Putin says U.S. is a "parasite" on global economy

[bridge too far]

Not only socialists wish for that, right minded people do. The problem is you can only have that when the society they are in has enough to go around to supply it. If you borrow so that it weakens the strong and so there is no fat to spare to help, then everyone is dragged down into the mire. I personally don't wish for my grand-daughter to live in squalor and poverty because the government tried a social experiment and overspent to try and uplift all, where-ever they come from.(It is not PC, but I resent people coming here and drawing from the system after not paying in, whatever their colour or creed.)

Until society decides that parents and citizens have to face up to their own responsibilities, children from poorer backgrounds will be held back as they do not have the right support from their parents to get somewhere. Most kids want to get on in life but due to the social system that pays you not to work some have no experience how to move up the ladder. It is a self defeating spiral.

 

There is plenty of fat to spare, Nick. You only have to read the 'feral elite' thread to see where it is. When people read about the huge distortions of wealth in this and other so-called developed countries, they either aspire to be as elite or they think 'what's the point in trying - I'll never get there'. That surplus fat could easily pay for all the cuts being imposed at the moment. Even charities are closing down because they've lost their funding and they're supposed to be the ones replacing our public services.

 

There has been research that shows that the more equal societies are, they are the happiest and most productive and that benefits every member of that society.

 

It's all very well talking about a society that 'pays you not to work'. Of course there are some lazy buggers who are happy to live off the state but I don't believe for one moment that they are the majority. With so many people being laid off at the moment, what do you propose we should do to support those poor souls who have done nothing wrong, paid taxes all their lives etc. etc and suddenly find themselves on the scrapheap through no fault of their own?

 

Unemployment in families becomes a self-perpetuating problem and, to some extent we're seeing that families where the parents were laid off, as youngsters, in the 80s and 90s now have children who've never seen the worth ethic and who stand little or no chance of getting work themselves.

 

But we've gone way off topic

[revolution saint]

Fantastic! A Left Vs Right pointless argument. I've missed these so much - they hardly ever happen.

[Seaford Saint]

Not only socialists wish for that, right minded people do. The problem is you can only have that when the society they are in has enough to go around to supply it. If you borrow so that it weakens the strong and so there is no fat to spare to help, then everyone is dragged down into the mire. I personally don't wish for my grand-daughter to live in squalor and poverty because the government tried a social experiment and overspent to try and uplift all, where-ever they come from.(It is not PC, but I resent people coming here and drawing from the system after not paying in, whatever their colour or creed.)

Until society decides that parents and citizens have to face up to their own responsibilities, children from poorer backgrounds will be held back as they do not have the right support from their parents to get somewhere. Most kids want to get on in life but due to the social system that pays you not to work some have no experience how to move up the ladder. It is a self defeating spiral.

 

If the world's richest economies cant provide the wherewithal to provide decent housing educatione etc...we must surely be entitled to ask why.....who has the money that could have provided it and how dd they get it? Personally this debt situation is interesting....not all debt is the same and the Irish property developer was right when interviewed last week. He was able to borrow a million euros on a salary of 25000 euros. Surely the bank must take the hit for that, but they aren't, we are. Not all Greek debt or UK debt is the same....I think it was Indonesia that borrowed to have a nuclear power station built. Unfortunately the power station was built on a fault line and cannot be swuitched on. The question arises, do the people of Indonesia have to pay back the billions it cost or should the bank not be punished for lending the money for an asset that could never realise its value?

[Verbal]

Fantastic! A Left Vs Right pointless argument. I've missed these so much - they hardly ever happen.

 

Not pointless at all. We Marxists are busy compiling lists for who's to be stood up against a wall, and we need threads like this to identify candidates.

[solentstars]

History of the Labour Party since the war....

 

i think the labour party since the war have done a hell of a lot of good for working people after the war and gave us opportunitys to advance in walks of life which was not the case pre-war.

i also think the conservative party at times in history have alot to be proud about and think cameron is a decent guy.

[Seaford Saint]

Northumbria water has been sold today to some one from Hong Kong....a crime in my view.

[solentstars]

Fantastic! A Left Vs Right pointless argument. I've missed these so much - they hardly ever happen.

i agree but thats what you get if your a die hard fan supporters of either party rather than free thinkers.

most people in this country are right wing on some issues and left wing on others i expect.

[OldNick]

Not pointless at all. We Marxists are busy compiling lists for who's to be stood up against a wall, and we need threads like this to identify candidates.

