Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)

I say this as a remainer - remainers are idiots and deserve to lose this whole brexit game.
 
Wandered past one of The World Transformed events earlier. Looked quite cool but I was busy.

I passed by a bit later when it was pissing it down and it looked less fun, given it was under quite small tents and it being Brighton it was breezy.

There's a scoop for you all.
 
finneh said:
If private schools were abolished there would be de facto private schools in areas with expensive housing that donated to the local schools to such a degree that it became a private school.

It would do nothing to help the overall quality of state schooling. Unless you mean the overall mean grade would increase because you'd integrate the good private school grades into the mediocre state grades?
Click to expand...

If all schools are under the same state system... you could very easily change the rules so any donations went to a fund for all schools in a wider area and couldn’t be accepted by individual schools.

Also, there’s a big difference between a school just naturally being in an area with more expensive housing and parents having to pay thousands to send their children there. More affluent areas often neighbour poorer areas as well. I live in an area which is pretty working class yet it’s within 2 miles of probably the most affluent part of Greater Manchester.
 
ZupZup said:
If all schools are under the same state system... you could very easily change the rules so any donations went to a fund for all schools in a wider area and couldn’t be accepted by individual schools.

Also, there’s a big difference between a school just naturally being in an area with more expensive housing and parents having to pay thousands to send their children there. More affluent areas often neighbour poorer areas as well. I live in an area which is pretty working class yet it’s within 2 miles of probably the most affluent part of Greater Manchester.
Click to expand...

Again even if donations went to the local council who distributed evenly throughout the area... Schools in the South East would be disproportionately benefited compared with the North East.

It would be hugely open to abuse also as you'd no doubt end up with paid after school classes... Or parents getting together to pay private tutors to provide extra education to the privileged few.

Overall it's typical policy of bringing the standards of the people who're receiving the best services down to the level of the worst.

It's not about better standards, it's about forcing everyone to receive the same poor state standards. Whether it be health, roads, education, energy, rail etc
 
Shamwow said:
I say this as a remainer - remainers are idiots and deserve to lose this whole brexit game.
Click to expand...

Nah, let's not go that far. No side that contains the likes of Cummings, Gove, Johnson and Farage deserves to win anything.
 
The private school thing is a lot like the Tom Watson thing, in that the actual practical merits of the idea are less important than the timing and rather tin eared optics of it.... Why go hard in on something that sounds even somewhat like private asset seizures, at his particular point? Who is it winning around?

It’s not an unconscionable concept, but it’s tactically myopic...
 
Last edited:
sun_tzu said:
Dunno about a hundred...
But I could see a chunk doing it en masse
Click to expand...

The party too will be finished. Resigning the whip is not an option. Wait till he is no longer leader. Cotbyn is not as popular among labour members as he was two or three years ago. He won't be there forever.
However, that MP is just regurgitating Tory rubbish.
 
finneh said:
It's not about better standards, it's about forcing everyone to receive the same poor state standards. Whether it be health, roads, education, energy, rail etc
Click to expand...

See... I believe we should have excellent state school standards. It’s not about lowering anything. The idea that wanting to abolish private schools means someone wants everyone to have the same poorer standard of education is rubbish.

I am just not convinced that whilst we have private schools, the state schools will be given the funding and resources they need to significantly raise their level. Largely because I don’t believe those in power would have any vested interest in improving the quality of state schools.
 
Dobba said:
Mr Corbyn, when we've said Remain would have been better off without you campaigning at all - on an almost daily basis - for the last 3 and a half years, we actually meant...
Click to expand...
Labour's current policy would've been considered solidly remain, until the Lib Dem's decided democracy is a mistake.
 
ZupZup said:
See... I believe we should have excellent state school standards. It’s not about lowering anything. The idea that wanting to abolish private schools means someone wants everyone to have the same poorer standard of education is rubbish.

I am just not convinced that whilst we have private schools, the state schools will be given the funding and resources they need to significantly raise their level. Largely because I don’t believe those in power would have any vested interest in improving the quality of state schools.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the desired effect is reducing everyone down to a poorer lever, just that this will be the inevitable outcome.

Let's say that a "perfect situation" occurs and private schooling is abolished. You instantly have maybe a £8-10 billion budget deficit in the schooling sector as well as over half a million more students having to be instantly integrated into an already burgeoning state system.

More investment you say? Well we're already sporting the biggest tax to GDP ratio for the UK in normal economic times. We're already "underspending" in Health, Transport, Defence, Policing, Education, Welfare, Pensions and Local Government. But spent that huge budget surplus we've been nesting away for hard times? We're £1.8 Trillion in debt with a deficit of near £40 Billion a year. Johnson is also jizzing billions in every direction already with no plan to pay for it... And the less said about Corbyn's Labour plans to plug the gap the better.
 
ZupZup said:
I am just not convinced that whilst we have private schools, the state schools will be given the funding and resources they need to significantly raise their level. Largely because I don’t believe those in power would have any vested interest in improving the quality of state schools.
Click to expand...

