Milk protests ...

[BrowningB525]

The milk you buy from super markets now is **** anyway, a program on the box not so long ago showed exactly what you get when they've finished taking the cream off the top, it's a light blue liquid, which is then mixed with white powder to make it look like milk...I kid you not...

 

I find that hard to beleive.

[Bazooka Joe]

 

I find that hard to beleive.

 

Why..?

[grrclark]

The questionable history is that of your generalised assertion of wholesale "rotten decline" and "absolutely appalling productivity and quality" in the UK prior to Thatcher being correct? When not all were rotten or in decline! However for arguement sake, if your assertions are correct who was responsible? You imply it was the fault of the workers when in actual fact it was the fault of the employers who greedily banked any profits and failed to invest in development, modern technology and machinery? that is more likely why we were going backwards as a nation relative to other parts of the world.....that could be why the (workers representatives) unions grew in influence! By on behalf of their members trying to force unwilling employers to invest their money in the business and ultimately to finance fairer working practices, terms and conditions and wages for their employees?

 

I am aware that we all occasionally fall into the trap of generalisation, however you can only gauge things by personal experience and comparing like for like situations..........and that means not attempting to bolster an arguement by comparing poverty in poor parts of the world to poverty in the UK, it is not a like for like comparison!

 

The UK was not just built on slavery and wool it was built on the spoils and wealth stolen from the countries the British empire conquered, and who benefitted from this wealth? The poor still in the workhouse? The children still employed on slave labour wages? Or the slavers, thieves and industrialist robber barons that got very rich and subsequently went into politics and sat in the commons and ultimately the lords and made laws to protect their ill gotten gains from those lower down the pecking order who would aspire to share the countries wealth and good fortune......pretty much the same as today really!

 

Like all good stories they become believable when they contain a little truth, for me your take on things fits into the category headed more dogmatic than factual

State industry was in rotten decline in the UK through a number of reasons There was poor management, as there very often is in public service, there was poor productivity which I wholeheartedly agree is as much a result of poor management as well as poor workforce attitude, there was excessive union influence and again I would be happy to agree that is as much the responsibility of the employers at the time as well as the workers and unions.

 

There was also a general lack of competitiveness due to emerging economies who were doing things faster, cheaper and at higher quality, Britain rested upon its laurels a little too much as big parts of the world started to beat us at our own game.

 

Private industry was hamstrung due to restrictive tax regimes that penalised the successful so there was no incentive as there was no reward for success. Of course there will be examples of success amongst all of that, but precious little if any existed in Britain's nationalised industries. The decline in British heavy industry started in the 50s as the post war world started afresh, particularly in Japan.

 

The blame for this I don't place at the hand of the individual workers, the problem was a distinct lack of leadership from the top that permeated all the way down. Thatcher dragged this country forward and I agree that came at a big cost to many, but those who were prepared to learn the lesson did and our success grew as a result, those that hang onto rose tinted views of the past have stagnated and remain bitter at the world as though some sort of huge injustice has been served upon them. There was no injustice, just a great big dose of reality.

 

I don't disagree about the distributed British empire contributing to our riches, power and wealth built our infrastructure and absolutely that came at the cost of others, but even the people at the bottom of the food chain in Britain still benefit from that.

 

I really don't dispute that we have had huge imbalance between those that have and those that don't, I don't even dispute that it can be terribly unfair because I can't.

 

However what we have to keep in context is that we can't keep the UK a closed system, the level of 'poverty' in this country is inextricably linked to what happens elsewhere because it is a globalised economy, like it or not.

 

Our lowest earners want a £9 minimum wage now and then next year it will be £10 then £11 and all the while costs are increasing to pay for this so you need a higher wage to be able to buy the things we want, likewise those on benefits wish to see their welfare subsidy increase in line so they are not unfairly disadvantaged. We cannot generate wealth in a closed society, all we can do is redistribute (race to the bottom). To create wealth in a society that lives in deficit we need to bring it in from external sources, but we are 4 or 5 or 10 or 20 times more expensive than growing economies.

 

Despite our competitive disadvantage in terms of our cost profile we are still outstripping the rest of our peers in the G7 and that is due to private enterprise.

