UK Elections

Discussion of current events
User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: UK Elections

Post by Sertorio » Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:43 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Sat Jun 10, 2017 5:16 pm

Hey, you made the initial assertion. It's your job to back it up.
The article from The Guardian which I quoted above shows I am not alone thinking as I do.
"...the reason Corbyn-led Labour did so well is because poverty and inequality are now at levels that would embarrass even the most brazen kleptocracy of the most corrupt banana republic. And they trust Corbyn’s Labour to do something about it."

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: UK Elections

Post by Sertorio » Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:59 am

Labour now has a six-point lead over the Tories, new poll finds
Figures show a swing of eight points for Jeremy Corbyn's party since the general election


Labour is now ahead of the Tories for the first time since Jeremy Corbyn became leader, a new poll has found.

Mr Corbyn’s party is now polling at 45 per cent, six points ahead of the Tories who are lagging behind on 39 per cent.

The Survation poll, conducted for the Mail on Sunday, shows a swing of eight points in Labour’s favour since the general election on 8 June.

Labour has now overtaken the Tories despite being more than 20 points behind when Theresa May first called for a general election.

The news comes as Ms May is expected to enter a “confidence and supply” arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) in an attempt to shore up her position as Prime Minister.

The Tories fell short of a majority in the general election, losing 13 seats, and it is now expected they will now be running a minority government via a non-binding agreement with the DUP.

Under the confidence and supply deal, the DUP would not have any of its MPs become government or cabinet ministers but would support Conservative legislation on a case-by-case basis.

It potentially hands the party more leverage over the Conservatives than a formal coalition in which they would become part of the government.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 84171.html

neverfail
Posts: 969
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: UK Elections

Post by neverfail » Sun Jun 11, 2017 5:16 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:59 am
Labour now has a six-point lead over the Tories, new poll finds
Figures show a swing of eight points for Jeremy Corbyn's party since the general election


Labour is now ahead of the Tories for the first time since Jeremy Corbyn became leader, a new poll has found.

Mr Corbyn’s party is now polling at 45 per cent, six points ahead of the Tories who are lagging behind on 39 per cent.

The Survation poll, conducted for the Mail on Sunday, shows a swing of eight points in Labour’s favour since the general election on 8 June.

Labour has now overtaken the Tories despite being more than 20 points behind when Theresa May first called for a general election.

The news comes as Ms May is expected to enter a “confidence and supply” arrangement with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) in an attempt to shore up her position as Prime Minister.

The Tories fell short of a majority in the general election, losing 13 seats, and it is now expected they will now be running a minority government via a non-binding agreement with the DUP.

Under the confidence and supply deal, the DUP would not have any of its MPs become government or cabinet ministers but would support Conservative legislation on a case-by-case basis.

It potentially hands the party more leverage over the Conservatives than a formal coalition in which they would become part of the government.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 84171.html
Too late for Labour!

On election day the voters still gave the Torys farm more seats in Parliament than Labour won. That's what counts.

neverfail
Posts: 969
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Is this Corbyn character living in la-la land?

Post by neverfail » Sun Jun 11, 2017 5:52 am

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... government

(Quote). Corbyn said the great repeal bill, designed to transfer EU law into British law to enable changes to regulations, “has now become history” and said Labour would offer something different. “We will put forward a position in which we negotiate tariff-free access to the European market and legislate after that,” he said.

Yes and I can just imagine the EU negotiators laughing in his face.

Get real, Jeremy!

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 771
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: the horse came in a good second place - so what?

Post by SteveFoerster » Sun Jun 11, 2017 7:29 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:39 am
neverfail wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:12 am
Sertorio wrote:
Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:39 pm

What evidence do you have that Labour's manifesto - leftist as it was - had little or no influence on the increase in Labour's vote?
It might have - though Labour still won far fewer votes and seats in Parliament than the Conservatives, despite Theresa May's reputedly woeful election campaign. Which implies to me that the voters' confidence in Jeremy Corbym is still not all that high.

Just curious to know Sertorio: what moves you to think that compassion in politics is a monopoly of the left?
Give me some examples of it coming from the right...
Every single free market reform proposed by conservatives and libertarians is compassionate because they lead to greater prosperity which helps everyone, including those at the bottom. The problem is that there's an awful lot of economic illiteracy out there (and around here, apparently), so people only recognise something as helping when it involves an immediate transfer of wealth by force, rather than the purposeful development of an economy where that sort of transfer isn't necessary.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Is this Corbyn character living in la-la land?

Post by Sertorio » Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:18 am

neverfail wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 5:52 am
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... government

(Quote). Corbyn said the great repeal bill, designed to transfer EU law into British law to enable changes to regulations, “has now become history” and said Labour would offer something different. “We will put forward a position in which we negotiate tariff-free access to the European market and legislate after that,” he said.

