Fucking right it's not. Leaving or not trying to mitigate the hell of leaving by refusing to stay in the Single Market is pure madness but. Your economy will wither and all your plans of a just society will be ashes.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Labour rejects concept of Social mobility
Collapse
X
-
The migrant crisis had led to thousands drowning in the Mediterranean. The lack of sanctions against the likes of Hungary or Poland
The way the European Debt crisis protected the banks against the people of the EU, chiefly because Schäuble appears never to have heard of Keynes.
And yes imposed neo-liberal open markets are counter productive if their main aim is to force wages down.
As for driving down wages. Sweden, an EU state, has very powerful unions, meaning that you don't see the low wages that you see in the UK. There's nobody in the EU stopping the UK from doing the same thing that Sweden has done.
The thing is, the socialist utopia that Corbyn wants to achieve, including the sensible policies you mentioned upthread, can be done with the UK remaining an EU member. Brexit provides no new tools to Corbyn that he doesn't already have while still remaining in the EU, in exchange for giving away all bargaining power the UK has in Europe, as well as burning down the UK economy. It is literally the most pointless thing ever. Labour should be shouting that from the rooftops.
The problem with the UK has always been that most UK politicians (left or right) don't understand what the EU is.Last edited by anton pulisov; 08-06-2019, 19:55.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
What conversation are we having here? What I think is wrong with the EU- which was what you asked me- or what policy do I think Jeremy Corbyn should follow?
I think if 1) Britain were still in the EU when and if 2) Jeremy Corbyn were to become Prime Minister I would hope he would pursue many of the policies you suggest- though how he should reverse the neo-liberalist measures that other countries have considered NINO- neoliberalist in name only - is a different matter.
However I don't know how a scenario where both 1 and 2 are possible, without the support of other parties -and some parts of his own - who have refused to offer him that support.
The German constitution protects the right to join a trade union. The pre Corbyn labour party didn't dare- or didn't want to reverse any of the anti trade union laws.Last edited by Nefertiti2; 08-06-2019, 20:20.
Comment
-
As Brian says above, the very issue with the European debt crisis was that the creation of the European Central Bank wasn't simultaneously accompanied by a European Fiscal Reserve, similar to the American entity, so that cashflows from Germany, France etc would have covered the financial crises, so the individual national governments can be blamed for not coming to an agreement, rather than viewing it as an ideological position by Brussels, per se. As for not punishing Hungary and Poland, the rules require unanimity, rather than a majority vote, so Warsaw will always defend Budapest, and vice-versa.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
While getting bored with Part Three of Planet Of The Daleks, I thought I’d check the 2015 leadership candidates’ current Brexit positions to see where we could have been.
Kendall - second referendum
Cooper - repeatedly championed legislation to prevent no deal, otherwise Lexit
Burnham - second referendum
Corbyn - TBCLast edited by Lucy Waterman; 08-06-2019, 20:38.
Comment
-
I think TBC is fair.
I also think that "respecting the result of the referendum" "negotiated agreement for Norway plus" or "Single Market and Customs Union" which were seen as options in response to the referendum seem to have disappeared from the menu.
"Lexit" seems to have changed in meaning from "Actively wanting to leave the EU" to "being on the left and accepting that there was a referendum which voted to leave".
Comment
-
Originally posted by Lucy Waterman View PostWhile getting bored with Part Three of Planet Of The Daleks, I thought I’d check the 2015 leadership candidates’ current Brexit positions to see where we could have been.
Kendall - second referendum
Cooper - repeatedly championed legislation to prevent no deal, otherwise Lexit
Burnham - second referendum
Corbyn - TBC
Comment
-
Originally posted by Nefertiti2 View PostI think TBC is fair.
I also think that "respecting the result of the referendum" "negotiated agreement for Norway plus" or "Single Market and Customs Union" which were seen as options in response to the referendum seem to have disappeared from the menu.
"Lexit" seems to have changed in meaning from "Actively wanting to leave the EU" to "being on the left and accepting that there was a referendum which voted to leave".
Comment
-
there was indeed an EU directive in the early 1990s to privatise railways.
What the First Railway Package did in 1991was to require that independent companies be allowed to apply for non-discriminatory track access to a member state's railway network and to require that infrastructure and train operations be controlled by separate entities (as a way of facilitating non-discrimination). It didn't require privatisation, though neoliberal governments like the UK took it as a licence to do so (even though privatisation had never been barred by EU law).
As AP notes, France never privatised SNCF and Macron just made what has become an almost bi-annual process never to do so. Nor does he see that stance at being at all in conflict with his belief in a more deeply integrated EU.
Comment
-
At this point, a realist - in 2016 there would have be a point in respecting it, given the general expectation would have been an EEA relationship with the EU, but as the Tories have lurched ever more rapidly in the direction of no deal, Labour would be perfectly entitled to call for a second referendum that precisely delineates the political and economic position of the UK, and if the electorate then opted for WTO terms, then so be it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Diable Rouge View PostAt this point, a realist - in 2016 there would have be a point in respecting it, given the general expectation would have been an EEA relationship with the EU, but as the Tories have lurched ever more rapidly in the direction of no deal, Labour would be perfectly entitled to call for a second referendum that precisely delineates the political and economic position of the UK, and if the electorate then opted for WTO terms, then so be it.
So is leaving on WTO terms a disaster, or just another option?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Nefertiti2 View Post
Labour might be "entitled" to do this- but 1) they dont have a majority in the house of commons to do this 2) "if the electorate then opted for WTO terms, then so be it?"
So is leaving on WTO terms a disaster, or just another option?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Lang Spoon View PostAye, he's pointlessly narrowed Labour's stance, either from triangulating to racists that prob won't Labour anyways, or a genuine idiot misunderstanding of State Aid and the SM. As he listens to Katy Clark, maybe the latter.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Nefertiti2 View Post
Labour might be "entitled" to do this- but 1) they dont have a majority in the house of commons to do this...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Nefertiti2 View PostCould we have subtitles again?
And When I use the phrase "WTO terms" please recognise the quotation marks around it
Comment
Comment