[Closed] The Tories - for those of us old enough to remember 1st hand

Edukator - Member

The conservatives have always had lousy economic numbers during the first few years of their mandates as the clear up the economic mess left by Labour. You can't congratulate Blair for the first two years of his mandate because he was riding on the result of years conservative good management. Thatcher was elected after the winter of discontent and it took a while to pick up the pieces.

Labour: tax busines more, introduce labour laws that are expensive for the employer, allow sabotage of the work place by a minority of communist fanatics, expand the public sector and pay people not to work.

Consevative: tax business less, limit union powers and favour democracy in the work place, reign in public spending and encourage people to work with measures such as the £1000 to start a buisiness under Thatcher.

That's why the economy does better under the conservatives. I believe that can be combined with measures to assure equality in education and health that I call caring capitalism [b][u]so my sympathies would lie with the Liberals if I had a vote.[/u][/b]

Edukator - if you think your extreme right-wing views, your adoration of Thatcher, and your ranting about "communist fanatics in the workplace" and "people getting paid not to work", could somehow be represented by the Liberal Democrats, then either, you know absolutely nothing about the LibDems or, you're even more stupid than I thought.

After your suggestion that Argentina has had a stable economy in recent years, and now your claim that the LibDems could represent the views of a right-wing Thatcherite, I can't wait to find out your next farcical comment will be. Keep it up mate 🙂

Some parts of the US, roach.

I'm only 29 but know enough of what it was like in the 80s with Thatcher! Out local tory MP still believes in hanging!

I used Argentinia as an example of a country where high inflation led to a series of woes. Try reading my posts again.

You are confusing my impartial presentation of the ideaologies of the UK parties with my own views and opinions Ernie.

He who pays the piper calls the tune: back in the day the Labour party was funded by the unions and the Conservative party by big business. Now both parties are in the pockets of their corporate pay masters.

The scary thing is our kids will remember how bad things are under this shower. The end of boom and bust? How arrogant and naive...Time for a change of govt and politics. End short termism and lets run the country like a business not to for votes....

How do we do that?

[i]lets run the country like a business[/i]

Take the money and run!

ideaologies

It's 'ideologies'. Glad to edukate 😉

By your rational, it would mean that no matter what career path you took, as long as you work hard at it then you should all earn the same money?

No, I'm not. You are being absurd. I've tried to give serious responses to your points, but your responses to mine are fatuous.

Did I say everyone should earn the same money, or did I say that I thought a multiple of 20 times from top to bottom was fair?

How do you enforce salary ranges?

Anything to add to the debate Heather? No, thought not. You'll find half a dozen typos/spelling errors and so on most of my longer posts because I know what I've just written and can't see any point in reading it agian. However, if I do make an effort I'll run rings around you. A before you say spell checker, over 50 words in this post so far are incorrectly spelt according to my computer.

Well you could (not saying you should) look at the average wage then apply 100% tax on everything 20 times greater than that.

Obviously I've only given that 3 seconds thought, and if I doubled that I might come up with something better, but it does answer your question.

But maybe next time you could give it 3 seconds thought instead and save me doing all this typing?

OK - how do we have a workable enforced salary range?

I can't be arsed. You're wasting my time. I don't claim to have thought up these ideas you know. They've been put forward before by eminent sociologists and economists. Go and look them up if you don't believe me.

RPRT, don't call debate absurd because not everyone conforms to your point of view, now back on topic

Did I say everyone should earn the same money

Would it be as hard say as psychiatric nurse, or a bomb disposal expert, or an underwater welder, or a trawlerman

So out of your list above, who deserves more money?

How for example do you differ between a CEO of a company who runs a business employing say 2000 people or a care worker? Who deserves more money? Or should they earn the same?

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism[/url]

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism[/url]

rightplacerighttime - how can you propose things that you don't understand? People can be full of all sorts of idealistic views but what's the point without proposing practical steps?

RPRT, don't call debate absurd because not everyone conforms to your point of view, now back on topic

I didn't call [b]debate[/b] absurd, I called [b]you[/b] absurd. I even spelled out exactly why, but apparently you can't remember what we've already discussed. Just after you said it was the poor who drive consumption I said that I thought a max salary for a CEO might be 20 times their lowest paid employee's wage. Then when I asked how "hard" someone might be able to work in order to justify a huge salary (maybe hundreds of times that of an average emplyee) you asked if I thought everyone should earn the same money. So to sum up, [b]you[/b] are absurd, because you ask questions to which you have already been given an answer.

