FabSwingers.com forum: Is Ed Miliband for real?

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

or what? For once i'm serious.

From the BBC, not known for being right wing :

"He told an audience of community groups that economic conditions were far worse that those which had faced the party when it won successive elections in 1997, 2001 and 2005."

So, which bunch of c*nts were responsible for that then?

"And he said he wanted to encourage as many Labour councils as possible to pay all staff the living wage."

Oh yeah, all staff? He's gonna pay current labour council leaders, on salaries & perks well over £100,000k a year and the rest, a living wage of say £25,000 is he?

Good luck with that one.

Perhaps he could start with his own salary and set a good example.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Jeez, i'd say Fuck me but Soapy might be on-line lol xx

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yrdwomanWoman
over a year ago

Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum

Perhaps he could start with his own salary and set a good example. "

Politicians actually get paid a lot less than local govt councillers. On the other hand, they get a LOT of perks.

Ed Milliband looks like a puppet to me. Really weird face.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

So, which bunch of c*nts were responsible for that then?

Lehman Brothers?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *un_JuiceCouple
over a year ago

Nr Chester

It's all a game, politics is a theatre our economy cannot possibly be sorted detriment to the tax payers. We are all in the mire most notably the likes of Greece and Italy. This next two years will be interesting.

All part of the continued New World Order and its agenda

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

I think MP's are paid too little, I would pay them more and cut expenses.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

So, which bunch of c*nts were responsible for that then?

Lehman Brothers?"

Regulated by?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Perhaps he could start with his own salary and set a good example.

Politicians actually get paid a lot less than local govt councillers. On the other hand, they get a LOT of perks.

Ed Milliband looks like a puppet to me. Really weird face."

Extremely unlikely, the top councillor of a large West Yorkshire Metropolitan Council is on around £40,000 p.a

An M.P's salary is around £69,000 p.a starters. So no.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Red Silly Brand, pillock of the nearly the highest order apart from the absolute twat that sits next to him Red Testicles.

Sardonic to the end

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

So, which bunch of c*nts were responsible for that then?

Lehman Brothers?

Regulated by? "

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I think MP's are paid too little, I would pay them more and cut expenses.

Agree. Remove temptation and attract better quality.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

I support Labour....... but he is a dickhead, an utter twat... I trust him as far as I could move a bus by farting in its general direction (and no it wouldn't move you cheeky git).

I could support calling him a dickhead and a twat with a long list of examples, but to be honest it would just make me feel sad having to go and read them all again.

Thankfully he's just one of those muppets that is put in charge whilst there's no chance of him having any actual power... and will make the next guy look good when they elect a serious leader to the party.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Jeez, i'd say Fuck me but Soapy might be on-line lol xx

I am xx

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

So, which bunch of c*nts were responsible for that then?

Lehman Brothers?

Regulated by?

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission?"

Regulated by?

Lehmans were never responsible for the huge borrowings and overspending of many of the EU governments,including ours at upto £160bn a year, were they? Maybe they and others asking for their money back may have been a factor.

Anyone got a spare £1bn they could lend me, please?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Jeez, i'd say Fuck me but Soapy might be on-line lol xx

I am xx

Well, you may be but yer not xx

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *evilwolfCouple
over a year ago

Leicestershire

"I support Labour....... but he is a dickhead, an utter twat... I trust him as far as I could move a bus by farting in its general direction (and no it wouldn't move you cheeky git).

I could support calling him a dickhead and a twat with a long list of examples, but to be honest it would just make me feel sad having to go and read them all again.

Exasperating ain't it - sorry times we live in...

Wolf

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I support Labour....... but he is a dickhead, an utter twat... I trust him as far as I could move a bus by farting in its general direction (and no it wouldn't move you cheeky git).

I could support calling him a dickhead and a twat with a long list of examples, but to be honest it would just make me feel sad having to go and read them all again.

You're a labour supporter who aren't fans of Milliband we are tory who aren't fans of Cameron.

Serious question is, and goes for LibDems too, do you think all our party leaders are chosen for personality/flair or substance.

Only saying this as we wanted David Davies as leader where i'm sure most Labour supporters would have chosen David Milliband. Sure Chris Huhne would have been a better LibDem too.

It's all very American.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Come-on, party politics aside, you’ve got to keep things in context …….

After-all being leader of an unelectable opposition party has got to be just about the easiest job in the world, so you may as well give it to someone who’s willing to purport idealistic rhetoric without firm substance or realistic intent ,,,,,,

I doubt he’ll get his chance to govern the country….!.

I suspect many within his own party don’t realistically _iew him as a worthy contender to govern this country, as they find themselves in the same position the Tories did when their ranks were depleted to a bunch of unelectable also-rans !!!!……

Oh,,, but more importantly, he really needs to seek out a better Tailor who could sort out his correct inside leg size measurement....

The guy walks around half mast..... sheeeezzzzz….!.

Sox™

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *yrdwomanWoman
over a year ago

Putting the 'cum' in Eboracum

Perhaps he could start with his own salary and set a good example.

Politicians actually get paid a lot less than local govt councillers. On the other hand, they get a LOT of perks.

Ed Milliband looks like a puppet to me. Really weird face.

