Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416002)

What I am calling for is global labour and wage (along with pension) standards so that no one is exploted and we all get a high standard of living even if it ends up in resulting in a global government

Originally Posted by Derek (Post 35416089)

As I said, try reading applications or forms submitted by recent school leavers. In a lot of cases they are a barely legible hodgepodge of poor spelling, terrible grammar and txt speak.

When migrants with English as a second or even third language can perform better than people who have gone through 10+ years of schooling in the UK you can see one reason employers would rather give them a job rather than a school leaver.



Yay! Solid gold toilet seats all round. Can't have any money left unspent. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan (Post 35416091)

So you mean how it was supposed to be under the communist system??

I tell you what Alan. You keep telling us that you are rich, so why don't you spread some of your wealth about?

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416094)

Have you seen the standards in the Thatcher/Major era?, they were not that good either and I did not sugggest that it was good, only better (than theb Tories)

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416094)

Clearly you have forgotten the improvements to health for example

Originally Posted by Derek (Post 35416097)

Yes, I'm a product of that era and have seen a decline that's even more profound over the last few years.



And what does that have to do with the topic at hand? :confused:

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416103)

To show that there have been improvements to the UK in the Labour Government of 1997-2011 when compaired to the Tory Government of 1979-1997

Originally Posted by Derek (Post 35416106)

The topic is unemployment. Whether it rises, falls, stays constant and the reasons and possible solutions to it.

It isn't a contest to see which government was better.

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416094)

Yet again you accuse me of being a Communist, just becuase I stand up for the rights of the working people, I am fairly wealthy (I did not use the term Rich), but I am not a millionaire even, and I'm certainly not rich enough to influence public policy

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416108)

My point was that only Radical Reform of Democracy and Capitalism can fix the unemployment problem

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan (Post 35416109)

Alan, take a look at communist ideals, and then compare them to the rubbish that you spout, and you will find them very similar. Apart from the fact that you actually want a class system as far as transport goes, where the rich fly first class, but the poor have to hitch hike.

I stand up for the rignts of workers, and I am a trade unionist. And one thing the unions certainly don't need is idiots who try to attach themselves to them, and actually discredit the unions with their loony left rantings, and support for violence. I mean who is going to support any union that is forced to take industrial action, when there is and idiot making out that he represents the union, but is so millitant that they can't see common sense or compromise?

To be honest what you say sounds more like immature ramblings, with snippets taken from various people who you admire. But you don't even realise yourself that many of the things that you come out with actually contradict each other.

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan (Post 35416109)

Radical reform in one place often causes problems in another. What is needed is gradual reform considering all the implications.

The biggest change needed, that will help the economy, and create employment, would be for those in power to stop acting for the good of themselves and their friends, and to act for the good of the whole country.

If the corruption in contracts for local and national government was sorted out, then that alone would save billions for the economy. But their would also be many corrupt people in power who would lose their jobs, and possibly be prosecuted. So the cover up will probably continue.

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35416127)

It obviously escapes the limited intellect of some budding world dictators around here, but BAD, uncontrolled borrowing and spending is what got us into the mess we're in.

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416117)

Last time I checked I do not adovocate the forced removal of people to prison camps just because they slightly disagreed with the system, also I do adocate 100% nationlisation, 5 year plans, forced people to be moved to the rural areas and starved to death

Last time I checked I do not advocate the forced removal of people to prison camps just because they slightly disagreed with the system, also I do advocate 100% nationalisation, 5 year plans, forced people to be moved to the rural areas and starved to death and lastly, for their leaders to live a billionaire jet set lifestyle or even a dictatorship of the proletariat :mad: :td:

So you call anyone who is prepared to stand up for the rights of the working people as “idiots�, “loony left�, “Communists�, “Terrorists� and even “Extremist�, all the people you describe want better rights, better wages and better pensions for the working people, even it it also includes boosting the ego of those leaders :mad: :td:

So while you defend a failed system, I defend a failed people :angel:

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416134)

For God sake, it was Free Market Capitalism and Neo Liberal Democracy that caused it, the spending was there to keep the working people on side to a failed system :mad: :td:

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan (Post 35416138)

Are you now copying and pasting your rants? :D

You are comparing Russian communism to true communism. Russian communism wasn't true communism, because people were not equal, and the leadership oppressed anyone who didn't agree with them. And they used violence and oppression to carry out their agenda. This is much the same as the violence, terrorism, and murder that you advocate on your twitter and facebook posts.

In theory we would all like to be equal, and the wealth to be spread out across the population in a much fairer way. But a successful economy can never exist this way, because there would be no incentive to set up and grow successful companies if the owners were on similar wages to those who they employ on the shop floor. So British business wouldn't be competitive in a global marketplace. And if employment was 100% (including unproductive workers who don't want to work), just so that everyone had a job, then wage bills would go through the roof. And so would inflation due to massive production costs.

You really need to look at all your rants, and put them all together. And then work out how they could actually work in a successful economy. Because from the way most people with any common sense see it, there are far too many conflicts in your rants. And they haven't been worked out with any degree of intelligence.

Reforms are needed to improve the economy, and bring down unemployment. But they need to be properly thought out...unlike many of yours!

---------- Post added at 12:49 ---------- Previous post was at 12:41 ----------



So you don't agree with "Free Market Capitalism", which is the only way for a country to have a successful economy in a global market. And you don't agree with "Democracy", so you agree with a dictatorship that forces the nation to comply with their wishes?......this is sounding like communist Russia again :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan (Post 35416138)

So you don't agree with "Free Market Capitalism", which is the only way for a country to have a successful economy in a global market. And you don't agree with "Democracy", so you agree with a dictatorship that forces the nation to comply with their wishes?......this is sounding like communist Russia again :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416151)

What conflicts do you see by the way?

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35416154)

need we say more

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35416035)

What about the Building for Schools programme, better test results etc, sure it is still not good enough, but it was better than Major for sure

Also you are wrong, I'm not the one who is out of touch with reality, but there are a lot of CF users who are

---------- Post added at 10:31 ---------- Previous post was at 10:27 ----------



If you are talking about the Iraq War (which killed hundreds of thousands by the way), sure it might have been a lire, but at least the Saddam Government was gone, the only issue I have was that it was done very, vey badly

As for the "Reckless Spending", it was needed for the underinvestment of the Tory Government of 1979-1997 in public servcies

Also thw Economic crisis was most caused by Free Market Capitalism and Neo-Liberal Democracy (Which Blair kept!)