Hungary clearly has stayed reasonably free of the metropolitan liberal elite, and the malign social effects and copying of them. Very refreshing. I don’t speak much of the language but having observed on three visits I think they can be good friends of Britain. Good at technical skills and we need strong trade relations with them in the future, and we will.

Oh bugger off to 4chan. If you’re going to impersonate someone else at least don’t make it so obvious.

Strangely this is the real Joe Broughton as he said this on Facebook. His views seem to have gone in quite a strongly rightwards direction since 2010 partly due to tribal loyalty etc.

Somebody who lives in Richmond prattling on about the evils of the “metropolitan liberal elite” is, erm, pretty unspoofable. If Joe moves to Hartlepool or Grimsby I’ll take him a bit more seriously.

Hahaha.

‘Somebody who lives in Richmond prattling on about the evils of the “metropolitan liberal elite” is, erm, pretty unspoofable.’

Absolutely…

And one might wonder what sort if person what want to copy the tactics of the likes of Boris and Trump, were it not for the fact that Joe seems like a fairly decent chaps – unlike his mentors

Hungary under Orban has also imposed some pretty batshit crazy Corbynism, such as nationalising private pensions. If McDonnell is prevented from doing that it will largely be thanks to the metropolitan elite.

“Strangely this is the real Joe Broughton as he said this on Facebook. His views seem to have gone in quite a strongly rightwards direction since 2010 partly due to tribal loyalty etc.”

Credit where credit is due, you yourself are a pleasing contrast to that. Well done on keeping a sane head on your shoulders despite what must be intolerable pressure at grassroots level right now. I hope you hold your council seat next year.

There was an article on PollingBetting.com on this very idea. The author seemed to suggest that most Corbyns policies are unaffordable but if Corbyn did nationalise pensions then it would generate a significant amount of revenue. As far as I’m aware this isnt party policy or in fact something Corbyn or McDonnell has ever supported

Didn’t McDonnell’s spending promises add up to half a trillion pounds? He’ll have to get it from somewhere, or else break them. Extra borrowing is not an option for a hard left government because no-one is going to be willing to lend.

I hear this line trotted out every question time by some Tory or it’s ‘more than the NHS & Education budget combined’ or its ‘twice the NHS budget’. I’m still waiting to find out where people get these numbers from.

Sounds like Tories are, in good faith or otherwise, conflating annual spending figures and spending figures across a whole parliament. 500 billion across five years is radical but not crazy.

However, I’ve heard a bunch of Labour MPs similarly conflate profit and turnover when discussing companies’ tax bills, which is equally ill-informed/disingenuous. Everyone needs a proper education in statistics, both voters and politicians.

“500 billion across five years is radical but not crazy.”

If you’re a radical left wing government, which no financier will lend to, yes it is crazy if there is no plan for where the money is going to come from other than more borrowing.

This is the paradox….a Corbyn government will HAVE to end the deficit very quickly because no financier in their right minds will agree to finance it. Lenders are hugely more tolerant of Tories/Blairite governments because of their constant assurances that they intend to eliminate the deficit over a stated timeframe (however vague and unrealistic).

Hasn’t the OBR forecast government borrowing in the 100s of billions over the next 5 years

You can only borrow if someone is willing to lend to you. Who is going to be willing to lend to a government which is hell bent on re-nationalising huge swathes of the economy with minimal compensation for shareholders? Or forcing companies to give 10% of their shares to the government, again for no compensation.

That’s a bit of an over exaggeration. Only water and mail are returning in house. Rail will continue until the franchises expire like LNER. Banking and energy will have to compete with municipal competition but that’s it. They are pretty moderate proposals compared to when steel, coal, rail, areospace, etc. all came in house.

“They are pretty moderate proposals compared to when steel, coal, rail, areospace, etc. all came in house.”

You don’t seem to be engaging with my line of argument very well.

All those industries were nationalised by paying a fair compensation to shareholders. In the case of the railways arguably too generous. And it was done largely by raising taxes and using Marshall Plan funding, not by borrowing from the international markets.

Either McDonnell will have to pay fair value compensation to shareholders, which will cost an absolute fortune, or effectively steal the shares which will be viewed by all potential investors in the UK as a gross violation of private property rights. Nobody will lend money to a government which does not respect the norms of private property.

In some ways it may be a good thing because it will force the UK to only spend what it raises in taxes, for the first time since the late 1990s. But if it happens, on austerity you ain’t seen nothing yet I’m afraid. I wonder if McDonnell in office might end up being a kind of Snowden, arguably the most austere chancellor since the war.

Surely you wouldn’t need to compensate share holders once their tender has expired. I’m not aware that the government has had to compensate Virgin or Stagecoach for East Coast. Nor do you compensate competitors if you succeed in your bid. Portsmouth City Council currently provide services for other councils and I’m not aware theyve had to compensate anyone.

Water companies and the shareholders of Royal Mail will need compensating but not anywhere near the figure shareholders came to enjoy when a fifth of all industry was nationalised.

But maybe you are right and McDonnell is a modern Snowden