logical step for Labour is to reverse Brexit

do you think in order for the wealthy to get wealthier the poor must get poorer?
If they exploit the low paid then yes.

If they take all the assets, then yes
If they privatise everything and make it more expensive then yes.

It they privatise the profits abd socialise the losses then yes

If the wealthy get progressively richer during austerity then yes


If a country has a strong democracy, then the wealthy can get wealthier whilst those at bottom can afford a liveable life: Denmark, Sweden, Norway for example
 
yes they do.

You command more salary, if two things are true:
1) Your skills are valuable to a business: More benefit than cost, can't run your business without them, etc.
2) There is nobody with these skills who is available for the same or less and no way of getting the result in a different way.
Textbook economics answer, but life is more complex. For example 1) and 2) could equally apply to trade unions negotiating better pay for their workers, yet such an approach would be dismissed as anti business by right wing think tanks.
 
If a country has a strong democracy, then the wealthy can get wealthier whilst those at bottom can afford a liveable life: Denmark, Sweden, Norway for example
I would encourage you to visit these countries and learn about their culture. None are particularly comparable to the UK.
 
Textbook economics answer, but life is more complex. For example 1) and 2) could equally apply to trade unions negotiating better pay for their workers, yet such an approach would be dismissed as anti business by right wing think tanks.
They negotiate high pay for their workers, by restricting the local market, but as we know industry finds a way unless its restricted / public sector.
Plenty of companies have gone to the wall due to unions controlling productivity and wages, while the company loses to competition.
 
I would encourage you to visit these countries and learn about their culture. None are particularly comparable to the UK.
So we should adjust our culture to be more like them then ............then maybe the dumb Uk electorate wouldnt keep voting in establishment elite public school rich who do it to enrich themselves

the reason they arent like the Uk is because we have a sh1t culture that enables the rich to influence politics and media for vested self interest
 
So we should adjust our culture to be more like them then ............then maybe the dumb Uk electorate wouldnt keep voting in establishment elite public school rich who do it to enrich themselves

the reason they arent like the Uk is because we have a sh1t culture that enables the rich to influence politics and media for vested self interest
oh dear, poor Notch thinks its all love and Abba, if you go to Sweden, you'll find a lot of poverty... until its rounded up and deported.

some of the world's strictest anti-immigration policies exist in Sweden and Denmark.
 
not true, yet another thing that youve got wrong

the EU is neo liberal rather than left wing

the EU rules require competitive tendering of government contracts which has led to a great deal of privatisation


well they did not, so thats yet another claim of yours totally wrong

Mick Lynch: pro brexit
Jeremy Corbyn: pro brexit
George Galloway: pro brexit





Ivor, why are you wrong on so many things? -I realise you are narrow minded and dogmatic, but you dont even know the very basics...........goodness knows what goes on in your head, you poor thing
You sound angry, and also utterly nuts. You should look up the meaning of the word "generally". You've produced a list of the exceptions that I stated that there are.

Neo-liberal, left wing, communism, whatever. It's all different branding of the same stuff. Government knows best, tax and regulate everything and don't listen to people. Every time lefty governments fail, they invent a new word for more of the same.

Any left-wing privatisation is normally cronyism, i.e. corruption, which is a feature of all left-wing governments. Usually just a means of someone taking government money for themselves. Or, in Gordon Brown's case, a way of hiding just how much money they were spending (i.e. PFI contracts).

I can't imagine what a government contract without competitive tendering would look like? Presumably a lot of contracts would be awarded fraudulently, hence it normally required. Even when I was getting my car repaired after someone crashed into it, I had to get two repair quotes to prove the cost was reasonable - this is all just common sense that's been around for ever.

Buuuutttt.... no doubt you'll angrily respond with some contorted waffle centred around the fact that I stated this therefore it proves something utterly unrelated.
 
The term gammon is not racist.

So stop being a see you next Tuesday for once
Real classy at the end there.

Obviously it's racist. It's mocking appearance by racial characteristic, in exactly the same way as making monkey noises at black football players.

Selective racism is still racism.
 
I can't imagine what a government contract without competitive tendering would look like?
1765294507720.png
 
Back
Top