Oh Hum its a funny old world

[Guinness]

Originally Posted by jaysay

So what your saying basically that people who have an initiative to go out and make the best they can by their own ingenuity (within the law) they're wrong, its like saying Joe Stalin was Equal with every tom dick tovarish in the street. I had a mate left school at sixteen with few qualifications he started 3 jobs, stood the market during the day, sold portable burglar alarms at night then went behind a bar at a night club to finish of his 18 hour day, this same guy now has a chain of shops, drives a mercedes and has a big house in the Ribble Valley, no doubt people like this are despised by the likes of yourself or is it the green eyed yellow monster

Nope not saying that at all. I'm not talking about equality, I'm talking about value, worth and fairness.

Your mate deserves what he has, he's grafted, he is productive and is value for money. I have no problem with him earning more than his cleaner or him living in a castle, I am not a communist.

Who do you think deserves the better pay...the bloke who hits a ball with a stick and wears a hat with a tick on it, the banker that gets a six figure bonus for losing your pension fund or the bloke that helps you get around Accrington. Which one is the most value for money and the most productive? And most importantly do you think that the gap between their incomes is fair?

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Guinness

Nope not saying that at all. I'm not talking about equality, I'm talking about value, worth and fairness.

Your mate deserves what he has, he's grafted, he is productive and is value for money. I have no problem with him earning more than his cleaner or him living in a castle, I am not a communist.

Who do you think deserves the better pay...the bloke who hits a ball with a stick and wears a hat with a tick on it, the banker that gets a six figure bonus for losing your pension fund or the bloke that helps you get around Accrington. Which one is the most value for money and the most productive? And most importantly do you think that the gap between their incomes is fair?

I have no problem with any sportsman earning what he can, normally its a very short career, your telling me that if you'd have been a talented footballer, golfer athlete, you would have turned your nose up at earning a good living for yourself, as for bankers, I don't have a problem with them either so long they act legitimately, which in the past it was proved this isn't always the case, if your dealing in money you make money so be it, I have the same outlook as Neil and remember I have been unable to work for years because of very poor health, have I moaned and envied people more luckier than myself, not a chance, envy has never been on my horizon, even now so long as I can get by and pay my way I don't give a monkies

[Eric]

Originally Posted by Guinness

Nope not saying that at all. I'm not talking about equality, I'm talking about value, worth and fairness.

Your mate deserves what he has, he's grafted, he is productive and is value for money. I have no problem with him earning more than his cleaner or him living in a castle, I am not a communist.

Who do you think deserves the better pay...the bloke who hits a ball with a stick and wears a hat with a tick on it, the banker that gets a six figure bonus for losing your pension fund or the bloke that helps you get around Accrington. Which one is the most value for money and the most productive? And most importantly do you think that the gap between their incomes is fair?

You are right, of course. You know you have to be on the right track when blinkered tories bring up Stalin I don't quite agree on the "athlete" thingy ... sure they earn too much, though I don't buy that short career argument ... after all, at a $100,000 a week, even four or five months would set one up pretty good But it's the Sheiks and other assorted billionaires who are ruining football, hockey, basketball etc. And the sponsors who mess around with other sports. What surprises me is that tens of thousands of Mancs have convinced themselves that they are watching "local" teams.Stanley is a football club; Manchester United is a marketing vehicle for overpriced red shirts with foreign names on the back.

And there will always be "this one guy that I know" who, with hard work, and some luck made it big. And, of course, the thousands who start off flipping burgers and graduate to slopping floors are conveniently forgotten ... they work just as hard, but didn't get the breaks. Tories, and to a slightly lesser degree, "new" socialists would have folks believe in equal opportunity, the level playing field idea ... as if we all begin the race at the same start line. That is one immense crock of horse manure. One can imagine what, say, David Cameron would be doing for a living if he had been born, to a poor single women in the projects. Living on welfare? Dealing a little dope on the side? Most likely he would be in jail The competitive model is not working ... and the irony is that most of those who have benefitted from competition want to eliminate it when they have made it big. Even the laissez faire US has laws against too few companies getting too much control.

If this funny old world is to survive co-operative models are the only ones which will work. After all, it's a good Lancashire idea. Came out of Rochdale in the 1840s

The little people are starting to get together and flex their muscle. Perfect results, of course, are not being acheived ... but "two steps forward, one step back" is still progress. In this "connected" world, folks are becoming aware of the glaring inequities you are pointing to, an ironic result of a socially connected world created by capitaists. About 3 months ago, four First Nations' women in Saskatoon came up with the idea for an "Idle No More" movement. Now look at it:

Idle No More - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Maybe this is the new politics. Maybe it will lead to a new economics. But all over the world people ... well, once they have removed their blinkers ... are getting pee'd off. Yanks are looking at their economic recovery being held hostage by the childish bs going on in Congress. They see US corporations exporting jobs, not products, in order to squeeze out a few extra bucks for the already rich. The US tories ... they prefer to be called Republicans ... are in disarray. The new revolution is underway. No bombs and barricades ... no real 'leadership" ... just smart phones, tablets and laptops.

[Less]

Wow, Eric, I wish I was capable of saying that.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by Less

Wow, Eric, I wish I was capable of saying that.

You are ... altho' you wouldn't be as long-winded

[Less]

Originally Posted by Eric

You are ... altho' you wouldn't be as long-winded

Buuuulllllll....



Shine

[Gordon Booth]

Nobody said life would be fair-get used to it.
Come the revolution the rich will loose their heads and some of the poor will get very rich. The whole cycle will start again.
In the history of the human race there have always been the very rich and the very poor, whatever the system. Unless you can name one I've missed?
As for co-operative models being the only ones which will work-I would have thought the USSR had proved that to be wrong quite conclusively. The Chinese have certainly accepted that now.

