|
Cerv posted:http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/news-opinion/derek-hatton-i-now-serious-12531334 to be fair, that's Derek Hatton his career arc is a little akin to Jerry Rubin
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 16:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
you can examine the sausage here: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2016-17/europeanunionnotificationofwithdrawal/documents.html
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
Sion posted:Labour MPs who did not vote for the curious, a few minutes with chris hanretty's estimates:  diane abbott must be having a really bad migraine
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:Man, if Swansea West only voted 42% Leave then Swansea East must have voted pretty heavily to leave since Swansea was leave overall hanretty's estimate for Swansea East is 62.1% I am not familiar enough with the town to know why there might be such a sharp divergence - Hanretty's estimates are driven by demographic statistics, so it must be pretty sharply different
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
More numbers, from the BBC page:pre:+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+-------------+--------+ | | | %Vote Leave | >50% | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+-------------+--------+ | The Labour MPs to go against their party's three-line whip - the strictest instruction to vote - were: | | | | | | | | | | Heidi Alexander (Lewisham East) | Lewisham East | 35.4% | | | Rushanara Ali (Bethnal Green and Bow) | Bethnal Green and Bow | 30.9% | | | Graham Allen (Nottingham North) | Nottingham North | 65.5% | Leave | | Rosena Allin-Khan (Tooting) | Tooting | 25.3% | | | Luciana Berger (Liverpool, Wavertree) | Liverpool, Wavertree | 35.8% | | | Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) | Exeter | 44.7% | | | Kevin Brennan (Cardiff West) | Cardiff West | 44.8% | | | Lyn Brown (West Ham) | West Ham | 47.4% | | | Chris Bryant (Rhondda) | Rhondda | 61.2% | Leave | | Karen Buck (Westminster North) | Westminster North | 33.0% | | | Dawn Butler (Brent Central) | Brent Central | 42.9% | | | Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) | Brentford and Isleworth | 39.5% | | | Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley) | Cynon Valley | 57.0% | Leave | | Ann Coffey (Stockport) | Stockport | 48.2% | | | Neil Coyle (Bermondsey and Old Southwark) | Bermondsey and Old Southwark | 27.0% | | | Mary Creagh (Wakefield) | Wakefield | 62.0% | Leave | | Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) | Walthamstow | 36.4% | | | Thangam Debbonaire (Bristol West) | Bristol West | 20.4% | | | Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) | Cardiff South and Penarth | 44.9% | | | Jim Dowd (Lewisham West and Penge) | Lewisham West and Penge | 34.5% | | | Maria Eagle (Garston and Halewood) | Garston and Halewood | 47.9% | | | Louise Ellman (Liverpool, Riverside) | Liverpool, Riverside | 26.9% | | | Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme) | Newcastle-under-Lyme | 61.7% | Leave | | Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) | Lewisham, Deptford | 24.7% | | | Mike Gapes (Ilford South) | Ilford South | 43.9% | | | Lilian Greenwood (Nottingham South) | Nottingham South | 45.0% | | | Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) | Dulwich and West Norwood | 22.1% | | | Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) | Hackney South and Shoreditch | 22.2% | | | Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) | Ealing Central and Acton | 28.2% | | | Peter Kyle (Hove) | Hove | 33.9% | | | David Lammy (Tottenham) | Tottenham | 33.4% | | | Rachael Maskell (York Central) | York Central | 38.5% | | | Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) | Bristol East | 48.8% | | | Catherine McKinnell (Newcastle upon Tyne North) | Newcastle upon Tyne North | 57.1% | Leave | | Madeleine Moon (Bridgend) | Bridgend | 49.7% | | | Ian Murray (Edinburgh South) | Edinburgh South | 23.6% | | | Stephen Pound (Ealing North) | Ealing North | 48.8% | | | Virendra Sharma (Ealing Southall) | Ealing, Southall | 44.3% | | | Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Kilburn) | Hampstead and Kilburn | 23.5% | | | Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) | Hammersmith | 31.0% | | | Jeff Smith (Manchester Withington) | Manchester, Withington | 26.3% | | | Owen Smith (Pontypridd) | Pontypridd | 45.8% | | | Jo Stevens (Cardiff Central) | Cardiff Central | 30.4% | | | Stephen Timms (East Ham) | East Ham | 46.9% | | | Catherine West (Hornsey and Wood Green) | Hornsey and Wood Green | 18.5% | | | Alan Whitehead (Southampton Test) | Southampton, Test | 50.7% | Leave | | Daniel Zeichner (Cambridge) | Cambridge | 26.5% | | | | | | | | Labour MPs who did not vote | | | | | | | | | | Diane Abbott (Hackney North) | Hackney North and Stoke Newington | 20.9% | | | Roberta Blackman-Woods (City of Durham) | City of Durham | 44.4% | | | Geraint Davies (Swansea West) | Swansea West | 42.7% | | | Pat Glass ( NW Durham) | North West Durham | 55.0% | Leave | | Kate Green (Stretford and Urmston) | Stretford and Urmston | 48.5% | | | Margaret Hodge (Barking) | Barking | 60.3% | Leave | | George Howarth (Knowsley) | Knowsley | 52.4% | Leave | | Sir Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton) | Manchester, Gorton | 37.9% | | | Chris Leslie (Nottingham East) | Nottingham East | 42.8% | | | Ian Mearns (Gateshead) | Gateshead | 56.0% | Leave | | Angela Smith (Penistone and Stocksbridge) | Penistone and Stocksbridge | 61.3% | Leave | | | | | | | One Conservative MP voted against | | | | | | | | | | Ken Clarke (Rushcliffe) | Rushcliffe | 41.3% | | | | | | | | Conservative MPs who did not vote | | | | | | | | | | Jake Berry (Rossendale and Darwen) | Rossendale and Darwen | 58.6% | Leave | | Nick Boles (Grantham and Stamford) | Grantham and Stamford | 61.0% | Leave | | Sir Alan Haselhurst (Saffron Walden) | Saffron Walden | 50.9% | Leave | | Sir Roger Gale (North Thanet) | North Thanet | 65.0% | Leave | | Karen Lumley (Redditch) | Redditch | 61.4% | Leave | | Mike Wood (Dudley South) | Dudley South | 70.2% | Leave | | | | | | | Liberal Democrat MPs who did not vote | | | | | | | | | | Norman Lamb (North Norfolk) | North Norfolk | 58.3% | Leave | | Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West) | Leeds North West | 35.4% | | | | | | | | SNP MPs who did not vote | | | | | | | | | | Callum McCaig (Aberdeen South) | Aberdeen South | 32.3% | | | Corri Wilson (Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock) | Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock | 43.0% | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------+-------------+--------+
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:That's indecipherable on mobile. True. Okay, have this: 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
Would-be socialist organizations outside of state control suffer from one fundamental problem: with freedom of exit, and without the ability to enforce taxes or effective taxes, the organization devolves into an endless barrel of adverse selection A dependence on some state-granted power is necessary to remain sustainable - the challenge is defending the political sustainability of these powers. You might think that stuff like "don't insult, confront, and enrage all possible allies" might be obvious. But it isn't. A second problem is that the cultural aversion to governance - that drives people to form such organizations to begin with - then leads to serious organizational dysfunctions and abuses as the organization grows larger. But that's another thing altogether.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
Sion posted:Corbyn's Big Beef Melt~ Corbae's Big Bottle of Jam wait
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
I wonder what Labour internal polling indicates at this point
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Yeah, but, again, who are these people? Because all previous experiences of Labour have shown that the way they think you have a proper discourse about immigration is to villify migrants. Tony Blair did this, which is how we started fetishising the Australian System, and the pitch in 2015 included the racist mug. Among the many popular criticisms of Corbyn that've leaked to the media, that he "doesn't get the working class" because he doesn't sufficiently villify migrants is among them. Who is there who's going to say "Actually migrants aren't stealing your jobs, the employment market just sucks and we're going to fix it", or "they're not taking the council houses/NHS beds, we just have nowhere near enough of them"? The trend of Labour does not appear to suggest this is a move that most of the PLP is willing to make. the public despises immigration regardless of the welfare system or lack thereof; this has been vividly true since the politics of the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1962. They don't give a poo poo about whether the country has full employment, far above anything reached in this neoliberal age (the unemployment rate in 1960 was 1.7%). They don't care that they have booming numbers of council houses. There are always too many immigrants. (at the same time they also want to say that they love and support Hard Working Immigrants, that they believe that Families Should Be Reunited, that they think that Britain Should Help The Targets Of Genocide Because Never Again Etc Etc. But you can only decide how to square this circle once you are in office) some desultory I-feel-your-pain-ing is always necessary; there's no call for going overboard, though, since at its core the voters who care most about migrants also straight-up don't believe that Labour will control immigration, and will not believe Labour no matter what statements it issues. It's just: don't go around openly confronting or insulting these people, because they have friends and families and they, as a class, vote too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
if I were on Corbyn's strategic team I'd be much more nervous about whether the Brexit furore is weakening Momentum, especially now that the Momentum NCG elections have put a slate into place for a whole year anyway, have some drama fodder: https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/827500089430175746
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