Yes and I can just imagine the EU negotiators laughing in his face.

Get real, Jeremy!
A free trade agreement between the EU and the UK makes a lot of sense and would benefit both parties. And it would be a lot easier to achieve than any other alternative.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: the horse came in a good second place - so what?

Post by Sertorio » Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:24 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 7:29 am

Every single free market reform proposed by conservatives and libertarians is compassionate because they lead to greater prosperity which helps everyone, including those at the bottom. The problem is that there's an awful lot of economic illiteracy out there (and around here, apparently), so people only recognise something as helping when it involves an immediate transfer of wealth by force, rather than the purposeful development of an economy where that sort of transfer isn't necessary.
Free trade only works to everybody's advantage when the two economies are equally competitive, although in different sectors of the economy. If one of the two is generally less developed and less competitive, only the richer and more competitive one will benefit. Not very compassionate, in my view... :(

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 771
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: the horse came in a good second place - so what?

Post by SteveFoerster » Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:48 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:24 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 7:29 am

Every single free market reform proposed by conservatives and libertarians is compassionate because they lead to greater prosperity which helps everyone, including those at the bottom. The problem is that there's an awful lot of economic illiteracy out there (and around here, apparently), so people only recognise something as helping when it involves an immediate transfer of wealth by force, rather than the purposeful development of an economy where that sort of transfer isn't necessary.
Free trade only works to everybody's advantage when the two economies are equally competitive, although in different sectors of the economy. If one of the two is generally less developed and less competitive, only the richer and more competitive one will benefit. Not very compassionate, in my view... :(
Maybe it wouldn't be compassonate, if that were true.

But it isn't. Absent perverse incentives from political interference, people don't engage in trades that aren't to their benefit, whether they're in a more or less developed economy.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: the horse came in a good second place - so what?

Post by Sertorio » Sun Jun 11, 2017 3:34 pm

SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:48 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:24 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 7:29 am

Every single free market reform proposed by conservatives and libertarians is compassionate because they lead to greater prosperity which helps everyone, including those at the bottom. The problem is that there's an awful lot of economic illiteracy out there (and around here, apparently), so people only recognise something as helping when it involves an immediate transfer of wealth by force, rather than the purposeful development of an economy where that sort of transfer isn't necessary.
Free trade only works to everybody's advantage when the two economies are equally competitive, although in different sectors of the economy. If one of the two is generally less developed and less competitive, only the richer and more competitive one will benefit. Not very compassionate, in my view... :(
Maybe it wouldn't be compassonate, if that were true.

But it isn't. Absent perverse incentives from political interference, people don't engage in trades that aren't to their benefit, whether they're in a more or less developed economy.
We are talking about free international trade. A business could be profitable in a close economy, and not competitive in a free trade area. That's why free trade only works to everybody's advantage when the trading economies are equally developed. Unless one of the parties is an oil producing underdeveloped country. Something 90% of people tend to ignore...

neverfail
Posts: 969
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: Is this Corbyn character living in la-la land?

Post by neverfail » Sun Jun 11, 2017 5:53 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:18 am
neverfail wrote:
Sun Jun 11, 2017 5:52 am
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... government

(Quote). Corbyn said the great repeal bill, designed to transfer EU law into British law to enable changes to regulations, “has now become history” and said Labour would offer something different. “We will put forward a position in which we negotiate tariff-free access to the European market and legislate after that,” he said.

Yes and I can just imagine the EU negotiators laughing in his face.

Get real, Jeremy!
A free trade agreement between the EU and the UK makes a lot of sense and would benefit both parties. And it would be a lot easier to achieve than any other alternative.
Given that it would now be in the best interests of the EU to make an example of Britain by making its exit as costly as possible (to deter other EU member states from following the same path) I doubt whether the EU negotiators could afford to grant Britain such plum concession.

In terms of the flow of mercantile trade between the two such an arrangement would be of very unequal value to the two. Given that the UK has by far the smaller number of consumers along with a floating pound that can be easily bidded down in relation to the Euro: any open free trade agreement between the EU and the UK would be bound to massively benefit the export trade of the latter rather than the former.

What pisses me off is the way both sides of politics in the UK (Theresa May campaigned on the same bogus theme) are pretending to the UK public that Britain can still have its EU cake whilst eating it. If they were honest instead of being politically opportunistic they would warn the British public that there are tough times ahead post-Brexit. Instead they are both raising false public hopes and expectations by pretending that Britain will still have a beneficial future trading relationship with the EU: as long as WE are in government doing the negotiating and not this (ugh) other crowd.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], cassowary and 4 guests