"The slow death of the Real Job is pulling society apart"

[Gmart]

Becsause there wasn't a great deal of freedom under Pinochet's regime.

No, and there is more freedom in the UK system, though less freedom than the Swedish system.

Are we going into a debate on the relative democratic merits of each country?

See here

TBH though I don't really get your point. That different countries have different levels of freedom?

 

[audiotech]

Did you say "we will see how Thatcher gets on eh?" in the early 80s, I wonder?

You total plank.

Nice.

I was very engaged against Thatcherism thanks. I suspect if you were alive at the time you'ld have spent most, if not all of it, with your head in your hands moaning.

France's president, Nicolas Sarkozy, will tonight confront the biggest challenge yet to his six-month tenure, when transport and utility workers begin open-ended strike action which could paralyse the country, deepening the sense of a "November of discontent".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,,2210039,00.html

French students strike against neoliberal reform., with thirty universities occupied.
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=13520

 

[audiotech]

"Neo-liberal ideology has taken a pasting lately don't you think? I see a European model and not a North American one developing. Well the UK is just about in Europe now."

unbelievable!! absolutely unbelieveablely stupid

so everything is grand in the land of thatcher .. my mistake .. i will move along .. nice capitalists just doing johnny foreigner a favour by giving him work .. how wonderful ..

cushy well paid council job?? u fking joking .. gtf tosser

british .. as in peopel who live in britain .. see?

'British jobs for British workers' you've already made that clear.

So no cushy, well paid jobs (management ) in the council where you are then? Lucky.

I don't see capitalism disappearing anytime soon, so are you thinking of setting up another autonomous squat in the meantime? Think! You can have a try-out with your own little tyranny?

 

[dennisr]

dennisr,

Now you see the sort of "Gmarthews" attitudes I invariably come up against all the time in real life. I hate to say it, but the vast majority of people out there hold his sort of views.

yes, it greatly shocks me - this near clash with 'real life' - i think I shall put my head in my hands and cry. My god, is it really this bad out there?

Idiots like Gsmart and their half-baked theories (say, what is that buzzword 'freedom' what does that mean to you Gsmart?) only have the audacity and arrogance because too many folk like you are busy crying in your beer mate.

Gmarst = no answers, not one answer to one of the problems raised with his theory just resorts to taking his ball home cos he dosen't want to play with the nasty boys who don't play by his rules. Foolish fella. Realism = follow your leader (as the screw up up the backside) . War is Peace etc etc

 

[dennisr]

We're only a generation or two away from the glory days of the commonwealth and all those lovely colonies giving us a cheap source of labour and raw materials. Bit rich to say that we haven't benefitted...

apparently 'we' have now got to give all these wonderful advantages up to 'remain competitive'.

We could argue about relative gains from imperialism - but it kind of misses the point as too what the problem we face (and for that matter the solutions open to us) are now imo

poster was spot on re my simple point

 

[Gmart]

#26 puts the situation very clearly. If you feel that it is half-baked as a theory then please feel free to comment and I will address each and every question mark you use. I challenge you to do so.

You can insult me all you like, but by failing to address any of the points I have raised and by ignoring me and resorting to insults, then you are simply showing me that you don't have logic on your side and cannot answer the questions I have raised.

 

[Gmart]

Anyway this thread is just a continuation of this thread which i commented on much to your consternation in #2.

You are just having a whinge and not putting forward any solutions which would be popular in a democracy. This means that yopu either can accept this, or you can go down the road of authoritarianism, which seems to be your preferred route.

And then you have the gall to attack my views.

 

[poster342002]

Idiots like Gsmart and their half-baked theories (say, what is that buzzword 'freedom' what does that mean to you Gsmart?) only have the audacity and arrogance because too many folk like you are busy crying in your beer mate.

Perhaps people like me have ended up "crying into their beer" as a result of umpteen years of banging their heads against the wall in futility with people like Gmarthews - who make up about 80% of the population, in my experience?

 

[tarannau]

I think dennisr was saying that the ruling classes benefited from imperialism, but not the poor in Britain or in the empire's colonies.

That's not entirely true though is it? For a country with such limited natural resources, services like public libraries, leisure provision, the NHS are far from terrible. Many countries would be more than envious.

