Season › 2011-12 › News
Everton to open Free School
, 15 November,
359comments | Jump to most recent
Everton in the Community have been granted permission (and funds!) by the government to open a Free School — the only one in the Premier League.
Quotes or other material sourced from Liverpool Echo
Reader Comments (359)
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
Jordan Beagle
2 Posted 15/11/2011 at 07:40:55
2 Posted 15/11/2011 at 07:40:55
Perhaps our skint Chairman can finally get some Maths and Accountancy lessons
Andrew Flanagan
3 Posted 15/11/2011 at 07:44:11
3 Posted 15/11/2011 at 07:44:11
David #1, great response. The truth is Everton are now going to be directly responsible for creaming money and brighter students away from other schools in the local education authority, some of which are the most deprived in and challenging in the country. Its fantastic that we have such a presence in the local community but this is a morally misguided step too far
Marc Williams
4 Posted 15/11/2011 at 07:46:04
4 Posted 15/11/2011 at 07:46:04
Just checked the proposed timetable.
Mr B Kenwright is down for a detention where he must right out 'I must not lie' 1000 times.
He'd told Miss that he'd been working on his Sales & Marketing NVQ project, 'How to find investment in modern sports businesses' 24/7, but then never handed it in.
Mr T Ross is also in detention after alledgedly calling his customers "CU^7$" during a Communication & Media Studies role play session.
Mr B Elstone & Mr D Moyes are both down for daily double maths. Apparently Bob couldn't work out how many bricks it would take to build a wall whilst young Davey just can't see that 4-5-1 just doesn't add up anymore.
Mr B Kenwright is down for a detention where he must right out 'I must not lie' 1000 times.
He'd told Miss that he'd been working on his Sales & Marketing NVQ project, 'How to find investment in modern sports businesses' 24/7, but then never handed it in.
Mr T Ross is also in detention after alledgedly calling his customers "CU^7$" during a Communication & Media Studies role play session.
Mr B Elstone & Mr D Moyes are both down for daily double maths. Apparently Bob couldn't work out how many bricks it would take to build a wall whilst young Davey just can't see that 4-5-1 just doesn't add up anymore.
Steve Guy
5 Posted 15/11/2011 at 08:02:50
5 Posted 15/11/2011 at 08:02:50
Davis W... "with a fan base largely against the Tories" ? err how do you know? By all means express your opinion but don't make statements like this unless you can back it up?
Shaun Sparke
6 Posted 15/11/2011 at 07:55:59
6 Posted 15/11/2011 at 07:55:59
Andrew, putting Davids political viewpoint aside. It is my understanding that the pupils who will be targeted are those aged between 14 and 19 who will be taught new skills that are not currently being provided under the educationally restricting national curriculum. I don?t think the intention is to cream off the brighter students but rather to assist local children that are not doing so well in state education.
Chris Matheson
7 Posted 15/11/2011 at 08:09:49
7 Posted 15/11/2011 at 08:09:49
Steve you make a fair point - but personally I am with Dave 100%.
Anyway here's my question: if Kenwright and his pals can't even run a football club, how the fyook do they think they will be able to run a school successfully?
Anyway here's my question: if Kenwright and his pals can't even run a football club, how the fyook do they think they will be able to run a school successfully?
Paul Cook
8 Posted 15/11/2011 at 08:24:41
8 Posted 15/11/2011 at 08:24:41
Spot on David Woolrich. Free schools are a nasty little policy from this nasty little Tory government. Everton should have nothing to do with the privatisation of our state education system.
Steve Guy, there haven't been any surveys on the political leaning of Everton fans, that's true. However, most Everton fans live in close proximity to the ground. This is area is solid Labour so it's not unreasonable to think most match-going Blue don't vote Tory.
Steve Guy, there haven't been any surveys on the political leaning of Everton fans, that's true. However, most Everton fans live in close proximity to the ground. This is area is solid Labour so it's not unreasonable to think most match-going Blue don't vote Tory.
Chris Robinson
9 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:08:02
9 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:08:02
It's an odd one this. I would ordinarily be against Free Schools on principle, taking much-needed funding away from the state sector schools. I would also expect the Labour Party to oppose them but, according to the Echo, it has the backing of Nick Smalls, the Labour Council's Cabinet Member for Employment, Enterprise and Skills.
Maybe EITC's school will offer something not available to a certain type of pupil in the state sector? Without knowing the full details, it's hard to judge.
Maybe EITC's school will offer something not available to a certain type of pupil in the state sector? Without knowing the full details, it's hard to judge.
Steve Guy
10 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:13:40
10 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:13:40
Paul,
"However, most Everton fans live in close proximity to the ground. This is area is solid Labour so it's not unreasonable to think most match-going Blue don't vote Tory"
Another massive generalisation followed by another dodgy piece of logic. How on earth can you substantiate that comment?
"However, most Everton fans live in close proximity to the ground. This is area is solid Labour so it's not unreasonable to think most match-going Blue don't vote Tory"
Another massive generalisation followed by another dodgy piece of logic. How on earth can you substantiate that comment?
Geoff Trenner
11 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:10:18
11 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:10:18
I'm not altogether sure that this is the right forum for what is becoming a political debate. That said, I'll have my say anyway.
I'm a Tory voting Evertonian, admittedly living 200 miles from Goodison but I get there as often as I can. I support Free Schools purely on the basis that they increase choice for parents & the current system isn't working. Our schools are churning out hordes of (at best) semi-literate morons. I know as I recruit a lot of people in entry level jobs & I now favour East Europeans over British 'workers' as they are better able to communicate & express themselves.
Are you suggesting that companies in solidly Labour voting areas shouldn't apply for the Regional Growth Fund offered by this 'vicious government'? Grow up!
I'm a Tory voting Evertonian, admittedly living 200 miles from Goodison but I get there as often as I can. I support Free Schools purely on the basis that they increase choice for parents & the current system isn't working. Our schools are churning out hordes of (at best) semi-literate morons. I know as I recruit a lot of people in entry level jobs & I now favour East Europeans over British 'workers' as they are better able to communicate & express themselves.
Are you suggesting that companies in solidly Labour voting areas shouldn't apply for the Regional Growth Fund offered by this 'vicious government'? Grow up!
Andrew Flanagan
12 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:40:36
12 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:40:36
Geoff #10
"Our schools are churning out hordes of (at best) semi-literate morons"
What an insightful observation of the education system in this country. Are you Michael Gove by any chance?
"Our schools are churning out hordes of (at best) semi-literate morons"
What an insightful observation of the education system in this country. Are you Michael Gove by any chance?
Andrew Ellams
13 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:43:13
13 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:43:13
Steve @ 9, I think the results of several years of voting in both local and national elections goes a long way to substantiating Paul Cook's claims
Alastair Bates
14 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:34:05
14 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:34:05
Sometimes you, my fellow Evertonians, baffle me; in fact the entire city of Liverpool baffles me on Politics. I can never get a straight answer whenever I ask ?What has the Labour Party ever done for Liverpool??, for what I see whenever they are in power..errr NOTHING!
How some people can be so small minded that they think only Labour supporters can support our club, sorry, when was that written, because its not in my blood. EFC is however, and so, as I've grown up and studied Politics - as part of a Criminology Degree ? I realised I have more in common with the Conservative Party and Conservative Ideologies than I could imagine - perhaps some of you do to but are so stuck in the belief that the Labour party are all sunshine and the Conservatives are the devil.
If you can remember our chairman Bill Kenwright is also a financial backer of the Labour Party and made a big donation at the time of the Kirby Public Enquiry to try and influence the Secretary of States decision, luckily it didn't.
The Labour Party might have started the Hillsborough Independent Panel in 2009 (it met for the first time with the papers in 2010l) after being elected for 12 of the 13 years in power, why didn?t it happen sooner, say in 1998 or 1999, if they do so much for the city?
I'm with Geoff #10 on this, all for Free Schools, for me they are an important introduction for the community and gives competition to our state schools to improve and not stagnate (as our club is doing). Standing still and doing the same again and again brings standards down, we all have to be pushed to do better, and State Schools are only worried that these Free Schools will show them up, and subsequently the failings of some teachers who are allowed to stagnate!
We should be proud that EFC are actually doing something well, plenty of other Premier League clubs enquired and put forward proposals to open free schools and because of our clubs fantastic work in the communities, that often goes unrecognised, we have the amazing opportunity to influence the future of our city for the better.
COYB
How some people can be so small minded that they think only Labour supporters can support our club, sorry, when was that written, because its not in my blood. EFC is however, and so, as I've grown up and studied Politics - as part of a Criminology Degree ? I realised I have more in common with the Conservative Party and Conservative Ideologies than I could imagine - perhaps some of you do to but are so stuck in the belief that the Labour party are all sunshine and the Conservatives are the devil.
If you can remember our chairman Bill Kenwright is also a financial backer of the Labour Party and made a big donation at the time of the Kirby Public Enquiry to try and influence the Secretary of States decision, luckily it didn't.
The Labour Party might have started the Hillsborough Independent Panel in 2009 (it met for the first time with the papers in 2010l) after being elected for 12 of the 13 years in power, why didn?t it happen sooner, say in 1998 or 1999, if they do so much for the city?
I'm with Geoff #10 on this, all for Free Schools, for me they are an important introduction for the community and gives competition to our state schools to improve and not stagnate (as our club is doing). Standing still and doing the same again and again brings standards down, we all have to be pushed to do better, and State Schools are only worried that these Free Schools will show them up, and subsequently the failings of some teachers who are allowed to stagnate!
We should be proud that EFC are actually doing something well, plenty of other Premier League clubs enquired and put forward proposals to open free schools and because of our clubs fantastic work in the communities, that often goes unrecognised, we have the amazing opportunity to influence the future of our city for the better.
COYB
Ciarán McGlone
15 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:46:02
15 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:46:02
Post 1. Spot on. Everton becoming a conduit for a tory policy of outsourcing our public services on the cheap. Shocking.
Liu Weixian
16 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:46:45
16 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:46:45
Geoff, it so happens that I am looking for work. Fancy taking a chance on me?
Geoff Trenner
17 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:45:19
17 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:45:19
Andrew F #11. No I'm not Michael Gove but I do happen to think that he has the good of the education system at heart.
My insight is based, as I said above, on my real world experience of applicants for entry level jobs. Youngsters with apparently good GCSE passes in Maths & English who can't spell, use grammar or do basic mental arithmetic. If Free Schools can reduce the number of 'semi literate morons' then I'm all for it. What about you?
My insight is based, as I said above, on my real world experience of applicants for entry level jobs. Youngsters with apparently good GCSE passes in Maths & English who can't spell, use grammar or do basic mental arithmetic. If Free Schools can reduce the number of 'semi literate morons' then I'm all for it. What about you?
Andrew Flanagan
18 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:49:33
18 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:49:33
Alastair Bates #14
The Tories have cut the Area Based Grant to Liverpool by 25%. That is a higher percentage than anywhere else in the country in a city that has more problems than a lot of places. Therefore, this city is far worse off under the Conservatives. I respect peoples political views but you are way off the mark on this one chief.
The Tories have cut the Area Based Grant to Liverpool by 25%. That is a higher percentage than anywhere else in the country in a city that has more problems than a lot of places. Therefore, this city is far worse off under the Conservatives. I respect peoples political views but you are way off the mark on this one chief.
Ciarán McGlone
19 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:50:52
19 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:50:52
Post 14. Hilarious. I wouldn't advocate lecturing people on here about the politics of education on the basis of your criminology degree. You may find yourself a little out of your depth. As the great rail privatisation showed, privatisation in vital services does not simply breed competition. It brings with it a whole raft of dangerous fiscal problems as a result of profit margins. If you want the education of children to be fundamentally driven by markets and shareholders then shame on you.
Geoff Trenner
20 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:01:37
20 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:01:37
Liu #16. If your CV comes across my desk it will receive the same consideration as any other.
Tony J Williams
21 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:56:46
21 Posted 15/11/2011 at 09:56:46
skoolin is like crap like innit n e way
Alastair Bates
22 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:00:40
22 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:00:40
Andrew #17 as a city Liverpool can't stay on the 'Take' all her life. Their has to become a point to 'stand on its own two feet' we overspent for years and have to rain back in spending somewhere and not every one will be happy with some of the decisions but they are necessary. I?d take the cut as an incentive to do better with the 75% remaining rather than wallow in the loss of 25%.
Remeber the what EFC would have done to be allowed to open a Free School;
Written a business case and plan, providing more in-depth detail about every aspect of their proposed school.
This includes its educational goals, thorough evidence of demand in the local area and specifications of the site.
All good things for the city of Liverpool and for the children of our future
Remeber the what EFC would have done to be allowed to open a Free School;
Written a business case and plan, providing more in-depth detail about every aspect of their proposed school.
This includes its educational goals, thorough evidence of demand in the local area and specifications of the site.
All good things for the city of Liverpool and for the children of our future
Geoff Trenner
23 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:08:11
23 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:08:11
Ciaran #19. If you are happy to accept that the current education system is the best we can do then shame on you. A policy is not automatically evil because it comes from the Tories any more than if it comes from Labour. If the people of Liverpool don't want a Free School then it will fail as it will be under-subscribed will it not? Let's wait & see whether they have the intelligence to put their childrens' education before political dogma.
Geoff Trenner
24 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:13:24
24 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:13:24
Tony #21. Did I interview you last week?
Alastair Bates
25 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:10:05
25 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:10:05
Ciarán #18
Nothing wrong with Rail Privatisation, I worked on our railway system for 11 years and it was fantastic, the people, the work, everything. The only way we would have the train stock we have today is because of privatisation, otherwise they might have all stopped!
Nothing wrong with Rail Privatisation, I worked on our railway system for 11 years and it was fantastic, the people, the work, everything. The only way we would have the train stock we have today is because of privatisation, otherwise they might have all stopped!
Gareth Prytherch
26 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:20:24
26 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:20:24
While you guys slog it out about your politics. It really is important before the Anti Bill gang get home from work that this is an Everton In The Community initiative which is a completely separate entity from the club and there is absolutely no pay off for the club beyond the PR.
It is also worth noting, whatever your beliefs about Free Schools, The Tories, Michael Gove or indeed any Torie voter that it is widely recognised that Everton In The Community is a leading light in Football in the Community.
Unfortunately in order to support the local children and young people and other marginalised groups chairities have to move with the times. Something people are hyper critical of the club for NOT doing all of the time.
It is also worth noting, whatever your beliefs about Free Schools, The Tories, Michael Gove or indeed any Torie voter that it is widely recognised that Everton In The Community is a leading light in Football in the Community.
Unfortunately in order to support the local children and young people and other marginalised groups chairities have to move with the times. Something people are hyper critical of the club for NOT doing all of the time.
Alastair Bates
27 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:22:15
27 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:22:15
I trust LCC will be backing the clubs push as they look to improve education standards in the City as the next challenge will be harder. EFC now needs support from the local authority to find a site.
As the Guardian put it; the process is deliberately designed to be independent of local councils but in many areas ? particularly where demand for free schools is greatest owing to educational under-performance or lack of school places ? the most suitable sites are owned by them.
As the Guardian put it; the process is deliberately designed to be independent of local councils but in many areas ? particularly where demand for free schools is greatest owing to educational under-performance or lack of school places ? the most suitable sites are owned by them.
Alastair Bates
28 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:28:22
28 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:28:22
Gareth #25 Nail Head Hit....
Puts #1 to shame......
Puts #1 to shame......
James McPherson
29 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:26:04
29 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:26:04
Michael Kenrick,
Given the existing level of rancour and division that exists on this site and given that this is a football and not a political website, can I ask why you are allowing this thread to continue?
Given the existing level of rancour and division that exists on this site and given that this is a football and not a political website, can I ask why you are allowing this thread to continue?
Phil Martin
30 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:31:16
30 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:31:16
Is this really the place for spouting Political allegiances?
Alastair Bates
31 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:29:53
31 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:29:53
Again the Guardian for you Labour Supporters;
'And it should be pointed out that political support and opposition has come from all parties. Many Labour and Lib Dem councillors have supported proposed schools, in spite of their parties' official scepticism; some Conservative authorities and councillors have been obstructive.
......compared with the real challenge that lies ahead. The new schools that open in the next few years have to deliver on the promises that they, and the government, have made for the policy. Parents have been told they will have a greater choice in the type of education their child receives, and that standards will rise as a result. Teachers have been told they have the opportunity to take control and make a real difference in their communities.'
Now tell me they won't be a good introduction?
'And it should be pointed out that political support and opposition has come from all parties. Many Labour and Lib Dem councillors have supported proposed schools, in spite of their parties' official scepticism; some Conservative authorities and councillors have been obstructive.
......compared with the real challenge that lies ahead. The new schools that open in the next few years have to deliver on the promises that they, and the government, have made for the policy. Parents have been told they will have a greater choice in the type of education their child receives, and that standards will rise as a result. Teachers have been told they have the opportunity to take control and make a real difference in their communities.'
Now tell me they won't be a good introduction?
Phil Martin
32 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:36:24
32 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:36:24
VOTE FOR PEDRO
Geoff Trenner
33 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:35:46
33 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:35:46
James#28. It makes a refreshing change from the 'we are crap' & 'play Bily in the hole' discussions.
As per my initial comment #10 this is probably not the right place for a political discussion but I've enjoyed it.
As per my initial comment #10 this is probably not the right place for a political discussion but I've enjoyed it.
Alastair Bates
34 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:42:26
34 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:42:26
Geoff #32 don?t forget the Moyes is a tactical disaster and Kenwright Out debates;
Certainly woke me up this morning...time for some proper work now though...
Certainly woke me up this morning...time for some proper work now though...
Geoff Trenner
35 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:50:05
35 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:50:05
Alastair#33. I have to confess that I wasn't expecting any support when I posted my first comment.
Right back to all those CVs!!
Right back to all those CVs!!
Tony J Williams
36 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:51:07
36 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:51:07
James, probably because it is Everton related and it actually quite interesting.......ermmmm Kenwrongs a gobshite and all that...ermmm...bum..
Vincent Steele
37 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:43:43
37 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:43:43
David#1 'They are designed to privatise education by the back door, reducing teachers' pay and conditions'
Reducing teachers pay and conditions? are you sure? or have you just made that up to have a rant?
Reducing teachers pay and conditions? are you sure? or have you just made that up to have a rant?
Ciarán McGlone
38 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:56:53
38 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:56:53
"Ciaran # 18. If you are happy to accept that the current education system is the best we can do then shame on you."
-------------------
Falsifying arguments to support ideological policy changes?
And who says the tories don't change!
-------------------
Falsifying arguments to support ideological policy changes?
And who says the tories don't change!
Alastair Bates
39 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:47:45
39 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:47:45
Andrew #17 - I did a little investigation on the Area Based Grants you mentioned:
For the Year 11-12 (revised June 2011) Liverpool tops the money received table!
1, Liverpool City Council 17.786
2, Manchester City Council 15.582
3, Greater London Authority 10.577
~
8, Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council 4.732
9, Burnley Borough Council 4.105
10, Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council 4.092
Surprising to me was in 21st Place is the second City;
21, Birmingham City Council 2.815
For the Year 11-12 (revised June 2011) Liverpool tops the money received table!
1, Liverpool City Council 17.786
2, Manchester City Council 15.582
3, Greater London Authority 10.577
~
8, Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council 4.732
9, Burnley Borough Council 4.105
10, Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council 4.092
Surprising to me was in 21st Place is the second City;
21, Birmingham City Council 2.815
Geoff Trenner
40 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:59:58
40 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:59:58
Ciaran#37. If I've read more into your earlier comment than you intended then I apologise. Perhaps you could now turn your attention to the salient point of my comment i.e. that
'If the people of Liverpool don't want a Free School then it will fail as it will be under-subscribed will it not? Let's wait & see whether they have the intelligence to put their childrens' education before political dogma.'
Any thoughts?
'If the people of Liverpool don't want a Free School then it will fail as it will be under-subscribed will it not? Let's wait & see whether they have the intelligence to put their childrens' education before political dogma.'
Any thoughts?
James McPherson
41 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:03:27
41 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:03:27
Geoff #32 /Tony #35
I appreciate that it is different to the normal hurly burly you get on this site and that may be welcomed by some. However, you just have to look at some of the vitriol "spouted" above to know that it is same old rancour over something that I regard as a very personal matter - unless of course you are on a political blog and this is your thing. There are plenty of them on the internet, as I am sure you know. Don't really come on to Toffeeweb for this as I do not see it as a political forum.
What next Catholics v Protestants?
I appreciate that it is different to the normal hurly burly you get on this site and that may be welcomed by some. However, you just have to look at some of the vitriol "spouted" above to know that it is same old rancour over something that I regard as a very personal matter - unless of course you are on a political blog and this is your thing. There are plenty of them on the internet, as I am sure you know. Don't really come on to Toffeeweb for this as I do not see it as a political forum.
What next Catholics v Protestants?
Tony J Williams
42 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:11:14
42 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:11:14
James, better yet, don't read it.
The vitriol will happen whether posters are taking about schools or how cack Bily is anyway.
I say go with the flow and log off afterwards and forget about it.
The vitriol will happen whether posters are taking about schools or how cack Bily is anyway.
I say go with the flow and log off afterwards and forget about it.
Derek Thomas
43 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:28:28
43 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:28:28
Nails colours to the mast in a couldn't give a shit if you don't like it manner..Football colour Blue...political colour...not red.
Anything that Everton do in a business / marketing / promotional way, that gets past 1st base, using the system(s) in place and actually comes to fruition has my vote.
This is not a big / key part of the Club's core business. But they seem to know what they are doing. Which is more than can be said for the people running the core sections of the Club...Eh Bill?
Maybe the Free School tail should be wagging the Footbal Club dog.
Anything that helps to reverse the 40 yrs or more of Leftie educationalist SHITE that has seen standards and discipline fall through the floor, again, has my vote, in spades
Most / some People of this City ( and else where ) need to stop being the political equivalent of bitter blues...and yes we know we have reasons ( I am as bitter as most blues ) and grow up politically, which for some might be an educational thing...maybe as a result of 40 yrs or more of leftie educational SHITE.
Ooooh a bit of politics missus
My name's Derek Thomas - Goodnight.
Anything that Everton do in a business / marketing / promotional way, that gets past 1st base, using the system(s) in place and actually comes to fruition has my vote.
This is not a big / key part of the Club's core business. But they seem to know what they are doing. Which is more than can be said for the people running the core sections of the Club...Eh Bill?
Maybe the Free School tail should be wagging the Footbal Club dog.
Anything that helps to reverse the 40 yrs or more of Leftie educationalist SHITE that has seen standards and discipline fall through the floor, again, has my vote, in spades
Most / some People of this City ( and else where ) need to stop being the political equivalent of bitter blues...and yes we know we have reasons ( I am as bitter as most blues ) and grow up politically, which for some might be an educational thing...maybe as a result of 40 yrs or more of leftie educational SHITE.
Ooooh a bit of politics missus
My name's Derek Thomas - Goodnight.
Geoff Trenner
44 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:11:18
44 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:11:18
James#40. Agreed, this is not the right place so I'll apologise for the second time today!
It's just that it's good to get other views on a topic that I consider to be far more important than whether Everton win on Saturday, are relegated or cease to exist altogether.
That said, I'm gone, no more comment.
Cheers all & coyb
It's just that it's good to get other views on a topic that I consider to be far more important than whether Everton win on Saturday, are relegated or cease to exist altogether.
That said, I'm gone, no more comment.
Cheers all & coyb
Nick Entwistle
45 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:10:04
45 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:10:04
These responses show exactly why democracy is set up not to work on the basis of divide and rule.
Fight the system! Or watch X-Factor...
Fight the system! Or watch X-Factor...
David Mathieson
46 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:56:23
46 Posted 15/11/2011 at 10:56:23
Torie voting woolybacks Geoff et al just eeeeeeeeeeeeee
Trevor Mackie
47 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:20:20
47 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:20:20
Trotsky was an evertonian.
Mike Allison
48 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:26:22
48 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:26:22
Couldn't read the full story as the link wouldn't open so maybe I'm missing the point. Why is this a political issue?
I've long thought we should open our own school so that we could train our academy kids more by building it into the curriculum, much as they do at Ajax. Isn't this the point of opening our own school?
If it isn't it should be and that would make it a great idea whichever bunch of self-serving career politicians had conned the electorate most recently.
I've long thought we should open our own school so that we could train our academy kids more by building it into the curriculum, much as they do at Ajax. Isn't this the point of opening our own school?
If it isn't it should be and that would make it a great idea whichever bunch of self-serving career politicians had conned the electorate most recently.
Andrew Flanagan
49 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:28:34
49 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:28:34
Alastair Bates #38
You are right in what you say. However the point I was making is that Liverpool ABG got cut by 25%. Compare this to other councils in the country and it is the most significant reduction as a % by far. My point being is that there is a reason Liverpool has money spent on it. The decline and neglect showed by mainly Conservative Governments in the 1970s, 80's and 90s has left major problems that have needed addressing, more so than other parts of the country.
You are right in what you say. However the point I was making is that Liverpool ABG got cut by 25%. Compare this to other councils in the country and it is the most significant reduction as a % by far. My point being is that there is a reason Liverpool has money spent on it. The decline and neglect showed by mainly Conservative Governments in the 1970s, 80's and 90s has left major problems that have needed addressing, more so than other parts of the country.
Tony J Williams
50 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:54:36
50 Posted 15/11/2011 at 11:54:36
It's all Thatcher's fault etc etc
Alastair Bates
51 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:06:31
51 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:06:31
We always go back to Thatcher, its as if Liverpool was full of Gold and was perfect till May 1979!
Alastair Bates
52 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:22:30
52 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:22:30
Andrew #48
You can only build on what?s gone before and how the system if left by the last incumbent thus before the 80?s & Thatcher 11 of the 15 years Labour set the foundations for the country and ultimately Liverpool
1964-70 Labour
1970-74 Conservative
1974-79 Labour
I agree that Liverpool needed and still needs money being spent on it as the local council didn't do much for decades. The same council, however still receives an awful lot more money that other equally deprived parts of the country and should set about utilising that money the best way it can rather than mulling over what it now hasn?t got.
You can only build on what?s gone before and how the system if left by the last incumbent thus before the 80?s & Thatcher 11 of the 15 years Labour set the foundations for the country and ultimately Liverpool
1964-70 Labour
1970-74 Conservative
1974-79 Labour
I agree that Liverpool needed and still needs money being spent on it as the local council didn't do much for decades. The same council, however still receives an awful lot more money that other equally deprived parts of the country and should set about utilising that money the best way it can rather than mulling over what it now hasn?t got.
Christine Foster
53 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:22:24
53 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:22:24
Alastair whilst l have learnt in life that one has to take opportunity when it comes along,, l also know the value of trust and integrity.
Children and parents must take advantage of every available opportunity when offered, no longer do we have realistic options such as grammar or secondary moderns, we have to deal with here and now.
That the clubs charity has the chance to make a difference should be applauded, the vehicle to do so may be driven by self righteous bigots but no matter, take the chance for the childrens sake.
But, it's sad that it has come to depend on charities for education, befitting to the Tories workhouses of the 19th century lest we forget.
But many of us have no wish to remember the arrogance of Tory dogma that tore the heart out of Liverpool for the creation of yuppies, greed and despair. Liverpool paid dearly for it's tradition roots, still does, so snide comments relating to a different era are unwelcome.
Lastly it's worth remembering that all those rights that many gave up liberty and life for, such as holiday pay, sick pay, a 40 hr week have been given away so cheaply with the arrogance of power.
Lest we forget indeed, we know better.
Children and parents must take advantage of every available opportunity when offered, no longer do we have realistic options such as grammar or secondary moderns, we have to deal with here and now.
That the clubs charity has the chance to make a difference should be applauded, the vehicle to do so may be driven by self righteous bigots but no matter, take the chance for the childrens sake.
But, it's sad that it has come to depend on charities for education, befitting to the Tories workhouses of the 19th century lest we forget.
But many of us have no wish to remember the arrogance of Tory dogma that tore the heart out of Liverpool for the creation of yuppies, greed and despair. Liverpool paid dearly for it's tradition roots, still does, so snide comments relating to a different era are unwelcome.
Lastly it's worth remembering that all those rights that many gave up liberty and life for, such as holiday pay, sick pay, a 40 hr week have been given away so cheaply with the arrogance of power.
Lest we forget indeed, we know better.
Robert Johnson
54 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:29:49
54 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:29:49
Personally i can't wait for Maggie Twatcher to die .That'll be some party eh ?.
Alan Rooney
55 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:51:22
55 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:51:22
I am proud to say I am true blue in footie and politics. I would never watch or vote red.
Geoff Trenner
56 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:55:13
56 Posted 15/11/2011 at 12:55:13
Robert#54. That my friend is way way beyond the pale. You may disagree with her politics but she was democratically elected with large majorities 3 times so a fair proportion of the populace (yes, including me) agreed with what she did. She is now a frail old lady so no threat or danger to anyone.
Noel Lynam
57 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:05:13
57 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:05:13
Bunch of Tory or Labour apologists, the lot of you. You ask who could do a better job than the governement or its opposition - I say Ian Holloway, Alan Pardew, Roberto Martinez, Gus Poyet, Joe Royle etc.
I have been saying since 2004 that the government will fail. But I get labelled a "government hater" while you all choose to bury your head in the sand, unlike me and the rest of the 0.02%.
I have given up on politics.
I have been saying since 2004 that the government will fail. But I get labelled a "government hater" while you all choose to bury your head in the sand, unlike me and the rest of the 0.02%.
I have given up on politics.
Tony Horne
58 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:05:23
58 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:05:23
"Free" schools are so called as they will be free of the National Curriculum which dictates what is to be taught and (largely) free from Ofsted inspectors who dictate how the curriculum is to be taught. In other words a con trick to blame existing schools (or rather the teachers working there) for the failures of successive governments' education policies.
For the people that run them, they will be a little bit like playing for Liverpool. The ref is always on your side. It is possible that they could be of some benefit for the pupils that go there.
For the people that run them, they will be a little bit like playing for Liverpool. The ref is always on your side. It is possible that they could be of some benefit for the pupils that go there.
Tony J Williams
59 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:37:33
59 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:37:33
Well in Noel, let's get this thread back on track to the status quo.....and I don't mean rocking all over the site
Ciarán McGlone
60 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:32:41
60 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:32:41
Ciaran#37. If I've read more into your earlier comment than you intended then I apologise. Perhaps you could now turn your attention to the salient point of my comment i.e. that
'If the people of Liverpool don't want a Free School then it will fail as it will be under-subscribed will it not? Let's wait & see whether they have the intelligence to put their childrens' education before political dogma.'
Any thoughts?
-----------------------
Yeah, i've a few...
Firstly, I find your pejorative assessment of those who may choose to avoid an education system founded on principles of the market and private industry - as rather tasteless. To imply that the people of Liverpool show a lack of intelligence if they do not support this system is typical tory hubris.
