Jeremy Corbyn - PM by default?

[Considermesometimes]

I am not a 'woke' labour supporter. I come from a long line of many generations of stout labour supporters. It would be unthinkable up to now in my family for anyone to vote for any other party. I would be shown the door at my gp's house for even having this conversation.

However, I am seriously seriously worried, I would go as far as to say terrified of the prospect of voting for Labour this time, and Jeremy Corbyn actually becoming Prime Minister.
I am interested to know how others are dealing with this problem.

I am worried that some of the policies such as seizing assets and homes from people, massive taxes etc. We are home owners and work very hard, it could all be jeopardised.

Forced closure of private schools in this area would be a complete and utter disaster. As it is we have to finish early on Friday afternoons, and do not have funds for every day stationary much less hundreds of extra children. What would happen to our already very full classes of 33-38 with all the extra children from the private schools? How is this even possible? And yet it seems Labour are fully committed to it when pressed on the issue.

The huge privatisation plan of utilities looks to cost around 200 billion pounds. I don't want our money spent this way! I would much prefer better schools and hospitals, and crime to be under control in this part of the country. I can't even get a GP app for my asthmatic dd at the moment. I could not care less about the Utilities or the railways etc. The LP just do not seem to understand at the moment what matters to most people.

The whole defence and nuclear issue. I don't feel we live in a particularly safe world. I like the fact we have some defences against the nut jobs in the Middle East or North Korea. The fact that other countries would not trust the UK under Corbyn to share intelligence with us, and his lack of decision making in a crisis, or even his basic understanding of deterrents is deeply disturbing.

I just don't think Corbyn is up to the job in any shape or form. Nor do most of the party.

I have thought about voting Lib Dems, but looking at the numbers that will almost certainly result in Corbyn being PM. There is almost no chance at all of Lib Dems getting 326 seats. A vote for Lib Dems is a vote for a Labour government probably propped up by the SNP who will demand another independence referendum in six months.

I am livid with the party for allowing this to happen, how is Corbyn still the leader of the party it is beyond me. How has this been allowed to happen? Chuka Umunna would have made an excellent PM, but all the best candidates are leaving the Labour party.

I don't think I can vote for anyone. That is my final conclusion, for the first time in thirty years I will not vote. What are you planning to do?

Again, how can you speak with such certainty about the plans and the impact of them when the manifesto hasn’t yet been released?

In the absence of the manifesto, we have to use the data at hand, namely the public statements of the Labour leadership, the motions passed at Labour conference, and the multi-decade track record of support for far-left policies by Corbyn, McDonnell, and Abbott that are a matter of public record.

Logical, no?

I currently support the foodbank in my area. I do around 6 hours a week, as well as donations, I also do collections. I sponsor many charities, and support whole heartedly further investment into those with disabilities, mental health services and children's services. The issue is that I can not continue support if my company goes under. All the people that rely on my support will not be able to.

We shouldn’t need food banks. Nor should people with disabilities or mental health and children’s services be dependent on charity. We live in the world’s sixth richest country where some people can’t afford to eat. Let that just sink in for a moment.

Businesses thrive in countries with much higher levels of taxation than ours. And everyone in those countries can afford food without the more fortunate playing Lady Bountiful.

The capital investment flight would happen overnight. We work in the City, and it is a very well known fact. Many/most investors would pull out of the UK due to the tax hikes that Corbyn would bring, and also a complete lack of confidence in him as a leader. I genuinely believe we would see this on day one. If you work in any industry related to investment, I can assure they all believe this to be the case. Multinationals would not thrive and would ultimately relocate. Jeremy's very hard left policies will prevent the UK from attracting more investment. This would be very bad for the economy, and you will not be able to pay for those public services

It’s funny how all we’ve heard from the right for the last 3 years is “project fear”, and yet that’s precisely what this is. Scaremongering. This is simply nonsense. We currently have some of the lowest rates of corporation tax and some of the best deals for employers in Europe. Where exactly are they going to go?