It's got nothing to do with your opinions or ideology, just your propensity for spouting twaddle.

rightplacerighttime - how can you propose things that you don't understand? People can be full of all sorts of idealistic views but what's the point without proposing practical steps?

Because you're baiting me. It's why FoI requests can be rejected as vexatious. I already made my point, but your response was similar to a toddler starting the "why?..." because... "why?..." because... loop.

I told you, look it up. Try Googling "maximum wage".

just your propensity for spouting twaddle

And with that sir, i am forever in your shadow.

Is this nonsense still going on? I must have dozed off...

[b]

I work all night, I work all day, to pay the bills I have to pay
Ain't it sad
And still there never seems to be a single penny left for me
That's too bad
In my dreams I have a plan
If I got me a wealthy man
I wouldn't have to work at all, I'd fool around and have a ball...
Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man's world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man's world
Aha-ahaaa
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
It's a rich man's world
A man like that is hard to find but I can't get him off my mind
Ain't it sad
And if he happens to be free I bet he wouldn't fancy me
That's too bad
So I must leave, I'll have to go
To Las Vegas or Monaco
And win a fortune in a game, my life will never be the same...
Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man's world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man's world
Aha-ahaaa
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
It's a rich man's world
Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man's world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man's world
Aha-ahaaa
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
It's a rich man's world
It's a rich man's world

[img] [/img]

Because you're baiting me.

Well maybe getting you to say anything of substance is like trying to get blood out of a stone. Anyway, the maximum wage is a daft idea right?

However, if I do make an effort I'll run rings around you.

Hmm. The last time i noticed your efforts you were claiming that having a relative on Sky TV gave you more credentials to speak on the miners' strike than anyone else. For Michael Howard it was the night, might it be the playground for your good self? If not, I think it's time for one of the little white tablets and a lie down.

I can't remember the tax paid in Thatchers day but I can remember the growing costs today.

Before April the 1st my car tax was £175 a year. Now its £200. Ontop of this I damaged the suspension on my car recently (£150). Then theres the massive tax on fuel, NI going up, Council tax rises, water rate rises, gas bill massive rises, food thats increasing.

You name it. Vote for who ever you want but my criteria would be to vote on current performance. I don't think Labour is covering itself in glory.

Yet again he Conservatives (remember Hague) are being led by an empty suit so it looks like Labour again. Depressing.

>so it looks like Labour again.

You're voting Labour ? 😯

Never. Im saying the Conservatives arent helping themselves. They picked a safe leader who doesn't seem to have anything leadership-wise/inspiring' about him

hora,

I've tried to make this point already, but there is more to this than politics.

Things are getting more expensive due to the fundamental limits of economic growth on our planet.

In the last 20 years the world population has grown from less than 5 billion to nearly 7 billion AND those of us in the west in particular are consuming ever more resources. We are running short of wood, fish, water, space and perhaps most importantly, oil.

It is not possible to legislate to increase any of these things. IMO the party to vote for is the one that is most likely to accept that these things are becoming problematic rather than peddling the story that economic growth can go on indefinitely.

I'm afraid it's inevitable that many things will become increasingly expensive in the future, whoever is in power.

Can someone define "rich" for me? I need to know if I should be envious or smug.

Ok, so I'll finally wade into this... and not on one side or the other..

RPRT - are you familiar with the trickle down effect?

I'm familiar with the term, yes. But you'll be unsurprised to hear that I don't subscribe to the thoery.

But you'll be unsurprised to hear that I don't subscribe to the thoery.

Can't say that I blame you; it was one of those ideas that people got very excited about in the late 80s and early 90s and is now taken about as seriously as Francis Fukuyama's 'End of History' thesis.

Mind you, people still read Ayn Rand and find 'truth' in it so there's no hope really.

Things are getting more expensive...

Which things? Food, travel, motoring, computing, telecoms, clothes etc have never been cheaper.

Just to take one example - but an important one I think - petrol/diesel?

Some people might include that as a cost in your categories of travel and motoring, but of course it is having a knock on effect into ALL of the other areas.

Happy to go through them one by one, but maybe someone else would like a go?

This used to say something deeply profound that would have transformed this country. But re-reading earlier posts, I can't see the point now.

