Jeremy's ten points

I see we are getting ( very slowly) towards the end of The Ten Commandments.
house building is already going on in this country, nothing is waiting for Corbyn to take power in 2020 ( should that ever happen!) Hundreds have been built in my village and surrounding villages are getting whatever the infrastructure can take, this is happening everywhere, right here and now.It has to happen, the last really big house building took place in the 60's and 70's.This not only provides homes that are much needed, will then keep house prices stable, and creates jobs all through the building industry, and the added knock on effect of people buying carpets, curtains, furniture etc.

It sounds like the BMA will work with Corbyn on healthcare.

www.onmedica.com/NewsArticle.aspx?id=56a6b080-b2c6-4ff4-86bf-126c48c40a44

The difference is, roses, that Corbyn is talking about building council houses to rent and capping private rent, not making profits for big building companies.

Obviously, Gracesgran is going too fast for you, roses. She has put up two more since housing.

MargaretX - you make this interesting point:

If you are going to tax all those with money they will leave the UK and their factories will close eventually. that kind of socialism has not worked anywhere in the world.

This is the same point continually made about increasing taxes. The factories you mention - be it steel, engineering (electrical, mechanical and electronics), and not just nuclear submarines and JCBs - have all been closed down anyway.

These 'growth opportunities' in manufacturing have already been outsourced to numerous foreign countries where wages are lower.

We then import them back. The closure of the UK's diverse manufacturing base was achieved between 1980 and 1997 - most having gone by then, there was little else the "wealth creators" could do, except shuffle money around in "The City".

On the topic of the rich contributing more to the tax pot as an excuse for the wealth inequality in the UK, that really doesn't stack up as an argument in favour of the present approach.

Back in the 1960s and 70s, the employee on "median earnings" was paying between 23% and 27%, and whilst tax rates for the "higher earners" was between 50% and 80% - the overall tax burden seems to have been shared more equally.

The proportion of gross income for median and higher earners was closer together than it is today.

I remember paying around 23% in income tax, and then NI contributions on top of that - we had at least some industry around then, that we generated wealth from ourselves.

Why did it change I wonder? Is it better now?

The sad thing is so many organisation could well have reached tipping point before their is a change of government Jen

Number 8: PROTECTION AT WORK
No zero hours contracts, strong collective bargaining to stamp out workplace injustice.

What's that Djen,' she has put up two more' is GG in the building trade now?

Joke!

Sorry out of order but a reply to Soon to be's response to my comment yesterday about renationalising the railways. I am copying a post I have just made on the other Corbyn thread.

Below is from the BBC magazine of March 2015 about the East Coast Mainline.

'A rare experiment in public ownership has come to an end.
This weekend East Coast main line train services passed from public to private hands. But is it realistic to talk about the rail network ever being renationalised?
A rare experiment in public ownership has come to an end.
Supporters say that Directly Operated Railways, a state-run body, rescued the East Coast main line after the collapse in 2009 of National Express's franchise. The firm had been unable to deliver promised revenues to the government.
Directly Operated Railways handed a billion pounds in premiums to the Treasury during its period in charge.'

So, a very recent example of a state run body making a profit.

My post of 8.41am wasnt worded very well. I dont doubt that there are occasions when it has been done, and that one appears to have been done very well indeed, but I will still say that it is rare.

I would like it not to be rare.
And I used to be very in favour of private companies running things, up until the 80s when workers' good working conditions started to go out of the window.
I still favour private companies running things [not necessarily health, water, education and energy] if things are run well with no exploitation.

What do you think of Corbyn funding the spending required to fulfil his vision by doing another round of Quantative Easing?

Different sort of QE.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015/08/17/the-political-economy-of-peoples-quantitative-easing/

Number 9:

EQUALITY FOR ALL
A society that accepts no barriers to everyone's talents and contribution. An end to scapegoating of migrants.

I would think it is hard to disagree with this one although, no doubt, some will.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/17/dual-nationality-passports-eu-migrants-fear-brexit-european-union-referendum

Scapegoating of migrants is on the agenda at the moment.

DJ

I posted a response re QE or PQE on the another Corbyn thread.

You didn't. You posted a criticism of Richard Murphy.
What's wrong with him being connected with the Joseph Rowntree Foundation?

Fair point.

I replied to my own post as it would have been a case of 'another' repeat, of a repeat of a repeat eventually and people are weary of reading the same thing over.

It happens when you post and then see another thread is discussing the same things.

And the last one ...

A LIFE-LONG NATIONAL EDUCATION SERVICE
For decent skills and opportunities throughout our lives; universal childcare, abolishing student fees and restoring grants, and funding adult skills training throughout our lives.

Good for the individual and good for the country in my view.

Yes, I agree.
Do any of the other prospective leaders talk about education?

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2015/08/18/paul-mason-gets-the-significance-of-peoples-qe/