10.11.10 - Demolition.

[immense]

Yes, they are.

The idea which people like yourself prefer to advocate, that the poor are simple people who are going to remain poor for the rest of their life is absolute and utter nonsense. The cleverest will suceed because they'll pay it off when they get a high-flying job - whether they are poor, middle class or upper class. If not, then the rich will have theirs paid off by family (nothing you can do about that, its a fact of life that some people are richer than others).

You genuinely don't understand do you? The only reason that poor people don't remain poor at the moment is because they have the opportunity to climb up the social hierarchy. I thought you didn't even believe in social class? Or are you beginning to understand? They can attend decent state schools, I know you will wrongly refute this but you can't tar all state schools with the same brush. Like there are struggling public schools who don't achieve what they should there are struggling state schools just like there are successful ones.

In terms of tax, on one hand I agree - but tax should be lowered overall anyway. If you tax these companies then they will simply move elsewhere as is what happened in the 1970s. Why do you think the United States flourished in comparison to the Soviet Union? Watch the first part of the video below, you might learn the basics of economics

That is again absolute codswallop. All these companies are going to leave one of the biggest consumerism places in the world and aren't going to be replaced? No. Watched the video and just because it adheres with what you believe doesn't give it any substance. You thought Gordon Brown was wrong on his economic policy yet he chaired the discussions with other European countries on how to act to the global recession.

Then nobody will invest in the banks. The banks will then go the same way as the railways, telephone companies, water companies, gas companies, electric companies etc etc when we nationalised them here many decades ago until they were finally freed by the Thatcher Ministry.

Again, to say nobody would invest in banks that serve the UK is ludicrous. They will still be running with vast amount of profits and only a small percentage of this will be used to invest in public services. I'm just glad labour were in charge when the world was hit with a global recession because unlike some political parties they intervened and ensure we didn't end up like Iceland and or Greece.

In terms of Trident, you want to scrap our best defence system? the same logic was adopted by the wackos in the Labour Party and CND back in the 1970s who wanted to scrap our nuclear weapons at a time when the USSR had thousands pointing at our towns and cities.

So you're pro-trident too. This isn't about scrapping it. They are replacing it. Why replace it? Sure, it might not be at the spear of systems but the UK isn't a world power any more. We used to be. We haven't been for over the last 100 years. We need to scrap this self-importance and realise we don't have to have the best of everything. I'm not saying it should be scrapped but I'm staunchly against it being replaced.

There are too many people going to university Jake and you know it - there are only so many skilled jobs. The reason why we are running short of so many unskilled jobs is very simple - we tax and regulate small companies too much which leads to unemployment. But thats what you want isnt it? more tax and regulation. Thats fine by me, but you'll end up with mass unemployment.

The more people that go to university the more skilled our work-force becomes. That is an irrefutable fact. People with degrees are now taking on jobs that 10 or so years ago would have been taken by people who didn't obtain degrees. Therefore, our services are being run and organised by qualified and educated people. You take university away from the masses then not only does it hinder their opportunities which is grossly unfair it will also affect wider society when the people in banks / government / schools aren't as qualified as they were previously.

Originally you said that just as many people would be going to university and now you're saying that not as many as go and that's a good thing because too many people go. You're just as bad as Nick Clegg, you.

[-:Undertaker:-]

You genuinely don't understand do you? The only reason that poor people don't remain poor at the moment is because they have the opportunity to climb up the social hierarchy. I thought you didn't even believe in social class? Or are you beginning to understand? They can attend decent state schools, I know you will wrongly refute this but you can't tar all state schools with the same brush. Like there are struggling public schools who don't achieve what they should there are struggling state schools just like there are successful ones.

I haven't tarred all state schools with the same brush, some state schools will be better than private schools but the majority are not. You are so against the rich and the wealthy but you adhere to that very system in support of the likes of the comprehensive system which allows the rich to go to the best state schools and the poor meanwhile are stuck with those in bad areas.

With marxoids like yourself, it often seems that you are determined to keep people down to keep your failed idealogy alive.

That is again absolute codswallop. All these companies are going to leave one of the biggest consumerism places in the world and aren't going to be replaced? No. Watched the video and just because it adheres with what you believe doesn't give it any substance. You thought Gordon Brown was wrong on his economic policy yet he chaired the discussions with other European countries on how to act to the global recession.

