This comment has received too many negative votesshow
What a clown this joker is with his statement that STWC is the most powerful movement of his lifetime. What could these middle class pacifist reformists stop? Fuckin self righteous socialism in their own heads arsewipes.
...old be so blindly ignorant to be unable to see when his country is in the wrong? Admitting Israel's fault in this respect doesn't make you any less of an Israeli, but blind patriotism and stubbornness will get you nowhere. Is it so hard to see Israel's fault in this matter?
Also, no one claims that "Israel is the source of all evil", just that it is wrong in the illegal occupation of Palestine. Why do you feel so much self-pity and the need to compare Israel with China, etc.?
Personal attacks, sarcasm... why the bee in your bonnet NewsFarm? You say you tried to inform me time and again about the failed Arafat deal and Hamas' murderous intent, but please read my posts again - I told you, I already know about all of this. And I'm on Israel's side. But on the subject of the Israeli occupation, Israel is in the wrong. Illegal occupation is never justified, despite Arafat's behaviour in the past and Hamas' current attitude towards the Jewish people. How can a 47 year...
I wrote a paper on the failed treaty for my Masters at university a few years back :-) It's a real travesty that Arafat was so uncooperative (to say the least!) and it's outrageous that Hamas are so openly anti-Semitic. I do see your point, I really do - I still stand by my point that it's not too late to hand over the occupied territory though :-p And I do understand that this viewpoint is easy for me to hold now that I'm safe outside Israel!
alan--I tried my very best to inform you time & again that Arafat stormed out of Camp David after being offered %97 back & ordered a Tel Aviv blood bath in return. I also tried my very best to inform you that Hamas charter clearly stipulates intent to annihilate me. Looks like I did not succeed. At any rate, time to go to bed. Wish me sweet & rockets free dreams...
" the eyes of the world are currently on Israel." (alan)
You nailed it right on the bud alan for which I thank you profusely. The world is indeed transfixed on Israel as the source of all evil. Need I say more? Let me divulge a state secret to you. Israel is also directly responsible for male pattern baldness. Shocking but true !!! Again, thank you much for pinpointing the very essence of the hypocrisy. Good night...
Self-serving moral brigades? It would be in my own interests to support our occupation of Palestine, surely? No one has forgiven China or the multitude of other nations you have mentioned, but the fact is that the eyes of the world are currently on Israel. This "woe is me" attitude is no help, we must own up to our mistakes and make them right (at least, in my idealistic worldview :-) ). It's not my fault that the west doesn't appreciate Israel's disregard for international law.
I support Israel, as I have said. I served in the Israeli military and support your country, but your inability to consider the possibility that this occupation of Palestine may be unjust perplexes me. I'm not saying a handover would solve all the issues and I'm aware of the problems in Palestine and elsewhere, but you really should give the idea some thought. We offered 97% before, why not 100% now? So we can hold our head high in the world without being viewed as warmongers (like my Britain).
NewsFarm, I *do* realise all the problems with the theocracies in the middle east, I've never said otherwise. But I'll say again, on this single issue of Israeli occupation, I side with Palestine. This ongoing, illegal occupation generates hate from "The West" and leads people to view Israel in the same light as Palestine, which is a shame as Israel is a socially progressive nation. Can you see what I'm saying? There's no need to bring in all of these other issues and personal attacks.
"I'll say again, on this single issue of Israeli occupation, I side with Palestine"-(alan)
Israel offered %97 back. Palestinians launched 2nd Intifada in return. The meaning of negotiation is to negotiate hence compromise. Israel offered an olive branch and got a blood bath in return. Support whoever you want alan.
"... leads people to view Israel in the same light as Palestine, " (alan)
The same people do not view Russia as evil reincarnated for killing 100,000 independence seeking Muslim Chechens in Grozny. I don't recall Chechens declaring intent to annihilate Russia any time soon so forgive my sarcastic sarcasm...
alan--How perplexing that the world opts to forgive China for horrific human rights atrocities and insanely illegal, brutal occupation, subjugation and oppression of Tibet. Where is the popular moral indignation of self righteous Europe and her hyper active yet self serving human rights moral brigades?...
alan--Europe, awash with a monstrous guilt complex pertaining to colonialism, subjugation, 2 world wars & worst genocidal Holocaust known to mankind is desperately seeking means to cleanse its soiled soul. How convenient to scape goat Israel of all countries as the perfect sacrificial lamb. Europe genocided 6 million Jews & now the Jews become the quintessential "Terror state". Nice try...
I don't have selective sympathy. But given the discussion on this page, we're talking about Palestine/Israel - there's not menough space to bring up all of the other injustices in the world. I sympathise with Israel on many other issues, but on this one I side with Palestine. I'm sorry if that offends you, but try viewing it from a nuetral viewpiont (easy for me to say, I know).
alan--Arabs do not seek to resolve this conflict for it will direct global outrage at their own corrupt dictatorial & brutal theocracies. Human rights, gay persecution, women as sub species, utmost poverty despite oil riches to name just a few horrid vices . How convenient to blame microscopic israel & U.S for all evil...
alan--The Arab League recently decided to object to any U.N. resolution condemning Sudan for genocidal atrocities against fellow Muslims in Darfur. Why don't you express moral indignation at the Muslim world for its politically expedient brand of selective sympathy? Or perhaps Muslims genociding Muslims is permissible under your moral code...,
alan-- This site is not about Israel. It is a glaring example of selective moral outrage for false moral vindication. Bader Meinhof was clearly idealistic when it wreaked havoc word wide (70's) to promote global peace & justice for all... How much more misguided and morally blind (or blinded) can one be?
"Terror" as portrayed in the media (in my country at least) has a different meaning to that in the English dictionary. I oppose all violence, but exploding buses is revenge against Israel's invasion of Palistinian land - I don't justfy such action, but as I implied, this is small fry compared to Israel's ongoing occupation of Palestinian land, imprisonment of civilians, etc.
alan--Selective sympathy to all things Palestinians while ignoring 100,000 Muslim Chechens killed by Russia, 250,000 East Timoreans starved to death by Indonesia (largest Muslim country), Arab Muslims genociding 350,000 non Arab Muslims is Sudan. A true idealist doesn't pick & choose his anguish based on political expedience
NewsFarm, I for one recognise Israel's right to exist and I don't support Palestine's failure to do so. I'm also strongly opposed to Hamas' opinions towards the Jewish people. So I'm not a raving supporter of Palestine or hater of Israel :-) However, I do feel that in this issue Israel's occupation of Palestine is unjust. Palestine won't settle for anything less than a complete handover of their lands, which I think to be fair since the occupation is illegal.
My previous 2 comments were supposed to be replies to other comments so they might not make complete sense.
What's with the personal attack NewsFarm? I might be idealistic but I'm hardly ignorant or naive, and I'm not self-righteous - if you have an opinion I'm open to discission. That's if you have something worthwhile to say? Don't take my attacks on Israel personally, I'm just as scathing when it comes to my own country's foreign policy/imperialism.
alan--Your mere justification of exploding Tel Aviv busses depletes your brand of idealism of any moral credence or value. Ever wondered why so many peace activists use violence to promote their "peaceful" agenda? Self inflicted contradiction at the seem. Hypocritical & self serving morality at my expense
Israel offered Arafat %96 of the West Bank & East Jerusalem at Camp David. He said no & launched 2nd Intifada. How many more years of terror must Israel endure? How many charred Tel Aviv buses before Palestinians recognized Israel, renounce terror, negotiate & learn to compromise?
Isreal must endure Palistinian "terror" until it ceases to illegally occupy ALL Palistine territory, not just 96% of it. Why should Palistine negotiate with a terrorist state like Israel? Palestine's "terror" tactics are in response to Israel's occupation; Israel is the terrorist state and burning buses is a small price to pay for war crimes and defiance of international law.
alan--I strongly advise revisiting your English dictionary in search for the meaning of: "Terror". Anyhow, since you are ill informed, misguided and idealistic, I decided to forgive you.
