poppet2 Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 The Tories have always been the party for the inherited wealth brigade. Cameron is a puppet of the said wealthy landowners and greedy bankers. Cameron does their dirty work in as covert way as he can. He is dismantling the NHS piece by piece at the moment to give to his cronies. The tories would never get elected if only true tories voted for them (ie the super rich with inherited wealth.) Unfortunately however there are some pretend tories who attach themselves to the party and vote for them because they are not very intelligent. But what Thatcher did was very clever. She appealed to the human instinct of greed, which sets the old adage of divide and rule amongst the workers. The working class thought twice about going on strike when they had a mortgage round their neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWOL Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 But what Thatcher did was very clever. She appealed to the human instinct of greed, which sets the old adage of divide and rule amongst the workers. The working class thought twice about going on strike when they had a mortgage round their neck. Hitler was also clever in what he did. It did not make him right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 The pretend tories are out in force this evening. To be fair, they are just further demonstrating what everyone knows about them anyway. I'd expect no less from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Pretty pointless OP IMO, everyone knows what the tories are like, we've seen it enough times before. I mean, look at the posts of some of the supposedly tory supporters on here and anyone can clearly see what they're like. Yeah, they answer the points put to them and go to great lengths to prove the validity of their point. Shame the same can't be said for you where you scuttle away when proven wrong to allow the thread to drop down the list. Remember this one for example? http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9114355&postcount=192 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Yeah, they answer the points put to them and go to great lengths to prove the validity of their point. Shame the same can't be said for you where you scuttle away when proven wrong to allow the thread to drop down the list. Remember this one for example? http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9114355&postcount=192 and queue the personal attacks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 and queue the personal attacks What "attack", pointing out the truth? You do it on loads of threads and run away when you're proven wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mort Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 The bickering can stop now or i can issue bans your choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Don't have a council house, haven't since I lived on the Badger. I rent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 It's not an either/or situation. All advanced economies have a blend of capitalism and socialism. There are no advanced pure capitalist [edit] economies and no advanced pure socialist economies. You could try and argue that more socialist policies lead to weaker economies but then you'd have to explain why the Scandanavian economies manage to blend high taxes and solid social provision with incredibly free markets and high levels of entrepreneurial activity. Unfortuntely the ability to attempt to distill everything into simple black/white terms is a major flaw in conservative thinking. Nearly every policy suffers from it. Except they don't. The Swedish market is not as free as the UK, or the USA for example, and they tried to defend their Swedish model of welfare in the 1990's and ended up with something like 500% interest rates (which makes the UK's 12% base rate look somewhat tame...). The tax take has been dropping a lot recently and so has their social welfare provision. This has been ongoing more or less since the 1990's and they still have persistantly high unemployment, especially amongst young people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Except they don't. The Swedish market is not as free as the UK, or the USA for example, and they tried to defend their Swedish model of welfare in the 1990's and ended up with something like 500% interest rates (which makes the UK's 12% base rate look somewhat tame...). The tax take has been dropping a lot recently and so has their social welfare provision. This has been ongoing more or less since the 1990's and they still have persistantly high unemployment, especially amongst young people. They did that to prevent a devaluation of the currency when it was under attack. For three days. They now have free markets, high taxes and solid social provision. How do you explain the social element of it? The success of the past 20 years? To me countries like Sweden have the best of both worlds. They have free markets, I would say more free than ours now, and they have solid social provision where the private sector can work in partnership with the state rather than trying to replace the state. Norway is an even better example though. I see you ignored it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.