No Jake, its not what I believe - it is business fact. It is how the business world works.

They will leave just as they left in the 1970s Jake. You say we are one of the biggest consumer states and thats correct, that doesn't mean they [the companies] have to be based here. They can just as easily move to India or China where there are less regulations and lower rates of tax. Godfrey Bloom worked in business, he is a business and not a politician - he knows what he is talking about. Why do you think the City of London has been so successful over the past few years since the Thatcher government? because she lowered tax rates and removed harmful regulations so that business moved here which in turn provides jobs.

A business is there to make money, it will move if it has to.

Here is one recent example; http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-0...u-k-taxes.html

"..it's not an accident that the areas of the world that have the highest growth are those with lower taxes, fewer regulations and smaller public sectors" - that applies to your economic idealogy, which is economics of the mad house.

Again, to say nobody would invest in banks that serve the UK is ludicrous. They will still be running with vast amount of profits and only a small percentage of this will be used to invest in public services. I'm just glad labour were in charge when the world was hit with a global recession because unlike some political parties they intervened and ensure we didn't end up like Iceland and or Greece.

But we are going to end up like Iceland and Greece. The reason why all of these countries are burdened with debt isn't because of the financial crash a few years ago, it is because now the bills for this debt are coming home. Greece had a left wing government and has now defaulted on its debt, held up only by German loans which will in turn need paying back. The only reason the United Kingdom has so far stayed afloat is not because our government spends our money, its because we can still acquire more loans to pay for other loans we have taken out in the past - meaning that, if present spending continues we will also eventually default on our debt just like we did last time under a Labour government in 1979 when Jim Callaghan had to go cap in hand to the IMF.

In good times, loans are easier to get hold of - hence why Labour was able to secure so many loans that lasted so long. Now with the money drying up, credit is harder to get - both for the individual and UK PLC. Interest payments will be higher, one famous example is that thanks to Labour we now spend more on debt interest than we do on the entire education budget.

So you're pro-trident too. This isn't about scrapping it. They are replacing it. Why replace it? Sure, it might not be at the spear of systems but the UK isn't a world power any more. We used to be. We haven't been for over the last 100 years. We need to scrap this self-importance and realise we don't have to have the best of everything. I'm not saying it should be scrapped but I'm staunchly against it being replaced.

The UK was never a world power when we had Trident in the first place, an independent nuclear arms system means that we remain militarily independent - we've seen the consquences in recent years of not being militarily independent by being dragged into wars with the United States which are none of our concern.

With the rise of China, India, Pakistan - do you really want to end our nuclear weapons system?

The more people that go to university the more skilled our work-force becomes. That is an irrefutable fact. People with degrees are now taking on jobs that 10 or so years ago would have been taken by people who didn't obtain degrees. Therefore, our services are being run and organised by qualified and educated people. You take university away from the masses then not only does it hinder their opportunities which is grossly unfair it will also affect wider society when the people in banks / government / schools aren't as qualified as they were previously.

So what do all of these skilled people do? there are only ever going to be so many scientists, so many doctors, so many highly skilled jobs - the rest will always be low skilled jobs. The more skilled you are also, means the more wages would rise thus in turn you end up with less people being hired overall because the business can simply not afford it.

Nobody is going to pay an educated binman more than an uneducated binman - they both do the same job at the end of the day.

Originally you said that just as many people would be going to university and now you're saying that not as many as go and that's a good thing because too many people go. You're just as bad as Nick Clegg, you.

So that means i've been consistent in saying that too many people go to university, unlike Nick Clegg, unlike David Cameron and unlike Harriet Harman - mentioning Harman, you'll find this interesting;

Harman is a beauty isn't she? Once you scratch beneath her extremely thick skin, you can see a remarkable person.

First she pontificates that Labour MPs must never use lies to win elections. This despite Labours promise to hold a referendum on Europe. She was pro invasion of Iraq under Blair and now sides with Red Ed Milliband saying we should never have gone to war. Now she tries to position Labour as the friend of university students, after her party introduced these fees.

Two faced? Or just an accomplished liar herself? Let the court of public opinion decide.
- Steve, Stony Stratford, Bucks, 10/11/2010 13:57

But even with that said, you'll still dismiss it - blinded faith.

