A Bit Of Enrichment For The Mp's To Enjoy

[Truther 1,579]

 

 

 

ERR no you aren't discussing anything with me, especially anything i ask lol...........like i said, you're a pro squirmer.....fair play though........it looks like you're being reasonable, hard to do that while being evasive............

Ask me a straight question and I'll do my best to answer it. All I could parse from that word salad above is that you think you've caught me out in some great contradiction but I'm not sure even you know for sure?

 

 

Its simple BGD, i'm failing to see why you deny being a multiculturalist (globalist if you prefer) when you spend so much time defending it? You're making a thin point about the differences between globalist/ internationalist while agreeing with globalist ideas? Strange?

 

 

I've said many times on this forum I'm a multiculturalist and my ideal would be a global community (so a globalist too I guess but Communist covers it better). You're a very confused man, aren't you?

 

 

Well it looked like a denial to me?

[Born Hunter 17,907]

Talk of state education, do you honestly believe that a state educated person has the same opportunities as a Eaton or Harrow educated person,? Attainment of ones capabilities is ok given a level playing field but unfortunately a system where families have to make a choice if their child can go on to University or higher education or be forced to leave home at 16 because of things like not being able to earn a living wage or paying council tax not based on the size of a home but which banding it happens to have been placed in. Welfare benefits are supposedly a safety net for those who fall on hard times or become ill or old but when exploitation happens some times out of greed or sometimes out of dire need then a Government cuts welfare because of a minority who they claim are involved in fraud, what about all the fraud committed by those who can employ a chartered accountancy firm to exploit loophole and avoid paying taxes on money they have probably exploited from Housing benefit rents or ill gotten gains from banking scams or over inflated expense accounts.I firmly believe those capable should earn a living but that living should be sufficient not to need top ups or pay day loans in order to put food on the table. I have been fortunate firstly by birth right and in getting a education and career but it does not make me oblivious to hardship and the suffering of others.

 

No, children educated through the state statistically will not have the same opportunities as those through private. But that doesn't put kids at food banks. Like I said, the state education system allows people from any social background to achieve quite reasonable comfort in life IF they are capable of making sensible decisions. Anybody from any background with sensible life choices and effort can get a University education. I wont hear any of this "poor people are priced out of Uni" because it's just not true at all.

 

Is it fair that the rich can give their children better chances in life? Yes absolutely, if you can't work hard and/or smart to get your offspring a better chance than your neighbours then what's the point in bothering? If we want everyone on a completely level socialist playing field then inheritance tax should be 100% on 100% of assets too. Can't be having anybody getting a better deal than anybody else, it's the same logic.

 

The education system we have allows everybody to achieve a reasonable level of life. The biggest factor I see is bad choices.

[staffs riffraff 1,068]

yes but some schools are only that in name

[Born Hunter 17,907]

yes but some schools are only that in name

 

Absolutely, but is that not a good argument to reform state education? Rather than enforce a mandatory fully socialist system?

 

To reform state education to ensure all state educated children are given the same education is to raise the masses to approach the standard of the elite.

 

To enforce a fully socialist education system (ban private and make state the only option) is to drag the elite down to the level of the masses.

 

Besides, I don't believe that our current state system is as bad as all that anyway. Though improvements can always be made and should always be strived for. Too many kids aren't taking advantage of what's on offer, they'd rather be stoned out their face than revise for their exams. That doesn't make the kids that do strive for more 'fortunate', it makes them smart.

 

As I've said before, there are social issues/environments that almost destine kids for a bad life. They aren't raised to make good choices and so the cycle is self perpetuating. Maybe then this socialist ideal should evolve to the state raising all children too, so they get the right and fair upbringing?

 

I hate the idea personally. Life is unfair, not everyone is born equal, that's nature, as much as we as humans try to separate from it.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Born Hunter

[J Darcy 5,871]

 

 

 

We're all in this together, remember ? This will chuck the cat in with the pigeons.....

 

Let's talk capitalist economics and deficit reduction - the current government's favourite topic.

 

Every previous government has run a deficit, for at least part of it's time in office - every single one. Thatcher ran the largest deficit this country has ever known, and no-one considered it an issue, not even the Iron Lady herself ! This profligacy continued into the debacle that was the Major government, and then along came Saint Tony of Blair.

 

Now everyone, pay attention, here's the interesting bit - for 7 years of the last Labour government, the British economy was run at a surplus ! The economic crisis, for which we are all being made to pay, was caused by a global banking collapse. The British economy was plunged suddenly into deficit, because of the vast amounts of money we had to borrow to bail out the banks. Cue economic depression and a change of government.....