there seems a serious level of dispute amongst the Momentum types over whether the Peterborough speech was supposed to serve the Labour left or the Labour right (which, to me, seems an extension of the underlying dispute whether Brexit can be Lexit made incarnate)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:kinda funny but also highlights how ridiculous the rail fare system in the UK is. it's that way because of patchwork subsidies to protect niche groups the entire logical, and predictable, impact of making these subsidies more obvious is that they'll become more expensive to sustain and then be finally dismantled, two decades after the transition to unregulated fares
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 06:47
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Everyone take out your copybooks, today's lesson is Liberals will always defend right wing populism over any kind of leftism. Write it 100 times. the writer is a American conservative/libertarian/small-gubmint type though he's a senior fellow of this. he writes for that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
as for why the Grauniad is picking it up: a mixture of #slatepitch contrariness and because the article, byline aside, is indistinguishable from left-wing authors making the same charge of corrupt and incompetent elites running the establishment
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
aside from the Americanism of using "middle class" to invoke the notion of the wage labouring class, the essay could have come from a left-wing populist, of which there are plenty of course CiF leans towards a particular set of views; non-liberal ones have to pass a somewhat higher bar than liberal ones. combine that with a desire for ronya fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Feb 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:That and the idea that Trump is somehow not part of the 'elites' himself, which Trump claims, Davidson strongly implies, and no left-wing populist would believe. cough substitute "anti-establishment" if you prefer
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
assuming that one thinks that it was about the by-election, three-lining the bill must seem like a great move in retrospect
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
the bank of england has the final say on whether there will be a crash, although a painful decline in projected growth that demands more austerity is of course another possibility
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
Jippa posted:Land devs are apparently sitting on loads of unused plots that already have planning permission granted so they can trickle out new homes and keep the prices high. it is an entirely predictable outcome if planning permission is cheap, but takes long time to grant, and land prices exhibit some volatility it is then entirely the public policy planner's policy problem if the policy planner rations itself based on the number of lots granted permission, rather than the number of lots actually U/C. the impact is, really, entirely foreseeable. anyway the country probably doesn't need to set fire to the green belt, but I can see it easily being the path of least resistance, especially if it lines up along partisan lines rather than a mix of CPRE and Green types
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:One of the greatest tricks of liberalism is to split that leisure time such that some have too little and are overworked, and some have too much and too little income. We then call the latter group skivers and seek to prove how we're not one of them by demanding ever shittier working conditions. so they can work after all, says a Tory waving a jobscentre slash bill. we knew it. put 'em to work. And since, as the liberals frequently tell us, we are on the left side of the Laffer curve and therefore tax cuts do not increase labour supply, tax cuts will decrease labour supply. And so the noble hard-working will go home earlier! What a shock, Tory prescriptions for a Marxist nostrum? And this is the point, hopefully, where you remember that Marx was a classical economist. His framework implies some really odd things about policies written from a postwar-liberal perspective. aaaaanyway. what's especially remarkable is that there's an odd parallel, at least facially, between the Marxist reserve-army-of-labour intuition and the contemporary efficiency-wages shirking model (which, despite the name, implies an equilibrium that is inefficient in a contemporary sense). the main differences are 1) what they imply about the cyclical behaviour of these aggregates during recessions, and 2) what they imply about the response to policies or external changes that might increase or decrease the real wage level ronya fucked around with this message at 14:35 on Feb 8, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
