Theresa May很多关键经济政策理念是工党和左翼的,工党还怎么玩啊?

按照Guardian,Theresa May关于经济方面的很多关键经济政策理念是工党和左翼的,甚至有人还说就是从工党上次大选宣言里抄的,如果保守党占领中右的同时向中左进发,不知道工党还可以玩什么,看起来只有John McDonnell的极左可以玩了。

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/jul/11/andrea-leadsom-apologises-to-theresa-may-politics-live?page=with:block-5783b3b4e4b0f36a6e1c5521#block-5783b3b4e4b0f36a6e1c5521

But the real interest in the speech lay in what it revealed about her thinking. Based on this text, it would be reasonable to assume that the May has lifted many of her ideas from four prominent leftwingers.

1 - The ‘Gordon Brown’ Theresa May

When Gordon Brown was chancellor he talked endlessly about the need to improve productivity. George Osborne says much less about this, but this passage sounded as if it could have been delivered by New Labour’s iron chancellor.

Yet we have long had a problem with productivity in Britain. So I want to make its improvement an important objective for the Treasury. I want to see an energy policy that emphasises the reliability of supply and lower costs for users. A better research and development policy that helps firms to make the right investment decisions. More Treasury-backed project bonds for new infrastructure projects. More house building. A proper industrial strategy to get the whole economy firing. And a plan to help not one or even two of our great regional cities but every single one of them.”

The sentence about Treasury-backed project bonds for infrastructure could have been drafted by Ken Livingstone, who has backed similar ideas for years. (It is also worth noting that this paragraph contains a minor swipe at George Osborne and his Northern Powerhouse plan; the government should be helping all big cities, not just Manchester, she is saying.)

2 - The ‘Will Hutton’ Theresa May

Younger readers may not remember “stakeholder capitalism”, a notion championed by the journalist and writer Will Hutton, but for about five minutes it was Tony Blair’s favourite philosophy, and May revived it in her speech. She said:

“[i]If we are going to have an economy that works for everyone, we are going to need to give people more control of their lives. And that means cutting out all the political platitudes about “stakeholder societies” - and doing something radical.

Because as we saw when Cadbury’s - that great Birmingham company - was bought by Kraft, or when AstraZeneca was almost sold to Pfizer, transient shareholders - who are mostly companies investing other people’s money - are not the only people with an interest when firms are sold or close. Workers have a stake, local communities have a stake, and often the whole country has a stake. It is hard to think of an industry of greater strategic importance to Britain than its pharmaceutical industry, and AstraZeneca is one of the jewels in its crown. Yet two years ago the Government almost allowed AstraZeneca to be sold to Pfizer, the US company with a track record of asset stripping and whose self-confessed attraction to the deal was to avoid tax. A proper industrial strategy wouldn’t automatically stop the sale of British firms to foreign ones, but it should be capable of stepping in to defend a sector that is as important as pharmaceuticals is to Britain.[/i]”

3 - The ‘Ed Miliband’ Theresa May

As Labour leader Ed Miliband promised to take on “vested interests”. May made a very similar promise today - while claiming that in doing so she was acting in accordance with Tory tradition.

From Robert Peel to Lady Thatcher, from Joseph Chamberlain to Winston Churchill, throughout history it has been the Conservative party’s role to rise to the occasion and to take on the vested interests before us, to break up power when it is concentrated among the few, to lead on behalf of the people.

More significantly, May announced several policy proposals that were pure Miliband. As reported overnight, she called for workers to be represented on company boards (going slightly further than Labour did in its 2015 manifesto). She also called for action on excessive executive pay and on cartels.

“A[i]s part of the changes I want to make to corporate governance, I want to make shareholder votes on corporate pay not just advisory but binding. I want to see more transparency, including the full disclosure of bonus targets and the publication of “pay multiple” data: that is, the ratio between the CEO’s pay and the average company worker’s pay. And I want to simplify the way bonuses are paid so that the bosses’ incentives are better aligned with the long-term interests of the company and its shareholders.

I also want us to be prepared to use - and reform - competition law so that markets work better for people. If there is evidence that the big utility firms and the retail banks are abusing their roles in highly-consolidated markets, we shouldn’t just complain about it, we shouldn’t say it’s too difficult, we should do something about it.[/i]”

Miliband also draw up plans to stop banks and energy companies exploiting consumers. Two of his most senior advisers - the Labour peer Stewart Wood, who advised Miliband on policy, and Tom Baldwin, Miliband’s communications chief - have accused May of plagiarism.

