Labour Leadership watch

Richard Murphy has just written this, whitewave.

"So, all the legal and structural arguments for People’s Quantitative Easing fall away: it is already authorised and legal.

So now the question is, why not do it? We still have no effective monetary policy in the UK and no chance of it in the foreseeable future: what might be considered ‘normal interest rates’ are likely to be a very long way off. In that case what is the reason for not doing QE assuming, as is true that we have a) unemployment b) low productivity and so c) under-usage of capacity which only needs the availability of credit (which is, note, the reason for QE) to bring it into use?

And why not also do it when a) we have increased market uncertainty b) a threat to export growth as a result of the China crash and c) a significant new risk of deflation which we need to do at all costs?

And finally, right across the country – in every constituency – I guarantee projects that are ‘shovel ready’ can be found. If I put out the appeal to local authorities and health authorities I think we can be sure they could line up with:

Extensions that are needed
Repairs needing doing
Insulation projects
Small road schemes
Local transport infrastructure improvements
Bandwidth improvements
Houses needing building
PFI projects they would love to drop
New schools
GP surgeries

And then ask universities and you’d get:

Capital for research projects and joint ventures
New applied research e.g. on renewables

And if you want to be really broad minded:

Create a small business venture capital fund.

Why not do all that now, when it is legal, authorised and could be managed by a new Nation al Investment Bank under existing BoE authority from the Treasury right now.

I really want to know why not."

Sometimes I wish he'd just shut up and not give Osborne ideas.

soontobe It sounds like you quite admire Donald Trump. What "difficult issues" are you referring to?

Are you aware that Trump recently said:

"When Mexico sends its people, they are not sending the best ..... they are sending people who have got lots of problems and they are bringing those problems. They are bringing drugs, they are bringing crime ..."

"The US has become a dumping ground for everyone's problems"

He also called into question Obama's right to stand for the presidency, claiming that he had not been born in the USA and queried Obama's academic record.

Others have pointed out that (1) modern America (having finished off a significant proportion of the indigenous Native American population) was built on inward immigration and (2) in fact the world has been the dumping ground for US economic policy - the NAFTA trade agreements opened the border to cheap American (government subsidised) corn which had a devastating impact on Mexican local agriculture and substantially increased unemployment levels.

Along with Trump's racist remarks, he is also on record as calling: a female lawyer "disgusting" for requesting a Court break so that she could pump breast milk for her baby; referring on different occasions to certain women as "dog", "bimbo", "pig", and suggesting that a female interviewer's rigorous questioning of him was due to the fact that she was menstruating.

He is not particularly popular in Scotland where, despite the opposition of locals and various conservation and wildlife organisations, he developed a site of special scientific interest as a golf resort and promised to provide 6,000 jobs, 200 of which have actually materialised. (Alex Salmond doesn't come out of that very well either).

It appears that his rants are upsetting increasing numbers of Americans but I find it worrying that there are still significant numbers who like what he stands for.

Sorry, I seem to have gone "off piste".

Hopefully if he does get the republican nomination, people will see him for what he is, Eloethan.
If it turns out to be a choice between him or Jeb Bush, that would be a hard one.

Good post Jen (22.47) - an interesting read.

At least with Turnips track record with women there's no chance of Sarah Palin having any power. I hope.

For roses, just in case she wants to go.

www.thepeoplesassembly.org.uk/demonstrate_at_tory_party_conference

There's a comedy gig there, too. It's at Manchester. I might encourage my granddaughter to spill red wine this year.

Well as this thread has a lot of discussion, repremand for my posts can I say this.

23rd Aug: I posted sentences such as: What would a Marxist/Far Left government put into place. Also. I am not surprised how many GN'ers who have declared they are voting for Corbyn obviously share his Marxist/Socialist/Communist, CALL IT WHAT YOU WANT views. I am surprised at the rise of the Far Left and I worry about about that as much as I do about the Far Right of Politics but I accept that is a personal opinion.

A post responded to that by saying labelling everyone with left wing views as being communist or Marxist is one that was used by MacCarthy.

23rd Aug I posted , Corbyn does have Marxist/Communist/Far left views, the same as the BNP and UKIP has Far Right views. That is how it is , if they were not Far Left views held by Corbyn he would be as Vanilla as the other 3 contenders. I again said Marxist/Communist/Socialism , CALL IT WHAT YOU WANT to satisfy your political stance.

Subsequent posts have made accusations of childish name calling, arrogance, thread spoiling, sarcasm, and apparent indignation the use of the words Marxist/Communist /Trotskyite ( that was the Guardian on Boothroyd by the way), and Socialist.