Parliament does not sit every day.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:Charity Shop as an insult is incredibly classist and basically shows a disdain for the poor. more an insult for a certain overeducated middle class anxiety imo shop volunteers are sometimes the noble poor or the bohemian intellectual, but they're often those who don't need the income quote:We also know that the great bulk of volunteering, charitable giving and civic participation is accounted for by a relatively small subset of the population – termed the "civic core" (those who collectively contribute two-thirds of unpaid help, participation in civic groups and charitable donations). New analysis in the Third Sector Research Centre shows that: 1% of the population account for 9% of the volume of unpaid help recorded in the Citizenship Survey; two-thirds of unpaid help is given by around 7% of the population; 87% is given by 31%. The core groups are largely composed of well educated, middle-aged professionals; 57% have higher education qualifications; 33% have degrees and are aged 40-64; over 40% of females with degrees are in these "core" groups. With these groups approaching saturation, a wider range of people will need to be drawn into voluntary action; we can't just trawl for the usual suspects.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2017 14:41
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:here are some tweets with slopey lines in them that trend looks weak enough to be driven by just one or two of the polls at the edges I don't disagree with the thesis, I just think the graph doesn't show much
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
Pochoclo posted:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-38971675 it's a sunset industry regardless, mainly because the price of energy is too high in the UK anyway if the UK govt could not be moved to bail it out when it was 1) considerably more socialist in its outlook, 2) considerably more involved in its ownership, and 3) had hundreds of thousands of relatively poorly-paid generational workers, not thousands of semi-skilled-to-skilled workers earning well over median wage, well, really, why would anyone expect it to be saved now
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
sure. I vote that the hydroelectric dams be built over your town, whilst the electricity powers the industry in mine. (remember capel celyn!) after decades of tumult, britain finds nominally independent statutory regulators to be a necessity for civil-social peace. solve that first, then propose nationalisation again.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
Canada has more party discipline than vanilla Westminster - the traditional analysis is that the UK has a three-line whip system, where only defying the three-line whip has substantive consequences, and conversely the three-line whip is theoretically only used in areas where party confidence is to be demonstrated. So the semantic difference between a one-line whip and a free vote is that a free vote implies that the party position is to explicitly demur conversely, in the Canadian federal parliament, all votes are treated as votes of confidence unless explicitly freed; this is a source of considerable angst to Canadian pro-democratisation reformers
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
as a rule of thumb, all of the Westminster spinoffs are considerably more party-centralist than the vanilla flavour, having diverged considerably since 1911 party it is due to constitutionalisation - stuff that was merely convention, like resigning to contest a by-election whenever one is expelled or crosses the floor (even if the number of rebels is not enough to collapse confidence) was, at the beginning of the 20th century, only a parliamentary convention. the UK proceeded to discard it for being undemocratic. New Zealand and Singapore encoded it in law.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
then again, the traditional analysis also holds that Labour is more cohesive and disciplined than the Tories, even though the crack started with Benn and that was how many decades ago now new stuff happens every now and then; that's why it's new
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I get the impression sometimes that the Tory party right now is like a really nicely furnished house that looks nice and well kept from the inside, but is subsiding , has woodrot and the roof could collapse at any second. The owner has decided that the best policy is to not think about the problems and try and make sure the outside stays looking spick and span. it seems to be doing well enough, as a party - it is successfully bridging factions that hate and despise each other, even though this hatred is so deep that it totally incapacitates the party from yielding anything like a consensus ideological outlook as an organization brought together to realize very few points of agreement, it is a remarkable success, and all the more so given the instability brought about by a rough post-Cameron succession and a lacklustre May premiership one should not expect too much out of a mass party. the nature of a big tent is that it's full of people one would rather not rub shoulders with.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
