I wanted to have some lunch, forgive me for not quoting the manifesto in it's entirety!
I take your point on soft-Brexit, but I advocate it given where we are today, in the country and in Parliament. Damage limitation imo. You don't agree, fair enough.
Going back to why I advocate for a Corbyn-led Labour government opposed to a Tory one. Broadly, it's so that the necessary money will be put back into public services via taking a bit more money from those who have the most. This should help to fix school budgets, prisons, social care (which takes strain from the NHS), local services like childrens centres (used most by the poorest), aid to reduce homelessness.
All these areas have been hammered by Tory budgets. And the Tories, imo, use austerity as a cover for ideologically shrinking the role of the state. Socialists like Corbyn don't hide that their ideology is to enhance the role of the state for, as they see it, the benefit of all; hence the programs of nationalisation which I also support.
Overall, a far less harsh society for those who need help the most, be that disabled people phucked over by Universal Credit, or people who live in neighbourhoods getting worse for violent crime (due in large part to there being 20,000 less old bill), or old people who are stuck in hospital because they can't get the care they need at home due to cuts in the budgets for social care, or the hospitals over-stretched not just by record low increases in funding, but having to bear the brunt of those social care cuts.
Add in things like making education free at the point of use, across the board, and being against interventionist wars like Iraq and Libya, which have made the world a far more dangerous place.
These are some of the broad outlines of policy that I'd support. For a little more detail, you'd have to read the 2017 manifesto and the accompanying 'grey book' that set out the tax plans.
I went through the manifesto at the time, Im not interested in you quoting it. Im more interested in why YOU support it.
So thanks for the response (in good faith as well, which is appreciated).
Up until now most counter argument from most Labour supporters has been "anything but the Tories", which Im sure you can appreciate gives the impression of being completely biased and with questionable objectivity.
The way I see it, youve got the faith, youre a believer in JC - something I cant comprehend at this point.
Youre in here defending the cause daily, clearly passionate, so the WHY is what is interesting to me.
I read the manifesto at the time (not the grey book if memory serves) and I saw business being punished, debt going up, and welfare being pumped with money with no real plan to spend it wisely or reform things.
[I do have a particular issue with Labour (under Blair) creating an army of voters by creating a nation of benefit riding layabouts, and cant deny its a real sticking point for me whenever Labour talk about pumping money into benefits etc.]
I saw a country already in debt simply going further down the hole.
I actually liked the ideas on nationalisation and education. I dont know how achievable they are, but I like the intent.
I think national rail and energy (and general infrastructure) etc is the sort of thing that can really help the country help itself.
Education is insanely expensive right now, and its crippling people financially for trying to better themselves, fundamentally theres something wrong there.
We can obviously disagree on it, but I actually think Soft Brexit is a massive issue - rather than a compromise I feel its storing up problems for down the line. Id much rather a more definitive plan around it other than to give into the EU on whatever they want, ceed any power, and basically be under their thumb. Corbyns version in particular seems to nix our ability to look outward to the rest of the world, which in turn makes it utterly pointless as "brexit" of any shape or form.
I can see you like the general intent, do you think it will actually work?
What will be the cost of pumping all that money into the state? Will we borrow it all? Will taxing businesses actually work? Or will they avoid what they can, lessen the take and lead to more debt?
Will the NHS actually be any better without genuine reform? I have serious doubts as to what simply upping the budget will achieve.
Cant argue with spending more on Policing, its a no brainer - but where the money comes from is of course a concern, on top of everything else they plan to spend.
And heres where they fail to convince me, the more I look at it (and I fully accept Im far from an expert), the more it seems to me like itll either never happen, never work, or leave us ultimately worse off...