Good price comparison chart at the bottom of the page of this weblink

[url= http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/historic-inflation-calculator ]Historic Inflation[/url]

luked2,

Can you try making your point again - not sure what you mean.

But you'll be unsurprised to hear that I don't subscribe to the thoery.

Purely interested here - why does it not work? All the money that is 'made', where does it go?

EDIT: would you beleive the rich keep it to themselves,they dont enegae in great acts of philanthrophy, but they keep it to themselves. Perhaps you could explain why it trickles down?
I like the fact that tiger roach just posted questions on every one of their posts and never answered anything.... a rather poor debating technique.

I dont get that link re inflation either.
This notion that everyne who is wealthy has worked hard for it, with the implication that everyone poor is lazy and has not worked hard is BS. The trickle down effect is also complete BS as well.

FROM WIKI: in his Cross of Gold speech [b]1896[/b], Democrat William Jennings Bryan said:

There are those who believe that, if you will only legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea, however, has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous, their prosperity will find its way up through every class which rests up on them.

molgrips,

Have a look at "money as debt" on youtube - it explains how money becomes concentrated in the hands of the already wealthy.

You need to understand how money is created before you can understand why it doesn't "trickle down" from the wealthy to the poor.

Well surely if rich people make a ton of money, they spend it in the economy? And if they hoard it in banks, well then that's extra capital for the banks to use money to make even more, no?

Yes of course the rich make a lot, but they don't keep it as gold bullion in a safe forever, do they?

Junkyard - well that ain't true and as I didn't get answers I kept pushing then got bored.

Robert Tressel's "Great Money Trick" springs to mind

[b][i]"Money is the real cause of poverty," said Sipho.
"Prove it," said Thandi.
"Money is the cause of poverty because it is the
device by which those who are too lazy to work are
enabled to rob the workers of the fruits of our labour."
"Prove it," repeated Thandi.
Sipho slowly folded up the piece of newspaper he
had been reading and put it into his pocket.
"All right," he replied, "I'll show you how the Great
Money Trick is worked."
Sipho opened his lunchbox and took from it two
slices of bread, but as these were not enough, he
asked that anyone who had some bread left should
give it to him. They gave him several pieces, which
he placed in a heap on a clean piece of paper, and,
having borrowed the knives they used to cut and eat
their lunches with from Nkosi, Thandi and Abendigo,
he addressed them as follows:
"These pieces of bread represent the raw materials
which exist naturally in and on the earth for the
use of all people; they were not made by any human
being, but were created for the benefit and suste-
nance of all, the same as were the air and the light
of the sun."
"Now," continued Sipho, "I am a capitalist; or
rather, I represent the bosses and landlords; the
Capitalist Class. That is to say, all these raw materials
belong to me. It does not matter for our present
argument how I got possession of them: the only
thing that matters now is the admitted fact that all the
raw materials which are necessary for the production
of the necessaries of life are now the property of the
Capitalist Class. I am that class: all these raw materials
belong to me."
"Now you three represent the Working Class.
You have nothing, and for my part, although I have
these raw materials, they are of no use to me. What
I need is the things that can be made out of these
raw materials by work: but I am too lazy to work for
myself. But first I must explain that I possess some-
thing else besides the raw materials. These three
knives represent all the machinery of production: the
factories, tools, railways, and so forth, without which
the necessaries of life cannot be produced in abun-
dance. And these three coins" - taking three 5 cent
pieces out of his pocket - "represent my money, capital."

Sipho proceeded to cut up one of the slices of
bread into a number of little square blocks.
"These represent the things which are produced
by labour, aided by machinery, from the raw materials.
We will suppose that a week's work is worth one
Rand."
Sipho now spoke to the Working Class as represented
by Nkosi, Thandi and Abendigo.
"You say that you are all in need of employment,
and as I am the kind-hearted Capitalist Class, I am
going to invest all my money in various industries, so
as to give you plenty of work. I shall pay each of you
one Rand per week, and a week's work is that you
must each produce three of these square blocks.
For doing this work you will each receive your
wages; the money will be your own, to do as you like
with, and the things you produce will of course be
mine, to do as I like with.
You will each take one of these machines and as
soon as you have done a week's work, you shall
have your money."
The Working Class accordingly set to work, and
the Capitalist Class sat down and watched them. As
soon as they had finished, they passed the nine little
blocks to Sipho, who placed them on a piece of
paper by his side and paid the workers their wages.
"These blocks represent the necessaries of life.
You can't live without some of these things, but as
they belong to me, you will have to buy them from
me: my price for these blocks is, one Rand each."
As the Working Class were in need of the neces-
saries of life and as they could not eat, drink or wear
the useless money, they were compelled to agree to
the kind capitalist's terms. They each bought back,
and at once consumed, one-third of the produce of
their labour. The Capitalist Class also devoured two
of the square blocks, and so the net result of the
week's work was that the kind capitalist had con-
sumed two Rand's worth of the things produced by
the labour of the others, and reckoning the squares
at their market value of one Rand each, he had more
than doubled his capital, for he still possessed the
three Rands in money and in addition four Rands
worth of goods. As for the Working Class, Nkosi,
Thandi and Abendigo, having each consumed the
Rand's worth of necessaries they had bought with
their wages, they were again in precisely the same
condition as when they started work - they had nothing.