Brexit is far more likely to have the sort of effect you’re talking about - as we’ve seen over the last 3 years - and yet the right aren’t talking about putting a stop to Brexit over economic fears are they? They bloody well should be, but no.

Corbyn is not very hard left - you say you’re a lifelong Labour voter and you think Labour policies are “very hard left”? You’re being disingenuous somewhere there.

It is my understanding that the conservatives are advocating a deal, the only party to advocate no deal is the brexit party.

Large sections of the Tory party want a no deal Brexit, including their leader. Don’t fool yourself. You think Johnson’s negotiations were any more than stalling for time? He knows full well that the deal he drew up was utterly pointless.

It is interesting that you are comparing Corbyn to a worst case scenario, no deal, so therefore it does not say very much about your own confidence as you compare him to the lesser evil of the two! Hardly a resounding vote in him!

I’m not only comparing a Corbyn led government to a Tory no deal Brexit.

If you’d bothered to read what I’d posted on your thread, I’ve shared huge swathes of information about the state of the country after a decade of Tory rule, and the unthinkable things that are now commonplace because of their policies. Corbyn would be (IMO) a thousand times better than even the best case Tory scenario (which would be Johnson being replaced with literally anyone, and an EU deal that leaves us worse off than we are now, because that’s any deal they could possibly construct).

Seriously, have you seen this? This man is leading our country, in the most tumultuous and crucial period in living memory.
www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/08/boris-johnson-goods-from-northern-ireland-to-gb-wont-be-checked-brexit

Logical, no?

What’s logical would be accurately representing the information.

In the UK, full time hours is considered by the government as 35 hours or more.

McDonnell mentioned reducing this to 32 hours a week, and that this change will happen over 10 years. This does not mean no one will work more than 32 hours, or that everyone will work four days a week. That’s a deliberate misrepresentation of what’s been said, and without seeing the manifesto, we cannot know how this will be managed.

So just stating “they’re going to cut everyone’s working to four days a week and companies will go bankrupt and leave” is nothing more than scaremongering based on media misrepresentation of a policy.

It is fab that you do so much but saying The issue is that I can not continue support if my company goes under. All the people that rely on my support will not be able to is a bit disingenuous as presumably if Labour get in then no one will need food banks.

Precisely Trewser - it’s not a case of companies pay more in taxes and nothing change.

Right now we are in a situation where public funds pay for infrastructure which benefits private companies. Where HMRC are subsiding companies’ profits by paying tax credits to underpaid employees, so that companies can make ever more profit. And the tax gap some years (the difference between what HMRC know they should get and what they actually get) is the same as the entire tax credits bill, so the country is losing out twice and larger companies are getting away with murder - the tories have even enabled large companies to be better off by involving them in the creation of tax law.

Where does this leave is? In a world where the wealthiest 26 people have as much money as the poorest 3.8 billion people or 50% of the world’s population.
www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jan/21/world-26-richest-people-own-as-much-as-poorest-50-per-cent-oxfam-report

This cannot continue. It simply cannot. We have to do something about it, on a global level, not a national one.

This is another reason we need to stay in the EU - if our government sacrifices employment rights to make us a more attractive propostion than the rest of Europe, we will end up with even more devastating levels of poverty and inequality.

How do people think this will resolve itself or end up in a few decades without governments stepping in? As the pay gap between company directors and low level workers has increased, nothing has been done. Automation is increasing. The wealthiest, those running the biggest companies on earth are only accruing more money, and having decreasing need for actual workers. Where do you think this ends up?

Corbyn is talking about policies which will have to implemented everywhere eventually. Things have to change, and we are in a position where we are being held to ransom by the wealthiest people in the world. It’s a bloody disgrace.

Europe need to clamp down and we need to be part of that.

Companies will benefit from improved public services - better healthcare for employees, more funded parental leave, better infrastructure, transport, childcare, education etc etc. It’s not a one way street.

presumably if Labour get in then no one will need food banks.

