Concern within the Labour Party that Jeremy Corbyn is doing well

whitewave explained that she and a large group of others are following Keynes.
I briefly looked him up.
That and I took her word for it. That was good enough for me.

I could I suppose discuss this all night if I could be bothered.

You can look up Keynes theory and compare it if you want to.
I am not going to right now. I might tomorrow if I can be bothered.

[I am pretty sure this is not going to satisfy you either].

Alea. Don't hold your breath.

David Miliband is more useful in his new job as president of the IRC, working in Greece and North Africa.

The only person that might be able to put a spanner in the works of 20 years of Conservative gov would be David Milliband. On the one hand I hope he stays in USA and on the other I think we need a credible opposition and it seems unlikely that would be the case if JC got the labour leadership.

(Flutterby, fully paid up member of silent majority)

No, I asked you to explain your comment about Keynes-you're the person who studied Economics, not me, I just asked you to expand on it.

Just seen Prescott being interviewed about Corbyn, and he seemed quite delighted. He wanted the debate opened up, and Corbyn is certainly doing that for him.

True Jen. It really does need discussion at this point so that every argument is prepared before the next election.

Being run by the state doesn't necessarily mean from the centre. Local government could do it.
Royal mail has really deteriorated since the government started selling bits off and separating the individual functions. Anyone know when their mail is collected from the box? It tells you that the last collection is at 9 a.m.
When is your delivery now? It's a way to improve efficiency, which is company speak for getting rid of staff. If Royal Mail is to do its job properly it relies on people.
The worst person for doing this was Alan Johnson.

I don't think it necessarily needs to be actually run by the state though Jen. We need to look at updating what "ownership by the state" actually means and, as we discussed in the NHS thread (I think it was there) you could franchise to Not for Profit companies. The main thing is to ensure the control and overview is in the hands of the state and that the profit goes back into the system and ensures fairly paid employees, with good health and safety, pensions, etc.

It's just taking an original principle and modernising how you achieve it. So actually less "going backwards" as some have said, than creating a modern version of rich Barons and serfs, which is what the Conservatives are doing.

Royal Mail as well, I agree with; as he says, it's a natural monopoly.

press.labour.org.uk/post/124926291219/ministers-have-covered-up-the-extent-of-network

This is why the railways need to be brought back to public ownership.

whitewave's post of 12.25pm yesterday explains it Alea.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/09/jeremy-corbyn-denies-would-bring-back-clause-iv

Well we know why don't we the usual right wing scramble to trash anything the left says by stretching the truth sometimes to the extent that it is unrecognisable from what was really said. Of course we also have a faction of the Labour party also gunning for JC.
My MP is voting for Liz Kendal.

Burnham also wants rail brought back into public hands. He talks of waiting for the franchises to lapse, then taking them over, so it does not cost.
Burnham puts it across as his own idea, whereas we know who thought of it first.
So why isn't Burnham accused of wanting to bring back clause lV?

Where did that come from. Right Jen

All the comments on the radio this morning seemed to be saying that JC is talking about a return to Clause IV. What he actually said in the article in the Indy appears to be:

"Mr Corbyn told the IoS: "I think we should talk about what the objectives of the party are, whether that's restoring the Clause IV as it was originally written or it's a different one, but I think we shouldn't shy away from public participation, public investment in industry and public control of the railways.

"I'm interested in the idea that we have a more inclusive, clearer set of objectives. I would want us to have a set of objectives which does include public ownership of some necessary things such as rail."

That is not saying a return to Clause IV. It is a discussion including whether that should be the case. I was concerned when I heard the comments but that still works for me.

Still hoping soontobe will see my question and answer it

"Ring"? Wrong? Right?

That sounds ring to me Jen. If you have signed up before the 12th I mean.

You can be a registered supporter from any country, TriciaF.

Am I bothered about economics? Yes
Am I bothered about economic theory and opinions? Only if they go in the direction I want to go to, and they are workable and cost effective

Since JC agrees with Keynes, and Keynes supporters keep close to the theory, and because I feel like a pupil at your school, then no

I have never studied Economics, indeed I am less familiar with John Maynard Keynes than his equally famous brother Milton, I wonder if you could expand on what you mean by your last point ("Keynes supporters keep close to the theory") please Soontobe?

Should add that given your Evangelical background, at first sight I thought you meant Jesus!! oops!

Isn't it a postal election?
You have until the glorious 12th to pay £3 by card. I think if you are a British citizen you can vote, TriciaF.
Voting papers sent out on 14th and a month to send them back?
Something like that anyway. It's on the Labour party website.

And me. I think that a lot of us left particularly after the Middle East debacle.

Thanks - it's too late now as I'm back in France. Unless I go over especially for the election.
I do hope Corbyn is elected, he seems to be our only real hope of leading an effective opposition at the moment. I lapsed some time ago when the party started to drift to the right.