Sensible Discussion on Labour Leadership hopefuls MK 2

However, Maizie is right. Taxes don't fund government spending. The UK government, as an issuer of a sovereign currency, can literally print as much money as it likes. Most of the money will return to the Treasury, unless it's squirreled overseas in offshore accounts and/or imports exceed exports. When sterling is weak and interest rates are low, it's a good time to issue money because imports are more expensive and are likely to decrease, therefore less money is likely to be spent on imports and the money paid back to investors is low. Some private individuals get rich on public debt.

Government 'debt' mostly takes the form of bonds and gilts. These are people's savings vehicles. Money withdrawn from the economy for the present but potentially to be spent and returned to the government by way of taxes. The costs of servicing the interest payable on bonds is currently negligible. In Germany people are buying bonds with a negative interest rate; but they are a safe place to save because savers are guaranteed to get their money back.

The only money in the economy which doesn't eventually end up back in 'government coffers' is savings and the 'black economy'. and, of course, the stuff that is squirrelled off into overseas tax havens. Of course, if it comes back to be spent in the UK it will be taxed in the usual way through sales taxation.

But, for our purposes; we who live in the 'real' economy, government spending is more than desirable as it circulates in the economy and stimulates small business growth; the businesses where people spend their wages. It also benefits larger business through government procurement as everything used by publicly funded institutions, schools, hospitals, police etc. has to be bought from private enterprises.

I do not understand how people can't understand this...

Cunco You have to look a bit deeper than just 'money supply'. Many economists would argue that what has been taught in Unis is outdated or mistaken. I would absolutely agree that 'money' is a very complex issue, particularly when it comes to foreign exchange and involves credit ratings etc. Basically, it seems to me to be a big confidence trick

A bit of a hoo ha going on over the delay in ballot papers being received by members isn't there.

Lisa Nandy, has written to General Secretary Jenny Formby demanding to know why so many members are yet to receive ballot papers.

Whether it be good intent or bad behind the problem it will obviously give cause for concern.

I read on Labour List there is a delay in ballot papers reaching
the party members who joined when the leadership election was announced

POGS in regard to your post @13:12 today, whatever positions the members of momentum or affiliated activists from the trade unions have achieved in the Labour Party they have been elected to those positions as per the rules and constitution drawn up by the Labour Party itself.

Therefore, there has been no "takeover" of the party as you state in your above-mentioned post, for if the majority in any of the ballots had not wished to see those persons in those positions they obviously would not have been elected.

I would also strongly defend my statement in an earlier post in his thread that the present problems in regard to the relationship between the trade unions and the Parliamentary Labour Party are not born out of any part of a left v right battle.

Without a doubt what shattered the little respect that affiliated activists retained for the Parliamentary Party was finally lost when a number of Labour MPs stated that should Rebecca Long-Bailey win the leadership election they would resign the Labour whip and sit as independent MPs in Parliament.

Therefore the above is not about left v right in the Parliamentary Party, it is about accepting the basic democracy that will be exercised by hundreds of thousands of Party members and affiliated members in this leadership election.

In the above, is it any wonder that many shop-floor trade union activists are now feeling that the affiliation between their organisations and this existing Labour Party has now "run its course" and their member's political levy could well be better expended on a new or totally reorganised political body.

Accepting basic democracy is most definitely what it is all about.

Democracy is a much maligned and misunderstood concept IMO.

Its quite difficult to have effective democracy without a credible opposition.

Grandad

We will have to differ on this one, I see it totally as left / right factions and mentioned the use of terminologies such as ' Tory Light', ' Traitors', ' Blairites' which are only used to push the point they are not of the Corbyn/Momentum faction.

You said:-

'Without a doubt what shattered the little respect that affiliated activists retained for the Parliamentary Party was finally lost when a number of Labour MPs stated that should Rebecca Long-Bailey win the leadership election they would resign the Labour whip and sit as independent MPs in Parliament.'
-

You have said this before but I don' t know of any MP who has stated they would resign the Labour Whip if Long Bailey wins.

I am not arguing the point but I will ask you again ' who are they '? I apologise if you have answered that question which I have asked you before and I missed your reply. I genuinely want to understand this allegation which is very interesting and knowing their names is part of the ability to understand.

Galaxy, perhaps if a complete affiliation break is made between the trades unions and this excuse for an organised political party, that will bring forward a credible opposition party from within the TUC.

In that, that this Labour Party should never have been allowed the autonomy it was given after it was born out of the trades unions all those years ago.

My opinion is that you are deluded if you think that 15 million people (or thereabouts) would vote for a political party based on the TUC Grandad.

The Labour Party has always been a much broader grouping than a trades union pressure group.

POGS, in regard to the MPs that are threatening to leave the Labour party if Rebbeca Long-Bailey is elected as leader, I believe the names were spoken of in the now defunct previous theead on this topic.