Now some of that may be as much to do with 'philanthropic' rich shits giving a little back as anything else, but it's tosh to suggest that the 'poor' or average working man hasn't benefited in any way from Britain's colonial past

The solutions open to us now are fairly limited if you ask me. Pulling up the drawbridges and trying to isolate our comparatively priveleged state is almost certainly likely to fail. Even previously successful Euro economies with far better worker protection and legislation, say France and Germany, are ailing badly and looking at further free market policies to increase 'worker flexibility'

In a perfect world we'd elevate the rights of workers globally to standards approaching ours. Instead our jobs and entitlements are often coming to resemble those of more casual workers in less fortunate countries, understandable given that our ('Global leading') British companies and continued push for ever lower consumer prices helps feed the frenzy

 

[Gmart]

Perhaps people like me have ended up "crying into their beer" as a result of umpteen years of banging their heads against the wall in futility with people like Gmarthews - who make up about 80% of the population, in my experience?

Whatever it is that you feel I am wrong about, please state it clearly and I will respond or accept my fault as any adult would do so.

Either that or stop the insults please.

 

[poster342002]

Whatever it is that you feel I am wrong about, please state it clearly and I will respond or accept my fault as any adult would do so.

Either that or stop the insults please.

I don't understand the question. I was replying to dennisr, trying to make him understand the futility I've expereinced in advocating leftist policics - as 80% of the population repsond with arguemnts similar to yours. No slight intended on you, so I apologise if any is percieved.

 

[Fruitloop]

Isn't that totally inevitable though? The dominant ideas of every epoch being the ideals of the ruling class and all that?

 

[Gmart]

I don't understand the question. I was replying to dennisr, trying to make him understand the futility I've expereinced in advocating leftist policics - as 80% of the population repsond with arguemnts similar to yours. No slight intended on you, so I apologise if any is percieved.

No problems I am just interested in the leftist policies that you are trying to advocate. I would love to have the ownership of the means of production in the hands of the people for example, but usually this is impossible due to the mess that results. The only nationalisation which Labour have done is Network Rail which was somewhat forced on them due to the failure of Railtrack.

i am a supporter of having a good social contract from Europe and feel that we must have the same rights Europe-wide. However many countries including our own tries to get around this by exercising their veto to the applause of the Eurosceptics, despite the fact that actually the workers would often be better off!!

Of course having a better quality of life in Europe will inevitably maintain the poverty of the developing world. For example one might argue for the liberalising of trade within the agriculture sector because the farmers in the third world want to pull themselves out of poverty. However the lobby system ensures that the farmers and land owners hold all the cards.

I would also argue for a replacement to council tax which would more effectively take the square metrage of the land and its usage into account.

Please do lets talk about this and try and find a solution. Are you a pro-European? Do you feel that in the globalised world we can only effectively achieve a living wage through cooperation with our European brothers? Or do you feel that isolationism is the way forward? How would you address the lack of incentive which socialist principles seem to tend towards?

 

[dennisr]

#26 puts the situation very clearly. If you feel that it is half-baked as a theory then please feel free to comment and I will address each and every question mark you use. I challenge you to do so.

You can insult me all you like, but by failing to address any of the points I have raised and by ignoring me and resorting to insults, then you are simply showing me that you don't have logic on your side and cannot answer the questions I have raised.

Oh a challenge - OK this was your post 26:

If you are a business in a competitive industry, and you have an equivalent size competitor down the street (or in India/China), then your priority is cutting costs so that you can cut prices to stay in business, so that you can pay people.

If you decide on a moral front to keep unskilled workers on a wage which is higher than your competitor, then you will go out of business in the medium to long term. End of story.

If somehow we are NOT talking about a business in a competitive industry, maybe an colluding oligopoly, which is trying to maintain its market share then these laws might be absorbed in a closed economy, but due to those pesky people in other countries also wanting to make a living we have a choice.

We could throw ourselves into the EU, becoming PRO-EU , leading to the instictive protectionism of the EU against the rest of the world, or we could continue our support of free trade and the free movement of workers, giving a more equal opportunity to many around the world.

Of course if you decide on the protectionist route then you leave yourself open to the accusation of many nations such as the Arabs that the West is united against them (therefore jihad), also you might find that they raise barriers to trade themselves leaving the net effect the same or even against you.

Of course you could take advantage of any natural disaster and attach conditions such as opening markets to the aid which happens a lot, but then you'd be with the status quo again

To which i have already replied (+ to your ongoing points):

cutting costs = cutting labour costs (ie cut wages)

There was a good expose of the international banana industry in the grauniad recently. It showed how they don't pay tax - effectively by moving (or pretending too in the case of the channel islands for instance) their products around (on paper).