Yes I'm deeply concerned about Israeli kids. Apparently you are not. Let me apologize as an Israeli for having a better army. Next time Israel will make an effort to self inflict casualties on her own to meet your absurd and cynical criteria for justice and equal suffrage distribution....
Condescending self righteousness, hypocrisy, double standards & naivete don't hold water. European communal guilt complex due to colonialism, 2 word wars & worst genocide in history leads her to false moral grounds. Selective sympathy at its worst. Not good. Don't preach me
How many more rockets should have Israel endured before launching a defensive strike to defend its shell shocked, terrorized & traumatized citizens against an enemy sworn to its destruction? Please advise
How maany years of oppression, slaughter, and occupation must the Palis endure at the hands of the Zionists? How many billions more of tax dollars must the US taxpayers pony up to keep the oppression going?
You are concerned about Israel's "shell shocked, terrorized & traumatized citizens". 1,300 Gazans murdered vs. 13 Israelis. What about the shell-shocked Gazans?
Hamas launched rockets at Israel after receiving Gaza. It is sworn to the destruction of Israel and revoked the Oslo Accords. Gazan should blame Hamas not Israel. Israel will defend her shell shocked citizens whether you approve it or not.
Israel has turned gaza into a huge prison -- worse than a prison. Not enough food or meds or electricity and no hope of parole. This is hardly "receiving gaza"
U.S tax money is used strictly for buying U.S made weapons. The money stays in the U.S and provides jobs for Americans. Get the facts before launching a farcical attack that renders you a populist demagogue of false information
Think back to basic, pre algebra arithmetic. Israel receives $3 billion per year. If it spends it all on US weapons, the end result is: US taxpayer out $3 billion, US weapons manufacturers up $3 billion minus $3 billion in materials, Israel is up $3 billion in weapons without having spent a dime.
Before "launching a farcical attack " you may wish to go back and learn arithmetic, dontcha think?
How would you explain Hamas fighters launching a rocket & hiding in kindergartens, schools or a hospital? Aerial videos of "launch & hide" fighters was given to U.N, relax... Hamas confiscated Unrwa food convoys for its own use. Bravo for the brotherly love and tear jerking compassion...
The plight of the Palestinians is tragic & conditions - abdominal. Time to renounce terror, negotiate & recognize Israel's right to exist. %90 of all Israelis support a palestinian state, provided that Palestinians chose to become partners for peace rather than fanatic adversaries for endless strife
Time to renounce Zionist terrorism and let Israle swim or sink on their own instead of maintaining this parasitic relationship they have with the USA.
Then they will have to behave like a normal , honorable nation or perish
"Time to renounce terror, negotiate & recognize Israel's right to exist."
I would say that it's time for Isreal to withdraw from occupied Palistinian territory, especially if indeed 90% of Israelis support a Palistinian state.
alan--Arabs violated U.N's recognition os Israel (1948), waged endless wars & lost. Tough luck. Arafat was offered %97 of West Bank & East Jerusalem, he refused, ordered 2nd Intifada & exploded Tel Aviv busses. Hamas charter states intent to destroy me (religious grounds), revoked previous peace agreements (Oslo Accords), got Gaza & launched 6000 rockets. A form of "gratitude" unacceptable by Israeli standards...
Israel offered Arafat %96 of the West Bank at Camp David & East Jerusalem as Capitol. He said no & launched the second Intifada. Who exactly doesn't want peace? Land back anyone? Please explain
How many more rockets should have Israel endured before launching a defensive strike to defend its shell shocked, terrorized & traumatized citizens against an enemy sworn to its destruction? Please advise
Had you interrogated a human ticking bomb who knows the whereabouts of a suicide bomber en route to a school bus with your daughter on, would you use all viable means to extract life saving information or uphold humane & lawful conduct at all cost?
Can a suicide bomber en route to a Tel Aviv bus be considered as a single component of a cluster bomb? Does he conduct a symmetrical or asymmetrical warfare in your eyes? How do you propose to defend your loved ones against him (as per london Underground attack)?
Your enemy will always use your high moral grounds against you. Upon realizing that conventional warfare leads to its defeat it switched to the urban warfare. Hiding in your midst. Tanks & f-16's are powerless. Now you are forced to compromise your values in order to defeat your enemy
Suicide bombers are the ultimate answer to Geneva conventions. NO to airborne cluster bombs & YES to walking cluster bombs. Invite 50 suicide bombers to a garden tea party & enjoy a cucumber sandwich with a human cluster bomb.
The enemy will always exploit your values against you
Please define a legal war. Let us know the legal way to kill someone or at least cause some injury. Oh do hurry, just kidding... I say, let us ban wars, fine war mongers a stiff fine and incarcerate repeat offenders in jail
Are 6000 rockets equal to a cluster bomb? What is the lawful definition of kiling someone? What would you consider to be a human & lawful way to hurt someone badly? Perhaps wars should be conducted by combat Geneva Convention trained lawyers in order to uphold Western values & civility...
Wars are not civil. Destruction is nor civil nor lawful either. Wars can not be regulated. Should one side maintain lawful conduct expect the other side to break it to the tee. This is the quintessential asymmetrical warfare. Launching rockets and than hide in kindergartens. Madness has no logic
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge- 6000 rockets were launched. You sound so cocky & self assured.Expose me for the lier that I'm. Provide ample proof that my statistics are misleading of risk making a fool of yourself. Better yet a populist demagogue...
You preach the "merits" of a "legal war" as per international law. How nonsensical. No war is "legal" and no weapons should meet international law. War is illegal, killing is illegal whether using 1 ton bombs or cluster bombs. 6000 rockets meet my criteria as one heck of a massive cluster bomb
After WW-1 the Versailles treaty re-designed Europe's map. Nations were created yet national resentments & frustrations lingered through WW-2. Current Serbs aggression towards Bosnians stems from WW-2 Bosnian atrocities toward Serbs. Part of humanity's DNA. No logic. No conventions
Arabs attacked Israel a day after she was born. Was that legal? Should Israel apologize for winning? Hamas launched 6000 rockets. Was that legal? My late grandpa used to say:"When waging wars, take defeat under consideration"
I'm not even going to bother anymore. If you're not even going to properly read the questions and habitually refuse to answer questions, then I'm just wasting my time on a pathetic little champaigne socialist whose views will change when he comes across some wealth
We must understand something here. This is not simply an economic debate between capitalism and socialism as an economic model. This is also a social and political debate as to what should be done with the money generated. These countries' living standards rose through an acceptance of interventionalist policies relating to social issues including education, health and employment
Sorry, repeated myself. I meant to copy and paste this - In response to living standards in Britain - living standards have rose dramatically under 11 years of Labour rule. Labour have delivered the lowest inflation, lowest unemployment, lowest interest rates in our country's history - have managed the strongest growth of any major industrial economy, that as a result of that has delivered record investment in the NHS
I do propose that we end this debate, and agree to disagree. We're both of extremely different persuasions and are never going to agree or accept any statement the other makes. Furthermore, I'm not interested in having "the last laugh" so any comment of that persuasion is not going to bother me a bit
Allegedly. I have, whether you value it as an answer or disagree with its quality is another issue altogether. I'm tired of saying the same thing over again. Please, lets go our separate ways
Look, I've responded to every statement you made today and have made an effort to ensure I have responded to every point you made in the last few days - there are so many from both sides (and I must admit you have failed to respond to some of mine). Nonetheless, I've tried to respond to as many points as I can, but as I said its hard to keep up with so many statements
You haven't answered my question on wealth redistribution between the hard worker and the lazy worker. Or why poverty rates have fallen world wide over the last 400 years when capitalism was born. Or why Britain had the highest standards of living following Thatcher's reforms. You haven't answered the question on Denmark and how it was destroyed by socialism, and how it resorted to free market policies to regenerate itself.