Extremely unlikely, the top councillor of a large West Yorkshire Metropolitan Council is on around £40,000 p.a

An M.P's salary is around £69,000 p.a starters. So no. "

There are several leaders of councils on over £250k pa, so yes.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Perhaps he could start with his own salary and set a good example.

Politicians actually get paid a lot less than local govt councillers. On the other hand, they get a LOT of perks.

Ed Milliband looks like a puppet to me. Really weird face.

Extremely unlikely, the top councillor of a large West Yorkshire Metropolitan Council is on around £40,000 p.a

An M.P's salary is around £69,000 p.a starters. So no.

There are several leaders of councils on over £250k pa, so yes."

Leaders yes, executives not councillors.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I don't have a problem with a public servant potentially making big bucks from doing their job properly.

As long as it's on merit i.e. the workers produced a lot more value than they are being paid, I've no problems. We all benefit from hard working civil servants.

I *do* have a problem with the enormous size of the state in the UK.

In some parts of the country, the government accounts for 66% of the local economy, 50% in most places.

That is just not right. Way, way too many people work for the state in this country. The NHS alone has a workforce larger than the Chinese Army. That's a fact.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Milliband is akin to a night watchman on a cricket team.....with a Five year fixed parliament in force it would be a nonsense to field your strongest captain with over Three years left on the clock......Labour found long ago that Ed isn't the answer, but he will be allowed to carry on for at least another year before a real leader emerges......

He is a very weak opposition leader, but it hardly matters at the moment, with the love in between Clegg and Cameron still stumbling along, lets see what occurs in the Spring of 2013....The Tories are only too aware that Milliband won't be the choice of the Labour party come next year....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

The NHS has in excess of 2.25 million workers?.....Is that really a fact?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The NHS has in excess of 2.25 million workers?.....Is that really a fact?"

I doubled checked where I'd heard that from.

Turns out I'm incorrect.

The Chinese army is 2.25 million members.

The NHS now employs 1.2m directly, more than any other organisation in the world apart from China's Red Army and the Indian Railways.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The NHS has in excess of 2.25 million workers?.....Is that really a fact?"

And I think that if we were comparing the indirect workers. e.g. the part of the economy that is dependent on the NHS's continued existence, effectively making them state employees incognito, then I think the NHS would exceed the Chinese Army's active standing army of 2.25 million.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Milliband is akin to a night watchman on a cricket team.....with a Five year fixed parliament in force it would be a nonsense to field your strongest captain with over Three years left on the clock......Labour found long ago that Ed isn't the answer, but he will be allowed to carry on for at least another year before a real leader emerges......

I think the Conservatives are relieved it s Ed and not David. However, i'm not sure the Labour Party has had a democratic way of changing and choosing leaders.

I think that E.Milliband will be leader come election time as apart from the ex cabinet crew there doesn't seem to be any emerging leaders.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

I think the Conservatives are relieved it s Ed and not David. However, i'm not sure the Labour Party has had a democratic way of changing and choosing leaders.

I think that E.Milliband will be leader come election time as apart from the ex cabinet crew there doesn't seem to be any emerging leaders."

It's worth mentioning that many Labour supporters would see that differently, maybe they are the best people to judge if there are better alternatives?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I know it sounds unbelievable, so I'm going to explicitly back up my sources here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12819538

It's actually slightly larger, it's 1.4 million according to the BBC.

(That's in England alone, not Scotland/Wales/Northern Ireland)

Shoulda kept an eye on the damn date, 1.2 million is outa date.

Anyway, that's 1 worker for every 36 citizens living in England working for the NHS in England.

The number of employed in England is approximately 24 million people.

See here: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-226770

That means that with respect to all those employed in England, approximately 1 in 17 people work for the NHS directly.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

I think he will have a big cock tho...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Quite right Jane, i'm not saying I know best lol. Just an observation and non party political. You'd normally expect to see some being courted by the media by now.

I still think that all 3 parties have gone for the charismatic over substance policy. American style shallow politics of rhetoric and sound bites from all since Blair.

New Labour was the biggest PR exercise in Europe, very well presented in a very polished way.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

"I think he IS a big cock tho..."

Yep.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

"I think he IS a big cock tho...

Yep."

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

or what? For once i'm serious.

From the BBC, not known for being right wing :

"He told an audience of community groups that economic conditions were far worse that those which had faced the party when it won successive elections in 1997, 2001 and 2005."

So, which bunch of c*nts were responsible for that then?

"And he said he wanted to encourage as many Labour councils as possible to pay all staff the living wage."

Oh yeah, all staff? He's gonna pay current labour council leaders, on salaries & perks well over £100,000k a year and the rest, a living wage of say £25,000 is he?

Good luck with that one.

Perhaps he could start with his own salary and set a good example. "

Fat chance.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

SOCIALISM

You have 2 cows.

You give one to your neighbour.

COMMUNISM

You have 2 cows.

The State takes both and gives you some milk.

FASCISM

You have 2 cows.

The State takes both and sells you some milk.

NAZISM

You have 2 cows.

The State takes both and shoots you.

BUREAUCRATISM

You have 2 cows.

The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away...

TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM

You have two cows.