Secondly, i'm not sure the measure of a successful school is simply done on the basis of pupil head count. There are plenty of failing schools (mostly in the north of England, incidentally, that are full to breaking point).
Cuts in local authority budgets and central education captial spend will no doubt creation the situation that working class parents will have to send their kids to these schools - whether they agree with the politics or not (because you can be guaranteed that no middle class or upper class family will be sending their kids to get educated by a football club).
The education system is a social contract were the state has a duty of care to provide the best education it can. You want to bastardise that social contract by the introduction of factors such as competition, shareholders and profit margins. I think thats an absolute disgrace.
'If the people of Liverpool don't want a Free School then it will fail as it will be under-subscribed will it not? Let's wait & see whether they have the intelligence to put their childrens' education before political dogma.'
Any thoughts?
-----------------------
Yeah, i've a few...
Firstly, I find your pejorative assessment of those who may choose to avoid an education system founded on principles of the market and private industry - as rather tasteless. To imply that the people of Liverpool show a lack of intelligence if they do not support this system is typical tory hubris.
Secondly, i'm not sure the measure of a successful school is simply done on the basis of pupil head count. There are plenty of failing schools (mostly in the north of England, incidentally, that are full to breaking point).
Cuts in local authority budgets and central education captial spend will no doubt creation the situation that working class parents will have to send their kids to these schools - whether they agree with the politics or not (because you can be guaranteed that no middle class or upper class family will be sending their kids to get educated by a football club).
The education system is a social contract were the state has a duty of care to provide the best education it can. You want to bastardise that social contract by the introduction of factors such as competition, shareholders and profit margins. I think thats an absolute disgrace.
Nick Entwistle
61 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:36:52
61 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:36:52
Christine, you're a buffoon. I've been thinking if that's going too far, too personal. I decided its bang on fair comment. Wow, just wow. Some people shouldn't be allowed to vote on the basis of grand lunacy. Wow.
Robert Johnson
62 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:27:44
62 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:27:44
Geoff @56
Geoff, We all become frail and old at some point, but its what we did when we were fit and healthy that counts.
Twatcher (sorry Thatcher) declared war on this city while she was in power, and went about the destruction of the city of Liverpool in a way that would have made Adolf Hitler proud. But that's what the Tories do, if you don't agree with their policies, they don't try and win you round, they punish you!
I hazard a guess, Geoff, that you were not around this city during the Twatcher years, as if you were, then you may have a different opinion. However, if indeed you would like to debate this further, perhaps you could start with mentioning one thing (just one) that she did for the people of Liverpool.
Geoff, We all become frail and old at some point, but its what we did when we were fit and healthy that counts.
Twatcher (sorry Thatcher) declared war on this city while she was in power, and went about the destruction of the city of Liverpool in a way that would have made Adolf Hitler proud. But that's what the Tories do, if you don't agree with their policies, they don't try and win you round, they punish you!
I hazard a guess, Geoff, that you were not around this city during the Twatcher years, as if you were, then you may have a different opinion. However, if indeed you would like to debate this further, perhaps you could start with mentioning one thing (just one) that she did for the people of Liverpool.
Michael Kenrick
Editorial Team
63 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:55:58
Editorial Team
63 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:55:58
James, #29, I don't see any problem with the thread. Sorry.
Michael Kenrick
Editorial Team
64 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:59:03
Editorial Team
64 Posted 15/11/2011 at 13:59:03
James, #29, "...rancour and division on the site..."
Am I to conclude that we should only allow pleasant and unified comment threads about things on which we all agree?
I don't see any problem with the thread. Sorry.
Am I to conclude that we should only allow pleasant and unified comment threads about things on which we all agree?
I don't see any problem with the thread. Sorry.
Brian Harrison
65 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:11:26
65 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:11:26
I wonder if the school song before assembly will be "if you know your history"
Brian Denton
66 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:07:37
66 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:07:37
Nick Entwistle, can't decide if you're just being facetious in that response to Christine. I suspect you are. Fancy calling our Christine a 'buffoon' for what was a coherently - and widely shared - view of what is the Tories view of our city. And don't forget, if YOU come from Liverpool they will also think YOU are a self-pitying whiner.
I personally think that anybody who thinks that of me - and Christ knows they've let the guard slip enough times, see comments by Boris Johnson, treatment of the Hillsborough families etc - is hardly deserving of my respect, let alone support.
I personally think that anybody who thinks that of me - and Christ knows they've let the guard slip enough times, see comments by Boris Johnson, treatment of the Hillsborough families etc - is hardly deserving of my respect, let alone support.
Geoff Trenner
67 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:13:31
67 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:13:31
Ciaran#60. 'the state has a duty of care to provide the best education it can'
-----------------------------------
Spot on & at present many, many schools are failing to do this despite huge increases in spending under the previous profligate government. See my original post at #11. What I ( & I'm sure you) want to see is the best outcome for children. If Free Schools can provide this then surely we should support them. - after all, 'the state has a duty of care to provide the best education it can'
-----------------------------------
Spot on & at present many, many schools are failing to do this despite huge increases in spending under the previous profligate government. See my original post at #11. What I ( & I'm sure you) want to see is the best outcome for children. If Free Schools can provide this then surely we should support them. - after all, 'the state has a duty of care to provide the best education it can'
Geoff Trenner
68 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:29:15
68 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:29:15
Robert#62
You are absolutely right that I was not in Liverpool in the Thatcher years - indeed the only time I have ever visited is to go to Goodison.
What Thatcher did for Liverpool was exactly the same as what she did for the rest of the UK. She swept away the liberal consensus that the unions were all powerful & could not be confronted & made us competitive again as a nation. If Liverpool wasn't ready to be grown up about that & preferred to wallow in self pity then shame on the city.
You are absolutely right that I was not in Liverpool in the Thatcher years - indeed the only time I have ever visited is to go to Goodison.
What Thatcher did for Liverpool was exactly the same as what she did for the rest of the UK. She swept away the liberal consensus that the unions were all powerful & could not be confronted & made us competitive again as a nation. If Liverpool wasn't ready to be grown up about that & preferred to wallow in self pity then shame on the city.
Alastair Bates
69 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:37:12
69 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:37:12
Christine#53 Lest we forget indeed in this very week.
Unfortunatly it often needs a charity to direct government policy and change it for the better. And its those charity workers who dont recognise 40hr weeks or sick pay or holiday pay that can make the difference instead of those civil servants who say its 15:30 and im clocking off, whilst the rest of us work to make ends meet and progress in our work.
Unfortunatly it often needs a charity to direct government policy and change it for the better. And its those charity workers who dont recognise 40hr weeks or sick pay or holiday pay that can make the difference instead of those civil servants who say its 15:30 and im clocking off, whilst the rest of us work to make ends meet and progress in our work.
Geoff Trenner
70 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:47:19
70 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:47:19
Michael#63. Good call, this is the best discussion I've seen on TW for many a year!! Thank you Michael & all contributors
James McPherson
71 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:36:51
71 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:36:51
Michael,
I am sensing there was a fair amount of tongue in cheek there! That is your prerogative of course. For the record, I think one of the best aspects of this site is the diverse spectrum of opinion expressed on this site. Opinion that can divide, cause heated exchanges and unify. Potent mix don't you think?
My point was centred upon whether Toffeeweb is the appropriate place for this spectrum of debate to be broadened to incorporate the present government's education policy.
Clearly your view is yes to this. Although if we're honest with each other, you have closed threads before on the basis of relevancy.
Not sure whether the path of this debate has gone in the direction you envisaged - but hey that's Toffeeweb. It's not meant to be prescriptive.
However, when I see "Twatcher" - love her or loathe her (for the record I am the latter) - she is a frail old lady with Alzheimers, I am not enlightened, are you?
I am sensing there was a fair amount of tongue in cheek there! That is your prerogative of course. For the record, I think one of the best aspects of this site is the diverse spectrum of opinion expressed on this site. Opinion that can divide, cause heated exchanges and unify. Potent mix don't you think?
My point was centred upon whether Toffeeweb is the appropriate place for this spectrum of debate to be broadened to incorporate the present government's education policy.
Clearly your view is yes to this. Although if we're honest with each other, you have closed threads before on the basis of relevancy.
Not sure whether the path of this debate has gone in the direction you envisaged - but hey that's Toffeeweb. It's not meant to be prescriptive.
However, when I see "Twatcher" - love her or loathe her (for the record I am the latter) - she is a frail old lady with Alzheimers, I am not enlightened, are you?
James McPherson
72 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:53:45
72 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:53:45
Michael,
Further to Geoff #63 - well, what the hell do I know? That's a feather in your cap I suppose. "The best debate on Toffeeweb for years"...the rights and wrongs of the government's education policy!
I am sure it's no reflection on what is a football website.
Perhaps you should give the public what they want and formally branch out!
Coming soon, George Osborne's lack of plan B - well there is some synergy there!
Further to Geoff #63 - well, what the hell do I know? That's a feather in your cap I suppose. "The best debate on Toffeeweb for years"...the rights and wrongs of the government's education policy!
I am sure it's no reflection on what is a football website.
Perhaps you should give the public what they want and formally branch out!
Coming soon, George Osborne's lack of plan B - well there is some synergy there!
Nick Entwistle
73 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:31:58
73 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:31:58
The self pitying whiner tag, Brian, is a stereotype placed on the people of Liverpool. And rightly so. Terry Christian slipped it in during The Wright Stuff last week to much laughter. We all take the piss out of peoples and places, no one is left alone. So don't go losing it.
But what it is born from is a city who wear their heart on their sleeve, can stand up for themselves when a voice is all they have, and show a community ethic that is above all over cities in the UK.
I'm not from Liverpool, you'd probably want to call me a shandy drinking southerner. But the whiner tag is as warranted as any other around the country. Yet is underpinned by a unfortunately silent respect for the people of Liverpool.
Perhaps if the 'them against us' attitude of Scousers waned some, you wouldn't whine about being known as whiners. That's the funniest aspect of all.
As for Christine's post. She normally has something worthwhile to say. Not today. Just another person who in assigning herself a political position (tribe) and adopts it to her identity. Identity associates with ego. Ego doesn't like to be wronged. People then end up believing views ranging from the well considered to the moronic because they underline and strengthen your sense of right. Psychology 101.
Tribes fight off over who is right who is wrong. Divide and rule. Regardless who you vote for the government always get in. Victory for the establishment. Been that way since the Greeks invented democracy.
But what it is born from is a city who wear their heart on their sleeve, can stand up for themselves when a voice is all they have, and show a community ethic that is above all over cities in the UK.
I'm not from Liverpool, you'd probably want to call me a shandy drinking southerner. But the whiner tag is as warranted as any other around the country. Yet is underpinned by a unfortunately silent respect for the people of Liverpool.
Perhaps if the 'them against us' attitude of Scousers waned some, you wouldn't whine about being known as whiners. That's the funniest aspect of all.
As for Christine's post. She normally has something worthwhile to say. Not today. Just another person who in assigning herself a political position (tribe) and adopts it to her identity. Identity associates with ego. Ego doesn't like to be wronged. People then end up believing views ranging from the well considered to the moronic because they underline and strengthen your sense of right. Psychology 101.
Tribes fight off over who is right who is wrong. Divide and rule. Regardless who you vote for the government always get in. Victory for the establishment. Been that way since the Greeks invented democracy.
Alastair Bates
74 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:43:46
74 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:43:46
I was in Liverpool during the 80's (alas only as a child) but the decisions did effect my family and greater family, you learn adapt, change and prosper or moan, stand still and think you are owed something.
Put simply what happened, happened because an area becomes too reliant on one industry for employment, as the Welsh Valleys for Coal, Birmingham for Car Manufacturing even looking further back the cotton mills of Lancashire, or even the ship building on the river Thames!
Then when that industry falls behind the times (ie it becomes cheaper to build/make something somewhere else) it is not the fault of the industry to move, or to collapse if it then can?t compete on price because a ?powerful? union can?t see that without change it will seize to exist.
Put simply what happened, happened because an area becomes too reliant on one industry for employment, as the Welsh Valleys for Coal, Birmingham for Car Manufacturing even looking further back the cotton mills of Lancashire, or even the ship building on the river Thames!
Then when that industry falls behind the times (ie it becomes cheaper to build/make something somewhere else) it is not the fault of the industry to move, or to collapse if it then can?t compete on price because a ?powerful? union can?t see that without change it will seize to exist.
Geoff Trenner
75 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:02:34
75 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:02:34
James#72. Not that much synergy - Osborne & Cameron have more (potential) strikers than you could shake a stick at. It might be interesting discussing the relative strengths of the left & right wings though!
Tony Waring
76 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:08:53
76 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:08:53
It will be instructive to see how many graduate from this school who are capable of spelling their name and constructing a comprehensible sentence without spelling or grammatical mistakes !
Brian Denton
77 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:03:57
77 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:03:57
Hmm, Nick, stereotyping 'rightly' - a slippery slope there, don't you think. Where does it end? The thick Irishman, perhaps? Or the bogus asylum-seeker? Perhaps the scrounging job-seeker is more to your taste?
Some of my best friends are black.
Some of my best friends are black.
Alastair Bates
78 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:06:17
78 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:06:17
Nick #73 Hear, hear
And im from Liverpool....and Proud to be.
And im from Liverpool....and Proud to be.
James McPherson
79 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:08:14
79 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:08:14
Touche and fair comment Geoff.
If I was to draw a political parallell between politics and Everton, I am drawn inexorably to Neville Chamberlain (David Moyes) waving a piece of white paper, stating, to joyous relief, I have assurances from Herr Hitler (Kenwright)....
Before anybody goes off into the deep end...I am merely drawing an analogy of deceit...rather than a comparative around acts of inhuman and barbaric atrocity. Perspective and all that....
If I was to draw a political parallell between politics and Everton, I am drawn inexorably to Neville Chamberlain (David Moyes) waving a piece of white paper, stating, to joyous relief, I have assurances from Herr Hitler (Kenwright)....
Before anybody goes off into the deep end...I am merely drawing an analogy of deceit...rather than a comparative around acts of inhuman and barbaric atrocity. Perspective and all that....
Gareth Prytherch
80 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:09:36
80 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:09:36
Geoff #68 I think you really need to do some research on what the Thatcher Government did. And if you still think that she did the same things all over the country you're either reading the wrong books or don't really give a shit.
Gavin Ramejkis
81 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:04:52
81 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:04:52
Geoff that has to be line of the year - "She swept away the liberal consensus that the unions were all powerful & could not be confronted & made us competitive again as a nation" as opposed to a modern day fascist who single handed dismantled this nation's ability as a manufacturer and heavy industries and re-invented it into a country of service desks and bankers. She ordered mounted police to baton charge miners who were intent on nothing more than trying to secure their livelihoods and homes for their families. She was a jumped up shopkeepers daughter, you know those that manufacture nothing themselves and sell other peoples wares.
Well, we all know service desks are ten a penny and cheaper offshore and the banking industry - well we ALL know where that has gotten us. As for manufacturing and export take a quick glance at the growing nation of China, produces a lot of goods so much it has to export many of them making it an extremely cash rich nation so much so that the Euro clowns who think throwing trillions of tax payers money at a dying system can save it have gone cap in hand to them looking for loans.
And you still think Thatcher was good for this country? She is an utter disgrace of a human being and will forever be held in contempt by many. No doubt she also be looking for a handout for a state funeral, she can whistle.
Well, we all know service desks are ten a penny and cheaper offshore and the banking industry - well we ALL know where that has gotten us. As for manufacturing and export take a quick glance at the growing nation of China, produces a lot of goods so much it has to export many of them making it an extremely cash rich nation so much so that the Euro clowns who think throwing trillions of tax payers money at a dying system can save it have gone cap in hand to them looking for loans.
And you still think Thatcher was good for this country? She is an utter disgrace of a human being and will forever be held in contempt by many. No doubt she also be looking for a handout for a state funeral, she can whistle.
Sam Morrison
82 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:02:31
82 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:02:31
Geoff (62) I find it hard to believe you are celebrating the emasculation of the unions - organisations that stood up for workers - when what Thatcher did in their stead was elevate privatisation and rampant capitalism; systems that have proven to be unsustainable because they're inherently about profit for the few - have you heard that the WHOLE WORLD is in debt? It sounds like an oxymoron, but we've managed it, despite tax payers have been bailing out the banks. Unions were corruptable like any other organisation, but ultimately they answered to their members - the people. That governance has been tragically missing in the City.
Robert Johnson
83 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:52:03
83 Posted 15/11/2011 at 14:52:03
Geoff @ 68
Well done Geoff, you can now put down your copy of The Sun newspaper.
As i thought Geoff, you know nothing of what went on here, other than what you read in the Tory press.
So with the greatest respect Geoff, ill save my argument for somebody who at least has a clue about what they are talking about.
Fell free to come back when you have researched the subject.
Sam Morrison
84 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:16:51
84 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:16:51
Gav, you got there before me!
Geoff Trenner
85 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:15:32
85 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:15:32
Gavin#81
'Geoff that has to be line of the year - I thank you!
And you still think Thatcher was good for this country? -Absolutely
I refer you to Alastair's comment at #74 regarding obsolete & non-competitive industries.
As for the miners (& the dockers before them) - they got exactly what they deserved after holding the country to ransom over so many years.
'Geoff that has to be line of the year - I thank you!
And you still think Thatcher was good for this country? -Absolutely
I refer you to Alastair's comment at #74 regarding obsolete & non-competitive industries.
As for the miners (& the dockers before them) - they got exactly what they deserved after holding the country to ransom over so many years.
Alastair Bates
86 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:16:39
86 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:16:39
Gavin #81 We are all happy to turn a blind eye and buy off China cause they produce it cheaply, ie dont have the regulations we have in this country, nor the safety record or the minimum wage. If we produced the goods that China produced, and could afford to buy them, our inflation wouldn't be 5% it would be 50% (not exact, its to make a point).
Nick Entwistle
87 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:28:05
87 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:28:05
Brian, where it ends is what is acceptable to society. As of yet whining isn't seen on the same level as racism.
As for a thick Irishman, that tag that has long since been passed over for the drunk one!
Alastaire, cheers.
As for a thick Irishman, that tag that has long since been passed over for the drunk one!
Alastaire, cheers.
Geoff Trenner
88 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:32:32
88 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:32:32
Robert#83. I've never read The Sun (or The Mirror) in my life. With the greatest respect I'm not going anywhere. That's the great thing about a democracy, we are all entitled to our views. If someone wants to explain to me what makes Liverpool different from the rest of the country (apart from having more than its fair share of self pitying whingers) then I'm all ears!
Ciarán McGlone
89 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:35:11
89 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:35:11
Geoff. 67. The point you conveniently omit is that if education is farmed out to the private sector, then it is no longer being provided by the state. The abrogation is clear.
Geoff Trenner
90 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:46:37
90 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:46:37
Ciaran #89. I will have to look abrogation up (as a product of the comprehensive system it has too many syllables for me). If the private sector can provide a better education than the state sector & it doesn't cost the taxpayer any more then surely we should welcome it. Nobody has to send their children to a Free School but from what I've heard many are hugely oversubscribed so there is a pent up demand there for 'something different'. I spent an absolute fortune sending my daughters to private school so I'd certainly have welcomed more choice in the 'free at the point of delivery' sector.
Ciaran, I don't think we are ever going to agree but I respect your views & the strength with which you clearly hold them.
Ciaran, I don't think we are ever going to agree but I respect your views & the strength with which you clearly hold them.
Stephen Kenny
91 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:52:38
91 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:52:38
A left wing debate and nobodys mentioned Bily, remarkable!
Alastair Bates
92 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:49:58
92 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:49:58
Ciarán #89 Free schools are not going to mean the abolishment of state education, they are a means to see if other organisation can improve the standard of the education that state schools who might be seen to be failing their communities provide and thus the future achievements of the pupils will be greater.
It is not being farmed out to the private sector; on the whole, charities are not the private sector. They also will not be given any more money per pupil than other state schools so it will be interesting to see the end results of the Everton Free School for the 14-19 year olds and they should be interesting for the state schools as they will be looking to enroll those who seem to be the most disruptive....as the quote;
Dr Denise Barrett-Baxendale, chief executive of Everton in the Community, said: ?Everton in the Community will work in partnership with the local authority and local secondary schools to create learning and development opportunities for those people who are at most risk of exclusion.
So #1 should buy his season tickets and invest moreover in the charity arm.
It is not being farmed out to the private sector; on the whole, charities are not the private sector. They also will not be given any more money per pupil than other state schools so it will be interesting to see the end results of the Everton Free School for the 14-19 year olds and they should be interesting for the state schools as they will be looking to enroll those who seem to be the most disruptive....as the quote;
Dr Denise Barrett-Baxendale, chief executive of Everton in the Community, said: ?Everton in the Community will work in partnership with the local authority and local secondary schools to create learning and development opportunities for those people who are at most risk of exclusion.
So #1 should buy his season tickets and invest moreover in the charity arm.
Peter Laing
93 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:53:31
93 Posted 15/11/2011 at 15:53:31
Geoff, I may end up with censorhip from Michael or even a black-listing in the process but reading your comments so far I regard you as a disgraceful human being. The Thatcher government was intent on making the North an industrial wasteland whilst ensuring that the South East / London continued to prosper on the roulette wheel of the city. Self pity is that from your myopic experiences of having the benefit of looking from the outside in when unemployment sky rocketed and levels of deprivation, ill-health and despair run rife in the city. Go and support Chelsea Geoff as I'm sure you will feel much more at home in that environment of self-congratulatory arseholes.
Geoff Trenner
94 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:06:43
94 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:06:43
Peter#93. I sincerely hope that you are neither censored nor black-listed for expressing your opinion.
As for the rest of your diatribe, I rest my case!
I've been an Evertonian since I was about 5 & I'm now in my 50s, I'm going nowhere.
As for the rest of your diatribe, I rest my case!
I've been an Evertonian since I was about 5 & I'm now in my 50s, I'm going nowhere.
Robert Johnson
95 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:11:06
95 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:11:06
Pete @93
Well Said Pete.
Well Said Pete.
Alastair Bates
96 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:08:31
96 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:08:31
Peter #93 Myopic experiances of Geoff looking in! I'd say its the myopic experiences of those within.
Maybe Thatchers quotes are as relevent today as they were at the time (sept 87) I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand "I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!" or "I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!" "I am homeless, the Government must house me!" and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations.
The only thing i'd disagree with is that their is such a thing as a society, but that everyone contributes to it by helping thy neighbour, which ultimatly this new Free School will.
Maybe Thatchers quotes are as relevent today as they were at the time (sept 87) I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand "I have a problem, it is the Government's job to cope with it!" or "I have a problem, I will go and get a grant to cope with it!" "I am homeless, the Government must house me!" and so they are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then also to help look after our neighbour and life is a reciprocal business and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations.
The only thing i'd disagree with is that their is such a thing as a society, but that everyone contributes to it by helping thy neighbour, which ultimatly this new Free School will.
James McPherson
97 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:16:22
97 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:16:22
Michael Kenrick.
Just checking in on your thoughts on this debate. Whatever the topic it often descends into "rancour".
For an Everton fan to label another Everton a "disgraceful human being" and an "arsehole" for holding a different political view is rank.
Are you some kind of Jeremy Kyle wannabee?
Peter Laing, get a grip.
We are a matter of days on from Rememberance Sunday, commemorating the absolute sacrifice some people made to prerserve freedom.
An apology is in order. Your choice of course. Choice, perhaps an alien concept to you.
Just checking in on your thoughts on this debate. Whatever the topic it often descends into "rancour".
For an Everton fan to label another Everton a "disgraceful human being" and an "arsehole" for holding a different political view is rank.
Are you some kind of Jeremy Kyle wannabee?
Peter Laing, get a grip.
We are a matter of days on from Rememberance Sunday, commemorating the absolute sacrifice some people made to prerserve freedom.
An apology is in order. Your choice of course. Choice, perhaps an alien concept to you.
Ciarán McGlone
98 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:13:33
98 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:13:33
Alistair, Geoff,
The reason why state education is trouble at the minute is because of lack of funding. A hangover from decades of tory and quais-tory policy - which has already seen the despicable model of PFI's and PPP's among other nefarious systems of revenue capture raise its ugly head - in what is supposed to be the state sector. We already have a two tier education system based upon individual wealth - now tory ideology wishes to infest the state system, a system which it should have unequivocal responsibility for maintaining at the highest standard - with the most destructive of capitalist ideals.
You misunderstand the workings of market based systems, if you think the introduction of a private sector competion model will increase the quality of education. It won't. Like the rail privatisation it'll be shoddy and subject to the vargaries of competition and shareholders.
And to be honest Geoff - I don't think you have any right to be telling us that we should be apathetic in allowing the state education system to become infested with the ideals of capitalism - whenever you've clearly opted to send your kids to private school.
The reason why state education is trouble at the minute is because of lack of funding. A hangover from decades of tory and quais-tory policy - which has already seen the despicable model of PFI's and PPP's among other nefarious systems of revenue capture raise its ugly head - in what is supposed to be the state sector. We already have a two tier education system based upon individual wealth - now tory ideology wishes to infest the state system, a system which it should have unequivocal responsibility for maintaining at the highest standard - with the most destructive of capitalist ideals.
You misunderstand the workings of market based systems, if you think the introduction of a private sector competion model will increase the quality of education. It won't. Like the rail privatisation it'll be shoddy and subject to the vargaries of competition and shareholders.
And to be honest Geoff - I don't think you have any right to be telling us that we should be apathetic in allowing the state education system to become infested with the ideals of capitalism - whenever you've clearly opted to send your kids to private school.
Alastair Bates
99 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:28:29
99 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:28:29
James #97 Im in agreement to a point but then it once was said 'I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.'
Geoff will be thinking along those lines I feel.
Geoff will be thinking along those lines I feel.
Sam Morrison
100 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:22:41
100 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:22:41
Alastair,
A government is supposed to represent and care for it's people. Not the private sector. It's really easy to take a plethora of complex issues and turn them into pithy, heartless remarks intimating that everyone's on the make and they should just pull their socks up. It's harder if you have to confront those realities.
A government is supposed to represent and care for it's people. Not the private sector. It's really easy to take a plethora of complex issues and turn them into pithy, heartless remarks intimating that everyone's on the make and they should just pull their socks up. It's harder if you have to confront those realities.
Ciarán McGlone
101 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:31:49
101 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:31:49
Alistair #96,
Most contradictory post of the year. You cannot abhor social responsibility on the one hand, and then advocate 'helping they neighbour' on the other. They are the same. This is the problem with the current abstract nonsense that's being peddled by tory evangelists. You either believe in the ideals of socialism, or you don't. You can't cherry pick your benevloence.
That's why the big society and its crass emanations (such as this free schools rubbish) are patent polictical gibberish.
Rampant individualism and altruism don't really go together...you want to try again?
Most contradictory post of the year. You cannot abhor social responsibility on the one hand, and then advocate 'helping they neighbour' on the other. They are the same. This is the problem with the current abstract nonsense that's being peddled by tory evangelists. You either believe in the ideals of socialism, or you don't. You can't cherry pick your benevloence.
That's why the big society and its crass emanations (such as this free schools rubbish) are patent polictical gibberish.
Rampant individualism and altruism don't really go together...you want to try again?
Alastair Bates
102 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:34:29
102 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:34:29
Ciarán #98 I however, went to state school and have recently moved, so that I could send my daughter to a state school rather than feel it necessary to send her to private - because I felt that the state school where I previously lived did not provide the education to a standard I want for my daughter nor pay in my taxes.
Yes, I am lucky that I can afford to move into an area were the state school is better than that in the area I moved from, but that was my choice for my child?s future.
With the free schools the shareholder is the state as they are funding it with the same amout of money per pupil given to the state school so if the free school does not attain its planned targets it will have its funding withdrawn, something we can not do to our underachieving state system.
Yes, I am lucky that I can afford to move into an area were the state school is better than that in the area I moved from, but that was my choice for my child?s future.
With the free schools the shareholder is the state as they are funding it with the same amout of money per pupil given to the state school so if the free school does not attain its planned targets it will have its funding withdrawn, something we can not do to our underachieving state system.
Tim Jenkins
103 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:50:05
103 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:50:05
I have got to say this is the best thread I have seen on this site for years.
For two pence, I am 100% with post #1 on this and those that have spoken against Everton?s decision to cosy up to the Tories.
Anybody who is sticking up for Thatcher is taking a pretty narrow minded view of the overall damage and disgrace on an International level that she caused to this country. The Thatcher years kicked in a neo-liberal era under the guidance of Milton Freedman that is still casting a shadow over our country today and is the reason why we are on the brink of Economic meltdown again today. It was the likes of Thatcher and in the US Regan that de-regulated the financial markets which is the fundamental reason for the financial crisis we are currently in and inequality that is ever increasing in this country. There is not a single example of a country on the planet that adopted Neo-Liberalism which did not result in the transfer of wealth from the working and middle class to those at the very top of the economic pyramid.
Thatcher was a close friend of one of the worst Tyrants in living memory Augusto Pinochet of Chile who had the blood of tens of thousands of his own citizens on his hands and her government called Nelson Mandela and the ANC ?Terrorists?. She was a disgrace.
And the Tory vs Labour argument unfortunately does not stand up, there hasn?t been any serious opposition on the left for the last 25 years. New Labour were simple Tory-light and carried on with exactly the same Neo-Liberal policies that Thatcher begun. They have more in common with one another than they do with any of us. Our current government is now doing exactly the same and David ?Call me Dave? Cameron (who is a distant relative of the Royal Family) & the Baronet George ?Gideon? Osborne are now trying to privatise the two biggest and most profitable aspects of the state (the health service and education system) that Thatcher wasn?t able to get her dirty hands on at the time. The Free School Program is a key part of this process. You cannot leave things as fundamental to people?s lives as health and education to the mercy of the free-markets.
There is an economic Tsunami on the horizon of the type that we haven?t seen before and we all better brace ourselves for when it crashes down next year. And the reason for this for this lies squarely at the Neo-Liberal ideology of Milton Freedman that we have been living under for the last 25 years and was adopted by Thatcher, Regan, Pinochet, The Argentine military Junta of the 80s (remember their economic collapse in 2001) and now the European union.
And the answer that our noble leaders are proposing to get us out of this mess is simple more of the same medicine. They don?t see our current situation as a crisis they see it as an opportunity to make us much profit for their banker friends as possible.
For two pence, I am 100% with post #1 on this and those that have spoken against Everton?s decision to cosy up to the Tories.
Anybody who is sticking up for Thatcher is taking a pretty narrow minded view of the overall damage and disgrace on an International level that she caused to this country. The Thatcher years kicked in a neo-liberal era under the guidance of Milton Freedman that is still casting a shadow over our country today and is the reason why we are on the brink of Economic meltdown again today. It was the likes of Thatcher and in the US Regan that de-regulated the financial markets which is the fundamental reason for the financial crisis we are currently in and inequality that is ever increasing in this country. There is not a single example of a country on the planet that adopted Neo-Liberalism which did not result in the transfer of wealth from the working and middle class to those at the very top of the economic pyramid.
