Corbyn 15.5 - the so-called pro-Corbyn echo-chamber

[Mr_Simnock]

 I have never been keep on slogan style politics (shit like 'brexit means brexit' or 'Britain open for business') but it is currently a rather effective message of quickly getting across what you hope to be seen to stand for or a particular key policy. I think Corbyn needs one or two quick and get it out at every opportunity along with the PLP. I think that might be a good start to try and pick up momentum in the press. Off the top of my head they could repeat stuff like 'The great austerity failure' as much as possible to try and get the message across the last 7 years have been a massive flop.

[Johnny Yesno]

But then where is reality in our current trajectory? Economies are propped on consumer debt, banks are probably going to crash again. We ended up with a massive debt due to bailing out the banks, now forgotten. Austerity implemented has led to exactly what was predicted - the national debt is now vastly bigger, Osbourne has failed utterly.Corporations and the rich rely on tax funded infrastructure to run their businesses but pay almost nothing via tax avoidance, further indebting national economies. None of this has any future plan other than continue until the whole thing collapses. The right/neoliberal narrative is utterly detached from the real world.

The problem is that May's tories appear to have washed their hands of Cameron's tories and shifted their justification for further transfers of wealth from poor to rich from Austerity to Brexit. That Lynton Crosby is a cunning fucker.

I do wish Corbyn would attack the tories on this kind of thing:

In July 2013, following the government's rejection of a plan to remove branding from cigarette packets, British Prime Minister David Cameron was urged by Liberal Democrat members of the governing coalition to sack Crosby as his chief election strategist because of Crosby's connection to the tobacco industry.[12]

Liberal Democrat MP Paul Burstow was quoted as saying: "Lynton Crosby cannot remain at the heart of government while he is also serving the interests of the tobacco industry. If he does not go the Prime Minister should sack him."[12] In July 2013 it was reported in The Guardian and elsewhere that Crosby Textor, the company which he co-founded (which is known as CTF Partners in the UK) had advised private healthcare providers on 'how to exploit perceived "failings" in the NHS' in 2010. Crosby issued The Guardian with a legal challenge over their reporting.[13][14] The issue resurfaced in mainstream news sources a few days before the 2015 UK General Election.[15][16]

In 2014, it was revealed that having been hired in 2012 by Philip Morris International, maker of Marlboro cigarettes, Crosby lobbied Lord Marland, then parliamentary undersecretary for intellectual property and a former Conservative party treasurer, to oppose the introduction of plain packaging on cigarettes.[17] This revelation came in papers released under the Freedom of Information Act by the Intellectual Property Office.[17]

[Johnny Yesno]

Off the top of my head they could repeat stuff like 'The great austerity failure' as much as possible to try and get the message across the last 7 years have been a massive flop.

Absolutely. The tories' failed experiment. The tories failed ideology.

The thing is, it's true.

[Mr_Simnock]

Well I would twitter that out to the masses and repeat it ad nauseum in the media if I was an MP, I might start to use it everyday anyway. Fuck it I think I will.

[Johnny Yesno]

Well I would twitter that out to the masses and repeat it ad nauseum in the media if I was an MP, I might start to use it everyday anyway. Fuck it I think I will.

Why not? I think it's largely the repetition that gave people the idea that Labour were solely responsible for the 2008 financial crash.

[Absorb the anus burn]

The problem with all of the CaB Corbyn threads is that they don't say 'Labour' in the title. It isn't about Corbyn - it's about the larger party and how it realigning itself with left wing values after drifting horribly to the centre and right under Kinnock, Blair and Brown. They shift actually began under Miliband. It's a necessary process and Corbyn is bravely taking all the flack in a calm and dignified manner.

[TrenterPercenter]

Anyway, here's a great talk from Professor Bill Mitchell, called 'Reframing the Progressive Agenda'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OVAROe3gW4

Good talk, I noticed that Richard Murphy was on the panel.  A lot of what Prof. Mitchell is saying is based on Marx's dialectical materialism, not the method as a practice of investigation but the concept, i.e. we create the material world through our thoughts i.e. money and what it could/should be used for.

[TrenterPercenter]

The problem with all of the CaB Corbyn threads is that they don't say 'Labour' in the title. It isn't about Corbyn - it's about the larger party and how it realigning itself with left wing values after drifting horribly to the centre and right under Kinnock, Blair and Brown. They shift actually began under Miliband. It's a necessary process and Corbyn is bravely taking all the flack in a calm and dignified manner.

Absolutely. This!

[Funcrusher]

Good talk, I noticed that Richard Murphy was on the panel.  A lot of what Prof. Mitchell is saying is based on Marx's dialectical materialism, not the method as a practice of investigation but the concept, i.e. we create the material world through our thoughts i.e. money and what it could/should be used for.

It's interesting that you mention Richard Murphy. He's someone I've had a lot of time for, who really understands tax avoidance and the economic arguments. Initially he seemed to be active in the Corbyn camp, but has now walked away and is a critic. The most recent thing I read from him argued that Corbyn is veering back towards a balanced budget, austerity lite type of position because they're afraid of the Labourspend too much meme, even though austerity has massively increased the deficit, which was caused by bank bailouts in the first place.