You sell one and buy a bull.

Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows.

You sell them and retire on the income.

SURREALISM

You have two giraffes.

The government requires you to take harmonica lessons

AN AMERICAN CORPORATION

You have two cows.

You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows.

Later, you hire a consultant to analyze why the cow has dropped dead.

ENRON VENTURE CAPITALISM

You have two cows.

You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows.

The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.

The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more.

You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States, leaving you with nine cows.

No balance sheet provided with the release.

The public then buys your bull.

A FRENCH CORPORATION

You have two cows.

You go on strike, organize a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.

A JAPANESE CORPORATION

You have two cows.

You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.

You then create a clever cow cartoon image called 'Cowkimon' and market it worldwide

A GERMAN CORPORATION

You have two cows.

You re-engineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves.

AN ITALIAN CORPORATION

You have two cows, but you don't know where they are.

You decide to have lunch.

A RUSSIAN CORPORATION

You have two cows.

You count them and learn you have five cows.

You count them again and learn you have 42 cows.

You count them again and learn you have 2 cows.

You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.

A SWISS CORPORATION

You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.

You charge the owners for storing them.

A CHINESE CORPORATION

You have two cows.

You have 300 people milking them.

You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity.

You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.

AN INDIAN CORPORATION

You have two cows.

You worship them.

A BRITISH CORPORATION

You have two cows.

Both are mad.

AN IRAQI CORPORATION

Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.

You tell them that you have none.

No-one believes you, so they bomb the **** out of you and invade your country.

You still have no cows, but at least now you are part of Democracy....

AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION

You have two cows.

Business seems pretty good.

You close the office and go to the pub for a few beers to celebrate.

A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION

You have two cows.

The one on the left looks very attractive.

A GREEK CORPORATION

You have two cows.

You borrow against the cows from the Germans

You kill the cows and make souvlaki

You can’t pay the interest so the Germans lend you more money

You can’t pay the interest so the Germans lend you more money .....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

very good

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"A BRITISH CORPORATION

You have two cows.

Both are mad. "

pretty much sums up our current political situation.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

brill love it, i'm all for the surreal point of _iew, makes perfect sense lol

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If that is your own work VenusDab, you should be selling it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"If that is your own work VenusDab, you should be selling it.

It's a poster, I have it on my wall

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"If that is your own work VenusDab, you should be selling it.

It's a poster, I have it on my wall

It was a Forward E-mail I recieved at work.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

He is real, very real sadly. If he was a figment of my imagination then maybe all the rest of them would be too!

On the point of the economy, our debt and deficit were fine until all the banks went belly up! Our national debt had only been lower as a percentage of GDP in 30 of the last 250 years now its just a bit shit!

I blame Goldman Sachs for the current problems, they fiddled the books of Fanny Mae and Fanny Mac in the states to make them look in a better position than they were and then bet against them in the stock market to make a quick $.... now that's evil!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"If that is your own work VenusDab, you should be selling it.

It's a poster, I have it on my wall

It was a Forward E-mail I recieved at work.

very apt and oh so frightening..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Love the list btw!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

"Love the list btw!"

one legs shorter than the other

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"On the point of the economy, our debt and deficit were fine until all the banks went belly up! Our national debt had only been lower as a percentage of GDP in 30 of the last 250 years now its just a bit shit!

sorry,

you cant be coming on here and being factually correct 'cos there will be people who will blame labour and more precisely Gordon Brown for pretty much anything..

the death of Lassie..

the end of The Empire..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

sorry,

you cant be coming on here and being factually correct 'cos there will be people who will blame labour and more precisely Gordon Brown for pretty much anything..

the death of Lassie..

the end of The Empire..

Lol thats true on every forum isnt it?

They killed Lassie? Bastards!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

Lol thats true on every forum isnt it?

They killed Lassie? Bastards!"

Stop..

its all still a bit raw..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Lol thats true on every forum isnt it?

They killed Lassie? Bastards!

Stop..

its all still a bit raw..

Thats the last of my childhood innocence gone. Damn you Labour! Damn you! *shakes fist*

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"He is real, very real sadly. If he was a figment of my imagination then maybe all the rest of them would be too!

Some stats. The UK's debt stands at 83% of GDP, but the external debt owed to other countries/insitutions stands at almost 500% of GDP.

To compare us with another basket case, i.e. the USA, their debt to GDP ratio is 76% and their external is 102%

To put it simply; we are in a much worse situation in relative terms, to the USA. Not many people seem to appreciate that.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

ooh stats fight....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

did anyone see the latest news on rolls royce yesterday i was flabbergasted

.the world or at least europe is in financial meltdown yet rolls royce has never sold so many of there flash cars in its history last yr and uk sales are up 36%.camermorons we are all in this together speech sounds very hollow today

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

"did anyone see the latest news on rolls royce yesterday i was flabbergasted

I think I heard on the radio the largest chunk of the sales went to China... the new millionaires across there.

I think

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Perhaps he could start with his own salary and set a good example.

Politicians actually get paid a lot less than local govt councillers. On the other hand, they get a LOT of perks.

Ed Milliband looks like a puppet to me. Really weird face."