Thatcher was a close friend of one of the worst Tyrants in living memory Augusto Pinochet of Chile who had the blood of tens of thousands of his own citizens on his hands and her government called Nelson Mandela and the ANC ?Terrorists?. She was a disgrace.
And the Tory vs Labour argument unfortunately does not stand up, there hasn?t been any serious opposition on the left for the last 25 years. New Labour were simple Tory-light and carried on with exactly the same Neo-Liberal policies that Thatcher begun. They have more in common with one another than they do with any of us. Our current government is now doing exactly the same and David ?Call me Dave? Cameron (who is a distant relative of the Royal Family) & the Baronet George ?Gideon? Osborne are now trying to privatise the two biggest and most profitable aspects of the state (the health service and education system) that Thatcher wasn?t able to get her dirty hands on at the time. The Free School Program is a key part of this process. You cannot leave things as fundamental to people?s lives as health and education to the mercy of the free-markets.
There is an economic Tsunami on the horizon of the type that we haven?t seen before and we all better brace ourselves for when it crashes down next year. And the reason for this for this lies squarely at the Neo-Liberal ideology of Milton Freedman that we have been living under for the last 25 years and was adopted by Thatcher, Regan, Pinochet, The Argentine military Junta of the 80s (remember their economic collapse in 2001) and now the European union.
And the answer that our noble leaders are proposing to get us out of this mess is simple more of the same medicine. They don?t see our current situation as a crisis they see it as an opportunity to make us much profit for their banker friends as possible.
Sam Morrison
104 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:47:28
104 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:47:28
Why is the state system underachieving, Alastair?
Is it because the teachers are rubbish, the curriculum out of date or the budgets are badly handled?
Or could it be down to a multitude of societal (OMG! society!) factors that might include such crazy things as parent income, the location of the school, the local education authority, the council, even government?
If you can entertain the notion that underachievement isn't necessarily just down to "the school" you can understand that all of the existing issues can impact on free schools too. It might be a fix from a financial perspective, but it's not from an educational one.
Is it because the teachers are rubbish, the curriculum out of date or the budgets are badly handled?
Or could it be down to a multitude of societal (OMG! society!) factors that might include such crazy things as parent income, the location of the school, the local education authority, the council, even government?
If you can entertain the notion that underachievement isn't necessarily just down to "the school" you can understand that all of the existing issues can impact on free schools too. It might be a fix from a financial perspective, but it's not from an educational one.
Alastair Bates
105 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:46:34
105 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:46:34
Ciarán #101 you make me laugh, (im not being nasty with that remark, please dont take it that way) Im liking the debate I don't expect anyone or everyone just to sit there and agree with me.
'Rampant individualism and altruism don't really go together' - Id disagree using the 'giving pledge' as a prime example.
With loathing social responsibility, sorry never said that, its just those who take but never give or see the state should help rather than doing something themselves.
'Rampant individualism and altruism don't really go together' - Id disagree using the 'giving pledge' as a prime example.
With loathing social responsibility, sorry never said that, its just those who take but never give or see the state should help rather than doing something themselves.
Ciarán McGlone
106 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:51:47
106 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:51:47
Alistair,
The shareholder is not the state. The state simply still funds it (if it decides it wants to).. tghe schools themselves are however run either by a trust or a private company ..and what do private companies have?
Yes, that's right folks...shareholders.
We've already seen major players in the academy sector making huge money out of a similar idea..
And what exactly happens if a free school doesn't meet its targets? what happens to the kids in these schools then, when the plug gets pulled on state funding?
It's a crackpot idea aimed at taking responsibility away from local government for the provision of one of the m,ost basic of human rights. Disgraeful, ill-advised nonsense.
The shareholder is not the state. The state simply still funds it (if it decides it wants to).. tghe schools themselves are however run either by a trust or a private company ..and what do private companies have?
Yes, that's right folks...shareholders.
We've already seen major players in the academy sector making huge money out of a similar idea..
And what exactly happens if a free school doesn't meet its targets? what happens to the kids in these schools then, when the plug gets pulled on state funding?
It's a crackpot idea aimed at taking responsibility away from local government for the provision of one of the m,ost basic of human rights. Disgraeful, ill-advised nonsense.
Sam Morrison
107 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:59:08
107 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:59:08
Again Alastair you talk about
"those who take but never give or see the state should help rather than doing something themselves"
I would rather have them in their made-up-Daily-Mail-esque multitudes than the handful of people currently getting rich off the state. We'd all be better off.
"those who take but never give or see the state should help rather than doing something themselves"
I would rather have them in their made-up-Daily-Mail-esque multitudes than the handful of people currently getting rich off the state. We'd all be better off.
Sam Morrison
108 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:01:37
108 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:01:37
What is the state for if not to look after it's own people?
Jon Ferguson
109 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:02:47
109 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:02:47
I don?t like the idea of free schools. I think there are certain things that should be controlled by the state. This list includes, prisons, transport and schools. In case anyone is interested then I think you can have private companies in water, gas and electricity however they should have to compete against a government body, which is working in the public interest. This would stop them colluding on prices. People who think that the market eventually sorts out these issues has a fundamental misunderstanding of business. Business is there to make money and it will do it anyway it can.
For that reason I don?t think that schools should not be run as a business. Whether it is at one end of the spectrum, hovering up all the best brains at the detriment to the local schools, or at the other end, driving down spending (teachers wages etc), it will find a way to take down the opposition. That is not to say changes aren?t required. I just don?t believe this is the answer and I wish our club wasn?t involved.
For that reason I don?t think that schools should not be run as a business. Whether it is at one end of the spectrum, hovering up all the best brains at the detriment to the local schools, or at the other end, driving down spending (teachers wages etc), it will find a way to take down the opposition. That is not to say changes aren?t required. I just don?t believe this is the answer and I wish our club wasn?t involved.
Ciarán McGlone
110 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:00:01
110 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:00:01
The giving pledge?
Be serious.
Just because someone who has exploited people for wealth - gives a bit of cash to charity, doesn't make it any less of a moral dichotomy!
Be serious.
Just because someone who has exploited people for wealth - gives a bit of cash to charity, doesn't make it any less of a moral dichotomy!
Jon Ferguson
111 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:03:31
111 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:03:31
correction * I don't think schools should be not be run as a business' should be 'I don't think schools should be run as a business'.
Mick Davies
112 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:52:34
112 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:52:34
I haven't read all the posts here so forgive me if I repeat anybody else's views. Firstly, there is no such thing as Tory/Labour/Liberal policy any more. They are all representing the same group of people, i.e. the wealthy and privileged strata of our society. That's called democracy. The voters in this country got what they deserved when energy prices recently went through the roof and shareholders made a killing on those who struggle to pay the massive increases (19.9%). The taxpayer owned these companies and the rail network and then - by proxy - agreed to give them to rich individuals who could get richer. Everton FC are now playing the same game, someone is going to make money off the taxpayer for doing what our schools are paid to do anyway. And if anyone thinks politics shouldn't be discussed on here, then EFC shouldn't get involved in helping to destroy our welfare state for profit. We have the AA fixing water supplies and electricity co's supplying gas. What next, Man U running the rail network? This madness has caused confusion and disaster for profit and the more foreign ownership of our resources, the less this country deserves brave young men losing their lives for their twisted agenda
Ciarán McGlone
113 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:07:27
113 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:07:27
Spot on Mick.
We're not long from Tesco schools popping up in every suburb wasteground in the land.
We're not long from Tesco schools popping up in every suburb wasteground in the land.
Dean Adams
114 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:58:30
114 Posted 15/11/2011 at 16:58:30
This thread is like so many on this site:
There are those who think they are right, those who think they know they are right and those who know they think they are right.
The reality of course is that some are occassionally right while others are wrong, some are occassionally wrong whilst others are right however both sides are never always right and will never agree because of the failure to accept that what they have been taught is fundamentally flawed. This applies to all of us yet only some accept this concept.
Work that out lads!!
There are those who think they are right, those who think they know they are right and those who know they think they are right.
The reality of course is that some are occassionally right while others are wrong, some are occassionally wrong whilst others are right however both sides are never always right and will never agree because of the failure to accept that what they have been taught is fundamentally flawed. This applies to all of us yet only some accept this concept.
Work that out lads!!
Mick Davies
115 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:06:56
115 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:06:56
Master Alistiar Bates says
Nothing wrong with Rail Privatisation, I worked on our railway system for 11 years and it was fantastic, the people, the work, everything. The only way we would have the train stock we have today is because of privatisation, otherwise they might have all stopped!
Well try telling the millions who are moaning about the unfair price increases, the victims and families of those who lost their lives in the Potters, Bar, Greyrigg, Tebay, Hatfield, Ladbroke Grove, Southall, Stafford, Largs etc. and they're just the major ones. Privatisation means someone makes a profit and this means culling services which are vital to people but don't rake in lots of filthy lucre. It doesn't matter that these people pay their taxes and in some cases have fought for this country, just as long as some faceless, usually foreign venture capitalist gets more money than he could spend in ten thousand lifetimes
Nothing wrong with Rail Privatisation, I worked on our railway system for 11 years and it was fantastic, the people, the work, everything. The only way we would have the train stock we have today is because of privatisation, otherwise they might have all stopped!
Well try telling the millions who are moaning about the unfair price increases, the victims and families of those who lost their lives in the Potters, Bar, Greyrigg, Tebay, Hatfield, Ladbroke Grove, Southall, Stafford, Largs etc. and they're just the major ones. Privatisation means someone makes a profit and this means culling services which are vital to people but don't rake in lots of filthy lucre. It doesn't matter that these people pay their taxes and in some cases have fought for this country, just as long as some faceless, usually foreign venture capitalist gets more money than he could spend in ten thousand lifetimes
GJ Butler
116 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:23:40
116 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:23:40
Tim @ 103.
'The best article seen on this site for years', and you mention Everton once before going on a fairly long rant about Tories, Labour, Thatcher, Pinochet, etc. Your reading the wrong sites.
I prefer the mid-April articles on why Ossie should have a statue built of him in place of Dixie after he has two good games in a row...
'The best article seen on this site for years', and you mention Everton once before going on a fairly long rant about Tories, Labour, Thatcher, Pinochet, etc. Your reading the wrong sites.
I prefer the mid-April articles on why Ossie should have a statue built of him in place of Dixie after he has two good games in a row...
Nick Entwistle
117 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:19:59
117 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:19:59
If this idea was put forward by a Labour government under the spin of socialist empowerment we would see a different message board completely.
Tim #103, everything you say about Thatcher can be applied to Blair.
Tim #103, everything you say about Thatcher can be applied to Blair.
Sam Morrison
118 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:29:56
118 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:29:56
Nick, criticising Thatcher does not imply support for Blair. Quite the opposite, I'd imagine!
Dean Adams
119 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:31:06
119 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:31:06
Nick Entwistle 117
Balanced view. Its the same coin no matter how people want to protest. If it wasnt Thatcher then it would have had to be someone.
Balanced view. Its the same coin no matter how people want to protest. If it wasnt Thatcher then it would have had to be someone.
Nick Entwistle
120 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:31:50
120 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:31:50
Sam, it doesn't, but as the first part of my post implies views here are based entirely of what colours people have nailed to the mast.
The attack on Thatcher was to make Dave and the boys guilty by association and undermine their school policy.
Such as Milliband and Balls like to do by mentioning the 80s at every opportunity.
But this Thatcher attack becomes moot when Blair is the same. That's what I'm saying.
The attack on Thatcher was to make Dave and the boys guilty by association and undermine their school policy.
Such as Milliband and Balls like to do by mentioning the 80s at every opportunity.
But this Thatcher attack becomes moot when Blair is the same. That's what I'm saying.
Tim Jenkins
121 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:34:53
121 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:34:53
@ GJ Butler. haha, I did go off on one a bit but this thread does make a change to the usual Moyes, Hibbo slating.
@ Nick. I agree, everything I said about Thatcher can be applied to Blair. I also said that New Labour were Tory-Light, they were also Tories but with red ties instead of blue and they used slightly different language to sell the same ideas. The rot set in at Thatcher though.
@ Nick. I agree, everything I said about Thatcher can be applied to Blair. I also said that New Labour were Tory-Light, they were also Tories but with red ties instead of blue and they used slightly different language to sell the same ideas. The rot set in at Thatcher though.
Alastair Bates
122 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:37:44
122 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:37:44
Mick #115, your attempt at an old joke...look it up the plural is the same as the singular. So it doesn't work, you got it wrong. Also you need to see how to spell my name. Get things right.
Sam Morrison
123 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:36:48
123 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:36:48
Dean, sitting back being arch is kind of easy, no?
I detest Thatcher, and Blair probably more so, because he represented a Labour government that was unrecognisable to me.
Yes, people will always find something to protest about. That's a good thing; it means things we often take for granted like free speech and right to debate still exist. Even the right to make sardonic asides would be lost if nobody protested.
I detest Thatcher, and Blair probably more so, because he represented a Labour government that was unrecognisable to me.
Yes, people will always find something to protest about. That's a good thing; it means things we often take for granted like free speech and right to debate still exist. Even the right to make sardonic asides would be lost if nobody protested.
Nick Entwistle
124 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:41:54
124 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:41:54
Tim, oh, you agree? Well we can't have an argument then can we!
Might as well put our feet up and see how this Bates McGlone fist shaking contest turns out.
Might as well put our feet up and see how this Bates McGlone fist shaking contest turns out.
Sam Morrison
125 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:44:40
125 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:44:40
Nick, you're making a fairly sweeping and reductionist statement there. I think people have been clear as to why they dislike/respect Thatcher and it's not because they've always voted for X.
Sam Morrison
126 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:49:42
126 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:49:42
(sorry Nick I'm referring to 120, not 124!)
Alastair Bates
127 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:49:17
127 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:49:17
Nick #124, This will start him off again, I'm laughing out loud in a que in waitrose buying cocunut milk at you bates mcglone fist shaking comment, love all evertonians COYB
Dean Adams
128 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:51:47
128 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:51:47
Sam Morrison 123
Really the point is that you can pin blame anywhere. For me it was with those arseholes that went on strike in the seventies, the unions flexing their muscles meant that we had the 3 day week, tonnes of rubbish in our streets, no fuel supplied to the schools so we were unable to exercise our right to free education........
I could go on for hours, the point is that the rot did not start with THatcher, you simply follow that premise like so many and dont see the bigger picture. The rot is society the problems are the people in it. Nothing is ever fair. Fact is when you look past that then and only then can you move on.
EFC are in the same predicament. Blaming the current incumbants or the ones past does not solve anything, making change does. That change is what frightens people and causes the fear that grips the people in such a paralysed state.
Really the point is that you can pin blame anywhere. For me it was with those arseholes that went on strike in the seventies, the unions flexing their muscles meant that we had the 3 day week, tonnes of rubbish in our streets, no fuel supplied to the schools so we were unable to exercise our right to free education........
I could go on for hours, the point is that the rot did not start with THatcher, you simply follow that premise like so many and dont see the bigger picture. The rot is society the problems are the people in it. Nothing is ever fair. Fact is when you look past that then and only then can you move on.
EFC are in the same predicament. Blaming the current incumbants or the ones past does not solve anything, making change does. That change is what frightens people and causes the fear that grips the people in such a paralysed state.
Nick Entwistle
129 Posted 15/11/2011 at 18:11:35
129 Posted 15/11/2011 at 18:11:35
Sure Sam, but the dislike for Thatcher is being said as a reason to dislike the current Tories and by extension any policy.
Tony #50 jokingly bring up the default 'Its all Thatcher's fault' argument, and then it comes to fruition two posts later.
It's why Labour mention the 80s at every opportunity now. It works, worryingly.
Tony #50 jokingly bring up the default 'Its all Thatcher's fault' argument, and then it comes to fruition two posts later.
It's why Labour mention the 80s at every opportunity now. It works, worryingly.
Brian Denton
130 Posted 15/11/2011 at 18:24:03
130 Posted 15/11/2011 at 18:24:03
Nick, the Tories were showing 'Winter of Discontent' footage in the 2001 Election campaign. People in glasshouses.........
Alan Williams
131 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:48:27
131 Posted 15/11/2011 at 17:48:27
I?m proud to be from Liverpool but more so an Evertonian. I grew up in the City with local Labour killing our City for years ? not Thatcher but Mr Hatton and his union colleagues that live in the past. I vote Conservative on most occasions and proud to do so.
I grew up just off City Road and my late farther was a big Labour supporter and Union rep and the country and local labour party shafted him. Mr Hatton served him a notice in the 80s and Blair/Brown shafted him later in life.
My father hated Thatcher, a bit like some on this site, but near the end of his time he changed his opinion. Thatcher in my opinion was a great prime Minster who changed UK Plc for the better. Places like the Albert Dock refurbishment (Tory idea) and Port of Liverpool have improved no end since the unions have taken a back stage... and the civil service need a kick next.
Labour have been in until recently and have presided over nearly bankrupting the place, sent us to war on lies, taxed private pensions twice thus meaning all non-government workers have lost tens of thousands, and Blair walks away and makes close to £20 million per year in speeches, please tell me what is so labour about the current Labour party. While the local people backed by the Unions and the ?left? spent years feeling sorry for themselves and blaming Thatcher, Manchester council (Labour) embraced it and changed the fabric of their city 15 years before the local Libs changed Liverpool.
Labour has done nothing for the City; they say they support it but the simple reason is they don?t need to because nationally people will just vote for them in Liverpool. It doesn?t matter who you vote for but do it for the correct reasons.
On the original post, this is an excellent move by EFC and just shows that it cares about the Community as this is not done for profit but to help kids who get expelled to achieve better and that shouldn?t be political, well done EFC pioneers in this area.
COYB
I grew up just off City Road and my late farther was a big Labour supporter and Union rep and the country and local labour party shafted him. Mr Hatton served him a notice in the 80s and Blair/Brown shafted him later in life.
My father hated Thatcher, a bit like some on this site, but near the end of his time he changed his opinion. Thatcher in my opinion was a great prime Minster who changed UK Plc for the better. Places like the Albert Dock refurbishment (Tory idea) and Port of Liverpool have improved no end since the unions have taken a back stage... and the civil service need a kick next.
Labour have been in until recently and have presided over nearly bankrupting the place, sent us to war on lies, taxed private pensions twice thus meaning all non-government workers have lost tens of thousands, and Blair walks away and makes close to £20 million per year in speeches, please tell me what is so labour about the current Labour party. While the local people backed by the Unions and the ?left? spent years feeling sorry for themselves and blaming Thatcher, Manchester council (Labour) embraced it and changed the fabric of their city 15 years before the local Libs changed Liverpool.
Labour has done nothing for the City; they say they support it but the simple reason is they don?t need to because nationally people will just vote for them in Liverpool. It doesn?t matter who you vote for but do it for the correct reasons.
On the original post, this is an excellent move by EFC and just shows that it cares about the Community as this is not done for profit but to help kids who get expelled to achieve better and that shouldn?t be political, well done EFC pioneers in this area.
COYB
Nick Entwistle
132 Posted 15/11/2011 at 18:37:12
132 Posted 15/11/2011 at 18:37:12
Brian, can't go with that given that's four years into power and Labour were spinning the 80s line in the election, as well as reintroducing the class divide argument. They have nothing to say other than empty rhetoric and have no basis to point fingers until they say what they would do. I'm no Tory boy, I just think they're helping this recession along by default opposing everything the Tory lot do which gives no confidence to the labour market or consumers. Shameful.
Andy Riley
133 Posted 15/11/2011 at 19:19:05
133 Posted 15/11/2011 at 19:19:05
I think you'll find we have been most successful under the Tories. I think the only League Championship for Everton under Labour was 1969-70 and the Wilson administration was voted out for Ted Heath a month or so later!
Ciarán McGlone
134 Posted 15/11/2011 at 19:31:17
134 Posted 15/11/2011 at 19:31:17
'arseholes that went on strike in the seventies' - cracking and insightful analysis of employee relations and the right to withdraw ones labour.
Ryan Holroyd
135 Posted 15/11/2011 at 19:43:55
135 Posted 15/11/2011 at 19:43:55
Alan
You say ' this is an excellent move by EFC and just shows that it cares about the Community'.
What a load of shit.
Is this the same club, spearhead by that fucking parasite wanker in our boadroomm that wanted to take EFC out of the city of its birth thus leaving struggling businesses in the area who depend on match day income all for his mates Phil Green and Robert Earl to make an extra bit of cash?
This free school is fuck all to do with Everton Football Club, it is Everton in the Community, the charity, that the school will be under.
If it was under the football club no doubt Bill fucking parasite Kenwright would asset strip it, ban parents evenings and outsource the catering.
You say ' this is an excellent move by EFC and just shows that it cares about the Community'.
What a load of shit.
Is this the same club, spearhead by that fucking parasite wanker in our boadroomm that wanted to take EFC out of the city of its birth thus leaving struggling businesses in the area who depend on match day income all for his mates Phil Green and Robert Earl to make an extra bit of cash?
This free school is fuck all to do with Everton Football Club, it is Everton in the Community, the charity, that the school will be under.
If it was under the football club no doubt Bill fucking parasite Kenwright would asset strip it, ban parents evenings and outsource the catering.
Dave Lynch
136 Posted 15/11/2011 at 20:28:25
136 Posted 15/11/2011 at 20:28:25
Dean @114.
I've worked it out mate.
It's called debating!
Do I win a prize?
I've worked it out mate.
It's called debating!
Do I win a prize?
Alex Quigley
137 Posted 15/11/2011 at 20:17:32
137 Posted 15/11/2011 at 20:17:32
As a teacher of nearly a decade in a successful state school, with a very broad and unbiased knowledge of a host of state and private schools, I view the entire Free School model as a grossly expensive early broadside for the deregulation of the school system. It is ironic that a football club in the deregulated free-for-all of the Premier league should be in on the piece of the action. I would draw the analogy with the real absence of financial fair play that gives Everton our perpetual glass ceiling, or the narrow competition of the Spanish league -which has become a boring two horse race. Is it right that we will sell off our best youngsters and they will be bought up by our rich neighbours in Manchester in perpetuity? This is akin to the Free school model, setting their own admissions and plucking the best candidates from nearby schools, going unmonitored and using their extra funds (given to secure their ideological success) to overpay for teachers...the other schools fail, but the lucky few who get picked are all right Jack! Like Man City, success is easily bought, making the playing field as level as Everton Valley!
Geoff Trenner - if the school is a failure, and my faith in Kenwright running a piss up in said brewery is low, then it will be a massively costly failure that the taxpayer will have funded, at the expense of existing schools that actually could be improved. I teach in a state school where the vast majority of students are literate. I am a Head of English that sees an English pass-rate of around 80% (90% for Literature) - with a complete range of special needs students etc. (typically marginalised by privatised Academies and Free schools because they reflect badly on league table results). Leave your Daily Mail generalisations for you nearest and dearest - I for one think they are ill-informed , and reveal that a capacity for literacy and numeracy does not always account for actual understanding.
Maybe, instead of a competitive free for all our school system could succeed with collaboration and real investment, like the most successful school systems in the world, such as Finland. Perhaps the Premier League could actually install some regulations - a dirty word for all the Tories on the thread - that ensures real financial fair play...maybe we may actually be able to once again fulfill our motto, rather than our perennial 6th place!
Geoff Trenner - if the school is a failure, and my faith in Kenwright running a piss up in said brewery is low, then it will be a massively costly failure that the taxpayer will have funded, at the expense of existing schools that actually could be improved. I teach in a state school where the vast majority of students are literate. I am a Head of English that sees an English pass-rate of around 80% (90% for Literature) - with a complete range of special needs students etc. (typically marginalised by privatised Academies and Free schools because they reflect badly on league table results). Leave your Daily Mail generalisations for you nearest and dearest - I for one think they are ill-informed , and reveal that a capacity for literacy and numeracy does not always account for actual understanding.
Maybe, instead of a competitive free for all our school system could succeed with collaboration and real investment, like the most successful school systems in the world, such as Finland. Perhaps the Premier League could actually install some regulations - a dirty word for all the Tories on the thread - that ensures real financial fair play...maybe we may actually be able to once again fulfill our motto, rather than our perennial 6th place!
Andy Crooks
138 Posted 15/11/2011 at 20:36:48
138 Posted 15/11/2011 at 20:36:48
Whatever one's political views are, associating the name of Everton with a free school is making an unambiguous political statement; something that I find astonishing.
While I'm not keen on political debates on this site, since we're having one I'll add this:
I'll be on strike later this month to defend a pathetic pension earned in a lowly paid job. I have colleagues who are afraid to strike for fear of losing their lowly paid jobs. This is a direct result of Mrs Thatcher's trades union legislation which, instead of reining in the unions, shifted the balance of power to the employer destroying rights that had been earned over a century. The right wing press have systematically set about vilifying and dismantling the public sector. Now...
While I'm not keen on political debates on this site, since we're having one I'll add this:
I'll be on strike later this month to defend a pathetic pension earned in a lowly paid job. I have colleagues who are afraid to strike for fear of losing their lowly paid jobs. This is a direct result of Mrs Thatcher's trades union legislation which, instead of reining in the unions, shifted the balance of power to the employer destroying rights that had been earned over a century. The right wing press have systematically set about vilifying and dismantling the public sector. Now...
Andy Crooks
139 Posted 15/11/2011 at 20:50:24
139 Posted 15/11/2011 at 20:50:24
Now.. got that of my chest. What's the team for the weekend?
Kevin Hudson
140 Posted 15/11/2011 at 21:00:37
140 Posted 15/11/2011 at 21:00:37
"Ban parents evenings and outsource the catering."
Chuckling my tits off at that one,Ryan, good stuff!!
(And probably true..!)
Chuckling my tits off at that one,Ryan, good stuff!!
(And probably true..!)
Dean Adams
141 Posted 15/11/2011 at 21:12:22
141 Posted 15/11/2011 at 21:12:22
Ciarán McGlone 134
You were there were you? They were arseholes and they went on strike regardless of the consequenses, caring only for the wage packet and the benefits to themselves. If you want to defend these people then fine you do so but if you know your history you will start to grasp the reality that Thatcher was not the great evil you spout so readily.
You were there were you? They were arseholes and they went on strike regardless of the consequenses, caring only for the wage packet and the benefits to themselves. If you want to defend these people then fine you do so but if you know your history you will start to grasp the reality that Thatcher was not the great evil you spout so readily.
Dean Adams
142 Posted 15/11/2011 at 21:18:17
142 Posted 15/11/2011 at 21:18:17
Dave Lynch 136
Debating indeed, the content can change but the format should remain that you dont ever need to get personal unless you conceed defeat!!
Apply that to our team this year and it opens the door to a rift that was not previously apparant.
The manager has almost deliberately changed the mood of the team and with it the success that we had hoped for has diminished. Lights out.
Debating indeed, the content can change but the format should remain that you dont ever need to get personal unless you conceed defeat!!
Apply that to our team this year and it opens the door to a rift that was not previously apparant.
The manager has almost deliberately changed the mood of the team and with it the success that we had hoped for has diminished. Lights out.
Gavin Ramejkis
143 Posted 15/11/2011 at 21:44:35
143 Posted 15/11/2011 at 21:44:35
Geoff a really poor response regarding the miners "deserving what they got", you originally struck me as being reasonably read but it appears thats quite myopic reading you chose. Cabinet papers revealed your beloved Thacher created the downfall of the caol mines a year before the strikes, the same papers show the early rising of power from France and the police powers to deal harshly with protests, what you seem to think was a response to strikers was in fact a concerted effort pre-planned and not reactive at all She carefully manipulated any hope the strikers may have gained from Russia into touch too.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/29/margaret-thatcher-undermine-miners-union
Not hearsay, not propoganda but records from the cabinet office released into the public domain.
Alastair, China's work ethics have nothing to do with the remaining fact they are a manufacturing nation, my point is that the UK ceased to be a major manufacturer during the first Thatcher term. As far as claiming the high ground on ethics by removing the right to strike for working rights that were earned to stop safety issues, maltreatment and the right to a fair wage what exactly do you think Thatcher was doing?
The world isn't a nice place but if you have generations who have fought for rights then to see them wiped out is an abhorrence, that isn't party specific but a matter of decency and fairness which are the crux of employment law. The argument that if we produced the same goods as China they would cost more doesn't explain the gap between the early 80s manufacturing void and today some 30 years later, China has grown without competition over 30 years if you want to make a comparison how about that one?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/aug/29/margaret-thatcher-undermine-miners-union
Not hearsay, not propoganda but records from the cabinet office released into the public domain.
Alastair, China's work ethics have nothing to do with the remaining fact they are a manufacturing nation, my point is that the UK ceased to be a major manufacturer during the first Thatcher term. As far as claiming the high ground on ethics by removing the right to strike for working rights that were earned to stop safety issues, maltreatment and the right to a fair wage what exactly do you think Thatcher was doing?
The world isn't a nice place but if you have generations who have fought for rights then to see them wiped out is an abhorrence, that isn't party specific but a matter of decency and fairness which are the crux of employment law. The argument that if we produced the same goods as China they would cost more doesn't explain the gap between the early 80s manufacturing void and today some 30 years later, China has grown without competition over 30 years if you want to make a comparison how about that one?
Ciarán McGlone
144 Posted 15/11/2011 at 22:09:49
144 Posted 15/11/2011 at 22:09:49
I haven't mentioned the milk snatcher Dean, but don't let that get in the way of a good daily mail rant.
And yes i will defend the right to strike, thank you very much.
And yes i will defend the right to strike, thank you very much.
Peter Laing
145 Posted 15/11/2011 at 22:21:54
145 Posted 15/11/2011 at 22:21:54
Alan # 131 true to script you enlighten us with your penchant for a dangerous, neo-conservative poisonous agenda. I bet your spineless and cynical views regarding civil servant / public sector employee's ties in with your continued attacks on Blue Union. Would you care to inform how you are gainly employed to allow others to pass remark regarding your circumstances. You are a very bitter-man.
Mick Gallagher
146 Posted 15/11/2011 at 22:42:54
146 Posted 15/11/2011 at 22:42:54
Since the tory blues want to ban unions from going on strike. Would it be ok for the blue union to have a march against Wolves or do you want marching banned as well. Sorry if my grammer isnt perfect but I only went to the local comprehensive.
No one likes to go on strike but that is the last thing you can do withdraw your labour, with thats to improve pay or conditions
No one likes to go on strike but that is the last thing you can do withdraw your labour, with thats to improve pay or conditions
Kevin Tully
147 Posted 15/11/2011 at 22:29:46
147 Posted 15/11/2011 at 22:29:46
Wow, you can tell when it's an International break on this site!
Personally, I blame the Romans, what did they ever do for us?
On a serious note, we need to address the many problems associated with the running of Everton Football Club before getting involved in any schemes such as this. We could be looking at playing Championship football next season if we don't buck up.
Personally, I blame the Romans, what did they ever do for us?
On a serious note, we need to address the many problems associated with the running of Everton Football Club before getting involved in any schemes such as this. We could be looking at playing Championship football next season if we don't buck up.
