On Tue, 7 Oct 2014 20:48:20 +0100, "Ian Field" <gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
>
>
>"Charles Lindbergh" <spirit@stlouis.invalid> wrote in message
>news:6c063ap75dsegvuuh7mido4183hp8ip5lq@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 21:17:56 +0100, "Ian Field"
>> <gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Charles Lindbergh" <spirit@stlouis.invalid> wrote in message
>>>news:h2j53ahfgo3809imgec2mped2shruscj2e@4ax.com...
>>>> On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 17:36:25 +0100, "Ian Field"
>>>> <gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Charles Lindbergh" <spirit@stlouis.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>>news:s8a33ah9ta5b2fqqf0bmfjar7fb4foj03c@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Sun, 5 Oct 2014 21:14:09 +0100, "Ian Field"
>>>>>> <gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Charles Lindbergh" <spirit@stlouis.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:56733adel7cii0race2gqfgp9786in34k5@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 14:51:57 GMT, Moi <moi@here.now> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Why in tech e-book? Easy, they're taking the first falering steps
>>>>>>>>>>>towards knowledge. If they search this forum in the past and
>>>>>>>>>>>themselves'll find plenty of information to educate theirself.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Anybody who uses phrases like 'socialist vultures' "spending other
>>>>>>>>>>>peoples' money" are just advertising their complete ignorance of
>>>>>>>>>>>basic
>>>>>>>>>>>socio-economic political philosophy.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Or to put into language that they can understand, they're dumb
>>>>>>>>>>>fucks
>>>>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>>>know nothing about politics - so why should anybody listen when
>>>>>>>>>>>they
>>>>>>>>>>>rabbit on about politics.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Good argument, you disagree with my position so I don't know
>>>>>>>>>> anything
>>>>>>>>>> about politics. Really, is that the very best you can do?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Saul Alinsky would be proud of you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I can't disagree with your position because you haven't presented
>>>>>>>>>one,
>>>>>>>>>merely a sentence deenigrating a position thqat you are ignorant of.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Have you ever seen the IT Crowd? The one where the woman who is
>>>>>>>>>totally
>>>>>>>>>ignorany of IT repeats what her staff have told her, in a managers
>>>>>>>>>meeting, that if you type 'google' into google you will 'break the
>>>>>>>>>internet'. She was just displaying her ignorance of what she was
>>>>>>>>>talking
>>>>>>>>>about.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>If you knew anything about basic socio-economic political theory (I
>>>>>>>>>include capitalism in this heading) you wouldn't use such terms,
>>>>>>>>>you'd
>>>>>>>>>be
>>>>>>>>>in a position to present an informed opinion.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Comments such as 'socialist vultures' and 'spending other peoples'
>>>>>>>>>money'
>>>>>>>>>are the equivalent to "if you type 'google' into google you'll break
>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>internet.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have been giving your comments some consideration. You are right
>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>> thing, socialists are not carrion scavengers. Socialists are worse
>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>> scavengers, they are parasites, more closely related to ticks, fleas
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> tapeworms.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At least vultures do the work of finding an organism which is
>>>>>>>> finished
>>>>>>>> using
>>>>>>>> it's assets.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In the UK; we have the Toraidhe, who decide that publicly owned assets
>>>>>>>actually belong to them while they're in government - and sell them
>>>>>>>off
>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>foreign investors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is quite apparent you do not like the conservative party in the UK.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If someone has done something illegal, they should be prosecuted. On
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> hand, if you simply disagree with their policies, vote them out of
>>>>>> office.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you can't vote them out of office, well, you are shit-out-of-luck.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By the way, exactly what "publicly owned assets" were sold off
>>>>>> inappropriately?
>>>>>
>>>>>It would be quicker to list the family silver that they haven't flogged
>>>>>off!
>>>>>
>>>>>British Rail, British Telecom (GPO) and the national grid spring to mind
>>>>>without much thought.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm not too sure who actually owned our car manufacturers, but I can't
>>>>>think
>>>>>of any that remain in British ownership since the previous infestation
>>>>>of
>>>>>thieving Toraidhe.
>>>>
>>>> I do not believe any government should be in the business of competing
>>>> with
>>>> private enterprise. As a result, the separation of BT from the post
>>>> office and
>>>> the privatization of British Rail were appropriate.
>>>
>>>Now they're run by people who DGAF about anything but profit - they're all
>>>massively more expensive now. In most cases the service has deteriorated
>>>sharply.
>>
>> Profit is wonderful, especially if one is a shareholder.
>>
>> If the service is poor, exercise your other options. When customers
>> migrate to
>> other services, companies notice.
>
>The nationalised industries were broken up into numerous small companies and
>we were told competition would ensure quality and value for money.
>
>The reality is somewhat different - any one is pretty much as bad as
>another.
>
>With rail travel, competition is irrelevant - if you get pissed off with the
>East coast line, your only alternative is go somewhere different instead.
I can appreciate your frustration, but do you really believe your government
could run things any better? Right now, you are not subsidizing these industries
with your taxes. If they were still under government control, don't you think
they would operate at a loss and require taxpayer subsidy? If you never took
the train, wouldn't you resent having to subsidize those who do use them?
Honestly, I can't think of anything that any government runs better than private
industry, can you?
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 |
|