Initially your statement was a worker and a drug user. I said - "You dont look at the individual as simply a "drug user". As a socialist, you take into account environmental circumstances, family background, educational opportunity, health and job prospects. Wealth distribution through taxation funds foundations set up by governments to help rehabilitate such individuals and re-create their lives"
It is relevant. Capitalism may have generated the wealth, but it was socialist-esque, interventionalist social policies that improved living conditions
In answer to the 400 years question I said - "We must understand something here. This is not simply an economic debate between capitalism and socialism as an economic model. This is also a social and political debate as to what should be done with the money generated. These countries' living standards rose through an acceptance of interventionalist policies relating to social issues including education, health and employment"
Again, capitalism isn't interventionist, it accepts individual liberty. So that answer again is completely irrelevent. It isn't even an answer. Interventionism arose with Marxism. 300 years of capitalism came before. So try again
In response to living standards in Britain - living standards have rose dramatically under 11 years of Labour rule. Labour have delivered the lowest inflation, lowest unemployment, lowest interest rates in our country's history - have managed the strongest growth of any major industrial economy, that as a result of that has delivered record investment in the NHS
And who dominates the IMF - the United States of America. If literacy levels are so much better, why does Britain have the worse primary school literacy levels in Europe, and why did a government study in America show that 23% of adult Americans were not "able to locate information in text", could not "make low-level inferences using printed materials", and were unable to "integrate easily identifiable pieces of information."
Learning is our own responsibility. We can be taught anything in school, but it is up to the person to digest it and remember it, which is why UN and EU statistics are useless. ANSWER MY FUCKING QUESTIONS YOU BRAINDEAD IMP
Well its easy for you to say that, because I trust you had the encouragement from home and stable economic circumstances that all in all creates a better learning experience. If someone is born into a tough, unsupportive family, what encouragement does that individual have to learn and to attempt to gain the most out of their education?
I was born into a divorced household to a mum battered by my dad. We lived in hostels for a few years. So don't make the pathetic assumption I have been pampered. I am where I am because I made the conscious decision to work hard. If people don't take that decision, then they should feel the consequences.
If you are this comitted to not answering my questions, why should I further waste my time with you. You obviously have no clue of history, and what statistics show. You don't answer questions. And you base things on hypothesis and what you think should happen, instead of basing it on what has happened
You dont look at the individual as simply a "drug user". As a socialist, you take into account environmental circumstances, family background, educational opportunity, health and job prospects. Wealth distribution through taxation funds foundations set up by governments to help rehabilitate such individuals and re-create their lives
Again I ask, why, when capitalism was born 400 years ago, have standards of living risen in all European countries that implemented it. WHy have death rates fallen?
Why haven't you answered my question on the redistribution between the hard worker and the drug user?
We must understand something here. This is not simply an economic debate between capitalism and socialism as an economic model. This is also a social and political debate as to what should be done with the money generated. These countries' living standards rose through an acceptance of interventionalist policies relating to social issues including education, health and employment
Like I have said repeatedly, when Denmark adopted interventionist policies... the country was crippled, poverty rose as did unemployment... I have asked you this question before but you have repeatedly failed to answer.
Don't even call this a debate... you just answer questions you are comfortable with, and conveniently miss the difficult ones. You are a champaigne socialist.
Essentially, this comes down to an issue of compassion and willingness to help. You dont see it necessary to help others who are less fortunate, I do.
Philanthropy again you fool... it is called democracy, you choose to help. Those that can help themselves but refuse to get a job should suffer. If a disabled person can work, a fit and healthy person has no right to sit on their arse and do nothing, and claim benefit
Please stop calling me a fool, I'm simply in disagreement with your views. The majority of people living on incapacity benefit and unemployment benefit really are incapacitated and unemployed - there are examples of manipulation of the system by individuals, yes i agree, but please dont use the examples to justify it as the common scenario
This goes back to what I said all along concerning Philanthropy, and thats the issue of the post-modern realities of human nature. Most people are not prepared to donate money for charitable causes - therefore it is up to the state to intervene and tax people to ensure things get done.
Bill Gates has just given his fortune away to needy children in Africa. A survey conducted recently suggests 7/10 people give to charity regurlarly, myself included. Most millionaires are charitable figures.
Because it is incredibly hard to start a sucessful business and keep it sucessful. Then they become rich. Only a tiny minority of people are going to put in that work. Look at it this way, if Bill Gates walked into a bar full of millionaires, you can still say he owns 95% of the wealth in that room. America is only 5% of the world population, but they produce most of the world's wealth.
What a sad, horrible person you are. So they're the rich ones because their the only ones prepared to put in the effort? What about their workers who put in the labour to make the company what it is?
A contract exists between a worker and the business owner(s). They do their work, and the owner does the rest. If the worker dosen't like it, they can leave. In socialist countries, they don't have this choice. Now answer my questions you pathetic little pillock
A contract exists between the worker and the business owner, yes. However, a healthy business is one with happy workers - therefore the owner is under an obligation to ensure good working conditions, sufficient pay and to uphold basic workers' rights
Which is available in a free market. In your rarified world, workers are oppressed. If you actually looked deeper at the truth instead of living in a lier's wet dream, you'd see this. A company needs workers, therefore it will offer attractive wage packets and conditions to attract the best workers. It is in communist states e.g. Korea, Cuba etc that workers are oppressed. Can you name me a capitalist country where workers are oppressed? And can you answer the other four questions too?
Are you adding new questions to the list that arent even there? First its 2, now its 4 - make your mind up. If workers are oppressed in Cuba then why are 99% employed and 99% of the population above the poverty line? Capitalist countries employ their workers from abroad thats why - you dont look at workers in capitalist countries, you look at workers in the sweatshops and factories in China, Indonesia etc
First off millions do not flee each year, otherwise there would be noone left. However, a large amount leave each year because the United States are succeeding in their attempts to squeeze and suffocate Cuba into submission. I dont understand - firstly you praise China for its embrace of capitalism (an economic theory that rapidly reduces poverty levels) yet you state that poverty is so high because of the Communist regime. A Communist regime that embraces free market economics, hmmm?
If you actually read what I have wrote, you'd see I wrote that poverty is still high because of Maoist policies, but since they have liberalised their economy, poverty is dropping quickly, but there is still a very long way to go. I have wrote that repeatedly. Answer my questions now boy
Do you follow current affairs in China? The government has blown untold billions on the Olympics, whilst people starve on the streets. The pictures tell the story - ITN News broadcasted a story on it a few months ago. Poverty is low in China because the government has concentrated its economy on wild expansion plans and extravegant projects, whilst neglecting its people
Millions live in poverty because Mao put them there. According to the statistics, poverty rates started to fall in the months and years following the opening of the markets and the lowering of taxes
Like I said before, China is still operating under a communist regime, but they are becoming more liberalised. Poverty is falling in that country rapidly. Now, answer my questions pillock
At the end of the day, in a modern world where individualism and free enterprise dominates, contemporary man is not prepared, through his own accord, to help his fellow man. Therefore, government is required to ensure that wealth is redistributed, namely through taxation
Philanthropy may be prevalent, but giving £2 a month to Oxfam isnt going to fund a national health service, a state education system, public transport and emergency services - get real dickhead
What a silly statement, I'm using Oxfam as an example. Philanthropy may be prevalent, but the quantity of the donation is another question. And 7/10 people are not millionaires. Taxation is the most effective way of ensuring that wealth is redistributed
Wealth shouldn't be redistributed, that's the point. 7/10 are not millionaires, but 7/10 people giving money away creates a significant amount. So, answer my questions prick
No socialist PM ever let the working classes by their homes at 60% discount did they? No socialist PM ever gave people the right to buy shares in companies, thus moving millions into the middle classes once the businesses boomed. No socialist PM increased trade thus lowering the price of everything e.g. TV's, VHS, Music players, food, because socialists follow protectionist policies, limiting trade supply, thus increasing prices, and with high taxes, this lowers living standards
Thatcher was Britain's greatest PM. She tripled spending on the NHS, and everyone became better off because old industries were killed off and new ones were set up. Unemployment was a by product of modernisation. And after the strikes were over, unemployment dropped to 1,600,000.