Beaker from the Muppets

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

"did anyone see the latest news on rolls royce yesterday i was flabbergasted

I think I heard on the radio the largest chunk of the sales went to China... the new millionaires across there.

I think

therefore you are

correct?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"He is real, very real sadly. If he was a figment of my imagination then maybe all the rest of them would be too!

Some stats. The UK's debt stands at 83% of GDP, but the external debt owed to other countries/insitutions stands at almost 500% of GDP.

To compare us with another basket case, i.e. the USA, their debt to GDP ratio is 76% and their external is 102%

To put it simply; we are in a much worse situation in relative terms, to the USA. Not many people seem to appreciate that."

That is mostly true, the 500% is total debt by all companies, institutions and persons, A large amount will be owed to banks and other uk based institutions and doesnt take into account how much other nations owe to the UK (its why apart from trade what happens in europe is so important) its a symptom of having a very large financial sector.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"did anyone see the latest news on rolls royce yesterday i was flabbergasted

I think I heard on the radio the largest chunk of the sales went to China... the new millionaires across there.

I think

therefore you are

correct?"

That's what I heard as well

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Public sector workers have it better than private sector workers on a like-for-like basis.

They also have 0 clue on economic reality.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

"Public sector workers have it better than private sector workers on a like-for-like basis.

They also have 0 clue on economic reality."

Try living without them....

You couldn't

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Public sector workers have it better than private sector workers on a like-for-like basis.

They also have 0 clue on economic reality.

Try living without them....

You couldn't"

Actually, there are too many of them so I think we could do with a lot less.

less to pay, more effecient but alas, the Union big boys wouldn't like that!

In fact, its funny how they want Labour back as labour created a potential replacement workforce in mass immigration.

Pity they created a massive welfare state at the same time so they didn't need to work.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

Less nurses.....less fire fighters.....less Police.....less teachers.....less street cleaners.....less refuse collectors....

Yeah, can see how we could be more efficient without them.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Less nurses.....less fire fighters.....less Police.....less teachers.....less street cleaners.....less refuse collectors....

Yeah, can see how we could be more efficient without them."

typical response.

There are more public sector workers working mid-managment non-jobs than any of the above mentioned.

Do you even think before you post?

Do you belong to a union or have friends in those occupations? Typical response really.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Less nurses.....less fire fighters.....less Police.....less teachers.....less street cleaners.....less refuse collectors....

Yeah, can see how we could be more efficient without them.

typical response.

There are more public sector workers working mid-managment non-jobs than any of the above mentioned.

Do you even think before you post?

Do you belong to a union or have friends in those occupations? Typical response really."

Can you quantify that with some solid dtats rather than opinion? It's a typical answer because it;s the realistic and truthful one.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Less nurses.....less fire fighters.....less Police.....less teachers.....less street cleaners.....less refuse collectors....

Yeah, can see how we could be more efficient without them.

typical response.

There are more public sector workers working mid-managment non-jobs than any of the above mentioned.

Do you even think before you post?

Do you belong to a union or have friends in those occupations? Typical response really.

Can you quantify that with some solid dtats rather than opinion? It's a typical answer because it;s the realistic and truthful one.

My mum worked in the NHS and then as a teacher.

More managers into the NHS and less head nurses/ward sisters.

Result? Standards went down but you pay managers more than you would a nurse.

H&S safety regulations require more people to enforce it and regulate it.

In fact I dont need to quote figures for this because figures are biased and the 11 years of Labour rule created such a massive public sector it needed sorting out.

Why do you think the Torys are getting hit by the Unions? The pension reform is the lesser of the evils which were to be implemented.

The other was to get rid of non-jobs that plague the NHS, customs, MOD central government and councils.

Public sector consumes money, private sector creates money. The public sector has better perks, job for life and refuses to be cut down to size.

ANyone who believes otherwise lives in Lala land.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I agree with gamma1.

The public sector is not a holy cow.

I am not an anarchist, or somebody who believes we can get rid of 9/10 of the government without consequences.

That doesn't mean for a second, that the public sector should be as large as it is now.

If you see the Government as a large corporation, then you'll see where we're coming from.

For the record, the number of nurses, doctors, firefighters, policemen et al, that regularly get trotted out as examples of a social good that needs to be paid for, represent a tiny tiny fraction of the total size of the public sector.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"Public sector workers have it better than private sector workers on a like-for-like basis.

They also have 0 clue on economic reality."

most of the 'like for like' argument does not hold water to be honest..

not many private sector Police forces are there..

nor Fire service..

yes some Nursing staff, then again the private sector medical services in this country have mostly all been trained and paid for from the public purse..

As for 'zero' clue, that has no logical sense as a statement..

public sector workers have their own 'micro economy' as home owners etc, just like 'normal people' ie, private sector...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Can you quantify that with some solid dtats rather than opinion? It's a typical answer because it;s the realistic and truthful one.

Hi,

The actual quantity of nurses/doctors/teachers/police/firemen compared to total public sector employees is ~2.5m out of ~7.5m

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

perhaps but its the 'front line' thats getting slashed..

the examples you give above and others provide the service to the 'public' who are the service users..

there are no private or public sector service users, its just people who need the service..

strangely enough public sector wotkers do pay taxes also which seems to be ignored a lot in the public/private debate..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *lackMetalMan
over a year ago

Centre

Perhaps he could start with his own salary and set a good example.