Marxist. Some such as Durhamjen, Eloethan and others seem to have taken acception to my use of the word Marxist in a personal manner and have clearly indicated I have upset them

I apologise to any poster I have offended but I will post words from a link Trisher put forward on the other Corbyn thread, the one that has caused all this bitterness. 'Great analysis of what constitutes Marxism and how it relates to the candidates'.

"If by Marxist, we mean he supports Marx's ideas that:-

• Capitalism leads to the alienation of groups of people.
• That under Capitalism , segments of society exploit other segments of society.
• That Capitalism cannot maintain the living standards of the population.
• That industry should move towards co-operative ownership.
• That the country should focus more on what satisfies human needs , rather than on private profits.

Then YES Corbyn IS A MARXIST , same as Liz Kendall, Yvette Cooper and Andy Burnham.

If you mean Leninism/Marxism that depends on the particular aspect. If we take the social aspects of :-

• Support for a Universal Social Welfare System.
• Improving public education and health systems.
• Provision of child care.
• Provision of benefits.
• Ending exploitation of women.

Then Corbyn does support those as does the entire Labour Party and some members of the Tory Party.

It further goes on to describe Marxism as a broad church of beliefs ranging from the very fringes of the Far Left to aspects of the One Nation Tory vision. It does give valid description of aspects of Marxism Corbyn DOES NOT subscribe to read the link for those.

So I am sorry if I have upest Durhamjen, AB, GG Eloethan and any other GN'er who feels I have misjudged them by linking them in what they viewed as in a derogatory manner by associating them with Mkarxism/Socialism but I genuinely thought those were your thoughts too.

I understand the use of the word Communist , albeit used in conjunction with 'Call It Whatever You Like' has also caused offence so I will apologise for that too.

However I will continue to say Corbyn holds Far Left/Marxist/Communist/Socialist VIEWS.

Why can you not call him a democratic socialist, which is what he says he is?

DJ

@>#%@&+>@># <>

Sorry, dj, I read that you said your grandson thought Obama should be made president for ever and that you agreed with him. That's what you wrote in your post. I compared that to Mugabe and other dictators who cannot be voted out, which is how I interpreted 'forever'. Even with a rule change the likelihood of Obama being president forever is zero and even if the likelihood were not zero, power corrupts as you know so I found the forever idea scary.

If my grandson said something similar I would explain about the corruptibility of power and how damaging it is.

No thanks Djen,for your kindly link, I would never go to anything with the title of 'People's Assembly'.

POGS, regardless of anybody on here and their far left views, you are correct IMO that Corbyn does indeed have a Marxist/Communist/Socialist mindset/views, and I don't imagine many other people think otherwise from what we are hearing.Which is why the Labour Party( in Parliament) are so anxious to be rid of him.

pogs as a fascist you have every right to describe the social democratic grans on here as Marxists. However, this does not make you correct, nor does it assist in developing the argument, which is a shame because I am sure if you used a more measured tone in your contribution would be welcome and in some cases would be accepted as valid. Name calling and calling the professed social Democrates Marxists is not only misinformed, but as silly as me calling you a fascist.

WW, what an exceedingly pompous post!

A bit of lighten up words are needed....... Bring on The People's Assembly
Comedy gig.

rose you have simply validated my argument that name calling does not forward the argument.

Eloethan. Yes I do to an extent.

Becuase he seems to have access to an awful lot of moiney, he is free, or at least freer to say what he really thinks, because he does not have any or many sponsors with all their vested interests to contend with.

His ideas do need exploring in depth though. And I suspect some of them are not viable.
I am also not sure how far I agree with some of them.

But he is certainly a breath of fresh air to the politics over there.

It could just turn out to be a lot of hot air though.

What is this childish 'name calling' thing? I merely pointed out the pomposity of the post you wrote.

It is a shame that some posters are getting heated, when they didnt used to be.

I think personal integrity is more important than debating.

Taking a breather from the thread may be a good idea, even if ideas are spouted that may be seen to be way off mark.

I just dont like to see those who may be talking the truth, hurt themselvs in some way.

As you wish.

dj.

If GO using something from 2012, I suppose that could be called now, but I am scratching my head a bit about that.

Also my knowledge of QE is ropey, but what you linked to, I wouldnt call QE.

Nor is bank lending in my book.

www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetarypolicy/pages/qe/default.aspx

The link is qe.

I wasnt meaning you whitewave.

Soontobe, your remarks are as ever, appreciated, if you need a breather from the thread, then go ahead.