This process was repeated several times: for
each week's work the producers were paid their
wages. They kept on working and spending all their
earnings. The kind-hearted capitalist consumed
twice as much as any one of them and his pool of
wealth continually increased. In a little while, reckoning
the little squares at their market value of one
Rand each, he was worth about one hundred Rand,
and the Working Class was still in the same condition
as when they began, and were still tearing into
their work as if their lives depended upon it.
After a while the rest of the crowd began to laugh,
and their merriment increased when the kind-heart-
ed capitalist, just after having sold a Rand's worth of
necessaries to each of his workers, suddenly took
their tools, the machinery of production, the knives,
away from them, and informed them that as owing to
over-production, all his storehouses were full-to-
bursting with the necessaries of life, he had decided
to close down the works.
"Well, and what the bloody hell are we to do
now?" demanded Thandi.
"That's not my business," replied the kind-hearted
capitalist. "I've paid your wages, and provided you
with plenty of work for a long time past. I have no
more work for you to do at present. Come round
again in a few months' time and I'll see what I can do
for you."
"But what about the necessaries of life?"
Demanded Nkosi.
"We must have something to eat."
"Of course you must," replied the capitalist, in a
friendly way; "and I shall be very pleased to sell you
some."
"But we haven't got any bloody money!"
"Well, you can't expect me to give you my goods
for nothing! You didn't work for me for nothing, you
know.
I paid you for your work and you should have saved
something: you should have been careful like me.
Look how I have got on by being careful!"
The unemployed looked
blankly at e a c h other, but the rest of the crowd
only laughed; and then the three unemployed
began to abuse the kind-hearted capitalist, demanding that he
should give them some of the necessaries of life that
he had piled up in his warehouses, or to be allowed
to work and produce some more for their own needs;
and even threatened to take some of the things by
force if he did not agree with their demands. But the
kind-hearted capitalist told them not to be cheeky,
and spoke to them about honesty, and said if they
were not careful he would have their faces battered
in for them by the police, or if necessary he would
call out the army and have them shot down like
dogs, the same as he had done before at many other
places.[/i][/b]

[img] [/img]

Uplink - so they started out with nothing and ended up with nothing? Also, the capitalist has a surplus of products which are depreciating in value as demand far exceeds supply. Are there no other capitalists to give them work? Or a state to tax them all in order to provide support when they need? Or a bank to loan them the money to go into business for themselves?

tiger roach, it's a parable.

Let's just remember that without capitalism we would all still be hunter gatherers.

Bad or not? You decide.

molgrips, have you watched that video yet?

tiger that was completely lost on you wasn't it[rhetorical point in case that was lost in you too]. As RPRT said it is a parable and the message is clearly lost on you.
Perhaps you could read the parable of the sower and reconsider your view that everyone who succeeds has done it from their own endevaours ?

No I'm at work.

FFS I'm just saying that it is irrelevant.

Just duck next time something like that comes along tiger

par·a·ble? ?/?pær?b?l/ Show Spelled[par-uh-buhl] Show IPA
–noun
1.a short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson.
2.a statement or comment that conveys a meaning indirectly by the use of comparison, analogy, or the like.

ar·gu·men·ta·tive? ?/??rgy??m?nt?t?v/ Show Spelled[ahr-gyuh-men-tuh-tiv] Show IPA
–adjective
1. fond of or given to argument and dispute; disputatious; contentious: The law students were an unusually argumentative group.
2. of or characterized by argument; controversial: an argumentative attitude toward political issues.
3. Law . arguing or containing arguments suggesting that a certain fact tends toward a certain conclusion.

