Tangled up in Blue
Certified Senior Citizen⭐
I thought it was Saddam and the way he treated the world
Oh please!:nope:
I thought it was Saddam and the way he treated the world
I thought it was Saddam and the way he treated the world
Oh please!:nope:
I suppose you two jokers would prefer for him to still be around gassing people.
Don't tell me you believe the reason why we invaded Iraq was to depose Saddam? :D
The US and its allies invaded Iraq to make an example of a Muslim state in the wake of 9/11 - they needed to be seen to be doing something tangible after being attacked by murderous Islamist pigs. Was there any economic self-interest factored in? Of course. But God forbid that a country should act in its own best interests, depose a murderous dictator and introduce democracy to a country that had only known fear and repression in its recent history. How awful.
But he had WMD which could be deployed at us within 40 minutes.
Oh yeah. I forgot. Where's that teenager's thesis again?
Not so keen to kick out ol' Saddam and make a big hoohah of his human rights record when he was playing ball with the west though eh?
We have a wonderful system that works well if big government twerps could leave it the hell alone. It's called capitalism.
Maybe not, but better late than never. When someone can explain to me why keeping Saddam around would have been a good thing, I'll admit defeat.
Which is why they had to intervene when the bastions of Capitalism, the banks, failed.
Anyhow.... The basic Conservative dogma is to look after big business and the rich. Its on the assumption that if they work and do well, so does everyone else.
The thing is... essentially we are all "everyone else". And if things don't work out generally, we suffer. If things don't work out for us, we suffer. I'll never forget Tebbit's "on yer bike" speech at the height of the unemployment crisis of the early 80s. His assumption was that the unemployed were lazy and work shy, whilst also believing, incorrectly, that there were jobs out there. The Tories have always insinuated that those who struggle for whatever reason are the cause of our ills (too many single mums, too many people on benefit). It's pretty much playground bullying.
Labour USED to offer an alternative, but they sold their convictions out years ago.
Why did the banks fail? Not because of unfettered capitalism, but because the Clinton government incentivised sub-prime lending. If the credit market had been left to function on strict principles of supply and demand, where loan applications were approved or disapproved based on the applicant's ability to pay rather than their particular hard luck story, then we wouldn't have had a banking crisis.
As to your dismissal of trickle down economic theory, your assessment seems to be based on two flawed assumptions:
1. The rich hoard all their money.
2. If you're not born rich, you can't become rich.
As I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, social workers and diversity counsellors (and full-time trade unionists) are not going to provide employment opportunities for their fellow citizens. People who own large companies, whether they be in financial services, building, retail or entertainment do. You only 'suffer' if you think you're too good to take up a lower paid job, offered by one of the 'capitalist pigs', even if you have no relevant experience or qualifications which would be required for a better job. The world needs ditch diggers too.
And there are jobs out there. Maybe not the ones you want - but there are jobs. Why do the new citizens of the EU from Eastern Europe flock to our shores? Because there's work available - maybe not glamourous well paid work, but there's work. I would take any Polish plumber over the workshy scroungers that make up the British non-working class.
It's not playground bullying, it's the expectation that everybody should do their bit. Why should a large portion of the population get a free ride on the backs of those with the gumption to work? We can't just keep throwing money in benefits and entitlements at those who don't want to work and expect our nation to arise from its slumbers.
Our empire was built on the back of our fighting men and our working men, augmented by scientific genius and bold entrepeneurs and explorers willing to risk everything. Our current excuse for a country is blighted by those who think they're entitled to everything but will risk nothing to get it, except possibly a derisory suspended sentence for attempting to steal from someone who has made their own way. Why should I have my earnings stripped from me and my family to pay someone who won't get off their arse and contribute?
Why did the banks fail? Not because of unfettered capitalism, but because the Clinton government incentivised sub-prime lending. If the credit market had been left to function on strict principles of supply and demand, where loan applications were approved or disapproved based on the applicant's ability to pay rather than their particular hard luck story, then we wouldn't have had a banking crisis.
It wasn't Clinton idea to package mortgages into various financial instruments such as CDOs and sell it on for profit.
But do you not agree that the banking meltdown was not the result of pure unfettered capitalism, and if not, why not?
They come from a climate of work or death? You mean they come from formerly socialist countries? Interesting.....
The US and its allies invaded Iraq to make an example of a Muslim state in the wake of 9/11 - they needed to be seen to be doing something tangible after being attacked by murderous Islamist pigs.
I thought this was the reason why Afghanistan was invaded?
<Was there any economic self-interest factored in? Of course. But God forbid that a country should act in its own best interests, depose a murderous dictator and introduce democracy to a country that had only known fear and repression in its recent history. QUOTE]<
What sort of democracy in Iraq are we talking about here exactly?
What about the illegal nature of the invasion? At least citizens in Spain were offered the chance to vote for a party which opposed the war.
Like millions of others throughout the world I marched in the streets here in Barcelona against Spain's involvment.
This just gets more and more amusing.:D
Why did the banks fail? Not because of unfettered capitalism, but because the Clinton government incentivised sub-prime lending. If the credit market had been left to function on strict principles of supply and demand, where loan applications were approved or disapproved based on the applicant's ability to pay rather than their particular hard luck story, then we wouldn't have had a banking crisis.
As to your dismissal of trickle down economic theory, your assessment seems to be based on two flawed assumptions:
1. The rich hoard all their money.
2. If you're not born rich, you can't become rich.
As I mentioned elsewhere in this thread, social workers and diversity counsellors (and full-time trade unionists) are not going to provide employment opportunities for their fellow citizens. People who own large companies, whether they be in financial services, building, retail or entertainment do. You only 'suffer' if you think you're too good to take up a lower paid job, offered by one of the 'capitalist pigs', even if you have no relevant experience or qualifications which would be required for a better job. The world needs ditch diggers too.
And there are jobs out there. Maybe not the ones you want - but there are jobs. Why do the new citizens of the EU from Eastern Europe flock to our shores? Because there's work available - maybe not glamourous well paid work, but there's work. I would take any Polish plumber over the workshy scroungers that make up the British non-working class.
It's not playground bullying, it's the expectation that everybody should do their bit. Why should a large portion of the population get a free ride on the backs of those with the gumption to work? We can't just keep throwing money in benefits and entitlements at those who don't want to work and expect our nation to arise from its slumbers.
Our empire was built on the back of our fighting men and our working men, augmented by scientific genius and bold entrepeneurs and explorers willing to risk everything. Our current excuse for a country is blighted by those who think they're entitled to everything but will risk nothing to get it, except possibly a derisory suspended sentence for attempting to steal from someone who has made their own way. Why should I have my earnings stripped from me and my family to pay someone who won't get off their arse and contribute?