The only time you lot can actually raise a smile, thinking about that type of power. Funny thing is , no truer word said in jest Lol

[Verbal]

The only time you lot can actually raise a smile, thinking about that type of power. Funny thing is , no truer word said in jest Lol

 

That's right Nick. I (and my lot) really meant it. The questions is: are you one the list or not? Personally, I'd like to add all antique dealers. As long as you're not one of those, you have a good chance.

[OldNick]

That's right Nick. I (and my lot) really meant it. The questions is: are you one the list or not? Personally, I'd like to add all antique dealers. As long as you're not one of those, you have a good chance.

dont worry we'd sell you lot some wooden posts that were riddled with woodworm and flintlocks pistols that blow up in your face as they fire.

Anyway I'd change sides when you came to power and say me BTF and Verbal always had the same ideals, and be in charge of the firing squad. This would be just after i had organised a coup to get rid of the real believer and had then taken over his pad, the palace he had nicked from the gentry. Filling it with treasures looted from whoever.....that's how it goes isn't it?

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Has dunce managed to hijack ANOTHER thread?

[Saintandy666]

Without the Labour party post-war, we wouldn't have a welfare system, the NHS and a minimum wage(and those are just three things). While obviously they have many failures, you can't write off their achievements.

[Jonnyboy]

i think the labour party since the war have done a hell of a lot of good for working people after the war and gave us opportunitys to advance in walks of life which was not the case pre-war.

i also think the conservative party at times in history have alot to be proud about and think cameron is a decent guy.

 

Guided Missile and his friends and family have always refused to use the NHS on a point of principle, good on em!

[Mao Cap]

Fantastic! A Left Vs Right pointless argument. I've missed these so much - they hardly ever happen.

 

I don't know about pointless. These threads can really convince people to give up their core beliefs.

 

Take me, for instance. 26 years as a moderate socialist, then a month or two ago dune posts something about Rhodesia and that was it for me. Now I'm enraged by the idea of the minimum wage and welfare state, and can't finish a sentence without using the phrase "gold-plated public-sector pensions". See, there it is again!

[Saintandy666]

Some journalist man on Sky News paper review just made a good point.

 

With the Euro crisis and US crisis people could turn to the UK.

[dune]

I bet verbal has been to the states. Usually he/she throws that in when discussing a point

 

And that he's CJ from Eggheads.

[Guided Missile]

Guided Missile and his friends and family have always refused to use the NHS on a point of principle, good on em!

We help pay for both the NHS and a private scheme. It makes us feel good that on one hand we jump the queue when treatment is needed and on the other, help finance the treatment of the obese, beer swigging, heavy smoking socialists that are forced to use the NHS.

 

It is interesting that the current NHS structure is far closer to that envisaged by the Conservatives in their 1944 White paper on a National Health Service. Labour's original structure was just plain wrong, as were the concepts of a national electricity organisation and a national rail authority. All of these were given up over the years to favour private enterprise and the benefits of competition and local needs. Like the Marxist states of the 70's, true socialism has been found to be a failed experiment and an expensive one at that.

 

Enter New Labour, Tony Blair and his warped impersonation of Thatcherism...

 

...and still the mugs vote for them....although, hopefully in declining numbers since they have been found out again.

Edited 3 August, 2011 by Guided Missile

[dune]

[Seaford Saint]

We help pay for both the NHS and a private scheme. It makes us feel good that on one hand we jump the queue when treatment is needed and on the other, help finance the treatment of the obese, beer swigging, heavy smoking socialists that are forced to use the NHS.

 

It is interesting that the current NHS structure is far closer to that envisaged by the Conservatives in their 1944 White paper on a National Health Service. Labour's original structure was just plain wrong, as were the concepts of a national electricity organisation and a national rail authority. All of these were given up over the years to favour private enterprise and the benefits of competition and local needs. Like the Marxist states of the 70's, true socialism has been found to be a failed experiment and an expensive one at that.

 

Enter New Labour, Tony Blair and his warped impersonation of Thatcherism...

 

...and still the mugs vote for them....although, hopefully in declining numbers since they have been found out again.

 

You better keep paying for those beer swilling heavy smoking socialists or they will take all your belongings off you

[Verbal]

We help pay for both the NHS and a private scheme. It makes us feel good that on one hand we jump the queue when treatment is needed and on the other, help finance the treatment of the obese, beer swigging, heavy smoking socialists that are forced to use the NHS.

