Millions back removal of dirty hippies with whom they are in complete agreement

[Guest MattP]

I wouldn't want to do the North (or really anywhere off the beaten trail) without a local, to be perfectly honest.

Not for a lack of adventurous spirit or a fear of putting myself out there, I just don't want to be a tourist - anywhere. I know that's a fairly bold statement, I know I'm never going to go somewhere and be completely at one with the local populace, but I like to try my best.

We're going to Tokyo and Fukuoka later in the year with my best friend (who's from the latter and works in the former) from university. I absolutely can't wait, it should be fabulous. That was the only flaw with Hong Kong, really, we went with family (admittedly, my father's other half lived there in her teens) and whilst we explored and did a lot, you get the impression that you're missing out on the real heart of the city because - somewhere that size - you need to know your way around to find the real gems.

Fortunately we've got friends across most of the East Asian continent, so I'm not really short of a tour guide or three.

You will absolutely love Tokyo. Very jealous.

Totally agree with you on the tourist aspect, I don't like it at all and take every precaution not to fall into the trap of it, first thing we always do is come out/avoid any areas full of them, go into the villages nearby, go to the real local bars where they don't speak a word of your language, it's the best way to do a city, always has been.

Only continent I've not been to now is South America, was intending to go this year but I'm tempted to hold out for next year now and try and tie it in with the World Cup.

[Daggers]

Well ,grow your own food and don't use banks, that'll teach em.

You accuse the Occupy campaign of not offering solutions and yet you come out with glib, predictable and bland Daily Mail statements lacking substance or thought.

[21st Century Fox]

This isn't as fun as yesterdays thread

[Webbo]

You accuse the Occupy campaign of not offering solutions and yet you come out with glib, predictable and bland Daily Mail statements lacking substance or thought.

I've just back checked the thread and I've not accused the occupy campaign of anything. Finners has said much nastier things about them than me. I'd forgotten all about them until they were evicted. I have no interest in them or their ideas.

[Captain...]

No it's not. I won't lie, I want to become a multi-millionaire, I want to travel the world again in style, I want a ten bedroom house with a games room, I want to fly business class wherever I go, I want the best restaurants and the best hotel rooms.

You only live once. Enjoy it.

That is spectacularly materialistic and quite sad really, how will you feel if you don't reach these heady heights (and you probably won't unless you win the lottery)?

It is this force feeding of this lifestyle that allows people to accept the atrocities that are committed in the name of profit.

You don't need be a multi millionaire to enjoy life, you don't need lots of money to enjoy good food, some of the best food I have tried has been cooked for me by a friend or even by myself. You equate expense with quality, the more expensive the better in your eyes and that is just not true (Fernando Torres as a glib example).

Capitalism is important in the development of countries, it drives people forwards it makes people thrive for more for success to bring their standard of living up to a point where they have parity and equality and allows this to happen to the priviledged and the hard working who then drag up the rest of the society if, and only if, socialist constraints come in to stop just complete domination by the few.

But now we are developed we cannot keep on growing at this rate, we cannot keep on consuming, aspiring, wanting and needing more, if you became a mulit millionnaire along with everyone else who wanted to then you still wouldn't be happy. You don't want to have £10,000,000, what you want is the status that comes with it, you want to eat at exclusive restaurants and stay at exclusive hotels, you don't want to pay £1,000 for a meal because the meal is worth £1,000 you want to be able to spend £1,000 on a meal because others can't.

This is the problem with human nature and capitalism, if we were all mulitmillionaires we wouldn't be happy we would need to be billionnaires, trillionnaires until the millionnaires will become the poor, this is also why communism could never work, it is not money that drives people it is the desire to have more money than others.

[Guest MattP]

That is spectacularly materialistic and quite sad really, how will you feel if you don't reach these heady heights (and you probably won't unless you win the lottery)?

It is this force feeding of this lifestyle that allows people to accept the atrocities that are committed in the name of profit.

