Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

A thank you to Brexiteers.

Still no functioning government in Northern Ireland at the moment which can be clearly traced to the fall out from the referendum.
I think it is because leave and lexit voters are cunts.
 
Still no functioning government in Northern Ireland at the moment which can be clearly traced to the fall out from the referendum.
I think it is because leave and lexit voters are cunts
 
Smokeandsteam said:
On the latter point globalisation is already in retreat/decline:


The key features of the neoliberal orthodoxy of the last 40 years: outsourcing, offshoring, freedom of movement of capital and labour to new plunder zones are all slowing. Biden and Trump will both emphasise national economy measured in the US elections: isolationism, recovery, driving domestic demand, onshoring etc.

There is a debate about the extent to which the process above is occurring and where, but the peak years of globalisation seem to be in the past.

On your first point, Germany and elsewhere adopted a policy of ‘just transition’ to protect their national economy and manage the shift away from basic productive capacity. Had the political will existed - and had Thatcher been defeated by the organised working class -
we could have and probably would have some the same.
Click to expand...
We’ll see. Agree the peak years might be in the past, as balance of power shifts away from ‘the west’ but can’t see a real retreat until it’s really no longer cheaper for companies to manufacture in China etc. only then might ‘made in the USA’ become a real thing again.
About 8/10 jobs in the UK are in services now, can’t see us coming back from that very easily, Judging what’s going on by electioneering speeches seems dubious.
 
The39thStep said:
Ok, brief and rushed summary of criticisms of the 'post-war consensus. The common narrative is that the Tories did not or were unable to challenge the reforms of the post war Labour government, that the experience of the interwar coalition had built the foundations for consensus, and that the breakdown of the consensus was the Thatcher government.

This has been contested not just by Marxists but by other historians. Ben Pimlott is probably the most famous critic.

Opposition to the notion of consensus would say that despite the landslide victory of the Atlee government, the Tories opposed many Labour government policies. These would include nationalisation or proposals to nationalise both in the 1945 government and then also in the 1951 elections. This included the nationalisation of iron and steel , road haulage and sugar. Whereas the Atlee government centred around some forms of collective provision the Tories followed a policy of individual households ie the expansion of the economy for car ownership rather than public transport, for white household goods such as washing machines rather than council laundries, against rationing ( Labour thought rationing reduced some inequalities and actually campaigned on rationing in the 1951 election. The Tories ( and what was left of the Liberals) opposed identity cards, the direction of labour and their 1951 election campaign was based on Set Britain Free ( from socialist control) . The Conservatives opposed the rising of tax and its 1951 government cut public spending.

Pimlott also points out that one would expect in a consensus that party loyalty would dilute as voters may make adjustments of who to vote for on the question of emphasis rather than policy difference. In fact party loyalty in elections did not erode and in fact the Tories stayed in office for 13 years and then only narrowly lost the election.

The coalition government period as consensus has generally suffered the same fate as the myth of the blitz with a number of studies of days lost in strikes and stoppages and the jailing of strikers ( ironically the jailing of strikers continued into the Atlee years so at least there was consensus on that) . However there were some coalition policies that were enacted by the Labour government, the Education Act ( a Tory policy) , the Town and Country Planning Act, full employment ( both for the rebuilding of the economy and as a reform) and the Beveridge report ( written by the Liberals) .The Tories opposed the initial plans for the NHS ( ironically agreeing with the Morrison wing of Labour that the hospitals should be private/charity base) Other historians have also pointed out that the lack of opposition to the nationalisation of coal and railways was not one of ideology but simply that the private sector was in no position to finance the reinvestment of stock, machinery and infrastructure that was required .

There are also some views that Crossland's influence was a decisive break in any continuity /consensus in the direction of the Labour Party, that the Callaghan government was the first to announce a break with Keynesian economics and that both Tory and Labour governments were constrained in various ways by both the Cold War and the Bretton-Wood agreement.
Click to expand...
Interesting, ta. Fair enough that there were differences between tories and labour on individual policies. Isn’t the real measure though how well the governments addressed the five "giants on the road to reconstruction (“poverty, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness”)? So needing a measure of social security and unemployment benefits and pensions, National Health Service, free education, council housing, and full employment from public ownership of essential industries.

I drew a graph 10 years or so ago of UK unemployment and sickness rates from 1881 to 2010 with statistical process behaviour limits to separate out the different economic systems. This shows full employment (only people out of work were classed as between jobs) and unique lack of boom and bust over the whole period, particularly clearly up to 70s. That’s almost the most important measure for me – giving the whole population reliable work to provide the essential services. Thatcher definitely broke that, impoverishing 3 million replaced by ‘handouts’ to rob them of self respect and the chance to contribute.


unemployment.jpg


Would be interesting to see other figures. I found this for house building, although council house building figures, and house prices and rents, might be better and more dramatic. Again shows 1945 to early 70s consistent investment, dropping off since then.

housing.jpg
 
philosophical said:
Still no functioning government in Northern Ireland at the moment which can be clearly traced to the fall out from the referendum.
I think it is because leave and lexit voters are cunts.
Click to expand...
philosophical said:
Still no functioning government in Northern Ireland at the moment which can be clearly traced to the fall out from the referendum.
I think it is because leave and lexit voters are cunts
Click to expand...

