this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024
-5 points (33.3% liked)

World Politics

759 readers
83 users here now


Political news from around the world.


No U.S, U.K, Ca, Aus, E.U politics

Posts must be related to Conflict, Politicians, Nation-states, Electoralism, or International Relations

Posts and Comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The elections are approaching and the polls show that the conservative are trailing. Is it a surprise? The leader makes image of the party, how much can a rich guy of Indian origin connect with the British public? Not at all. There could still be the appeal to the other British indian, after all the statistics say that British of Asian descent make a big minority, but a big chunk of them originates from Pakistan and on them Sunak is likely to have the opposite effect. There is also the big share of British Indians who are concentrated in Urban areas where the rest of the population overwhemingly votes for labour, they won't bring any support. For what matters all the other voters Sunak is definitely not a popular character as was Boris Johnson when the Tories won the election.

What I say is quite obvious to the experts and the Tories have a team of very good analysts. Why are they sticking with Sunak? Because they want to lose, they could not carry out the work that must be done now. The privatisations of the Thatcher era have exhausted their purpose. Big finance extracted all the value they could squeeze from the privatised services and they now they hold big piles of debts. it's time to nationalise the losses.

It's not just Thames Water. The railways have been asking for money for quite some time. Wales and Scotland already nationalised the local networks. The rest of the work already started, now it's time to complete it.

all 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

In the UK it's always time to nationalise the losses, it's the profits that are privatised.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Not just the UK

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but the next government will put it on a bigger scale. Maybe it will not cost as much as the banks bailouts, but it will absorb a lot of money and the burden will fall as usual on the middle classes which make the majority of the population. Part of the burden may be deferred by piling up on the government debt, but eventually it will have to be paid by the usual ones.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

And yet the middle classes keep voting for the same people who do this, because they're distracted by other issues.

Those other issues are much more readily addressed if the bulk of people (e.g. Those self-same middle class) weren't being taxed so heavily and therefore could afford to live more comfortably.

Such people have financial room in their lives to focus on grander concerns. This is sociology/psychology 101 stuff.

A poor person worried about how to pay the rent gives fuck all about the environment or who's currently thieving from the government.

It's especially interesting when people denigrate the idea of populism, when it's patently clear that our governments are (at a minimum) antagonistic to the average person, and most politicians put Marie-Antoinette to shame. (Yes, "let them eat cake" is probably apocryphal, but today's scum sucking from the government teat have no shame whatsoever).

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Private profits, nationalised losses, are what we already have?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

This is just an observation of what's happening. As it says the Thatcher cycle is completed, the new cycle is beginning.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Reposted because of an error in the title. It seems you cannot correct wrong titles.