[Zetetic]

He's doing some good stuff on rail (even Hislop grudgingly endorsed this on HIGNFY)

Can you push me in the right direction for this? All I can turn up is the Virgin Trains stuff and the recent Momentum video.

and his commitment to a publicly funded health service is clear, both of which in the context of New Labour is refreshing.

Is this specifically about PFI? That aside, I never got the impression that New Labour was intent on pushing away from public-funding (as opposed to insurance or the like).

[Buelligan]

Can you push me in the right direction for this?

11.28 onwards, here.

[Johnny Yesno]

11.28 onwards, here.

Blocked here.

[pancreas]

TFM, please don't post here. The above is innocuous, but you will be unable to control yourself---and then neither will anyone else. Barry has been very clear that you are to respect the rules of this thread.

I'm happy to talk to you via PM. I will even consider joining you in a brief conversation in the other thread, but not here.

[Zetetic]

11.28 onwards, here.

Cheers.  Mention of Corbyn on rail is from around 14:10 to 15:30: meeting with unions re Southern and advocating nationalisation seems to be the sum of it.

(Video not accessible from UK IPs, unfortunately, as Yesno notes.)

[TrenterPercenter]

It's interesting that you mention Richard Murphy. He's someone I've had a lot of time for, who really understands tax avoidance and the economic arguments. Initially he seemed to be active in the Corbyn camp, but has now walked away and is a critic. The most recent thing I read from him argued that Corbyn is veering back towards a balanced budget, austerity lite type of position because they're afraid of the Labourspend too much meme, even though austerity has massively increased the deficit, which was caused by bank bailouts in the first place.

Yes this is true I followed Murphy for sometime prior to Corbyn being on the scene. 

This is actually an old argument between Marx's theories and Keynesian economic theories.  Can you really govern by just controlling the money supply? What is the effect of changing internal monetary policy in global markets? I can see arguments for and and against Murphy's view but I agree which his assessment that central banks can be used as investment banks.

I have no doubt Corbyn and McDonnell agree the same, only disagree on how to get there.  I explained in the other thread that McDonnell is not going to go for austerity lite as is patently obvious.  He is in fact just lying to combat the "labour wrecked the economy line" he reserves the right to borrow as much as he likes for non-day to day spending i.e. they will can invest heavily in infrastructure which is the opposite of austerity.


Politicians lie i'm not sure why when McDonnell does it, it suddenly becomes a big deal.  Osborne lied, continually for 6 years no-one batted an eyelid.

[mook]

TFM, please don't post here. The above is innocuous, but you will be unable to control yourself---and then neither will anyone else. Barry has been very clear that you are to respect the rules of this thread.

I'm happy to talk to you via PM. I will even consider joining you in a brief conversation in the other thread, but not here.

yes TFM get out of this thread. NOW! scram

[HappyTree]

McDonnell's been lying? Oh dear. What did he lie about? I've liked him up to this point but I can't condone anyone lying about stuff, no matter what side of the fence they're on.

[NoSleep]

It's explained in the same post where you saw it mentioned.

I explained in the other thread that McDonnell is not going to go for austerity lite as is patently obvious.  He is in fact just lying to combat the "labour wrecked the economy line" he reserves the right to borrow as much as he likes for non-day to day spending i.e. they will can invest heavily in infrastructure which is the opposite of austerity.

[mook]

cripes! no need to fire off negs mate, i was only trying to help. i consider myself to be the middle ground between tfm's odd blend of perma-posting lunacy & the head in the sand stance that the fervent friend's of jeremy have adopted as a way to cope. think of me as an ambassador of commonsense in a world gone loopy.

[Buelligan]

McDonnell's been lying? Oh dear. What did he lie about? I've liked him up to this point but I can't condone anyone lying about stuff, no matter what side of the fence they're on.

I'm not mad keen on liars either but I like John McDonnell an awful lot so I'm going to give him a pass this time.

[TheFalconMalteser]

TFM, please don't post here. The above is innocuous, but you will be unable to control yourself---and then neither will anyone else. Barry has been very clear that you are to respect the rules of this thread.

I'm happy to talk to you via PM. I will even consider joining you in a brief conversation in the other thread, but not here.

Of course, if people want a place to talk positively about Corbyn go for it, but otherwise get a grip.  Enjoy.  Actually, it will be interesting to see some of you come to terms with failure without obvious bogeyman to rail against.

[HappyTree]

It's explained in the same post where you saw it mentioned.

I'm not seeing what he lied about in that quote. He mentions that he explained it in the other thread. When I said "finito" that means I will never open that other argumentative thread again. I do hope Neil can insist that this thread not be ruined by people desperate for their comments to disrupt other people.

[TrenterPercenter]

McDonnell's been lying? Oh dear. What did he lie about? I've liked him up to this point but I can't condone anyone lying about stuff, no matter what side of the fence they're on.

