Question Time

[Common as Mook]

No, its about everyone being equal. There's a book about that isn't there. Doesn't end so well.

 

[Deano's Invisible Pants]

Do some people think that socialism is just about taking all the money and splitting it equally because if you do then you are probably dumber than you could ever know. It's about equal opportunity. Some will take that opportunity and others won't. Billy Bragg has made his money and I suspect pays all his taxes. Some, like Philip Green don't. If David Cameron had been born on a council estate would he be where he is now? Very much doubt it.

Wrong. Socialism is about equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. Even if everyone started from the same place, some would be more intelligent, talented and gifted and would typically attain a disproportionate amount of wealth. Socialists would seek to 'correct' this inequality of outcome.

And regarding David Cameron, no, he might not have got to No. 10 had he been born on a council estate. But if you're implying that it is because he went to Eton that he is now PM, then you obviously forget the like of John Major, Margaret Thatcher and Edward Heath, none of whom, I believe, received a private education. Did John Major even have a degree?

 

[Dave the OAP]

getting back to the point, that bloody asian woman from Baroness warsi from Dewsbury is a right patronising so and so. Everytime she appears on the screen I want to throw something at her...preferably something that wont break the screen obviously

 

[User removed 4]

Jane Moore is a horrible human being.

Seriously why ?? Just her general political views or something that you have personally witnessed or some hearsay story, because i'd love to smash it.

 

[Simster]

getting back to the point, that bloody asian woman from Baroness warsi from Dewsbury is a right patronising so and so. Everytime she appears on the screen I want to throw something at her...preferably something that wont break the screen obviously

Warsi is an irritating bitch. Did I read on here once that she has NEVER one an election in her life?

 

[drew]

How, in the name of merry f***, do you know that?? Are you basing this assumption on the fact because he was born into a privileged family he wouldnt have the necessary chutzpah to succeed? If so that is inverse snobbery of the highest order.

Read the post again. I never said I knew he wouldn't just that in my opinion, without his background he wouldn't be at the pinnacle of conservatism.

Well how many people from a Council Estate have been leaders of the Tory Party? How many people from a council estate have become prime minister despite not being able to win an election against someone as unpopular as Gordon Brown?

History and simple statistics thats how in the name of merry f*** that anyone with an ounce of sense know that!

Thank you.

I couldnt give a flying one to be honest. Background means nothing to me.

My challenge is to the general assumption that priviledged upbringing means you lack any kind of drive and determination. Some of the most driven people I've worked with are those that have grown up having exactly what they wanted when they wanted. Equally there are those that have come from nothing and worked their way to the top of their profession.

I think you conveniently miss the point.

Wrong. Socialism is about equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. Even if everyone started from the same place, some would be more intelligent, talented and gifted and would typically attain a disproportionate amount of wealth. Socialists would seek to 'correct' this inequality of outcome.

And regarding David Cameron, no, he might not have got to No. 10 had he been born on a council estate. But if you're implying that it is because he went to Eton that he is now PM, then you obviously forget the like of John Major, Margaret Thatcher and Edward Heath, none of whom, I believe, received a private education. Did John Major even have a degree?

Not sure I agree with that. You imply that socialism means everyone ends up with the same but surely it means that two people doing the same job with the same effort should get the same reward. Not sure there is anything that says that you are not entitled to more if you put more effort into it. It also starts with the premise that everything (land/property) is owned by society for the benefit of society.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

No, its about everyone being equal. There's a book about that isn't there. Doesn't end so well.

there are a lot of different strains. These days, in mainstream UK politics, it seems to mean a bit of state intervention.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Conservatives believe in the unequal distribution of wealth, socialism is about the equal distribution of misery.

Of course, it's laugh a f***ing minute on the streets these days. Cool Britannia was much more fun.