Thatcher is a scorn on the history of the United Kingdom. She is a heartless bitch, and an oxygen stealer. Rest assured, I will be there in Parliament Square heckling her coffin when she passes into Westminster Abbey. She destroyed the lives of millions. Furthermore, she is a war criminal for her actions in the Falklands War, notably with the sinking of the Belgrano
The Argies invaded the Falklands... what about the three ships the Argies sunk? What about the Belgrano general admitting that the ship was about to attack? Thatcher was the greatest PM this coutry ever had. Taxes were lowered for all. We had the highest living standards in Europe because of her. Old and dead industries were cut off, thus liberating the public spending budget from pointless spending.
I'm not questioning the reasons we went to war, I support the war. However, there is no question the Belgrano was retreating and leaving the exclusion zone - this was an immediate response to the warning giving by the British fleet
What are you talking about? The Belgrano was not in a position to attack when she was sunk, she was not facing the British fleet and was turning away from the inner levels of the exclusion zone - this is fact
The Belgrano made it clear it was not in a position to strike. If it was going to move into a position to strike it would not turn around and proceed to leave the exclusion zone. You cant fire at a fleet with your back turned. Even in war, there are rules - in this case the rule was the exclusion zone. The British fleet warned the Belgrano and gave it the opportunity to retreat - to which it responded by doing so. Thatcher gave the order despite British Admirals ensuring her it was retreating
55% is nowhere near enough! American life expectancy is a year shorter than the overall figure of Western Europe and 4 years shorter than that of Norway. Over the past two decades, the country's rank in life expectancy has dropped from 11th to 42nd place in the world. The infant mortality rate of 6.37 per thousand likewise places the United States 42nd out of 221 countries, behind all of Western Europe
The state should let people live their lives how they want. The state should only intervene with people who cannot possibly work e.g. disabled. Those who can and refuse to work should be left alone to suffer for the consequences of their laziness. There are people in third world countries who want to work but their governments are so corrupt their is no money left and they starve to death. People in rich Western countries have no excuse
So when Bush can overhaul the health and education systems improving them massively whilst lowering taxes, whereas Castro taxes his population to the limits, there's the difference. I notice 4 questions of mine have gone unanswered
Now lets look at the USA - the leading light for capitalism, an economic theory you claimed to be the fairest for people. No universal healthcare and a rediculously expensive private healthcare system, unemployment 5%, 12% under poverty line and roughly 40% falling below the poverty line at some time within a 10 year time span, national debt $9.2 trillion, The United Nations Development Programme Report 2006 on income equality ranks the United States as tied for 73rd out of 126 countries
55% of American healthcare is free. The American population is significantly larger than Cuba's. The UN development index is a sham. It measures child literacy rates and divorce rates instead of actual measures of human living standards. If you checked say the BM index, you'd see Americans have twice the living standard of the Scandinavian countries. 5,000,000 Americans are illegal aliens, 6,000,000 less than the entire population of Cuba
If you want to continue to use examples of capitalist countries, I refer you again to Cuba. Free education (including higher education), free healthcare, unemployment is just over 1%, population living below the poverty line 1%, 78% of industry is nationalised, according to the WHO life expectancy and infant mortality rates in Cuba have been comparable to Western industrialized countries, Cuba spends twice as more on public health than the Latin American average, even more than Brazil
All education in all countries is paid for by the taxpayer... it is not free. If you actually looked at the actual country instead of glorified opinion, you'd see millions live in absolute poverty in Cuba, whilst Castro has a hundred million dollar fortune. What's the point of having free healthcare if you are already dead before claiming it.
Cuba has one of the worst human rights records. And it's economy is subsidised by terrorist nations who oppress their people. That have a massive tax burden, and millions have been murdered for standing up to the regime. Why do millions and millions leave if it is such a nice place to leave? They don't have a vote, and tehy have only recently been allowed to use the internet, and even that is monitored.
Amen Mr Benn.
spokenwordnerd 5 months ago
Tony Benn is a true gent.
CountryQuestion 1 year ago
Well said sir, a true champion of political common sense.
TheBattleForYourMind 2 years ago 10
no one will be able to replace tony benn. truly phenomenal
2NDCUMMING 2 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What a clown this joker is with his statement that STWC is the most powerful movement of his lifetime. What could these middle class pacifist reformists stop? Fuckin self righteous socialism in their own heads arsewipes.
eoin1916 2 years ago
...old be so blindly ignorant to be unable to see when his country is in the wrong? Admitting Israel's fault in this respect doesn't make you any less of an Israeli, but blind patriotism and stubbornness will get you nowhere. Is it so hard to see Israel's fault in this matter?
Also, no one claims that "Israel is the source of all evil", just that it is wrong in the illegal occupation of Palestine. Why do you feel so much self-pity and the need to compare Israel with China, etc.?
alandshaw 2 years ago 2
Personal attacks, sarcasm... why the bee in your bonnet NewsFarm? You say you tried to inform me time and again about the failed Arafat deal and Hamas' murderous intent, but please read my posts again - I told you, I already know about all of this. And I'm on Israel's side. But on the subject of the Israeli occupation, Israel is in the wrong. Illegal occupation is never justified, despite Arafat's behaviour in the past and Hamas' current attitude towards the Jewish people. How can a 47 year...
alandshaw 2 years ago
I wrote a paper on the failed treaty for my Masters at university a few years back :-) It's a real travesty that Arafat was so uncooperative (to say the least!) and it's outrageous that Hamas are so openly anti-Semitic. I do see your point, I really do - I still stand by my point that it's not too late to hand over the occupied territory though :-p And I do understand that this viewpoint is easy for me to hold now that I'm safe outside Israel!
Regardless, sleep well brother :-)
alandshaw 2 years ago 2
alan--I tried my very best to inform you time & again that Arafat stormed out of Camp David after being offered %97 back & ordered a Tel Aviv blood bath in return. I also tried my very best to inform you that Hamas charter clearly stipulates intent to annihilate me. Looks like I did not succeed. At any rate, time to go to bed. Wish me sweet & rockets free dreams...
NewsFarm 2 years ago
" the eyes of the world are currently on Israel." (alan)
You nailed it right on the bud alan for which I thank you profusely. The world is indeed transfixed on Israel as the source of all evil. Need I say more? Let me divulge a state secret to you. Israel is also directly responsible for male pattern baldness. Shocking but true !!! Again, thank you much for pinpointing the very essence of the hypocrisy. Good night...
NewsFarm 2 years ago
And I know that Palestine disregards international law too, but this doesn't give Israel the right to occupy their country :-)
alandshaw 2 years ago 5
Self-serving moral brigades? It would be in my own interests to support our occupation of Palestine, surely? No one has forgiven China or the multitude of other nations you have mentioned, but the fact is that the eyes of the world are currently on Israel. This "woe is me" attitude is no help, we must own up to our mistakes and make them right (at least, in my idealistic worldview :-) ). It's not my fault that the west doesn't appreciate Israel's disregard for international law.
alandshaw 2 years ago 3
I support Israel, as I have said. I served in the Israeli military and support your country, but your inability to consider the possibility that this occupation of Palestine may be unjust perplexes me. I'm not saying a handover would solve all the issues and I'm aware of the problems in Palestine and elsewhere, but you really should give the idea some thought. We offered 97% before, why not 100% now? So we can hold our head high in the world without being viewed as warmongers (like my Britain).
alandshaw 2 years ago 3
NewsFarm, I *do* realise all the problems with the theocracies in the middle east, I've never said otherwise. But I'll say again, on this single issue of Israeli occupation, I side with Palestine. This ongoing, illegal occupation generates hate from "The West" and leads people to view Israel in the same light as Palestine, which is a shame as Israel is a socially progressive nation. Can you see what I'm saying? There's no need to bring in all of these other issues and personal attacks.
alandshaw 2 years ago 2
"I'll say again, on this single issue of Israeli occupation, I side with Palestine"-(alan)
Israel offered %97 back. Palestinians launched 2nd Intifada in return. The meaning of negotiation is to negotiate hence compromise. Israel offered an olive branch and got a blood bath in return. Support whoever you want alan.