 

Cameron spins a lie that the collapse was caused by government overspending and profligacy, Labour fails to counter the lie and lots of voters swallow it.

 

As a result, 300,000 of the poorest families (most of them working) are about to lose around £60 a week, the richest have had the taxes cut and the very fabric of society is under attack in too many ways to go into here.

 

 

 

All through history,

The story's been the same.

It's the rich that get the pleasure -

And the poor that get the blame !

 

If we view the national deficit, we see relative consistency through years of tory power..... then labour get in and a shockwave hits the graph! Unfortunate timing or piss poor planning?

 

 

Or repairing the damage done to infrastructure and society as a whole and making up for tax cuts made by the previous Tory administration?

 

BGD, the money for 'society' has to come from somewhere. there's tens of thousands of lazy sods who don't want a job. You know why? because they don't need to work. For example, a friend of mine has a few kids, and he's trying to get on the sick. If he makes the criteria he will be getting £320 A WEEK!! Why work if you can let everyone else work for you?

Where do you suggest the cuts should be made in order for money to be available for a 'fairer' society?

 

BGD I'll ask the question again........

 

And elabourate...... if we want a 'fairer' society, where everyone has equal benefits, then surely the amount paid into the 'kitty' should be equal too.....anything other than that would surely not be fair?

[J Darcy 5,871]

 

Talk of state education, do you honestly believe that a state educated person has the same opportunities as a Eaton or Harrow educated person,? Attainment of ones capabilities is ok given a level playing field but unfortunately a system where families have to make a choice if their child can go on to University or higher education or be forced to leave home at 16 because of things like not being able to earn a living wage or paying council tax not based on the size of a home but which banding it happens to have been placed in. Welfare benefits are supposedly a safety net for those who fall on hard times or become ill or old but when exploitation happens some times out of greed or sometimes out of dire need then a Government cuts welfare because of a minority who they claim are involved in fraud, what about all the fraud committed by those who can employ a chartered accountancy firm to exploit loophole and avoid paying taxes on money they have probably exploited from Housing benefit rents or ill gotten gains from banking scams or over inflated expense accounts.I firmly believe those capable should earn a living but that living should be sufficient not to need top ups or pay day loans in order to put food on the table. I have been fortunate firstly by birth right and in getting a education and career but it does not make me oblivious to hardship and the suffering of others.

 

No, children educated through the state statistically will not have the same opportunities as those through private. But that doesn't put kids at food banks. Like I said, the state education system allows people from any social background to achieve quite reasonable comfort in life IF they are capable of making sensible decisions. Anybody from any background with sensible life choices and effort can get a University education. I wont hear any of this "poor people are priced out of Uni" because it's just not true at all.

 

Is it fair that the rich can give their children better chances in life? Yes absolutely, if you can't work hard and/or smart to get your offspring a better chance than your neighbours then what's the point in bothering? If we want everyone on a completely level socialist playing field then inheritance tax should be 100% on 100% of assets too. Can't be having anybody getting a better deal than anybody else, it's the same logic.

 

The education system we have allows everybody to achieve a reasonable level of life. The biggest factor I see is bad choices.

 

Some great points there.

[Born Hunter 17,907]

 

No, children educated through the state statistically will not have the same opportunities as those through private. But that doesn't put kids at food banks. Like I said, the state education system allows people from any social background to achieve quite reasonable comfort in life IF they are capable of making sensible decisions. Anybody from any background with sensible life choices and effort can get a University education. I wont hear any of this "poor people are priced out of Uni" because it's just not true at all.

 

Is it fair that the rich can give their children better chances in life? Yes absolutely, if you can't work hard and/or smart to get your offspring a better chance than your neighbours then what's the point in bothering? If we want everyone on a completely level socialist playing field then inheritance tax should be 100% on 100% of assets too. Can't be having anybody getting a better deal than anybody else, it's the same logic.

 

The education system we have allows everybody to achieve a reasonable level of life. The biggest factor I see is bad choices.

 

Some great points there.

 

 

Well I'm glad someone agrees. In a minute someone will come along and tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about because they have coats, purse nets and any number of other inanimate objects older than me.

[J Darcy 5,871]

 

 

No, children educated through the state statistically will not have the same opportunities as those through private. But that doesn't put kids at food banks. Like I said, the state education system allows people from any social background to achieve quite reasonable comfort in life IF they are capable of making sensible decisions. Anybody from any background with sensible life choices and effort can get a University education. I wont hear any of this "poor people are priced out of Uni" because it's just not true at all.

