn, led by J Freedland, Nick Cohen, Jessica Elgot, Will Hutton, and others.
Getting things wrong is one thing but allowing the paper to be used for such blatantly partisan rants is another entirely.
The leaked governance report remains un-dealt with, the Forde Inquiry report is still suppressed , their chosen man Special K is failing dismally and wrecking the party. It's not all over yet!
 
It's not all over yet!
It may well be if the party continues to be ripped down the middle by dinosaurs like you, mired in the past and unable to adapt to 21st Century issues!

The right are loving this. Enough with the treachery - get behind our leader. Or we're farked.
 
Are you a bovver boots man Jacob?
Trouble is even if you had someone like that leading the party, people don't want to be stuck in the working class bracket, everyone is an aspiring millionaire now.
 
It is unclear (to me anyway) who runs the country.

Folk believe they democratically elect government. PR is a non-issue - the referendum went 68/32% against. Most are not able to understand complex arguments and respond mainly to (a) media opinion, and (b) that which affects them personally. We perpetuate the concept of democratic process despite its weaknesses.

Politicians don't run the country. they think they do. They may set general direction and strategy, but they can't avoid media scrutiny and reporting. They are reliant for advice and implementation on the civil service. They can do nothing if they are not elected.

Businesses have some claim to run the country - they are able to deploy the resources as they see fit, although motivated by profit rather than public good. If corruption exists between business and politicians, it is business that gets the greater share of the corrupt cake.

The media could be charged with some justification they run the country - historically press (reducing circulation) and more recently TV. Their time is passing - uncontrolled social media being increasingly the way in which the young (< ~35) are informed and develop opinions.

The only constant over the last 165 years is the UK civil service. They have survived wars, countless changes of government, the loss of empire, economic turmoil, technological change etc. There are around 450,000 of them and comfortably outnumber politicians, business leaders and the media combined. So I suspect Sir Humphrey was right - they do run the country.

Political success will will go to those that manage social media effectively. The "prize" of political leadership will be based on "personality", "spin" and "selective truths" rather than underpinned by serious debate. Whether politicians will find a way to displace the civil service is another matter entirely.
 
It may well be if the party continues to be ripped down the middle by dinosaurs like you, mired in the past and unable to adapt to 21st Century issues!

The right are loving this.
Of course they are. Starmer is no threat even if he wins an election, which looks extremely unlikely. The right wing MSM are right behind him - suits them entirely to have a lame duck LOTO and a divided party
Enough with the treachery - get behind our leader. Or we're farked.
The person ripping the party down the middle is Starmer, surely you have noticed?
Though maybe not it doesn't get reported too well in the MSM. You have to read Tribune, Morning Star, The Jacobin, Jonathan Cook, or the big array of alternative Labour FB pages.
The dinosaurs are not the issue he has lost the youth vote, deliberately it seems - he was setting out to purge Jess Barnard until he realised that this was a silly thing to do just before the conference,
Labour apologises to chair of youth wing for ‘investigation error’
I think everybody was behind him until he broke all his pledges one by one not least that he would unify the party. He hadn't said he would do it by purging half the membership.
PS The Forde report may be starting to leak! About time too.



PPS and as for party unity - Special K seems to have unified the left, which is quite an achievement!
 
Last edited:
It is unclear (to me anyway) who runs the country.

Folk believe they democratically elect government. PR is a non-issue - the referendum went 68/32% against. ......
Trouble is PR is a party issue too. As things are at the moment it would disadvantage the Tories, Labour not affected, but other minority parties would get more seats.
This is interesting: as you can see Labour nearly level pegs seats to votes, Tories do very well, other parties do very badly. General Election 2019: Turning votes into seats
An archaic system and discarded in many other countries, and a very live issue. Essentially undemocratic as it stands.
The left are making a mistake by calling for a "progressive alliance" but the last thing most voters seem to want is progress. A "democratic alliance" would be a better term.
 
Are you a bovver boots man Jacob?
Trouble is even if you had someone like that leading the party, people don't want to be stuck in the working class bracket, everyone is an aspiring millionaire now.

the political landscape has changed rather a lot.

less union bound heavy industry, more self employed contractors, more people in the gig economy…..all people that are effectively business owners.
 
Does seem that a lot of people really don't know whats going on in their own party. I'd add to the list of alternative Labour comment the JVL Jewish Voice for Labour
 
...

Labour need to adapt…..luckily Starmer is more in tune with reality than 70s man
If only! Starmer's inspiration seems to be Blair 1997, or some feeble version thereof. Mr nobody Mandelson was there back then and is still having no positive influence "helping" Special K! Is he an establishment mole/saboteur? They do want to keep Labour out of power.
Just been watching the Blair/Brown TV prog. Fascinating stuff. Blairs biggest (only?) achievement would seem to have been the NI agreement which is quite something and he deserves the credit for his part in it.
 
If only! Starmer's inspiration seems to be Blair 1997, or some feeble version thereof. Mr nobody Mandelson was there back then and is still having no positive influence "helping" Special K! Is he an establishment mole/saboteur? They do want to keep Labour out of power.
Just been watching the Blair/Brown TV prog. Fascinating stuff. Blairs biggest (only?) achievement would seem to have been the NI agreement which is quite something and he deserves the credit for his part in it.

It is no surprise to me that you can’t find anything Blair achieved, despite him being the most successful Labour leader in your lifetime.
Labour supporters refuse to give any credit to Labour’s most successful leader in modern history….and they wonder why the party always loses.


By the way, I’ve just noticed this thread is in the open forum so I guess we should avoid politics here.
 
It is no surprise to me that you can’t find anything Blair achieved, despite him being the most successful Labour leader in your lifetime.
Labour supporters refuse to give any credit to Labour’s most successful leader in modern history….and they wonder why the party always loses.


By the way, I’ve just noticed this thread is in the open forum so I guess we should avoid politics here.
I'll copy paste in the padded room!
 
Labour need to find themselves a Dominic Cummings.

and have one single strategy: win power, win power, win power

and when they are in, ditch their manifesto and start doing what they want -maybe some of your socialist policies like renationalisation.

Sadly, the only way Labour can win is by cooperating with other “progressive “ parties in elections. One shared policy needs to be PR. And they won’t do it.
 
Sadly, the only way Labour can win is by cooperating with other “progressive “ parties in elections. One shared policy needs to be PR. And they won’t do it.
Actually they don't need to compromise beyond supporting PR. A "progressive alliance" not needed but a democratic alliance is. Quite a bright prospect nothing sad about it?
Starmer not supportive of PR, for no apparent reason, perhaps as part of appeal to the mythical "red wall" or perhaps just an extension of his sabotage of Labour. Members support PR by a big majority but Starmer is dumping members as fast as he can. 150k down already.
 
Sadly, the only way Labour can win is by cooperating with other “progressive “ parties in elections. One shared policy needs to be PR. And they won’t do it.
Labour don’t have the numbers currently to win in 2024

the next real chance is 2028.


Im not sure PR should be a manifesto policy - the UK public May see that as trivial compared to the impending economic crisis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top