You don't need be a multi millionaire to enjoy life, you don't need lots of money to enjoy good food, some of the best food I have tried has been cooked for me by a friend or even by myself. You equate expense with quality, the more expensive the better in your eyes and that is just not true (Fernando Torres as a glib example).

Capitalism is important in the development of countries, it drives people forwards it makes people thrive for more for success to bring their standard of living up to a point where they have parity and equality and allows this to happen to the priviledged and the hard working who then drag up the rest of the society if, and only if, socialist constraints come in to stop just complete domination by the few.

But now we are developed we cannot keep on growing at this rate, we cannot keep on consuming, aspiring, wanting and needing more, if you became a mulit millionnaire along with everyone else who wanted to then you still wouldn't be happy. You don't want to have £10,000,000, what you want is the status that comes with it, you want to eat at exclusive restaurants and stay at exclusive hotels, you don't want to pay £1,000 for a meal because the meal is worth £1,000 you want to be able to spend £1,000 on a meal because others can't.

This is the problem with human nature and capitalism, if we were all mulitmillionaires we wouldn't be happy we would need to be billionnaires, trillionnaires until the millionnaires will become the poor, this is also why communism could never work, it is not money that drives people it is the desire to have more money than others.

Don't play the lottery, will my business interest make me a million? Doubtful, not impossible though.

You seem to be missing the point a little bit about what I'm saying, I'm not saying you need money to have a great life or enjoy it, some of the best weekends ive done are where you are skint and searching out nars that are £1 a pint etc.

It just makes life so much more comfortable if you have a lot of it, everything from travel to general living costs, for every one Torres mistake there are ten Ronaldo's....money doesnt always equal qualtiy but it sure half gives you a better chance of it. Go and have a steak in the High Cross and then have one in 1573 in town, I know which one you will enjoy more.

It's not about status, im not that materialistic. It's all about ease and comfort.

[Captain...]

Don't play the lottery, will my business interest make me a million? Doubtful, not impossible though.

You seem to be missing the point a little bit about what I'm saying, I'm not saying you need money to have a great life or enjoy it, some of the best weekends ive done are where you are skint and searching out nars that are £1 a pint etc.

It just makes life so much more comfortable if you have a lot of it, everything from travel to general living costs, for every one Torres mistake there are ten Ronaldo's....money doesnt always equal qualtiy but it sure half gives you a better chance of it. Go and have a steak in the High Cross and then have one in 1573 in town, I know which one you will enjoy more.

It's not about status, im not that materialistic. It's all about ease and comfort.

But being a mulitmillionnaire and having a 10 bedroom house is not about comfort and ease, it is about luxury and status, you can be perfectly comfortable and at ease on the dole, no house no job no responsibility, a bit of money each week to get you by and all the time in the world to enjoy the free things in life, and as we all know the best things in life are free.

I hate money, I hate what it does to people and how it is used to control people, manipulate and exploit people.

[21st Century Fox]

Don't play the lottery, will my business interest make me a million? Doubtful, not impossible though.

You seem to be missing the point a little bit about what I'm saying, I'm not saying you need money to have a great life or enjoy it, some of the best weekends ive done are where you are skint and searching out nars that are £1 a pint etc.

It just makes life so much more comfortable if you have a lot of it, everything from travel to general living costs, for every one Torres mistake there are ten Ronaldo's....money doesnt always equal qualtiy but it sure half gives you a better chance of it. Go and have a steak in the High Cross and then have one in 1573 in town, I know which one you will enjoy more.

It's not about status, im not that materialistic. It's all about ease and comfort.

You'd only be comfortable because thats what the current system dictates as comfort.

[Guest MattP]

You'd only be comfortable because thats what the current system dictates as comfort.

Surely comfort is a personal thing, some people are comfortable on a camping trip, some people are comfortable in a 5 star hotel.

