Share this page!

Steve Howell Profile picture
Twitter logo
2 Oct, 4 tweets, 2 min read
Great to catch up with Jeremy in Shrewsbury and give him a copy of Collateral Damage.

Typically, it was a priority for him to make the journey to join a packed event to celebrate the #Shrewsbury24 Appeal Court ruling that the convictions of the building workers were unsafe.
Terry Renshaw, one of the #Shrewsbury24, told the event to mark their victory: "If I get emotional, forgive me. The thing is, we didn't give up. It took 47 years, but we kept going. We took on the police, the government, the judiciary and, yes, the secret service - and we won."
For those who'd like a copy, there's a secure PayPal facility that takes credit cards on my website and two options for eBooks: steve-howell.com/collateral-dam…
More info on Collateral Damage here: steve-howell.com/collateral-dam…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Steve Howell

Steve Howell Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @FromSteveHowell

Steve Howell Profile picture
22 Dec 19
1/5 The Sunday Times has been sold a dud by someone with an axe to grind.

Labour's targeting (though always open to debate) was rational, ICM provided weekly private polls to check trends and MPs hostile to Corbyn got support.

This is not the full list.
2/5 When I started working on the campaign in early Nov, there was a target list of 96 seats, of which 30 were defensive. It comprised the Tory seats with the narrowest majorities and our most vulnerable seats. It wasn't secret, all members of the strategy team had access to it.
3/5 Just after the manifesto launch, the list was reviewed. The polls were narrowing but not as fast as we'd have liked. The scale of the problem in leave areas was becoming clear. We immediately added 16 defensive seats. After consulting the regions, we added a further 21.
Read 6 tweets
Steve Howell Profile picture
1 Nov 19
1/6 The BBC is disputing Corbyn’s claim that the Tories have "slashed taxes for the richest".

@BBCRealityCheck says it's “hard" to describe Tory changes as "taxes for the richest being slashed”.

Really? This needs its own reality check. Bear with me.
2/6 First, there's a sleight of hand in defining 'richest'.

@BBCRealityCheck acknowledges the Tories abolished the 50p tax rate for income of £150,000+.

But it measures the impact of this by using data for the top 10% when less than 1% of earners - the very richest - benefited.
3/6 Second, there's the glaring omission of Capital Gains Tax.

For the rich, tax on wealth gains are a much bigger deal than income tax.

The Tories have cut CGT for high earners from 28% to 18%.

That yields a £1m tax saving on an asset bought for £10m and sold for £20m.
Read 6 tweets
Steve Howell Profile picture
15 Jun 19
1/5 Prof Dorling's right call Blair the King in the sense he presided over the highest level of inequality since 1929.

But it was Thatcher who set in motion the huge redistribution of wealth & income in favour of the owners of capital of the last 40 years.
2/5 Thatcher gave owners of capital a bigger share of the cake in three main ways: a/ shifting taxation from capital to working people, b/ crushing the miners/attacking union rights, c/ opening up more of the economy to profit-making through a massive programme of privatisation.
3/5 In 1997, millions of us had high hopes that New Labour would reverse much of this. And there were some advances - the minimum wage, a big investment in the NHS, tax changes that protected those on low incomes. But on the three fundamentals it was business as usual.
Read 5 tweets
Steve Howell Profile picture
15 Jun 19
1/4 Was Jeremy Corbyn right to say inequality has been rising for decades?

Tony Blair has turned this into a debate about his record. But he hasn't refuted the basic facts - because he can't: whichever measure you take inequality has been on an upward trend since the 1970s.
2/4 IMO the most fundamental indicator of inequality is the graph on the previous tweet showing wages and salaries as a % of national income. This is basically the share of the cake that working people (even very well paid ones) get - and it's fallen from over 60% to 50%.
3/4 In the first couple of Blair years, working people did see their share of the cake increase. But from 2001, it fell again. This is not inconsistent with Labour in those years reducing poverty - because that can be achieved by redistributing wealth among wage/salary earners.
Read 5 tweets
Steve Howell Profile picture
1 Jun 19
1/7 I voted Remain in 2016 on the basis that some reform of the EU's pro-market rules was possible, working with socialists across Europe. But if we're going to sail under the R&R banner again, I think we need a reality check. Things have changed.
2/7 At the heart of the R&R debate are the EU's rules on state aid, which preclude anything that distorts competition. These rules are rooted in the 1957 Treaty of Rome and would require a new treaty supported by all member states to be changed. So do they give any wiggle room?
3/7 Advocates of R&R point out the EU does allow some state aid exemptions and the UK (at 0.36% of GDP) uses them less than Germany (1.31%). But those percentages are low, so how much wiggle room is there for the ambitious plans in Labour's 2017 manifesto? (References at end)
Read 8 tweets
Steve Howell Profile picture
27 May 19
1/7 Paul Mason says he'll "circle the wagons" around Corbyn - but it looks like that's to starve him into abandoning his principles and throwing some his best allies to the wolves.

His article is not the answer to a coup but the manifesto for it.

theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
2/7 At the heart of Paul Mason's attack is the claim that Labour's 2017 electoral advance was based "above all" on "large scale" tactical voting by Remainers. This is the basis for his assertion that Labour must embrace Remain and a 2nd referendum. But it's a false premise.
3/7 Even the author of the study Mason relies on admits her model shows "relationship" but "does not imply causation". True, it's likely some Remainers voted tactically, but many factors contributed to Labour's vote going up from 9.3m (30.4%) to 12.9m (40%), our best for 20years.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @FromSteveHowell has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @FromSteveHowell!

Read all threads by @FromSteveHowell

:(