[Tintinnabulate]

People have to pay for education from primary school in many countries including India. It means they value education more and you don't get ********s at school trying to look cool, fighting with teachers and wrecking the building like you do here.
And paying people to go to college? That's ******* pathetic. Giving money should never be used as an incentive for college. If they cba going to college and getting free education then **** off.

Maybe people - including kids - should stop smoking and drinking from such a young age and save money for University.

OH NO ALL MY STUDENT LOAN IS GONE COS I DRUNK AND SMOKED IT ALL IN 4 WEEKS! PLZ HELP.

[AgnesIO]

People have to pay for education from primary school in many countries including India. It means they value education more and you don't get ********s at school trying to look cool, fighting with teachers and wrecking the building like you do here.
And paying people to go to college? That's ******* pathetic. Giving money should never be used as an inventive for college. If they cba going to college and getting free education then **** off.

Maybe people - including kids - should stop smoking and drinking from such a young age and save money for University.

OH NO ALL MY STUDENT LOAN IS GONE COS I DRUNK AND SMOKED IT ALL IN 4 WEEKS! PLZ HELP.

I couldn't agree more with you here. +Rep

[alexxxxx]

People have to pay for education from primary school in many countries including India. It means they value education more and you don't get ********s at school trying to look cool, fighting with teachers and wrecking the building like you do here.
And paying people to go to college? That's ******* pathetic. Giving money should never be used as an incentive for college. If they cba going to college and getting free education then **** off.

Maybe people - including kids - should stop smoking and drinking from such a young age and save money for University.

OH NO ALL MY STUDENT LOAN IS GONE COS I DRUNK AND SMOKED IT ALL IN 4 WEEKS! PLZ HELP.

then you'd have even more of an underclass of people like there is in india.

basically i can imagine this protest will detract from the main issue that the gove is cutting 40% of the uni budget and raising fees, where it is likely that the quality will fall whilst fees rise. id hate to be doing a humanities subject.. the contact time is already incredibly small. it would not be worth 6k/yr. my course is 20+hr a week and is quite good value for money.

[Mathew]

At present, the uni fees don't concern me but I understand they will in a couple of years. I suppose I should be quite bothered by this, but I haven't even been following the story that closely so I can't say whether it's good or not.

What I do find utterly pathetic though, is the stupid rioting and protesting going on outside (and now inside) Conservative HQ. Why should the protesters be taken seriously if they're smashing glass, making fires and hitting the authorities? By all means hold up your petty little signs and call Nick Clegg every name under the sun, but why act like a complete lunatic?

By watching the clips of Tory HQ today, I'd love to higher the fees just to prove a point and piss everyone off. One minute teenagers are complaining that they're being sterotyped as rowdy, loud, dangerous and rude; I suppose today just proves that sterotype right. Get a grip.

[immense]

At present, the uni fees don't concern me but I understand they will in a couple of years. I suppose I should be quite bothered by this, but I haven't even been following the story that closely so I can't say whether it's good or not.

What I do find utterly pathetic though, is the stupid rioting and protesting going on outside (and now inside) Conservative HQ. Why should the protesters be taken seriously if they're smashing glass, making fires and hitting the authorities? By all means hold up your petty little signs and call Nick Clegg every name under the sun, but why act like a complete lunatic?

By watching the clips of Tory HQ today, I'd love to higher the fees just to prove a point and piss everyone off. One minute teenagers are complaining that they're being sterotyped as rowdy, loud, dangerous and rude; I suppose today just proves that sterotype right. Get a grip.

The president of the NUS has condemned this and the people inside have been described as "old-school anarchists" - not students. However, conflict of reports - some people are saying it was a mix. Either way, this wasn't planned, people just used this march whose aim it was to prove a point about the brain-dead ideas of the coalition to get away with what they wanted to do. From videos I've seen, there is a separate group of violent people and student with placards around the outside. Looking to see what is going on, which is fair enough. Human beings are curious creatures. I'm sure some students got involved too but I think it's unfair to say this was organised and done by just students.

[MrPinkPanther]

I got hit by a riot policeman, he bashed me with his shield. Woop woop. The most manly event in my life.

[immense]

I got hit by a riot policeman, he bashed me with his shield. Woop woop. The most manly event in my life.

and the last, lets be honest. what was the general vibe? any humorous chants? any fit guys?

[Inseriousity.]

The vast majority went to protest; a small group of nutters went to riot.
Don't think it'll prove any stereotypes really... but it'll help the papers with their stories!!