If you don't trust the government to allocate the required funding resources to state schools, that's a very good reason to not ban private schools. The suggestion that state schools would improve if the better private schools were nationalised is, quite frankly, insane.
 
ZupZup said:
Also, there’s a big difference between a school just naturally being in an area with more expensive housing and parents having to pay thousands to send their children there. More affluent areas often neighbour poorer areas as well.
Click to expand...
I dunno, what is the difference between being rich enough to pay 2k/month for school fees and 2k/month for a mortgage for a house near a top state school, if the outcome for your kid is access to the best teaching and facilities? It is still privileged access denied to the poor.
 
nickm said:
I dunno, what is the difference between being rich enough to pay 2k/month for school fees and 2k/month for a mortgage for a house near a top state school, if the outcome for your kid is access to the best teaching and facilities? It is still privileged access denied to the poor.
Click to expand...
That is absolutely an issue and ending rich people having advantages under capitalism isn't possible but they can be reduced and removing these vile schools designed to create social capital for children of rich parents would be a hugely significant change.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
That is absolutely an issue and ending rich people having advantages under capitalism isn't possible but they can be reduced and removing these vile schools designed to create social capital for children of rich parents would be a hugely significant change.
Click to expand...

It might be if the solution weren't always "worse education for the richest", to harmonise things.

We fundamentally need competition in every sector. Without competition every business is destined for failure because you remove any incentive to be better.

Competition is the absolute key that unlocks success in every walk of life. Competition in performances based salary. Competition in bad organisations going bust (hello Thomas Cook). Competition in bad schools and hospitals being put out of business by good ones.

This doesn't meant 100% free market forces shafting poor people. It means giving everyone the resource to make their own decisions, rather than telling them they must use crap services "because socialism".

If you need surgery and it costs £5k on the NHS, have a voucher system where you can spend this voucher anywhere. Free market forces will mean poor peacticioners fail and gold ones expand. If your shit school costs the government £10k a year per pupil, give parents a voucher and let the parents choose where to spend it.

If state hospitals and education win all the business and the extra competition merely makes them work harder, fantastic. If every single state institution goes bump as private companies are providing better services at the same cost then great also as the patients and pupils are the sole beneficiaries.

Why competition law exists but doesn't apply to state systems is beyond me. Any critical thinker must look at state systems and think "what's the incentive for them to be better".
 
BobbyManc said:
Nonsense. Labour is committed to a second referendum. That's as good as you're going to get short of lurching towards a policy of revoking Article 50. What difference does it make to the actual policy if Corbyn personally campaigns on the side of Remain or not? I fully understand why people would be frustrated with that position, myself included, but lets stop with the dramatics. The only realistic chance we have of reversing Brexit is through a Labour government.
Click to expand...
Spot on. Beat me to it!
 
MadMike said:
The suggestion that state schools would improve if the better private schools were nationalised is, quite frankly, insane.
Click to expand...

It’s really not insane though is it? It isn’t even a remotely unpopular opinion. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

nickm said:
I dunno, what is the difference between being rich enough to pay 2k/month for school fees and 2k/month for a mortgage for a house near a top state school, if the outcome for your kid is access to the best teaching and facilities? It is still privileged access denied to the poor.
Click to expand...

I’ve already gone over this but there is quite clearly a big difference between the two. Private schools are largely restricted to the wealthy... far more so than state schools that happen to be in affluent areas. Affluent areas are often not far in distance from more working class areas. If you think of a wealthy area, you will usually find there are poorer areas that aren’t a big distance away.
 
finneh said:
It might be if the solution weren't always "worse education for the richest", to harmonise things.

We fundamentally need competition in every sector. Without competition every business is destined for failure because you remove any incentive to be better.

Competition is the absolute key that unlocks success in every walk of life. Competition in performances based salary. Competition in bad organisations going bust (hello Thomas Cook). Competition in bad schools and hospitals being put out of business by good ones.

This doesn't meant 100% free market forces shafting poor people. It means giving everyone the resource to make their own decisions, rather than telling them they must use crap services "because socialism".

If you need surgery and it costs £5k on the NHS, have a voucher system where you can spend this voucher anywhere. Free market forces will mean poor peacticioners fail and gold ones expand. If your shit school costs the government £10k a year per pupil, give parents a voucher and let the parents choose where to spend it.

If state hospitals and education win all the business and the extra competition merely makes them work harder, fantastic. If every single state institution goes bump as private companies are providing better services at the same cost then great also as the patients and pupils are the sole beneficiaries.

Why competition law exists but doesn't apply to state systems is beyond me. Any critical thinker must look at state systems and think "what's the incentive for them to be better".
Click to expand...

Why dod you think the more competetive and privatised health systems in the US, Switzerland, and Germany, cost substantially more per capita for comparable outcomes compared to the moribund uncompetitive NHS? Why does the rate of private sector involvement in healthcare correlate to higher healthcare expenditures across Europe?
 
Dobba said:
Mr Corbyn, when we've said Remain would have been better off without you campaigning at all - on an almost daily basis - for the last 3 and a half years, we actually meant...
Click to expand...
Except the overwhelming message to Corbyn for the last three and a half years has been near enough the opposite, 'Get off the fence', although some have said that means 'campaign outright for remain', and others say it means 'be honest and admit you're anti-EU', but either way it's not what you're saying.
 