Dean Adams
148 Posted 15/11/2011 at 23:14:40
148 Posted 15/11/2011 at 23:14:40
Ciarán McGlone 144
Never read the Mail old fella. I find that newspapers are good for nothuing and very little fact is ever printed.
It seems that you however spend many an hour rehersing your myopic one liners. Long live Toffeeeweb and Michael for allowing such jovial banter in such dark times.
Never read the Mail old fella. I find that newspapers are good for nothuing and very little fact is ever printed.
It seems that you however spend many an hour rehersing your myopic one liners. Long live Toffeeeweb and Michael for allowing such jovial banter in such dark times.
Nick Entwistle
149 Posted 15/11/2011 at 23:29:07
149 Posted 15/11/2011 at 23:29:07
We're close to post 150 and no one's mentioned Hitler!
Robert Johnson
150 Posted 16/11/2011 at 00:09:50
150 Posted 16/11/2011 at 00:09:50
Nick @149
Sorry Nick, i mentioned him in my thread @ 62 .
Sorry Nick, i mentioned him in my thread @ 62 .
Kevin Sparke
151 Posted 16/11/2011 at 00:00:44
151 Posted 16/11/2011 at 00:00:44
"No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin"
Aneurin Bevan
Minister for Health in the only socialist government we've ever had (1945-1951) and even though Labour inherited a national debt of 120% GDP they still managed to introduce the NHS, the welfare state, build 100,000 houses, nationalise the railways, steel, coal, electricity, gas, transport...
Back then we really were 'all in it together'
Aneurin Bevan
Minister for Health in the only socialist government we've ever had (1945-1951) and even though Labour inherited a national debt of 120% GDP they still managed to introduce the NHS, the welfare state, build 100,000 houses, nationalise the railways, steel, coal, electricity, gas, transport...
Back then we really were 'all in it together'
James I'Anson
152 Posted 16/11/2011 at 00:38:24
152 Posted 16/11/2011 at 00:38:24
This thread has made me sick.
Gavin, I already held you in high regard, but now you've elevated yourself mate. Great responses to these people.
Alex Quigley, You're a working class hero.
Geoff, Alastair,Dean,Nick,Alan etc
I challenge you to enter ANY pub, factory,dock,shop,school,office or building site in Liverpool and spout your poisonous shite like you have done on here.
Offensive material removed by moderator
Gavin, I already held you in high regard, but now you've elevated yourself mate. Great responses to these people.
Alex Quigley, You're a working class hero.
Geoff, Alastair,Dean,Nick,Alan etc
I challenge you to enter ANY pub, factory,dock,shop,school,office or building site in Liverpool and spout your poisonous shite like you have done on here.
Offensive material removed by moderator
Chris Verghoden
153 Posted 16/11/2011 at 03:02:04
153 Posted 16/11/2011 at 03:02:04
When I see pro and anti Thatcher debates;particularly re Liverpool; I always think of the series The Boys from the Blackstuff.
That is generally lauded as depiciting the stark reality of unemployment and life in the Thatcher era.
It could be argued however, that this is not really the case.
In the original play, they went up to do a job in Middlesborough. They then proceeded to do a foreigner behind the boss's back in order to make money for themselves. They also shafted the foreman and their mate in the process. They got ripped off by the gypsies, all got sacked and were blacklisted from other firms.
They then spent a full series feeling sorry for themselves. The only one who had a real argument was Dixie Dean, because it wasn't his fault and he refused to entertain the others any more.
So it could be said that they tried a bit of Thatcheresque free enterprise but got stung. They then blamed the state for their predicament.
So, working class heroes or thick scouse chancers who stab their workmates in the back ?!!...
Just shows that whatever political viewpoint you hold, it can be manipulated to suit your argument. Doesn't necessarily make you right or wrong though.
That is generally lauded as depiciting the stark reality of unemployment and life in the Thatcher era.
It could be argued however, that this is not really the case.
In the original play, they went up to do a job in Middlesborough. They then proceeded to do a foreigner behind the boss's back in order to make money for themselves. They also shafted the foreman and their mate in the process. They got ripped off by the gypsies, all got sacked and were blacklisted from other firms.
They then spent a full series feeling sorry for themselves. The only one who had a real argument was Dixie Dean, because it wasn't his fault and he refused to entertain the others any more.
So it could be said that they tried a bit of Thatcheresque free enterprise but got stung. They then blamed the state for their predicament.
So, working class heroes or thick scouse chancers who stab their workmates in the back ?!!...
Just shows that whatever political viewpoint you hold, it can be manipulated to suit your argument. Doesn't necessarily make you right or wrong though.
Shaun Sparke
154 Posted 16/11/2011 at 07:57:29
154 Posted 16/11/2011 at 07:57:29
Chris. It was a play, it never happened! I don't suppose that you still have your "free George Jackson" T shirt still in the wardrobe do you?
Geoff Trenner
155 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:49:00
155 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:49:00
Gavin#143. I didn't say that Thatcher's actions were a response to strikers actions in that strike. If you had read my comment more carefully you'd see that I said it was a response to being held to ransom over many years.
Of course she planned it & I applaud her for the intent, the forethought, the planning & the execution.
It would be great to have her back now in her pomp - she would stand head & shoulders above anyone in our current soft liberal government
Of course she planned it & I applaud her for the intent, the forethought, the planning & the execution.
It would be great to have her back now in her pomp - she would stand head & shoulders above anyone in our current soft liberal government
Alan Williams
156 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:14:22
156 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:14:22
Peter, what reply is that? My wife works in the public sector and sadly her Union has voted yes to a strike, she also votes labour I don?t, but she will still turn up at work regardless. I had to read all the lies Unison put in their leaflets complete propaganda. The Unions didn?t give a shit about the private sector people losing tens of thousands out of our pension funds by the party that they donated their workers funds too so what I?m trying to explain is people in Liverpool cant take a moral high ground by voting Labour as they too like the Tories have shafted the working class. Manchester Labour embraced Westminster and got on with improving the lives of people in Manchester we did the usual bull and moaned and got left behind. That man Hatton whilst nearly putting the whole of the council on the dole was still getting his Fireman wages, then leaves politics and creates a PR company driving around the City in his Jag then becomes a property millionaire in Cyprus what a great socialist he is! I remember council workers at long Lane depot clocking in then going home and returning to clock off doing nothing all day and my farther was told to stop doing his job and go home, Dockers having a job for life and nepotism being the main aim to strangle a once great port, if MDHC hadn?t stood up to them the port would be dead, today it is thriving with an extension to the container terminal that will bring many more jobs into the North West. In Life you need a balance and a good Union is one that has vision to compromise not bankrupt the employer that feeds it like the Mr Grows of this world. I have respect for some Unions and utter hatred for others, thankfully in my job I have dealt with the former on a regular basis. A simple analogy that works for me is you only get out of life what you put in and work on the concept that the state owes you nothing and that?s what you achieve for you and your family must come from your own pocket, its not easy to achieve and some cant but I will live in hope that me and my family never have to ask for anything and I will work as many hours as possible to achieve it and that what makes an economy move forward. My work ethic comes from my roots in Liverpool and I?m proud of it, and I feel if we looked at the good in the City as apposed to the militant side we would beat hands down any other City on the UK. COYB
David Mathieson
157 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:33:39
157 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:33:39
Offensive post removed by moderator
Geoff Trenner
158 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:57:20
158 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:57:20
James#152. Are you suggesting that there would be violence if I spoke in a public space in Liverpool? Surely the wonderful people of the city wouldn't resort to that in the face of someone presenting a rational & sincerely held viewpoint.
Violence is usually the response of someone who has lost the arguement or lacks the intelligence to engage in one.
Violence is usually the response of someone who has lost the arguement or lacks the intelligence to engage in one.
Peter Laing
159 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:59:48
159 Posted 16/11/2011 at 08:59:48
Well said James #152 I was thinking exactly the same, I'm glad this post was allowed to run as it confirmed many of my suspicions regarding the afformentioned. How people can actually come onto this site and voice such stereotypical bile such as 'self-pitying' scousers is beyond me. A cursory glance at the Hillsborough inquiry that is taking place after more than 20 years of lies and denial is enough to suggest and prove that there was a government agenda against the people of Liverpool, it will be interesting to read the accounts of the day from the cabinet office. Proud to be an Evertonian and from the city of Liverpool.
Geoff Trenner
160 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:20:30
160 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:20:30
David#157. If that is the sum total of your contribution then I'm sure you'll be sorely missed by Toffeeweb. Bye
Peter Laing
161 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:25:25
161 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:25:25
Geoff I quote what you said regarding the people of Liverpool (apart from having more than its fair share of self pitying whingers) to come out with that in any pub around Goodison Park or the City centre when you next visit and you will have more than an argument on your hands. It's easy to hide behind the the keyboard and spout your vitriolic bile, I challenge you however to be upfront with your views regarding the vast majority of Evertonians and people from Liverpool when you next pay a visit - how about Saturday ?
Alan Williams
162 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:00:44
162 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:00:44
James, I kept my opinion whilst living in Liverpool in the 80's, early 90's I stood up to people selling the Socialist Worker, I debated in sixth form against fellow pupils and teachers my principles am not a Gobshite as you say, I can hold my own on and off the field of play. My best mate is very high in the Unions and thankfully we don?t debate much but our friendship is as strong as ever and I may not agree with him but I respect him, even with him being a RS. Having a different opinion doesn?t mean you don?t respect the other side, I just see it from a completely different prospective and I?m totally comfortable with my ethic, I hold myself responsible for what I do not the Government. These people say they care about you, basically they care about not losing your monthly subscription, and they play on people insecurities like every other party no better or worse but they claim to have the moral high ground, well they don?t they are mostly full of shit!! I vote Conservative because it suits me most nothing more, call me selfish, maybe, but my father backed the cause all his life and got nothing for it I don?t intend being that delusional, except obviously when I hope EFC win the league every August. My apologies for not following the same politics as my friends and family, but that?s my choice. COYB
Dave Lynch
163 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:11:18
163 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:11:18
I have watched this thread with great interest.
Geoff.
My heart sinks when i read what you have written mate.
How can you applaud someone who intentionally and cold heartedly destroyed not only a national industry but also a whole way of life, decimated communities and plunged then into abject poverty.
It had nothing to do with bullying unions but had everything to do with monetory gain.
Cheaper to buy Polish coal that produce our own.........
The woman was a tyrant and her values where there for all to see when she welcomed Pinochet and treated him like some sort of demi god.
The use of the police against it's own people, people who through their taxes payed for that police force was abhorent to say the least.
If it wasn't for monetary gain then why wern't the pits re-opened under a fresh structure once the unions where beaten ?
You sir should hang your head in shame.
Thatchers legacy still lives on, she is the only past pm who has an armed guard stationed outside her home when she is resident in London, what a legacy that is.
Geoff.
My heart sinks when i read what you have written mate.
How can you applaud someone who intentionally and cold heartedly destroyed not only a national industry but also a whole way of life, decimated communities and plunged then into abject poverty.
It had nothing to do with bullying unions but had everything to do with monetory gain.
Cheaper to buy Polish coal that produce our own.........
The woman was a tyrant and her values where there for all to see when she welcomed Pinochet and treated him like some sort of demi god.
The use of the police against it's own people, people who through their taxes payed for that police force was abhorent to say the least.
If it wasn't for monetary gain then why wern't the pits re-opened under a fresh structure once the unions where beaten ?
You sir should hang your head in shame.
Thatchers legacy still lives on, she is the only past pm who has an armed guard stationed outside her home when she is resident in London, what a legacy that is.
Geoff Trenner
164 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:38:19
164 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:38:19
Peter#161 You say 'and you will have more than an argument on your hands'. Says it all really & I'll refer you to my comment #158
Sam Morrison
165 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:49:51
165 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:49:51
Peter Laing; this is a great thread, please don't start making veiled threats to people, it's been pretty civil so far considering the weight of emotion and I reckon it's best kept that way.
Peter Laing
166 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:46:26
166 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:46:26
Geoff is it rational to use a tired and stereotypical 'one coat fits all' mentality when describing the people of Liverpool, I find your comments both insulting and derogatory and a nasty and vindicitive slur from a man who quite clearly has more than an issue with politics. You obviously have an agenda regarding people such as myself who hail from this great city, a city that is quite rightly proud of its traditions, people and heritage - including football teams. You may be an Evertonian but just remember where your team comes from and where its core support belongs.
Adam Cunliffe
167 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:51:10
167 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:51:10
1984 cup final. My Dad and his mates were going to the match against Watford, yet one fella couldnt afford to, the reason why? He was striking against Thatcher crippling the mining community. So what my Dad and his mates who wern't miners do? They all chipped in them selves so he didn't have to go back to work and be considered a 'scab'
My Nan, socialist to the core detests Maggie Thatcher 'the milk snatcher'. Now I'm only 17 and as a first time voter next election I'll be voting Labour. Why? Because it's going to cost me best part of 30 fucking grand in order to complete my degree in primary teaching. They're pricing the poor out of university. And what happens when the poor can't afford to go on to higher education? They don't have the same career's as the rich who can afford it, so therefore the rich keep on getting richer and the cycle of depravation continues.
Now I'm by no means a political expert, but from studying A-level history there's a re-occuring theme going on...Under a Conservative government the poor suffer the shitty end of the stick. So therefore, I shall be voting Labour as soon as I get a chance.
COYB
My Nan, socialist to the core detests Maggie Thatcher 'the milk snatcher'. Now I'm only 17 and as a first time voter next election I'll be voting Labour. Why? Because it's going to cost me best part of 30 fucking grand in order to complete my degree in primary teaching. They're pricing the poor out of university. And what happens when the poor can't afford to go on to higher education? They don't have the same career's as the rich who can afford it, so therefore the rich keep on getting richer and the cycle of depravation continues.
Now I'm by no means a political expert, but from studying A-level history there's a re-occuring theme going on...Under a Conservative government the poor suffer the shitty end of the stick. So therefore, I shall be voting Labour as soon as I get a chance.
COYB
Geoff Trenner
168 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:43:58
168 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:43:58
Dave#163. I'm not your 'mate'.
Ask yourself why it was cheaper to buy Polish coal than produce our own. Answer, because numerous previous governments had caved in to wage demands from the miners union thus pushing up the cost of production.
I certainly don't agree with everything Thatcher did & I have my reservations regarding her lauding of Pinochet.
So the police shouldn't be used against anyone who pays taxes?
If Thatcher needs an armed guard it's because she stood up to the IRA & other thugs who think that violence is the answer when you disagree with someone!
Ask yourself why it was cheaper to buy Polish coal than produce our own. Answer, because numerous previous governments had caved in to wage demands from the miners union thus pushing up the cost of production.
I certainly don't agree with everything Thatcher did & I have my reservations regarding her lauding of Pinochet.
So the police shouldn't be used against anyone who pays taxes?
If Thatcher needs an armed guard it's because she stood up to the IRA & other thugs who think that violence is the answer when you disagree with someone!
Geoff Trenner
169 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:57:12
169 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:57:12
Adam#167. That is your democratic right & good luck to you. I would however suggest that you look into the way that university tuition fee loans are structured. Check out a guy called Martin Lewis aka Money Saving Expert who has produced a very good clear guide. If you still feel the same after looking at this then fine but at least you'll be better informed.
Dave Lynch
170 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:59:26
170 Posted 16/11/2011 at 09:59:26
Geoff.
I used the word 'mate' very losely.
It's a word used very frequently in Liverpool when spoken through gritted teeth.
Hope this clears things up.
I used the word 'mate' very losely.
It's a word used very frequently in Liverpool when spoken through gritted teeth.
Hope this clears things up.
Tim Jenkins
171 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:00:25
171 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:00:25
The greatest weapon of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.
Geoff Trenner
172 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:03:43
172 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:03:43
Dave#170 Thanks Dave, perfectly clear. Personally I find it easier to speak with teeth 'ungritted'.
Peter Laing
173 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:03:26
173 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:03:26
With the greatest respect to you Sam #165 if Geoff thinks he can go around whitewashing people from Liverpool with the stereotypes he has trotted out I will bring him to task. It was not a veiled threat but more of an invitation to hear these comments next time he visits Goodison Park.
Geoff Trenner
174 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:06:51
174 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:06:51
Peter#166. My agenda is I think perfectly clear from my contribution to this debate.
I don't have a problem with the people of Liverpool per se, it just seems that the city has more than it's fair share of self pitying whingers. Perhaps they are reds both politically & in football terms.
I don't have a problem with the people of Liverpool per se, it just seems that the city has more than it's fair share of self pitying whingers. Perhaps they are reds both politically & in football terms.
Nick Entwistle
175 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:09:00
175 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:09:00
Adam, Geoff #167 is correct. Check out Martin Lewis who will give an unbiased view point, explaining it financially rather than as a political tool.
Sam Morrison
176 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:04:50
176 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:04:50
Geoff, I'm not sure how Martin Lewis vindicates the idea that people must pay for their education. Here's some of the sub-headings from his page on student loans:
You WILL owe money for longer and MAY pay a LOT more
Part time fees rising, but tuition fee loans now available
The new system is UNLIKELY to impact the ability to get a mortgage (my caps)
You may not be allowed to repay early
Many people will never pay it all back
We may be getting back to the whole 'stop asking for help and do it all yourself' compassionate conservatism question here, but the above doesn't sound like it'll change Adam's mind. I'm of the belief that a country invests in itself: ie, it's people. Investment in this case meaning education.
You WILL owe money for longer and MAY pay a LOT more
Part time fees rising, but tuition fee loans now available
The new system is UNLIKELY to impact the ability to get a mortgage (my caps)
You may not be allowed to repay early
Many people will never pay it all back
We may be getting back to the whole 'stop asking for help and do it all yourself' compassionate conservatism question here, but the above doesn't sound like it'll change Adam's mind. I'm of the belief that a country invests in itself: ie, it's people. Investment in this case meaning education.
Geoff Trenner
177 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:25:19
177 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:25:19
Sam#176. Sam, I'm not trying to justify the fees or even the principle of paying them. They are a fact of life & I'd hate Adam or anyone else to decide not to go to uni because of a misunderstanding about how the system works. As I said, if he reads Martin Lewis's guide & still feels the same then fine.
Stephen Kenny
178 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:17:59
178 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:17:59
Adam,
In all honesty the british labour market is not in that great a need of more well educated workers. I work in an industry full of people with degrees and letters and they are not working anywhere near a level they are qualified to, simply because there was never a need for them to be so highly qualified. I suspect there is a great deal of this in most industries.
I come from a deprived area and have a number of extended family who are dependant on the welfare state. There's no doubt that going onto higher education would have been easier had I been born into a family from Woolton instead of one from Dovecot, BUT, the reason it's easier for the kid from there is beacuse his father or grandfather or whoever else in his family went out and put his family first by working harder/smarter, saving instead of going down the pub, made sacrifices other men/women refused to make knowing that his payoff was his families longer term prosperity. That's a responsibility too many in our city have shirked.
I don't vote but if I did it certainly wouldn't be for Labour after the way I've seen how unions go about thier business!
In all honesty the british labour market is not in that great a need of more well educated workers. I work in an industry full of people with degrees and letters and they are not working anywhere near a level they are qualified to, simply because there was never a need for them to be so highly qualified. I suspect there is a great deal of this in most industries.
I come from a deprived area and have a number of extended family who are dependant on the welfare state. There's no doubt that going onto higher education would have been easier had I been born into a family from Woolton instead of one from Dovecot, BUT, the reason it's easier for the kid from there is beacuse his father or grandfather or whoever else in his family went out and put his family first by working harder/smarter, saving instead of going down the pub, made sacrifices other men/women refused to make knowing that his payoff was his families longer term prosperity. That's a responsibility too many in our city have shirked.
I don't vote but if I did it certainly wouldn't be for Labour after the way I've seen how unions go about thier business!
Geoff Trenner
179 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:37:28
179 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:37:28
Stephen#178. Brave man, I hope you've got a hard hat at hand!
Sam Morrison
180 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:43:00
180 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:43:00
Geoff - we're not having the same argument in that case. My issue with fees is not that they need a minor TV celebrity to explain them, it's that they exist at all. I've read through what he has to say about them and agree it's very helpful. But it shouldn't be necessary.
Mike Rourke
181 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:26:21
181 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:26:21
So, has anybody changed their viewpoint, even fractionally, based on the arguments presented here?
Of course you haven't. But at least you got it off your chest.
What does sicken me though is that I'm sure many of the people who look forward to Thatcher/Scargill/Whoever dying so that they can 'party' are probably the very same who broadcast on here that Liverpool fans 'lack class' because of their perpetual moanings over the relatively unimportant game of footy. Sad.
On topic, and remaining more focused on the football side, is Barcelona's academy not also a school? I do know that they are roundly praised for producing well rounded individuals as well as talented footballers.
If Everton are attempting to do the same then I can only see this as a rare good news story about the club.
I want Kenwright Out, Out, Out but as they say; even a broken clock will be right twice a day.
Of course you haven't. But at least you got it off your chest.
What does sicken me though is that I'm sure many of the people who look forward to Thatcher/Scargill/Whoever dying so that they can 'party' are probably the very same who broadcast on here that Liverpool fans 'lack class' because of their perpetual moanings over the relatively unimportant game of footy. Sad.
On topic, and remaining more focused on the football side, is Barcelona's academy not also a school? I do know that they are roundly praised for producing well rounded individuals as well as talented footballers.
If Everton are attempting to do the same then I can only see this as a rare good news story about the club.
I want Kenwright Out, Out, Out but as they say; even a broken clock will be right twice a day.
Ciarán McGlone
182 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:41:53
182 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:41:53
Alan Williams,
Typical Malthusian nonsense.
I seems your still debating in sixth form.
Before you go any further in your celebration of being a scab..can you please explain what lies UNISON put into their ballot documentation?
Typical Malthusian nonsense.
I seems your still debating in sixth form.
Before you go any further in your celebration of being a scab..can you please explain what lies UNISON put into their ballot documentation?
Sam Morrison
183 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:45:48
183 Posted 16/11/2011 at 10:45:48
Mike, I've changed my mind about Nick Clegg.
Peter Laing
184 Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:08:49
184 Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:08:49
Agree Ciaran #182 the same Alan Williams who obviously has an agenda with public sector workers such as myself based upon the cynical divide and conquer policy being used by David Cameron to set those working in the private sector against public sector workers based upon the spin of mythical 'gold-plated' pensions that do not actually exist for the vast majority of teachers, nurses etc. People such as Alan who will hopefully require the services of public sector workers such as myself in the future if he is misfortunate enough to suffer ill-health or frailty.
Andrew Ellams
185 Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:29:41
185 Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:29:41
Stepjen #178. spot on mate. I left the military in 1996 and have worked in Finance based roles, mainly in the Telecoms sector ever since. In that time I have worked with ex nurses who packed that in, geology and archeology graduates and even a few people with relevant business and finance degress whi can't get to the level that they once would have because the market is saturated due to the dumbing down of the education system to allow pretty much any student to progress as far as they like and therefore keep them off the unemployment statitstics.
Ciarán McGlone
186 Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:41:14
186 Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:41:14
Indeed Peter,
The small state parties have been using their influence in the media to propogate the myth that everybody in the public sector is on a lucrative final salary pension scheme..in relaity the vast majority of civil servants in N.I are on less than 10k a year in regard to their public sector pension..
What the private sector also conveniently forgets is that the private sector is, on the whole, far better paid than the public sector in job equivalency. A private sector employee doesn't have to wait an average of 13 years to get paid the rate for the job.
When I was a public sector worker I was paid approximately 50% less for my work than a private sector worker with the equivalent experience and qualifications. You never see these facts in the right wing press...because it doesn't suit an agenda of 'lowest common denominator' pension policy to actually tell the truth..
The small state parties have been using their influence in the media to propogate the myth that everybody in the public sector is on a lucrative final salary pension scheme..in relaity the vast majority of civil servants in N.I are on less than 10k a year in regard to their public sector pension..
What the private sector also conveniently forgets is that the private sector is, on the whole, far better paid than the public sector in job equivalency. A private sector employee doesn't have to wait an average of 13 years to get paid the rate for the job.
When I was a public sector worker I was paid approximately 50% less for my work than a private sector worker with the equivalent experience and qualifications. You never see these facts in the right wing press...because it doesn't suit an agenda of 'lowest common denominator' pension policy to actually tell the truth..
Brian Denton
187 Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:33:18
187 Posted 16/11/2011 at 11:33:18
A couple of points; firstly on student loans I simply don't believe that having a £30,000, £40,000 debt around young adults' necks won't either affect the ability to ability to get a mortgage or act as a drag on house prices for years to come. It must do one or the other by simple maths. Or perhaps these well-informed people can inform me how that circle is going to be squared?
Equally (I know a lot about this issue because I have two children at University) the argument is often made that you don't start paying until you start earning a certain amount - but unfortunately that doesn't stop the interest racking up from the day the loan is issued. Not the day they graduate; not the day they start earning £21,000 pa; but the day the loan is issued. The less you earn, the less you will pay off, the more interest will accrue to the loan. But then (our articulate and soi-disant better informed people will tell me) the loan will be written off it isn't all paid back. Well, I'm afraid that business model won't work, and even if it does it will have all sorts of unforeseen - and unforeseeable - consequences.
Secondly, the public sector/private sector divide on pensions: if my house has been burgled, should I have the right to insist that the nurse or teacher who lives down the street must have her house burgled too?
Thirdly, to the posters who say that the sole reason for losing this that or the other industry to country x is because our workers are less productive, this almost always refers to unit labour costs, which is shorthand for saying that the competing worker earns less than their British equivalent. Can anyone give me an example where British jobs have been lost to a country where the workers are paid MORE than here?
To leave with a couple of little observations: "Capitalism is the strange belief that the nastiest of men, for the nastiest of motives, will act for the benefit of all "(JM Keynes) and "the best runners in a rat race are rats" (dunno).
COYB
Equally (I know a lot about this issue because I have two children at University) the argument is often made that you don't start paying until you start earning a certain amount - but unfortunately that doesn't stop the interest racking up from the day the loan is issued. Not the day they graduate; not the day they start earning £21,000 pa; but the day the loan is issued. The less you earn, the less you will pay off, the more interest will accrue to the loan. But then (our articulate and soi-disant better informed people will tell me) the loan will be written off it isn't all paid back. Well, I'm afraid that business model won't work, and even if it does it will have all sorts of unforeseen - and unforeseeable - consequences.
Secondly, the public sector/private sector divide on pensions: if my house has been burgled, should I have the right to insist that the nurse or teacher who lives down the street must have her house burgled too?
Thirdly, to the posters who say that the sole reason for losing this that or the other industry to country x is because our workers are less productive, this almost always refers to unit labour costs, which is shorthand for saying that the competing worker earns less than their British equivalent. Can anyone give me an example where British jobs have been lost to a country where the workers are paid MORE than here?
To leave with a couple of little observations: "Capitalism is the strange belief that the nastiest of men, for the nastiest of motives, will act for the benefit of all "(JM Keynes) and "the best runners in a rat race are rats" (dunno).
COYB
Steve Guy
188 Posted 16/11/2011 at 12:14:41
188 Posted 16/11/2011 at 12:14:41
189 posts. Is this a record for a TW OP ? It must be if it's for a topic that is only indirectly related to football matters ?! I think TW should get a BBC "Question Time" special organised for all the budding politicians who are clearly out there !
Alan Williams
189 Posted 16/11/2011 at 12:38:57
189 Posted 16/11/2011 at 12:38:57
Peter Laing, go in the Brick pub and see what EFC scousers say about Hillsborough before you quote a moral high ground. What are own say about that day is far worse than any Tory MP has ever said. COYB
Peter Laing
190 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:06:55
190 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:06:55
I frequent the Brick and various other public houses around Goodison Park on most match days Alan and have never heard or seen the afformentioned references to Hillsborough. I have never heard a chant at the match or anywhere else mocking Liverpool supporters for the loss experienced at Hillsborough, if your reference is to the 'murderers' chants then we are talking about a totally different kettle of fish as you very well know.
Nick Entwistle
191 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:24:41
191 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:24:41
I invite you to air these views in a pub close to Goodison = you won't dare because my drunk friends will beat the crap out of you, therefor I am right... all the while I fight from the safety behind my keyboard.
Alan Williams
192 Posted 16/11/2011 at 12:55:37
192 Posted 16/11/2011 at 12:55:37
Peter/Ciaran, please read your replies again and my post. I don?t work for the public sector but my wife and brothers do. My wife will cross the line because she works for the NHS and is putting patient care above her own pocket, she supports Labour ? I don?t!!
Unison said on the first line that she will have to work longer because of the greedy bankers; this is a complete and utter lie. We ALL have to work longer because people are living longer and the state can?t afford it, simple economics.
Private pensions were changed way before the recent crash, it only fair that the public sector falls in line. Why should public sector workers be allowed to retire up to 10 years before everybody else and on 2/3rd final salary??? My brother will retire in 3 years time at 55 on a good wedge and I?m happy for him but he knows how lucky he is and wants out before it changes.
The state workforce before the recent cuts was 53%. That 53% of people employed by the state that means in economic terms a bankrupt country, the private sector must be larger than the public sector as a country if we wish to trade in the black and sadly past governments have chosen to abuse the public purse and now its time to pay it back, the mistake was largely down to your beloved Labour Party. Its not Blair or Brown that is paying the price but the working class individuals like my wife. COYB
Unison said on the first line that she will have to work longer because of the greedy bankers; this is a complete and utter lie. We ALL have to work longer because people are living longer and the state can?t afford it, simple economics.
Private pensions were changed way before the recent crash, it only fair that the public sector falls in line. Why should public sector workers be allowed to retire up to 10 years before everybody else and on 2/3rd final salary??? My brother will retire in 3 years time at 55 on a good wedge and I?m happy for him but he knows how lucky he is and wants out before it changes.
The state workforce before the recent cuts was 53%. That 53% of people employed by the state that means in economic terms a bankrupt country, the private sector must be larger than the public sector as a country if we wish to trade in the black and sadly past governments have chosen to abuse the public purse and now its time to pay it back, the mistake was largely down to your beloved Labour Party. Its not Blair or Brown that is paying the price but the working class individuals like my wife. COYB
Adam Cunliffe
193 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:22:13
193 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:22:13
Ironically I'm typing this on the sly in the 6th form library but here's my next two penneth...
I'll definitely be going to uni, simply because the thought of trying to gain employment without some kind of degree is almost unthinkable. However, originally I wanted to do something Geography related, however purely on the basis that your not exactly guaranteed a job at the end of it led me to think having qualified primary teacher status would more or less be a guarantee of job.
The fee's although they seem expensive, aren't TOO hard to pay back. The problem is the length of time it takes to pay them back. I believe you pay a small percentage of your salary every month and this is on a sliding scale i.e if you earn 50k per anum, you pay say 3k over a year, wheras if your earning 25k you'd pay £1500 back each year. Somthing along those lines anyway.
