Re-nationalisation of industries - Corbyn

[jakswan]

I took the correction didn't think it was posting it now reads:-

So season tickets (which workers will have) are actually cheaper now than when the railways were nationalised.

hmm, I thought I'd understood .. until your lastest post - So you did mean workers will (when?) be able to buy season tickets that are cheaper than they were in 1947?

I'll try again.

"A single from London to Manchester has gone up by 208%, up from £50 in 1995 to £154 today. That is more than three times the rate of inflation.
But a season ticket for the same journey has risen by only 65% - just less than inflation."

So season tickets (which workers will have) are actually cheaper now than when the railways were in the public sector in 1995.

[jeremyp]

I took the correction didn't think it was posting it now reads:-

So season tickets (which workers will have) are actually cheaper now than when the railways were nationalised.

hmm, I thought I'd understood .. until your lastest post - So you did mean workers will (when?) be able to buy season tickets that are cheaper than they were in 1947?

I think I have figured out the confusion. The phrase "when the railways were nationalised" is ambiguous. It can refer to

• the act of nationalisation
• the state of being in public ownership

I think Jakswan meant the latter.

[Hope]

I think I have figured out the confusion. The phrase "when the railways were nationalised" is ambiguous. It can refer to

• the act of nationalisation
• the state of being in public ownership

I think Jakswan meant the latter.

Good to see that you have finally caught up with what I pointed out in posts #260, 271 and 274 and with which you fairly aggressively disagreed with back then.

[Outrider]

Breaking News:  it is Corbyn.

With that guy in the driving seat it is likely Labour will be unelectable for the foreseeable future!

As a majority leader, perhaps - I've heard people questioning today already if he intends to remain in the seat through the next election.

However, the prospect of a slight lift in Labour support in Scotland becomes a significant possibility, as does the possibility of a formal left-wing alliance.

Lib Dems will, most likely, regain at least some of their seats at the next election, and they're more likely to align with Labour in the short term than with the increasingly right-wing and authoritarian Tories. The Greens would welcome the possibility of a formal alliance that gets them into genuine policy-making, and the policies are more akin to the SNP and Plaid Cymru core values.

O.

[jakswan]

As a majority leader, perhaps - I've heard people questioning today already if he intends to remain in the seat through the next election.

However, the prospect of a slight lift in Labour support in Scotland becomes a significant possibility, as does the possibility of a formal left-wing alliance.

Lib Dems will, most likely, regain at least some of their seats at the next election, and they're more likely to align with Labour in the short term than with the increasingly right-wing and authoritarian Tories. The Greens would welcome the possibility of a formal alliance that gets them into genuine policy-making, and the policies are more akin to the SNP and Plaid Cymru core values.

I can't see that playing well, SNP are toxic South of the Border, how long will it take for someone to claim Corbyn's friends are Hamas, Hezbollah, Sinn Fein and SNP.

[Sassy]

Jeremy Corbyn has apparently called for renationalisation of certain areas of industries - the old Clause 4.

Do you agree?  If so, which areas would you like to see re-nationalised?

Water, Gas and  Electricity.

What if they remove claus 4 first...

[Jack Knave]

Breaking News:  it is Corbyn.

With that guy in the driving seat it is likely Labour will be unelectable for the foreseeable future!

I wouldn't be too sure of that - the times they are a changin' - Corbyn won't stick to all the hard lines he has aired and will soften his outlook to embrace more of his Labour MPs. All politicians do this when reality hits them - look as Tsipras and how he caved in. This will disappoint some of those who voted for him but will bring on board voters who are having a hard time from austerity and feeling forgotten by the last decades politics.

The are many Labour types up North who do not like what Corbyn has said so far but this will change because of the above, and will no doubt lose some of UKIP's ex-Labour voters.

[wigginhall]

Yes, I think Corbyn will focus on anti-austerity, and will kick Nato and so on into the long grass.  Even then, it won't be enough.  Labour can't win, unless there is a big mess, either economically, or politically.  Normally, you would say that the Tories can avoid this, but we live in very peculiar times.   How many people predicted that C would win the Labour leadership?

