The Conservatives

[MammaBrussels]

I cannot believe someone, even someone in the Conservative Party, would say this.

How can anyone support them?

Are their bonuses as high as ours?

Do they have as comfortable pensions for the Sir Fred the Shreds and a state cushion that as uncomfortable for the many?

xenia-

It's sad that people continue to propagate this nonsense...

Thatcher did marvellous things for this country and got us out of all the 1970s problems, of three day weeks and the country on its knees because of the power of the unions. Everyone prospered until the crash and Labour over spending which has hit the poor very hard.

Actually, everyone didn't prosper until the crash. The wealth and income gap has been steadily increasing since the late 1970s.

Wages (in real terms) for the vast majority of the public - in the UK and West in general - have stagnated or decreased since the late 70s, early 80s. It is precisely because of Thatcher/Reagan neo-liberalism that we are in the position we are now:

Wealth inequality hasn't been this great since the 1930s - in fact, when we had the last great crash. The economy isn't going anywhere because nobody has any money to spend.

The contradictions of Capitalism has brought the economy to its knees: after decades of attacks on workers rights, wages, security, etc. people have neither the money nor inclination to spend money to get the economy going. There are too busy paying back their debts (or trying), saving (or trying), and unwilling to take risks in spending when they don't know how secure their next paycheque is.

IF we can get the economy moving again and make Britain the country where people want to come to do business then the poor will benefit. Now we are one of the highest taxed in Europe there is not much chance of that although France is moving itself to first place there perhaps so we might get some benefits there.

More utter nonsense. In fact, corporate profits in the West in general are at an all time high, yet so is unemployment, and so is household debt, and so is job insecurity. The 'trickle-down' theory is complete and utter horeshit.

We've already started offering free labour to companies. How much more easy do you want it to be for businesses? Neo-liberal deregulation and corporate cock-sucking hasn't brought wealth and prosperity to the many. It has only done so for the very few.

We certainly need to ensure that the state cushion is less comfortable for many.

What on earth are you talking about? You want to make people's jobs and livelihoods even more insecure than they are now? Would you like to return to Victorian times? Perhaps abolish the welfare state altogether? Do you think that would benefit society as a whole?

The recipients of the largest amount of state largesse are corporations, who regularly receive subsidies, handouts, and bailouts. The theme for the past four decades has been: socialise risk, privitise profits.

Nicholas dear is is a fact that when someone like you starts flinging insults in a debate it is usually a sign that they know they are beat.

The fact is that the your director father moved the company to the east not Thatcher. Manufacturing in the 70's UK was so bad because of the lazy overly unionised and nationalised industry culture. Thatcher freed the markets to work providing wealth and prosperity for all who were wiling to look for a job and better themselves through education. The industries that changed and moved with the times prospered those who refused like ship builders and some car manufacturers pushed their own jobs out of the country and for that they can thank their union bosses.

Labour destroyed education over there years in power to the point that childen leave state schools with a level of education that is poor in conparison to how it was.

ttsca

The talk of a wage gap is a complete load of nonsense. What does it matter what the to person is payed as the fact is the bottom are better paid than ever so they have been lifted out of poverty and were doing better than ever. If they are struggling with debts they should remember it was them who ran those debts up and you have to pay your bills someday.

The wealthy state is bloated and far far too generous especially when it comes to housing. The welfare state should be a safety net to break your fall and nothing more.

Labour destroyed education over there years in power to the point that childen leave state schools with a level of education that is poor in conparison to how it was

3/10

No Novack. What you could at least try to do is read a post properly. My father didn't move the company overseas.

And you're talking bullshit when you repeat the usual right wing nonsense about unions and nationalisation. All privatisation has done is increase bills because the law says shareholders come first, not customers. Without the unions we wouldn't have health and safety in the workplace, we could be fired at a moments notice for no reason, there would be no minimum wage, there would be no equality for women or the disabled.

The decline in standards in education started when grammar schools were abolished. Which was a policy introduced by Labour and backed by the Nasty party, because for once their privately educated offspring were finding bright working class kids taking the jobs usually reserved for them. No matter what they say the Toryscum will never vote for their return.

Another lie Novack when you say those at the bottom are better paid now than ever before. In 1991 I worked as a press operator with a group of friends, two of which are still at the same company. In 1994 when I left to go back into construction as an estimator I was taking home an average of £1700 per month. I know one of the two men there now takes home just over £1100 for more hours.