The issue is the period of time I and all my mates and other students will be paying it back for. The thought of having a mortgage, a wife, children even, along with a car (and insurance on that etc) to be still paying off your uni fee's when you could be in your 40's and 50's is just imo a disgrace.
Education should be a right for all, regardless of whether or not you can afford it. Just like people argue that 'if your good enough your old enough' with the likes of Ross Barkley, it should be a case of 'If your clever enough, you can go to university'. Yet I know a lot of people who won't go simply through cost. I mean, i'll probably be going to either Leeds or Sheffield so it shouldn't affect me, but I definitely picked two Liverpool based uni's as part of my choices just in case I had to live at home, yet this would never have been an issue untill the fee's went up, as now living costs are an added expense along side the increased fees.
Though I will say this, what's far worse than the Tories passing the law, was the Lib Dems supporting it. Nick Clegg is the biggest tosser there is, the Lib Dems were the party of the students once upon a time, and they've most definitely pissed on their chips as far as that's concerned. After promising they'd be against the fee increase and to then put vote IN FAVOUR of it..disgraceful doesn't come close.
I'll definitely be going to uni, simply because the thought of trying to gain employment without some kind of degree is almost unthinkable. However, originally I wanted to do something Geography related, however purely on the basis that your not exactly guaranteed a job at the end of it led me to think having qualified primary teacher status would more or less be a guarantee of job.
The fee's although they seem expensive, aren't TOO hard to pay back. The problem is the length of time it takes to pay them back. I believe you pay a small percentage of your salary every month and this is on a sliding scale i.e if you earn 50k per anum, you pay say 3k over a year, wheras if your earning 25k you'd pay £1500 back each year. Somthing along those lines anyway.
The issue is the period of time I and all my mates and other students will be paying it back for. The thought of having a mortgage, a wife, children even, along with a car (and insurance on that etc) to be still paying off your uni fee's when you could be in your 40's and 50's is just imo a disgrace.
Education should be a right for all, regardless of whether or not you can afford it. Just like people argue that 'if your good enough your old enough' with the likes of Ross Barkley, it should be a case of 'If your clever enough, you can go to university'. Yet I know a lot of people who won't go simply through cost. I mean, i'll probably be going to either Leeds or Sheffield so it shouldn't affect me, but I definitely picked two Liverpool based uni's as part of my choices just in case I had to live at home, yet this would never have been an issue untill the fee's went up, as now living costs are an added expense along side the increased fees.
Though I will say this, what's far worse than the Tories passing the law, was the Lib Dems supporting it. Nick Clegg is the biggest tosser there is, the Lib Dems were the party of the students once upon a time, and they've most definitely pissed on their chips as far as that's concerned. After promising they'd be against the fee increase and to then put vote IN FAVOUR of it..disgraceful doesn't come close.
Geoff Trenner
194 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:26:04
194 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:26:04
Adam#167. Clearly most people on here are, like yourself, against tuition fees. I'm not going to get into that debate as no doubt I'll receive veiled threats for daring to disagree. Do please check out Martin Lewis before deciding what to do, I don't personally believe that anyone should be put off uni by the fees.
One last thing, if you are going into primary education it might be worth checking out the difference between depravation & deprivation!
One last thing, if you are going into primary education it might be worth checking out the difference between depravation & deprivation!
Geoff Trenner
195 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:38:04
195 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:38:04
Adam#193. Sorry Adam our posts crossed there. If you are lucky enough to earn £50k per annum you'll pay back £2.6k per annum. On £25k you'll pay back £360 per annum. It's 9% of anything you earn over £21k
Ciarán McGlone
196 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:38:58
196 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:38:58
Alan,
Corssing a picket line makes her a scab - whatever the justification. She is undermining the democratic wishes of her colleagues - and you clearly celebrated such a decision.
Do not make it out to be some sort of benevolent decision...people like your wife undermine any credible leverage the ordinary worker has in regard to justified grievances with their employer.
Alan, in regard to your 'UNISON Lies' - to suggest that there is not a link between the failure to regulate the banks, the shortfall in pension pots and the subsequent plans to make people work longer - is patent nonsense. It is not a lie to stretch the causation of the imminent tory policy - or previous policy, to be fair.
If that is your only example of "all the lies unison put in their leaflets" - then I think it is you that is guilty of lying.
And to be honest, that trend perfectly corresponds with the rest of your ill-thought out posts. To suggest that because private pensions are shit...that everybody else's pensions should be shit - is typical of the self-serving and greed infested tory politics we are seeing being put into action.
Corssing a picket line makes her a scab - whatever the justification. She is undermining the democratic wishes of her colleagues - and you clearly celebrated such a decision.
Do not make it out to be some sort of benevolent decision...people like your wife undermine any credible leverage the ordinary worker has in regard to justified grievances with their employer.
Alan, in regard to your 'UNISON Lies' - to suggest that there is not a link between the failure to regulate the banks, the shortfall in pension pots and the subsequent plans to make people work longer - is patent nonsense. It is not a lie to stretch the causation of the imminent tory policy - or previous policy, to be fair.
If that is your only example of "all the lies unison put in their leaflets" - then I think it is you that is guilty of lying.
And to be honest, that trend perfectly corresponds with the rest of your ill-thought out posts. To suggest that because private pensions are shit...that everybody else's pensions should be shit - is typical of the self-serving and greed infested tory politics we are seeing being put into action.
Brian Denton
197 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:52:32
197 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:52:32
Geoff, do you care to do the math on how long it will take to pay back £39,000 (3 x tuition fee loans at £9,000 plus say maintenance loans at 3 x £4,000) at an interest rate of say 4% when you're paying £360 per annum?
Let's do the simple bit first. Ignoring interest. £39,000 divided by £360 is 108 years. Optimistic eh? I couldn't be bothered calculating the time taken when including accrued interest, but take it from me it will be a considerably higher figure.
Now, in the north of England even earning £25,000 is quite an ask. It follows therefore that assuming life expectancy doesn't shoot up to 150, an awful lot of these loans are not going to be repaid using the current repayment model. Therefore at some point the Government will change it (perhaps to become a secured debt on property owned).
Or perhaps Martin Lewis's sound advice will magic away the problem.
Let's do the simple bit first. Ignoring interest. £39,000 divided by £360 is 108 years. Optimistic eh? I couldn't be bothered calculating the time taken when including accrued interest, but take it from me it will be a considerably higher figure.
Now, in the north of England even earning £25,000 is quite an ask. It follows therefore that assuming life expectancy doesn't shoot up to 150, an awful lot of these loans are not going to be repaid using the current repayment model. Therefore at some point the Government will change it (perhaps to become a secured debt on property owned).
Or perhaps Martin Lewis's sound advice will magic away the problem.
Geoff Trenner
198 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:12:39
198 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:12:39
Brian#197. I'll repeat that I'm not defending the current system, though I do believe that students should contribute to the cost of their education. I just want kids thinking of going to uni to make the decision based on fact rather than the spin put on it by our politicians.
I don't know what may happen in the future any more than you do so the youngsters must make the decision based on what we do know which is the figures I quoted above.
Both of my daughters have student loans that they are paying back. Would I rather they didn't have to? Of course but student loans is a reality that no party in power will do away with.
I don't know what may happen in the future any more than you do so the youngsters must make the decision based on what we do know which is the figures I quoted above.
Both of my daughters have student loans that they are paying back. Would I rather they didn't have to? Of course but student loans is a reality that no party in power will do away with.
Shaun Brennan
199 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:22:47
199 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:22:47
Ultimately, this is what it all boils down too. greed.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/nov/14/academies-pay-200k-salaries
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/nov/14/academies-pay-200k-salaries
Colin Wainwright
200 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:47:37
200 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:47:37
Kenwright has gone a long way towards totally dividing Evertonians over the past ten years, but after listening to the insulting, un-educated, sub-Littlejohn drivel spouted by Geoff Trenner and the party political broadcasts of Alistair Bates, I'm quite fuckin happy to be divided.
I grew up in Liverpool through the 70s and 80s. I seen the city dying through mass unemployment, while champagne fuelled, coke fiend yuppies, lived the high life down south. This was down, not to Derek Hatton and his cronies, as Alan Williams suggests, but to Thatchers serial neglect of the Labour voting North. There is a reason why there's not one fuckin Tory MP in Scotland, y'know.
Its this fuckin worship of that fascist bitch Thatcher, and Trenner's ill-informed insults (you probably shouldnt come out with that shit, next time you bless us with your presence), that have truly sickened me though.
Fuckin shocked TBH!
I grew up in Liverpool through the 70s and 80s. I seen the city dying through mass unemployment, while champagne fuelled, coke fiend yuppies, lived the high life down south. This was down, not to Derek Hatton and his cronies, as Alan Williams suggests, but to Thatchers serial neglect of the Labour voting North. There is a reason why there's not one fuckin Tory MP in Scotland, y'know.
Its this fuckin worship of that fascist bitch Thatcher, and Trenner's ill-informed insults (you probably shouldnt come out with that shit, next time you bless us with your presence), that have truly sickened me though.
Fuckin shocked TBH!
Geoff Trenner
201 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:29:00
201 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:29:00
Colin#200. It must be great being blessed with that level of eploquence! You see it one way, I see it another. I don't think that there is any need for the personal abuse do you? I refer you to my comment at #158
I'm certainly very happy to be divided as long you & those who think like you are on the other side of the divide.
I'm certainly very happy to be divided as long you & those who think like you are on the other side of the divide.
Christine Foster
202 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:32:19
202 Posted 16/11/2011 at 13:32:19
Nick Entwistle, my apologies for the delay in responding, l have just finished a 17 hour day, something that sadly is more the norm than not.
To call you a half wit would be an insult so l won"t bother, nor do l think it fairo, accurate yes but probably not fair, because your probably someone who still believes that the trickle down theory works or that we should all get on our bikes and head for the southern counties to find a job.
If you bothered to actually read my post you will see that l applauded the fact that the club took the initiative, but sad that we have to rely on charities to do so. Were does the responsibility of governments start and finish?
How dare you and others bemoan the fact that we as a country are not as competitive as China or some other low skilled low cost, unsafe, sweat shop. Many like you see the justification for destroying rights for better profits.
No one is advocating returns to bad union practices, but frankly to applaud an ideology that is responsible for the gfc, to condemn those who will direct suffer for the rank profiteering of banks and sit and praise a system wager the same banks have obscene profits, bale outs etc whilst the general working population foot the bill and suffer the consequences of a corrupt banking system is disgraceful. But then l suppose you and others will justify the use of police against anyone who protests.
Good taste and manners prevent me from telling you where to go, but I guess your already there..
To call you a half wit would be an insult so l won"t bother, nor do l think it fairo, accurate yes but probably not fair, because your probably someone who still believes that the trickle down theory works or that we should all get on our bikes and head for the southern counties to find a job.
If you bothered to actually read my post you will see that l applauded the fact that the club took the initiative, but sad that we have to rely on charities to do so. Were does the responsibility of governments start and finish?
How dare you and others bemoan the fact that we as a country are not as competitive as China or some other low skilled low cost, unsafe, sweat shop. Many like you see the justification for destroying rights for better profits.
No one is advocating returns to bad union practices, but frankly to applaud an ideology that is responsible for the gfc, to condemn those who will direct suffer for the rank profiteering of banks and sit and praise a system wager the same banks have obscene profits, bale outs etc whilst the general working population foot the bill and suffer the consequences of a corrupt banking system is disgraceful. But then l suppose you and others will justify the use of police against anyone who protests.
Good taste and manners prevent me from telling you where to go, but I guess your already there..
Geoff Trenner
203 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:40:42
203 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:40:42
Colin#200. David Mundell is a Tory MP in Scotland
Christine Foster
204 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:38:54
204 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:38:54
SOCIALISM
You have 2 cows.
You give one to your neighbour.
COMMUNISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and gives you some milk.
FASCISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and sells you some milk.
NAZISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and shoots you.
BUREAUCRATISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away.
TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell one and buy a bull.
Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows.
You sell them and retire on the income.
ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND (VENTURE) CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows.
The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.
The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more.
You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States , leaving you with nine cows.
No balance sheet provided with the release.
The public then buys your bull.
SURREALISM
You have two giraffes.
The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.
AN AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows.
Later, you hire a consultant to analyse why the cow has dropped dead.
A FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on strike, organize a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.
A JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
You then create a clever cow cartoon image called a Cowkimona and market it worldwide.
AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows, but you don?t know where they are.
You decide to have lunch.
A SWISS CORPORATION
You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.
You charge the owners for storing them.
A CHINESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You have 300 people milking them.
You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity.
You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.
AN INDIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You worship them.
A BRITISH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Both are mad.
AN IRAQI CORPORATION
Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.
You tell them that you have none.
No-one believes you, so they bomb the crap out of you and invade your country.
You still have no cows, but at least you are now a Democracy.
AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Business seems pretty good.
You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.
A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION
You have two cows.
The one on the left looks very attractive.
You have 2 cows.
You give one to your neighbour.
COMMUNISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and gives you some milk.
FASCISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and sells you some milk.
NAZISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and shoots you.
BUREAUCRATISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away.
TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell one and buy a bull.
Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows.
You sell them and retire on the income.
ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND (VENTURE) CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows.
The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.
The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more.
You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States , leaving you with nine cows.
No balance sheet provided with the release.
The public then buys your bull.
SURREALISM
You have two giraffes.
The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.
AN AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows.
Later, you hire a consultant to analyse why the cow has dropped dead.
A FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on strike, organize a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.
A JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
You then create a clever cow cartoon image called a Cowkimona and market it worldwide.
AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows, but you don?t know where they are.
You decide to have lunch.
A SWISS CORPORATION
You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.
You charge the owners for storing them.
A CHINESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You have 300 people milking them.
You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity.
You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.
AN INDIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You worship them.
A BRITISH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Both are mad.
AN IRAQI CORPORATION
Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.
You tell them that you have none.
No-one believes you, so they bomb the crap out of you and invade your country.
You still have no cows, but at least you are now a Democracy.
AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Business seems pretty good.
You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.
A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION
You have two cows.
The one on the left looks very attractive.
Geoff Trenner
205 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:51:23
205 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:51:23
Chrisine#204. How about a vote to decide which one is most popular. I'll start - TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
Brian Denton
206 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:53:30
206 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:53:30
Geoff, the problem is how to define 'traditional capitalism'. Is it the Victorian 'children down the mines, red in tooth and claw, survival of the fittest' capitalism? Or the Keynesian/Bretton Woods/Scandinavian manged capitalism?
In the popularity stakes, I would say (apart from possibly in America) 'popular' capitalism is the latter model. It just can't be delivered in this country !
In the popularity stakes, I would say (apart from possibly in America) 'popular' capitalism is the latter model. It just can't be delivered in this country !
Tim Jenkins
207 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:56:09
207 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:56:09
Geoff we have not had Traditional Capitalism for 25+ years, the political party that you have been defending ended that when they begun the Neo-Liberal era and de-regulated the markets.
Because of the we have ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND (VENTURE) CAPITALISM
Because of the we have ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND (VENTURE) CAPITALISM
Alan Williams
208 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:10:12
208 Posted 16/11/2011 at 14:10:12
Ciaran, 75% of its members either never bothered voting or voted no! Welcome to the majority world of the Unions. Private pensions had to adapt you lot need to wake up and stop being luddites, the only reason a state could afford to pay such pensions is by the private sector pushing the economy forward. I?m glad to see your socialist ethics coming through that basically you want to keep your benefits while your fellow private sector workers have to work longer and harder to pay for it! Good old selfish socialism is still alive I see!! The sad thing about this argument is nobody wins, we will/have both need to make changes the difference is I like millions others got on with it. One simple question when you all have your day out in London, why didn?t you all come out on strike to support private pensions, I didn?t see any support for us and some of us were members of Unions so don?t expect a tad of support from us in return. Labour taxed private pensions twice whilst in power reducing everybody?s pots, thus meaning all private holders would be worse off by many thousands, Labour the party of the people, my arse!!
Geoff Trenner
209 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:14:07
209 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:14:07
Brian & Tim; To quote Winston Churchill:
'democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
I'd say the same for capitalism ? not perfect but better than any alternative that I'm aware of...
'democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
I'd say the same for capitalism ? not perfect but better than any alternative that I'm aware of...
Chris Rudd
210 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:15:26
210 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:15:26
And on Saturday we'll all wander down to a mortgaged up to the hilt Goodison to watch a bunch of millionaires kick a football about...as Ms Morrisette said...
Nick Entwistle
211 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:11:47
211 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:11:47
Christine, you presume far too much to make what you say relevant... with or without a 17 hour shift.
You haven't got a clue why I called you a buffoon and a month of shifts wouldn't bring you any closer.
Now if you excuse me, I have a wine and houmus tasting in Notting Hill to enjoy. May have time to sneer at some passing wage donkeys who have come down from The North with their rickets and accents.
You haven't got a clue why I called you a buffoon and a month of shifts wouldn't bring you any closer.
Now if you excuse me, I have a wine and houmus tasting in Notting Hill to enjoy. May have time to sneer at some passing wage donkeys who have come down from The North with their rickets and accents.
Brian Denton
212 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:35:29
212 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:35:29
Geoff, you still don't address my point that there are different forms of capitalism. Which one do you believe in?
Nick, you're just (if I may coin a phrase) a buffoon. Merely saying "You wouldn't understand my argument" is not a clinching argument.
Nick, you're just (if I may coin a phrase) a buffoon. Merely saying "You wouldn't understand my argument" is not a clinching argument.
Sam Morrison
213 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:48:17
213 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:48:17
Nick I normally enjoy your posts but this dripping sarcasm has me reaching for the rennies. Can you enlighten us as to what is fuelling your antagonism here? Preferably without ironic veneer?
Tim Jenkins
214 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:50:24
214 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:50:24
Geoff - that may well be true but it is the type of Capitalism that you have to look at. The type of Capitalism that exists in Sweden is very different to the type the exists in Jamaica for example. It is all a question of perspective, there are people on the right-wing of American politics who genuinely believe that France and Sweden are socialist countries.
There is an Elephant in the room here that you need to get your head around and that is the monster that is the un-regulated banking sector. I am not going to get into a Labour Vs Tory debate because that has been done to death on this thread. Both of them (and the Lib Dems) are completely in the pocket of the banks and will put their interests before the majority of people in this country. Inequality in this country is at the highest level it has been since the 1930?s.
It wasn?t the unions striking over pensions that caused the collapse of Lehman Brothers was it. And as far as socialism is concerned, our leaders are all for un-regulated capitalism until their friends in the casino that is the City of London need to bail out a bank with taxpayers money. That sounds a little bit like socialism to me. So what is it socialism for the rich capitalism for the poor?
There is an Elephant in the room here that you need to get your head around and that is the monster that is the un-regulated banking sector. I am not going to get into a Labour Vs Tory debate because that has been done to death on this thread. Both of them (and the Lib Dems) are completely in the pocket of the banks and will put their interests before the majority of people in this country. Inequality in this country is at the highest level it has been since the 1930?s.
It wasn?t the unions striking over pensions that caused the collapse of Lehman Brothers was it. And as far as socialism is concerned, our leaders are all for un-regulated capitalism until their friends in the casino that is the City of London need to bail out a bank with taxpayers money. That sounds a little bit like socialism to me. So what is it socialism for the rich capitalism for the poor?
Nick Entwistle
215 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:45:06
215 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:45:06
Brian, I said she didn't have a clue, far removed from that she wouldn't understand it.
And I've not submitted an argument to clinch anything, more discussions for mutual progression.
Though on Christine's original post it was a direct comment.
And I've not submitted an argument to clinch anything, more discussions for mutual progression.
Though on Christine's original post it was a direct comment.
Nick Entwistle
217 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:52:33
217 Posted 16/11/2011 at 15:52:33
Hey Sam, because I was responding to the presumption of character that Christine paints of me. More a satirical enactment than a point of sarcasm.
Colin Wainwright
218 Posted 16/11/2011 at 16:16:19
218 Posted 16/11/2011 at 16:16:19
Geoff Trenner (#201)
As with all Tories, you take condescention to a new level. No personal abuse in my post. I simply stated that you were spouting ill-informed, offensive drivel (which is true).
Also, there was no implied threat of violence. Far from it. Just advising you not to repeat your sentiments in the wrong pub, on your next visit to our whinger populated city.
I'll let you get back to your Mail crossword.
As with all Tories, you take condescention to a new level. No personal abuse in my post. I simply stated that you were spouting ill-informed, offensive drivel (which is true).
Also, there was no implied threat of violence. Far from it. Just advising you not to repeat your sentiments in the wrong pub, on your next visit to our whinger populated city.
I'll let you get back to your Mail crossword.
Colin Wainwright
219 Posted 16/11/2011 at 16:25:17
219 Posted 16/11/2011 at 16:25:17
BTW, there's a reason why there is ONLY FUCKIN 1 MP in Scotland.
Nice bit of research Tory boy.
Nice bit of research Tory boy.
Geoff Trenner
220 Posted 16/11/2011 at 16:47:17
220 Posted 16/11/2011 at 16:47:17
Brian#212 & Tim#214. The sort of capitalism that I'm in favour of is the sort of capitalism that allows people to keep most of every penny they earn rather than it being taken & spent by our political masters. Where I can earn as much as I'm worth without being hit by punitive (50%) income tax rates. Where employees in the private sector aren't paying for public sector pensions that they can't possibly afford for themselves. Where enterprise is encouraged & the lazy & feckless aren't able to live off my effort.
I don't have an answer to the bank regulation but then nor does anyone else. The banks couldn't be allowed to go to the wall without causing economic collapse so I guess they had to be bailed out (this goes against my instincts that failing companies should be allowed to fail) but as I say I don't have an answer.
I'll come back to capitalism (generically but clearly excluding the Victorian kids up chimney type) being better than the alternatives.
I don't have an answer to the bank regulation but then nor does anyone else. The banks couldn't be allowed to go to the wall without causing economic collapse so I guess they had to be bailed out (this goes against my instincts that failing companies should be allowed to fail) but as I say I don't have an answer.
I'll come back to capitalism (generically but clearly excluding the Victorian kids up chimney type) being better than the alternatives.
Ciarán McGlone
221 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:11:25
221 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:11:25
Alan,
You ask - why didn't the public sector come out on strike for private pension changes?
You do realise that only parties to a strike can actually strike? You do realise that, don't you?
The trade Unions have had a campaign against the reduction in private and public sector pensions for several years now.
So, the unions did support action on the basis of private reductions. However the private sector was too busy whinging about public sector pensions to get off their arses and do something about it.
The rest of your post is frankly gibberish.
You ask - why didn't the public sector come out on strike for private pension changes?
You do realise that only parties to a strike can actually strike? You do realise that, don't you?
The trade Unions have had a campaign against the reduction in private and public sector pensions for several years now.
So, the unions did support action on the basis of private reductions. However the private sector was too busy whinging about public sector pensions to get off their arses and do something about it.
The rest of your post is frankly gibberish.
Peter Laing
222 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:17:58
222 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:17:58
Nick you have contrived to reveal what I always thought you to be a complete and utter wanker
Brian Denton
223 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:21:36
223 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:21:36
Geoff, okay I get a pretty good idea of your capitalism. It's the American low-tax, low-state spending model. What is often referred to as 'the Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism. But it's not the only one !
There was a telling line in your posting, namely "...Where I can earn as much as I'm worth....." where what you mean is "..where I can get paid as much as the market will bear....". Because I don't happen to believe that a soldier or a nurse - for fuck's sake soldiers put their LIVES on the line - is WORTH less than a banker, or a professional footballer for that matter. So don't spout that 'what I'm worth' line. Unless of course you actually believe that you are WORTH more than a nurse or a teacher. In which case, my friend, our values are at right angles to each other.
There was a telling line in your posting, namely "...Where I can earn as much as I'm worth....." where what you mean is "..where I can get paid as much as the market will bear....". Because I don't happen to believe that a soldier or a nurse - for fuck's sake soldiers put their LIVES on the line - is WORTH less than a banker, or a professional footballer for that matter. So don't spout that 'what I'm worth' line. Unless of course you actually believe that you are WORTH more than a nurse or a teacher. In which case, my friend, our values are at right angles to each other.
Ciarán McGlone
224 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:22:03
224 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:22:03
Geoff,
If you believe in a non-cohesive state, with absolutely no sense of social responsiblilty, and no public sector- then that's your prerogative.
It doesn't make you much of a human being though - or particularly sensible either..(i'd love to know how your utopian, free-market society would end up)
If you believe in a non-cohesive state, with absolutely no sense of social responsiblilty, and no public sector- then that's your prerogative.
It doesn't make you much of a human being though - or particularly sensible either..(i'd love to know how your utopian, free-market society would end up)
Dean Adams
225 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:19:08
225 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:19:08
James I'Anson 152
Wow fella. Learn to read and you might find that I have not defended the Tories nor Thatcher merely pointed out that the problems were there long before the 80's
Wow fella. Learn to read and you might find that I have not defended the Tories nor Thatcher merely pointed out that the problems were there long before the 80's
Tim Jenkins
226 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:12:48
226 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:12:48
Somebody told me a joke once that is quite fitting to this thread, it involves a Banker, A Daily Mail reader (Geoff - I am not suggesting you are one) and somebody claiming benefits. They are all sitting around a table drinking tea and there are 10 biscuits, the banker takes 9 of the 10 biscuits and then says to the Daily Mail reader ?You'd better watch the person on benefits ? they want your biscuit?.
I don?t believe we should get too caught up by arguing among ourselves over tit-for-tat issues but we need to have a look at who are really making the decisions and behaving in a way that is causing the most damage to society. And I would suggest that is the Politicians and Bankers working together to look after the interests of the ruling class and not Unions, workers on strike and those on benefits. I am not suggesting for a moment that there are not some people who are manipulating the benefit system or not contributing to society in some positive way, but the majority of people who find themselves are not and want to make a contribution as the system as it stands does not allow them.
The amount that we pay for due to people manipulating the welfare state is a drop in the ocean compared to what we pay for because of corruption at the highest level of our society. Look at the likes of corporate tax avoidance - Vodafone alone got let off a £6 Billion tax bill, and that is just one corporate merger by one company. Boots the Chemist moved there head office from Nottingham to a Post Box in Switzeland to avoid paying tax in the UK, because of corporations acting in this way we all have to pay more.
The UK banking bailout that occurred in 2008 cost an estimated £850billion, which from what I understand works out that every tax payer in the UK will have to contribute approximately £22,000 to this. You may not see this bailout Tax in your pay slip next to PAYE and National Insurance but you will feel it in inflation, the cut to public services that we will have to start paying private companies for (such as education and healthcare) and rising VAT (I can see that going up in the next budget). The UK Government is spending an estimate £80-100 billion on the Trident Nucleur missle system, that is almost enough to eradicate the whole of the national debt alone. And at the same time telling us there is no alternative to the austerity we are going to be put under.
I could go on forever. Although we may not all agree I would say this thread has been a good thing, pat on the back for TW for keeping it going as only by discussing issues such as this even if we disagree can we begin to look at solutions.
I don?t believe we should get too caught up by arguing among ourselves over tit-for-tat issues but we need to have a look at who are really making the decisions and behaving in a way that is causing the most damage to society. And I would suggest that is the Politicians and Bankers working together to look after the interests of the ruling class and not Unions, workers on strike and those on benefits. I am not suggesting for a moment that there are not some people who are manipulating the benefit system or not contributing to society in some positive way, but the majority of people who find themselves are not and want to make a contribution as the system as it stands does not allow them.
The amount that we pay for due to people manipulating the welfare state is a drop in the ocean compared to what we pay for because of corruption at the highest level of our society. Look at the likes of corporate tax avoidance - Vodafone alone got let off a £6 Billion tax bill, and that is just one corporate merger by one company. Boots the Chemist moved there head office from Nottingham to a Post Box in Switzeland to avoid paying tax in the UK, because of corporations acting in this way we all have to pay more.
The UK banking bailout that occurred in 2008 cost an estimated £850billion, which from what I understand works out that every tax payer in the UK will have to contribute approximately £22,000 to this. You may not see this bailout Tax in your pay slip next to PAYE and National Insurance but you will feel it in inflation, the cut to public services that we will have to start paying private companies for (such as education and healthcare) and rising VAT (I can see that going up in the next budget). The UK Government is spending an estimate £80-100 billion on the Trident Nucleur missle system, that is almost enough to eradicate the whole of the national debt alone. And at the same time telling us there is no alternative to the austerity we are going to be put under.
I could go on forever. Although we may not all agree I would say this thread has been a good thing, pat on the back for TW for keeping it going as only by discussing issues such as this even if we disagree can we begin to look at solutions.
Geoff Trenner
227 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:30:48
227 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:30:48
Brian, are you suggesting that we should pay people based on their perceived (by whom) value to society.
The market, which yes I believe in, pays as little as it needs to in order to recruit & retain the number & quality of people it needs. It's simply supply & demand with football clubs having to pay more for players from a small pool than hospitals have to pay for nurses from a larger pool.
Am I worth more than a nurse? I earn more than a nurse so I guess my skills are more valuable & scarce. How do you compare my value, having started my own business & employing a good number of people, with a nurse who turns up & just does her job every day?
The market, which yes I believe in, pays as little as it needs to in order to recruit & retain the number & quality of people it needs. It's simply supply & demand with football clubs having to pay more for players from a small pool than hospitals have to pay for nurses from a larger pool.
Am I worth more than a nurse? I earn more than a nurse so I guess my skills are more valuable & scarce. How do you compare my value, having started my own business & employing a good number of people, with a nurse who turns up & just does her job every day?
Nick Entwistle
228 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:41:43
228 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:41:43
Peter, I've never thought of you to be anything, probably as you're entirely forgettable. I had to look back on your posts to see who you were and... sorry, forgot what I was trying to be bothered to say. Who got married?
Brian Denton
229 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:47:32
229 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:47:32
Geoff, would that the market was so perfect ! The labour market at the high end is a mutual back-scratching system, and not a free market at all. I would argue that a nurse is worth more than say Fred Goodwin. All he did was fuck up a bank. I could have done that a lot more cheaply than he did, so how did the 'market allocation' of remuneration levels work there?
Geoff Trenner
230 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:47:16
230 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:47:16
Tim#225. I don't read The Mail (I consider it to be a populist right-wing rag).
I don't disagree with much that you say. Anybody defrauding the state should be brought to justice, be they large corporations or benefit fraudsters.
As I said above, the banks had to be bailed out to prevent total economic collapse ? I don't approve, I just don't see an alternative.
Hear hear regarding TW letting this run, I've thoroughly enjoyed it
I don't disagree with much that you say. Anybody defrauding the state should be brought to justice, be they large corporations or benefit fraudsters.
As I said above, the banks had to be bailed out to prevent total economic collapse ? I don't approve, I just don't see an alternative.
Hear hear regarding TW letting this run, I've thoroughly enjoyed it
Sam Morrison
231 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:55:42
231 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:55:42
Nick, I was going to say it's pointless continuing this when you're intent on being obtuse... well, I have said it now!