More interestingly for me was the simple fact that for every pound we spend in the UK on bananas only 1 pence goes to the workers growing, producing and packaging the crop. There was a wee bit on the conditions these workers live under - if you could call it a life.

So thats what the employers would want here, in their 'perfect' world - 1p in the £1 wages. A proper banana republic (or monarchy - does not matter really). There is a contradiction in all this though - if our wages are low how do we buy their products? (ie how do they get their profits from sales of their products)

and people say 'socialism does not work' - i can't see how capitalism works for either these banana workers or closer to home (in our 'race to the bottom'). This also seems to be the simple point missed by all those calling for immigration controls as some supposed 'solution' to the lowering of wages - give nthat immigration is not the cause of lowering of wages - neither can it be the solution (simply an excuse by those screwing us to get us to 'rally' behind their flag).

ps so were does that other 99p go???

still patient...

If you do cut your costs (ie if WE take wage cuts) the job ain't worth doing and it ain't living.

Maybe we have to look outside the box of THEM and THEIR world view rather than continue to act like rats running around in ever dereaceing (and increasingly pointless) circles.

Its always someone else who recommends that me and mine take the wage cut "for the good of all" - funny that

Even from THIER point of vview - we take the wages cuts means we can no longer afford their products - crap job or no job

little bit "oh, feck it I am irritated now" at this point (when you introduce the 'lazy' and 'its your own fault' crap as a replacement for debate or genuine reply to points made):

Thats your 'answer' to the problem created by the mechinisms by which the system operates? - so no answers then from a defender of capitalist idiocy (sorry 'economics').

Ahhh, so it would be 'my fault' as a individual' and a (point the finger...) lazy individual at that- how fecking original a target to blame is that?

Personally, i doing fine - I have retrained at least 5 times now - but thanks for the 'concern' (far from 'lazy', so please don't make the usual next mistake of assuming I am in some way 'jealous' of other wealth - plenty of my own mate - its nowt personal its simply the idiocy you use to defend your position).

People don't half talk out of their arseholes sometimes. Are you a journalist Gsmart, given the highly original (if utterly wrongheaded) material you are coming out with.

So you see Gsmart you started the name calling as a replacement for a lack of arguement - except you probably don't even see this as name calling - simply "facts of life" as you call your excuses. (its called 'projection' mate

OK - you reply to the points I made (repeated above) - and I'll happily refrain from cynicism

 

[durruti02]

'British jobs for British workers' you've already made that clear.

So no cushy, well paid jobs (management ) in the council where you are then? Lucky.

I don't see capitalism disappearing anytime soon, so are you thinking of setting up another autonomous squat in the meantime? Think! You can have a try-out with your own little tyranny?

you and nino and so many others seem determined to dispute my ideas not by confronting them but smear and attempted ridicule .. so we have an attempt to suggest i am a manager in a cushy council job ( LOL u r so wide of the mark!) .. yes council but soooo not cushy) .. will we see an apology from you? unlikely

then there is the 'British smear' which i guess you hope could prejudice people against what i say as they might (without reading the threads) assume wrongly that i am some variety of nationalist ..

there is NO nationalist angle to all this HOWEVER much you wish to use that so as to ignore the fundamental issues being discussed

and then you bring up 'autonomous squat' .. why?? i can only assume presumably some other attempt at a smear

so let me ask you 2 questions

1) do you really disagree with the article? and why??

and

2) a new office/factory is to open where you live ( british jobs) .. do you support local people getting work ( british jobs) at this workplace or do you demand the employer employs migrant labour?

 

[tarannau]

2) a new office/factory is to open where you live ( british jobs) .. do you support local people getting work ( british jobs) at this workplace or do you demand the employer employs migrant labour?

Love the mind-sappingly narrow range of options. Or do you expect the employer to select the best person for the job, based on a range of predicted qualities including wage levels, local/relevant knowledge and experience?

Who the hell demands that employers employ migrant labour by the way?

Are you able to hold an honest debate, or are strawmen and gross, clearly nonsensical, oversimplifications your mental limit?

 

[durruti02]

Love the mind-sappingly narrow range of options. Or do you expect the employer to select the best person for the job, based on a range of predicted qualities including wage levels, local/relevant knowledge and experience?

Who the hell demands that employers employ migrant labour by the way?