[Hope]

This will disappoint some of those who voted for him but will bring on board voters who are having a hard time from austerity and feeling forgotten by the last decades politics.

Are you referring to the politics of the last decade or the politics of the last decades here, Jack?  (decade's, or decades')

[Jack Knave]

This will disappoint some of those who voted for him but will bring on board voters who are having a hard time from austerity and feeling forgotten by the last decades politics.

Are you referring to the politics of the last decade or the politics of the last decades here, Jack?  (decade's, or decades')

Sorry, yes, it should have read decade's.

Really, all this austerity stuff we have now is a product of the Thatcherite Neo-Liberal project but its effects have only been felt fairly recently, hence 'decade's politics'.

[Hope]

Really, all this austerity stuff we have now is a product of the Thatcherite Neo-Liberal project but its effects have only been felt fairly recently, hence 'decade's politics'.

Again, I'd disagree, Jack.  This whole austerity stuff can be traced back to the demise of Britain's manufacturing industries, which really started shortly after the 2nd World War. 

Take the Cowley car plants in Oxford.  One of the big bugbears of both the unions and management there in the 60s and 70s was the out-dated equipment that was both inefficient and dangerous.  It was well-known at the time that a lot of the machinery used at that time was still of pre-war vintage. 

[jakswan]

Really, all this austerity stuff we have now is a product of the Thatcherite Neo-Liberal project but its effects have only been felt fairly recently, hence 'decade's politics'.

Again, I'd disagree, Jack.  This whole austerity stuff can be traced back to the demise of Britain's manufacturing industries, which really started shortly after the 2nd World War. 

Take the Cowley car plants in Oxford.  One of the big bugbears of both the unions and management there in the 60s and 70s was the out-dated equipment that was both inefficient and dangerous.  It was well-known at the time that a lot of the machinery used at that time was still of pre-war vintage.

Austerity is about cutting government spending, I'm not seeing the link between this and car plants?

[Hope]

Austerity is about cutting government spending, I'm not seeing the link between this and car plants?

jaks, if the UK still had efficient manufacturing industries run by and owned by British industrialists, rather than by companies from the Far East and parts of Europe and America, the Exchequer could be receiving far more in corporation tax and other business-related income sources than it currently does.  It is partly as a result of this that the Government has to borrow as much as it does, and hence the need for austerity.  The UK is no longer a big player in international business and finance - despite what many would have us believe.  In fact, with the exception perhaps of Germany, European nations are now members of the 2nd division of nations on a number of parameters.  Britain's role on the UN Security Council is a historic exception to the rule.

[jakswan]

jaks, if the UK still had efficient manufacturing industries run by and owned by British industrialists, rather than by companies from the Far East and parts of Europe and America, the Exchequer could be receiving far more in corporation tax and other business-related income sources than it currently does.  It is partly as a result of this that the Government has to borrow as much as it does, and hence the need for austerity. 

No you can't make that assumption.

The UK is no longer a big player in international business and finance - despite what many would have us believe.  In fact, with the exception perhaps of Germany, European nations are now members of the 2nd division of nations on a number of parameters.  Britain's role on the UN Security Council is a historic exception to the rule.

Any evidence for any of these claims? Last time I looked UK had 6th largest economy in the world.

[Outrider]

jaks, if the UK still had efficient manufacturing industries run by and owned by British industrialists, rather than by companies from the Far East and parts of Europe and America, the Exchequer could be receiving far more in corporation tax and other business-related income sources than it currently does.

The only way for the UK to return to a manufacturing base is to eliminate the bulk of the Health and Safety legislation we've implemented and regress to a third-world standard of living in order to have labour cheap enough to compete - presuming we could still get the materials cheaply, because they just aren't here any more.

As to getting more from corporation tax, if we can't get the current companies to pay in the world economy, why would we be any better at getting them to pay for physical manufacture rather than service provision? If we were, why would they remain here when they can do it cheaper elsewhere?

This economic downturn in the UK - in the West in general - is just the inevitable downturn that comes from having benefitted in the past, this is the free market in action. We have earned, become rich, become affluent and therefore become uncompetitive. Other countries will now have their day - the only way to buck that trend is to use the facilities we have to create technologies and industries that other countries cannot match.

If we are to look at cars, for instance, we need to be leading the field in fuel cells (for instance).

O.

[Hope]

Any evidence for any of these claims? Last time I looked UK had 6th largest economy in the world.

"The United Kingdom has the fifth-largest national economy (and second-largest in Europe) measured by nominal GDP and tenth-largest in the world (and third-largest in Europe)[1] measured by purchasing power parity (PPP). "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_Kingdom

I appreciate that the UK is part of the G* and other, similar groupings, but I understand that our influence is waning.

By the way, and on a slightly different train of thought, what is your view on the composition of the G8 - where not only is the EU now a member, but also France, Germany, Italy and the UK.  Isn't that somewhat Euro-centric?

[Hope]

The only way for the UK to return to a manufacturing base is to eliminate the bulk of the Health and Safety legislation we've implemented and regress to a third-world standard of living in order to have labour cheap enough to compete - presuming we could still get the materials cheaply, because they just aren't here any more.

I agree completely with what you sad in this post.  If you remember though, I was trying to get Jack K to realise that the downturn didn't start with Thatcher; if anything, she was effectively the final act of a 30-40 year process.

[jakswan]

Any evidence for any of these claims? Last time I looked UK had 6th largest economy in the world.

"The United Kingdom has the fifth-largest national economy (and second-largest in Europe) measured by nominal GDP and tenth-largest in the world (and third-largest in Europe)[1] measured by purchasing power parity (PPP). "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_United_Kingdom

I appreciate that the UK is part of the G* and other, similar groupings, but I understand that our influence is waning.

By the way, and on a slightly different train of thought, what is your view on the composition of the G8 - where not only is the EU now a member, but also France, Germany, Italy and the UK.  Isn't that somewhat Euro-centric?

So are withdrawing 'The UK is no longer a big player in international business and finance'?

The G8 is a forum, what do you think it is and its members chosen?
.

[Jack Knave]

Really, all this austerity stuff we have now is a product of the Thatcherite Neo-Liberal project but its effects have only been felt fairly recently, hence 'decade's politics'.

Again, I'd disagree, Jack.  This whole austerity stuff can be traced back to the demise of Britain's manufacturing industries, which really started shortly after the 2nd World War. 

Take the Cowley car plants in Oxford.  One of the big bugbears of both the unions and management there in the 60s and 70s was the out-dated equipment that was both inefficient and dangerous.  It was well-known at the time that a lot of the machinery used at that time was still of pre-war vintage.

You need to finish your little dissertation. What are you trying to say?

You could say that this attitude you seem to be implying goes back even further to the way our education system was perceived in the early 20th century. Britain was seen as being more 'academic', more of the 'leaders' than the 'workers' - we had had centuries where we had basically sponged of the empire for our lifestyle.

[Jack Knave]

Austerity is about cutting government spending, I'm not seeing the link between this and car plants?

jaks, if the UK still had efficient manufacturing industries run by and owned by British industrialists, rather than by companies from the Far East and parts of Europe and America, the Exchequer could be receiving far more in corporation tax and other business-related income sources than it currently does.  It is partly as a result of this that the Government has to borrow as much as it does, and hence the need for austerity.  The UK is no longer a big player in international business and finance - despite what many would have us believe.  In fact, with the exception perhaps of Germany, European nations are now members of the 2nd division of nations on a number of parameters.  Britain's role on the UN Security Council is a historic exception to the rule.

Well, it is true that privatisation has been an total failure and yet our politicians keep trying it out. It is also true that the idea you can rely on foreigners for your essentials and there wont be any risks or consequence is a 'global' lie, as it allows them to hold us at gunpoint - as seen by how Russia does this with its gas on Europe. We have lost a huge amount of our skills base which would be immensely difficult to get back and puts us at a disadvantage with the rest of the world.

