On the Coming Election in Britain

     Simon Wren-Lewis makes the case that Labor is the party to do something about inequality and that Ed Midland is not Tony Blair:

     "The Blair governments did a lot to fight poverty, but were famously relaxed about inequality, or more specifically the earnings of the 1%. For many in those governments this reflected their own views, but it also reflected a political calculation. The calculation went as follows. To win, Labour needed to be seen as competent to run the economy. The media all too often look to business leaders to answer that question. So Labour needed to be business friendly. Now being business friendly should mean creating an environment that business can thrive in. However to get the approval of business leaders you also need to create an environment where business leaders can thrive personally, and they are very much part of the 1%. QED."

     "Labour today is not following this strategy. First, Miliband has said quite clearly that he sees tackling inequality as a major issue: "Now I have heard some people say they don’t know what we stand for. So let me take the opportunity today to spell it out in the simplest of terms. It is what I stood for when I won the leadership of this party. And it is what I stand for today. This country is too unequal. And we need to change it." Second, it has two policies that directly impinge on the 1%: the mansion tax and restoring the 50p income tax band."

      "There are some on the left who dismiss these measures as marginal. One of the comments on my earlier post said that “When it comes to the broad trend of ever greater inequality there really is no meaningful difference between the main parties.” This seems to me a colossal tactical error. To see why, you only have to note what has happened over the last week in the UK. Various business leaders have proclaimed that a Labour government would be a disaster. Stefano Pessina, who among other things runs the Boots chain, declined to elaborate on why exactly Labour would be a disaster. In contrast, he was quite clear that the UK leaving the EU would be a big mistake, which of course is much more likely to happen under a Conservative government!"

      http://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2015/02/inequality-business-leaders-and-more.html

      The actual UK election itself is a close one where it seems that if David Cameron is going to hold on, he'll need to form a coalition. That the next election could be another coalition government is quite possible.

      http://news.yahoo.com/poll-gives-camerons-conservatives-small-lead-may-election-164522022--business.html

       Still, in reading WL's analysis, I was struck by some symmetries with US electoral politics. In the US, we always here Leftists claim that there is no difference between the parties while business leaders show their clear preference for Republicans. 

       The fact that business leaders actually agree with Labor on a large issue like staying in the EU and yet are totally in the hoc for Conservatives is like in the US where Wall Street clearly favors the Democrats' position on immigration but would never think of supporting the Dems. 

       Seems that in elections the Left always thinks there's no difference-but then some of them steal dream of socialism-while business always sides with the more conservative mainstream party. 

       P.S. Don't know if I mentioned this before, I might have, but I was born in England. We actually left the country when I was 3, in fact, we came over on a ship, the QE2. 

       Yes, I am an American citizen and have been for 15 years, The beauty of Britain is they allow you to be a dual citizen.

       P.S.S. I'm pretty sure if I were there I'd be for Labor. Cameron is saying 'Vote for me and I'll do more and more austerity.'

      Labor though is in trouble in Scotland apparently, which could imperil it's hopes of winning. Although Scotland voted against independence, since the election the independence party has been on a tear. 

       http://news.yahoo.com/nationalists-imperil-35-labour-partys-41-seats-scotland-093431198--business.html

       So clearly, if there are ideological similarities between the US and UK there are also major differences. In the UK there are lots of other parties-I'm not convinced this is for the better-and the UK is still technically 'an empire'' or at least possesses Scotland, Wales, and Ireland as well as England.