 

It is interesting that the current NHS structure is far closer to that envisaged by the Conservatives in their 1944 White paper on a National Health Service. Labour's original structure was just plain wrong, as were the concepts of a national electricity organisation and a national rail authority. All of these were given up over the years to favour private enterprise and the benefits of competition and local needs. Like the Marxist states of the 70's, true socialism has been found to be a failed experiment and an expensive one at that.

 

Enter New Labour, Tony Blair and his warped impersonation of Thatcherism...

 

...and still the mugs vote for them....although, hopefully in declining numbers since they have been found out again.

 

As a veggie, medditeranean-diet, outdoors-y socialist (sort of), I'm happy that you gout-ridden, pot-bellied, chronically diseased reactionaries are repeatedly having to make regular payments into the health system. Hopefully the 'declining numbers' will look after themselves - and if not, the poorer service and health care in the private sector certainly will.

[Guided Missile]

As a veggie, medditeranean-diet, outdoors-y socialist (sort of), I'm happy that you gout-ridden, pot-bellied, chronically diseased reactionaries are repeatedly having to make regular payments into the health system. Hopefully the 'declining numbers' will look after themselves - and if not, the poorer service and health care in the private sector certainly will.

That's what Linda McCartney said...

[pap]

It is interesting that the current NHS structure is far closer to that envisaged by the Conservatives in their 1944 White paper on a National Health Service. Labour's original structure was just plain wrong, as were the concepts of a national electricity organisation and a national rail authority. All of these were given up over the years to favour private enterprise and the benefits of competition and local needs. Like the Marxist states of the 70's, true socialism has been found to be a failed experiment and an expensive one at that.

 

Don't agree with this bit. Rail privatisation has been a total disaster. For most regular commuters, the concept of competition doesn't exist. Not happy with your service to London? Want to use another provider? Tough. You're fecked.

 

Of course, the crowning turd in the punchbowl for the taxpayer is that the bit that doesn't make any profit, i.e., the upkeep of the network, is in public hands and we all have to pay for it.

[Verbal]

That's what Linda McCartney said...

 

Her burgers are rubbish. I suspect that was the problem.

[Minty]

I actually quite like them...

[Guided Missile]

Don't agree with this bit. Rail privatisation has been a total disaster...

A total load of ****** from another moaning commuter, without any supporting facts and a poor memory of British Rail, its rolling stock and punctuality. Here's a few facts to help you out:

 

SOUTH WEST TRAINS AVERAGE PERF. 52 WEEKS TO 23 JULY

PUNCTUALITY 93.1

RELIABILITY 99.6

UK train passengers taking middle or long-distance trips are among the most satisfied rail users in Europe, according to a survey published yesterday.

In a 'Eurobarometer' poll of 9,000 passengers from 25 EU countries, 87 per cent of British rail passengers were satisfied with reliability and punctuality – some 35 per cent higher than in Germany.

The UK scored above the EU average in 17 of 19 service areas, including cleanliness and upkeep of stations, ease of buying a ticket, service frequency and punctuality and reliability.

Association of Train Operating Companies spokesperson Edward Welsh said: “Significant investment in recent years has seen quicker and more punctual trains, better stations and an improved overall service for passengers in this country.”

[Verbal]

i actually quite like them...

 

r.i.p.

[solentstars]

Don't agree with this bit. Rail privatisation has been a total disaster. For most regular commuters, the concept of competition doesn't exist. Not happy with your service to London? Want to use another provider? Tough. You're fecked.

 

Of course, the crowning turd in the punchbowl for the taxpayer is that the bit that doesn't make any profit, i.e., the upkeep of the network, is in public hands and we all have to pay for it.

 

Privation has been a disaster for trains and bus services and should have stayed in the public sector.I wonder when we will get the superfast bullet trains most advanced countrys have had and tickets at reasonable prices.

 

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

[pap]

A total load of ****** from another moaning commuter, without any supporting facts and a poor memory of British Rail, its rolling stock and punctuality. Here's a few facts to help you out:

 

Yup. About as crap as saying "competition" has been good, or even exists for the railways. All privatisation has done is create a bunch of regional monopolies and fare increases that can't be challenged or undercut by a competitor. In that sense, we're no better off than we were under British rail.

 

New rolling stock is all very good, but its utility really depends on whether you can afford to use them. Above inflation rises in Jan ( and they were pricey anyway ). Plus, privatisation has done nothing to address issues like overcrowding. Try getting out of Euston on a Friday afternoon.