But being a mulitmillionnaire and having a 10 bedroom house is not about comfort and ease, it is about luxury and status, you can be perfectly comfortable and at ease on the dole, no house no job no responsibility, a bit of money each week to get you by and all the time in the world to enjoy the free things in life, and as we all know the best things in life are free.

I hate money, I hate what it does to people and how it is used to control people, manipulate and exploit people.

Agree with the last line, let's face it money is nothing more than a drug really and most of us are addicted.

I don't anyone who could live a comfortable enjoyable life on the dole. How can you when you can't afford to do the things you want to do.

[dave the caveman]

And your post, I've selectively quoted, makes you sound like a complete spastic.

Between your nonsensical gibberish in this thread and your laughable comments in the £26k thread, I've come to the conclusion that you are a sheltered child with no experience of the real world or how it works. How old are you? No older than 14 surely. I've never heard as much fluffy, poncy crap since I spent a day hanging out at a temple full of western spiritualists in India.

[21st Century Fox]

Between your nonsensical gibberish in this thread and your laughable comments in the £26k thread, I've come to the conclusion that you are a sheltered child with no experience of the real world or how it works. How old are you? No older than 14 surely. I've never heard as much fluffy, poncy crap since I spent a day hanging out at a temple full of western spiritualists in India.

You might be a brilliant satirist.

[Daggers]

How old are you? No older than 14 surely.

My God, one minute you're a retard with crap tumbling from your mouth and the next you're a potential pedo. You need to get yourself over to the Foxy Fangirls Facebook page and fill your boots quick before the police come into your house at 5:30 in the morning.

Unfortunately I'm not allowed to play with you anymore, my mum says I'm allergic to stupid.

[Captain...]

Agree with the last line, let's face it money is nothing more than a drug really and most of us are addicted.

I don't anyone who could live a comfortable enjoyable life on the dole. How can you when you can't afford to do the things you want to do.

It depends what you mean by comfort, I don't know about living on the dole, because I have never done so, but when I first came to Spain I was paying about 300 euros a month on rent, and earning about 700 - 800 euros a month, so net of about 100 euros a week (not too far off JSA). Yet I was fantastically happy, I could eat good food, sleep in a warm bed and had lots of time to enjoy life, I have no savings and nothing to show for the last 3 years of my life except lots of friends, a decent level of Spanish and a previously unknown talent for beach volley ball. Then I started seeing a girl and things got serious and I started to realise that I couldn't provide on that lifestyle so I have had to reassess, which is kinda sad.

Edit: I guess if you can't afford to do what you want, then change what you want, readjust your wants, your needs are your priorities, your wants are luxuries, find a way to find something in life that you can afford that you enjoy, such as playing footy down the park with your mates.

[dave the caveman]

I hate money, I hate what it does to people and how it is used to control people, manipulate and exploit people.

You might hate money but i'm sure you'd like deep restrictions on your personal freedoms and ability to make choices a lot less. It's not your right to say what people should or shouldn't be motvated by and it certainly isn't the government's right to enforce policies such as wage and bonus caps which are effectively saying, we're going to take away your freedom to make the choice to be motivated by money. No government should ever be allowed anywhere near implementing anything like that kind of control.

And that's why these vague, meandering protests (and to a certain extent the left wing in general) are so dangerous. They have the support of people who can't see past what they perceive to be potential pound signs. They think great, take some money from the bankers and it's more for me, but in reality it would set in course a sequence of events that would end in a terrible disaster for everyone.

Under the current system, those who are suitably motivated and possess the necessary attributes have every chance of achieving their goals whether they be motivated by money or something else. The people who fail in our society are the people who for one reason or another do not possess the motivation or attributes. There's a balance then between allowing the successful people to flourish and propping the failures up. It's the strong looking after the weak. But once the strong devote too much of their resources to looking after the weak they too become weak, and then we have no strength whatsoever and then we're in one hell of a mess.