You do realise Novack, that there are over 2,600,000 people unemployed and claiming JSA chasing 464,000 jobs? Where does that leave your safety net? I forgot, you don't care, as long as you're alright. You, and those like you, are the first to cry for help when it all goes to shit. Calls to bail out the banks, because the rich would've lost the most, that's what your lot do.

When you come back with actual facts to back up your frankly ridiculous statements I'll take you seriously. Till then I'll continue to point and laugh.

That high LineRunner? I'm of the school of thought that people really can't be this thick.

I think a good test of whether people are 'better paid now than before' is to ask what an hour's minimum wage would buy in terms of part of a normal family shopping basket.

Someone on another thead pointed out that you pay £5 for a pack of cheese in a supermarket this month. Other food prices are rising rapidly; but not wages.

People are a lot better off than they were. I have no problems with income differences. If the rich are richer the poor tend to do better too. Most of us do not want a society where everyone has exactly the same. As long as the poor are housed and fed that is fine. There is no moral right that they have the same as the rich or that income differences btween them are at certain level.

Presumably the left would not prefer the poor to have say only £50 a week and the rich only £200 comnpared with the ppor no £100 a week and the rich on £20k? Tghat can be the strak choice between a failing left wing system where everyone suffers or pure great capitalism. The left failed to get in. They failed on many counts and now the poor are suffering and paying the price of the left's failings. Both parties proposed massive cuts because the coffers are bear.

Nicholas your friend operating a press could have retrained gone to night school correspondence course but chose to stay in a job that could be pretty much automated by robot could it not? He could have moved with the times.

The price of cheese is irrelevant as is the price of the average anything as those on JSA should not be buying the average but should be living within there means. It is not my job to subsidise their lives anymore than I have to. We are already shelling out for their education and healthcare.

I do realise there are many unemployed and also many unemployable but they have no right to free money. The need to cut their cloth to suit there income.

JSA should be for genuine job seekers and they should be prepared to take the first job that comes along. It should not be a sit at home and life of the rest of the hard working population allowance.

Labour are unelectable and you know it so I understand your frustration so your need to chuck around nastiness. Labour invented that silly election system in Scotland thinking that they'd never lose control in their heartland and yet they have. If Scotland votes for independence fact is they'll never govern again in Westminster and the country will not need to suffer their profligacy again.

The price of cheese is irrelevant

Indeed, indeed.

Novack would have poor not eat cheese.

Of course I don't believe she is talking about just cheese, but dairy products in general.

He trained as a setter/operator. He is qualified to set 25000 tonne double action presses, and he also qualified to program the robots used to transfer the panels between processes. He supervise his team. All this for the national average wage. Why should he change a fairly secure job for something with no security?

There are processes which can't be automated. For instance, parts which have to have massive amounts of release oil sprayed on before being pressed, otherwise they'd split and damage the tools. They have to be handled by humans as they're too dangerous to leave to robot.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Tesco and a packet of cheddar is only 2 pounds so your price of cheese being a fiver is just nonsense.

Welfare state should only be for the genuinely vulnerable and you all know that but the UK unlike most of Europe has the feckless underclass who prefer to milk the system and live off of everyone else.

I had a comprehensive education but st least I know the difference between their and there, bear and bare.

Fact is food has been at an unrealistic low price for most of the last 2 decades. It is now adjusting back up to a realistic level which used to be around 25% of take home for the average worker.

And I know how to read a post - I clearly referred to a post on another thread.

The other thread was actually very interesting, about working people like me affording meals for four.

being smug about spelling and grammar then failing to type at has nothing to do with eduction. Unfortunately predictive text doesn't always use the correct word but for that I blame apple.

Nothing more foolish looking than the grammar pedant failing.

And yes, I am sure these posters would rather see people living in cardboard boxes than pay into the welfare state. And they would still tell these people they are lucky.

There's a difference between a typo and poor grammer. But I'm glad I pissed you off. You deserve it

I've always wondered why people don't check predictive text. It's not the same as making a simple typo - it's the wholesale conversion of one's typing into potential mistakes. Can you not just look back over it, Novack? Is there no facility for proof-reading and correcting at all?