Margaret Thatcher dies at 87

[Leftbehind]

I agree with Al.

[Leftbehind]

Don't worry I wish you the exact same.

[Leftbehind]

Also of relevance:

"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."

Like she did when describing Mandela as a terrorist? Or the sections of our society she labelled enemies? The hypocrisy from the Right is truly overbearing in this thread.

Like I said in another thread, some people might think the Brits who aren't exactly mourning are behaving petty or classless, but I do wonder what they'd say about the reactions of those who lived in Pinochet's Chile or black South Africans who lived under apartheid.

That's a point forgotten amidst the domestic evils. We leftists have to show "respect" to Thatcher's death, while she supported our counterparts being slaughtered in Chile with absolutely none, even vouching for the mass-murderer long after realpolitik could be used an excuse.

[Leftbehind]

Right, but the BBC is governed by the British government;

lol

Vosem, I'm guessing you're not familiar with the London County Council or its successor.

I'm not; a quick Wikipedia glance informs me that it was disbanded in 1965. Please do tell me more.

GLC.

[Leftbehind]

Definitely changed the world, regardless of your opinion of her.

Well you could grant that to all manner of horrific leaders so I suppose that's a fitting legacy.

[Leftbehind]

How's your compassionate conservatism going btw? Last I heard people more or less on their deathbed were being forced out to non-existent work so you can cut their benefits?

Or is it okay, because you now accept that the right don't hold any compassion?

[Leftbehind]

How's your compassionate conservatism going btw? Last I heard people more or less on their deathbed were being forced out to non-existent work so you can cut their benefits?

Or is it okay, because you now accept that the right don't hold any compassion?

Mindless socialist rhetoric versus the front cover of a profound left wing paper.

I'll take the paper as better evidence.

Funnily enough plenty of evidence for it though: http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigations/2012/04/32-die-a-week-after-failing-in.html ?

[Leftbehind]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDtClJYJBj8

I loved the shout "we can't take it" from the Tory bench. Hard to take the truth indeed.

And the Speaker's reaction to fake outrage, priceless.

Typical celebrity turned politician hypocrite is hypocritical. Maybe when Glenda Jackson moves into a council house and gives her Oscar award to a homeless person I will take her seriously. At least George Galloway and Gerry Adams seem sincere in there thrashings.

So becoming rich but wanting an equal society anyway because you've known what it's like not to be is considered hypocritical to you, but a woman who professed to roll back the state (in actuality just subsidies and support for the working class) whilst centralising power and proscribing which videos could be watched and precisely what schools were allowed to (or in this case couldn't) teach on homosexuality isn't. Oh and supporting authoritarian dictators lol.  

[Leftbehind]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDtClJYJBj8

I loved the shout "we can't take it" from the Tory bench. Hard to take the truth indeed.

And the Speaker's reaction to fake outrage, priceless.

Typical celebrity turned politician hypocrite is hypocritical. Maybe when Glenda Jackson moves into a council house and gives her Oscar award to a homeless person I will take her seriously. At least George Galloway and Gerry Adams seem sincere in there thrashings.

So being rich but wanting an equal society is considered hypocritical to you, but a woman who professed to roll back the state (in actuality just subsidies and support for the working class) whilst centralising power and proscribing which videos could be watched and precisely what schools were allowed to (or in this case couldn't) teach on homosexuality isn't. Oh and support authoritarian dictators lol.  

BUT THEY WERE PRO-FREE MARKET!!!!1111

The people were FREE to live in abject misery and fear!  

[Leftbehind]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDtClJYJBj8

I loved the shout "we can't take it" from the Tory bench. Hard to take the truth indeed.

And the Speaker's reaction to fake outrage, priceless.

Typical celebrity turned politician hypocrite is hypocritical. Maybe when Glenda Jackson moves into a council house and gives her Oscar award to a homeless person I will take her seriously. At least George Galloway and Gerry Adams seem sincere in there thrashings.

So becoming rich but wanting an equal society anyway because you've known what it's like not to be is considered hypocritical to you, but a woman who professed to roll back the state (in actuality just subsidies and support for the working class) whilst centralising power and proscribing which videos could be watched and precisely what schools were allowed to (or in this case couldn't) teach on homosexuality isn't. Oh and supporting authoritarian dictators lol.  

So, when is Glenda Jackson gonna give up 83% of her annual earnings? Tell me, do you personally think you are entitled to healthcare primarily funded with money from Glenda Jackson’s wallet?