Until we come up with a better system (which communism is not, obviously), some people need to be allowed to flourish, others need to be allowed to fail. It's only fair that those who flourish will be the one's who worked hard for it and deserve it and those who fail be the one's who, for one reason or another, just can't seem to equip themselves with the skills necessary to succeed.

[Zingari]

But being a mulitmillionnaire and having a 10 bedroom house is not about comfort and ease, it is about luxury and status, you can be perfectly comfortable and at ease on the dole, no house no job no responsibility, a bit of money each week to get you by and all the time in the world to enjoy the free things in life, and as we all know the best things in life are free.

I hate money, I hate what it does to people and how it is used to control people, manipulate and exploit people.

me too but i've decided to sacrifice myself for others and i run a free collection and disposal service .

[Captain...]

You might hate money but i'm sure you'd like deep restrictions on your personal freedoms and ability to make choices a lot less. It's not your right to say what people should or shouldn't be motvated by and it certainly isn't the government's right to enforce policies such as wage and bonus caps which are effectively saying, we're going to take away your freedom to make the choice to be motivated by money. No government should ever be allowed anywhere near implementing anything like that kind of control.

The government, if it is the will of the people who vote them in, do have the right to implement these kind of restrictions, rampant capitalism left unchecked would tear the society we live in apart, the quantities of money being bandied around for bonuses are so obscene that it goes well beyond motivation to succeed.

And that's why these vague, meandering protests (and to a certain extent the left wing in general) are so dangerous. They have the support of people who can't see past what they perceive to be potential pound signs. They think great, take some money from the bankers and it's more for me, but in reality it would set in course a sequence of events that would end in a terrible disaster for everyone.

That is just utter nonsense, it is not about more for me or even about creating a fair society, in the main it is about the fact that people are being rewarded with obscene amounts of money for not even doing their jobs properly or in some cases breaking the law and avoiding paying 500 million in owed taxes. The bankers are largely responsible for the state we are in, and yet they are getting hugely rewarded for it.

Under the current system, those who are suitably motivated and possess the necessary attributes have every chance of achieving their goals whether they be motivated by money or something else. The people who fail in our society are the people who for one reason or another do not possess the motivation or attributes. There's a balance then between allowing the successful people to flourish and propping the failures up. It's the strong looking after the weak. But once the strong devote too much of their resources to looking after the weak they too become weak, and then we have no strength whatsoever and then we're in one hell of a mess.

Depends on what you mean by fail, did the man who mortgaged his house and took out loans to expand a business that he believed in and had the ability and desire and motivation to succed and would have succeded on a level playing field, but ended up losing everything because he was priced out the market, by inferior products with better marketing campaigns, or by having products sourced cheaper and unethically/illegally, or by illegal collusion between the capitalist giants.

Or is the man who owns a corner shop or Cafe who turns over a steady but small profit every year but doesn't have the desire/motivation to expand and grow, doesn't want to risk it all buying another shop, he has enough to put food on his table and support his family.

Until we come up with a better system (which communism is not, obviously), some people need to be allowed to flourish, others need to be allowed to fail. It's only fair that those who flourish will be the one's who worked hard for it and deserve it and those who fail be the one's who, for one reason or another, just can't seem to equip themselves with the skills necessary to succeed.

By that comment do you think that we need to find a better system, in my mind communism is a better system it is just not suited to human beings. My issues with capitalism has nothing to do with allowing people to flourish and fail, it is about stopping large organisations controlling the markets and stopping people even having the chance to fail.

[dave the caveman]

The government, if it is the will of the people who vote them in, do have the right to implement these kind of restrictions, rampant capitalism left unchecked would tear the society we live in apart, the quantities of money being bandied around for bonuses are so obscene that it goes well beyond motivation to succeed.

Doesn't matter whether you consider them obscene or what you consider them really. If the profits were earned legally then it is up to the business to do with them as they wish and if that means paying large bonuses then so be it.

