Is Corbyn a far left politician?

[Anna B]

It is doing.

 

Do you think it should fall with a shrinking economy?

 

There is enough money and food in the world for everyone to have a reasonable standard of living. The distribution is where it all goes wrong.

[unbeliever]

It depends upon why the economy is shrinking. If it is shrinking due to a shrinking population then yes, if it is shrinking due to a loss of confidence then no.

 

If you are to link increases in spending to GDP/capita, but not link decreases similarly, are you going to run a surplus when the GDP/capita is growing to cover the extra costs when it shrinks?

 

If so, I think that's roughly the plan after 2020.

[JFKvsNixon]

If you are to link increases in spending to GDP/capita, but not link decreases similarly, are you going to run a surplus when the GDP/capita is growing to cover the extra costs when it shrinks?

 

The trick is getting the balance right isn't it? I also think that a good proportion of the spending should be spent on investing in the countries infrastructure.

[unbeliever]

There is enough money and food in the world for everyone to have a reasonable standard of living. The distribution is where it all goes wrong.

 

If you weren't dealing with humans, that would be fine. But you are.

With humans, if you disconnect achievement (and thereby effort) from reward, which is what excessive redistribution does, then you lose a lot of productivity.

 

Too little redistribution and you fail to tape into peoples' potential. You want to train people to their full potential and generally look after them properly. That is in everybody's best interests.

Too much redistribution and you break the link between effort and reward and too many people do the bare minimum, or nothing at all.

 

Nobody knows where the perfect balance is. It changes. It's different in different cultures. It depends on what other nations are doing. There are generational, regional, and sub-cultural differences within a single nation. You're looking for the sweet spot. That's how you progress fastest and improve the lot of the people most rapidly.

 

The problem I have with Corbyn is that I judge, based largely on the evidence of history and what I see and read about around me, that he's way off on where the sweet spot is.

I actually think that he's so far off, that he would not just slow down progress, but reverse it. It's quite clear that too much redistribution and you actually make the recipients of said redistribution worse off.

 

You have to worry about the size of the pie as well as how big everybody's slice is.

 

I also worry about where Corbyn will get his money from. I worry about that a lot. A substantial increase in the basic rate of income tax seems likely (unless he tells me otherwise). Also increases in NI and business taxes which would mean fewer jobs. Then there's the matter of personal allowances and banding.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2016 at 19:47 ----------

 

The trick is getting the balance right isn't it? I also think that a good proportion of the spending should be spent on investing in the countries infrastructure.

 

I tend to agree. Although there has been some rather bad infrastructure spending of late.

I also think that education and training should be rolled together with infrastructure spending as both increase the earning power of the nation.

 

Problem is that spending rose too fast in the nougties and now has to be corrected. Once that's done, I have high hopes that you'll see the state spending pattern you describe.

Edited January 10, 2016 by unbeliever

[JFKvsNixon]

I tend to agree. Although there has been some rather bad infrastructure spending of late.

I also think that education and training should be rolled together with infrastructure spending as both increase the earning power of the nation.

 

Problem is that spending rose too fast in the nougties and now has to be corrected. Once that's done, I have high hopes that you'll see the state spending pattern you describe.

 

My problem with the Labour Government's spending was the money spent on the welfare budget, in particular the tax credits and housing benefit. I applaud the money spent on the NHS and education, although not how it encouraged the target culture with those departments.

[unbeliever]

My problem with the Labour Government's spending was the money spent on the welfare budget, in particular the tax credits and housing benefit. I applaud the money spent on the NHS and education, although not how it encouraged the target culture with those departments.

 

Quite. Too much redistribution which disincentivised work and training to better oneself.

Of course beyond spending you have to get into policy and standards as you rightly point out.

 

If they'd kept welfare spending under control, they could have boosted spending on key services and still kept the spending in terms of GDP/capita at reasonable levels.

[Anna B]

If you weren't dealing with humans, that would be fine. But you are.

With humans, if you disconnect achievement (and thereby effort) from reward, which is what excessive redistribution does, then you lose a lot of productivity.

 

Too little redistribution and you fail to tape into peoples' potential. You want to train people to their full potential and generally look after them properly. That is in everybody's best interests.

Too much redistribution and you break the link between effort and reward and too many people do the bare minimum, or nothing at all.