 

I can only speak for myself, but any long trip I make on my own now happens by plane. With the family in tow, it's car all the way. Trains are really poor value for money because they're run for profit, and unlike most other businesses, there is no competition.

[Guided Missile]

Yup. About as crap as saying "competition" has been good, or even exists for the railways. All privatisation has done is create a bunch of regional monopolies and fare increases that can't be challenged or undercut by a competitor. In that sense, we're no better off than we were under British rail.

It would be better if you argued the point with facts, rather than ignore the facts I posted and change the point of the argument.

 

My point is train network, overall is better now than it was under Government control. The fact that it is more expensive, crowded at peak times and less cost effective and convenient, than travelling by car and air was not my point. If you have any facts to back up the argument that it was better when nationalised, please share them. Being crowded only serves to demonstrate the increased popularity of train travel.

At the same time, please justify why you think the tax payer should be expected to subsidise the cost and comfort of your travel by train, as they did when the system was nationalised? Someone has to pay for the rail network. Why shouldn't it be the user rather than the taxpayer?

[pap]

It would be better if you argued the point with facts, rather than ignore the facts I posted and change the point of the argument.

 

My point is train network, overall is better now than it was under Government control. The fact that it is more expensive, crowded at peak times and less cost effective and convenient, than travelling by car and air was not my point. If you have any facts to back up the argument that it was better when nationalised, please share them. Being crowded only serves to demonstrate the increased popularity of train travel.

At the same time, please justify why you think the tax payer should be expected to subsidise the cost and comfort of your travel by train, as they did when the system was nationalised? Someone has to pay for the rail network. Why shouldn't it be the user rather than the taxpayer?

 

I'm not disputing the figures you've posted, even though you are a tad guilty of cherry-picking ( pricing, availability of seats, regional variation ). You're also ignoring the point I made about monopolies.

 

Your last point, about subsidisation, only works if the entire network is privately funded and paid for by those taking the trips. It isn't. I'm a tax payer, and as such, I'm already subsidising the rail network. Remember we pay for the bits that aren't profitable. The Train Operating Companies pay for the bits that are, and have raised fares even though we're footing the bill for the part that doesn't make any money.

 

So, right now, I'm paying for a service I don't use.

 

I liked this bit in particular.

 

Being crowded only serves to demonstrate the increased popularity of train travel.

 

No, it's more to do with the fact that people have no other choice but to use trains if they commute, and not enough trains being on to accommodate these people. Try getting from Southampton to Central London in less than 1h 15mins in a car. Then try parking.

[Jonnyboy]

A total load of ****** from another moaning commuter, without any supporting facts and a poor memory of British Rail, its rolling stock and punctuality. Here's a few facts to help you out:

 

 

 

SOUTH WEST TRAINS AVERAGE PERF. 52 WEEKS TO 23 JULY

PUNCTUALITY 93.1

RELIABILITY 99.6

 

 

 

UK train passengers taking middle or long-distance trips are among the most satisfied rail users in Europe, according to a survey published yesterday.

In a 'Eurobarometer' poll of 9,000 passengers from 25 EU countries, 87 per cent of British rail passengers were satisfied with reliability and punctuality – some 35 per cent higher than in Germany.

The UK scored above the EU average in 17 of 19 service areas, including cleanliness and upkeep of stations, ease of buying a ticket, service frequency and punctuality and reliability.

Association of Train Operating Companies spokesperson Edward Welsh said: “Significant investment in recent years has seen quicker and more punctual trains, better stations and an improved overall service for passengers in this country.”

 

Facts? Propaganda more like.

I don't believe any of your tory lies.

[bridge too far]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-14370310

 

The train service in this region isn't very good.

[Guided Missile]

Facts? Propaganda more like.

I don't believe any of your tory lies.

 

Gallup poll on behalf of the European Commission. Download it here and educate yourself...

[dune]

Gallup poll on behalf of the European Commission. Download it here and educate yourself...

 

I would suggest he's beyond education.

[Jonnyboy]

Gallup poll on behalf of the European Commission. Download it here and educate yourself...

 

have either of you used a train recently? You need to max out your credit card.

[Redondo Saint]

Yup. About as crap as saying "competition" has been good, or even exists for the railways. All privatisation has done is create a bunch of regional monopolies and fare increases that can't be challenged or undercut by a competitor. In that sense, we're no better off than we were under British rail.