Politicians actually get paid a lot less than local govt councillers. On the other hand, they get a LOT of perks.

Ed Milliband looks like a puppet to me. Really weird face.

Extremely unlikely, the top councillor of a large West Yorkshire Metropolitan Council is on around £40,000 p.a

An M.P's salary is around £69,000 p.a starters. So no. "

Well, that's Yorkshire. In London, some make 5x that. Shit, they make more than the Prime Minister!!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Public sector workers have it better than private sector workers on a like-for-like basis.

They also have 0 clue on economic reality.

most of the 'like for like' argument does not hold water to be honest..

not many private sector Police forces are there..

nor Fire service..

yes some Nursing staff, then again the private sector medical services in this country have mostly all been trained and paid for from the public purse..

As for 'zero' clue, that has no logical sense as a statement..

public sector workers have their own 'micro economy' as home owners etc, just like 'normal people' ie, private sector...

I think the problem isn't that the public sector is 'bad'. It isn't, it serves many a useful purpose.

Nor is the problem that they get paid too much. If a public sector worker does 10x more work than another, I think it perfectly reasonable he get paid 10x more money.

The problem is twofold:

A: Public sector workers never get fired. Yes, that is a blanket statement, but it happens to be true.

In past four decades a mere 18 teachers have been sacked. That's insane. The same applies to other public service jobs. It's indefensible. What do you have to do to get fired?

B: Large sections of the public sector... Don't need to exist at all in the public sector For example, I believe learner driver schools are operated by the state. There is no reason for that to be the case!

Similarly, there should be way more private universities than we have now, it is profoundly uncompetitive.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs

[Removed by poster at 11/01/12 00:41:53]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sorry, forget to add the most important argument of all:

C: That although the government can act as a social good e.g. police etc, it is essentially a service provider.

That means that although it helps create wealth, it doesn't actually produce wealth directly. It's fundamentally not what a government does in a capitalist system. As such, the solution is either to absorb 'the commanding heights' into the state, or privatize them.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

perhaps but its the 'front line' thats getting slashed..

the examples you give above and others provide the service to the 'public' who are the service users..

there are no private or public sector service users, its just people who need the service..

strangely enough public sector wotkers do pay taxes also which seems to be ignored a lot in the public/private debate..

Related to this topic:

Why do public servants pay taxes?

Why not simply pay them the gross and not tax them? i.e. their gross and net pay are the same thing.

Seems like a giant waste of money on accounting and payroll activities.

I mean, the government knows exactly what they are doing. So there is no variability in the amount to be taxed. If they own shares or whatever, that's an individual matter.

Why does the government tax public employees on their incomes.

It's simply ludicrous."

possibly because it employs a Secretary of State, junior ministers, senior civil servants etc etc...

that one is beyond my pay scale..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs

[Removed by poster at 11/01/12 00:55:26]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the problem isn't that the public sector is 'bad'. It isn't, it serves many a useful purpose.

Nor is the problem that they get paid too much. If a public sector worker does 10x more work than another, I think it perfectly reasonable he get paid 10x more money.

The problem is twofold:

A: Public sector workers never get fired. Yes, that is a blanket statement, but it happens to be true.

In past four decades a mere 18 teachers have been sacked. That's insane. The same applies to other public service jobs. It's indefensible. What do you have to do to get fired?

Similarly, there should be way more private universities than we have now, it is profoundly uncompetitive.

A 'useful purpose' is perhaps appropriate if a librarian has oredered you the latest part of a trilogy but a tad glib and tongue in cheek perhaps if your trapped in a car with a broken femur..

i can tell you that your suggestion about the rest is baseless also..

With all due respect, I think you're wrong about a lot of things. In any case, let's be amicable and leave it at that.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

I think the problem isn't that the public sector is 'bad'. It isn't, it serves many a useful purpose.

Nor is the problem that they get paid too much. If a public sector worker does 10x more work than another, I think it perfectly reasonable he get paid 10x more money.

The problem is twofold:

A: Public sector workers never get fired. Yes, that is a blanket statement, but it happens to be true.

In past four decades a mere 18 teachers have been sacked. That's insane. The same applies to other public service jobs. It's indefensible. What do you have to do to get fired?

Similarly, there should be way more private universities than we have now, it is profoundly uncompetitive.

A 'useful purpose' is perhaps appropriate if a librarian has oredered you the latest part of a trilogy but a tad glib and tongue in cheek perhaps if your trapped in a car with a broken femur..

i can tell you that your suggestion about the rest is baseless also..

With all due respect, I think you're wrong about a lot of things. In any case, let's be amicable and leave it at that."

and also being very amicable, and with respect..

which parts do you think i am wrong about...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs

"strangely enough public sector workers do pay taxes also which seems to be ignored a lot in the public/private debate"

Yes and their kids go to school and use hospitals etc etc and it does get over looked by the Tory media band wagon.

I still love how the labour party single handedly brought the world to its knees! lol

How many remember mortgage rates at 16% and who was in power?