Much as I disagree with them, at least Geoff, Alan et al are engaging in debate rather than scoffing from the sidelines. I still don't understand your objection to Christine's original post, but I guess if you haven't revealed it by now - overtly I mean, not in a stream of knowing bon-mots - you're not going to.
Much as I disagree with them, at least Geoff, Alan et al are engaging in debate rather than scoffing from the sidelines. I still don't understand your objection to Christine's original post, but I guess if you haven't revealed it by now - overtly I mean, not in a stream of knowing bon-mots - you're not going to.
Sam Morrison
232 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:59:22
232 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:59:22
The world has turned upside down! I'm siding with Ciaran and Gavin in a thread!
Mick Gallagher
233 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:05:50
233 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:05:50
So as boss Geoff if you works voted to strike over pay or working conditions so no doubt you would just sack them.
Geoff Trenner
234 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:57:48
234 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:57:48
Brian the market got that one wrong but in my experience (exclusively private sector) it gets most right. If companies got many wrong they would go out of business.
Nick Entwistle
235 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:09:13
235 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:09:13
Sam, not at all, that's bang on the reason. Nothing obtuse about it. But they say people aren't supposed to explain satire. You either get it or you don't.
Geoff Trenner
236 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:08:51
236 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:08:51
Mick at #232. I don't know, it has never happened & I'd see it a a failure on both sides if it did. I pay my people the going rate for the job (as little as I need to in order to recruit & retain the required number & quality of people) & promote from within when I can. If my employees had a problem I'm confident that they'd come to me & we'd talk it through though at the end of the day it is my business so I'd make the final decision.
That Ok with you ?
That Ok with you ?
Tim Jenkins
237 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:57:45
237 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:57:45
At least we have found some common ground. One thing that I disagree on is that not bailing out the banks would have caused a total economic collapse. I would suggest that the current method being used to handle the crisis such as bailouts and austerity is going to be far more damaging long term than not baling the banks would have been.
I went to a talk this weekend and there was a speaker there by the name of Ha-Joon Chang (one the world?s most respected Economists) and somebody actually put that question to him: ?What would have happened if we had not bailed out the banks??? and he proposed a pretty good solution which, to be honest I cannot remember all of the finer details of... but it was something along the lines of "let the banks fail... the money that was used to prop up falling banks should be put into a fund to be used in the real economy such, as preventing people losing their homes etc and that bailing out banks is not going to make things better long term."
I guess we will see over the coming years how this will all pan out. My opinion is that we are going to have a monumental struggle on our hands.
Changing the subject slightly but something worth noting is that the IMF and European Union have effectively carried out two financial coup d'état?s is in the last month by installing ?yes men? for the banks as Prime Ministers who are going to do what they say in Greece and Italy. We currently have an Ex Goldman Sachs banker as the Prime Minister of Greece (Lucas Papademos), A Goldman Sachs Adviser as the Prime Minster of Italy (Mario Monti) and a Ex Goldman Sachs banker as the head of the European Central Bank (Mario Draghi).
Who is really calling the shots?
I went to a talk this weekend and there was a speaker there by the name of Ha-Joon Chang (one the world?s most respected Economists) and somebody actually put that question to him: ?What would have happened if we had not bailed out the banks??? and he proposed a pretty good solution which, to be honest I cannot remember all of the finer details of... but it was something along the lines of "let the banks fail... the money that was used to prop up falling banks should be put into a fund to be used in the real economy such, as preventing people losing their homes etc and that bailing out banks is not going to make things better long term."
I guess we will see over the coming years how this will all pan out. My opinion is that we are going to have a monumental struggle on our hands.
Changing the subject slightly but something worth noting is that the IMF and European Union have effectively carried out two financial coup d'état?s is in the last month by installing ?yes men? for the banks as Prime Ministers who are going to do what they say in Greece and Italy. We currently have an Ex Goldman Sachs banker as the Prime Minister of Greece (Lucas Papademos), A Goldman Sachs Adviser as the Prime Minster of Italy (Mario Monti) and a Ex Goldman Sachs banker as the head of the European Central Bank (Mario Draghi).
Who is really calling the shots?
Sam Morrison
238 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:14:41
238 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:14:41
Satire and obtuseness: not synonyms, Nick.
Tim Jenkins
239 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:16:21
239 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:16:21
Fuck knows why that has posted twice, school boy error there..
[Now Fixed ? Ed.]
[Now Fixed ? Ed.]
Alan Williams
240 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:48:33
240 Posted 16/11/2011 at 17:48:33
Ciaran- Last question as football needs to take over on this site now, if the Unions were interested in helping private pensions why did they contribute millions in funds for a Labour government that stitched up the exact same people that got them in power (middle England) they put pressure to get Ed Miliband in which will probably mean labour being un-electable at the next election but never backed some of its own workers. I bet if Labour were implementing these cuts to the public sector they would put pressure on at cabinet level. The unions haven?t protected the private sector at all hence my sarcasms. COYB
Mick Gallagher
241 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:20:28
241 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:20:28
Im sure you are a great boss to work for Geoff very fair indeed.
It is your business just asking a question if its ok with you ?
It is your business just asking a question if its ok with you ?
Andy Codling
242 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:22:53
242 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:22:53
It makes me sad that I could sit by and hold a conversation with someone like Geoff Trenner in Goodison Park, not knowing how he secretly sneers and holds the people of Liverpool in contempt.
Sam Hoare
243 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:31:13
243 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:31:13
Andy, that seems pretty unfair and deliberately provocative to me.
Agree or disagree i think Geoff has mostly stated his argument without personal attack. You're just looking for a scrap aren't you.
Agree or disagree i think Geoff has mostly stated his argument without personal attack. You're just looking for a scrap aren't you.
Phil Martin
244 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:51:30
244 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:51:30
Next week can we discuss abortion, and also the rehabilitation of paedophiles?
Mike Rourke
245 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:34:19
245 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:34:19
The human conditon, eh.
Firmly held beliefs even more firmly entrenched once challenged
Hackles raised
History dredged up
Insults thrown
...simply be sorted out by a couple of open minds a pencil and a decent map of Jerusalem...
It wil be fun to see if we can put the politics to one side all return to discussing the merits ( or not ) of playing Osman in a more central role in the reasonably uncivilized way we used to.
I doubt it.
'Fuckin' Tory bastard wants Heitinga in the starting XI!'
'Coleman should be rested?! Dirty socialist scum'
Etc
Firmly held beliefs even more firmly entrenched once challenged
Hackles raised
History dredged up
Insults thrown
...simply be sorted out by a couple of open minds a pencil and a decent map of Jerusalem...
It wil be fun to see if we can put the politics to one side all return to discussing the merits ( or not ) of playing Osman in a more central role in the reasonably uncivilized way we used to.
I doubt it.
'Fuckin' Tory bastard wants Heitinga in the starting XI!'
'Coleman should be rested?! Dirty socialist scum'
Etc
Geoff Trenner
246 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:56:54
246 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:56:54
Mick, I like to think so.. No complaints so far
Andy, I don't think that I've suggested anywhere that I hold the people of Liverpool in contempt. I said that Liverpool has more than its fair share of self pitying whingers. I certainly hold them in contempt.
Sam, thank you, I certainly hope that I've done so.
Phil, why wait?
Brian Denton
247 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:59:58
247 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:59:58
To be honest Mike, I'm sure I will have forgotten most of the political lines taken here as soon as battle recommences on the pitch. But it was an interesting interlude. Reminded me of all the angst I used to feel when I found out that our Chairman of the time, the blessed Mr Carter, was one of the high priests of the Conservative Party establishment in Liverpool.....
Anyway, one bright thought is that if the eighties are returning to Liverpool maybe our team will be great again!
Anyway, one bright thought is that if the eighties are returning to Liverpool maybe our team will be great again!
Andy Crooks
248 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:49:48
248 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:49:48
The dead religion of "the markets" deciding what happens is an affront to decency. Too many people have their views moulded by a rabid right-wing press that skilfully and, in the guise of common sense, pursues an agenda that divides society.
Why are footballers wages reported in pounds per week? Do we hear of bankers, film stars etc being decried in the same way? It seems to offend the media that working class lads can earn a fortune. The wages of footballers are obscene as are the wages of anyone earning vast fortunes.
The state (ie, all of us) has a duty to look after the weakest. Margaret Thatcher created a society of survival of the fittest. We are not animals.
Why are footballers wages reported in pounds per week? Do we hear of bankers, film stars etc being decried in the same way? It seems to offend the media that working class lads can earn a fortune. The wages of footballers are obscene as are the wages of anyone earning vast fortunes.
The state (ie, all of us) has a duty to look after the weakest. Margaret Thatcher created a society of survival of the fittest. We are not animals.
Eugene Ruane
249 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:10:29
249 Posted 16/11/2011 at 18:10:29
Geoff you say..
"The sort of capitalism that I'm in favour of is the sort of capitalism that allows people to keep most of every penny they earn rather than it being taken & spent by our political masters".
Hmmm.....(thinks).
Earns?
Funny, if you replace the word 'earns' with 'gets', that paragraph takes on a slightly meaning.
Part of the problem now (imo) is that the massive wages some get are not REALLY 'earned'.
Are they?
Market forces you say?
Right...NOW?
Your sort of capitalism appears (to me) to say "I don't give a fuck if nurses are paid shite, I'M well-paid and intend to give my innate human greed full reign and consequently support whatever system allows me to keep most of it".
(nb: I don't for one second expect to to say "yes, you've caught me out, I am simply a self-serving, greedy cunt who gets paid a good few bob and gets worked up at the idea of any of it going to anyone but me", but..).
Moving on - a general 'political' point.
There is something (kind of) ironic about stridently debating politics on a football forum.
Why?
Well because of the whole..erm.. 'opium of the masses' thing.
The bankers of this country have basically raped the future.
If you have kids, (nb: I don't) their future options for houses, jobs etc, are (in the main) fucked.
Pensions are also fucked and people will have to work longer, even though jobs are being cut in their thousands (nb: today's figures: 1 in 5 under 25 out of work).
And practically all MP's from ALL the political parties have fiddled (ie: STOLEN) expenses (FROM US!)
So how many of us are out there protesting?
100,000?
A million?
Well..um...there's a couple of hundred tents at St Pauls!
I'm not pointing the finger, or suggesting I'm any different, just suggesting that come the weekend, it'll be "We need to beat Wolves.." etc and the REAL issues (the stuff that REALLY affects our lives) will be forgotten until the next quiet (ie: international) week.
In fact one could ask are Everton FC actually part of THE problem?
Makes me think a couple of years without Everton (and Sky and bet365 and I'm A fucking Celeb, etc etc) and we could REALLY get out there and (metaphorically) crack some banker heads.
(still it WOULD be good to get 3 points on.....)
"The sort of capitalism that I'm in favour of is the sort of capitalism that allows people to keep most of every penny they earn rather than it being taken & spent by our political masters".
Hmmm.....(thinks).
Earns?
Funny, if you replace the word 'earns' with 'gets', that paragraph takes on a slightly meaning.
Part of the problem now (imo) is that the massive wages some get are not REALLY 'earned'.
Are they?
Market forces you say?
Right...NOW?
Your sort of capitalism appears (to me) to say "I don't give a fuck if nurses are paid shite, I'M well-paid and intend to give my innate human greed full reign and consequently support whatever system allows me to keep most of it".
(nb: I don't for one second expect to to say "yes, you've caught me out, I am simply a self-serving, greedy cunt who gets paid a good few bob and gets worked up at the idea of any of it going to anyone but me", but..).
Moving on - a general 'political' point.
There is something (kind of) ironic about stridently debating politics on a football forum.
Why?
Well because of the whole..erm.. 'opium of the masses' thing.
The bankers of this country have basically raped the future.
If you have kids, (nb: I don't) their future options for houses, jobs etc, are (in the main) fucked.
Pensions are also fucked and people will have to work longer, even though jobs are being cut in their thousands (nb: today's figures: 1 in 5 under 25 out of work).
And practically all MP's from ALL the political parties have fiddled (ie: STOLEN) expenses (FROM US!)
So how many of us are out there protesting?
100,000?
A million?
Well..um...there's a couple of hundred tents at St Pauls!
I'm not pointing the finger, or suggesting I'm any different, just suggesting that come the weekend, it'll be "We need to beat Wolves.." etc and the REAL issues (the stuff that REALLY affects our lives) will be forgotten until the next quiet (ie: international) week.
In fact one could ask are Everton FC actually part of THE problem?
Makes me think a couple of years without Everton (and Sky and bet365 and I'm A fucking Celeb, etc etc) and we could REALLY get out there and (metaphorically) crack some banker heads.
(still it WOULD be good to get 3 points on.....)
Brian Denton
250 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:12:44
250 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:12:44
Andy, I think it would be even better if they reported bankers' salaries by the minute...(why do they always refer to these as 'compensation' packages, by the way, as though they are having a wrong righted).
At least with footballers it is related, however obscenely, to pure verifiable talent. As opposed to in the City where nepotism, croneyism, and mutually self-serving 'remuneration committees' obscure any real idea of what a proper pay level should be.
At least with footballers it is related, however obscenely, to pure verifiable talent. As opposed to in the City where nepotism, croneyism, and mutually self-serving 'remuneration committees' obscure any real idea of what a proper pay level should be.
Ciarán McGlone
252 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:14:47
252 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:14:47
Alan,
The unions themselves have been regularly stitched up by labour. If you knew anything about union politics you'd know that.
To imply that the unions were somehow in league with every Tory lite policy became they back them is a poss poor argument.
The unions themselves have been regularly stitched up by labour. If you knew anything about union politics you'd know that.
To imply that the unions were somehow in league with every Tory lite policy became they back them is a poss poor argument.
Sam Morrison
253 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:44:56
253 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:44:56
Good post Eugene. I've noticed btw that a lot of the people who are unforgiving of David Moyes are turning out to be lefties. As a mini-social experiment, I wonder if everyone should include a MOYES OUT or MOYES IN a the end of their posts. Or possibly MOYES: I"M NOT SURE. I'll plump for the latter.
Kevin Sparke
254 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:38:31
254 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:38:31
The type of capitalism we have now is full free market fundamentalist (with the emphasis on 'mentalist') and to see how well it's working have a look at the way the the whole world economic system is totally fucked.
Everyone owes money, every country is deep in debt, every national economy including the mighty United States and China is circling the plug hole of depression and depression is almost a certainty in the next few years.
We've had 33 years of this economic madness, 33 years of 'The Lady is not for turning' and 'there is no plan B' - all the politicians are, New Labour, Blue Labour, Tory, Lib Dem are enablers for the big boys in big finance - have a look at were the money to fund the parties comes from... The City of London - 50% for the Tories 38% from three economic institutions... Labour, Tory, Lib Dem - it doesn't matter who you vote for they're all in the pocket of big finance.
The tragedy is we've been here before - lack of control of financial institutions fucked the world economic system in 1929 and the Great Depression which lead to the rise of fascism and the only thing that cured that was WW2...
As this is a football site - have a look at the mirror of the economy on display every week in the Premier League - when Fulham, or Aston Villa or even us Everton have a realist chance of winning the League - I'll believe the system is working... until then; the gap between rich and poor grows ever wider by the month and everyone apart from Manchester United, Manchester City and Chelsea supporters can forget about competing. (And if you think Newcastle United will finish in the top 4 I've some magic beans to sell you)
Everyone owes money, every country is deep in debt, every national economy including the mighty United States and China is circling the plug hole of depression and depression is almost a certainty in the next few years.
We've had 33 years of this economic madness, 33 years of 'The Lady is not for turning' and 'there is no plan B' - all the politicians are, New Labour, Blue Labour, Tory, Lib Dem are enablers for the big boys in big finance - have a look at were the money to fund the parties comes from... The City of London - 50% for the Tories 38% from three economic institutions... Labour, Tory, Lib Dem - it doesn't matter who you vote for they're all in the pocket of big finance.
The tragedy is we've been here before - lack of control of financial institutions fucked the world economic system in 1929 and the Great Depression which lead to the rise of fascism and the only thing that cured that was WW2...
As this is a football site - have a look at the mirror of the economy on display every week in the Premier League - when Fulham, or Aston Villa or even us Everton have a realist chance of winning the League - I'll believe the system is working... until then; the gap between rich and poor grows ever wider by the month and everyone apart from Manchester United, Manchester City and Chelsea supporters can forget about competing. (And if you think Newcastle United will finish in the top 4 I've some magic beans to sell you)
Nick Entwistle
255 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:08:17
255 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:08:17
"Satire and obtuseness: not synonyms, Nick."
Don't have a clue what that's supposed to mean Sam, and not sure what you want me to say.
She presumed me to be a type of person so I took the piss as if I were that person.
Better? I can't simplify any more than that.
Don't have a clue what that's supposed to mean Sam, and not sure what you want me to say.
She presumed me to be a type of person so I took the piss as if I were that person.
Better? I can't simplify any more than that.
Peter Laing
256 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:31:43
256 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:31:43
No Nick from where I am looking you acted like the classroom bully.
Peter Laing
257 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:32:51
257 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:32:51
Superb riposte Eugene, nail on the head with the usual acerbic and scathing wit to boot.
Nick Entwistle
258 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:36:55
258 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:36:55
No, you don't.
Michael Kenrick
Editorial Team
259 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:28:24
Editorial Team
259 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:28:24
Wow! Passing the 250-mark... who'da thunk it?
I saw it was getting animated and political early on and chose to let it run because I think it was beginning to reveals some interesting things that Euguene and a number of others have picked up on or reflected.
For me, it shows up the fallacy that yer Evertonian is this neatly packaged creature who thinks about everything a certain way. I don't think he exists. We are all individuals and we are all different... until we group together as a 'union' and say we share the same aims..!!!
The debate has all the familiar shades and nuances we see in other animated threads on topics such as Moyes the Manager, right down to the insults and yes, the inevitable abuse from some numpties. [Although calling a fellow Evertonian "human excrement" for having a particular political viewpoint takes us to an especially pathetic nadir; thank you, David Mathieson.]
Well done to most of you for keeping it mostly civil, despite the understandable passions inflamed.
I saw it was getting animated and political early on and chose to let it run because I think it was beginning to reveals some interesting things that Euguene and a number of others have picked up on or reflected.
For me, it shows up the fallacy that yer Evertonian is this neatly packaged creature who thinks about everything a certain way. I don't think he exists. We are all individuals and we are all different... until we group together as a 'union' and say we share the same aims..!!!
The debate has all the familiar shades and nuances we see in other animated threads on topics such as Moyes the Manager, right down to the insults and yes, the inevitable abuse from some numpties. [Although calling a fellow Evertonian "human excrement" for having a particular political viewpoint takes us to an especially pathetic nadir; thank you, David Mathieson.]
Well done to most of you for keeping it mostly civil, despite the understandable passions inflamed.
Eugene Ruane
260 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:44:13
260 Posted 16/11/2011 at 20:44:13
Michael (257) - obviously the human excrement thing is 'above and beyond', however (because mad amuses me) I LOVE the..um..'specificity' of the word 'human'.
Can't help getting a mental picture of someone, looking for the right insult, trying different 'brands' of excrement to see which one gets a reaction.
Sort of..
"You're Vole excrement!".
(no reaction)
"You're CAMEL excrement!"
(nothing)
"Horse!"
(rien)
"Ah! You're....er....HUMAN excrement!"
"WHAT DID YOU FUCKING CALL ME!!?"
Type...stuff.
Can't help getting a mental picture of someone, looking for the right insult, trying different 'brands' of excrement to see which one gets a reaction.
Sort of..
"You're Vole excrement!".
(no reaction)
"You're CAMEL excrement!"
(nothing)
"Horse!"
(rien)
"Ah! You're....er....HUMAN excrement!"
"WHAT DID YOU FUCKING CALL ME!!?"
Type...stuff.
Andrew Conroy
262 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:13:44
262 Posted 16/11/2011 at 19:13:44
This (Ciaran, #60):
The education system is a social contract were the state has a duty of care to provide the best education it can. You want to bastardise that social contract by the introduction of factors such as competition, shareholders and profit margins. I think thats an absolute disgrace.
The education system is a social contract were the state has a duty of care to provide the best education it can. You want to bastardise that social contract by the introduction of factors such as competition, shareholders and profit margins. I think thats an absolute disgrace.
Chris Leyland
263 Posted 16/11/2011 at 21:28:03
263 Posted 16/11/2011 at 21:28:03
The best debate on here for years.
I think we should let Geoff keep every penny he earns himself. However, we should then let him pay every time he feels ill and has to see a GP. If he has private medical care then he needs to pay the state a contribution towards the cost it has laid out for training the Doctors who now treat him.
We should make him pay back all the costs of his state education (or if he was privately educated a proportion of the costs of training and educating those state-educated teachers he was taught by).
We should stop the council from emptying his bins and when he tries to go to his local rubbish tip, we should charge him the market rate at the maximum profit we can get to take his rubbish.
If he wants to drive on the publically owned roads we should charge him for doing so. He doesn't want to pay tax so his petrol won't include the tax element, so we should set him a market premium for using our roads.
We should also charge him a fee to pay us back for using the state-educated workforce he now has at his disposal to help him maximise his personal wealth.
God forbid he is the victim of any type of crime as we will need to charge him for the police to investigate.
Hopefully no fire at any of his properties, as we will need to charge him for sending out the fire service.
I reckon he can keep all the money he has earned thus far and pay no tax at all and he will so much better off as a result as long as he doesn't get sick, doesn't use public roads, doesn't need the police, doesn't employ anyone educated by the state, and can recycle all his waste himself.
I think we should let Geoff keep every penny he earns himself. However, we should then let him pay every time he feels ill and has to see a GP. If he has private medical care then he needs to pay the state a contribution towards the cost it has laid out for training the Doctors who now treat him.
We should make him pay back all the costs of his state education (or if he was privately educated a proportion of the costs of training and educating those state-educated teachers he was taught by).
We should stop the council from emptying his bins and when he tries to go to his local rubbish tip, we should charge him the market rate at the maximum profit we can get to take his rubbish.
If he wants to drive on the publically owned roads we should charge him for doing so. He doesn't want to pay tax so his petrol won't include the tax element, so we should set him a market premium for using our roads.
We should also charge him a fee to pay us back for using the state-educated workforce he now has at his disposal to help him maximise his personal wealth.
God forbid he is the victim of any type of crime as we will need to charge him for the police to investigate.
Hopefully no fire at any of his properties, as we will need to charge him for sending out the fire service.
I reckon he can keep all the money he has earned thus far and pay no tax at all and he will so much better off as a result as long as he doesn't get sick, doesn't use public roads, doesn't need the police, doesn't employ anyone educated by the state, and can recycle all his waste himself.
David O'Keefe
264 Posted 16/11/2011 at 21:49:52
264 Posted 16/11/2011 at 21:49:52
I look forward to the day that EFC gets involved in the work programme. I'll be getting involved in that debate.
Kevin Sparke
265 Posted 16/11/2011 at 22:18:36
265 Posted 16/11/2011 at 22:18:36
Chris - re charging Geoff for the fire engine when his private property goes up in flames... well, that's exactly what used to happen. Houses and businesses would have a plaque outside of them to tell the fire bobbies that they were insured and had paid for fire protection. There were one or two problems with this. Firstly, properties that were not insured were left to burn down until they became a risk to other properties. Some rival 'fire protection' companies would set up and would not put out fires that were insured with other companies. Sometimes the fire protection companies would set fire to rival firms properties to put them out of business- you know, in the spirit of free enterprise...
Tim Jenkins
266 Posted 16/11/2011 at 22:37:23
266 Posted 16/11/2011 at 22:37:23
For those on you on this thread who have been preaching the fairness of the invisible hand of the free market and how the Tories policies are in fact fair and just and sensible.
I suggest you take the time to watch a documentary that has just come out called "The end of poverty", you can watch the whole thing on YouTube.
You will get a little lesson in history and economics and I think you will find every argument you have made on here torn to absolute shreds.
I suggest you take the time to watch a documentary that has just come out called "The end of poverty", you can watch the whole thing on YouTube.
You will get a little lesson in history and economics and I think you will find every argument you have made on here torn to absolute shreds.
Sam Morrison
268 Posted 16/11/2011 at 22:58:14
268 Posted 16/11/2011 at 22:58:14
Nick, I was merely being flippant - you claimed satire, I saw it as being obtuse. That's all. Thanks for your explanation - I need to read back through it all to make sense now...
Dean Adams
269 Posted 16/11/2011 at 22:57:49
269 Posted 16/11/2011 at 22:57:49
This has been one of the most amusing and interesting threads on Toffeeweb for a long time. Shame some blues have such a short sighted opinnion on others with different views.
Chris Leyland 261
Why should Geoff do all these things any more than you?
He probably pays a heavy price for his council tax compared to you for pretty much the same facilities, which of course include the local police. I see no logic at all in your comments, but maybe you found it amusing!!
Brian Denton
270 Posted 16/11/2011 at 23:21:30
270 Posted 16/11/2011 at 23:21:30
Dean, I think Chris's point was that Geoff wants to REDUCE the amount of tax he pays and this post was merely pointing out the logic of that reduction.
Dean Adams
271 Posted 16/11/2011 at 23:37:45
271 Posted 16/11/2011 at 23:37:45
Brian Denton 268
I would have to concur that I would like to reduce the amount of tax I pay too.
The reduction however would not result in the levels that Geoff seems to command. Therin lies the difference in salaries and many a source of rancour in this thread and indeed on this site regarding our club.
It probably aint fair, but thats the way it is and all the bitching and whinning wont improve things in the slightest, at least I percieve that that was part of what Geoff alluded to. Or am I just simplifying it!!
I would have to concur that I would like to reduce the amount of tax I pay too.
The reduction however would not result in the levels that Geoff seems to command. Therin lies the difference in salaries and many a source of rancour in this thread and indeed on this site regarding our club.
It probably aint fair, but thats the way it is and all the bitching and whinning wont improve things in the slightest, at least I percieve that that was part of what Geoff alluded to. Or am I just simplifying it!!
Eugene Ruane
272 Posted 17/11/2011 at 00:09:01
272 Posted 17/11/2011 at 00:09:01
Dean (269), you say..
"Therin lies the difference in salaries and many a source of rancour in this thread and indeed on this site regarding our club. It probably aint fair, but thats the way it is and all the bitching and whining wont improve things in the slightest"
Well you're right, it's NOT fair and you're right again, all the bitching and moaning WON'T improve anything (well, certainly not in society - organised bitching could I suppose change things to a small degree at Everton).
My earlier point (re 'opium of the masses') is that the thing that brings us all here in the first place, is one of the reasons (distractions?) WHY "all the bitching and whining wont improve things in the slightest".
Because that's ALL it is and that's as far as it'll go.
Kind of.. "Tut aren't the tories cunts (nb: YES!) and I'll go spare if we don't play two up front against Wolves".
Remember, the Russian revolution wasn't peasants sitting about tutting and muttering "Isn't the price of beetroot shocking!"
The French revolution wasn't the poor, wearily shaking their heads and whining "C'est une rule pour le BCBG, et un autre rule pour le pauvre" (or whatever).
They got out there and put themselves about - plenty of (not in the least bit) civil disobedience.
Posh, wealthy arse kicked, good and proper.
History (even very recent history) says for REAL change to occur, people need to take to the streets in great numbers and give the powers that be, a huge fright.
I'm NOT advocating it, just pointing out what (historically) HAS brought radical change to any society that appears to be run not for the majority, but for the benefit of the few.
"Therin lies the difference in salaries and many a source of rancour in this thread and indeed on this site regarding our club. It probably aint fair, but thats the way it is and all the bitching and whining wont improve things in the slightest"
Well you're right, it's NOT fair and you're right again, all the bitching and moaning WON'T improve anything (well, certainly not in society - organised bitching could I suppose change things to a small degree at Everton).
My earlier point (re 'opium of the masses') is that the thing that brings us all here in the first place, is one of the reasons (distractions?) WHY "all the bitching and whining wont improve things in the slightest".
Because that's ALL it is and that's as far as it'll go.
Kind of.. "Tut aren't the tories cunts (nb: YES!) and I'll go spare if we don't play two up front against Wolves".
Remember, the Russian revolution wasn't peasants sitting about tutting and muttering "Isn't the price of beetroot shocking!"
The French revolution wasn't the poor, wearily shaking their heads and whining "C'est une rule pour le BCBG, et un autre rule pour le pauvre" (or whatever).
They got out there and put themselves about - plenty of (not in the least bit) civil disobedience.
Posh, wealthy arse kicked, good and proper.
History (even very recent history) says for REAL change to occur, people need to take to the streets in great numbers and give the powers that be, a huge fright.
I'm NOT advocating it, just pointing out what (historically) HAS brought radical change to any society that appears to be run not for the majority, but for the benefit of the few.
Steve Carter
273 Posted 17/11/2011 at 02:05:48
273 Posted 17/11/2011 at 02:05:48
This is THE funniest thing I have EVER read on Toffeeweb. Thanks for letting it go, Michael.
Steve Carter
274 Posted 17/11/2011 at 02:14:14
274 Posted 17/11/2011 at 02:14:14
And Michael - an idea: would it be possible for you to consider (for special items like this one) building in a YouTube-like facility into Toffeeweb so's people could video their posts, and we could see what they looked like, hear their accents, etc.?
Derek Arrowsmith
275 Posted 17/11/2011 at 05:18:31
275 Posted 17/11/2011 at 05:18:31
This is some of the funniest stuff I have ever read and just reminds me of why I exercised my right to choose and left the UK. Before anyone starts on about the upper class and having money to be able to leave I will say I am not upper class and as a family we struggled financially for a few years until we found our feet. I have been a blue since I was 5 (nearly 45 years), and coming from a family with no interest in football, made a choice based on my favourite colour one I have not regretted.
Back to topic, just as a matter of interest has anyone actually read what free schools are about? if not try this link http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools/b0061428/free-schools/what
The schools are not businesses, they are not for profit and are state funded, so most of the arguements against them appear to be unfounded.
Back to topic, just as a matter of interest has anyone actually read what free schools are about? if not try this link http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools/b0061428/free-schools/what
The schools are not businesses, they are not for profit and are state funded, so most of the arguements against them appear to be unfounded.
Eric Myles
276 Posted 17/11/2011 at 07:14:12
276 Posted 17/11/2011 at 07:14:12
Chris #260, welcome to my world, you've almost accurately described living in Thailand.
Ciarán McGlone
277 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:04:02
277 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:04:02
Dean,
Your moral indignance at the insults used above really did make me chuckle..
It's fine to advocate a market driven social ideology which marginalises an entire demograhic - but as soon as someone calls you a '££$*&' for championing this self-interest - they've step over the line??
Do me a favour.
Now I wouldn't normally advocate insults in political debate - not because some of the comments on this thread don't make me angry (I personally think I deserve a medal for sidestepping the ill-informed celebration of Thatcher in Ireland comment) - but I avoid it because those with less fertile minds appear to think that using an insult, or getting angry, negates your argument (we've already seen ti several times on this thread).
