Labour supporters may be ignorant.

Annie I was not saying any untruths about you and I'm taken aback that you should think this of me. I simply asked you why you find it hard to believe a costed manifesto? Isn't it logical to think you prefer the status quo in this case? I assure you that no offence was intended and I hope my posting history on GN backs me up.

I await a reply, I will not accept untruths about me , I do not lie and expect the same courtesy in return

Wilma, when have I ever said I believe anything the present government has said?

Annie where is the logic in not believing a costed manifesto, but believing in the current government which has revised forecast after forecast, reneged on promise after promise, brought in policy after policy not even in its manifesto? I too lived through the 70s and I felt more secure under a Labour government than I ever have under a Tory government.

Yes, Annie we need to borrow to invest in the country to stimulate the economy. The current approach isn't exactly a roaring success is it?

Remembering their manifesto is no problem, believing it? difficult

Have you seen how much the Tory government has increased the debt by borrowing? More each month of austerity. And nothing done with it. Labour have promised to borrow to invest, which will have returns in both economic and social matters. And their manifesto was fully costed, if you remember.

Trisher thinks the seventies were better than now , no, there were no food banks, not as many benefits,

And borrow billions which will be around the necks of our grandchildren

And once again Trisher you are spouting WORST CASE SCENARIOS, as if every other person in the UK knew this sort of awful deprivation and as though it is the personal fault of government.

It isn't.

But Day6 it is the government's fault. This government has been in power for 7 years now and our incomes are at pre2008 levels. Millions of people in this country do know that level of deprivation and some of them are 2nd generation. The government is responsible for every single decision it makes.

This government does not have the political will to -

1. Provide the money for the NHS to improve services.
2. Fund the building thousands of social housing homes.
3. Fund infrastructure outside of London.
4. Fund Social Care
5. Raise Income Tax even 1p to fund some of these much needed things.

I could go on. Every single decision taken by this government means it lacks the political will to do something else. Things could be different if the government had the political will to make it happen. It does not.

That is why I hope the Labour Party does get into power because then we might see some decisions being made that help the disadvantaged and poorer people who are the worst affected by the decisions made by this government.

Corbyn's promises may well tempt many "ordinary" voters , but paying for them could be another matter.

Yes, humptydumpty, because there have always been people who will be on that lowest rung of the ladder in terms of income. I lived in darned cardigans and hid from the rent man.

It's not desirable to have to make ends meet but so many of our generation, and those after us, as Annie has just mentioned, know what is is to make ends meet on a meagre income. It's hard.

Aggressive Labour/Momentum followers may imagine it is outrageous to struggle, (and they'll blame the government) but it's not a new phenomenon, unfortunately.

In making a case for the left they will ALWAYS use worse case scenarios, not best case ones, like working classes making head way and having realistic goals and aspirations, even on low incomes.

Between the gutter and Mayfair life there is a huge middle ground of people who want their concerns addressed too, but no, see how many times food banks are used in left wing contributors arguments as if they are the norm.

I wish that no one had to use food banks but how do you completely eradicate poverty? There are measure a government can take to raise money for services but even then there are those who will struggle no matter how much intervention is provided. That's a fact of life sadly.

Those people are not the norm. Their plight needs addressing but so do SO many others.

Pray tell what political ideology completely wipes out struggle? Where did it happen and when?

As it is now?

A very fair post Day6.

The seventies bring back memories of strikes, it was not the blissful decade some seem here to think it was, it led to 1983 followed by the yuppies decade . The young who think Momentum-Corbyn is the answer will learn the hard way.

I found the seventies hard, had to save for a house phone , it was needed because daughter 2 suffered badly with ear infections, it was buy the phone or take my daughters to the kiosk, rented a TV, a reconditioned one, read the electric meter every night to work out how much electricity had cost that day, either pay the bill or get cut off. It just meant balancing every penny every day, never got into debt, but it was a struggle. This is how the poorer in society lived .

"At least in the 70s families were not living for years in B&B accommodation, or relying on food banks to eat lemongrove."