 

To improve our competitiveness we need to increase productivity as that also reduces our cost profile and we have to innovate. The one thing that British nationalised industry has never done is innovate and we actively fight against productivity increases as people perceive that to be a threat against jobs.

 

Thatcher opened the doors to the global economy in a big way and we have all benefitted as a result, even those at the very bottom as they move up relative to everyone else, even if they are statistically in poverty.

 

What would you have us do?

Should we have a punitive tax rate on the very wealthy, should we disincentive the majority by giving the minority a whole lot more for doing hee haw?

Should we impose a more punitive rate on large global corporations and watch just how fast they decide to move to another tax favourable country?

Do we renationalise our utilities companies and cause billion of pounds to our pension funds? Do we renationalise our transport infrastructure and then work how out how we fund upgrades?

Do we increase our tax burden on the majority and reduce their standard of living to pay for some vanity project of 'fairness'?

Maybe we just go after the banking industry a whole lot more and put in place more onerous policies of governance to prevent them becoming rich as that is unfair on the rest and watch them bail out to China or India or Brazil where there are 3 billion people waiting to embrace the capitalist dream, as flawed as that may be?

Do we do as Greece did and vote for the socialist dream and stick it to the man? after all it is a roaring success for them just now

 

As an aside did you know in that socialist utopia that is Greece that the level of inequality between the rich and poor is by a magnitude greater than the UK? Even France that has long been the socialist bastion of Europe where public protest and strikes really has meaning there is greater levels of inequality than in the UK, same in Poland the rising star of Eastern Europe.

 

All countries with a wonderful history of socialism, nationalised industry and really powerful trade unionism. I guess it really must work.

Edited August 4, 2015 by grrclark

[Diceman]

The milk you buy from super markets now is **** anyway, a program on the box not so long ago showed exactly what you get when they've finished taking the cream off the top, it's a light blue liquid, which is then mixed with white powder to make it look like milk...I kid you not...

This is not how normal milk is made at all. I think you might be misunderstanding the process they use on micro filtered milk like Cravendale. It is separated to remove the cream then the rest is pushed through very fine filters to remove spoilage organisms as an alternative to HTST pasteurisation. Then they mix the cream back in. Expensive and uncommon but supposed to taste better.

[islandgun]

This is not how normal milk is made at all. I think you might be misunderstanding the process they use on micro filtered milk like Cravendale. It is separated to remove the cream then the rest is pushed through very fine filters to remove spoilage organisms as an alternative to HTST pasteurisation. Then they mix the cream back in. Expensive and uncommon but supposed to taste better.

As I understood it at uni, we really should drink full fat milk, only then does it have any nutritional value, it is great stuff for kids, but adults have trouble digesting it, it should fetch a good price and should be valued.

[keg]

Unfortunately your questionable history lessons don't explain how we are ALL better off due to Thatcherism? 5th richest country in the world maybe? but as a percentage, how many individuals and/or company shareholders hold the majority percentage of this countries wealth? Compare this to how many individuals are officially living in poverty despite qualifying to claim supplementary benefits?

 

Please address your response to the ordinary people dying from cancer who can't have the drugs they need to prolong their lives, or the individual who can't get a job that pays enough to reasonably support them, because employers give their jobs to foreign migrants who are used to working 15 hrs a day for a fiver a week! cheaper labour = more profit! Or the person who has to lie to get benefits to enable them to better support their families or the people who have died because they have had their benefits stopped (figures which the government have got but refuse to reveal)

 

I would guess you are looking over the fence from the side of the exploiter rather than the exploited..........so in response to your posting and again to paraphrase Mandy-Rice Davies "he would say that wouldn't he?"

No system is perfect and there is only so much money to go round. You seem to be able to criticise, tell us how you would do things?

[Diceman]

And for those of you wondering why British farmers don't modernise and become competitive, remember Nocton Dairies whose plans for a mega farm with 7000 cattle were blocked by the environment agency on dubious grounds and attacked by the animal rights lobby who spread false and malicious rumours about poor welfare standards. The supermarkets bowed to consumer pressure and said they would never buy from such a farm. Except they do now, but from farms in other parts of the world, equally subsidised by your euro taxes, where the Daily Mail hadn't noticed what's going on. Hypocrites.