Politics is just like fashion it always comes back around! lol

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

""strangely enough public sector workers do pay taxes also which seems to be ignored a lot in the public/private debate"

Yes and their kids go to school and use hospitals etc etc and it does get over looked by the Tory media band wagon.

I still love how the labour party single handedly brought the world to its knees! lol

How many remember mortgage rates at 16% and who was in power?

Politics is just like fashion it always comes back around! lol"

i simply refuse to believe that at some point in the future i shall be wearing the cardigan and matching tank top combo which seemed so cool and with it in the mid 70's...

never i tell ya..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Emotional, nurses, teacher etc. That part of the state is acceptable and most will appreciate the work they do.

However, labour really rolled out the state in their years. Massive increase in civil servants etc to run their ever increasing departments and also local initiatives.

Think it's usual in times of hardship for everyone to blame everyone.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the problem isn't that the public sector is 'bad'. It isn't, it serves many a useful purpose.

Nor is the problem that they get paid too much. If a public sector worker does 10x more work than another, I think it perfectly reasonable he get paid 10x more money.

The problem is twofold:

A: Public sector workers never get fired. Yes, that is a blanket statement, but it happens to be true.

In past four decades a mere 18 teachers have been sacked. That's insane. The same applies to other public service jobs. It's indefensible. What do you have to do to get fired?

Similarly, there should be way more private universities than we have now, it is profoundly uncompetitive.

A 'useful purpose' is perhaps appropriate if a librarian has oredered you the latest part of a trilogy but a tad glib and tongue in cheek perhaps if your trapped in a car with a broken femur..

i can tell you that your suggestion about the rest is baseless also..

With all due respect, I think you're wrong about a lot of things. In any case, let's be amicable and leave it at that.

and also being very amicable, and with respect..

which parts do you think i am wrong about..."

Basically it's the idea that the size of the State is irrelevant so long as the State is providing value/services. That is not the case, everything has a price.

Death, dying, natural selection. These are normal elements of life in biology and economics. Governments aren't an exception.

The services that a government provides, in my _iew, should be somewhat recession immune so the system keeps humming along.

However, you pay a price for everything. For consistent job security, you should accept a lower salary. Higher risk = more money.

That's the rules of the game. If you don't obey them, you'll eventually be forced to capitulate with great losses to more rational minded nations.

Paying a premia, as currently exists, for state employment, will cause enormous economic displacements, moving credit into low value production and away from high value production.

In Africa, we see the consequences of such behavior in the clear. The best jobs are in the public sector. As a result, there is massive corruption and skewing of incentives. This is occuring in The West too, it's just that it's less obvious because we became wealthy previously i.e. we've become fat and lazy.

These are the laws of economics, everything has consequences. There is an optimally sized State, and the UK definitely doesn't have one. It has become parasitic, cancerous. The tax payer paid 20 billion pounds for the biggest IT software flop in history, it added nothing to the economy or NHS's efficiency. That is an outrage. Yet the English are not outraged. They are asleep.

That is my _iew, you don't have to accept it.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *drianukMan
over a year ago

Spain, Lancs

Just look at the last days of the Roman empire.

Everyone wanted to work for the state becuase of the pay and status.

Look what happened to Rome (except for Byzantium).

State salaries in UK today are higher than private sector salaries and more and more people work for the state.

I work for the state - and my productivity is less than 30 per cent of what it was when I worked in the private sector.

Draw your own conclusion.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

"Just look at the last days of the Roman empire.

Everyone wanted to work for the state becuase of the pay and status.

Look what happened to Rome (except for Byzantium).

State salaries in UK today are higher than private sector salaries and more and more people work for the state.

I work for the state - and my productivity is less than 30 per cent of what it was when I worked in the private sector.

Draw your own conclusion."

your happy to do less, that could be down to many things...

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

I think the problem isn't that the public sector is 'bad'. It isn't, it serves many a useful purpose.

Nor is the problem that they get paid too much. If a public sector worker does 10x more work than another, I think it perfectly reasonable he get paid 10x more money.

The problem is twofold:

A: Public sector workers never get fired. Yes, that is a blanket statement, but it happens to be true.

In past four decades a mere 18 teachers have been sacked. That's insane. The same applies to other public service jobs. It's indefensible. What do you have to do to get fired?

Similarly, there should be way more private universities than we have now, it is profoundly uncompetitive.

A 'useful purpose' is perhaps appropriate if a librarian has oredered you the latest part of a trilogy but a tad glib and tongue in cheek perhaps if your trapped in a car with a broken femur..

i can tell you that your suggestion about the rest is baseless also..

With all due respect, I think you're wrong about a lot of things. In any case, let's be amicable and leave it at that.

and also being very amicable, and with respect..

which parts do you think i am wrong about...

Basically it's the idea that the size of the State is irrelevant so long as the State is providing value/services. That is not the case, everything has a price.

Death, dying, natural selection. These are normal elements of life in biology and economics. Governments aren't an exception.

The services that a government provides, in my _iew, should be somewhat recession immune so the system keeps humming along.

However, you pay a price for everything. For consistent job security, you should accept a lower salary. Higher risk = more money.