And once again Trisher you are spouting WORST CASE SCENARIOS, as if every other person in the UK knew this sort of awful deprivation and as though it is the personal fault of government.

It isn't.

There weren't food banks in the 1970s. Poor people, who existed then, surprise surprise, went hungry or lived on meagre meals.

In the '70s social housing was often a disgrace. People lived in damp and draughty homes.

Neither of the above is desirable but we do have more social awareness now.

We also have people who cannot manage money, however much they are given. A former colleague of mine works with the unemployed and runs courses regarding how to budget and live within your means (something many of us older people have to do too.) She is shocked by the way those with little prioritise, especially when feeding children is not their priority.

We have to look at society too and appreciate that some people will need benefits and advocates for life. Some people just cannot cope for a myriad of reasons. I am sympathetic but this has always been the case and advocates like my colleague exist.

Many left-wingers who contribute tend to pick this sector as being typical when it isn't. It exists and in a fair world it wouldn't, but I don't see Corbyn and co giving anyone a fair world. Unless managing the country's finances is a priority many people struggling now will fare even worse in years to come. Those who work want to see value for money too as far as the way their taxes are spent.

Momentum also use worst case scenarios to promote Labour and bash the government. They are losing the support of the working classes who also know struggle but also aspire to better things, as do most people, even in the lowest paid jobs.

I heard someone saying on BBC yesterday that most of the doorstep campaigners for Labour at the last election were Momentum members.
I did a little door-knocking last June and those campaigning were ordinary Labour members. They were all older people, lifelong Labour supporters (and mainly teachers or retired teachers!).
But I don't live in a young urban area - there might be different Labour membership profile elsewhere I suppose.

At least in the 70s families were not living for years in B&B accommodation, or relying on food banks to eat lemongrove.
Still if that makes you feel better.

I agree with you yggdrasil. I would rather have someone who cares than someone who doesn’t any day.

Or we could be taken back to the 1970’s?

Why does anyone think that there is such division in the LP about Corbyn being Leader?
There was division at the start lemongrove partly to do with who runs the party, the PLP or the grassroots, most have now come round to the grassroots. There are of course a small number of vociferous people who continue to deny the reality and want something else. Arguably the equivalent of those who opposed Blair when he led the country to war.

I am so tired of trying to explain the policies are not ultra-left and nowhere like the equivalent of the 1945 government that made growing up in the 50s and 60s so much better. As for the Unions I would love them to have more power, perhaps then they could act against the iniquitous zero hours contracts, which ruin people's lives, and take us back to the 1930s, when my grandfather queued at the dock gates in the hope of being given work to feed his family.

Yes Luckygirl I do realise that (your last paragraph) but think that McDonnell would go much further down the borrowing line than anyone else has done in the past within a Labour Government( when we are not ‘at war’.)
Why does anyone think that there is such division in the LP about Corbyn being Leader?
If anyone wants an ultra left Government and the return of the immense power of the Unions influencing everything that they do ( the government) then fine.....but not fine for anyone else, including a good number of Labour MP’s and voters.

Spot on yggdrasil

Huffpost is usually fairly unbiassed, but do notice this article was written 2 months ago before the Conferences.

As to the rest, I am fed up with the slur that Corbyn and McDonnell are Marxists. They are in fact Keynsians, an economic plan that worked very well for half a century before Thatcher decided on a different model.

And many people have not turned away from Labour, a few Blairites maybe, but many more (like me) have rejoined seeing a return to traditional values

Yes Day6 - I was not referring to you personally.

lemongrove - economists have long argued about the best way to manage national economies - the borrow and spend on improving infrastructure and employment opportunities is a legitimate theory. National budgets are different from personal or family budgets and are not managed in the same way.

I do wonder about people who write articles like Nik Cohen's. It isn't factual simply a biased diatribe. Has he actually spoken to a real Marxist or Revolutionary Socialist ? They have very little in common with any members of the Labour Party. They are interesting in that they sometimes have knowledge of historical events and a perception of what happened that is sometimes at odds with the accepted accounts. This ridiculous idea that the Labour party is in some way a communist organisation is simply a piece of right wing propaganda.