Posting the same thing twice doesn't make it true, you muppet
 
two sheds said:
Interesting, ta. Fair enough that there were differences between tories and labour on individual policies. Isn’t the real measure though how well the governments addressed the five "giants on the road to reconstruction (“poverty, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness”)? So needing a measure of social security and unemployment benefits and pensions, National Health Service, free education, council housing, and full employment from public ownership of essential industries.

I drew a graph 10 years or so ago of UK unemployment and sickness rates from 1881 to 2010 with statistical process behaviour limits to separate out the different economic systems. This shows full employment (only people out of work were classed as between jobs) and unique lack of boom and bust over the whole period, particularly clearly up to 70s. That’s almost the most important measure for me – giving the whole population reliable work to provide the essential services. Thatcher definitely broke that, impoverishing 3 million replaced by ‘handouts’ to rob them of self respect and the chance to contribute. The full employment shows a unique lack of boom and bust during that period.


View attachment 373475


Would be interesting to see other figures. I found this for house building, although council house building figures, and house prices and rents, might be better and more dramatic. Again shows 1945 to early 70s consistent investment, dropping off since then.

View attachment 373476
Click to expand...


Cheers. What we are looking at is the period which is normally categorised as Kensyian isn't and the early 70s mid-70s categorised as neoliberalism. Cant be easily segmented by exact date as capitalism is fluent and generally dynamic but state intervention certainly not unique to post-1945 although more widely used post-1945.
You could probably try relabel the top graph into other economic theory ie laissez fair/neoclassical, monopoly capitalism, Keynesian and neo liberal for some consistency?
 
The39thStep said:
Cheers. What we are looking at is the period which is normally categorised as Kensyian isn't and the early 70s mid-70s categorised as neoliberalism. Cant be easily segmented by exact date as capitalism is fluent and generally dynamic but state intervention certainly not unique to post-1945 although more widely used post-1945.
You could probably try relabel the top graph into other economic theory ie laissez fair/neoclassical, monopoly capitalism, Keynesian and neo liberal for some consistency?
Click to expand...
inter war period was monopoly capitalism? How was it different to pre WWI?
 
two sheds said:
inter war period was monopoly capitalism? How was it different to pre WWI?
Click to expand...
Obviously its rough and short hand labelling years wise etc but I would say characterised by beginning of state intervention as necessary to provide the infrastructure for capitalist production for example; Germany nationalised railways, the UK nationalised electricity, airways , London Transport, France nationalised railways etc . Increasing state intervention in the period leading up to and during WW2.

btw I'm off out for a drink now so will be beyond anything but insulting people or telling anecdotes.
 
T & P said:
But don't you get it? It's all the fault of the Remoaners that things have turned out they way they have. Our former EU partners are of course a bunch of gullible fools- everyone knows that- who would have agreed to any pisspoor Brexit agreement Boris would have put in front of them, as the Leave campaign had rightly been telling us throughout the build-up to the referendum. But then all the complaining and political turmoil after the vote caused by us treacherous enemies of the people opened their eyes and made them, completely unreasonably, to refuse to let the UK continuing to enjoy all the benefits and perks of EU membership without being a member anymore.

We nearly had those Johnny Foreigners. If only some of us had kept our mouths shut... :(
Click to expand...
Indeed the have our cake and eat it deal was oven ready, it was just traitors like me that meant it got spaffed up the wall....
 
The39thStep said:
We will lose the momentum if we start somewhere again and tbh this thread needs to up its game. Btw the Financial Times article that brogdale took the wages/gdp graph from is actually a very good https://archive.ph/d5be1
Click to expand...
“The trend is clear across EU countries: workers are losing economic ground. Subdued wage growth, underemployment and unstable jobs have all helped to fuel a sense of grievanceamong many workers that they are missing out on the proceeds of growth.”

Imagine how bad things would be if they weren’t being protected by the EU.
 
The39thStep said:
Obviously its rough and short hand labelling years wise etc but I would say characterised by beginning of state intervention as necessary to provide the infrastructure for capitalist production for example; Germany nationalised railways, the UK nationalised electricity, airways , London Transport, France nationalised railways etc . Increasing state intervention in the period leading up to and during WW2.

btw I'm off out for a drink now so will be beyond anything but insulting people or telling anecdotes.
Click to expand...
Enjoy :)

Mind you the depression took over US & UK as dominant event didn't it? Shows up really clearly on the unemployment graph in huge number of unemployed rather than having them employed in nationalizing the industries (I hadn't realized these were nationalized that early).
 
Smokeandsteam said:
“The trend is clear across EU countries: workers are losing economic ground. Subdued wage growth, underemployment and unstable jobs have all helped to fuel a sense of grievanceamong many workers that they are missing out on the proceeds of growth.”

Imagine how bad things would be if they weren’t being protected by the EU.
Click to expand...
Almost as though the same forces are at work whether a polity is within or without the trading bloc of the supra state?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kid_Eternity
No thanks app - boycotting Israel with a tap of a button
Replies
4
Views
424
existentialist
existentialist
ash
Another Brexit benefit- using Wi-Fi in Europe
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
Elpenor
Elpenor
editor
  • Poll
Do you want a separate Brexit forum?
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
5K
platinumsage
platinumsage
Serene
So what happened to 350 million a week from brexit being put into the NHS??
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
tony.c
Any 11pm Brexit fireworks near you?
Replies
23
Views
1K
N_igma
N_igma
Back
Top Bottom