Lewes Forum thread

Go on, tell 'em what you think

Lewes Forum New message

'Royal' Mail

On 14 Aug 2018 at 8:33am jake wrote:
'Royal' Mail has been fined £50 million for breaking competition laws. Its nationalisation was the biggest since the railways and was directly against the will of many British people. Two things make me particularly angry - one is that the adjective 'Royal' has become merely a brand name for a cowboy company. It speaks volumes about the aspirations of Liam Fox et al. I also am angry every time I walk past our old post office building on the High Street. This fine building belonged to us and was stolen from us in a cynical asset stripping exercise. Do we really want to vote for a government hell bent on continuing to demolish the state and all that that entails?
On 14 Aug 2018 at 8:57am Halcyon Days wrote:
Because in 14 years Blair and Brown didn't privatise a damn thing did they?. In fact I clearly recall them renationalising everything. There was 100% employment, zero inflation, no wars (hahahah), trains were on time all day everyday, dozens of beat bobbies patrolling the spotless streets, but of course they weren't needed because for those 14 halcyon years there was no crime. There was zero pollution too, everyone lived in rose lined cottages, and I mean everyone because there were no homeless people either. Oh those were the days........
On 14 Aug 2018 at 8:58am inthegutter wrote:
I share the sentiment, but I think you meant privatisation not nationalisation.
On 14 Aug 2018 at 9:08am inthegutter wrote:
@Halcyon Days
Compared to the Conservatives, Labour barely privatised anything. In fact the biggest things they privatised were BNFL, and Qinetiq (the spin-off from DERA), and some airports. The problem with re-nationalising is that it's expensive and fraught with legal complications.
Of course things weren't perfect under Labour, and they certainly made mistakes in hindsight, but at least until 2008 when the GLOBAL financial crisis his they reduced the national debt, oversaw continued growth, and increased funding for education and the NHS, as well improving civil rights for LGBT+ and other minorities.
P.S. nice attempt at using the Tu Quoque Fallacy as your argument.
On 14 Aug 2018 at 9:28am @inthegutter wrote:
@inthegutter.....You make a fair argument against my less than serious post. However it remains the case that the left are in denial and continually seek to blame anyone and everyone other than themselves and their, quite frankly, weird politics, for all the worlds ills.
I confess I had to look up Tu Quoque Fallacy, my private education taught me very little, except how to cheat at cards and disguise a gouge in the scrum. Every day is a school day.
On 14 Aug 2018 at 9:34am clear sighted wrote:
Hard as it is to reconcile, I think Blair simply followed on with Thatcher's mission of adopting a neoliberal economic policy; as did Brown. The Labour party became inhabited by politicians happy with the 'filthy rich' and tending to the needs of 'the market'. We really have been in the thrall of this doctrine at the heart of government since 1989 and politics has become an arena for those who can best serve the needs of the market. There has been no real choice.
To my mind it is an international movement. The uproar over the possibility of a moderate labour government is testament to a real fear of those in power of the threat of kinder politics.
On 14 Aug 2018 at 9:44am @clearsighted wrote:
Except there will never be another moderate Labour government. The choice is communism-lite under Corbyn and McDonnel, or Tory-lite under....actually I have no idea who they are anymore.
On 14 Aug 2018 at 10:14am Just Saying wrote:
Can anyone give me a single example of where privatisation has saved money for the customer (don't say BT as opening the market to competition is what reduced the costs not privatisation)?
On 14 Aug 2018 at 10:24am inthegutter wrote:
@Halycon Days
I'm not sure what you're getting at... what are the "weird politics of the left"?
To elucidate my economic position: I think virtually everyone in this country acknowledges that the "state" (i.e. members of society pooling resources) is beneficial. Where we economically (left-centre-right) differ is the range of activities that are socialised. I doubt even the most hardcore libertarian in the UK (I can imagine it in the US though) would think it's a good idea not to have socialised defence (Her Majesty's Armed Forces) and civil protection (emergency services). I imagine even most Conservatives support some-degree of socialised education, road system, and even education. Beyond these is where you get into left-centre-right disagreements. My thoughts on the matter are that there are other services which are natural monopolies and thus should be entirely socialised: utilities, and rail transport for example.

On 14 Aug 2018 at 11:30am clearsighted wrote:
The point I was trying to make albeit by implication is that the present Labour leadership is truly moderate compared with the early ground breaking post war governments. It is also truly moderate when compared with the radical neoliberal policies of recent conservative and 'new' labour administrations. (I include the promiscuous Liberal Democrats in this as well) This is why disinformation is so dangerous. The demonisation of current Labour policy is because of its modest aims for a fairer society. Anything that seeks to soften the greedy and disruptive practices of big business and their tame politicians is seen as an idealogical threat. Hence the unrelenting increasingly bold and crass spurious attacks on Corbyn. There's a frenzied panic to find the elusive dirt that doesn't actually exist, orchestrated by a slavish media. The existing Labour party is no existential threat. It is merely moving politics slightly to the left, therefore giving a modest choice to voters instead of the merely centre right and extreme right options - the damage of which can be seen all around us. We currently live in a cruel and uncaring society.
On 14 Aug 2018 at 11:36am Mark wrote:
Absolutely @Halycon Days, to privatise an industry leaving the owner with a monopoly is clearly wrong and will invariably result in an increase in costs to the consumer and a deterioration in service. That's basic stuff. And yet it's been done repeatedly. Of course the government were aware that privately-owned water companies would develop into profiteers. They couldn't have not realised that. This alone is proof of the neocapitalist agenda that Clear Sighted describes. Hayek, Freidman and others were paid by American business interests to give it quasi-academic credentials. Ronald Reagan became its mouthpiece. Margaret Thatcher bought into it wholesale and imported it to the UK. Now its how we roll.
On 14 Aug 2018 at 11:38am Mark wrote:
A silly little thing like The Royal Mail matters very little to that machine.
On 14 Aug 2018 at 7:26pm Wide awake wrote:
At last, some reasoned debate - spot on chaps

24 posts left

Your response

You must now log in (or register) to post
Click here to add a link »
Smile Wink Sad Confused Kiss Favourite Fishing Devil Cool



Lewes Portal 78:143
Lewes Portal

Is that such bad news. Years after year, the same old tedious thing. more
Liberty cannot be preserved without general knowledge among the people.
John Adams