 

Is it fair that the rich can give their children better chances in life? Yes absolutely, if you can't work hard and/or smart to get your offspring a better chance than your neighbours then what's the point in bothering? If we want everyone on a completely level socialist playing field then inheritance tax should be 100% on 100% of assets too. Can't be having anybody getting a better deal than anybody else, it's the same logic.

 

The education system we have allows everybody to achieve a reasonable level of life. The biggest factor I see is bad choices.

 

Some great points there.

 

 

Well I'm glad someone agrees. In a minute someone will come along and tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about because they have coats, purse nets and any number of other inanimate objects older than me.

 

One more thing, IMO, education, these days, isn't all that'. How many of this years crop of university graduates will go on to earn enough to start paying off their student loan?? How many will be stacking shelves or serving burgers for the rest of their lives?

 

 

All of the wealthiest people I know went to state schools, they're all down to earth but they've made their millions by being switched on and BETTER than their contemporaries.....that's how it should be.......

There's two kind of people; the moaners that think the world owes them a living, and those that are grafters and go out and find what they want in life. There's equal opportunities in the UK to get a good lifestyle, IF you want it hard enough.....

[Truther 1,579]

 

yes but some schools are only that in name

 

Absolutely, but is that not a good argument to reform state education? Rather than enforce a mandatory fully socialist system?

 

To reform state education to ensure all state educated children are given the same education is to raise the masses to approach the standard of the elite.

 

To enforce a fully socialist education system (ban private and make state the only option) is to drag the elite down to the level of the masses.

 

Besides, I don't believe that our current state system is as bad as all that anyway. Though improvements can always be made and should always be strived for. Too many kids aren't taking advantage of what's on offer, they'd rather be stoned out their face than revise for their exams. That doesn't make the kids that do strive for more 'fortunate', it makes them smart.

 

As I've said before, there are social issues/environments that almost destine kids for a bad life. They aren't raised to make good choices and so the cycle is self perpetuating. Maybe then this socialist ideal should evolve to the state raising all children too, so they get the right and fair upbringing?

 

I hate the idea personally. Life is unfair, not everyone is born equal, that's nature, as much as we as humans try to separate from it.

 

 

I don't agree BH, why would any capitalist system strive to educate the worker ants, who would empty the dustbins if everyone had a degree, and the hard evidence seems to point to our glorious leaders conning the masses at every twist and turn, not trying to make their lot better?

 

"I hate the idea personally. Life is unfair, not everyone is born equal, that's nature, as much as we as humans try to separate from it"

 

I think originally people were born equal, under mother nature, people aren't born equal in society now that's true, but that's down to human nature, not mother nature surely. Like it or not humans are hard wired to be socialist, cooperative, we wouldn't have made it this far if not. The will to live/thrive obviously played its part in our development to this stage, but combined with over population its now likely to be our downfall.

[J Darcy 5,871]

 

 

yes but some schools are only that in name

 

Absolutely, but is that not a good argument to reform state education? Rather than enforce a mandatory fully socialist system?

 

To reform state education to ensure all state educated children are given the same education is to raise the masses to approach the standard of the elite.

 

To enforce a fully socialist education system (ban private and make state the only option) is to drag the elite down to the level of the masses.

 

Besides, I don't believe that our current state system is as bad as all that anyway. Though improvements can always be made and should always be strived for. Too many kids aren't taking advantage of what's on offer, they'd rather be stoned out their face than revise for their exams. That doesn't make the kids that do strive for more 'fortunate', it makes them smart.

 

As I've said before, there are social issues/environments that almost destine kids for a bad life. They aren't raised to make good choices and so the cycle is self perpetuating. Maybe then this socialist ideal should evolve to the state raising all children too, so they get the right and fair upbringing?

 

I hate the idea personally. Life is unfair, not everyone is born equal, that's nature, as much as we as humans try to separate from it.

 

 

I think originally people were born equal, under mother nature, people aren't born equal in society now that's true, but that's down to human nature, not mother nature surely. Like it or not humans are hard wired to be socialist, cooperative, we wouldn't have made it this far if not. The will to live/thrive obviously played its part in our development to this stage, but combined with over population its now likely to be our downfall.

 

Truther how can this be correct if humans Evolved? Of course we are all born different, even as cave men.

Some will have been better hunters than others and they might have lived when others died.

Some might have been more savvy at keeping warm than others, they will survive when others died.