NewsFarm 2 years ago
"... leads people to view Israel in the same light as Palestine, " (alan)
The same people do not view Russia as evil reincarnated for killing 100,000 independence seeking Muslim Chechens in Grozny. I don't recall Chechens declaring intent to annihilate Russia any time soon so forgive my sarcastic sarcasm...
NewsFarm 2 years ago
alan--How perplexing that the world opts to forgive China for horrific human rights atrocities and insanely illegal, brutal occupation, subjugation and oppression of Tibet. Where is the popular moral indignation of self righteous Europe and her hyper active yet self serving human rights moral brigades?...
NewsFarm 2 years ago
alan--Europe, awash with a monstrous guilt complex pertaining to colonialism, subjugation, 2 world wars & worst genocidal Holocaust known to mankind is desperately seeking means to cleanse its soiled soul. How convenient to scape goat Israel of all countries as the perfect sacrificial lamb. Europe genocided 6 million Jews & now the Jews become the quintessential "Terror state". Nice try...
NewsFarm 2 years ago
I don't have selective sympathy. But given the discussion on this page, we're talking about Palestine/Israel - there's not menough space to bring up all of the other injustices in the world. I sympathise with Israel on many other issues, but on this one I side with Palestine. I'm sorry if that offends you, but try viewing it from a nuetral viewpiont (easy for me to say, I know).
alandshaw 2 years ago 2
alan--Arabs do not seek to resolve this conflict for it will direct global outrage at their own corrupt dictatorial & brutal theocracies. Human rights, gay persecution, women as sub species, utmost poverty despite oil riches to name just a few horrid vices . How convenient to blame microscopic israel & U.S for all evil...
NewsFarm 2 years ago
alan--The Arab League recently decided to object to any U.N. resolution condemning Sudan for genocidal atrocities against fellow Muslims in Darfur. Why don't you express moral indignation at the Muslim world for its politically expedient brand of selective sympathy? Or perhaps Muslims genociding Muslims is permissible under your moral code...,
NewsFarm 2 years ago
alan-- This site is not about Israel. It is a glaring example of selective moral outrage for false moral vindication. Bader Meinhof was clearly idealistic when it wreaked havoc word wide (70's) to promote global peace & justice for all... How much more misguided and morally blind (or blinded) can one be?
NewsFarm 2 years ago
"Terror" as portrayed in the media (in my country at least) has a different meaning to that in the English dictionary. I oppose all violence, but exploding buses is revenge against Israel's invasion of Palistinian land - I don't justfy such action, but as I implied, this is small fry compared to Israel's ongoing occupation of Palestinian land, imprisonment of civilians, etc.
alandshaw 2 years ago
alan--Selective sympathy to all things Palestinians while ignoring 100,000 Muslim Chechens killed by Russia, 250,000 East Timoreans starved to death by Indonesia (largest Muslim country), Arab Muslims genociding 350,000 non Arab Muslims is Sudan. A true idealist doesn't pick & choose his anguish based on political expedience
NewsFarm 2 years ago
NewsFarm, I for one recognise Israel's right to exist and I don't support Palestine's failure to do so. I'm also strongly opposed to Hamas' opinions towards the Jewish people. So I'm not a raving supporter of Palestine or hater of Israel :-) However, I do feel that in this issue Israel's occupation of Palestine is unjust. Palestine won't settle for anything less than a complete handover of their lands, which I think to be fair since the occupation is illegal.
alandshaw 2 years ago
My previous 2 comments were supposed to be replies to other comments so they might not make complete sense.
What's with the personal attack NewsFarm? I might be idealistic but I'm hardly ignorant or naive, and I'm not self-righteous - if you have an opinion I'm open to discission. That's if you have something worthwhile to say? Don't take my attacks on Israel personally, I'm just as scathing when it comes to my own country's foreign policy/imperialism.
Anyway - great video, I love Tony Benn :-)
alandshaw 2 years ago
alan--Your mere justification of exploding Tel Aviv busses depletes your brand of idealism of any moral credence or value. Ever wondered why so many peace activists use violence to promote their "peaceful" agenda? Self inflicted contradiction at the seem. Hypocritical & self serving morality at my expense
NewsFarm 2 years ago
Israel offered Arafat %96 of the West Bank & East Jerusalem at Camp David. He said no & launched 2nd Intifada. How many more years of terror must Israel endure? How many charred Tel Aviv buses before Palestinians recognized Israel, renounce terror, negotiate & learn to compromise?
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Isreal must endure Palistinian "terror" until it ceases to illegally occupy ALL Palistine territory, not just 96% of it. Why should Palistine negotiate with a terrorist state like Israel? Palestine's "terror" tactics are in response to Israel's occupation; Israel is the terrorist state and burning buses is a small price to pay for war crimes and defiance of international law.
alandshaw 2 years ago
alandshaw--ignorance, self righteousness & naivete may slow your emotional development. Seek professional help & keep me posted.
NewsFarm 2 years ago
alan--I strongly advise revisiting your English dictionary in search for the meaning of: "Terror". Anyhow, since you are ill informed, misguided and idealistic, I decided to forgive you.
NewsFarm 2 years ago
Yes I'm deeply concerned about Israeli kids. Apparently you are not. Let me apologize as an Israeli for having a better army. Next time Israel will make an effort to self inflict casualties on her own to meet your absurd and cynical criteria for justice and equal suffrage distribution....
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Condescending self righteousness, hypocrisy, double standards & naivete don't hold water. European communal guilt complex due to colonialism, 2 word wars & worst genocide in history leads her to false moral grounds. Selective sympathy at its worst. Not good. Don't preach me
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
How many more rockets should have Israel endured before launching a defensive strike to defend its shell shocked, terrorized & traumatized citizens against an enemy sworn to its destruction? Please advise
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
How maany years of oppression, slaughter, and occupation must the Palis endure at the hands of the Zionists? How many billions more of tax dollars must the US taxpayers pony up to keep the oppression going?
You are concerned about Israel's "shell shocked, terrorized & traumatized citizens". 1,300 Gazans murdered vs. 13 Israelis. What about the shell-shocked Gazans?
A little perspective and common sense please
oldjoe5 3 years ago
Hamas launched rockets at Israel after receiving Gaza. It is sworn to the destruction of Israel and revoked the Oslo Accords. Gazan should blame Hamas not Israel. Israel will defend her shell shocked citizens whether you approve it or not.
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Israel has turned gaza into a huge prison -- worse than a prison. Not enough food or meds or electricity and no hope of parole. This is hardly "receiving gaza"
oldjoe5 3 years ago
U.S tax money is used strictly for buying U.S made weapons. The money stays in the U.S and provides jobs for Americans. Get the facts before launching a farcical attack that renders you a populist demagogue of false information
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Think back to basic, pre algebra arithmetic. Israel receives $3 billion per year. If it spends it all on US weapons, the end result is: US taxpayer out $3 billion, US weapons manufacturers up $3 billion minus $3 billion in materials, Israel is up $3 billion in weapons without having spent a dime.
Before "launching a farcical attack " you may wish to go back and learn arithmetic, dontcha think?
oldjoe5 3 years ago 2
How would you explain Hamas fighters launching a rocket & hiding in kindergartens, schools or a hospital? Aerial videos of "launch & hide" fighters was given to U.N, relax... Hamas confiscated Unrwa food convoys for its own use. Bravo for the brotherly love and tear jerking compassion...
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Hamas hiding in kindergartens? Do you have one piece of evidence of this -- not counting the self serving statements of the cowardly, murderous IDF?
