Go Corbyn

btw

afaik both labour and the scandinavian social-democrats had a relatively strong actually socialist element in their heyday

you can criticise its means and its vision and how soft it was

but the thing is that social-democracy as we romanticise it (public industry, council estates, extensive healthcare, virtually free university, worker's rights galore) is a product of a brand of democratic socialism falling short of its goals

not a product of wanting to be "social-democratic"

  On 9/14/2015 at 6:52 PM, poblequadrat said:

 

  On 9/14/2015 at 6:46 PM, fletcher said:

 

But my family and the state (everyone else who pays taxes) is paying for it.

 

why is that a bad thing?

 

Agreed. Substance abuse is an illness and needs to be treated. Only with a helping hand will he be able to set himself on a road to recovery - thankfully we still live in a country that provides care for those who need it (although the Tories are currently doing everything they can to undermine and dismantle it). If he was just kicked out onto the street he will, in the long run, end up costing the tax payer a lot more than if he's looked after and treated while he needs it. Potentially if he sorts his life out in a few years he'll end up with a decent job and will by the time he's retired more than have paid for the costs of his care. Other people 'paying for him' doesn't even factor in to the equation. It's just another retarded right wing myth

Edit: also lol, apparently Labour HQ is literally on fire

  On 9/14/2015 at 6:34 PM, Amen Warrior said:

 

  On 9/14/2015 at 3:10 PM, eugene said:

 

  On 9/14/2015 at 3:07 PM, westhead said:

 

  On 9/14/2015 at 2:53 PM, eugene said:

 

  Quote

Because I give a shit people other than myself - can you dig that? If not, sorry mate, you're a lost cause.

ok but why demand that from people who don't feel like caring for literally everyone? you could set up some charity yourself.

Because it should be an obligation as a citizen of the UK. If you don't like it maybe you could go and live in the Victorian era, or somewhere else where they don't have public healthcare and education - perhaps Indonesia? You could put your kids out on the street, selling their arses to pay for your root canal surgery. That'd be nice wouldn't it?

why the fuck should it be? no one should be forced to pay for some 25-35 y/o neckbeards subsistence and healthcare, for example.

We get it, you wish you didn't have to contribute to jeremy kyle guest

doss money.

  On 9/14/2015 at 6:25 PM, eugene said:

where would you draw that line? would you be ok with endlessly supporting an alcoholic who doesnt seem to do any effort to deal with the problem? would you be ok with supporting someone who lost his money due to gambling, for example?

You *fundamentally* don't understand taxation

 

but i'm not really talking about taxation, you got the wrong guy.

  On 9/14/2015 at 6:52 PM, poblequadrat said:

 

  On 9/14/2015 at 6:46 PM, fletcher said:

 

But my family and the state (everyone else who pays taxes) is paying for it.

 

why is that a bad thing?

 

because there are potentially more beneficial ways to spend that money, both for own and common good.

[youtubehd]0ZlnPB8sHh8[/youtubehd]

  On 9/14/2015 at 7:00 PM, poblequadrat said:

btw

 

afaik both labour and the scandinavian social-democrats had a relatively strong actually socialist element in their heyday

you can criticise its means and its vision and how soft it was

 

but the thing is that social-democracy as we romanticise it (public industry, council estates, extensive healthcare, virtually free university, worker's rights galore) is a product of a brand of democratic socialism falling short of its goals

 

not a product of wanting to be "social-democratic"

Has any society ever reached the ideological "end goal" in a democratic country? - and is that even possible and desirable when you really think about it?

I mean there are also backsides of social democratic society, it's probably healthy with a bit of liberalism and conservatism from time to time.

I think it's easy to label leftist economic thinking as irresponsible and naive. But there are real life evidence that expansive public spending doesn't have to be dooming at all, it can actually help develop the economy quite a bit. But it's important to keep in mind that Scandinavian model was formed in a time of economic boom post-WWII, so of course it's not that simple to say just let go of the public wallet.

But Cameron labelling Labour returning to their roots as "a national security risk", come the fuck on. The inequality of Britain is exploding. I know the Tories are not fightning for equality, but do people really believe this tight and cutting fiscal policy is progressive and any good for the country at all, when it's pretty evident that many people are facing much worse living standards for every day that goes by?

  On 9/14/2015 at 8:07 PM, BCM said:

[youtubehd]0ZlnPB8sHh8[/youtubehd]

Massive tune.

  On 9/14/2015 at 10:23 PM, Npoess said:

 

  On 9/14/2015 at 7:00 PM, poblequadrat said:

btw

 

afaik both labour and the scandinavian social-democrats had a relatively strong actually socialist element in their heyday

you can criticise its means and its vision and how soft it was

 

but the thing is that social-democracy as we romanticise it (public industry, council estates, extensive healthcare, virtually free university, worker's rights galore) is a product of a brand of democratic socialism falling short of its goals

 

not a product of wanting to be "social-democratic"

 

Has any society ever reached the ideological "end goal" in a democratic country? - and is that even possible and desirable when you really think about it?

 

I mean there are also backsides of social democratic society, it's probably healthy with a bit of liberalism and conservatism from time to time.