4 - The ‘Elizabeth Warren’ Theresa May

May also seems to have taken inspiration from Elizabeth Warren, the US Democratic senator, who delivered this much-quoted speech five years ago.

And here is May’s version.

And tax. We need to talk about tax. Because we’re Conservatives, and of course we believe in a low-tax economy, in which British businesses are more competitive and families get to keep more of what they earn - but we also understand that tax is the price we pay for living in a civilised society. No individual and no business, however rich, has succeeded all on their own. Their goods are transported by road, their workers are educated in schools, their customers are part of sophisticated networks taking in the private sector, the public sector and charities. It doesn’t matter to me whether you’re Amazon, Google or Starbucks, you have a duty to put something back, you have a debt to your fellow citizens, you have a responsibility to pay your taxes. So as Prime Minister, I will crack down on individual and corporate tax avoidance and evasion.

工党玩分裂啊,然后再拿小红本玩共产主义

我还是挺看好她的,贫富悬殊肯定引起社会问题,趁现在问题还在可以控制范围之内平衡这个问题非常有必要。 过大的金融行业会引起更大的泡沫,德银跟意大利银行都是很好的例子。 我自己本身是金融业但是我是支持退欧的,因为在现有体制下好的资源只会在社会顶层为顶层人士服务,这会造成资源浪费。 农产品,石油,大宗商品已经在被赋予金融属性以后已经失去了本身的属性,价格操纵在投行手里,不管怎么样也会失控。 只有商品服务跟劳动力资源回归本身的价值,才是一个健康的产业链。

They play soft play {:5_137:}

目前的英国形势,自由"极端"的政策 才能扭转局面。如果政策忽左忽右,动荡时间会更长。当然不管什么政策,她都有可能被选下去。这个首相可不是那么好当的

您说的自然有道理。只是,我不觉得英国有本钱去追求健康的经济结构了。因为想要健康的结构,需要本钱。这世界上任何事情都有价目的。理应存在而无法负担的东西很多。英国之前在欧盟内的身份已经让自己享受了超过自己实力的地位和好处了。要出来单干,起码要脱层皮。但是我不觉得英国人和英国社会有这个能力了。起码,英国的职业教育无法负担起为健康经济结构提供劳动力的重任。所谓健康的经济结构,也就是看上去很美。英国的体量和自然条件做不到。就算要壮士断腕,非要如此。那么也要有明确的计划和意志。但是我不觉得英国的政客和百姓有这个觉悟。个人层面这样做或许有奇效。国家层面这样做,恐怕是武断,甚至不负责。

如果是美国中国甚至巴西印度有“健康全面的经济结构”这方面的要求,都可以理解,英国要求这个,只能说是不了解自己的实际情况。记得有退欧派的网友说留在欧盟就是吸毒上瘾,一时爽,以后遭殃。只是,戒毒是那么容易的么?要怪目前上瘾,就怪二战后英国的劳动生产率低,怪英国人一手好牌打成烂局。自己不想和昭和时代日本人一样过劳死,也不想同50年代德国人一样作为亡国奴而奋斗。更不想和戴高乐时代的法国一样退出北约军事组织而保持自己的军事独立存在,并且法国还坚持工业项目国产化。不会追求用美国的现成技术和产品,不着眼一时的采购价格便宜。这些都做不到,那么英国人真的没资格抱怨自己金融产业独大上瘾。

而且,您是金融从业人员。您一定也知道伦敦目前的金融中心地位和连带的人才优势,其实都是历史的遗产。当年大英帝国时代。英国就广泛投资海外。伦敦自然成了世界金融之都。后来也有一定惯性到今天。并非英国人就天生会金融,天生会数学,英国的制度天生就好,不然80年代也不需要金融城big bang了。看自然禀赋,英国还真的不如阿根廷,甚至不一定比西班牙好。如果英国人真的觉得自己天生就是世界金融之都,没了欧盟自己照样玩的好。那么只能大家一起看今后的变化。毕竟,这世界上风光一时而最终没落甚至消失的文明和帝国太多了。多一个英国不是不可能的。大家到时候都自求多福。

这些理念挺不错的,这是替可能提前到来的大选拉选票吗?

不知道能不能真正的实施下去,感觉May阿姨的方略和Cameron&Osborn不是一条路子啊,这样动荡敏感的时期她不怕把资本家赶跑了吗?