[Less]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

The Chinese have certainly accepted that now.

They I think must be the meek that will inherit the Earth, not from organisation, nor' from fighting.
There are just so many of them manufacturing nothing of real value, we all buy it, with borrowed money from China, eventually they will call in that ever-increasing loan.

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by Less

They I think must be the meek that will inherit the Earth, not from organisation, nor' from fighting.
There are just so many of them manufacturing nothing of real value, we all buy it, with borrowed money from China, eventually they will call in that ever-increasing loan.

'The yellow race will inherit the Earth'. Maybe not quite in my time, your time Less or Erics, but our childrens. When they call that loan in it won't just be their money they want back.
They are moving on to manufacturing things which are of real value very rapidly- then we'll see the world change.Erics next 'revolution' may not be very comfortable.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

Nobody said life would be fair-get used to it.
Come the revolution the rich will loose their heads and some of the poor will get very rich. The whole cycle will start again.
In the history of the human race there have always been the very rich and the very poor, whatever the system. Unless you can name one I've missed?
As for co-operative models being the only ones which will work-I would have thought the USSR had proved that to be wrong quite conclusively. The Chinese have certainly accepted that now.

Your digital view of history is becoming pixelated. And quite silly. Especially looking at the example of the Soviet Union and concluding it proves anything ... other than that a co-operative effort will defeat the Wehrmacht, put a man in space, and build lousy automobiles Since Adam delved and Eve span, humanity has been in a constant state of revolution. (Nice to add a touch of Shakespeare to an argument conducted in English) Not cyclical at all, just constant evolutionary change. You know, random mutation, selective retention applied to society. If you believe that revolutions are somehow created in smokey rooms or attics by bearded wannabe intellectuals who make the kind of bombs that coyote's throw at road runners, then you are missing the point. In fact, most revolutions are inevitable. There is, for example, no technological revolution. Once you have the first computer ... maybe we should thank the nazis for providing us with the challenge of Enigma ... the technological "miracles" of today are boringly inevitable. It took thousands of years to get off the ground in a heavier than air machine. Yet the "distance" from Kitty Hawk to Tranquility Base is, what, 66 years. And "revolutions", all major changes, feed off one another. No random mutation of wheat in the Fertile Crescent = equals no ancient Egypt. Altho' something else might have happened to give rise to civilization, which may or may not have been a good idea. Like it or not, the revolution is taking place right now. Altho', how it will pan out is anybody's guess.

[jaysay]

I've notice that those on the left always have the prefect way of life mapped out ready to be implemented when the time is right, They have all the answer, yet when they get the opportunity to make those much heralded changes nothing happens, maybe when they get in a place of power and are able to change things they like being on the other side and once again stick two fingers up to, as Eric calls um, ordinary Joe's. Our own illustrious MP being a prime example now he sings that cobbled up verse of the red flag, the working class can kiss my ass I've got the bosses job at lastand there's a lot more of his ilk sing from the same hymn sheet

[accyman]

Originally Posted by Eric

One can imagine what, say, David Cameron would be doing for a living if he had been born, to a poor single women in the projects. Living on welfare?.

hed probbably be someones little bitch in or out of jail infact he was probbably someone slittle bitch at his posh school

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by Eric

Your digital view of history is becoming pixelated. And quite silly.
I don't think so, I've just got a new monitor.

Especially looking at the example of the Soviet Union and concluding it proves anything ... other than that a co-operative effort will defeat the Wehrmacht, put a man in space, and build lousy automobiles
Can't have been that successful, it only lasted 69 years, then collapsed, bankrupt. Shortest lived Empire in history?

Since Adam delved and Eve span, humanity has been in a constant state of revolution.
(Nice to add a touch of Shakespeare to an argument conducted in English) Not cyclical at all, just constant evolutionary change. You know, random mutation, selective retention applied to society. If you believe that revolutions are somehow created in smokey rooms or attics by bearded wannabe intellectuals who make the kind of bombs that coyote's throw at road runners, then you are missing the point.
Try telling Lenin and Trotsky that.

In fact, most revolutions are inevitable.
Can't agree, only evolution is inevitable.

There is, for example, no technological revolution.
No, but there is technological evolution.

Once you have the first computer ... maybe we should thank the nazis for providing us with the challenge of Enigma ... the technological "miracles" of today are boringly inevitable. It took thousands of years to get off the ground in a heavier than air machine. Yet the "distance" from Kitty Hawk to Tranquility Base is, what, 66 years.
And "revolutions", all major changes, feed off one another.
That's historically inaccurate-give me an example. Major changes feeding off one another is evolution.

No random mutation of wheat in the Fertile Crescent = equals no ancient Egypt.
But the wheat wasn't revolting, it was evolving.

Altho' something else might have happened to give rise to civilization, which may or may not have been a good idea. Like it or not, the revolution is taking place right now.
No, evolution is taking place now and always. revolutions aren't continuous,they just pop up.
Altho', how it will pan out is anybody's guess.

It's the way you tell em!

[Gordon Booth]

I had to put 'It's the way you tell em' in.It didn't like me just sticking bits in Erics post!
Heck, could have said that on an edit!

[Guinness]

Case in point...both happened tonight

value, worth and fair

Football star helps the homeless - CNN.com

overpaid and worthless

Joey Barton in bizarre Twitter Darwinism rant - Mirror Online

Hmm..Johnny Foreigner with humility and humanity and the Brit with the I'm alright Jack stuff the rest of you attitude