711 said:
Except the overwhelming message to Corbyn for the last three and a half years has been near enough the opposite, 'Get off the fence', although some have said that means 'campaign outright for remain', and others say it means 'be honest and admit you're anti-EU', but either way it's not what you're saying.
Click to expand...
I can barely keep up. I thought his 7/10 rating on The Last Leg singlehandedly lost the campaign?

They also demanded a People's Vote. Then got one and decided revoke was the only policy that didn't put you in Farage's pocket.
 
berbatrick said:
Why dod you think the more competetive and privatised health systems in the US, Switzerland, and Germany, cost substantially more per capita for comparable outcomes compared to the moribund uncompetitive NHS? Why does the rate of private sector involvement in healthcare correlate to higher healthcare expenditures across Europe?
Click to expand...

I think we can discount the US straight away because the level of lobbyism and outside of market force intervention makes their system inherently a poor example.

England also has more than twice the population density of Switzerland and nearly twice the density of Germany; so it's obviously going to be more efficient irrspective of the system.

In terms of private sector involvement I'm not saying that they'll be magically better... In fact I'd imagine there would be half a dozen failures for every successful private health provider. However that's the point isn't it? All poor providers have to fail in order for there to be a good system evolve and grow. Also hell of they all failed to be successful being paid the same for treatments as NHS costs then hell we're no worse off.

Imagine if we banned private involvement in space travel. SpaceX and there competitors wouldn't exist who've pushed the boundaries of space travel more in the last decade or so than in the previous 5.

When literally all around our lives are the exceptional benefits of competition. Messi Vs Ronaldo. Djokovic Vs Nadal Vs Federer. IPhone Vs Samsung. Battery technologies. Green energy technologies. Robotics.Pharmaceutical breakthroughs. Hell even private sector breakthroughs in the development of cultured meat and 3D printing.

Irrespective of pretty much every other area of life being dominated by technological breakthroughs as a result of free market competition; our response to providing heavily regulated charitable competition in health and education is "outrageous".
 
Last edited:
finneh said:
Isn't that merely a mimic or the Tory "vote UKIP get Corbyn" nonsense?
Click to expand...

No, because it is true, unless you can suggest a realistic outcome whereby Brexit is reversed without the need for the Labour party in office? Likewise, there is an obvious rationale behind the Tory claim. A typical Tory voter turning to the Brexit Party is only making a Labour government more likely. So that's not nonsense either.
 
BobbyManc said:
No, because it is true, unless you can suggest a realistic outcome whereby Brexit is reversed without the need for the Labour party in office? Likewise, there is an obvious rationale behind the Tory claim. A typical Tory voter turning to the Brexit Party is only making a Labour government more likely. So that's not nonsense either.
Click to expand...

In that case we may as well make illegal any party that isn't the Tories or Labour on the strength that irrespective of being more closely aligned with your views if you aren't voting Labour you're voting Tory and vice versa.

It isn't like patterns in voting don't actually effect the main parties stances bringing them closer to the central ground for example.
 
Last edited:
finneh said:
In that case we may as well make illegal any party that isn't the Tories or Labour on the strength that irrespective of being more closely aligned with your views if you aren't voting Labour you're voting Tory and vice versa.
Click to expand...

How on earth that follows from the points I have made I have no idea, but that's a monumental leap of logic you've made there. Congratulations.
 
finneh said:
In that case we may as well make illegal any party that isn't the Tories or Labour on the strength that irrespective of being more closely aligned with your views if you aren't voting Labour you're voting Tory and vice versa.

It isn't like patterns in voting don't actually effect the main parties stances bringing them closer to the central ground for example.
Click to expand...
I really hoped you were going to make a case for proportional representation then.

The case you made instead was depressing.
 
Dobba said:
I can barely keep up. I thought his 7/10 rating on The Last Leg singlehandedly lost the campaign?

They also demanded a People's Vote. Then got one and decided revoke was the only policy that didn't put you in Farage's pocket.
Click to expand...
I don't know if you really mean you can't keep up or not, but I'm happy to say I can't anyway. I don't know what the Last Leg is either, sorry.

Yeah, it's true to say revoke would have been highlighted by Farage, but at least it would have attracted others, whereas the continued fence-sitting has still handed ammunition to Farage, but gained support from no one.
 
BobbyManc said:
How on earth that follows from the points I have made I have no idea, but that's a monumental leap of logic you've made there. Congratulations.
Click to expand...

Your stance seemed to be that not voting for Labour was essentially voting Tory (and presumably vice versa). If that's the case then there's only two parties to vote for, no?
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
I really hoped you were going to make a case for proportional representation then.

The case you made instead was depressing.
Click to expand...

I agree with PR for what it's worth. However I find the argument that you shouldn't vote with your conscience merely due to "strategic" reasons is exactly the reason we have two terrible parties with clowns in charge (irrspective of being stuck with an undemocratic voting system).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.