However, here in the below link is what Len McCluskey has stated to those MPs, and it is obvious that he is coming under pressure from the activists within Unite in regard to the behaviour of those MPs whose political Levy subscriptions are paid in support of.

Never been known previously for McCluskey to be so blunt on any matter I believe.

Link begins here:-
www.scotsman.com/news/politics/unite-boss-says-clear-out-now-labour-mps-threatening-quit-if-rebecca-long-bailey-becomes-leader-1396080

growstuff, perhaps I am as deluded as those that supported the Liberal Democrats at the last General Election in thinking they could win.

Now, what was it they won, eleven seats in total?

I think that no members of the Labour party or affiliate members need take advise from Lib Dem supporters on any matter based on the above happening.

I am not a lib dem supporter and I too have grave doubts about that proposition. Starting a new political party even with union support is almost impossible.

Galaxy in regard to your post @20:44 today, I believe that the trades unions are the only viable organisation(s) on the left of British politics who could set up and maintain a new political party.

Yes, many have tried and failed in the past when moving out of the Labour Party by way of lacking the resources necessary to successfully bring a new left-leaning plausible party into long term being.

The trades unions through the TUC would certainly not lack those resources, and like many, I now believe that this Parliamentary Labour Party is now so divided that it requires totally replacing in the interests of balance in British politics.

Grandad

No you did not provide names on the other thread, I had a look as I thought I might need to apologise to you. I cannot help but think there will still be no names coming forth.

In your link there is no mention of any MP's being named but
it does say in your link however :-

On Radio 5 Live's Piennar's Politics show this morning, he said: "If you want to give me some names then we can debate that with them.
--

I have to wonder if this is a genuine story or various people, commentators, those with an agenda, repeating gossip as they cannot ' name names'.

Maybe it's another Long Bailey campaign team attempt to garner votes for their preferred Leader?

Well, POGS, I am not about to go back through the last thread to find those names. I believe it was the normal, "undermining troublemakers" in the Parliamentary Labour Party that made those threats.

However, if you do not wish to believe what I and the media have stated and Len McCluskey has so vehemently condemned, so be it.

They now seem to have gone very quiet on the issue, perhaps in the realisation of what they may well have brought about.

I will sum up my thoughts on those MPs in one word, "BAST*RDS.

Grandad

You did not provide names on either the last thread or this one so it is hard to believe anybody who makes the accusation.

Feb 20th on this thread your answer to the question when I asked again who are the MP's being accused of ' resigning the whip' if Long Bailey became leader was -

' POGS, in regard to your post @10:21 today, several Red Top newspapers have carried the reports of Labour MPs resigning should Long-Bailey be elected as Labour leader. However, no names have been mentioned, but obviously, the press has been briefed by someone, and many within the movement will have names come to mind based on passed troubles caused in the Parliamentary party. '
--

That is my point, weeks of this story being repeated , again recently, there still remains no factual evidence to confirm it. Possibly it was/is gossip or the Long Bailey campaign team attempting to garner votes, who knows.

As for your saying -

' I will sum up my thoughts on those MPs in one word, "BAST*RDS.'

I might agree with you but who are they?

Pogs, in regard to your post @22:57 yesterday, here is a report from the Huffington Post that names Bermondsey and Old Southwark MP Neil Coyle as being one of those that is threatening to leave Parliamentary Labour Party if Long-Bailey Is elected as leader.

As the above took me less than five minutes to research, I feel that you should now place more of your own effort into looking up those involved in this threat rather than continually asking others to research your queries for you.

Although, supposedly working from home due to the current health crisis, I have to go into the office early this morning to meet one of our Assignment teams whose work schedule we have had to change due to the Coronavirus situation.

So, perhaps POGS, you will have furnished this forum with the names of other MPs supposedly threatening to quit the Labour party by the time of my return?

Whether this is a genuine threat or a bogus accusation by yet another faction in the Parliamentary Labour Party, I feel it adds to the weight of argument that this Parliamentary Labour Party is not fit for purpose and all support provided to it from affiliated organisations should be withdrawn and a new left-leaning political body brought into being.

A rather long link to the above is provided here:-

m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/mps-could-desert-labour-if-rebecca-long-bailey-wins-leadership_uk_5e3ae5bbc5b6b5fb438b4073/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9tLWh1ZmZpbmd0b25wb3N0LWNvLXVrLmNkbi5hbXBwcm9qZWN0Lm9yZy92L3MvbS5odWZmaW5ndG9ucG9zdC5jby51ay9hbXAvZW50cnkvbXBzLWNvdWxkLWRlc2VydC1sYWJvdXItaWYtcmViZWNjYS1sb25nLWJhaWxleS13aW5zLWxlYWRlcnNoaXBfdWtfNWUzYWU1YmJjNWI2YjVmYjQzOGI0MDczLz9hbXBfanNfdj1hMyZhbXBfZ3NhPTEmdXNxcD1tcTMzMUFRRktBR3dBU0ElM0Q&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACz9U8K-cpBkvephucYL8tJJN0BNwCJR_T0d5M8boHAYKAhKSJAreeT8grgxykIkrEZOGI3T_yeClYTWPYwk3WjJxghFQterNBxnj3rFFoj-GVtHp1Ys90HAnezWHVBCL2BrD2e3b1BdAW4rhugNUG10qjr0b0wGPO6DRbRlsz-8

Why do you think this new left leaning party would have more success than Corbyns labour?