 

When the last British dairy farmer goes out of business (along with all their suppliers) let's see how long it takes for milk prices on our little green island to double. And cheese. And cream. And butter. And..and...and...

[keg]

State industry was in rotten decline in the UK through a number of reasons There was poor management, as there very often is in public service, there was poor productivity which I wholeheartedly agree is as much a result of poor management as well as poor workforce attitude, there was excessive union influence and again I would be happy to agree that is as much the responsibility of the employers at the time as well as the workers and unions.

 

There was also a general lack of competitiveness due to emerging economies who were doing things faster, cheaper and at higher quality, Britain rested upon its laurels a little too much as big parts of the world started to beat us at our own game.

 

Private industry was hamstrung due to restrictive tax regimes that penalised the successful so there was no incentive as there was no reward for success. Of course there will be examples of success amongst all of that, but precious little if any existed in Britain's nationalised industries. The decline in British heavy industry started in the 50s as the post war world started afresh, particularly in Japan.

 

The blame for this I don't place at the hand of the individual workers, the problem was a distinct lack of leadership from the top that permeated all the way down. Thatcher dragged this country forward and I agree that came at a big cost to many, but those who were prepared to learn the lesson did and our success grew as a result, those that hang onto rose tinted views of the past have stagnated and remain bitter at the world as though some sort of huge injustice has been served upon them. There was no injustice, just a great big dose of reality.

 

I don't disagree about the distributed British empire contributing to our riches, power and wealth built our infrastructure and absolutely that came at the cost of others, but even the people at the bottom of the food chain in Britain still benefit from that.

 

I really don't dispute that we have had huge imbalance between those that have and those that don't, I don't even dispute that it can be terribly unfair because I can't.

 

However what we have to keep in context is that we can't keep the UK a closed system, the level of 'poverty' in this country is inextricably linked to what happens elsewhere because it is a globalised economy, like it or not.

 

Our lowest earners want a £9 minimum wage now and then next year it will be £10 then £11 and all the while costs are increasing to pay for this so you need a higher wage to be able to buy the things we want, likewise those on benefits wish to see their welfare subsidy increase in line so they are not unfairly disadvantaged. We cannot generate wealth in a closed society, all we can do is redistribute (race to the bottom). To create wealth in a society that lives in deficit we need to bring it in from external sources, but we are 4 or 5 or 10 or 20 times more expensive than growing economies.

 

Despite our competitive disadvantage in terms of our cost profile we are still outstripping the rest of our peers in the G7 and that is due to private enterprise.

 

To improve our competitiveness we need to increase productivity as that also reduces our cost profile and we have to innovate. The one thing that British nationalised industry has never done is innovate and we actively fight against productivity increases as people perceive that to be a threat against jobs.

 

Thatcher opened the doors to the global economy in a big way and we have all benefitted as a result, even those at the very bottom as they move up relative to everyone else, even if they are statistically in poverty.

 

What would you have us do?

Should we have a punitive tax rate on the very wealthy, should we disincentive the majority by giving the minority a whole lot more for doing hee haw?

Should we impose a more punitive rate on large global corporations and watch just how fast they decide to move to another tax favourable country?

Do we renationalise our utilities companies and cause billion of pounds to our pension funds? Do we renationalise our transport infrastructure and then work how out how we fund upgrades?

Do we increase our tax burden on the majority and reduce their standard of living to pay for some vanity project of 'fairness'?

Maybe we just go after the banking industry a whole lot more and put in place more onerous policies of governance to prevent them becoming rich as that is unfair on the rest and watch them bail out to China or India or Brazil where there are 3 billion people waiting to embrace the capitalist dream, as flawed as that may be?

Do we do as Greece did and vote for the socialist dream and stick it to the man? after all it is a roaring success for them just now

 

As an aside did you know in that socialist utopia that is Greece that the level of inequality between the rich and poor is by a magnitude greater than the UK? Even France that has long been the socialist bastion of Europe where public protest and strikes really has meaning there is greater levels of inequality than in the UK, same in Poland the rising star of Eastern Europe.