Probably when she adopts the laughable notion that voluntary charity is the best way to redistribute wealth and help the struggling working classes despite its complete failure to do just that in Victorian times. As for healthcare - absolutely, and she probably does to.

[Leftbehind]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDtClJYJBj8

I loved the shout "we can't take it" from the Tory bench. Hard to take the truth indeed.

And the Speaker's reaction to fake outrage, priceless.

Typical celebrity turned politician hypocrite is hypocritical. Maybe when Glenda Jackson moves into a council house and gives her Oscar award to a homeless person I will take her seriously. At least George Galloway and Gerry Adams seem sincere in there thrashings.

So becoming rich but wanting an equal society anyway because you've known what it's like not to be is considered hypocritical to you, but a woman who professed to roll back the state (in actuality just subsidies and support for the working class) whilst centralising power and proscribing which videos could be watched and precisely what schools were allowed to (or in this case couldn't) teach on homosexuality isn't. Oh and supporting authoritarian dictators lol.  

So, when is Glenda Jackson gonna give up 83% of her annual earnings? Tell me, do you personally think you are entitled to healthcare primarily funded with money from Glenda Jackson’s wallet?

Probably when she adopts the laughable notion that voluntary charity is the best way to redistribute wealth and help the struggling working classes despite its complete failure to do just that in Victorian times. As for healthcare - absolutely, and she probably does to.

As for healthcare - absolutely, and she probably does to.

So, you think the upper 1% should pay for your needs. In other words, you are a contemptible parasite. It is not an unfair idea for a national sales tax or flat income tax that puts all people in the same bracket to cover a national healthcare plan. It is unfair for the wealthy people at the top to pay for your healthcare because you have not earned the money they have earned in life. Everyone has one basic thing that makes them equal-your natural instinct to make a profit if you choose to follow it.  The fact that you support the redistribution of wealth in order to save your own money proves this instinct.

Doubt I've read such horsesh**t, congrats. I do indeed support progressive taxation like most normal people (excluding capitalist apologists like yourself) because otherwise the actual parasites - the capitalists - in our economy would quickly turn healthcare into something working-class couldn't afford (like many in your country couldn't) for their own profit, and to assert that my opposition to it proves your ludicrous rule is astonishing: it's not about 'saving my own money', I wouldn't have any money to save (and most people find the notion of profit re healthcare to be abhorrent btw). Which brings us neatly round to your parasites again - prepared to enforce and strengthen an absurdly unequal pay for equal work but 'contemptible' when it's taxed unequally. Cry me a river.

[Leftbehind]

Capitalist apologist? What is there to apologize for? Capitalism is natural. To say capitalism is bad for humanity is equivalent to saying homosexuality is bad for humanity-it is a natural instinct in man.

Capitalism is sociopathic, allowing millions to die through enforced scarcity of resources whilst sections live in abundance. If it was so 'natural' why did it take so long for it to emerge?

The definition of a parasite is the following:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How do the capitalist live off their “hosts” expense? The businesses they run: are they not built on the capital first placed into creating the business by the owner? Or do the employees put in the money to start the company, and then the owner milks all the profit from it while the employees get nothing? No business has ever been built on the latter format, except in collectivist societies.

They may start businesses through having the capital in the first place, but their success is dependent on workers - who, through the course of capitalism are seeing the remuneration for their work fall ever further - below subsistence in many cases - with profits funnelled to the capitalists.

Your final sentence implies that CEO’s and business owners do not work hard. Have you managed hundreds of stores, tried to arrange massive transportation networks, and continue to keep costs in check? It’s impossible to do alone. Assistants must be hired, and these assistants have to be managed as well.

No one's ever said that managers don't have stress in their jobs, but no more so than the underpaid and overworked workers (much less so in my direct experience) and yet are paid astronomical multiples - that continue to grow each year in spite of everything. Case in point being our significant, and expanding, sector in the UK: our supermarkets.

Not even mentioning those who evade tax whilst seeing fit to benefit from the society taxes provided.

All in all, the ultimate failure of socialism is the fact that it contradicts mans natural individualist nature.

The failure of socialism was its belief it could be self-contained whilst the rest of the world remained capitalist (especially in economically insignificant areas). Socialism has to be delivered by the working class around the world, if it is ever to be successful. Thankfully your lot are making capitalism increasingly untenable.