That is just utter nonsense, it is not about more for me or even about creating a fair society, in the main it is about the fact that people are being rewarded with obscene amounts of money for not even doing their jobs properly or in some cases breaking the law and avoiding paying 500 million in owed taxes. The bankers are largely responsible for the state we are in, and yet they are getting hugely rewarded for it.

It is at best economically naive to say that it is "the bankers" fault that we are in the mess we are in. The economy has moved on from the credit crunch. That was five years ago, and even then laying the blame solely on this yet again vague and undefined concept of "the bankers" (as used in the media, not necessarily yourself) is being somewhat short sighted. Our current economic situation is complex and the role played by banks is smaller than the role played by our consumerist society's desire for everything to be cheap. That means you and me, buying the cheap stuff made abroad, rather than buying the stuff that was made in Britain. That decision, made by millions of people in this country, time and time again, every single day has had a much larger effect on our current economic situation than any bankers bonus has ever had. Not saying it's wrong, or laying the blame on anyone, but you have to understand that "the bankers" are a false enemy created by the media to sell newspapers to people who need to satisfy their desire to blame someone.

Depends on what you mean by fail, did the man who mortgaged his house and took out loans to expand a business that he believed in and had the ability and desire and motivation to succed and would have succeded on a level playing field, but ended up losing everything because he was priced out the market, by inferior products with better marketing campaigns, or by having products sourced cheaper and unethically/illegally, or by illegal collusion between the capitalist giants.

Or is the man who owns a corner shop or Cafe who turns over a steady but small profit every year but doesn't have the desire/motivation to expand and grow, doesn't want to risk it all buying another shop, he has enough to put food on his table and support his family.

You threw illegal behaviour in there which obviously changes things. Without that the person who failed is a failure and the person who is succeeding is a success. Are you implying that capitalism necessarily breeds illegal behaviour? What about communism then in that case? Do the history books tell us that communism has been good for the people?

The one place I would make a concession with the occupy protesters is for proper regulation of capitalist markets and also fair high level tax contributions. But both are complex issues with far reaching consequences. I generally believe that for almost every decision for which the daily mail prints an oversimplified, provocotive headline, if you take the time to work back and make yourself aware of how that decision was reached you will be able to see the logic, and that logic will be not be based on evil corperate greed but on solid, well meaning principles.

By that comment do you think that we need to find a better system, in my mind communism is a better system it is just not suited to human beings. My issues with capitalism has nothing to do with allowing people to flourish and fail, it is about stopping large organisations controlling the markets and stopping people even having the chance to fail.

I don't think we need to find a better system, no. But if someone came up with one then great. can't see it happening though. At the end of the day the fact that we are having this conversation is a triumph for capitalism on several levels. For one that we are allowed to without risk of facing punishment. Two that the technology exists, and three that both of us can afford the technology. Without capitalism I'm not sure any of those factors would yet be in place. If you can show me a country that uses a better system than we do to better effect, I might start believing it's possible. Until then, occupy protesters and their supporters need to get a grip.

[Mr B]

I don't even care if this is real or a joke, anything that is a step towards getting rid of gypos is good in my book.

[Captain...]

Doesn't matter whether you consider them obscene or what you consider them really. If the profits were earned legally then it is up to the business to do with them as they wish and if that means paying large bonuses then so be it.

In some cases the rewards are at the expense of the consumer and the tax payer directly so in the case of RBS and Hester in that it was tax payers money, and in the recent case of barclays avoiding paying 500 million in tax and rewarding the person responsible for that with a 40 million pound bonus.

Even in the case of perfectly legal companies paying huge bonuses, it is just the obscene amount of money being paid out for working exactly the same number of hours a day as a factory labourer. To the point of it just being so much money that it will just never get spent and sit there in banks getting more and more money, one of the principles of capitalism is the constant flow of money in a fixed market and all the time money is leaving the market and going into the reserves of people who very often don't deserve it.