We do know, with lots of video documentation, that the IDF uses Gazan citizens as human shields
oldjoe5 3 years ago 2
The plight of the Palestinians is tragic & conditions - abdominal. Time to renounce terror, negotiate & recognize Israel's right to exist. %90 of all Israelis support a palestinian state, provided that Palestinians chose to become partners for peace rather than fanatic adversaries for endless strife
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Time to renounce Zionist terrorism and let Israle swim or sink on their own instead of maintaining this parasitic relationship they have with the USA.
Then they will have to behave like a normal , honorable nation or perish
oldjoe5 3 years ago 2
"Time to renounce terror, negotiate & recognize Israel's right to exist."
I would say that it's time for Isreal to withdraw from occupied Palistinian territory, especially if indeed 90% of Israelis support a Palistinian state.
alandshaw 2 years ago
alan--Arabs violated U.N's recognition os Israel (1948), waged endless wars & lost. Tough luck. Arafat was offered %97 of West Bank & East Jerusalem, he refused, ordered 2nd Intifada & exploded Tel Aviv busses. Hamas charter states intent to destroy me (religious grounds), revoked previous peace agreements (Oslo Accords), got Gaza & launched 6000 rockets. A form of "gratitude" unacceptable by Israeli standards...
NewsFarm 2 years ago
Israel offered Arafat %96 of the West Bank at Camp David & East Jerusalem as Capitol. He said no & launched the second Intifada. Who exactly doesn't want peace? Land back anyone? Please explain
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
How many more rockets should have Israel endured before launching a defensive strike to defend its shell shocked, terrorized & traumatized citizens against an enemy sworn to its destruction? Please advise
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Had you interrogated a human ticking bomb who knows the whereabouts of a suicide bomber en route to a school bus with your daughter on, would you use all viable means to extract life saving information or uphold humane & lawful conduct at all cost?
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Can a suicide bomber en route to a Tel Aviv bus be considered as a single component of a cluster bomb? Does he conduct a symmetrical or asymmetrical warfare in your eyes? How do you propose to defend your loved ones against him (as per london Underground attack)?
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Your enemy will always use your high moral grounds against you. Upon realizing that conventional warfare leads to its defeat it switched to the urban warfare. Hiding in your midst. Tanks & f-16's are powerless. Now you are forced to compromise your values in order to defeat your enemy
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Suicide bombers are the ultimate answer to Geneva conventions. NO to airborne cluster bombs & YES to walking cluster bombs. Invite 50 suicide bombers to a garden tea party & enjoy a cucumber sandwich with a human cluster bomb.
The enemy will always exploit your values against you
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
pinko liberals
mikemarchbanklutrell 3 years ago
To Stop Funding Illegal Wars and how To Withold Your Tax
Please checkout the website MAKE WARS HISTORY
It tells you how it is illegal for us to be paying taxs to fund illegal wars and how you can request not to pay until the war crimes stop..
There is a pre written letter for you to send to your employer..
Please share this website with others and make a difference.
Thanks
Di
MakeWarzHistory 3 years ago
Please define a legal war. Let us know the legal way to kill someone or at least cause some injury. Oh do hurry, just kidding... I say, let us ban wars, fine war mongers a stiff fine and incarcerate repeat offenders in jail
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
A legal war is one that is begun and conducted within the parameters set forth by International Law.
Pre-emptive war is illegal. Adding land to your country via warf is illegal. Torture is illegal
oldjoe5 3 years ago
Are 6000 rockets equal to a cluster bomb? What is the lawful definition of kiling someone? What would you consider to be a human & lawful way to hurt someone badly? Perhaps wars should be conducted by combat Geneva Convention trained lawyers in order to uphold Western values & civility...
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Wars are not civil. Destruction is nor civil nor lawful either. Wars can not be regulated. Should one side maintain lawful conduct expect the other side to break it to the tee. This is the quintessential asymmetrical warfare. Launching rockets and than hide in kindergartens. Madness has no logic
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
6,000 rockets? Huh? One rocket fired in June and one more in August.
What is a humane way to hurt someone badly? What kind of dumbass question is that.
Here is a real number -- 1,300 plus Gazans slaughtered by Israle in 22 days, 13 Israelis killed in the same time -- 1/2 of them by the IDF
oldjoe5 3 years ago
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge- 6000 rockets were launched. You sound so cocky & self assured.Expose me for the lier that I'm. Provide ample proof that my statistics are misleading of risk making a fool of yourself. Better yet a populist demagogue...
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
You preach the "merits" of a "legal war" as per international law. How nonsensical. No war is "legal" and no weapons should meet international law. War is illegal, killing is illegal whether using 1 ton bombs or cluster bombs. 6000 rockets meet my criteria as one heck of a massive cluster bomb
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Apparently, you know nothing of international law.
Nor of making reasonable comparisons. Israel did not just drop one cluster bomb, or one ration of white phosphorous
oldjoe5 3 years ago
After WW-1 the Versailles treaty re-designed Europe's map. Nations were created yet national resentments & frustrations lingered through WW-2. Current Serbs aggression towards Bosnians stems from WW-2 Bosnian atrocities toward Serbs. Part of humanity's DNA. No logic. No conventions
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
Arabs attacked Israel a day after she was born. Was that legal? Should Israel apologize for winning? Hamas launched 6000 rockets. Was that legal? My late grandpa used to say:"When waging wars, take defeat under consideration"
thenewsfarm 3 years ago
it seems like evry country hates america, except france...ive never heard/read/watch anything about them talking about us...
itsmando 3 years ago
I'm not even going to bother anymore. If you're not even going to properly read the questions and habitually refuse to answer questions, then I'm just wasting my time on a pathetic little champaigne socialist whose views will change when he comes across some wealth
dragonlee90 3 years ago
We must understand something here. This is not simply an economic debate between capitalism and socialism as an economic model. This is also a social and political debate as to what should be done with the money generated. These countries' living standards rose through an acceptance of interventionalist policies relating to social issues including education, health and employment
robmunro1989 3 years ago
I repeat myself, if you read the question, you'd realise that is not remotely an answer
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Sorry, repeated myself. I meant to copy and paste this - In response to living standards in Britain - living standards have rose dramatically under 11 years of Labour rule. Labour have delivered the lowest inflation, lowest unemployment, lowest interest rates in our country's history - have managed the strongest growth of any major industrial economy, that as a result of that has delivered record investment in the NHS
robmunro1989 3 years ago
I too am getting tired of you constantly using the fact that I havent answered supposed questions as a retort
robmunro1989 3 years ago
I do propose that we end this debate, and agree to disagree. We're both of extremely different persuasions and are never going to agree or accept any statement the other makes. Furthermore, I'm not interested in having "the last laugh" so any comment of that persuasion is not going to bother me a bit
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Because you haven't
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Allegedly. I have, whether you value it as an answer or disagree with its quality is another issue altogether. I'm tired of saying the same thing over again. Please, lets go our separate ways
robmunro1989 3 years ago
I'm sorry, but when I come across some wealth I welcome the fact that I will be required to redistribute that wealth as a member of society
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Why should I bother with someone as pathetic as you if you don't even answer my questions?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Look, I've responded to every statement you made today and have made an effort to ensure I have responded to every point you made in the last few days - there are so many from both sides (and I must admit you have failed to respond to some of mine). Nonetheless, I've tried to respond to as many points as I can, but as I said its hard to keep up with so many statements
robmunro1989 3 years ago
You haven't answered my question on wealth redistribution between the hard worker and the lazy worker. Or why poverty rates have fallen world wide over the last 400 years when capitalism was born. Or why Britain had the highest standards of living following Thatcher's reforms. You haven't answered the question on Denmark and how it was destroyed by socialism, and how it resorted to free market policies to regenerate itself.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Initially your statement was a worker and a drug user. I said - "You dont look at the individual as simply a "drug user". As a socialist, you take into account environmental circumstances, family background, educational opportunity, health and job prospects. Wealth distribution through taxation funds foundations set up by governments to help rehabilitate such individuals and re-create their lives"
robmunro1989 3 years ago
If you'd actually read the question, you'd see that ''reply'' was completely irrelevant
dragonlee90 3 years ago
It is relevant. Capitalism may have generated the wealth, but it was socialist-esque, interventionalist social policies that improved living conditions
robmunro1989 3 years ago 4
In answer to the 400 years question I said - "We must understand something here. This is not simply an economic debate between capitalism and socialism as an economic model. This is also a social and political debate as to what should be done with the money generated. These countries' living standards rose through an acceptance of interventionalist policies relating to social issues including education, health and employment"
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Again, capitalism isn't interventionist, it accepts individual liberty. So that answer again is completely irrelevent. It isn't even an answer. Interventionism arose with Marxism. 300 years of capitalism came before. So try again
dragonlee90 3 years ago
In response to living standards in Britain - living standards have rose dramatically under 11 years of Labour rule. Labour have delivered the lowest inflation, lowest unemployment, lowest interest rates in our country's history - have managed the strongest growth of any major industrial economy, that as a result of that has delivered record investment in the NHS
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Why should I continue with this if you are habitually refusing to answer my questions?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Statistics from the IMF...