 

I think it's easy to label leftist economic thinking as irresponsible and naive. But there are real life evidence that expansive public spending doesn't have to be dooming at all, it can actually help develop the economy quite a bit. But it's important to keep in mind that Scandinavian model was formed in a time of economic boom post-WWII, so of course it's not that simple to say just let go of the public wallet.

 

But Cameron labelling Labour returning to their roots as "a national security risk", come the fuck on. The inequality of Britain is exploding. I know the Tories are not fightning for equality, but do people really believe this tight and cutting fiscal policy is progressive and any good for the country at all, when it's pretty evident that many people are facing much worse living standards for every day that goes by?

 

 

what i mean is you must have a perspective of full socialism and work on finding better ways of achieving it, else you're just clinging on to some mythical idea of pre-mid-70's social democracy or, worse yet, patching the present system up as best as you can with some measures that aim to make our lives easier, which will never lead to a sustainable welfare state. in a way i think conservatives are kinda right about their economic ideas, the thing is the economy they defend isn't the only possible economy like at all (because it's not strictly about growth, but about accumulation first and growth as something it calls for, that's why neoliberals don't really care about keynesian measures boosting consumption etc)

the state barely exists when it comes to production and servicing the goods, so these areas need to be taken back from private hands which is in itself a pretty antagonistic move (also one which is pretty much illegal under the UE, not that anyone should care), and on top of that, the state is also pretty much ruined, which means that you can't pull your punches against private property - basically we've got to steal back what we gave away AND find a way of balancing production, trade and consumption that doesn't rely on accumulation (ie stealing what belongs to the people, no matter what it is) to sustain itself, because if we don't then whatever we take back will eventually be lost again

which, unless you have access to a vast pool of natural resources, is pretty tricky if you're the only state trying to pull it off, so maybe fireworks, propaganda an some stop-gap measures would be a cleverer move than trying to actually do something serious about the economy, but unless you have proper socialism in sight, then it's just that - fireworks, propaganda and stop-gap measures, with no larger plan behind

the sun pedaling pure lies as usual. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/09/15/the-sun-newspaper-corbyn-privy-council_n_8138174.html

can't look at the page at work though DOH!

Corbyn refuses to sing God Save the Queen at the Battle of Britain service today

Right wing press is outraged

  On 9/15/2015 at 8:34 PM, Bread said:

Corbyn refuses to sing God Save the Queen at the Battle of Britain service today

Right wing press is outraged

I feel outrage at people being outraged by an atheist republican refusing to sing that dross, it's a never-ending spiral.

its the worst national anthem in the world

scientific fact

It is pretty crap.

Maybe watmm should collectively write a new one.

*starts new thread*

its just so flat & dull & the fact no-one who sings it actually gives a toss about her vag except for a few olde Etonians & the elderly is the biggest irony

def worth setting a challenge for,,,, good idea

https://youtu.be/AmgbtfptGa0?

Queen E-lizabeth is a cunt.

She's from Germany and

Her husband is a Greek

They're a pair of cunts and

all their kids are cunts too

the - queen- mums - the - on - ly

decent one and thats cause she's dead

SUNG TO THE TUNE OF GOON GUMPAS

  On 9/15/2015 at 11:36 PM, cwmbrancity said:

its the worst national anthem in the world

 

scientific fact

It just scrapes past the Canadian anthem, which is a fucking hideous dirge lawl

The British anthem is meant to be a waltz and can be quite nifty if played right

if that

  On 9/16/2015 at 12:14 AM, Tricone RC said:

 

  On 9/15/2015 at 11:36 PM, cwmbrancity said:

its the worst national anthem in the world

 

scientific fact

It just scrapes past the Canadian anthem, which is a fucking hideous dirge lawl

 

The British anthem is meant to be a waltz and can be quite nifty if played right

 

fortunately we have Welsh, Scots n both Irish anthems to draw from (if you think of things from a British n Irish isles perspective)

whats funny is the gusto this leaking sack of cum is given at certain sporting events by drunken twats with that new flag they've started getting attached to too, that flag of St Geoege piss take

Anglo-Saxon wind-up ended

  On 9/15/2015 at 11:42 PM, fletcher said:

It is pretty crap.

Maybe watmm should collectively write a new one.

*starts new thread*

Just use Grantz Graf and be done with it

Anyone who cannot hum along perfectly is shot as a traitor

  On 9/16/2015 at 3:06 AM, cwmbrancity said:

whats funny is the gusto this leaking sack of cum is given at certain sporting events by drunken twats with that new flag they've started getting attached to too, that flag of St Geoege piss take

 

Anglo-Saxon wind-up ended

lol

you get Jerusalem at a lot of sports stuff tho, which is way better than GSTQ, at least partly cos of this

  On 9/16/2015 at 12:11 AM, perunamuussi said:

Queen E-lizabeth is a cunt.

She's from Germany and

Her husband is a Greek

They're a pair of cunts and

all their kids are cunts too

the - queen- mums - the - on - ly

decent one and thats cause she's dead

 

SUNG TO THE TUNE OF GOON GUMPAS

yeah, but if she was from Germany and her name E-li-s-a-beth?? she could get it..

How did he do?

Osbourne always look semi-psychotic with disdain during pmq's