That's the rules of the game. If you don't obey them, you'll eventually be forced to capitulate with great losses to more rational minded nations.

Paying a premia, as currently exists, for state employment, will cause enormous economic displacements, moving credit into low value production and away from high value production.

That is my _iew, you don't have to accept it. "

I agree with the last paragraph..

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Politics of fear, for many decades, probably since the first time somebody ruled over a cave full of people, ALL governments have used fear to control the population, obvious examples are "the cold war", which was replaced with the war on terrorism.

BUT they have also become experts in creating more subtle enemies for us to fear / deride and want to conquer so much that we will let the government do what is required to rid us of the danger.

It appears that the current government is quite successful in setting up the public sector as an enemy, weird as they are part of it… but then it’s easy to target the invisible middle management.

Some realities…

Why do we have a health system which is the top ten of the world’s health systems on performance and bottom ten on cost?

Major Civil Service employment is in the North East and Wales, set up by the Conservatives when they closed the coal and steel works leaving mass unemployment, if you now cut those jobs where will they work? Or would it be better to pay them benefits instead.

I was a civil servant, and got privatised… in the year before we were privatised the total cost of my department including all staff and all expenditure was £3million, we bought British product so a good proportion of that £3,000,000 went back into employing other UK Citizens. First year after privatisation the service was massively reduced, and my new employer charged £12,000,000 for the service and all the purchases came from Germany and Japan meaning there was no extra income for UK companies (and my new employer isn’t English either! So most profits leave the country)

Past Labour government is also NOT the enemy, they are not the cause of the current economic situation, and in fact borrowed LESS year on year than the current government does each year.

Stop giving them power by being reactionary! There are enough enemies of your chosen path through life without believing the government’s current victims are the cause of your problems.

The danger of the civil service pension? For 40 years contributions are made into a pension scheme by employee and employer to provide for your old age, but the investor of those contributions has been misusing the contributions and now can’t afford to pay the promised pensions…. If that investor was a private company then it would be a court case, someone would go to jail and the government would shore up the pension fund for the people who are affected… However, in this case that investor is the government it’s down to the greed of the public servants who have the audacity to want the pension they have worked 40 years to get! That’s not Labour or Conservative or any alliance that’s ALL of them!

Try not to be a victim of the media, try not to be ruled by fear of enemies, especially invisible ones, instead try to live your life as best you can avoiding the hate and fear others try to create in you….

Anyone fancy a shag?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

are any of our so called leaders for real, cameron edd or in scotland that prat salmond ,

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I don't have a problem with a public servant potentially making big bucks from doing their job properly.

As long as it's on merit i.e. the workers produced a lot more value than they are being paid, I've no problems. We all benefit from hard working civil servants.

I *do* have a problem with the enormous size of the state in the UK.

In some parts of the country, the government accounts for 66% of the local economy, 50% in most places.

That is just not right. Way, way too many people work for the state in this country. The NHS alone has a workforce larger than the Chinese Army. That's a fact. "

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I don't have a problem with a public servant potentially making big bucks from doing their job properly.

As long as it's on merit i.e. the workers produced a lot more value than they are being paid, I've no problems. We all benefit from hard working civil servants.

I *do* have a problem with the enormous size of the state in the UK.

In some parts of the country, the government accounts for 66% of the local economy, 50% in most places.

That is just not right. Way, way too many people work for the state in this country. The NHS alone has a workforce larger than the Chinese Army. That's a fact. "

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

to say that the NHS employ more people than the chinese army and state that this is a fact well the real figures are these chinese army 4,585000 aprox

NHS 1,500000 aprox

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *john121Man
over a year ago

staffs

""strangely enough public sector workers do pay taxes also which seems to be ignored a lot in the public/private debate"

Yes and their kids go to school and use hospitals etc etc and it does get over looked by the Tory media band wagon.

I still love how the labour party single handedly brought the world to its knees! lol

How many remember mortgage rates at 16% and who was in power?

Politics is just like fashion it always comes back around! lol

i simply refuse to believe that at some point in the future i shall be wearing the cardigan and matching tank top combo which seemed so cool and with it in the mid 70's...

never i tell ya..

Never say never!

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Unfortunately the public don't seem to have warmed to Ed at all, though I'm sure he's a decent guy.

Personally I would have liked to see his brother David in charge, and think he would be doing better than Ed is at the moment, had he have won the leadership election.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the problem isn't that the public sector is 'bad'. It isn't, it serves many a useful purpose.

Nor is the problem that they get paid too much. If a public sector worker does 10x more work than another, I think it perfectly reasonable he get paid 10x more money.

The problem is twofold:

A: Public sector workers never get fired. Yes, that is a blanket statement, but it happens to be true.

In past four decades a mere 18 teachers have been sacked. That's insane. The same applies to other public service jobs. It's indefensible. What do you have to do to get fired?

Similarly, there should be way more private universities than we have now, it is profoundly uncompetitive.

A 'useful purpose' is perhaps appropriate if a librarian has oredered you the latest part of a trilogy but a tad glib and tongue in cheek perhaps if your trapped in a car with a broken femur..

i can tell you that your suggestion about the rest is baseless also..