It is at best economically naive to say that it is "the bankers" fault that we are in the mess we are in. The economy has moved on from the credit crunch. That was five years ago, and even then laying the blame solely on this yet again vague and undefined concept of "the bankers" (as used in the media, not necessarily yourself) is being somewhat short sighted. Our current economic situation is complex and the role played by banks is smaller than the role played by our consumerist society's desire for everything to be cheap. That means you and me, buying the cheap stuff made abroad, rather than buying the stuff that was made in Britain. That decision, made by millions of people in this country, time and time again, every single day has had a much larger effect on our current economic situation than any bankers bonus has ever had. Not saying it's wrong, or laying the blame on anyone, but you have to understand that "the bankers" are a false enemy created by the media to sell newspapers to people who need to satisfy their desire to blame someone.

Of course it is not just the bankers fault, it is those at the top end keeping money in reserve and not spending and those at the bottom spending money they don't have, and the politicians for not regulating it properly, even to the point of breaking the financial regulations they set in place to safe guard against such crises. It is all a big mess and no it is not just the bankers, but they have done as much as anyone with our money to make the situation a hell of a lot worse.

You threw illegal behaviour in there which obviously changes things. Without that the person who failed is a failure and the person who is succeeding is a success. Are you implying that capitalism necessarily breeds illegal behaviour? What about communism then in that case? Do the history books tell us that communism has been good for the people?

I would say that capitalism has bred a lot of illegal and criminal activity, we live in a capitalist world that is rife with white collar crime motivated by greed.

The one place I would make a concession with the occupy protesters is for proper regulation of capitalist markets and also fair high level tax contributions. But both are complex issues with far reaching consequences. I generally believe that for almost every decision for which the daily mail prints an oversimplified, provocotive headline, if you take the time to work back and make yourself aware of how that decision was reached you will be able to see the logic, and that logic will be not be based on evil corperate greed but on solid, well meaning principles.

Likewise capitalism was based on sound economic principals, but like communism every chance has been taken to exploit it and without strict regulations and companies playing fair it will always lead to exploitation. The principals of capitalism were set many many years ago and the world has changed alot, and the increased globalisation has meant that the principles based on closed markets are now just not relevant. They were also seemingly based in a world of inifite resources and energy which is now not true. There also countries acting as tax havens and providing exploited child labour that are also seriously undermining some of the priniciples of free market economics

I don't think we need to find a better system, no. But if someone came up with one then great. can't see it happening though. At the end of the day the fact that we are having this conversation is a triumph for capitalism on several levels. For one that we are allowed to without risk of facing punishment. Two that the technology exists, and three that both of us can afford the technology. Without capitalism I'm not sure any of those factors would yet be in place. If you can show me a country that uses a better system than we do to better effect, I might start believing it's possible. Until then, occupy protesters and their supporters need to get a grip.

Us having this conversation is not a triumph of capitalism, it is a triumph of freedom, and there are plenty of examples of capitalist countries that don't permit such freedoms, the middle east is econmically capitalist but also totalitarian rather than a liberal society in which live. The idea that the technology wouldn't exist under say communism instead of capitalism is also wrong, did the USSR not win the space race in that they put the first man into space, so were technologically more advanced.

I certainly think that we need to reassess the rules which we have in place to govern money, and update things for the modern world, I am not saying communism is the right answer, I am certainly left leaning though and believe that the state should have more control over the public services and provide more for the people, and not in the way of hand outs but in actually improving the quality of life for everyone for non monetary rewards.

[FoxyPV]

A social democracy rather than the liberal democray we live in would be a nice step forward.

[21st Century Fox]

I don't even care if this is real or a joke, anything that is a step towards getting rid of gypos is good in my book.

What a well articulated comment, thank you for your contribution.