Are you able to hold an honest debate, or are strawmen and gross, clearly nonsensical, oversimplifications your mental limit?

ok fine so your option is the employer selects 'the best person for the job' .. but thats not worrking is it???? thats teh whole point of this thread
it is THIS that is has led to millions outof work ..

employers want cheap labour .. people do not want low paid work .. employers and the state do not want to train .. employers want compliant staff ..

your extra option is part of the problem . that is why i gave MC 2 options .. does he want local employed or not

 

[becky p]

Who the hell demands that employers employ migrant labour by the way?

Are you able to hold an honest debate, or are strawmen and gross, clearly nonsensical, oversimplifications your mental limit?

I can not fathom your reason for asking such a question.
Has durruti complained of people demanding that employers employ migrant labour?
Employers generally choose the person who they feel will do the job best for the least money. Market forces,demand that they try to get the best for the least amount of money.

 

[audiotech]

you and nino and so many others seem determined to dispute my ideas not by confronting them but smear and attempted ridicule .. so we have an attempt to suggest i am a manager in a cushy council job ( LOL u r so wide of the mark!) .. yes council but soooo not cushy) .. will we see an apology from you? unlikely

then there is the 'British smear' which i guess you hope could prejudice people against what i say as they might (without reading the threads) assume wrongly that i am some variety of nationalist ..

there is NO nationalist angle to all this HOWEVER much you wish to use that so as to ignore the fundamental issues being discussed

and then you bring up 'autonomous squat' .. why?? i can only assume presumably some other attempt at a smear

so let me ask you 2 questions

1) do you really disagree with the article? and why??

and

2) a new office/factory is to open where you live ( british jobs) .. do you support local people getting work ( british jobs) at this workplace or do you demand the employer employs migrant labour?

A "mind-sappingly narrow range of options" it is.

I'll get this out of the way first. You're the one who continually smears, particularly to people who don't agree with you.

You might have noticed that I did agree with the remarks about the government's absence of answers, which the article makes clear:

...is crystallised by that ugly and pretty much meaningless slogan "British jobs for British workers".

What also is ugly and meaningless, is your slogan: "local jobs for local people".

 

[tarannau]

ok fine so your option is the employer selects 'the best person for the job' .. but thats not worrking is it???? thats teh whole point of this thread
it is THIS that is has led to millions outof work ..

employers want cheap labour .. people do not want low paid work .. employers and the state do not want to train .. employers want compliant staff ..

your extra option is part of the problem . that is why i gave MC 2 options .. does he want local employed or not

Gibberish in the main. How dare employers try and select the best person for the job eh? That's led to millions out of work in Durrutti's vastly oversimplified world for simpletons. It's just not a starting point for an honest or productive debate.

Why you persist in giving these useless, false choices (eg. 'that is why i gave MC 2 options .. does he want local employed or not') I'll never know. And you've the bare faced cheek to suggest that other people aren't contributing effectively.

 

[durruti02]

likwe i said .. you both neither support local people being employed .. tarannau supports the bosses 'best person for the job' ( thats done us great trusting the bosses LOL) .. and MC support migrants being employed before locals cos he is SOOOO anti-RACIST LOL

 

[audiotech]

.. and MC support migrants being employed before locals cos he is SOOOO anti-RACIST LOL

I don't differentiate on race with regards to migrants. I see you do though. No doubt you'll be excusing this as a joke and a wind-up - sad.

And migrants employed locally? How do they fit into your "local jobs for local people" slogan?

 

[Gmart]

It showed how [the international banana industry] doesn't pay tax.

Terrible, neither does News International, and I think that's bad too, everyone should pay the right amount of tax while the government which we vote for should ensure a tax system with no loop holes so that industry pay their share. Sadly, the temptation might be to keep the loop holes so that the jobs are created. What to do...

for every pound we spend in the UK on bananas only 1 pence goes to the workers

How much does 1p buy in the local economy? Very relevant that, and if it is NOT a living wage, how many people have died so far?

the conditions these workers live under - if you could call it a life.

I know, life's not fair, sympathy and support if you can afford it.

if our wages are low how do we buy their products?

Because of the currency exchange rate.

and people say 'socialism does not work' - i can't see how capitalism works for either these banana workers

Neither works but capitalism is the system which allows freedom and is thus usually preferred.

immigration is not the cause of lowering of wages

Yes it is, it shifts the supply of unskilled workers curve to the right on your basic supply and demand curve graph.