With all due respect, I think you're wrong about a lot of things. In any case, let's be amicable and leave it at that.

and also being very amicable, and with respect..

which parts do you think i am wrong about...

Basically it's the idea that the size of the State is irrelevant so long as the State is providing value/services. That is not the case, everything has a price.

Death, dying, natural selection. These are normal elements of life in biology and economics. Governments aren't an exception.

The services that a government provides, in my _iew, should be somewhat recession immune so the system keeps humming along.

However, you pay a price for everything. For consistent job security, you should accept a lower salary. Higher risk = more money.

That's the rules of the game. If you don't obey them, you'll eventually be forced to capitulate with great losses to more rational minded nations.

Paying a premia, as currently exists, for state employment, will cause enormous economic displacements, moving credit into low value production and away from high value production.

That is my _iew, you don't have to accept it. "

A) public sector workers do get fired ive seen a few people in my department fired but the reason so few qualified staff are fired is the difficulty replacing them. Who would want to be a teacher with all those kids?

B) Driving centres are public, learner schools are not. Its to ensure standards in testing, look at the fuss over the private exam boards for schools and declining standard/teachers being told questions early.

Why would you want a private university? it wouldn't improve teaching, it would just cost pupils a fortune, distort the market and separate those with rich families from those who don't. It would hamper research they would only invest in what was immediately profitable and would neglect anything they didn't feel would make them money. Sadly that's not the way science works to find the great money trees that private industry would want you have to examine all the rest of the trees first.

Yes the much vaunted NHS IT software was a waste of money, mostly wasted by large firms who failed to deliver what they were contracted to do. It was 13 billion and some of that was never paid. There was definitely anger about it, most NHS staff were less than happy about the delays, the cost savings that had to come out of front line budgets and the like.

On pay.... If i was in the private sector with my qualifications id be on twice as much, but im not, I wanted to work for the NHS so I accept the reduced pay for doing something I enjoy and that i feel adds value to the UK as a whole. We have one of the best healthcare systems in the world which is almost unique for being totally free from additional charges and unlike what the majority believe is actually not that expensive. Yes theres money to be saved still but name me one private company that could prove they are 100% efficient and ill give them a medal.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

C) How much wealth would be created if there was no law and order? No planning system? No tax collectors? An expensive private health system that favoured the rich and left most workers without health cover?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The Conservatives in opposition went through a few leaders until Cameron won power: Hague, IDS and Howard, and the Labour Party will do the same as Miliband is the first of what will prove to be several leaders in opposition until they win power - which they inevitably will as no political party in the UK will ever enjoy perpetual government.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"to say that the NHS employ more people than the chinese army and state that this is a fact well the real figures are these chinese army 4,585000 aprox

NHS 1,500000 aprox"

Actually I corrected that statement somewhere above in the thread if you search for my posts you'll see.

I said the NHS was 1.4 million and the Chinese Army was 2.25 million I believe.

(in the case of the Chinese Army, I suspect you're counting the reservists and other groups, which isn't valid, it's like counting the Home Guard as part of the Army)

See the wikipedia article on the Chinese Army:

"The PLA is the world's largest military force, with approximately 3 million members (see List of countries by number of total troops), and has the world's largest (active) standing army, with approximately 2.25 million members"

Thanks

Matt

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ushroom7 OP Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Good job they're not dyslexic, the Gaza strip ain't that big.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"C) How much wealth would be created if there was no law and order? No planning system? No tax collectors? An expensive private health system that favoured the rich and left most workers without health cover?"

I can't address your longer post, because it almost becomes a philosophical argument because we're talking about such a huge topic.

On C: I agree that the government is necessary, those functions are fundamental.

What we disagree on, is where the limit on government control should be. That is all, it's a matter of degree.

Unless I'm very wrong, you don't want full government control over the markets, and I don't want an anarchist State.

One of the tools used to think about the optimal balance between the Government and the Market is the Laffer Curve. Somewhere along those plotted lines, there is a happy medium. Obviously it changes over time and is the subject of much debate.

My real concern, is that unlike the Market, the Government doesn't appear to have a method of reducing it's size without great violence. There is no method to do it. It's not a matter of political willpower, the market doesn't depend on willpower, it depends on profit and loss to decide winners and losers.

I'm not saying we should use a market oriented solution to reduce the size of government departments either.

I *am* saying, that if the size of government increases, even by a little, and it cannot roll back in size, then eventually it will dominate the Market completely. And then we will suffer.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I dont listen to what he says, i just like looking at him.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Why are we talking about armies of a million+ when it's blatantly obvious the next world war will be fought via computers launching ICBMs and ground troops will serve no part in it.

Large armies have only one purpose - to supress the people they are supposed to 'protect' and keep the men ruling them in power.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Why are we talking about armies of a million+ when it's blatantly obvious the next world war will be fought via computers launching ICBMs and ground troops will serve no part in it.

Large armies have only one purpose - to supress the people they are supposed to 'protect' and keep the men ruling them in power."

I think wishy, that land armies have been decreasing in size for a long time now (with respect to population size).

Like you say, large armies serve less and less of a purpose nowadays.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ntheswingCouple
over a year ago

middlesbrough

No matter how many nukes are used, you still need an army to take and hold the enemys lands.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread