So What's Neoliberalism?

[Delbow 686]

57 minutes ago, apelike said:

The problem with that however is that European tradition is now also one of Neoliberalism and far stronger than in the UK

 

Surely it's mixed. Macron has been trying hard to introduce a neoliberal dimension to France's economy but is facing a lot of barriers. Germany has a much more consensual politics between employers and unions, and is federal so there may be differences between states. Economic liberalism has crept in a bit in Scandinavia, but is possibly in retreat in Denmark. Some countries have many more state run services than the UK does.

[tinfoilhat 11]

20 minutes ago, Anna B said:

The issue with Milliband in this context is the treatment he got in the press, again personal attacks on him, rather than his policies, for 'eating a bacon sandwich,' pinching the leadership off his brother, and having a 'Britain hating father;' very similar to the personal smearing of Corbyn, and hardly qualifying as first rate journalism, but they stick in the mind of the Red Top Labour voters and do the damage. Michael Foot got the same treatment.

 

Anything considered 'left wing' gets systematically trashed. Unions for example are constantly portrayed as evil and damaging to Britain. No wonder Union membership has dropped, when we actually need it more than ever. Everything is skewed in favour of keeping the right in power.

The power of the media, which is in the hands of only a few oligarchs, cannot be underestimated.

It is a very well known way of controlling the masses.  

But the treatment he received - to a point  - was deserved. I wasn't a fan. His policies were muddled and a bit odd. He was trying to be all things to all men and lacked humanity, fearing, to me at least, of offending the wrong people at the wrong time, both inside his party and out.

 

Now 2020 Ed is different gravy. Hes not going to eat any kind of sandwich to keep the press happy. I like firebrand, devil may care Ed. If he'd gone down this road when he was leader, I'd have voted for him. 

[apelike 10]

3 minutes ago, Delbow said:

Surely it's mixed.

Not really as the EU itself is a very Neoliberal organisation so all those that are members are also Neoliberal, its just that they are Social Democratic Neoliberals.

 

[Mister M 1,608]

1 hour ago, apelike said:

 

According to Unison: https://www.unison.org.uk/care-workers-your-rights/#:~:text=Yes.,the work that they do.&text=This means that time spent,included in the pay calculation.

 

"All homecare workers are entitled to be paid at least the national minimum wage or national living wage for the work that they do. This includes care workers on zero hours contracts.

This means that time spent caring for clients, travelling to appointments and waiting to start the appointment should be included in the pay calculation."

 

They also go on to say the guidance is clear, its against the law and people not getting the correct pay should claim or get in touch with them.

 

 

Anna stated in her post of #208

 

"....Carer was not allowed to do certain things alone like lift her up the bed, she was told she needed to employ an extra carer for that, doubling the cost."

 

That is a result of Health and Safety laws that guide Carers. Some of the big expenditures on the NHS over the past few decades has also been because of Health and Safety laws designed to protect workers.

However what should happen doesn't always mean does:

Legal win for care workers not paid travel time sees them awarded £10,000 in back pay (homecare.co.uk)

Many of the workers are non unionised and probably are also  frightened of repercussions if they do go to the authorities. 

 

[Mister M 1,608]

1 hour ago, apelike said:

The problem with that however is that European tradition is now also one of Neoliberalism and far stronger than in the UK.

 

Without going off topic too much, Miliband's problem was he was just like Hague in that he was bland and not charismatic enough to be a leader of government.

 

My impression was that countries like Germany have, or had up until recently a much more mixed economy, a more equitable balance between employers & trade unions, and a stronger social security system.

[Arnold_Lane 0]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

The power of the media, which is in the hands of only a few oligarchs, cannot be underestimated.

It is a very well known way of controlling the masses.  

Repeating this will never make it true.

[Anna B 1,401]

12 hours ago, apelike said:

So Anna, what do you have or can put forward that will or can replace the current structure?

 

When it comes to business and politics unless you have something better to offer, that the masses will go for, then its bound to fail just like a new product will.

I think the answer is a return to Responsible Capitalism, as advocated by Jeremy Corbyn. That's why I was so disappointed at the way he was treated. 

 

Having said that, we are moving into uncharted times, with things like automation and AI, so we have a chance to try new ideas. One thing's for sure, we have to have a more equal society and a more equal world. Handled properly, automation is a game changer that could benefit everyone, but the profits have to trickle down.

 

My fear is it will just make the rich, richer, at the expense of everyone else. 

 

[Arnold_Lane 0]

2 minutes ago, Anna B said:

I think the answer is a return to Responsible Capitalism, as advocated by Jeremy Corbyn. That's why I was so disappointed at the way he was treated. 

 

Apelike said something the masses will go for.  They didn't go for Corbyn.  Twice.  

 

I saw Corbyn on TV a lot and thought him a petulant, unintelligent, un-dynamic, fence-sitting bore who promised more than he could deliver.  So I didn't vote for him or his party.  The only part the media played there was putting him on TV for me to see for myself.  Clearly many others felt the same.  Of course it's easier to say it was a conspiracy against him because that absolves him of responsibility for his and the party's failings under his leadership.  His supporters didn't help either and ought to now accept that.

 

So, what else?

 

I didn't vote Tory either.

 

 

 

 

[Mister M 1,608]

28 minutes ago, Arnold_Lane said:

Apelike said something the masses will go for.  They didn't go for Corbyn.  Twice.  

 

I saw Corbyn on TV a lot and thought him a petulant, unintelligent, un-dynamic, fence-sitting bore who promised more than he could deliver.  So I didn't vote for him or his party.  The only part the media played there was putting him on TV for me to see for myself.  Clearly many others felt the same.  Of course it's easier to say it was a conspiracy against him because that absolves him of responsibility for his and the party's failings under his leadership.  His supporters didn't help either and ought to now accept that.

 

So, what else?

 

I didn't vote Tory either.

 

 

 

 

I'm sure there are lots of people who voted Tory because they feared a petulant, unintelligent, un-dynamic, fence-sitting bore who promised more than he could deliver.

And look what they / we ended up with: a petulant, unintelligent, un-dynamic, fence-sitting bore who promised more than he could deliver. And much else beside.

And speaking of leaders wanting to absolve themselves of responsibility....

Edited February 10, 2021 by Mister M

[Arnold_Lane 0]

3 minutes ago, Mister M said:

I'm sure there are lots of people who voted Tory because they feared a petulant, unintelligent, un-dynamic, fence-sitting bore who promised more than he could deliver.

And look what they / we ended up with: a petulant, unintelligent, un-dynamic, fence-sitting bore who promised more than he could deliver. And much else beside.

And speaking of leaders wanting to absolve themselves of responsibility....

Quite.

[apelike 10]

1 hour ago, Mister M said:

I'm sure there are lots of people who voted Tory because they feared a petulant, unintelligent, un-dynamic, fence-sitting bore who promised more than he could deliver.

I'm honestly not sure that is true. Many like me voted Tory this time round because of Brexit and the demographics on that are undisputable. A great deal of them were floating voters like me who decided being out of the EU was what they wanted so they voted in a Tory government that would uphold the result of a democratically held referendum.  Corbyn wanted to ignore that, stay in the EU and try to reform it from within, which was never going to happen even if he had won. The EU is a collective and one member alone will not and cannot change that. What voters ended up with was a 2 edged sword, good (Brexit) and bad (Tory), and the next GE will determine whether this Tory government can stay in power.

 

Edited February 10, 2021 by apelike

[Anna B 1,401]

13 minutes ago, apelike said:

I'm honestly not sure that is true. Many like me voted Tory this time round because of Brexit and the demographics on that are undisputable. A great deal of them were floating voters like me who decided being out of the EU was what they wanted so they voted in a Tory government that would uphold the result of a democratically held referendum.  Corbyn wanted to ignore that, stay in the EU and try to reform it from within, which was never going to happen even if he had won. The EU is a collective and one member alone will not and cannot change that. What voters ended up with was a 2 edged sword, good (Brexit) and bad (Tory), and the next GE will determine whether this Tory government can stay in power.

 

I'm sure you're right.

The Tories very cleverly, and deliberately tied the election to Brexit, thus diverting attention from their poor austerity record and other misdemeanors. People forget that. Similarly the Tories only gained power with the help of the Lib Dems, and Mrs May lost her majority massively in spite of calling a snap election and ended up with a hung parliament,

So not as cut and dried as people claim. 

 

As for Corbyn, it's his policies of returning to Responsible Capitalism I'm advocating, not necessarily the man in charge. 

I want somebody who looks out for the people not the Mega Corporations. The many, not the few.

 

Having said that, Corbyn was a very rare politician; experienced, honest and incorruptable.

He also had the principles, integrity, and the drive to follow through with what he proposed.

They don't come along very often, if ever, and will be a tough act to follow.

Starmer isn't a patch, and doesn't want the same things, as proved by the purging of the Corbynista agenda. He is Neoliberal through and through, and doesn't represent a threat to the status quo. 

 

So no real choice anymore, just business as usual whoever wins the next election...more of the same.