The socialists are considering applying a so called Robin Hood Tax and this at first sight would appear to include a proposed tax on every foreign exchange trade. For those who recive pension or other income in the UK and then transfer it to say French bank accounts this would be an unwelcome move. It's emerging policy from the Republic of Islington
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34375702?post_id=10153016774904830_10153343014889830#_=_
I have seen plenty of expats welcoming the transition of Labour with Corbyn but will they be quite so happy when such a tax will apply to their own income? It doesn't so far seem to propose any differentiation between large scale trades for profit and the minnows like us.
OK so it may reduce French income and therefore French income tax, but it's just another tax of many.
Those places were state monopolies in which a vast part of the revenues were always spent on benefits for the state such as defence. They were never socialist states at all, especially back in time when directly under the influence of Iosif Dzhugashvili, the 'man of steel', and his immediate heirs. Socialism does not demand or defend monopolies and control of individual personal freedoms. Just have a look at Robert Owen's New Lanark, bearing in mind that he was one of the founders of utopian socialism and the cooperative movement and also a factory and property owner, thus a so-called capitalist, to see how a socially oriented politic in which people live equitably might be. Not the book of rules according to Uncle Joe or Jeremy Corbyn at all.
I know what I saw in Russia and East Germany in the 60s and in fact my more recent trips to Russia things don't seem to have improved much but the prices certainly have become much higher. Maybe I confused being Russian with socialism; Russians always seem to prefer being unhappy. idealism is another thing.
Including as far back as Keir Hardy, the Labour Party has never been socialist by any correct definition any more than the CP and any other bunch of Stalinists. I think exprssions like 'comrade the architect' are more political humour that none of the people who use know is just humour. Nor have trade unionists ever been socialists since the early 20 century, therefore before you wheel n Scargill yelling 'comrades this' and 'comrades that' at TUC congresses try reading a proper work on socialism. As for the corny line about what scruffs they all are, Aldermaston and so on, when I used to go on such marches I clearly remember scruffy, unshaven, long haired Young Conservatives wearing CND badges marching as well. As for scruffs, the aristocratic classes are no only the scruffiest of the lot but also the dirtiest and most malodorous, usually of your political leaning, according to a friend who is an independent leaning, literally liberal peer and has been in the HoL since he was 25. People may call themselves what they like, that does not make them that, they might all know the name Marx but I doubt one in a hundred has ever held one of his works and only a fraction of that got past the first chapter of most of them, as for works by other equally significant people who might inform them what socialism is, I tend to doubt many of them have heard of most of them.
Ah ah! We shall see what we shall see. I'd rather stick with the devil I know for the time being. A completely untried (ie no governement experience) team with such provenance and bizarre ideas is hardly likely to raise confidence. I have a relation who actively works for the Labour Party in Islington, and I used to deal with most London boroughs on a regular basis, so I feel relatively well qualified to comment. It was in Brent though that a councillor once addressed me as "Comrade the architect"- I refrained from uttering the riposte I favoured as I was trying to get planning consent off the twerps. And I think they describe themselves as socialists Brian, and even get kitted out at some outfitters that seem to specialise in Aldermaston march cast offs. Very retro!
Which socialists? You know very well that they are simply social democrats very similar to your own preferred party but who present what often amount to the same policies framed differently. Foreign exchange taxes are nothing extraordinary in this world, perhaps thus far for the UK but then sooner or later it was highly likely to happen and when that occurs we shall see which government is in office. You know as well as I do that this is a proposal and before it could become policy then law, firstly it would have to be adopted by that party, included in their manifesto now that it has been discussed publicly followed by that party winning an election, sticking to their policy and parliament passing it into law. If it happened then 2022 would be about the earliest it could happen. Anyway, not wishing to take it on face value I had a look at the proposal and there are details you overlook. For instance, lower range 'personal' transfers which I assume would include pensions, would not be subject to such a tax, also given that it is phrased in a way that targets finance and trade, I hardly imagine our little bits of pocket money will be included. Other income, perhaps, but then if I remember rightly people spend a lot of time placing the income from investments outside the UK to avoid paying tax, so is it right that this continue?
Anyway, first of all David, that party has to win an election which is hardly likely unless they really do come up with some popular policies. Saying that such policies come from the Republic of Islington is also condemning an untried and tested policy of a party that is in office when it is simply a proposal that over the next five years is likely to be forgotten. Finally, calling a party socialists who are patently not thus allows one to refer to another something like capitalist pigs, placing greater emphasis on the latter word.