Its always someone else who recommends that me and mine take the wage cut "for the good of all" - funny that

Yeah funny that, only the second thing I agree with you on. I would suggest that we have a more modern tax system which takes money more equally from all the sections of society which are making money, thus inproving the competitiveness of the country and the economy etc. See this thread.

when you introduce the 'lazy' and 'its your own fault' crap as a replacement for debate or genuine reply to

That's funny because the first person to use the word 'lazy' on this thread is YOU in #34 where you use it twice, then you go on to quote yourself and then incorrectly quote me as saying it. I would go on about a slur on my character and that I demand an apology, but actually I'll just laugh at your own ineptness instead. Note though, that you have falsely accused me.

 

[tarannau]

I can not fathom your reason for asking such a question.
Has durruti complained of people demanding that employers employ migrant labour?
.

Why spring to someone's defence without being arsed to read the thread? That was Durrutti's duff assertion in post 75 and quoted elsewhere, the false choice between 'do you support local people getting work ( british jobs) at this workplace or do you demand the employer employs migrant labour?;' I repeat: who the hell demands that employers go for migrant labour?

Even worse, despite the point being queried, the numbnut tries the same nonsensical slur again a few posts later with MC5 - 'and MC support migrants being employed before locals cos he is SOOOO anti-RACIST LOL'

How does that follow then? Why keep offering such false choices and grossly misrepresenting what others say? It's a dishonest approach and utter load of bollocks.

 

[dennisr]

That's funny because the first person to use the word 'lazy' on this thread is YOU in #34 where you use it twice, then you go on to quote yourself and then incorrectly quote me as saying it. I would go on about a slur on my character and that I demand an apology, but actually I'll just laugh at your own ineptness instead. Note though, that you have falsely accused me.

Yes you did. Its the usual stock in trade of folk without answers to a problem created by the manner in which this economic system works. Of course you did not use the word 'lazy- - but that excuse is just pedantry on your part. Here is what you said. The obvious implications are more than clear

If you don't like the wage rate you are being offered then get another job.

If your job is not a living wage, ie you can't live on it then maybe your costs of living are too high, or you need to retrain to get a job which pays more. If you can't do that then welcome to the poverty trap which not working at school dropped you into.

and then

If you chose to be an unskilled worker when you have the opportunity to train as something that the community might actually want and pay you well for thenyou would be a fool. But you know this becoz you have retrained 5 times (good for you).

Meanwhile people who start up businesses are indeed individuals, and they provide jobs for a vast number of people.

The world is the way it is. You may as well complain about winter. That's just the way it is. Sitting there and complaining about how unfair it isand how you should be able to sit there and do whatever you want is just childish. And for you to attack me for pointing out some of the facts of life is just useless.

I have to keep quoting you back at you. Lets call a horse a horse Gsmart. The ineptness is entirely yours.

You have no answers beyond 'thats the way it is' and at least we have 'freedom'

What the hell is 'freedom' - that comment is both meaningless and trite.

i worked for a few years with - mainly - east europeans while in germany (re-training on the cheap again - no investment by any business). One fella made the simple point that (to paraphase) - "ok we lived under dictatorship. but we had the advantage of knowing what we read and saw on TV was all lies - unlike you westerners". There was a recent programme on the 'post stalinist' generation - the sins and daughters of those Gdansk shipyard workers who really fought for 'freedom' (as opposed to using an empty word to cover their own smug foolishness) recently - job security gone, training gone, respect and recompence for skills learnt over years gone, oh, and the ship building industry and jobs gone.

What is "freedom" if one does not have the money to exercise that freedom?

Take another example, In South Africa we are told that Aparthied was overthrown - but is just meant that the Apartheid of rich and poor became more obvious, getting rid of the camoflage amnd 'legitimisation' of supposed 'race'.

In eastern europe people now have 'freedom of choice' - that means they can choose what products they cannot afford - while loosing the security of permanent jobs, cheap housing and food.

Those east europeans now have the 'freedom to travel' - but this means simply 'to join in the race to the bottom' - to have to travel hundreds of miles, to watch families and lives constantly overturned for the 'right' to work for less and less relatively at the behest of employers needs rather than their own needs.

I am generalising - but you can see the points I am getting at.

But - I concede - at least we have the freedom to moan about it - the moment anyone goes beyond 'moaning' lets see what 'freedoms' we have though.

Are you trying to tell me that this 'freedom' was a worthwhile result for those brave folk who stood up to the dictatorships in those countries?

'The way it is' - can and will change, inevitably, because it does not work for the majority of people - guatamalan bananas workers, east european workers, south african workers and the rest of us. 'the way it is' has not always been and will not always be - its inefficient and fails the vast majority of people worldwide. The results are buried under rubble in bagdad or breathing their last painfully and in poverty in some ex mining town in wales or yorkshire or where ever it maybe after worked damn hard all their lives. It is not those people faults - so do not dare to try and put the blame on them if you do not want to be shot down in your ineptness.

