I think Corbyn is a far better candidate than Galloway, and John McDonnell has got a good head on his shoulders. Corbyn has proven himself to be a good speaker, and argues his case well, and so does McDonnell. Neither are particularly charismatic, but I think that's a good thing, because political parties need to be about policies, not personalities.
The biggest problem facing society today, not just in the UK but in the US, the rest of Europe and in developing countries too, is the growing disparity between the super-wealthy and the poor. Since the end of the first world war, each generation generally grew up better off and with more opportunities than their parents. This has ceased to be true, and Millennials are the first generation who will generally be worse off than their parents. This is a recipe for revolution, and revolutions are usually bloody and unpredictable and not very nice to live through, which is why I'd prefer politicians to implement radical and meaningful changes as an alternative.
When I was growing up, and then when I was in my twenties, my family and I had job security and housing security. You didn't have to be in a desperate situation to get a council house - and the availability of affordable council housing meant that while landlords could still rent out property privately, they couldn't charge sky-high rents because people wouldn't pay them. Now most of the housing stock has been sold off and houses are investment properties, landlords can charge what they want, and people have no option but to pay them - so young people are spending vast amounts of their salary on rent, and not able to get on the housing ladder. And it's not ordinary small investors benefiting from this - even small terraced houses near where I live are often owned by large corporations and pension funds; in London, they're often owned by Russian billionaires.
Similarly, getting a job in the 1970s was pretty easy, and once you had a job it tended to be for life. Now, unemployment is technically low, but it's often on short-term contracts, not well paid, and no prospects of advancement. Riding a bike delivering food for Deliveroo might be decent pocket money when you're 20, but not when you're 50 - and even in your twenties, it's not a great basis for settling down and starting a family: no job security, no accommodation security.
The policies of successive governments over the last forty years have made this situation worse - the rich have got much richer, and everyone else has got less security. If something isn't done about it - and not just tinkering at the edges like New Labour did, but real policies that will reverse this trend - things will turn very nasty indeed in a decade or two.
Just found this rather interesting graphic:
Cheers for that.
It would be best for people never to actually be able to own homes because this is open to abuseJust have ones that can be rented.
but there is a but, and that is that with both systems there are problems , private concerns v publicly owned/government run companies, and it is this, corruption, we are not giving a law force any teeth to tackle it.
Take the theft of homes by investors and the banks, they have managed to remove these essential commodoties from the common person, commodoties that were built with our materials our labour and probably maintained out of our purse too.
So imagine now if the powers that be dealt with the thieves correctly, they would demand all the rents back, all the default mortgaged homes that the banks own inderectly should be taken back so the needy can use them and not iused for profit. Same would apply to all the utilities etc, get them into our ownership, but be strong against the corruption in the organisations that run them. Redistribute the shares from sharehoders plus compensation from them as they have milked the services for too long, with the added benefit of a future government renationalising rumdown railways, water pepes etc so that we end up paying to renew everything and then due to that initial cost plus corruption within those organisations we realise they are costing us too much so decide to privatise them again, that is until they become unfit for purpose so back to renationilisation...don't tell the magic circle I exposed that trick!
Well, first point, Roco. Non-EU countries are geographically further away from us than the EU, which means higher transport costs, which will be passed on to the consumer. So that's a long way from "saving a few bob".
Second point. There are lots of things we can't grow in the UK, because of the climate.
Third point. Sphinx has a 'thing' about cheese (she doesn't like it). I love cheese. I love English cheese, of course, but I also love continental cheeses, especially those of France and Holland. To my mind, it will be a very sad day in my life when I have to do without them, to satisfy some narrow anti-EU ideology.
And you think the EU don't artificially keep prices high.