They're wrong. Getting angry doesn't in any way undermine an argument. In fact, its usually the only thing that ultimately works in political hegemony.
But perhaps you don't understand the anger Dean. It wouldn't surpise me. So Let me explain it to you.
We have people on this thread - suggesting that public sector workers, who get paid buttons, should stop whinging and meekly accept ideological changes which gravely affect their ability to subsist.
Some of those perpetrating this position on this thread have openly admitted being business owners and drawing in excess of £150K a year.
Not only do these people lecture from a position of privilege - they advocate (like yourself) further reductions in state responsibility. SImply on the basis that it would allow them to acquire as much wealth as possible.
These posters are absolutely furious at having to subsidise the rather meagre terms and conditions of those in the public sector - you know, the people who prop up the system that makes their wealth acquisition possible.
However these are the same business owners who will happily gobble up the benefits that being part of that system - 100% Business Relief on inheritance Tax, a 5 Million pound CGT relief on the sale of a business, all the other various tax incentives provided for businesses and any grants/assistance they received for their start up...
God forbid that they actually put something back..
So next time you want to get angry about the insults sent in your direction Dean - have a little think about how insulting your politics actually are..
Your moral indignance at the insults used above really did make me chuckle..
It's fine to advocate a market driven social ideology which marginalises an entire demograhic - but as soon as someone calls you a '££$*&' for championing this self-interest - they've step over the line??
Do me a favour.
Now I wouldn't normally advocate insults in political debate - not because some of the comments on this thread don't make me angry (I personally think I deserve a medal for sidestepping the ill-informed celebration of Thatcher in Ireland comment) - but I avoid it because those with less fertile minds appear to think that using an insult, or getting angry, negates your argument (we've already seen ti several times on this thread).
They're wrong. Getting angry doesn't in any way undermine an argument. In fact, its usually the only thing that ultimately works in political hegemony.
But perhaps you don't understand the anger Dean. It wouldn't surpise me. So Let me explain it to you.
We have people on this thread - suggesting that public sector workers, who get paid buttons, should stop whinging and meekly accept ideological changes which gravely affect their ability to subsist.
Some of those perpetrating this position on this thread have openly admitted being business owners and drawing in excess of £150K a year.
Not only do these people lecture from a position of privilege - they advocate (like yourself) further reductions in state responsibility. SImply on the basis that it would allow them to acquire as much wealth as possible.
These posters are absolutely furious at having to subsidise the rather meagre terms and conditions of those in the public sector - you know, the people who prop up the system that makes their wealth acquisition possible.
However these are the same business owners who will happily gobble up the benefits that being part of that system - 100% Business Relief on inheritance Tax, a 5 Million pound CGT relief on the sale of a business, all the other various tax incentives provided for businesses and any grants/assistance they received for their start up...
God forbid that they actually put something back..
So next time you want to get angry about the insults sent in your direction Dean - have a little think about how insulting your politics actually are..
Ciarán McGlone
278 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:38:36
278 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:38:36
Oh and I forgot something...
The same business owners on this thread have been the very ones moaning about private sector pensions...when in actual fact, who's actually to blame for a failure to provide decent private sector pensions other than him and his likes?
"You want an increase in your pension contributions Akmar? - Fuck Off - I need a new Duck Motte"
It must have killed these people when the minimum wage was enacted...those that bother..
The same business owners on this thread have been the very ones moaning about private sector pensions...when in actual fact, who's actually to blame for a failure to provide decent private sector pensions other than him and his likes?
"You want an increase in your pension contributions Akmar? - Fuck Off - I need a new Duck Motte"
It must have killed these people when the minimum wage was enacted...those that bother..
Mike Berry
279 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:35:47
279 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:35:47
People's Club? Surely some mistake, we are now the Tory Boys!!
Dave Lynch
280 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:50:13
280 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:50:13
Ciaran.
Your banging your head against the proverbial mate.
People like Geoff want it all, the benefits of a socialist system that you rightly state is 'propped up' by the working class and the wealth that comes with the captalist free market.
They precieve themselves as providers to an underclass who would do well to doff their caps in their general direction and be gratefull of the few crumbs thrown their way.
Society is ailing, it's there for all to see and the Thatcherite principles that have been muted on here will drag the whole of society back to the dark days of the 70s.
Your banging your head against the proverbial mate.
People like Geoff want it all, the benefits of a socialist system that you rightly state is 'propped up' by the working class and the wealth that comes with the captalist free market.
They precieve themselves as providers to an underclass who would do well to doff their caps in their general direction and be gratefull of the few crumbs thrown their way.
Society is ailing, it's there for all to see and the Thatcherite principles that have been muted on here will drag the whole of society back to the dark days of the 70s.
Eugene Ruane
281 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:19:12
281 Posted 17/11/2011 at 09:19:12
Derek Arrowsmith (271) - Wow!
Thanks for the completely impartial, all the facts link!
I'm now totally convinced by that information... from er..a government department.
(no chance of any of THAT being shifty bollocks eh!)
In fact, I'm so convinced, I've become..a Tory and am going fox-hunting on Saturday.
(nb: NOT because I like chasing animals and killing them, but because 'it be the naaaaaadural woy of the coundryzoyyyyde').
I'm also going to nob my secretary, then lecture everyone about their morals.
By the way, there's FOUR pages there on free schools - any reason you didn't start on page one?
Couldn't be coz the clip of the minister (page one) makes him look like he's trying waaaaaaay too fucking hard and possibly damaging his own argument, simply by looking and sounding the way he does..could it?
(ie: like a public schoolboy...created Gerry & Sylvia Anderson).
Seriously, if you're trying to convince people that a govt idea on education is worthwhile/legitimate, how convincing do you think it is to use their own fucking link to do it?
(hardly likely to say "Look, obviously I'm not telling you everything" is he?)
Here's page one.
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools/b0061428/free-schools
Thanks for the completely impartial, all the facts link!
I'm now totally convinced by that information... from er..a government department.
(no chance of any of THAT being shifty bollocks eh!)
In fact, I'm so convinced, I've become..a Tory and am going fox-hunting on Saturday.
(nb: NOT because I like chasing animals and killing them, but because 'it be the naaaaaadural woy of the coundryzoyyyyde').
I'm also going to nob my secretary, then lecture everyone about their morals.
By the way, there's FOUR pages there on free schools - any reason you didn't start on page one?
Couldn't be coz the clip of the minister (page one) makes him look like he's trying waaaaaaay too fucking hard and possibly damaging his own argument, simply by looking and sounding the way he does..could it?
(ie: like a public schoolboy...created Gerry & Sylvia Anderson).
Seriously, if you're trying to convince people that a govt idea on education is worthwhile/legitimate, how convincing do you think it is to use their own fucking link to do it?
(hardly likely to say "Look, obviously I'm not telling you everything" is he?)
Here's page one.
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools/b0061428/free-schools
Eugene Ruane
282 Posted 17/11/2011 at 10:49:30
282 Posted 17/11/2011 at 10:49:30
Ciaran (273) - spot on.
That moral indignation is, more often than not, a straw, grasped when a piss-weak argument begins to crumble.
"Do we really need the invective and foul language? Michael I'm not advocating censorship but..."
Etc blah whine.
Personally, I honestly wouldn't mind so much if the average conservative said "Look, I just don't give a fuck about the greater good, I'm only here for a short time, I don't believe anything can be changed, so I intend to grab as much for me and mine as I can. Survival of the fittest? Absolutely! You don't like it? Tough shit"
But (as with fox-hunting) it's the complete bullshit 'justification' that really riles.
For the record, I don't believe we actually have political parties anymore, I believe we have self-serving cliques who exist simply 'be in power'.
I don't believe labour party are really any different from the Conservatives (I don't even believe the labour party ARE the labour party)
It's now simply "I get my gang into power - we win".
The country?
"Oh shit yeah......forgot about them".
That moral indignation is, more often than not, a straw, grasped when a piss-weak argument begins to crumble.
"Do we really need the invective and foul language? Michael I'm not advocating censorship but..."
Etc blah whine.
Personally, I honestly wouldn't mind so much if the average conservative said "Look, I just don't give a fuck about the greater good, I'm only here for a short time, I don't believe anything can be changed, so I intend to grab as much for me and mine as I can. Survival of the fittest? Absolutely! You don't like it? Tough shit"
But (as with fox-hunting) it's the complete bullshit 'justification' that really riles.
For the record, I don't believe we actually have political parties anymore, I believe we have self-serving cliques who exist simply 'be in power'.
I don't believe labour party are really any different from the Conservatives (I don't even believe the labour party ARE the labour party)
It's now simply "I get my gang into power - we win".
The country?
"Oh shit yeah......forgot about them".
Sam Hoare
283 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:02:36
283 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:02:36
Eugene, i totally agree with you about the marginalisation of any clear party divides. Which is why i find it increasingly impossible to know who to follow or vote for as it seems the dictinctions between party manifesto's or certainly their ability to carry them out (as witnessed by any Lib Dem followers) is totally negligible.
I wonder however what you would then advocate instead. What is the way forward for a country with no genuine socialist ideology?
I wonder however what you would then advocate instead. What is the way forward for a country with no genuine socialist ideology?
Geoff Trenner
284 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:48:35
284 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:48:35
Sorry guys, been away exploiting my employees by winning a contact to keep a couple of them in work for the next 3 months!
Ciaran#273. Yes I am a business owner but nowhere did I say that i earned in excess of £150k. What i said was that I wanted a form of (capitalist) economy
'Where I can earn as much as I'm worth without being hit by punitive (50%) income tax rates.'
I've never paid myself anything like that & this year, because business is tough & profits down, I will not be drawing a salary at all. We'll survive on my wife's salary as a teacher. By doing so hopefully the business (which I've invested a huge amount of money into over the years) will survive & I'll keep my workforce.
Some of you guys have a very warped idea of what being 'a boss' is all about!
Ciaran#273. Yes I am a business owner but nowhere did I say that i earned in excess of £150k. What i said was that I wanted a form of (capitalist) economy
'Where I can earn as much as I'm worth without being hit by punitive (50%) income tax rates.'
I've never paid myself anything like that & this year, because business is tough & profits down, I will not be drawing a salary at all. We'll survive on my wife's salary as a teacher. By doing so hopefully the business (which I've invested a huge amount of money into over the years) will survive & I'll keep my workforce.
Some of you guys have a very warped idea of what being 'a boss' is all about!
Sam Hoare
285 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:57:03
285 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:57:03
People love to vilify on here Geoff! Half of the time with only slight regard for the truth of the matter.
Eugene Ruane
286 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:41:05
286 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:41:05
Sam (279). A depressing answer I'm afraid. I think for true fairness and genuine social change to come about, something VERY radical has to happen. And the reality is, there's very little chance of that happening, especially if (as I hinted at earlier) we (myself included) spend so much of our time arguing the toss over the ability (or not) of Ossie/Hibbo/Bily etc. Fact is, real change is rarely given and tends to come about only when it is taken. A population distracted by Sky, the X-box, the PL are probably the least likely ever to say.. "TO THE STREETS!!"
Ciarán McGlone
287 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:57:36
287 Posted 17/11/2011 at 11:57:36
Geoff,
I apologise. You only despise the requirement to pay into society according to your means...
That, of course, changes everything.
I apologise. You only despise the requirement to pay into society according to your means...
That, of course, changes everything.
Brian Denton
288 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:06:03
288 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:06:03
Coming back to education, one of the funniest things I heard was a few years ago, when a Tory Education spokesman was telling the BBC interviewer that they (the Communist BBC) concentrated far too much on large class sizes, which were not a bad thing. The interviewer then asked him why private schools always plugged as their great selling point that they had much smaller class sizes than state schools. There was a silence - the Tory just refused to acknowledge the question, let alone try to answer it. Hilarious....and telling.
Eugene Ruane
289 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:05:14
289 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:05:14
Geoff did you 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps'? (whatever bootstraps are - something you get with your self-made man kit I imagine).
Geoff Trenner
290 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:19:12
290 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:19:12
Eugene#285. Do I detect an animosity to someone doing well for themselves?
To answer your question, I come from a very poor working class background. My English grandfather was a farm labourer living in a tied cottage most of his life & my Polish grandfather was shot by the Russians in the war. My father (Polish by birth) worked in manual roles in the construction industry. So yes, I've 'pulled myself up by my bootstraps' whatever they are and I'm extremely proud of the fact. Why shouldn't I be?
To answer your question, I come from a very poor working class background. My English grandfather was a farm labourer living in a tied cottage most of his life & my Polish grandfather was shot by the Russians in the war. My father (Polish by birth) worked in manual roles in the construction industry. So yes, I've 'pulled myself up by my bootstraps' whatever they are and I'm extremely proud of the fact. Why shouldn't I be?
Andy Crooks
291 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:13:08
291 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:13:08
Ciaran @ 273. This post says all that needs be said.I work in a public sector post that enhances the life of every citizen that chooses to use the service. I just got my pension forecast yesterday. In twelve years time,if I make it, I'll retire with a pension of £5,100. I can't wait. The vilification of the public sector by the right wing press is obscene. The gullibility of the millions,including friends of mine, who swallow it up is frightening.
I'd play Rodwell in a more attacking role against Wolves.
I'd play Rodwell in a more attacking role against Wolves.
Martin Mason
292 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:15:59
292 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:15:59
I'm a conservative and a genuine socialist and there is no conflict. I believe that only by having a wealth generating free market capitalist system can you have the wealth required to look after those less fortunate as we must do. Socialism itself creates nothing.
I also fully sympathise with hard working business owners and any wealth generator of any kind who are generally treated with contempt by government and those who are supported in any way by that wealth.
I used to run a business in the UK and pay a lot of tax but when the government started making more out of my labours than me I left.
I have great sympathy with most public sector workers but hate the public sector fat cats who believe they should get private sector ceo wages and index linked pensions.
I also fully sympathise with hard working business owners and any wealth generator of any kind who are generally treated with contempt by government and those who are supported in any way by that wealth.
I used to run a business in the UK and pay a lot of tax but when the government started making more out of my labours than me I left.
I have great sympathy with most public sector workers but hate the public sector fat cats who believe they should get private sector ceo wages and index linked pensions.
Brian Denton
293 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:31:24
293 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:31:24
Martin, a point of agreement at last! I too can't stomach the public sector fat cats who want all the rewards of being a top private sector manager (because I'm worth it) .
Ciarán McGlone
294 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:26:03
294 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:26:03
Geoff,
While pulling the old 'working class hero' routine - You appeared to miss Eugene's point ...He was asking whether you got any help/assistance/hand outs etc....on the glorified path to reliance on your wifes nursing wages..
(N.B I think that particular little anecdote is frankly a spoof/untrue/misleading/duplicitous)
While pulling the old 'working class hero' routine - You appeared to miss Eugene's point ...He was asking whether you got any help/assistance/hand outs etc....on the glorified path to reliance on your wifes nursing wages..
(N.B I think that particular little anecdote is frankly a spoof/untrue/misleading/duplicitous)
Geoff Trenner
295 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:31:21
295 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:31:21
Andy#287. I appreciate that that's not a lot to live on. I've no idea what you earn or how long you've been paying into your pension but compare that with someone in the private sector who has earned the same as you over the same number of years & has to buy an annuity with their pension pot.
A 65 year old retiring today would need £100k in their pension pot to get a pension of £6k per year.
A 65 year old retiring today would need £100k in their pension pot to get a pension of £6k per year.
Ciarán McGlone
296 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:48:36
296 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:48:36
Geoff,
What percentage of employee contributions do you contribute to your employees pension fund?
What percentage of employee contributions do you contribute to your employees pension fund?
Geoff Trenner
297 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:47:01
297 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:47:01
Ciaran#290. Whether you choose to believe me or not matters not one iota to me. It happens to be true but ho hum
Where did Eugene ask whether I'd received any hand-outs? If it was on an earlier comment then sorry I missed it.
My wife is a teacher not a nurse & I'm not pretending that I've never taken a decent salary from the business. In the past I've taken decent amounts of profit from the business but this year I can't. However, I'm not wallowing in self pity or whinging about it!
Where did Eugene ask whether I'd received any hand-outs? If it was on an earlier comment then sorry I missed it.
My wife is a teacher not a nurse & I'm not pretending that I've never taken a decent salary from the business. In the past I've taken decent amounts of profit from the business but this year I can't. However, I'm not wallowing in self pity or whinging about it!
Geoff Trenner
298 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:54:35
298 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:54:35
Ciaran#292. I match their contributions (up to a maximum figure) so it's up to them!
Sam Hoare
299 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:51:42
299 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:51:42
Eugene @282 I agree. The vast majority seem too distracted by various procrastinations to really enact any change, rather just the ocassional moan as exemplified by this thread. Sometimes i feel sorry for Politicians who, useless and corrupt as many of them are seem lie they are just their to soak up public grievance while actually its night on impossible for them to make wholesale changes because things have become so entrenched.
On another note my girlfriend has just come back from Burundi and Congo. At the end of the day our situation in the UK is still a million miles better off than in 9/10 of the world where rape, murder, no education or healthcare are daily ways of life. That doesn't mean of course that we shouldn't feel the injustices of our own situations but only that we should keep hold of perspective.
On another note my girlfriend has just come back from Burundi and Congo. At the end of the day our situation in the UK is still a million miles better off than in 9/10 of the world where rape, murder, no education or healthcare are daily ways of life. That doesn't mean of course that we shouldn't feel the injustices of our own situations but only that we should keep hold of perspective.
Ciarán McGlone
300 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:56:07
300 Posted 17/11/2011 at 12:56:07
Geoff,
You're not wallowing in self pity because I would suggest you are more than relatively well off... therefore you'd have no right to wallow in self pity. Those less well off then yourself can hardly be judged by the same criteria.
Also, the fact that you have now admitted to previously drawing large amounts from your business...again suggests to me that you are being totally disingenuous when you claim to be reliant on your wife nursing salary..
I'll ask again...how much do you contribute to your employees pensions?
You're not wallowing in self pity because I would suggest you are more than relatively well off... therefore you'd have no right to wallow in self pity. Those less well off then yourself can hardly be judged by the same criteria.
Also, the fact that you have now admitted to previously drawing large amounts from your business...again suggests to me that you are being totally disingenuous when you claim to be reliant on your wife nursing salary..
I'll ask again...how much do you contribute to your employees pensions?
Sam Hoare
301 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:00:51
301 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:00:51
Ciaran, i think you should get off your lofty horse and cut Geoff a break.
For one you are clearly not reading his post correctly, either that or you deliberately keep calling his wife a nurse rather than a teacher.
Is it possible he's not quite the ogre you would love to make him out to be?
For one you are clearly not reading his post correctly, either that or you deliberately keep calling his wife a nurse rather than a teacher.
Is it possible he's not quite the ogre you would love to make him out to be?
Geoff Trenner
302 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:01:09
302 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:01:09
Ciaran#296. I didn't say I'd taken large amounts, I said that I'd taken a decent salary. My definition of decent may be higher or lower than yours I don't know.
I've answered your question re pensions #294 not that it is any of your business
I've answered your question re pensions #294 not that it is any of your business
Sam Morrison
303 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:30:35
303 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:30:35
I personally feel that Ever Decreasing Circles is a superior sit-com to The Good Life. Anyone care to take me on?
Mick Gallagher
304 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:44:10
304 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:44:10
How can you say that, Sam, when The Good Life had FELICITY KENDALL??? I rest my case and it's problem spelt wrong but you know who I mean.
Tony J Williams
305 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:54:59
305 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:54:59
Indeed Mick, I would certainly rather backscuttle Felicity Kendall than Penelope Wilton any day of the week.
Sam Morrison
306 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:57:18
306 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:57:18
Tony and Mick, typical fucking scousers aren't you, going for Felicity Mint-Cake Kendall, with her squeaky (ie whinging) voice and her flouting of society's conventions.
Penelope Wilton didn't NEED to grow sprouts out of a wheelbarrow, because she went to the SUPERMARKET to buy them whilst Richard Briers organised the cricket fixtures and arranged the furniture just-so.
Penelope Wilton didn't NEED to grow sprouts out of a wheelbarrow, because she went to the SUPERMARKET to buy them whilst Richard Briers organised the cricket fixtures and arranged the furniture just-so.
Tony J Williams
307 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:02:59
307 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:02:59
Damnit, rumbled after just the first post......grrrr
Ciarán McGlone
308 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:48:52
308 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:48:52
Geoff,
So you claim to match their pensions?
That would be rather at odds with your previous suggested beliefs on employee remuneration..
"The market, which yes I believe in, pays as little as it needs to in order to recruit & retain the number & quality of people it needs"
Strange dichotomy.
So you claim to match their pensions?
That would be rather at odds with your previous suggested beliefs on employee remuneration..
"The market, which yes I believe in, pays as little as it needs to in order to recruit & retain the number & quality of people it needs"
Strange dichotomy.
Ray Roche
309 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:52:29
309 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:52:29
I find it difficult to champion ANY political party, whether it's Labour, with the likes of the odious Baroness Uddin and that sanctimonious twat Blair to Mr Smug (Cameron) and his puppet Cleggy. (I thought he was better in Last Of The Summer Wine) I wouldn't trust any one of them as far as I could throw them uphill. However, if I was promised ONE punch this time next year at the octogenarian Thatcher, I would go to the gym and start training now. One punch,just one, and hope that she survived the year.
Sam Morrison
310 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:05:34
310 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:05:34
Ciaran, try and stay on topic. Ever Decreasing Circles or The Good Life?
It's my belief that while the Good Life presented Tom and Barbara as 'alternative' and created a balance of power that allowed them to ridicule Jerry and Margo, Ever Decreasing Circles brought us a sophisticated monster in Martin Bryce, and everyman caught up in the self-constructed prison of his own monstrous ego - an ego that reflected the Britain of the time - a pompous buffoon, unable to come to terms with it's own lack of relevance.
Plus it had Peter Egan in casual slacks.
It's my belief that while the Good Life presented Tom and Barbara as 'alternative' and created a balance of power that allowed them to ridicule Jerry and Margo, Ever Decreasing Circles brought us a sophisticated monster in Martin Bryce, and everyman caught up in the self-constructed prison of his own monstrous ego - an ego that reflected the Britain of the time - a pompous buffoon, unable to come to terms with it's own lack of relevance.
Plus it had Peter Egan in casual slacks.
Geoff Trenner
311 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:23:13
311 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:23:13
Ciaran#304. No dichotomy here. Pensions is part of the package & what I do is pretty much the same as what other small employers in my industry do. So I do it to remain competitive in the recruiting & retaining game.
This is my last contribution, sorry, I know that you're all going to miss me but I've got some more employee exploitation to do. Now where did I put that 8-year-old chimney sweep?
This is my last contribution, sorry, I know that you're all going to miss me but I've got some more employee exploitation to do. Now where did I put that 8-year-old chimney sweep?
Brian Denton
312 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:38:09
312 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:38:09
Geoff, check chimney..........
Eugene Ruane
313 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:58:00
313 Posted 17/11/2011 at 13:58:00
Geoff, you ask me (286) - "Eugene do I detect an animosity to someone doing well?"
Eh!?
Doing 'well'?
I thought you said (280) "I will not be drawing a salary at all. We'll survive on my wife's salary as a teacher"
Well...which one is it?
Tell you what, you make up your mind whether you're Alan Sugar or The Little Match Girl and then get back to me.
Oh and you obviously have NO clue what a self-made man cliché your 'look at my poor background!' rant is (are we supposed to be impressed by what could be interpreted as a betrayal of your class?)
Bet it's a few whiskeys and.."I've worked BLEDDY hard for every penny and I don't blimmin' well see why my tax...." (no I DON'T know this and yes I AM guessing, but with each post, you DO reveal a little more).
Sorry, but for me the only thing more obnoxious than a toff tory is a working-class tory - imo the ultimate dupe.
Eh!?
Doing 'well'?
I thought you said (280) "I will not be drawing a salary at all. We'll survive on my wife's salary as a teacher"
Well...which one is it?
Tell you what, you make up your mind whether you're Alan Sugar or The Little Match Girl and then get back to me.
Oh and you obviously have NO clue what a self-made man cliché your 'look at my poor background!' rant is (are we supposed to be impressed by what could be interpreted as a betrayal of your class?)
Bet it's a few whiskeys and.."I've worked BLEDDY hard for every penny and I don't blimmin' well see why my tax...." (no I DON'T know this and yes I AM guessing, but with each post, you DO reveal a little more).
Sorry, but for me the only thing more obnoxious than a toff tory is a working-class tory - imo the ultimate dupe.
Jamie Barlow
314 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:36:55
314 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:36:55
Felicity 'Treacle' Kendall and Richard 'Sugar-flavoured-snot' Briars!! What do they do now?! Chocolate bloody buttons ads, thats what!! They're just a couple of reactionary stereotypes, confirming the myth that everyone in Britain is a lovable, middle-class eccentric - and - i - HATE - THEM!! - Vyvyan
Eugene Ruane
315 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:40:11
315 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:40:11
Tony (301) Penelope Wilton over Felicity Kendall - ABSOLUTELY!
And this decision by the way is not based on looks, arse, 'scuttlability' etc, just the fact that, unlike Kendall, Penelope Wilton would not have the rotten, putrid stench of Carla Lane's 'Solo' all over her.
Seriously, how could you contemplate sex with someone who has spoken lines of such staggeringly unfunny blandness?
Fact: You'd never get 'it' up.
And this decision by the way is not based on looks, arse, 'scuttlability' etc, just the fact that, unlike Kendall, Penelope Wilton would not have the rotten, putrid stench of Carla Lane's 'Solo' all over her.
Seriously, how could you contemplate sex with someone who has spoken lines of such staggeringly unfunny blandness?
Fact: You'd never get 'it' up.
Dave Lynch
316 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:49:57
316 Posted 17/11/2011 at 14:49:57
I'd've personally scuttled Margo.
Stephen Kenny
317 Posted 17/11/2011 at 15:03:15
317 Posted 17/11/2011 at 15:03:15
Anybody on this thread who has slated Geoff for his beliefs should go out and try starting thier own business. Walk away from a comfy desk and regular wage, perhaps risk your family home, bankruptcy and a million other pitfalls that lay in wait unless your right on the ball, constantly, not just 35hrs a week then go home with no worries.
Ciaran,
I had a lot of respect for your views particularly earlier in the thread, but you have jumped to a lot of conclusions about Geoff and his Life(style) without knowing anything about him. Nowhere does he advocate being completely out for himself, survival of the fittest etc, etc.
If your not willing to take his comments at face value then why should anyone on here treat yours any differently.
I disagree with a lot of Geoff's beliefs politically, but how you (& Eugene) can try to castigate someone based on opposing beliefs is behaving in a way you complained bitterly about earlier in this thread!
Ciaran,
I had a lot of respect for your views particularly earlier in the thread, but you have jumped to a lot of conclusions about Geoff and his Life(style) without knowing anything about him. Nowhere does he advocate being completely out for himself, survival of the fittest etc, etc.
If your not willing to take his comments at face value then why should anyone on here treat yours any differently.
I disagree with a lot of Geoff's beliefs politically, but how you (& Eugene) can try to castigate someone based on opposing beliefs is behaving in a way you complained bitterly about earlier in this thread!
Brian Denton
318 Posted 17/11/2011 at 15:26:52
318 Posted 17/11/2011 at 15:26:52
I'd have preferred Patricia Brake from Porridge, with a side order of Cherry Gillespie from Pan's People. But there you go.
Ray Roche
319 Posted 17/11/2011 at 15:44:39
319 Posted 17/11/2011 at 15:44:39
CherryGillespie... oooooohhhh...nurse..fetch me the Kleenex...
Ciarán McGlone
320 Posted 17/11/2011 at 15:47:41
320 Posted 17/11/2011 at 15:47:41
Stephen Kenny,
You are wrong. I have quoted Geoff verbatim.
That is exactly his MO - he wants a reduced state, reduced taxes etc etc ...as anyone who has followed this thread will have read...can I suggest you re-read the thread (if you have a spare few hours).
You are wrong. I have quoted Geoff verbatim.
That is exactly his MO - he wants a reduced state, reduced taxes etc etc ...as anyone who has followed this thread will have read...can I suggest you re-read the thread (if you have a spare few hours).
Ciarán McGlone
321 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:01:23
321 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:01:23
I particularly liked this bit were he compared his "worth" with that of a nurse..
"Am I worth more than a nurse? I earn more than a nurse so I guess my skills are more valuable & scarce. How do you compare my value, having started my own business & employing a good number of people, with a nurse who turns up & just does her job every day? "
"Am I worth more than a nurse? I earn more than a nurse so I guess my skills are more valuable & scarce. How do you compare my value, having started my own business & employing a good number of people, with a nurse who turns up & just does her job every day? "
Stephen Kenny
322 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:09:01
322 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:09:01
Ciaran,
As the vast majority of us will have had a relative cared for at some point, I'm sure we all have a great deal of admiration for nurses, doctor's etc. But the fact is society values nurses at what they get paid.
Should one nurse think, I'm not happy, set herself up as a private carer or start a business then I would applaud her and say she's entitled to whatever she can make based on how skilled she is at her vocation. I've no doubt that once the punitive reality of what she would have to shell out just to be in business hits home, she would echo a fair amount of Geoff's non-political sentiments.
By the sounds of it Geoff has his own recruitment business. He could probably go and earn what society says a recruitment consultant is worth.
The fact that he took the risk of going it alone means he's entilted to whatever comes his way.
There's plenty of legislation and more importantly competition, that ensures Geoff or any SME for that matter treats thier staff in a decent way, and by looking after himself he is also looking after them, based on a simple rationale that having worked at a sucessful company elevates your reputation and creates opportunities that were not there before.
Greed is not good, but neither is a bleeding heart.
As the vast majority of us will have had a relative cared for at some point, I'm sure we all have a great deal of admiration for nurses, doctor's etc. But the fact is society values nurses at what they get paid.
Should one nurse think, I'm not happy, set herself up as a private carer or start a business then I would applaud her and say she's entitled to whatever she can make based on how skilled she is at her vocation. I've no doubt that once the punitive reality of what she would have to shell out just to be in business hits home, she would echo a fair amount of Geoff's non-political sentiments.
By the sounds of it Geoff has his own recruitment business. He could probably go and earn what society says a recruitment consultant is worth.
The fact that he took the risk of going it alone means he's entilted to whatever comes his way.
There's plenty of legislation and more importantly competition, that ensures Geoff or any SME for that matter treats thier staff in a decent way, and by looking after himself he is also looking after them, based on a simple rationale that having worked at a sucessful company elevates your reputation and creates opportunities that were not there before.
Greed is not good, but neither is a bleeding heart.
Stephen Kenny
323 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:23:00
323 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:23:00
Also,
I have read the thread fully, not that you would make any unfounded assumptions?
I have read the thread fully, not that you would make any unfounded assumptions?
Nick Entwistle
324 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:40:59
324 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:40:59
Brian #308. HAH!
------
Reduced taxes sounds good to me. 50% is immoral.
------
Reduced taxes sounds good to me. 50% is immoral.