我觉的很好啊~ 这样保守党就成了工党了

到时候自然会有别的什么党来制衡的了~~~

社会产业结构转型是要付出大代价的,英国的资源条件,社会结构,对外来人员的接纳包容程度都很一般, 在我看来今天英国民众也不是能够大众上下团结一心人人咬紧牙关共度困难的一群人。金融产业也许不健康,现在如果英国不依靠金融服务业,她应该转型哪种产业?英国所有的‘优势条件’,民主法律制度,通用语言,做金融服务业是优势,做其他产业就不一定是优势,一切高度民主化必然带来的低效率还可能成为很大的劣势。

话说May阿姨的长相实在是。。。女生男相

MT的成功是因为她比男人更男人,TM也是一条路子吧。:cn14:

转载 ■■■■■■ 网友
发信人: ElectricBro (Peace de Wars), 信区: USANews
标 题: 英国右派卡梅伦 - 潜伏改革 退欧成功 完美谢幕
发信站: BBS ■■■■站 (Mon Jul 11 17:28:36 2016, 美东)
http://www.■■■■■■.com/article_t/USANews/31997157.html
英国右派卡梅伦 - 潜伏改革 退欧成功 完美谢幕

硬手腕改革,大刀砍福利,消减企业税,引海外资本,就业率提高,市场复活力。

欧盟议会压制英国立法,欧盟大陆来的非法移民遣返受阻,非法移民福利诈骗,拉低底
层工人收入水平,英国保守党巧妙地把砍福利造成的社会情绪转嫁给非法移民和欧盟议
会。

在退欧问题上,女王唱红脸,卡梅伦唱黑脸,所以保守派获得大量传统左派的支持,退
欧成功。保守派卡梅伦坚决否定二次投票,他福利消减改革见成效,经济复苏,完成使
命,完美谢幕。

推保守派Therasa May上任首相,May大娘在退欧问题一直不温不火给自己留足够的台阶
和政治迂回空间。上任后,摆脱欧盟英国重新国家定位,继续执行卡梅伦的经济政策,
砍福利砍税。

英国是现代宪政的发明者,大市场小政府保守主义的鼻祖,也是民主体制下党派政治游
戏的大师。

大英万岁!

“推保守派Therasa May上任首相,May大娘在退欧问题一直不温不火给自己留足够的台阶
和政治迂回空间。上任后,摆脱欧盟英国重新国家定位,继续执行卡梅伦的经济政策,
砍福利砍税。”

这段完全错误,May已经暗示不会砍税可能有加税的可能,另外她已经明确放弃减缩这说明不会砍福利。

任何一个过度依赖金融服务行业的国家经济都是不健康的。金融行业的运作方式很容易催生大量泡沫跟负债,表面繁华里面其实已经烂透,而且贫富悬殊是必然结果,从而产生大量社会问题。 欧盟国家右翼势力大量增强很好的说明了这点,在我看来这不是民粹主义的结果,而是金融泡沫跟实体经济脱离产生的必然结果。现在英国的金融体系跟泡沫都还在很好的控制范围内,可以承受脱欧带来的冲击,但是随着大量的量化宽松,国家其实是在透支着未来10年的经济。如果现在不重新调整,国家继续量化宽松,透支20年,30年的经济,这些泡沫有可能会随着实体经济增长消失,但是在我看来,更大的可能性是被拖进更大的漩涡,到时候的泡沫再破,英国跟欧盟国家都未必能承受得起。 现在意大利银行的债务跟德银的系统性危机都是一个警钟,现在去拯救都已经需要1100亿,以后泡沫更大会催生更大的金融危机,到时候再去想调整经济结构已经来不及了。

嗯。上面那位说的是现在英国已然病入膏肓,想不依赖也不行了。
这届人民不行,素质也不行。
英国人工作效率全西欧最低,也是活该。

TM年轻的时候其实还蛮漂亮的 {:5_137:}

MT。。。不知木兰是女郎啊

哎。。。灭绝上台,我等还怎么混哦。。。。。。

工作效率。。。英国还真不是倒数第一。。。法国意大利人表示不满。。。

这俩名字缩写,啧啧,猿粪呀。。。不同的是撒切尔生孩子上也不甘落后,龙凤双胞胎不是一般人想生就能生得出啊,而且这效率,一次2个,比别人省了好久。。。

论工作效率,南欧猪国还是遥遥领先的

这真的要看是做什么吧。。。

一些工作效率那么高的行业,干那么辛苦也没啥意义

哪能向天朝的钢铁厂那么能干啊 {:5_134:}