The Brexit Thread

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
16,804
Corbyn is honest but communist
There has never, is not and will never be such a thing as an "honest communist". The millisecond those types get into power and get their paws on other people's money is the millisecond their true colours start to show.
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
17,881
Yes. Your point? He also refused to resign after a no confidence vote in him succeeded.
And there are proper procedures for replacing the leader of the party. Funny that in the three years since the vote of no confidence they've not replaced him. The reason I suspect is that a majority of Labour party members actually support him. Perhaps he is after all the closest thing to a genuine labour leader the party has had in a long time.

Well he's a lot further left than most in the UK, and a lot further left than most in the Labour party. There is socialism and then there is socialism.
There's market socialism. He seems to be in that arena.

In truth Corbyn only looks far left because New Labour abandoned its principles and too many in the current party would rather kowtow to the wealthy than do the difficult things that are needed to reform the economy. Which the wealthy elite have very successfully skewed in their favour to the detriment of everyone else. The last thing they want is for the rewards of productivity falling into the hands of the peasants (that's everyone, but them). Hence calling him a communist.
 

Ancalagon

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
16,037
Some of Corbyn's reforms are needed, I agree, but not nationalisation. Nationalisation is straight up communism, and works in only a very small number of scenarios.

NHS - yes, needs to stay and needs a lot more funding to operate better. Corbyn is right about that. Don't want it sold off to the Yanks either.
BT - why nationalise this? Makes no sense. Just regulate the market better, if it needs it.
Railways - not convinced nationalisation will make things better here.

I also disagree with the sheer amount he wants to spend. Yes, it could encourage growth, but the debt needs to be paid eventually - by a future generation perhaps.

Personally I miss New Labour - they would be a Labour I could vote for.
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
17,881
Nationalisation is straight up communism, and works in only a very small number of scenarios.
That's one thing it definitely is not. Regardless I am not aware of him promoting a policy of nationalising everything.

Railways - not convinced nationalisation will make things better here.
Privatisation has failed there. The proposal to allow them to revert back to the state over time sounds like a perfect opportunity to give public control another try.

Personally I miss New Labour - they would be a Labour I could vote for.
They're basically a light version of the Tories. They were worse really, because they pretended to be the Labour party. At least the Tories are a bit more open about their worship of business and the wealthy to detriment of everyone else.

Here's their manifesto:


Which parts are communist?
Communist/socialist are terms commonly thrown at anyone who criticises the current plutocratic status quo. Bringing up stagnant wages and the income from modern productivity gains going straight into the pockets of the wealthy will quickly get you accused of being a communist or socialist. Never mind actually trying to fix the system. Even a proper implementation of capitalism would be a vast improvement, but the wealthy would never stand for a genuinely freer market, because they'll be the biggest losers.

Apparently only communists use the word manifesto. Someone should let the Conservatives know.
 

Dave

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
49,280
Railways - not convinced nationalisation will make things better here.
Though strangely enough my regional rail service (LNER) was re-nationalised a few years ago, since then it's been more on time and has made more profit (for the treasury) than the previous private operator made.
 
Last edited:

AlmightyBender

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
3,910
you expect someone to read through that novel length meaningless drivel?!?

that aside, the number of times they repeat the word manifesto should have anyone's commie-detector at least beeping, then there is this, which is taken directly from Karl Marx himself, and paraphrased to sound enlightened and "modern":


at least Marx didn't faff about with unnecessarily lengthy phrases to say the same:


or are you about to argue Marx is #NotRealCommunism ? :ROFL:
Thanks for admitting that you don't actually know know what you are talking about and pearl-clutching against. This takes true bravery, good for you. I appreciate that level of vulnerability.
 

Hamish McPanji

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
38,805
Though strangely enough my regional rail service (GNER) was re-nationalised a few years ago, since then it's been more on time and has made more profit (for the treasury) than the previous private operator made.
Rail prices are just ridiculous in the UK. Compared to mainland Europe, which is affordable
 

Dave

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
49,280
Rail prices are just ridiculous in the UK. Compared to mainland Europe, which is affordable
Definitely, it can be cheaper to fly to a lot of places. Newcastle-Edinburgh is one of the few I know of that is reasonable. Newcastle-London is ridiculously expensive.
 

Chris_the_Brit

High Tory
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
26,829
That's one thing it definitely is not. Regardless I am not aware of him promoting a policy of nationalising everything.


Privatisation has failed there. The proposal to allow them to revert back to the state over time sounds like a perfect opportunity to give public control another try.
On what criteria are you saying privatisation has failed? Yes, London fares are ridiculously expensive (I was spending between £35 - £60 a week for unlimited travel depending on the zone I was in on my recent holiday compared to €20 a week in Paris) but then the government would be spending more money subsidising commuters, the subsidy which could easily balloon.


 
Last edited:

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
16,377
Though strangely enough my regional rail service (LNER) was re-nationalised a few years ago, since then it's been more on time and has made more profit (for the treasury) than the previous private operator made.
Having only one opperator in a certain section isn't really privatisation or free market capitalism. It just a government approved monopoly, which is bad. You need competition if you are going to privatise things.
 

Hamish McPanji

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
38,805
On what criteria are you saying privatisation has failed? Yes, London fares are ridiculously expensive (I was spending between £35 - £60 a week for unlimited travel depending on the zone I was in on my recent holiday compared to €20 a week in Paris) but then the government would be spending more money subsidising commuters, the subsidy which could easily balloon.


TFL is not the same thing. Did you travel anywhere else? Apart from London on rail?
 

Hamish McPanji

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
38,805
I think they're both ridiculous ..... long distance in Europe is also damn expensive. I'd rather just fly :unsure:
There are a lot of other costs associated with flying. Including travelling to the airport, which is often in the sticks. And baggage fees as well.
 

The Voice

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
8,517
Definitely, it can be cheaper to fly to a lot of places. Newcastle-Edinburgh is one of the few I know of that is reasonable. Newcastle-London is ridiculously expensive.
Don't remember the exact destinations, but could have been London-Newcastle. Someone needed to get to a wedding, and found it cheaper to fly to Spain, stay over for the night and fly on to the wedding destination the next day than it was to travel there by train.

Another one found it was cheaper to buy a small 2nd hand car, fill up the tank and drive than to catch the train.

I'm all for nationalising the rail companies - mainly so I don't have to sit through anymore of this RMT/SWR bullshit which is running for all of December and directly affects my ability to get to and from work (2nd day in a row I haven't even bothered trying to get to the office). But I'm not sure we'll see much of an improvement in service, definitely not if tickets are going to get so much cheaper. National Rail, which runs the entire network is, as the name suggests, already nationalised, but responsible for up to 60% of all downtime due to faults, etc.

Although, should Labour come into power, they're backed by all the unions, RMT included, so what's to stop them striking willy nilly if they're backed by the government?
 

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
16,804
Thanks for admitting that you don't actually know know what you are talking about and pearl-clutching against. This takes true bravery, good for you. I appreciate that level of vulnerability.
oh god, even your namesake, after months of non-drinking, which as you know is fatal to bending units, would know wtf communism is and what paraphrased communism with a sugar coating is

your lack of comprehension is only surpassed by your ignorance, don't let logic stop you though, wallow in it, it is fun to watch!
 
Top