 

All countries with a wonderful history of socialism, nationalised industry and really powerful trade unionism. I guess it really must work.

It does Grr You know socialism works. If Comrade Corbyn gets in we may get closer to it then we think

 

Just reading "Thatcher and sons" by Simon Jenkins" Makes very interesting reading....

And for those of you wondering why British farmers don't modernise and become competitive, remember Nocton Dairies whose plans for a mega farm with 7000 cattle were blocked by the environment agency on dubious grounds and attacked by the animal rights lobby who spread false and malicious rumours about poor welfare standards. The supermarkets bowed to consumer pressure and said they would never buy from such a farm. Except they do now, but from farms in other parts of the world, equally subsidised by your euro taxes, where the Daily Mail hadn't noticed what's going on. Hypocrites.

 

When the last British dairy farmer goes out of business (along with all their suppliers) let's see how long it takes for milk prices on our little green island to double. And cheese. And cream. And butter. And..and...and...

+1

[Bazooka Joe]

I think you might be misunderstanding the process

 

 

Nope..haven't misunderstood it at all.

 

Read No-2

 

http://butterbeliever.com/fat-free-dairy-skim-milk-secrets/

[panoma1]

No system is perfect and there is only so much money to go round. You seem to be able to criticise, tell us how you would do things?

If ten people hold 90% of the wealth of the country and ten million hold 10% ...........your absolutely right the system ain't perfect! ..........Except maybe for the ten people who hold the 99%!

 

As to what I would do about it? I financially contribute to elected representatives in parliament (MP's) who are paid out of public money to do these "things".....that's their job! They don't need me to tell them how to do it, they know, but they won't do it! Because sticking their heads above the parapet would be taking on the establishment and consequently the death knell to their political career, they only get on in politics if they do as they are told and sacrifice any beliefs they may hold in the interests of, or to the will of the party (gangs) hierarchy!

 

If you press me, rooting out corruption in all its forms would be a good start!

[keg]

 

Nope..haven't misunderstood it at all.

 

Read No-2

 

http://butterbeliever.com/fat-free-dairy-skim-milk-secrets/

I think you have,Sounds like another person with an axe to grind.."Blood and Pus in skim milk" Maybe in the USA but not here and this article was written by an American who by the sound of it edits posts if they do not agree with her according to some of the posters.

 

The author has no medical qualifications and is by her own admission, a health researcher and writer. I think i will set myself up as one of those- anyone can.

[grrclark]

If ten people hold 90% of the wealth of the country and ten million hold 10% ...........your absolutely right the system ain't perfect! ..........Except maybe for the ten people who hold the 99%!

 

As to what I would do about it? I financially contribute to elected representatives in parliament (MP's) who are paid out of public money to do these "things".....that's their job! They don't need me to tell them how to do it, they know, but they won't do it! Because sticking their heads above the parapet would be taking on the establishment and consequently the death knell to their political career, they only get on in politics if they do as they are told and sacrifice any beliefs they may hold in the interests of, or to the will of the party (gangs) hierarchy!

 

If you press me, rooting out corruption in all its forms would be a good start!

Typical socialist answer, it is someone else responsibility to fix the problem. Same as it's someone else who has responsibility to foot the bill for all the fair things that should happen.

 

If you feel hugely passionate about it campaign for it, you as an individual can make a difference. Every single person in any elected position had to make a decision to stand for something they believe in and be prepared to fight their corner for their opinion, they had to face down the naysayers and the doubters to win support and backing.

 

You are obviously a passionate guy about many things, stick your head above the parapet and try to make a difference based on your beliefs. You may just be tilting at windmills, but you might actually achieve something too.

[panoma1]

State industry was in rotten decline in the UK through a number of reasons There was poor management, as there very often is in public service, there was poor productivity which I wholeheartedly agree is as much a result of poor management as well as poor workforce attitude, there was excessive union influence and again I would be happy to agree that is as much the responsibility of the employers at the time as well as the workers and unions.

 

There was also a general lack of competitiveness due to emerging economies who were doing things faster, cheaper and at higher quality, Britain rested upon its laurels a little too much as big parts of the world started to beat us at our own game.