 

[dennisr]

Yeah funny that, only the second thing I agree with you on. I would suggest that we have a more modern tax system which takes money more equally from all the sections of society which are making money, thus inproving the competitiveness of the country and the economy etc. See this thread.

On that tread - you seem to be talking about a fairer redistribution of wealth. Yes, we would agree on that.

I simply don't think we can rely in that fairer tax (or any wider redistribution) system being given from 'on high', from above. We cannot rely on the generosity of those in who's interest it is to keep the rest of use at the bottom of the pile. Any more than we can rely on the illusion of 'market forces' to even things out naturally when this is just a cover for a system who's every tendency is in the opposite direction.

 

[Gmart]

dennisr misrepresented me in this post stating that I accused people of being lazy. Actually I had never said this word, he had introduced it in #34 and #39 where he also called me a wanker, and then misrepresented my view as using this word in #74.

I informed him of his mistake in #83 but in #85 he goes on to state:

Yes you did. Its the usual stock in trade of folk without answers to a problem created by the manner in which this economic system works. Of course you did not use the word 'lazy- - but that excuse is just pedantry on your part. Here is what you said. The obvious implications are more than clear.

Feel free to look, I have been trying to engage him in debate, but he seems unwilling. He seems more interested in misquoting me to make me look like a monster, so that he can bad mouth me for these inaccurate accusations.

I've reported him of course.

If you can't afford to maintain a system, then it will fall apart. No one is going to come by and give you free money, why should they?

'The way it is' - can and will change, inevitably, because it does not work for the majority of people

Only if they can afford it they will. Maybe they'll have a revolution and take a few houses from the rich, but if that happens and they don't know what to replace it with, then it will happen again.

'the way it is' has not always been and will not always be

By definition that is EXACTLY wrong.

It is not those people's faults - so do not dare to try and put the blame on them if you do not want to be shot down in your ineptness.

Sometimes it is 'their fault' and sometimes it's not. I am not interested in whose fault it is, why bother trying to work that out? So that you can point? So you can be right? So that you can make an example of them? So that you can teach people a lesson? You sound like part of the "String 'em up I say!" brigade, the mob who go around beating up paediatricians.

You're just like all the others, you reckon you have all the answers and will justify authoritarianism by imposing your view of the world on 'them'. You just believe in controlling people, not letting them be free to pursue happiness in their own way. They refuse to recycle? Well impose a system, if that doesn't work, impose another, more and more systems until we are just riddled with them, and we are still going on about how bad everything is, if only we could control the people more.

You judge people as well, way too quickly, indeed you probably feel judged, and so you judge others as a response. How's that working out eh? Happy? Wake up with a scowl? Scowling now?

 

[dennisr]

I've reported him of course.

wanker

(without any answers to the substancial questions raised - of course)

 

[dennisr]

No one is going to come by and give you free money, why should they?

Another attempt to engage in 'debate'? (my arse)

debate is where you put a reply to the points raised you wingeing git

where did anyone ask for 'free money'? - unless it was you asking for free money, on behalf of employers, in the form of wage cuts from the rest of us. You are asking for free labour to be more accurate, I suppose.

 

[dennisr]

You're just like all the others

diddums - moaning minny

you reckon you have all the answers and will justify authoritarianism by imposing your view of the world on 'them'.

where did i do this?

You just believe in controlling people, not letting them be free to pursue happiness in their own way.

where did I do this?

They refuse to recycle? Well impose a system, if that doesn't work, impose another, more and more systems until we are just riddled with them, and we are still going on about how bad everything is, if only we could control the people more.

where did I do this?

You are the one trying to impose a system - with your there is no alternative comments - apparently we dont have a choice so should shut up and knuckle down (lazy, moaning bastards that we are)

All i said was WE should think outside of the box (can you see the difference in this approach? - something to do with one's democratic freedoms and right to have one's own opinion -ironically i would defend your right to your own idiotic views as well)

You judge people as well, way too quickly, indeed you probably feel judged, and so you judge others as a response. How's that working out eh? Happy? Wake up with a scowl? Scowling now?

Fine, thanks - I think I gave you plenty of posts to reply - you didn't moaner (how does this feel having your own crap thrown back at you?)

You seem tied up by the obvious contradictions in your own 'arguements' - I suppose its what comes of trying to defend a system that - probably - does not even work that well for you