 

Nobody knows where the perfect balance is. It changes. It's different in different cultures. It depends on what other nations are doing. There are generational, regional, and sub-cultural differences within a single nation. You're looking for the sweet spot. That's how you progress fastest and improve the lot of the people most rapidly.

 

The problem I have with Corbyn is that I judge, based largely on the evidence of history and what I see and read about around me, that he's way off on where the sweet spot is.

I actually think that he's so far off, that he would not just slow down progress, but reverse it. It's quite clear that too much redistribution and you actually make the recipients of said redistribution worse off.

 

You have to worry about the size of the pie as well as how big everybody's slice is.

 

I also worry about where Corbyn will get his money from. I worry about that a lot. A substantial increase in the basic rate of income tax seems likely (unless he tells me otherwise). Also increases in NI and business taxes which would mean fewer jobs. Then there's the matter of personal allowances and banding.

 

---------- Post added 10-01-2016 at 19:47 ----------

 

 

I tend to agree. Although there has been some rather bad infrastructure spending of late.

I also think that education and training should be rolled together with infrastructure spending as both increase the earning power of the nation.

 

Problem is that spending rose too fast in the nougties and now has to be corrected. Once that's done, I have high hopes that you'll see the state spending pattern you describe.

 

I agree with a lot of this, but times are changing rapidly.

 

The connection between work and reward has been broken by excessively high salaries and bonuses for the few, which has a knock on effect down the chain, and is every bit a disincentive to work as benefits. Also when benefits become a more reliable form of income than work, you also have a problem.

 

But the world of work is going to undergo massive upheavals in the future with the coming of more mechanisation, computerisation and robotics. This is in the interests of business, and will maximise profits, so will continue exponentially. It is not, however, in the interest of workers who will be unable to keep their jobs.

 

There needs to be a great deal of thought given to this before we move inexorably towards a future of 'haves and have nots' that we see in the third world today.

[unbeliever]

I agree with a lot of this, but times are changing rapidly.

 

The connection between work and reward has been broken by excessively high salaries and bonuses for the few, which has a knock on effect down the chain, and is every bit a disincentive to work as benefits. Also when benefits become a more reliable form of income than work, you also have a problem.

 

But the world of work is going to undergo massive upheavals in the future with the coming of more mechanisation, computerisation and robotics. This is in the interests of business, and will maximise profits, so will continue exponentially. It is not, however, in the interest of workers who will be unable to keep their jobs.

 

There needs to be a great deal of thought given to this before we move inexorably towards a future of 'haves and have nots' that we see in the third world today.

 

The weakness of the link between effort and reward is worrying. Traditionally the link between effort and achievement was stronger and therefore so was link between effort and reward.

The solution to this is education and training. If people capable of doing the top jobs weren't so scarce, they would not command such high salaries.

But Corbyn's approach makes things worse by diminishing the link between achievement and reward. It's no solution.

[JFKvsNixon]

I agree with a lot of this, but times are changing rapidly.

 

The connection between work and reward has been broken by excessively high salaries and bonuses for the few, which has a knock on effect down the chain, and is every bit a disincentive to work as benefits. Also when benefits become a more reliable form of income than work, you also have a problem.

 

But the world of work is going to undergo massive upheavals in the future with the coming of more mechanisation, computerisation and robotics. This is in the interests of business, and will maximise profits, so will continue exponentially. It is not, however, in the interest of workers who will be unable to keep their jobs.

 

There needs to be a great deal of thought given to this before we move inexorably towards a future of 'haves and have nots' that we see in the third world today.

 

The big change in the future will be 3D printing, it will decimate manufacturing. Not even countries like China with their low wages will be able to compete.

[foxy lady]

There is enough money and food in the world for everyone to have a reasonable standard of living. The distribution is where it all goes wrong.

 

That is abject nonsense. The average person in the world earns $2,920 which is around £1800. The average Brit earns £26500.

 

America and western europe consume more than 15 times as much of the world's resourses as Africa for a similar population.

 

There isn't the fuel, food or oxygen for the rest of the world to come up to our standard. So in order to all enjoy a similar standard of living we would need to have a life style similar to people in North Korea, do away with motor vehicles and heating and share a bike and a bathroom with our neighbours.

 

I suppose that is the sort of aspiration Corbyn has for the UK, but that isn't for me.

Edited January 10, 2016 by foxy lady