Michael Kenrick
325 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:53:28
325 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:53:28
Past 300 and we seem to be straying a little off-topic...
Phil Martin
326 Posted 17/11/2011 at 17:04:32
326 Posted 17/11/2011 at 17:04:32
Is this still going? Some of you guys need to get laid a little more...
Phil Martin
327 Posted 17/11/2011 at 17:04:32
327 Posted 17/11/2011 at 17:04:32
Is this still going? Some of you guys need to get laid a little more...
Eugene Ruane
328 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:40:15
328 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:40:15
Stephen Kenny (318) - you say..
"Greed is not good, but neither is a bleeding heart".
Imo, a clutching-at-straws, ludicrously and obviously unfair 'comparison' (and therefore, possibly a bit of a give-away)
You almost certainly know WHY the comparison is bollocks, but I'll spell it out anyway.
Greed IS greed, pure and simple (it's not a metaphor or an analogy)
Your use of 'bleeding heart' however, does NOT refer to a heart that is bleeding.
It IS (in this and most cases) a truly desperate, derogatory term, usually used by people who don't give a fuck, to describe people who do (very popular with the American 'Christian' right wing).
Don't get me wrong, I understand EXACTLY why the term is used.
I mean if your politics is basically grab as much as you can for yourself and fuck the rest, obviously it would be comforting if you could think of those who DO give a shite about someone other than themselves, in a way that makes them appear flawed or odd.
As I suggest, desperate and obvious.
"Greed is not good, but neither is a bleeding heart".
Imo, a clutching-at-straws, ludicrously and obviously unfair 'comparison' (and therefore, possibly a bit of a give-away)
You almost certainly know WHY the comparison is bollocks, but I'll spell it out anyway.
Greed IS greed, pure and simple (it's not a metaphor or an analogy)
Your use of 'bleeding heart' however, does NOT refer to a heart that is bleeding.
It IS (in this and most cases) a truly desperate, derogatory term, usually used by people who don't give a fuck, to describe people who do (very popular with the American 'Christian' right wing).
Don't get me wrong, I understand EXACTLY why the term is used.
I mean if your politics is basically grab as much as you can for yourself and fuck the rest, obviously it would be comforting if you could think of those who DO give a shite about someone other than themselves, in a way that makes them appear flawed or odd.
As I suggest, desperate and obvious.
Eugene Ruane
329 Posted 17/11/2011 at 17:17:20
329 Posted 17/11/2011 at 17:17:20
Phil 'Big John Holmes' Martin - 'get laid a little more'?
I'm getting an image of...
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k258/samfilms/avatars/jack1.jpg
I'm getting an image of...
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k258/samfilms/avatars/jack1.jpg
Ciarán McGlone
330 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:56:37
330 Posted 17/11/2011 at 16:56:37
Well, if you've read the thread - perhaps you'd like to illustrate what 'unfounded assumptions' i've made Stephen..
As for the above..it appears that you are guilty of making a few assumptions yourself..nowhere in this thread have I impugned Geoff or anybody else for starting their own business...nowhere did I say Geoff is not entitled to 'whatever comes his way'. That's a ludicrous implication.
However it does tend to stick in the craw do whenever privileged people sneer at those who have justified reason to complain about their lot. The 'get on your bike' approach to people with difficulties really does lack any kind of humanity.
However the main problem with Geoff is that he wants more than he's entitled to - his words not mine - but you'll know that having read the thread! He doesn't want to pay 'most' of the taxes he pays, and has no belief that he should be party to the social contract he finds himself currently in.
It's Geoff's his socio-economic 'aspiration' which is my major problem - not the fact that he runs a company.
As for the above..it appears that you are guilty of making a few assumptions yourself..nowhere in this thread have I impugned Geoff or anybody else for starting their own business...nowhere did I say Geoff is not entitled to 'whatever comes his way'. That's a ludicrous implication.
However it does tend to stick in the craw do whenever privileged people sneer at those who have justified reason to complain about their lot. The 'get on your bike' approach to people with difficulties really does lack any kind of humanity.
However the main problem with Geoff is that he wants more than he's entitled to - his words not mine - but you'll know that having read the thread! He doesn't want to pay 'most' of the taxes he pays, and has no belief that he should be party to the social contract he finds himself currently in.
It's Geoff's his socio-economic 'aspiration' which is my major problem - not the fact that he runs a company.
Dean Adams
331 Posted 17/11/2011 at 17:16:10
331 Posted 17/11/2011 at 17:16:10
Ciarán McGlone 273
Wow you really are a bit up yourself. If you ever bothered to check the facts you would see what a complete mess you are in. Because I choose not to call you names like any school child might does not make me any of the things that you elude to.
If you of course continue to eschew any form of intellect from your debate then I guess you will always make wild and inaccurate assumptions. I unlike you did not get nasty or aggressive, if I had then you would know about it.
You show the lefties up with your ill advised comments but that of course is par for the course with you.
I unlike you have no pension provision, even though all my working life I have paid for the privilege, alas that was stolen from me and thousands of others by Mr Brown who was ohh so prudent. He was more of an assassin than Thatcher. Problem is so many wallow in self pity whilst others just get on with life, trying to make a living for themselves
Again unlike you who proports to be public sector I have been in the private sector and redundancy is just part and parcel for me as I have lost count of the number of failed businesses that have caused others to fold that have made me unemployed. Again unlike you I have multi tasked and put myself in a position where I can be employed in various fields if needed to avoid the hardship of constantly not getting monies owed by companies that fail.
You are a pretentious prig and as such I guess I expect nothing more from you.
Wow you really are a bit up yourself. If you ever bothered to check the facts you would see what a complete mess you are in. Because I choose not to call you names like any school child might does not make me any of the things that you elude to.
If you of course continue to eschew any form of intellect from your debate then I guess you will always make wild and inaccurate assumptions. I unlike you did not get nasty or aggressive, if I had then you would know about it.
You show the lefties up with your ill advised comments but that of course is par for the course with you.
I unlike you have no pension provision, even though all my working life I have paid for the privilege, alas that was stolen from me and thousands of others by Mr Brown who was ohh so prudent. He was more of an assassin than Thatcher. Problem is so many wallow in self pity whilst others just get on with life, trying to make a living for themselves
Again unlike you who proports to be public sector I have been in the private sector and redundancy is just part and parcel for me as I have lost count of the number of failed businesses that have caused others to fold that have made me unemployed. Again unlike you I have multi tasked and put myself in a position where I can be employed in various fields if needed to avoid the hardship of constantly not getting monies owed by companies that fail.
You are a pretentious prig and as such I guess I expect nothing more from you.
Phil Martin
332 Posted 17/11/2011 at 19:52:59
332 Posted 17/11/2011 at 19:52:59
Thanks Eugene, a compliment indeed.
Stephen Kenny
333 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:22:35
333 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:22:35
"Hmmm.....(thinks).
Earns?
Funny, if you replace the word 'earns' with 'gets', that paragraph takes on a slightly meaning."
Very true. Except nobody used the words you then went on to have a sly dig at Geoff for.
Thankfully you can spot clutching at straws, desparate and obvious.
Earns?
Funny, if you replace the word 'earns' with 'gets', that paragraph takes on a slightly meaning."
Very true. Except nobody used the words you then went on to have a sly dig at Geoff for.
Thankfully you can spot clutching at straws, desparate and obvious.
Gavin Ramejkis
334 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:14:08
334 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:14:08
Stephen #313, I'm the person you are alluding to, started my own business in 2000 and never turned into a tory scumbag. Whether you run a business or not doesn't automatically convert you to another political party, I've had good times and bad but would say in the present global state I'm no more at risk than anyone in a permanent post unless they ar a senior banker or member of the Condems..
I'm no fan of either party, to me the labour died the day John Smith did, Tory Blair was just a tory in a red tie and as far as Golden Brown goes I'd love to give him a hiding to this day, the joys of IR35 and having to pay NI contributions for my company and myself despite the cold hard fact my company will never get a pension or claim NHS treatment.
I'm no fan of either party, to me the labour died the day John Smith did, Tory Blair was just a tory in a red tie and as far as Golden Brown goes I'd love to give him a hiding to this day, the joys of IR35 and having to pay NI contributions for my company and myself despite the cold hard fact my company will never get a pension or claim NHS treatment.
Stephen Kenny
335 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:29:24
335 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:29:24
Ciaran,
This one stuck out.
"suggesting that public sector workers, who get paid buttons, should stop whinging and meekly accept ideological changes which gravely affect their ability to subsist."
Also a bucket full on Post-273
This one stuck out.
"suggesting that public sector workers, who get paid buttons, should stop whinging and meekly accept ideological changes which gravely affect their ability to subsist."
Also a bucket full on Post-273
Stephen Kenny
336 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:40:36
336 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:40:36
Gavin,
I don't vote for the simple reason that there isn't a party out there that can represent my views.
I believe in a fair days work for a fair day's pay, and I also believe that if you are willing to take the risk then you deserve a greater reward.
I think 50% tax is ridiculous even though I'll probably never be in a position to pay it and I also see it as counter productive.
I believe a state that has over 50% working in a public capacity is a disgrace, and having worked in this sector and seen with my own eyes how the unions, and a large percentage of my unions members behave it is difficult to find support for them.
I don't vote for the simple reason that there isn't a party out there that can represent my views.
I believe in a fair days work for a fair day's pay, and I also believe that if you are willing to take the risk then you deserve a greater reward.
I think 50% tax is ridiculous even though I'll probably never be in a position to pay it and I also see it as counter productive.
I believe a state that has over 50% working in a public capacity is a disgrace, and having worked in this sector and seen with my own eyes how the unions, and a large percentage of my unions members behave it is difficult to find support for them.
Ciarán McGlone
337 Posted 17/11/2011 at 21:02:05
337 Posted 17/11/2011 at 21:02:05
Stephen,
Are you seriously tryin g to tell me that you've read this thread and you haven't seen anyone suggesting that public sector workers should stop whinging?
Are you seriously tryin g to tell me that you've read this thread and you haven't seen anyone suggesting that public sector workers should stop whinging?
Eugene Ruane
338 Posted 17/11/2011 at 21:18:00
338 Posted 17/11/2011 at 21:18:00
Stephen, re 329.
Have you gone mental?
Genuinely NOT a clue what that post means,
You appear to be chasing your tail.
Have you gone mental?
Genuinely NOT a clue what that post means,
You appear to be chasing your tail.
Dean Adams
339 Posted 17/11/2011 at 21:30:25
339 Posted 17/11/2011 at 21:30:25
Ciarán McGlone
Whats up clown. Proving that you are a pretentious prig?
If you change half of what anyone says then by definition they are saying something different. Oh how much more of this left wing labour double talk can you spout. Are you sure your not Ed Balls or even Milliband in disguise.
Whats up clown. Proving that you are a pretentious prig?
If you change half of what anyone says then by definition they are saying something different. Oh how much more of this left wing labour double talk can you spout. Are you sure your not Ed Balls or even Milliband in disguise.
Alex Quigley
340 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:48:49
340 Posted 17/11/2011 at 20:48:49
Loving #323 and Ciaran I sincerely admire your wiping the floor with the tenuous Tory arguments in this thread.
Michael - surely some sort of record for the longest Toffeeweb thread ever reached? It should be archived under 'Bluenoses do Question Time'.
Michael - surely some sort of record for the longest Toffeeweb thread ever reached? It should be archived under 'Bluenoses do Question Time'.
Dean Adams
341 Posted 17/11/2011 at 21:40:59
341 Posted 17/11/2011 at 21:40:59
It's fine to advocate a market driven social ideology which marginalises an entire demograhic - but as soon as someone calls you a '££$*&' for championing this self-interest - they've step over the line??
Crass ciaran but without those who have the state you pine for cant recieve handouts. I know you fail to answer ALL pertinant questions just like you seek to pervert the words of others. You are a acting like some sort of pariah, but I guess from your postings you almost certainly live alone, have no friends and no prospects. Makes you a complete looser.
Crass ciaran but without those who have the state you pine for cant recieve handouts. I know you fail to answer ALL pertinant questions just like you seek to pervert the words of others. You are a acting like some sort of pariah, but I guess from your postings you almost certainly live alone, have no friends and no prospects. Makes you a complete looser.
Eugene Ruane
342 Posted 18/11/2011 at 00:23:00
342 Posted 18/11/2011 at 00:23:00
Know it's childish but I love when this happens!
Dean says (of Ciaran) - "but I guess from your postings you almost certainly live alone, have no friends and no prospects. Makes you a complete looser"
Love the idea of someone calling someone else a loser, without..er..actually being able to spell loser.
What a fule!
Dean says (of Ciaran) - "but I guess from your postings you almost certainly live alone, have no friends and no prospects. Makes you a complete looser"
Love the idea of someone calling someone else a loser, without..er..actually being able to spell loser.
What a fule!
Colin Wainwright
343 Posted 18/11/2011 at 08:32:33
343 Posted 18/11/2011 at 08:32:33
Dean Adams (#327)
Dean Adams (#337)
'
/>'You are a acting like some sort of pariah, but I guess from your postings you almost certainly live alone, have no friends and no prospects. Makes you a complete looser.'
Twat
Dean Adams (#337)
'
/>'You are a acting like some sort of pariah, but I guess from your postings you almost certainly live alone, have no friends and no prospects. Makes you a complete looser.'
Twat
Dean Adams
344 Posted 18/11/2011 at 12:27:05
344 Posted 18/11/2011 at 12:27:05
Colin Wainwright 339
So he lives with you. Oh well happy two of you found each other you moron.
So he lives with you. Oh well happy two of you found each other you moron.
Dean Adams
345 Posted 18/11/2011 at 12:31:39
345 Posted 18/11/2011 at 12:31:39
Eugene Ruane 338
He is dissolute, vague and slack just like the definition of what I said you stupid obtuse man.
He is dissolute, vague and slack just like the definition of what I said you stupid obtuse man.
Eugene Ruane
346 Posted 18/11/2011 at 13:48:21
346 Posted 18/11/2011 at 13:48:21
Dean - are you really good friends with a Lion and a Tin Man?
'"...just like the definition of what I said" !?
Are you by any chance familiar with the works of the great playwright, Ernest Wise?
It certainly appears you're familiar with the style of some of the plays 'what he wrote'.
I'M stupid?
Well, Maybe, BUT as I can spell loser and you can't, what on earth DOES that make you?
I'm picturing a fence-post with a hat on.
Poltroon!
'"...just like the definition of what I said" !?
Are you by any chance familiar with the works of the great playwright, Ernest Wise?
It certainly appears you're familiar with the style of some of the plays 'what he wrote'.
I'M stupid?
Well, Maybe, BUT as I can spell loser and you can't, what on earth DOES that make you?
I'm picturing a fence-post with a hat on.
Poltroon!
Colin Wainwright
347 Posted 18/11/2011 at 14:30:07
347 Posted 18/11/2011 at 14:30:07
Dean (#340)
My post at 339 missed a second quote from your good self, which may have given the wrong impression.
I was trying to get across that in post 327, you insisted that you, choose not to call Cairan names, like a school child. Yet in post 337, you imply that Ciaran lives alone and is 'a complete looser'.
Rather like a school child.
So you're a contradictory twat.
My post at 339 missed a second quote from your good self, which may have given the wrong impression.
I was trying to get across that in post 327, you insisted that you, choose not to call Cairan names, like a school child. Yet in post 337, you imply that Ciaran lives alone and is 'a complete looser'.
Rather like a school child.
So you're a contradictory twat.
Trevor Mackie
348 Posted 18/11/2011 at 14:49:51
348 Posted 18/11/2011 at 14:49:51
Has anyone measured who's pissed the furthest then?
Stephen Kenny
349 Posted 18/11/2011 at 14:45:46
349 Posted 18/11/2011 at 14:45:46
Ciaran,
No, not in the black and white terms your trying to portray. I saw someone trying to make a reasoned argument to counter your own, which for the most was exactly the same.
I also saw a fair amount of people, some who have nowhere near your level of debating skill change his words, threaten and insult him.
Eugene,
I haven't got a tail. If I did it would be attached to me and I'd have no need to chase it. I'm sure you understand the post perfectly. Admitting so would mean admitting your daft non-argument was your own creation.
No, not in the black and white terms your trying to portray. I saw someone trying to make a reasoned argument to counter your own, which for the most was exactly the same.
I also saw a fair amount of people, some who have nowhere near your level of debating skill change his words, threaten and insult him.
Eugene,
I haven't got a tail. If I did it would be attached to me and I'd have no need to chase it. I'm sure you understand the post perfectly. Admitting so would mean admitting your daft non-argument was your own creation.
Ciarán McGlone
350 Posted 18/11/2011 at 15:04:20
350 Posted 18/11/2011 at 15:04:20
Stephen,
I've no idea what "not in the black and white terms you're trying to portray" actually means..
I'll have to assume it means that you did see those comments made by others in the thread and you're trying to extricate yourself from accusing me from making stuff up..I assume you will excuse the obvious irony of me guessing - considering your vagueness)<
If i'm wrong, you can of course take the opportunity to explain that phrase..
While your at it, could you possibly explain why having 50% of the working population employed in the public service is 'disgraceful' (i.e something that we should abhor)
I'd also ask you about your generalisation on the 'Unions' - but i'd hazard a guess even before you answer that question, that you'll regale me with stories of individuals and not actual 'unions'.. (however, again, feel free to put me straight)
I've no idea what "not in the black and white terms you're trying to portray" actually means..
I'll have to assume it means that you did see those comments made by others in the thread and you're trying to extricate yourself from accusing me from making stuff up..I assume you will excuse the obvious irony of me guessing - considering your vagueness)<
If i'm wrong, you can of course take the opportunity to explain that phrase..
While your at it, could you possibly explain why having 50% of the working population employed in the public service is 'disgraceful' (i.e something that we should abhor)
I'd also ask you about your generalisation on the 'Unions' - but i'd hazard a guess even before you answer that question, that you'll regale me with stories of individuals and not actual 'unions'.. (however, again, feel free to put me straight)
Rob Fountain
351 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:02:58
351 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:02:58
Im jumping back a few # here but im not sure either side has won. Indeed a few people anti-geoff conveniently miss the hypocrisies in their own points.
Chris #260. Im not sure anyone on here has stated they don?t want to pay taxes, but still claim state benefits. And regardless, taking your list to absurdity as you?ve started we could add ?Hes only allowed to claim the pension he paid in.? But this is part of the point isn?t it ? that public workers want improved pensions (as they will be living longer) but don?t want to pay more in. So if, as you claim, Geoff doesn?t want to pay (more), but still get the benefits of the state, surely the same argument could be pointed at public workers? More money is needed, and if someone doesn?t want to pay in, why should they get something out?
And Ciaran #274. you will win every argument if everyone in the private sector did earn £150k. But they don?t. I mean what if you compared a lowly paid private sector shop worker to a CEO or head surgeon in a hospital ? should the private sector minimum wage earner pay more tax to ensure the rich doctor can retire earlier and get a bigger pension? Now, im deliberately employing the sames tactic and not comparing like for like to make a point, so overall, whilst Im all for taxing the big bankers more, it would serve the anti-public sector-pension-increase supporters better to not conveniently compare themselves just to bankers ? as it stands ALL the private sector will have to pay more to further subsidise the public sector pensions (as more money is needed in the overall pot as people will be retired for longer), and just like the public sector, most of these private sector workers are not well paid, are worried for future job security, and cant afford the same pensions for themselves that they are asking to further subsidise for others.
Im sure I?ll get some abuse for this, and for whats its worth im anti tory, anti current labor, anti lib den and I feel sorry for the mess this place is gonna be in in 50 years. I wanted to add this tho cos i don?t think you can blame the current govt for dividing and conquering as been done on here as i don?t think the publc sector are putting forward their case very well. I mean so long as the best justification the public sector can give for not increasing pension contributions from 11% to 14% is cos the ?bankers are rich? then the 99% of the private sector who aren?t rich are gonna go ?err Im not, and if you don?t pay then I will have to, and why should i do that, im skint too?...
Chris #260. Im not sure anyone on here has stated they don?t want to pay taxes, but still claim state benefits. And regardless, taking your list to absurdity as you?ve started we could add ?Hes only allowed to claim the pension he paid in.? But this is part of the point isn?t it ? that public workers want improved pensions (as they will be living longer) but don?t want to pay more in. So if, as you claim, Geoff doesn?t want to pay (more), but still get the benefits of the state, surely the same argument could be pointed at public workers? More money is needed, and if someone doesn?t want to pay in, why should they get something out?
And Ciaran #274. you will win every argument if everyone in the private sector did earn £150k. But they don?t. I mean what if you compared a lowly paid private sector shop worker to a CEO or head surgeon in a hospital ? should the private sector minimum wage earner pay more tax to ensure the rich doctor can retire earlier and get a bigger pension? Now, im deliberately employing the sames tactic and not comparing like for like to make a point, so overall, whilst Im all for taxing the big bankers more, it would serve the anti-public sector-pension-increase supporters better to not conveniently compare themselves just to bankers ? as it stands ALL the private sector will have to pay more to further subsidise the public sector pensions (as more money is needed in the overall pot as people will be retired for longer), and just like the public sector, most of these private sector workers are not well paid, are worried for future job security, and cant afford the same pensions for themselves that they are asking to further subsidise for others.
Im sure I?ll get some abuse for this, and for whats its worth im anti tory, anti current labor, anti lib den and I feel sorry for the mess this place is gonna be in in 50 years. I wanted to add this tho cos i don?t think you can blame the current govt for dividing and conquering as been done on here as i don?t think the publc sector are putting forward their case very well. I mean so long as the best justification the public sector can give for not increasing pension contributions from 11% to 14% is cos the ?bankers are rich? then the 99% of the private sector who aren?t rich are gonna go ?err Im not, and if you don?t pay then I will have to, and why should i do that, im skint too?...
Gavin Ramejkis
352 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:07:04
352 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:07:04
Rob the current government can quite rightly be blamed for some corkers; whilst running a nice austerity line in this country raising unemployment to record levels with the inevitable loss of taxes and revenue they ring fencing foreign aid to a country whose principle line is piracy - Somalia, ring fencing aid to Pakistan a country so poor they are developing their own nuclear weapons and buying very expensive military wares from China, top that with a government with a very dubious line on bombing Libya to the tune of between £200m and £250m per day on the laughable line of aid to the Libyan people fighting for their freedom from a tyrannical leader who used tanks and aircraft against them but not a single shot fired at Syria whose videos of tanks and weaponry aimed at their public are being posted daily on youtube, a small clue on Libya and Syria - which one has oil?
You then get a complete slimebag like Osbourne claiming they have the country's best interest at heart - do me a favour. Almost as big an insult to people's intelligence as Tory Blair's WMD claims in Iraq - they also had oil
You then get a complete slimebag like Osbourne claiming they have the country's best interest at heart - do me a favour. Almost as big an insult to people's intelligence as Tory Blair's WMD claims in Iraq - they also had oil
Colin Wainwright
353 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:35:45
353 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:35:45
Nail on head Gavin.
Nick Entwistle
354 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:52:11
354 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:52:11
Gavin, your figures are so massively overblown its ridiculous.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15275202
And what is dubious about bombing, not Libya, but military threats to stop an inhalation of a people?
As for no action on Syria, you can do better than the tired oil argument.
If this takes off, we're looking at 500 posts!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15275202
And what is dubious about bombing, not Libya, but military threats to stop an inhalation of a people?
As for no action on Syria, you can do better than the tired oil argument.
If this takes off, we're looking at 500 posts!
Stephen Kenny
355 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:54:23
355 Posted 18/11/2011 at 18:54:23
Ciaran,
Geoff had in a number of posts suggested public sector pensions had not suffered in the same way private sector pensions had. He also suggested that public sector workers had not supported the private sector and should not expect the same in return. Perosnally not something I agree with
You then attributed this to him;
"suggesting that public sector workers, who get paid buttons, should stop whinging and meekly accept ideological changes which gravely affect their ability to subsist."
That's not what was said or suggested and you know it.
That's where the "not in black and white terms" comment came from.
With regards to this "While your at it, could you possibly explain why having 50% of the working population employed in the public service is 'disgraceful' (i.e something that we should abhor)"
Again putting words in people's mouths. I never suggested we should abhor it, I said it's a disgrace.
The reason it's a disgrace is the previous government, so obsessed with targets, measurements and creating a fascade of prosperity allowed this sector to grow far bigger than our country requires to function, while at the same time reducing defence spending leaving men sent to fight others wars so criminally underfunded they were subsequently killed and maimed, as well as leaving charities to fill the gaps they had a social responsibility to fill.
I could "regale" you with plenty of tales of as you put it "individuals" bringing services to a grinding halt through childish disputes but I'm sure that would just prolong a debate that has clearly run it's course.
Geoff had in a number of posts suggested public sector pensions had not suffered in the same way private sector pensions had. He also suggested that public sector workers had not supported the private sector and should not expect the same in return. Perosnally not something I agree with
You then attributed this to him;
"suggesting that public sector workers, who get paid buttons, should stop whinging and meekly accept ideological changes which gravely affect their ability to subsist."
That's not what was said or suggested and you know it.
That's where the "not in black and white terms" comment came from.
With regards to this "While your at it, could you possibly explain why having 50% of the working population employed in the public service is 'disgraceful' (i.e something that we should abhor)"
Again putting words in people's mouths. I never suggested we should abhor it, I said it's a disgrace.
The reason it's a disgrace is the previous government, so obsessed with targets, measurements and creating a fascade of prosperity allowed this sector to grow far bigger than our country requires to function, while at the same time reducing defence spending leaving men sent to fight others wars so criminally underfunded they were subsequently killed and maimed, as well as leaving charities to fill the gaps they had a social responsibility to fill.
I could "regale" you with plenty of tales of as you put it "individuals" bringing services to a grinding halt through childish disputes but I'm sure that would just prolong a debate that has clearly run it's course.
Colin Wainwright
356 Posted 18/11/2011 at 19:31:51
356 Posted 18/11/2011 at 19:31:51
Nick. What is the reason for the apparent reluctance to treat the Syrian administration in the same way the Gaddafi regime was, if not for the ''tired oil argument''?
Ciarán McGlone
357 Posted 18/11/2011 at 19:45:47
357 Posted 18/11/2011 at 19:45:47
Stephen,
I didn't attribute that claim directly to Geoff. is there any reason you choose to omit the preceding seven words?
I'll not even comment on your response to the other questions.
I didn't attribute that claim directly to Geoff. is there any reason you choose to omit the preceding seven words?
I'll not even comment on your response to the other questions.
Nick Entwistle
358 Posted 18/11/2011 at 21:09:58
358 Posted 18/11/2011 at 21:09:58
Well Colin, first up, the potential for casualties in Syria are not on the potential faced in Libya. Protesters are being killed, not the potential for cities being wiped off the map.
Secondly, in Libya there was an uprising, willing to take over the country militarily, to which NATO helped them achieve by destroying opposing forces.
In Syria there is a protest movement unwilling, unable to do the same. So what would be the military objective?
Third, Western forces in the middle-east again? Hot potato.
Fourth, the Arab League are still in heavy diplomacy with Syria and have their own potential to strike if they wanted to.
Fifth, I don?t believe Iraq/ Afghanistan were wars for oil, but lets say they were: A puppet government has not been installed in Libya. Western influence has not increased in this country due to NATO action. Blair had already struck a deal.
Sixth, The US took a back seat!
Secondly, in Libya there was an uprising, willing to take over the country militarily, to which NATO helped them achieve by destroying opposing forces.
In Syria there is a protest movement unwilling, unable to do the same. So what would be the military objective?
Third, Western forces in the middle-east again? Hot potato.
Fourth, the Arab League are still in heavy diplomacy with Syria and have their own potential to strike if they wanted to.
Fifth, I don?t believe Iraq/ Afghanistan were wars for oil, but lets say they were: A puppet government has not been installed in Libya. Western influence has not increased in this country due to NATO action. Blair had already struck a deal.
Sixth, The US took a back seat!
Dean Adams
359 Posted 18/11/2011 at 22:19:15
359 Posted 18/11/2011 at 22:19:15
Colin Wainwright 343
If he was so clever and being open and honest then maybe an answer to my questions, but alas none were given.
As for your fellow socialist, the ex english language teacher, poor fellow is suffering shell shock.
Giving it out in little gangs like little school bullies, just pathetic, but oh so typical.
For your little mate ER, a little less subtlety this time, loooooser!!
Maybe you think only you have poetic licence you pompous prick. We can all use such eloquent language if we need, some of us just to prove the point because others are just soooo OBTUSE.
If he was so clever and being open and honest then maybe an answer to my questions, but alas none were given.
As for your fellow socialist, the ex english language teacher, poor fellow is suffering shell shock.
Giving it out in little gangs like little school bullies, just pathetic, but oh so typical.
For your little mate ER, a little less subtlety this time, loooooser!!
Maybe you think only you have poetic licence you pompous prick. We can all use such eloquent language if we need, some of us just to prove the point because others are just soooo OBTUSE.
Mick Davies
360 Posted 19/11/2011 at 04:47:35
360 Posted 19/11/2011 at 04:47:35
Another shameful saga in the recent history of Everton FC. Any attempt at private institutions getting their hands on hard-earned taxpayers' money has got to be viewed with suspicion, especially when a failing bank was bailed out by public funds, and then sold at a £400m loss to a greedy entrepreneur to add to his record company, airline, soft drinks industry etc.
These schools will be run by cowboys for profit, and a teaching qualification is not necessary to actually teach in one!!!!!
These schools will be run by cowboys for profit, and a teaching qualification is not necessary to actually teach in one!!!!!
Ciarán McGlone
361 Posted 19/11/2011 at 10:47:04
361 Posted 19/11/2011 at 10:47:04
Dean,
I'm begging you. Stop.
I'm begging you. Stop.
Colin Wainwright
362 Posted 19/11/2011 at 10:48:01
362 Posted 19/11/2011 at 10:48:01
Dean. I haven't got a little gang. Just got a little pissed off with some of the comments on this thread, yours included, and gave an opinion.
Fair play, I shouldn't have called you a twat, as i don't know you. Apologies for that.
Fair play, I shouldn't have called you a twat, as i don't know you. Apologies for that.
Dean Adams
363 Posted 19/11/2011 at 11:10:34
363 Posted 19/11/2011 at 11:10:34
Colin Wainwright 358
Ditto. Agreed. All's fair and all that.
Ditto. Agreed. All's fair and all that.
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.
1 Posted 15/11/2011 at 07:38:24
I am a season ticket holder and so are my two children. However, they will not see another penny from me.
Why? Free schools are a flagship Tory policy. They are designed to privatise education by the back door, reducing teachers' pay and conditions. The Tories will bribe those making bids for free schools. This is public money being given to private organisations.
Why is our club dealing with such a vicious government? These people hate our city with a vengeance (remember the European ban, anyone?).
For a club in such a poor area, with a fan base largely against the Tories, why are we having dealings with them? Is it to get a bribe to build the Park End development and call it a school building?
Enough is enough for me. What a disgrace our club has become.