Err, no. There are a great many reasons why people use food banks and agencies issue the vouchers. The statistics collected can be very misleading.

Whilst ‘abolishing the need for food banks’ is a very noble aim, it just isn’t going to happen. I can see nothing in Labour’s policies that will eliminate the need for them. I say this as someone who volunteers in a food bank.

I find it very difficult to square the OP’s professed life time commitment to left wing politics with her simultaneous commitment to a One Nation Tory model of social responsibility. Which is, of course, admirable, but very much at odds with Labour Party principles.

Food banks didn’t exist 20 years ago @SweetSummerchild, why can’t we return to that? What are the issues that mean we can’t have a society where food banks are necessary?

That’s misrepresentation, and it impacts the views of people reading who aren’t clicking through and reading the actual links.

Well it’s true that the man from the local authority who will be conducting the health check on the school may not be carrying a clipboard when he does it, but a health check doesn’t sound like what Angela Rayner said when she talked about ‘measuring excellence’ does it? So who is misrepresenting policy here? The Shadow Education Secretary, or the Labour Party?

So who is misrepresenting policy here? The Shadow Education Secretary, or the Labour Party?

I think you’ll find that will be you. Clearly you either haven’t read the whole article that was linked or you’re hoping nobody else will bother. And stop with the “man with a clipboard” shtick.

I find it very difficult to square the OP’s professed life time commitment to left wing politics with her simultaneous commitment to a One Nation Tory model of social responsibility.

I thought the same...

Food banks didn’t exist 20 years ago

Yes, they did. The church which runs the food bank that I volunteer at has been running it for far longer than 20 years.

As I said on another thread earlier this week, I spoke to 9 clients on Tuesday. Only one of those would have not needed to use the food bank under a Labour government.

Until we get rid of crime, substance abuse, domestic abuse, personal debt, child abuse and illegal immigration we will never get rid of the need for food banks.

Clearly you either haven’t read the whole article that was linked or you’re hoping nobody else will bother.

Oh @Alsohuman you don’t know me. Quite happy for people to read articles and discuss education policy with me. In fact, I started a thread about this one when Labour announced it. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/3698444-Labour-to-scrap-Ofsted?pg=1

On the thread people also discuss the idea of Local Authorities inspecting SEN provision essentially being asking them to mark their own homework. Worrying, given the current state of SEN provision.

This cannot continue. It simply cannot. We have to do something about it, on a global level, not a national one.

Deathgrip - if Labour win this election, do you think they should bring in exchange controls to prevent trillions from leaving the country?

Deathgrip - if Labour win this election, do you think they should bring in exchange controls to prevent trillions from leaving the country?

I do, but obviously the timing on policies like that needs to be carefully considered.

In an ideal world, I would introduce exchange controls alongside tax law which forces companies to pay tax in the country in which money is earned - we need to find ways to stop money being funnelled out of countries, this is one way. However, it would need to be a consistent policy across Europe, and I suspect this is where we will end up eventually as a small group of individuals / corporations continue to bleed individual countries financially and horde cash.

For example, ATOS earn hundreds of millions for their (awful) work assessing disabled people, and yet pay no U.K. corporation tax as they’re registered elsewhere (I believe it’s France, I could be mistaken). The government has literally diverted money from disabled people (those on extremely low incomes, whose money circulates very quickly once they receive it - food shopping, utilities, rent / mortgage etc etc) towards companies and very little of it comes back since a disproportionate amount of their income goes to the top of the company and to shareholders. This is another of the huge problems with the widening CEO/low-level employee pay gap.

But again, I’m not an economist and don’t pretend to be an expert. If economists concur there’s a better way to do things, then great, but carrying on as we are is not sustainable.

On the thread people also discuss the idea of Local Authorities inspecting SEN provision essentially being asking them to mark their own homework. Worrying, given the current state of SEN provision.