This is what I don't understand, Galaxy and Grandad never addresses the issue.

Splitting the LP now would just guarantee decades of tory government. Why do that?

Political parties change over time. Look at what's happening in Germany, where the oldest party has almost disappeared, or at what happened to the old Liberal Party at the beginning of the twentieth century. The Labour Party is no different.

If factions within the Labour Party feel they can no longer operate a united front, it's inevitable they will split. It's possibly unstoppable. However, it seems to me, as an outsider, that there are factions within the Labour Party who want it to happen and are deluded enough to think they can win. I'm not sure what kind of battle they think they will win because it won't be a party which can win elections. The British public just isn't prepared to vote for a hard left, ideologically pure socialist government, dominated by the unions.

If those people within the Labour Party really care about the people they claim to represent, they need to look at ways they can defeat this Tory government through pragmatism and forget their ideological battle.

Maybe the Labour Party will split. In which case it will probably be at least a decade before an anti-Tory government wins power, although a force will emerge and it will win eventually. Goodness knows how much damage the Tories will have done by then. McCluskey and Corbyn will have long gone.

Grandad

It is not for me to produce facts as I have not repeatedly made the statement and I point out if you had not raised this point again so recently I would have dropped asking.

In your link the only named MP's are Neil Coyle, and Wes Streeting who I accept are not on the Corbynista faction of the Party.

When asked to presumably comment on the rumour by Huff Post, who did not provide facts, how the question was formatted to could lead to various answers.

MP Wes Streeting said ' he was sceptical any breakaway would materialise given the failure of the Independent Group, and that MPs saw shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer as the most likely winner not Long-Bailey.

MP Neil Coyle, who put the number “closer to a dozen”, told HuffPost UK: “Continuity Corbyn is a death knell for Labour' . told HuffPost “Division, factionalism and introspection will continue. Favouritism and bullying will continue. Anti-Semitism will continue. Failure in elections will continue.'

Coyle is probably correct.

The death knell is too strong a term as Labour will always be a Political Party unless a ' split ' does evolve, such as one you have described the Unions withdrawing funding for the Parliamentary Labour Party, giving rise to neither the PLP or Unions can lay claim to owning the Labour Party name as their sole domain.

' IF ' and again I repeat' IF ' that scenario occurs then it will be because Rebecca Long Bailey becomes Leader and does follow in Corbyns footsteps but that only time will tell. That revolves around who she as Labour Leader chooses to surround her. If the status quo remains e. g Seamus Milne, Walker, Momentum then that will be the time probably to know who, what, when, where the Labour Party moves forward to any kind of a ' split

On a personal note it must be a troubling time and I do appreciate you are busy, it must be hard going'.

Grandad I think you are possibly more deluded than some LibDems before the last election. However, I don't see what this bit of whataboutery has to do with the Labour Party. Personally, I was never happy with how the LibDems were conducting themselves at national level and wasn't the slightest bit surprised they did so badly in the last election.

The fact is that the British electorate will not vote for a union-dominated Labour Party. I think you should do some research on the history of the Labour Party, if you honestly think that the unions "own" the Labour Party or were solely responsibly for its beginnings. You are totally ignoring the role of the non-union socialist societies. You are also ignoring the fact that society and the scope of politics has changed. Unite is not the only, or even the biggest trade union, and must not be allowed to call the tune.

growstuff It seems the unions believe 'he who pays the piper calls the tune'. That's hardly a socialist idea for a party of the hard left.

When the new method of electing a Labour leader produced Corbyn (who stood 'because John and Dianne had already had a go'), there were no complaints from the hard left. Now the new method threatens to select a candidate perhaps nearer the centre, it's up-sticks and we'll do our own thing.

Ramsey MacDonald once said: 'In youth one believes in democracy, later on, one has to accept it.' Or perhaps not.

The worst problem with UK politics, apart from the undemocratic FPTP voting system, is the reluctance of the two dominant parties to split.

When at the last election, I was telling for the LibDems at our local polling station, there were two Tory ladies with me. Although the LibDems had a rota and we only did a shift of one hour, they seemed to have been there all day, presumably because they had a lack of volounteers.

Unusually for our local Tory Party members, they seemed to be quite intelligent.

They were both extremely opposed to David Cameron for having called the referendum in the way that he did and told me they were both ardent Remainers, but went on to say that the referendum had to happen because otherwise there would have been a split in their party.

It was clear to me that they put party before country,exactly the opposite to the LibDems whose willingness to enter a coalition in 2010 has cost us dear.

Who is right?