 

It's nature. There's strong and weak in all species, ourselves included. And all survive fine when the goings good. However, in times of temperature fluctuation/ food shortage/etc then only the best of the species will survive. In Homo Sapien it is obvious that the smartest ones will prosper....the rest will just tread water.....

[Truther 1,579]

 

 

No, children educated through the state statistically will not have the same opportunities as those through private. But that doesn't put kids at food banks. Like I said, the state education system allows people from any social background to achieve quite reasonable comfort in life IF they are capable of making sensible decisions. Anybody from any background with sensible life choices and effort can get a University education. I wont hear any of this "poor people are priced out of Uni" because it's just not true at all.

 

Is it fair that the rich can give their children better chances in life? Yes absolutely, if you can't work hard and/or smart to get your offspring a better chance than your neighbours then what's the point in bothering? If we want everyone on a completely level socialist playing field then inheritance tax should be 100% on 100% of assets too. Can't be having anybody getting a better deal than anybody else, it's the same logic.

 

The education system we have allows everybody to achieve a reasonable level of life. The biggest factor I see is bad choices.

 

Some great points there.

 

 

Well I'm glad someone agrees. In a minute someone will come along and tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about because they have coats, purse nets and any number of other inanimate objects older than me.

 

 

You must have a crystal ball mate Just a discussion BH............

[Born Hunter 17,907]

 

I don't agree BH, why would any capitalist system strive to educate the worker ants, who would empty the dustbins if everyone had a degree, and the hard evidence seems to point to our glorious leaders conning the masses at every twist and turn, not trying to make their lot better?

 

"I hate the idea personally. Life is unfair, not everyone is born equal, that's nature, as much as we as humans try to separate from it"

 

I think originally people were born equal, under mother nature, people aren't born equal in society now that's true, but that's down to human nature, not mother nature surely. Like it or not humans are hard wired to be socialist, cooperative, we wouldn't have made it this far if not. The will to live/thrive obviously played its part in our development to this stage, but combined with over population its now likely to be our downfall.

 

 

Okay, they are some interesting points...

 

Any capitalist system is subject to market pressure. If everyone was educated for accountancy then the dustbin emptyers and window cleaners would suddenly be in high demand. It levels out in a natural way.

 

We are naturally socialists.... well a little yes but I see more capitalist in our nature. Unsurprisingly I don't think we fit in to either in a very nice satisfying way. We are competitive, we have to be to survive in nature, it's one of our greatest evolved traits imo. Natural selection is capitalism, but that doesn't mean we can't apply socialist principles to ultimate better ourselves. Simply, I want to be the best, I want to be the best so my kids have a better chance of being the best and so on, if by working with you we/I can be better then I'll be a socialist today but fundamentally for capitalist reasons. That's how I see humans, in fact that's how I see every animal. Nature makes us that way.

 

Even in nature men are not equal. Some are smarter than others, some are stronger than others, some are the sons of alphas, some are born into social groups that dominate their neighbours.

[staffs riffraff 1,068]

truther said it better than I could. They don't want education standards too high for the majority and its not just education its the social structure you were raised in as well in my opinion.

[Born Hunter 17,907]

truther said it better than I could. They don't want education standards too high for the majority and its not just education its the social structure you were raised in as well in my opinion.

 

Who's 'they' and how do you know this?

 

That's obviously rhetorical, I presume you're referring to the elite that control so many aspect of society. I'd replace 'control' with 'influence' but that's another debate.

 

Getting to the point, I'd counter your argument with; true capitalism doesn't allow state (or any force higher) control. The controlling factors are the market. Today, school/Uni education is demanded by the people because that's what's seen as being the best way to the top. If everyone was educated and the skill of washing pots was in high demand then the public wouldn't give a feck about conventional education and would be demanding state training in pot washing as the best means to get to the top.

 

Fundamentally, I don't think we'll agree on this because we have different starting points. The likes of Truther and yourself start from the belief that 'they' control society and so what happens is their will, whereas I don't believe that. I believe that the elite certainly have varying degrees of influence on society (sometimes scarily so) through numerous mechanisms but ultimately it's the politicians that have the power and they are a result of what the people create. It's of course not truly democratic (another utopian dream) but it's not quite the NWO conspiracy that's often painted either.

 

I really don't think providing, what is really, quite great education to us masses, and in doing so giving us the knowledge, ability and nature to question and fight anything and everything is a very shrood move for a group that allegedly control us. I just don't buy it.

[jacknife 2,005]

You only need a basic high school education to well in life