I unfortunately have extensive personal experience of LA ineptitude and the shocking lack of SEN provision. But local authorities are currently running at a £3bn deficit, and they predict this will be an £8bn deficit by 2024. By this stage, 70% of LAs say they will be completely unable to afford non-statutory services. This is the result of Tory policy which is already occurring. Thousands of children with EHCPs and no school place, even more who don’t have EHCPs.

The plan laid out in the article you shared was a two-tier system so the entire responsibility for assessing schools would not fall to the LA, clipboard or otherwise. As I’ve said repeatedly, I need to see the manifestos and the detail of their plans before I can judge whether I believe it’s workable or not.

What I do know is that I trust Labour to fund LAs and SEN provision far more than I trust the tories. I trust Labour to reform current SEN provision far more too. Again, I need to see the detail because right now I can’t judge whether I would agree with this policy or not.

I came across this article from September and wondered if it might allay some financial and economic fears of voting for Corbyn...

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/21/bankers-corbyn-tories-no-deal-capitalism-radical-government

You want Labour to bring in exchange controls?! And you wonder why people think the party would be an economic disaster?

As with the USSR and the Berlin wall, countries run by the far left need to put up barriers to prevent people escaping with both their persons and their money...

*Yes, they did. The church which runs the food bank that I volunteer at has been running it for far longer than 20 years.

As I said on another thread earlier this week, I spoke to 9 clients on Tuesday. Only one of those would have not needed to use the food bank under a Labour government.

Until we get rid of crime, substance abuse, domestic abuse, personal debt, child abuse and illegal immigration we will never get rid of the need for food banks.*

There were two, yes two, foodbanks in the UK in 2004.

We had all the issues mentioned before we had foodbanks, why didn’t we need them then? Austerity has made people in work poorer to the point of needing charity, let alone those on benefits. Why are people so eager to defend the indefensible?

Again, please can someone explain to me why there's all this emphasis on manifestos?? Admittedly they have some limited use as statements of intent, but much of the contents are non-specific piffle and even the few firm "commitments" are not enforceable (and that's without the issue that much which follows has never appeared in the manifestos anyway)

Call me dense, but I genuinely don't get what the fascination is with things which are scarcely worth the paper they're written on

There were two, yes two, foodbanks in the UK in 2004.

Careful. The Trussell Trust only ran 2 foodbanks in 2004 but they’re not the only people to run foodbanks.

Sweet summer I've had similar experience. Yet another example of labour die hard educating someone in the field who actually knows what they are talking about... This is the problem with labour in a nut shell and why they loose core voters.

@Puzzledandpissedoff, they’re all we’ve got. They’ve been pretty important over Brexit, given that both main parties said they’d deliver it in their 2017 manifestos. At least they give us an indication of what’s promised and stop people making up policy as they go along.

Also, there was much poverty under Blair and they openly admitted child poverty grew under thier reign and that they had failed.
Added to that the looming credit crunch and the The descion to allow Eastern European workers, migrants, flooded the lower tiers of society with more very Poor people.
Many smaller charities were swamped, no budgets for the increase in poor.
It was the UK poor who were hit the hardest and its why Frank field wrote his... Please vote leave for the poor plea pre referendum.

Now people wonder why food banks exist. Yes the austerity was further blow but what else were tories supposed to do after Blair bled this country dry and left it on its knees in every way!

You want Labour to bring in exchange controls?!

Really? That’s what you took from my comment? Fancy reading the rest of it?

please can someone explain to me why there's all this emphasis on manifestos?? Admittedly they have some limited use as statements of intent, but much of the contents are non-specific piffle and even the few firm "commitments" are not enforceable (and that's without the issue that much which follows has never appeared in the manifestos anyway)

Because this is a discussion of policy, and half of it is people saying “labour will hike up business rates for small businesses” (not true) or “labour will enforce a four day week” (not true) etc etc.

What we have right now is a lot of media speculation for the most part, based on comments made at party conferences etc without the necessary context.

Manifestos are absolutely crucial in deciding who to vote for. Otherwise you’re basing your decision on nothing more than the opinions of journalists and random people on the internet.