neepsendlane Posted November 19, 2012 Author Share Posted November 19, 2012 They can make their countries what they wish - all they need to do is learn to work and plan and provide for themselves as Europeans have done for thousands of years. You seem to have a very limited idea of European history , Perhaps you have not heard about the starving millions in early 1900's Russia. or the famine in Ireland and Spain, or perhaps the 1930's depression in England. All these events lead to revolution and World war. And today history is repeating its self in Europe. All this not thousands of years ago but less than one hundred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 You seem to have a very limited idea of European history , Perhaps you have not heard about the starving millions in early 1900's Russia. or the famine in Ireland and Spain, or perhaps the 1930's depression in England. All these events lead to revolution and World war. And today history is repeating its self in Europe. All this not thousands of years ago but less than one hundred. You don't say! A few dips on the graph, that's all - at least I don't have a limited idea of perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 They can make their countries what they wish - all they need to do is learn to work and plan and provide for themselves as Europeans have done for thousands of years. OK. Let's look at India as an example. They have wealth and resources, they have towering modern cities, top universities, the atomic bomb and a space programme, as well as more millionaires per capita than any other country. They are also a democracy. They also have low levels of literacy, short life expectancy, non existant healthcare for the poor, and people living in rubbish tips and shanty towns, and many dying of malnutrition and disease from poor water. How can this second group 'make their country what they wish?' How can they make their politicians put in place the basics of life so that they at least have a chance? Even those that have a job live and work in appalling conditions so that we can have cheap goods. The rich are not going to give up any of their wealth willingly, or pay higher taxes to make it happen. Politicians are not going to anger their 'wealthmakers' by demanding more from them. But neither do they have the money from taxes to do it alone. When we were at a similar point in our past we had a number of philanthropists, reformers and devout Christians that were willing to put their money where their mouth is and push for change, but in our modern world this seems to have changed. It seems to be every man for himself You don't seem to realise that this sort of difference between rich and poor could happen here unless we protect the rights that we have, yet politicians are using any excuse to try and strip them from us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 I notice your quote from Churchill at the end of your post, I wonder if he made this when he was turning the troops onto striking miners. Men by the way who's family's in the food chain were starving. When did he do that? Tuesday 8th Nov 1910. Hi Conrod. I noticed you ignored the response there. Any comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 I suspect society was more tranquil and easily managed when people could just accept their place in the food chain. When was this utopian time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 We are about to enter a period of diminishing resources. We can either fight for them, or agree to share them. There is enough for all, as long as no one is too greedy. 25% of the world's population use 4/5ths of the world's resources [LINK] Oddly enough I was watching an old episode of Horizon on YouTube yesterday that made the same claim. The problem is that people don't voluntarily give up their comfortable lifestyles. If everything was shared out equally, we'd probably end up at the level of a low paid Indian worker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 OK. Let's look at India as an example. They have wealth and resources, they have towering modern cities, top universities, the atomic bomb and a space programme, as well as more millionaires per capita than any other country. They are also a democracy. They also have low levels of literacy, short life expectancy, non existant healthcare for the poor, and people living in rubbish tips and shanty towns, and many dying of malnutrition and disease from poor water. How can this second group 'make their country what they wish?' How can they make their politicians put in place the basics of life so that they at least have a chance? Even those that have a job live and work in appalling conditions so that we can have cheap goods. The rich are not going to give up any of their wealth willingly, or pay higher taxes to make it happen. Politicians are not going to anger their 'wealthmakers' by demanding more from them. But neither do they have the money from taxes to do it alone. When we were at a similar point in our past we had a number of philanthropists, reformers and devout Christians that were willing to put their money where their mouth is and push for change, but in our modern world this seems to have changed. It seems to be every man for himself You don't seem to realise that this sort of difference between rich and poor could happen here unless we protect the rights that we have, yet politicians are using any excuse to try and strip them from us. That's life, there are winners and losers. There's no point fretting about it, just make the most of your own opportunities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Hi Conrod. I noticed you ignored the response there. Any comments? I asked question and received an answer, neepsend didn't ask me a question, so there was no response ignored. What's to comment on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S10mainly Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Tuesday 8th Nov 1910. And then 60 years later Thatcher turned the police onto striking miners in Sheffield, brilliant in't it. Still we are all in it together. Are we not. Tonypandy Riots When the local Constabulary asked for outside support to maintain public order, and the Lancashire Fusliers were dispatched to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Also sounds like a tax loophole to me. Yes it's a tax loophole, but it's a legal one. I'm guessing that successive governments have chosen to turn a blind eye to it in order not to break up the big country homes and estates. The alternative would have been for someone like the National Trust to run the stately homes and estates, but why would that be preferable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.