[Rincewind]

Its only a joke in the same way Alf Garnett was. Warren Mitchell is a staunch Labour supporter and I doubt he would have took on the role if he thought his character was meant to be taken seriously. Johnny Speight highlighted prejudices that were about at the time and through Alf Garnett made those that held those views look foolish. Every argument he had was torn apart even sometimes by his wife.

The problem was those foolish enough to hold those views would be discussing the show the following night. 'Oh yeh he wuz right wernt he, he only speaks the troof.' and similar utterings..

It appears some are still blinkered and acting like 'Alf Garnett's'

[Guest ttfn]

In some cases the rewards are at the expense of the consumer and the tax payer directly so in the case of RBS and Hester in that it was tax payers money, and in the recent case of barclays avoiding paying 500 million in tax and rewarding the person responsible for that with a 40 million pound bonus.

Even in the case of perfectly legal companies paying huge bonuses, it is just the obscene amount of money being paid out for working exactly the same number of hours a day as a factory labourer. To the point of it just being so much money that it will just never get spent and sit there in banks getting more and more money, one of the principles of capitalism is the constant flow of money in a fixed market and all the time money is leaving the market and going into the reserves of people who very often don't deserve it.

Of course it is not just the bankers fault, it is those at the top end keeping money in reserve and not spending and those at the bottom spending money they don't have, and the politicians for not regulating it properly, even to the point of breaking the financial regulations they set in place to safe guard against such crises. It is all a big mess and no it is not just the bankers, but they have done as much as anyone with our money to make the situation a hell of a lot worse.

I would say that capitalism has bred a lot of illegal and criminal activity, we live in a capitalist world that is rife with white collar crime motivated by greed.

Likewise capitalism was based on sound economic principals, but like communism every chance has been taken to exploit it and without strict regulations and companies playing fair it will always lead to exploitation. The principals of capitalism were set many many years ago and the world has changed alot, and the increased globalisation has meant that the principles based on closed markets are now just not relevant. They were also seemingly based in a world of inifite resources and energy which is now not true. There also countries acting as tax havens and providing exploited child labour that are also seriously undermining some of the priniciples of free market economics

Us having this conversation is not a triumph of capitalism, it is a triumph of freedom, and there are plenty of examples of capitalist countries that don't permit such freedoms, the middle east is econmically capitalist but also totalitarian rather than a liberal society in which live. The idea that the technology wouldn't exist under say communism instead of capitalism is also wrong, did the USSR not win the space race in that they put the first man into space, so were technologically more advanced.

I certainly think that we need to reassess the rules which we have in place to govern money, and update things for the modern world, I am not saying communism is the right answer, I am certainly left leaning though and believe that the state should have more control over the public services and provide more for the people, and not in the way of hand outs but in actually improving the quality of life for everyone for non monetary rewards.

Agree with a lot of what you say in here. It's certainly very well articulated.

I would tend to disagree with the point that capitalism and technological advancement aren't intrinsically linked. A cursory look at the history of this country shows a dramatic upwards trend in the economy when free-market capitalism began to be encouraged. The Industrial Revolution was driven not just by the factory owners of the north west and midlands, but also by the private railway companies who developed the infrastructure to make it possible, sensing an opportunity that, for the first time, there was a genuine opportunity for a shift in wealth away from the hereditary elite.

I could go on about the privatisation of industry in Russia and China over the last 20 years but I don't have time!

[James.]

Yo Finners when are you going to Japan? We've booked flights in July. Would be keen on getting some tips for Tokyo particularly if your mate knows the place. Conversely if you're going after us I can tell you what we got up to. They have cat brothels FYI.

[Zingari]

Yo Finners when are you going to Japan? We've booked flights in July. Would be keen on getting some tips for Tokyo particularly if your mate knows the place. Conversely if you're going after us I can tell you what we got up to. They have cat brothels FYI.

Blimey that sounds a bit risky , I hope they keep their claws and teeth well blunted

What do you pay them with ? balls of wool ? live mice ?