He's not lying. Well technically not unless he broke his own rule, and then it would come down to what you consider is not day-to-day spending.....Murphy says the rule allows him to borrow to build a hospital but not borrow for the staff to work in it.

this is where Marx comes in; what are the means of production not only? the hospital, equipment etc but also the "labour" of the workers therefore they are infrastructure from the relative position of the public.

Lie is too strong of a word really.

[HappyTree]

Ok Trenter, sorry but specifically what did he lie about? Nobody's saying!

[pancreas]

'The great austerity failure' as much as possible to try and get the message across the last 7 years have been a massive flop.

I agree with this. This is one thing the right has been so much better at. General hard-nosed strategy. You don't have to give that up to be a good socialist---the communist manifesto is a good example of boiling down radical difficult ideas into something eminently digestible.

I'm even more concerned with Labour's current campaign strategy---particularly given the Copeland by-election. In principle they have a really good chance to show what the increased membership can do and conceivably even win. They have coffers stuffed to the brim with funds they can use. Unfortunately, in my experience of the grass roots party and the people involved during recent council elections, I don't know if they have the correct approach. The door-knocking is reasonably well-coordinated, but there's no real attempt to proselytise on the door-step. In Newcastle, I have never seen a Labour stall set out in Northumberland Street, though there have been some (generally not well-attended) rallies around Grey's Monument. The leaflets were not at all targeted to the area, and in Copeland this will be extremely important. There should be advertising boards up right now, but I bet there aren't. All this nitty-gritty is essential to get right, and the Tories absolutely do. Partly this is what I hope Momentum will help with.

Incidentally, this shouldn't have anything to do with Corbyn. There should be people in the NEC etc who are responsible for this. This kind of logistical thing is not his purview (and I would guess he'd be crap at it).

[TrenterPercenter]

Ok Trenter, sorry but specifically what did he lie about? Nobody's saying!

This is in the context of Richard Murphy's falling out with him.

in a nutshell.

Murphy says you shouldn't aim for a balanced budget or a "fiscal rule" there is no need to, investment is good and breaking that rule as long as it is sensible investment is fine.

McDonnell says no we must live within our means and have a fiscal rule which he says is maintain levels of day to day spending, but separates non-day to day spending i.e. public investment from this.

Murphy doesn't consider paying staff public investment - i'll wager McDonnell does therefore he I suppose isn't being upfront in saying public investment accounts for paying wages in public investments.  It is bit more complicated than this but that in essence is my take on it all.

They are both right in their views (it is possible to have two different paths to a better tomorrow) and both wrong in their criticisms of each other (weirdly) Murphy perhaps being a little bit purist in the sense that he himself doesn't honestly believe McDonnell is planning to build empty hospitals....


https://medium.com/@james.meadway/richard-murphy-and-fiscal-credibility-rule-a-reply-156e701fb850#.u47an4ty0
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/08/04/john-ncdonnells-fiscal-rule-a-final-note/

[Zetetic]

I think it's also about whether the five-year rule is long enough to permit proper counter-cyclical spending and the ambiguity of "day-to-day" (when the point of the five years bit is surely that it's absolutely fine to borrow to to pay expenses from one day to the next, so long as you have a plan to pay this back within five years). (Edit: Noting also that any such rule relies on forecasting being worth anything.)

I can't see on what basis you could possibly argue that the majority of staff expenditure wouldn't be recurring expenditure rather than capital expenditure investment. (I mean it's a neat idea that you could perhaps argue around training and experience that you are developing a loosely attached asset of a sort.)



For reference:

We believe that governments should not need to borrow to fund their day-to-day spending.

And that is why we would commit to always eliminating the deficit on current spending in five years, as part of a strategy to target balance on current spending over a target five-year period.

While there are exceptional times when shocks from the private sector mean that government has to step in to help, everybody knows that if you're putting the rent on the credit card month after month, things needs to change.

Alongside this, we recognise the need for investment which raises the growth rate of our economy by increasing productivity as well as stimulating demand in the short term.

That is why our target for eliminating the deficit excludes investment.

Source.

[Funcrusher]

I feel that using phrases like putting the rent on the credit card are part if the problem we have - the economy of a nation isn't the same as a household pantry money, because spending affects income. I saw Richard Murphy speak after the Cuntolition arrived and he explained why austerity would tank the economy, reducing tax take and increasing the benefit bill, thus increasing the deficit, which is exactly what happened.

The banks saddled us with a huge debt, but no one seems to remember or care. How much if what they owe us have they paid back? No one seems to care.

Osbourne, having come in talking about how great a threat the deficit was, has increased it hugely. No one seems to care.

Meanwhile the headline on one of the Tory rags the other day showed one immigrant without a passport being allowed in. How much will this cost us, by comparison, even if he and others claim benefits. But this is where we're at now, with no real counter narrative.

[Johnny Yesno]

I feel that using phrases like putting the rent on the credit card are part if the problem we have

Yes, I think that's worse than the little red book incident.

[Replies From View]

Hopefully he's using that language in order to turn it around later.