I stopped reading at the bosses too lazy to work bit.

Socialist clap trap.

bastard [?b??st?d ?bæs-]
n
1. Informal, offensive an obnoxious or despicable person
2. Informal, often humorous or affectionate a person, esp a man lucky bastard
3. Informal something extremely difficult or unpleasant that job is a real bastard
4. Old-fashioned or offensive a person born of unmarried parents; an illegitimate baby, child, or adult
5. something irregular, abnormal, or inferior
6. Talkemada
7. (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Breeds) a hybrid, esp an accidental or inferior one
adj (prenominal)
1. Old-fashioned or offensive illegitimate by birth
2. irregular, abnormal, or inferior in shape, size, or appearance
3. resembling a specified thing, but not actually being such a bastard cedar
4. counterfeit; spurious
[from Old French bastart, perhaps from bast in the phrase fils de bast son of the packsaddle (that is, of an unlawful and not the marriage bed), from Medieval Latin bastum packsaddle, of uncertain origin]

😯

con·de·scend·ing?bell·end ?Spelled[kon-duh-sen-ding bell-en-de]

–adjective
1. showing or implying a usually patronizing descent from dignity or superiority:
2. Junkyard

😉

It's worth pointing out that bankers etc often do work pretty hard. Just because it's not physical doesn't mean it's not hard.

Some criminals work pretty hard. Just because it's not legal doesn't mean it's not hard.

Some criminals work pretty hard. Just because it's not legal doesn't mean it's not hard.

Didn't you mention something earlier about absurd responses?

😯

it is hard not to condescend someone who fails to undestand a parable, takes it literally and then says FFS it is irrelevant. Clearly they have not got it.
Bell end you say surely we must have met then?

it is hard not to condescend someone

Yes, we get you. 🙄

Sorry did you need a wink to get the sarcasm?

This is easy I am on a roll now 😆

JOKING I will stop now
IGMC.

IGMC

I've already put it in the taxi for you!

😉

[url=

shit on the Common People like YOU.[/url]

[img] [/img]

You've got to hand it to Dave there for finding a photo opp with someone even more loathsome looking than himself.

Didn't you mention something earlier about absurd responses?

You know the difference between funny peculiar and funny ha ha?

I remember the buses being 'deregulated' so that fares would come down, service would improve, lots of competition between companies in every city - a glowing, enhanced world better for all bus users.

Since then, nearly ever bus company in every city is owned by the same ntional firm. They also have a finger in the trains, so even less competition between modes of transport.

Lots of the routes have disappeared as packed routes no longer help support community routes, so the public are giving money to shareholders to keep the routes open, if the company even agrees to help communities.

All the profits that went to improving the service/keeping prices lower now go to the shareholders pockets.

Now we have a £2 fare here to go under half a mile - this is at the 'low rate' not the high rate fares during rush hour!

Oh and my main memory from Thatchers era

"Utterly selfish is Good. Feel no shame."

Ha ha, talkemada - thanks for bringing me that bit of lunchtime fun.

Just in case any of you missed that link:

[url=

me laugh.[/url]

Since then, nearly ever bus company in every city is owned by the same ntional firm

I think you'll find they've been re-nationalised

by the German government

Mmmm
despite the attitudes of most of this forums contributors, we are all guilty of spending what probably to most of the world would believe is obscene amounts of money on a push bike!!
IMO

Junkyard - I shall ignore your preference to insult rather than be constructive but will suggest you put down what you think the point of the parable is so that we can at least see what you think we are talking about.

The labour supporter in that photo looks angry doesn't he?

I can't remember the tax paid in Thatchers day but I can remember the growing costs today.

Before April the 1st my car tax was £175 a year. Now its £200. Ontop of this I damaged the suspension on my car recently (£150).

Let's just remember that without capitalism we would all still be hunter gatherers.

we'd have skipped capitalism and gone straight to state capitalism, as they did in the USSR (before they went back to a kind of capitalism).

Because it didn't work?

Shall I have Ravioli for me tea?

[img] [/img]

If it's fresh, yes. From a can, no.

But I [i]like[/i] Heinz tinned Ravioli! 🙁

Ok, but only for a special treat.

Yay! 😀

Is this the best song to sum Britain under the Tory jackboot 😉

saw them once and they played it about 5 times in one set.