In the last 20 years when dozens of economies have opened their markets
-Poverty has been reduced 12% across the world
-The number of people living on less than $1 a week has dropped 400,000,000
-Child Labour has dropped from 14% to 10%
-Literacy rates have risen 20%
All because of capitalism.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
And who dominates the IMF - the United States of America. If literacy levels are so much better, why does Britain have the worse primary school literacy levels in Europe, and why did a government study in America show that 23% of adult Americans were not "able to locate information in text", could not "make low-level inferences using printed materials", and were unable to "integrate easily identifiable pieces of information."
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Learning is our own responsibility. We can be taught anything in school, but it is up to the person to digest it and remember it, which is why UN and EU statistics are useless. ANSWER MY FUCKING QUESTIONS YOU BRAINDEAD IMP
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Well its easy for you to say that, because I trust you had the encouragement from home and stable economic circumstances that all in all creates a better learning experience. If someone is born into a tough, unsupportive family, what encouragement does that individual have to learn and to attempt to gain the most out of their education?
robmunro1989 3 years ago
I was born into a divorced household to a mum battered by my dad. We lived in hostels for a few years. So don't make the pathetic assumption I have been pampered. I am where I am because I made the conscious decision to work hard. If people don't take that decision, then they should feel the consequences.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Fair enough, I apologise for misjudging you and am truly sorry for the circumstances you were born into.
robmunro1989 3 years ago
I don't want apologies, I just want answers, or I see no point in me continuing this
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Why don't you answer my questions?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Now answer my questions
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Why do you refuse to answer the questions?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
I have answered your questions - stop using it as part of the debate
robmunro1989 3 years ago
If you are this comitted to not answering my questions, why should I further waste my time with you. You obviously have no clue of history, and what statistics show. You don't answer questions. And you base things on hypothesis and what you think should happen, instead of basing it on what has happened
dragonlee90 3 years ago
How can I answer questions when you keep coming back with further points? I have answered everything so far
robmunro1989 3 years ago
No you haven't
dragonlee90 3 years ago
You dont look at the individual as simply a "drug user". As a socialist, you take into account environmental circumstances, family background, educational opportunity, health and job prospects. Wealth distribution through taxation funds foundations set up by governments to help rehabilitate such individuals and re-create their lives
robmunro1989 3 years ago
READ THE QUESTION
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Again I ask, why, when capitalism was born 400 years ago, have standards of living risen in all European countries that implemented it. WHy have death rates fallen?
Why haven't you answered my question on the redistribution between the hard worker and the drug user?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
We must understand something here. This is not simply an economic debate between capitalism and socialism as an economic model. This is also a social and political debate as to what should be done with the money generated. These countries' living standards rose through an acceptance of interventionalist policies relating to social issues including education, health and employment
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Like I have said repeatedly, when Denmark adopted interventionist policies... the country was crippled, poverty rose as did unemployment... I have asked you this question before but you have repeatedly failed to answer.
Don't even call this a debate... you just answer questions you are comfortable with, and conveniently miss the difficult ones. You are a champaigne socialist.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Essentially, this comes down to an issue of compassion and willingness to help. You dont see it necessary to help others who are less fortunate, I do.
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Philanthropy again you fool... it is called democracy, you choose to help. Those that can help themselves but refuse to get a job should suffer. If a disabled person can work, a fit and healthy person has no right to sit on their arse and do nothing, and claim benefit
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Please stop calling me a fool, I'm simply in disagreement with your views. The majority of people living on incapacity benefit and unemployment benefit really are incapacitated and unemployed - there are examples of manipulation of the system by individuals, yes i agree, but please dont use the examples to justify it as the common scenario
robmunro1989 3 years ago
The government have estimated 80% of those on incapacity benefit can work... that is around 5,000,000 people
dragonlee90 3 years ago
That is an over-exaggerated claim - state your sources
robmunro1989 3 years ago
What claim?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
80% falsely claiming incapacity benefit
robmunro1989 3 years ago
It was in the Sunday Times, and the government admitted on Newsnight.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
The government also said there were weopens of mass destruction in Iraq
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Why don't you answer my questions you pathetic little pillock?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
This goes back to what I said all along concerning Philanthropy, and thats the issue of the post-modern realities of human nature. Most people are not prepared to donate money for charitable causes - therefore it is up to the state to intervene and tax people to ensure things get done.
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Bill Gates has just given his fortune away to needy children in Africa. A survey conducted recently suggests 7/10 people give to charity regurlarly, myself included. Most millionaires are charitable figures.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
If the rich regularly donated, then why does the richest 2% own 80% of the worlds wealth :S
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Because it is incredibly hard to start a sucessful business and keep it sucessful. Then they become rich. Only a tiny minority of people are going to put in that work. Look at it this way, if Bill Gates walked into a bar full of millionaires, you can still say he owns 95% of the wealth in that room. America is only 5% of the world population, but they produce most of the world's wealth.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
What a sad, horrible person you are. So they're the rich ones because their the only ones prepared to put in the effort? What about their workers who put in the labour to make the company what it is?
robmunro1989 3 years ago
A contract exists between a worker and the business owner(s). They do their work, and the owner does the rest. If the worker dosen't like it, they can leave. In socialist countries, they don't have this choice. Now answer my questions you pathetic little pillock
dragonlee90 3 years ago
And the company also has shares, which means the worker can by some. In nationalised companies, there isn't this option.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
A contract exists between the worker and the business owner, yes. However, a healthy business is one with happy workers - therefore the owner is under an obligation to ensure good working conditions, sufficient pay and to uphold basic workers' rights
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Which is available in a free market. In your rarified world, workers are oppressed. If you actually looked deeper at the truth instead of living in a lier's wet dream, you'd see this. A company needs workers, therefore it will offer attractive wage packets and conditions to attract the best workers. It is in communist states e.g. Korea, Cuba etc that workers are oppressed. Can you name me a capitalist country where workers are oppressed? And can you answer the other four questions too?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Are you adding new questions to the list that arent even there? First its 2, now its 4 - make your mind up. If workers are oppressed in Cuba then why are 99% employed and 99% of the population above the poverty line? Capitalist countries employ their workers from abroad thats why - you dont look at workers in capitalist countries, you look at workers in the sweatshops and factories in China, Indonesia etc
robmunro1989 3 years ago
It was always 4 questions, there are just more now that you are refusing to answer, whereas I have answered all of yours.
