Subject: RE: BS: The last days of Thatcher
From:
Teribus
Date: 13 Mar 08 - 10:12 AM
"All the direct result of the changes Thatcher deliberately brought about."
Utter nonsense, how what somebody did between twenty and thirty years ago be the direct cause of what a fifteen year old is doing now I find rather hard to believe.
"1950s? Strong trade unions, high self- esteem, strong social self- discipline."
Ah, so it had nothing to do with the fact that the vast majority of adults in the 1950's had experienced the largest armed conflict in the history of the planet, or failing that had all done their National Service. That's where your discipline came from. No shortage of opportunities either, massive amounts of work had to be done to repair the war damage during the 1950's. Attendance at school and respect for teachers in the 1950's compared to 2000's. Church attendance during the 1950's compared to 2000's. Ratio of working women 1950's to 2000's is what? Number of single parent families 1950's compared to 2000's is what?
Oh right, as a "socialist" the Government has to give us jobs, the Government has to look after our children - Bollocks. Its the socialist free-ride addiction, "Somebody else's fault, somebody else must pay". You know all your rights but none of your responsibilities, failure to balance that up is what is destroying the UK, nothing whatsoever to do with Margaret Thatcher, but she did highlight that 20 years ago.
Now come on tell us about Blair's, "Education, Education, Education", and his "Tough on Crime". Hey PMB have you still got your little card from the 1997 General Election? You know the one with those ten Labour promises. Score (fulfilled v unfulfilled) was 0 - 10 at the last election, well I mean for fucks sake they've only had 11 years - obviously slow starters, better give 'em a bit of time, eh?. They want to watch because I think they'll come a cropper at the next General Election particularly after yesterday's Budget.
"As far as local taxation is concerned, it should be based on the principle of movement from those who can afford to those who need."
The incentive here Richard, is to do what exactly? Result we all become "those who need", its cheaper, what then?
"Therefore a simple diversion of income tax and other revenue and gains taxes would be appropriate."
That would provide incentive for those with money to move, which would result in you taking in less money than you are taking in now. You still have the same bills to pay so you then must tax the poor.
"VAT should also be removed and replaced by revenue taxes."
Not quite that simple though is it Richard. VAT exists because we are in the EU, that is the money that we shovel across to Brussels so that those unelected EU-Commissioner wasters (Kinnock & Mendelson) can squander it in a totally unaccountable fashion. So think again.
"Anyone living here should pay revenue and gains taxes, and those who live here part of the time should pay our taxes on UK income and a proportion (time apportioned) of their worldwide income subject to treaty double-tax relief."
Again the above would only provide incentive for those with money to move, which would result in you taking in less money than you are taking in now. You still have the same bills to pay so you then must tax the poor.
"If we don't get society back...yak, yak,yak" Did somebody steal it Richard? How do you steal society? This by the way is the full version of that "sound byte" which all you ranting socialist prats refuse to quote for some reason:
"I think we've been through a period where too many people have been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It's our duty to look after ourselves and then, also to look after our neighbour. People have got the entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There's no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation." - (Prime minister Margaret Thatcher, talking to Women's Own magazine, October 31 1987)
I particularly liked this one from you Richard, it says volumes about you and the political cause that you espouse:
"It would be really, really nice if that woman, crippled with arthritis and in pain with the abscesses that her hospital reforms condemned so many others to, watching out of her asylum window, could see the flames start to rise, and know that it was all the testament to her genesis.
I know some who should be in there with her.
It won't be immigration that gives us rivers of blood. It will be exploitation.
And people like you should go up against the wall."
What you are required to do is take responsibility for your own life and work. The typical militant socialist response - petulant threats of violence. What a pathetic, sorry bunch of motherfuckers you are.
|
sj