left wing?! excuse me comrade you should have jumped off the bolivarian cliff too:quote:With the possible exception of Venezuela, the reforms of progressive governments were only designed to confront US hegemony and mitigate the effects of neoliberalism. They did little to challenge the more fundamental structures of capitalism in these countries. The main targets for nationalization were foreign assets, while the structures of power within Latin American countries were mostly left intact. (psst. it is dollarization that mitigates one of the major weaknesses of latam left-wing ideological perspectives, which normally have an allergy to the notion of budgetary limits that would astonish a 1980s liverpudlian Militant. The disciplined adherence to the dollar is arguably one of Correa's greatest successes - it made the overwhelming need for hard currency into a tangible reality rather than a confabulable abstraction) ronya fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Feb 21, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
there is an element of risk transfer involved in bai inah loans, so it's not exactly identical to a rent-to-own you may be assured however that the bank is well paid for assuming the risk. you are also not immunized from late payment fees; the theological card in play is that the fees must be composed of 1) the actual losses borne by the bank for the late or non-payment, and 2) additional penalty charges which may be levied to deter late payment, but must be turned over to charity if collected. as you can imagine, especially given #1, the interest rate is not substantially different from non-Islamic interest rates
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
I am not an expert, but anecdotally malaysian and emirati jurisprudence is especially influential mainly because they are relatively friendly to islamic financial innovation - if you run around shouting riba riba riba, then you're not going to develop a market in it and are hence not going to be an authority anyway but these countries favour a strongly neoliberalised, efficient-markets interpretation of it, e.g., a bai inah is not usurious because the purchase and the loan is theoretically unrelated, i.e., after buying the house from the bank, the new homeowner must have the option (not an obligation) to either pay in full and walk away, or otherwise raise the funds by mortgaging it to the bank - or any other bank. fairness is interpreted in terms of optionality and the presumption of an efficient rate available to a consumer in the open market. and then one bangs the table about maslaha and istisla and then I walk out the room shaking my head
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
Paxman posted:
let's see where he is after a few more grinding tube strikes
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I didn't think the stuff you wrote could get more impenetrable, but you've one-upped yourself here modern islamic finance is like that - it's a conventional cupcake with a dash of arabic sprinkles
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
as always: note the spike on the right. new labour's concept of redistribution involved broad social classes, not the relatively Americanised handful-of-fat-cats-vs-the-middle-classes perspective. slices of society as large as a third or a fifth, not the highly mobile 0.1% this was, after all, still the early 1990s when it got going hence, famously enough, its understanding of university tuition fees as an egalitarian move. the relatively well-off use more of it. the relatively worse-off get larger subsidies, if they use it at all. what's not to love? it is not, perhaps, an ideology for success in the 2010s. but it's not obvious to me what egalitarian policy would succeed at the ballot box today. and hammering on about housing and national living wages likewise doesn't do much about that 0.1%, in wealth or income.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 10:24
|
|
|
I think it's fair to suggest that if the Labour left had succeeded against Kinnock's reforms, it would not have won 1992 or 1997. Holding a Labour government constant, a Labour right leader seems an inevitability. The more interesting counterfactual, really, is what might have happened if President Gore did not drag Blair into Iraq. ronya fucked around with this message at 10:34 on Feb 24, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
spectralent posted:The problem with this problem is that it's monstrous. We need to stop the hatred of migrants before we start setting up loving camps. Paddy Ashdown would have outpolled the Fuhrer's corpse, and pundits today would rub their chins about the wise four who foresaw the doom of Labour and quit early, unlike the ex-Marxist fools who thought they could salvage the wreck.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 10:39
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Are you aware of the concept of hyperbole. Labour moving left would have had to contend with Social Democrats going the other way it didn't, so it didn't have to the contention that any alternative to continued decades of Tory rule would have triumphed does not, therefore, automatically imply a Labour government
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 10:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
btw kristtallnacht did feature neighbourhoods of people bringing their children to smash Jewish homes pogroms: fun for all the family
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2017 11:01
|
|