[Hope]

So are withdrawing 'The UK is no longer a big player in international business and finance'?

I assume you missed out a 'you' here.  No I'm not withdrawing my statement because  that is what I am hearing in almost every economic and financial report I hear - on TV/radio/etc.  We are no longer a big player on the international stage.  We are on the wane.

The G8 is a forum, what do you think it is and its members chosen?

The members were originally chosen before there was such a thing as the EU and shortly after the UK joined (or was allowed into) the EEC.  Not quite sure why Italy was included - its economy has always been relatively small, I thought - but could see why France wasn't going to accept being left off the table if Germany was to be there.

As you say it is a forum, a talking shop.  Does it actually produce anything other than ideas?

[Hope]

You need to finish your little dissertation. What are you trying to say?

The second paragraph was an exemplar of the point I'd made in the first.

You could say that this attitude you seem to be implying goes back even further to the way our education system was perceived in the early 20th century. Britain was seen as being more 'academic', more of the 'leaders' than the 'workers' - we had had centuries where we had basically sponged of the empire for our lifestyle.

Not really.  Historically, we had led the world until the 1st World War, then America and Germany began to run us close and even overtake us.  The existence of Trades Unions shows that we weren't "seen as being more 'academic', more of the 'leaders' than the 'workers' " even if multiple inventions came out of Britain.  Unfortunately, in part due to the efforts we put into the 2nd World War, we finished that conflict on our economic knees which meant that other nations, besides the US and Germany - like Japan and Korea (and more recently China), began to catch us up.

[Nearly Sane]

So are withdrawing 'The UK is no longer a big player in international business and finance'?

I assume you missed out a 'you' here.  No I'm not withdrawing my statement because  that is what I am hearing in almost every economic and financial report I hear - on TV/radio/etc.  We are no longer a big player on the international stage.  We are on the wane.

The G8 is a forum, what do you think it is and its members chosen?

The members were originally chosen before there was such a thing as the EU and shortly after the UK joined (or was allowed into) the EEC.  Not quite sure why Italy was included - its economy has always been relatively small, I thought - but could see why France wasn't going to accept being left off the table if Germany was to be there.

As you say it is a forum, a talking shop.  Does it actually produce anything other than ideas?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il_sorpasso_(economics)

[jakswan]

No I'm not withdrawing my statement because  that is what I am hearing in almost every economic and financial report I hear - on TV/radio/etc.  We are no longer a big player on the international stage.  We are on the wane.

Ok you can just be wrong then.

Your first statement is factually incorrect, 'we are on the wane' is an opinion.

The members were originally chosen before there was such a thing as the EU and shortly after the UK joined (or was allowed into) the EEC.  Not quite sure why Italy was included - its economy has always been relatively small, I thought - but could see why France wasn't going to accept being left off the table if Germany was to be there.

As you say it is a forum, a talking shop.  Does it actually produce anything other than ideas?

Italy has one of the largest economies in the World, and would have possibly been top 6/7 at the the time this organisation formed. I think you should better educate yourself on these topics.

[Hope]

Your first statement is factually incorrect,

Sorry, Jaks, since you have no idea which news reports I read and listen to (though mostly those on the BBC and in newspapers like the Independent, Guardian and Times), you can't state whether or not my first statement is factually wrong.  I sort of agree that the phrase 'we are on the wane' could be an opinion, but then I'm simply stating what said experts and reporters say and write.

Italy has one of the largest economies in the World, and would have possibly been top 6/7 at the the time this organisation formed. I think you should better educate yourself on these topics.

"the eight-largest by nominal GDP in the world, and the 12th-largest by GDP (PPP)"(wikipedia) to be precise.  I suppose my lack of appreciation of that was as much to do with the fact that I've never been there and therefore not experienced the quality of life, and partly because I thought that it was more into niche products - like Ferraris, expensive shoes and clothing, etc.  I also tend to forget things like its wine and meat production.  It may also have to do with the fact that I've always thought that it was Germany who got the Marshall Aid; was there an Italian equivalent following the 2nd WW?  My fault.