 

New rolling stock is all very good, but its utility really depends on whether you can afford to use them. Above inflation rises in Jan ( and they were pricey anyway ). Plus, privatisation has done nothing to address issues like overcrowding. Try getting out of Euston on a Friday afternoon.

 

I can only speak for myself, but any long trip I make on my own now happens by plane. With the family in tow, it's car all the way. Trains are really poor value for money because they're run for profit, and unlike most other businesses, there is no competition.

 

If train services are not run for profit are you saying the govt should subsidise it at a loss??? Surely not?

[solentstars]

have either of you used a train recently? You need to max out your credit card.

 

It's cheaper to get a plane the most expensive train service in Europe for a third world train system .

 

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

[Jonnyboy]

It's cheaper to get a plane the most expensive train service in Europe for a third world train system .

 

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

 

exactly, last year my mates train was delayed for work again, he stood and shouted "it's not good enough!" and the whole carriage started clapping him.

[Guided Missile]

exactly, last year my mates train was delayed for work again, he stood and shouted "it's not good enough!" and the whole carriage started clapping him.

Totally destroys my argument. I guess the European Commission could have asked your mate, instead of paying Gallup to carry out extensive telephone interviews with 400 rail commuters in the UK.

[solentstars]

exactly, last year my mates train was delayed for work again, he stood and shouted "it's not good enough!" and the whole carriage started clapping him.

It's the sort of service you get from private monopolys and no competion

 

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

[Barney Trubble]

There ain't a hope in hell of any of our public transport systems becoming a viable replacement for the motor, even after they have taxed the motorist off the road, the public transport system will still be in the 70's.

 

The country would grind to a halt if our only option of getting to and from work was public transport.

 

Wolverhampton recently had a new multi-million pound bus station, then Cetro decided to charge the bus companies 50p each, when one of their buses used it. Of course, the bus companies just changed their route to avoid using the new terminal and the customer was inconvenienced. It's that sort of utter nonsense that means that the car will always be king.

[Jonnyboy]

Totally destroys my argument. I guess the European Commission could have asked your mate, instead of paying Gallup to carry out extensive telephone interviews with 400 rail commuters in the UK.

 

from looking through your mainly irrelevant link, the uk comes out as a midtable team in the european set-up

 

it seems to be all based on opinions - a wishy washy european qualitative style study. the sort of thing you'd probably be dead against if it promoting a socialist result.

 

peoples attitudes change, for example the germans may have very high standards and are more likely to express disatisfaction when in fact their rail network is far superior to ours.

 

I am more interested in factual quantitative studies within the uk showing real changes in costs for passengers and times of journies, over the last 40 years or so. this would give a far better picture than asking some lithuanians who travel by rail twice a year if the toilets at their local station were clean.

[Guided Missile]

from looking through your mainly irrelevant link, the uk comes out as a midtable team in the european set-up

 

it seems to be all based on opinions - a wishy washy european qualitative style study. the sort of thing you'd probably be dead against if it promoting a socialist result.

 

peoples attitudes change, for example the germans may have very high standards and are more likely to express disatisfaction when in fact their rail network is far superior to ours.

 

I am more interested in factual quantitative studies within the uk showing real changes in costs for passengers and times of journies, over the last 40 years or so. this would give a far better picture than asking some lithuanians who travel by rail twice a year if the toilets at their local station were clean.

 

I'd spend some time debating the points you've made, but you're obviously totally illiterate and a waste of a post....

[Jonnyboy]

I'd spend some time debating the points you've made, but you're obviously totally illiterate and a waste of a post....

 

Yes that's right, totally illiterate - oh look, Ive spelt some words right!!!

Kind of blows your theory out of the water eh?

[Jonnyboy]

I'd spend some time debating the points you've made, but you're obviously totally illiterate and a waste of a post....

 

I'm a "waste of a post?"

 

Well that doesn't make much sense does it Shakespeare?

[Jonnyboy]

pwned.

[trousers]

Having commuted daily to London by train for the last 25 years, I can confirm GM's statement that the service is considerably more reliable than it was pre-privatisation is correct.

 

I will need to do some research on the cost side of things to see if the "it's much more expensive these days" suppositions also hold true.

 

I would imagine the overall cost the commuter had to pay for his/her journey in 1986 (tax + fare) isn't much different to what we have to pay now (relatively speaking).