Millions in Cuba are living in poverty. Why do millions flee each year if it is such a good place to live?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
First off millions do not flee each year, otherwise there would be noone left. However, a large amount leave each year because the United States are succeeding in their attempts to squeeze and suffocate Cuba into submission. I dont understand - firstly you praise China for its embrace of capitalism (an economic theory that rapidly reduces poverty levels) yet you state that poverty is so high because of the Communist regime. A Communist regime that embraces free market economics, hmmm?
robmunro1989 3 years ago
If you actually read what I have wrote, you'd see I wrote that poverty is still high because of Maoist policies, but since they have liberalised their economy, poverty is dropping quickly, but there is still a very long way to go. I have wrote that repeatedly. Answer my questions now boy
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Stop fucking telling me to answer questions that I already have answered and questions that you are persistently adding to with more statements!
robmunro1989 3 years ago
There are 4 questions you have left unanswered... so ANSWER THEM you prick
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Do you follow current affairs in China? The government has blown untold billions on the Olympics, whilst people starve on the streets. The pictures tell the story - ITN News broadcasted a story on it a few months ago. Poverty is low in China because the government has concentrated its economy on wild expansion plans and extravegant projects, whilst neglecting its people
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Millions live in poverty because Mao put them there. According to the statistics, poverty rates started to fall in the months and years following the opening of the markets and the lowering of taxes
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Like I said before, China is still operating under a communist regime, but they are becoming more liberalised. Poverty is falling in that country rapidly. Now, answer my questions pillock
dragonlee90 3 years ago
At the end of the day, in a modern world where individualism and free enterprise dominates, contemporary man is not prepared, through his own accord, to help his fellow man. Therefore, government is required to ensure that wealth is redistributed, namely through taxation
robmunro1989 3 years ago
So why is philanthropy so prevalent in our society then if man is not prepared to help each other? You really are an insufferable moron
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Philanthropy may be prevalent, but giving £2 a month to Oxfam isnt going to fund a national health service, a state education system, public transport and emergency services - get real dickhead
robmunro1989 3 years ago
So you think Oxfam is the only charity?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
What a silly statement, I'm using Oxfam as an example. Philanthropy may be prevalent, but the quantity of the donation is another question. And 7/10 people are not millionaires. Taxation is the most effective way of ensuring that wealth is redistributed
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Wealth shouldn't be redistributed, that's the point. 7/10 are not millionaires, but 7/10 people giving money away creates a significant amount. So, answer my questions prick
dragonlee90 3 years ago
No socialist PM ever let the working classes by their homes at 60% discount did they? No socialist PM ever gave people the right to buy shares in companies, thus moving millions into the middle classes once the businesses boomed. No socialist PM increased trade thus lowering the price of everything e.g. TV's, VHS, Music players, food, because socialists follow protectionist policies, limiting trade supply, thus increasing prices, and with high taxes, this lowers living standards
dragonlee90 3 years ago
4 questions still need answering boy
dragonlee90 3 years ago
There are so many replies its hard to keep up with points
robmunro1989 3 years ago
There are 3 questions from yesterday you have failed to answer
dragonlee90 3 years ago
We've filled up two pages in the space of 10 mins, all our comments are all over the place - state the questions and allow me to answer them
robmunro1989 3 years ago
You need to learn to read
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Thatcher was Britain's greatest PM. She tripled spending on the NHS, and everyone became better off because old industries were killed off and new ones were set up. Unemployment was a by product of modernisation. And after the strikes were over, unemployment dropped to 1,600,000.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Thatcher is a scorn on the history of the United Kingdom. She is a heartless bitch, and an oxygen stealer. Rest assured, I will be there in Parliament Square heckling her coffin when she passes into Westminster Abbey. She destroyed the lives of millions. Furthermore, she is a war criminal for her actions in the Falklands War, notably with the sinking of the Belgrano
robmunro1989 3 years ago
The Argies invaded the Falklands... what about the three ships the Argies sunk? What about the Belgrano general admitting that the ship was about to attack? Thatcher was the greatest PM this coutry ever had. Taxes were lowered for all. We had the highest living standards in Europe because of her. Old and dead industries were cut off, thus liberating the public spending budget from pointless spending.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
I'm not questioning the reasons we went to war, I support the war. However, there is no question the Belgrano was retreating and leaving the exclusion zone - this was an immediate response to the warning giving by the British fleet
robmunro1989 3 years ago
The General of the Belgrano itself disagrees... how'd you explain that one?
dragonlee90 3 years ago
What are you talking about? The Belgrano was not in a position to attack when she was sunk, she was not facing the British fleet and was turning away from the inner levels of the exclusion zone - this is fact
robmunro1989 3 years ago
So why does the General of the Belgrano say it was going into position to strike? IT IS WAR, you don't take chances.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
The Belgrano made it clear it was not in a position to strike. If it was going to move into a position to strike it would not turn around and proceed to leave the exclusion zone. You cant fire at a fleet with your back turned. Even in war, there are rules - in this case the rule was the exclusion zone. The British fleet warned the Belgrano and gave it the opportunity to retreat - to which it responded by doing so. Thatcher gave the order despite British Admirals ensuring her it was retreating
robmunro1989 3 years ago
The General of the Belgrano himself said the sinking was justified as they were preparing a strike. Look it up
dragonlee90 3 years ago
55% is nowhere near enough! American life expectancy is a year shorter than the overall figure of Western Europe and 4 years shorter than that of Norway. Over the past two decades, the country's rank in life expectancy has dropped from 11th to 42nd place in the world. The infant mortality rate of 6.37 per thousand likewise places the United States 42nd out of 221 countries, behind all of Western Europe
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Because they are all fat bastards
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Deep point
robmunro1989 3 years ago
66% because they have the choice to eat what they want, not what the state forces them to eat
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Whats your problem with state intervention? It was good enough for Plato, and its good enough for me
robmunro1989 3 years ago
The state should let people live their lives how they want. The state should only intervene with people who cannot possibly work e.g. disabled. Those who can and refuse to work should be left alone to suffer for the consequences of their laziness. There are people in third world countries who want to work but their governments are so corrupt their is no money left and they starve to death. People in rich Western countries have no excuse
dragonlee90 3 years ago
So when Bush can overhaul the health and education systems improving them massively whilst lowering taxes, whereas Castro taxes his population to the limits, there's the difference. I notice 4 questions of mine have gone unanswered
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Who presents the resolutions to the UN condemning Cuba for its human rights record? The United States of America
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Now lets look at the USA - the leading light for capitalism, an economic theory you claimed to be the fairest for people. No universal healthcare and a rediculously expensive private healthcare system, unemployment 5%, 12% under poverty line and roughly 40% falling below the poverty line at some time within a 10 year time span, national debt $9.2 trillion, The United Nations Development Programme Report 2006 on income equality ranks the United States as tied for 73rd out of 126 countries
robmunro1989 3 years ago
55% of American healthcare is free. The American population is significantly larger than Cuba's. The UN development index is a sham. It measures child literacy rates and divorce rates instead of actual measures of human living standards. If you checked say the BM index, you'd see Americans have twice the living standard of the Scandinavian countries. 5,000,000 Americans are illegal aliens, 6,000,000 less than the entire population of Cuba
dragonlee90 3 years ago
If you want to continue to use examples of capitalist countries, I refer you again to Cuba. Free education (including higher education), free healthcare, unemployment is just over 1%, population living below the poverty line 1%, 78% of industry is nationalised, according to the WHO life expectancy and infant mortality rates in Cuba have been comparable to Western industrialized countries, Cuba spends twice as more on public health than the Latin American average, even more than Brazil
robmunro1989 3 years ago
All education in all countries is paid for by the taxpayer... it is not free. If you actually looked at the actual country instead of glorified opinion, you'd see millions live in absolute poverty in Cuba, whilst Castro has a hundred million dollar fortune. What's the point of having free healthcare if you are already dead before claiming it.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
1% of Cubans live below the poverty line, this is because of free healthcare, state education and job opportunities
robmunro1989 3 years ago
I also note that you have left several of my questions unanswered. Quite pitiful.
dragonlee90 3 years ago
Furthermore, inflation in Cuba stands at 3.6% compared to the US's 5%
robmunro1989 3 years ago
Cuba has one of the worst human rights records. And it's economy is subsidised by terrorist nations who oppress their people. That have a massive tax burden, and millions have been murdered for standing up to the regime. Why do millions and millions leave if it is such a nice place to leave? They don't have a vote, and tehy have only recently been allowed to use the internet, and even that is monitored.
dragonlee90 3 years ago