 

Private industry was hamstrung due to restrictive tax regimes that penalised the successful so there was no incentive as there was no reward for success. Of course there will be examples of success amongst all of that, but precious little if any existed in Britain's nationalised industries. The decline in British heavy industry started in the 50s as the post war world started afresh, particularly in Japan.

 

The blame for this I don't place at the hand of the individual workers, the problem was a distinct lack of leadership from the top that permeated all the way down. Thatcher dragged this country forward and I agree that came at a big cost to many, but those who were prepared to learn the lesson did and our success grew as a result, those that hang onto rose tinted views of the past have stagnated and remain bitter at the world as though some sort of huge injustice has been served upon them. There was no injustice, just a great big dose of reality.

 

I don't disagree about the distributed British empire contributing to our riches, power and wealth built our infrastructure and absolutely that came at the cost of others, but even the people at the bottom of the food chain in Britain still benefit from that.

 

I really don't dispute that we have had huge imbalance between those that have and those that don't, I don't even dispute that it can be terribly unfair because I can't.

 

However what we have to keep in context is that we can't keep the UK a closed system, the level of 'poverty' in this country is inextricably linked to what happens elsewhere because it is a globalised economy, like it or not.

 

Our lowest earners want a £9 minimum wage now and then next year it will be £10 then £11 and all the while costs are increasing to pay for this so you need a higher wage to be able to buy the things we want, likewise those on benefits wish to see their welfare subsidy increase in line so they are not unfairly disadvantaged. We cannot generate wealth in a closed society, all we can do is redistribute (race to the bottom). To create wealth in a society that lives in deficit we need to bring it in from external sources, but we are 4 or 5 or 10 or 20 times more expensive than growing economies.

 

Despite our competitive disadvantage in terms of our cost profile we are still outstripping the rest of our peers in the G7 and that is due to private enterprise.

 

To improve our competitiveness we need to increase productivity as that also reduces our cost profile and we have to innovate. The one thing that British nationalised industry has never done is innovate and we actively fight against productivity increases as people perceive that to be a threat against jobs.

 

Thatcher opened the doors to the global economy in a big way and we have all benefitted as a result, even those at the very bottom as they move up relative to everyone else, even if they are statistically in poverty.

 

What would you have us do?

Should we have a punitive tax rate on the very wealthy, should we disincentive the majority by giving the minority a whole lot more for doing hee haw?

Should we impose a more punitive rate on large global corporations and watch just how fast they decide to move to another tax favourable country?

Do we renationalise our utilities companies and cause billion of pounds to our pension funds? Do we renationalise our transport infrastructure and then work how out how we fund upgrades?

Do we increase our tax burden on the majority and reduce their standard of living to pay for some vanity project of 'fairness'?

Maybe we just go after the banking industry a whole lot more and put in place more onerous policies of governance to prevent them becoming rich as that is unfair on the rest and watch them bail out to China or India or Brazil where there are 3 billion people waiting to embrace the capitalist dream, as flawed as that may be?

Do we do as Greece did and vote for the socialist dream and stick it to the man? after all it is a roaring success for them just now

 

As an aside did you know in that socialist utopia that is Greece that the level of inequality between the rich and poor is by a magnitude greater than the UK? Even France that has long been the socialist bastion of Europe where public protest and strikes really has meaning there is greater levels of inequality than in the UK, same in Poland the rising star of Eastern Europe.

 

All countries with a wonderful history of socialism, nationalised industry and really powerful trade unionism. I guess it really must work.

I am not naive enough to believe in a socialist utopia, human nature would never allow it to happen, and I wholeheartedly applaud businesses that contribute to the their owners/shareholders and the countries wealth providing they are honest pay their taxes and treat their employees and customers fairly!.........But corruption and greed seldom allows this to happen either.

[keg]

If ten people hold 90% of the wealth of the country and ten million hold 10% ...........your absolutely right the system ain't perfect! ..........Except maybe for the ten people who hold the 99%!

 

As to what I would do about it? I financially contribute to elected representatives in parliament (MP's) who are paid out of public money to do these "things".....that's their job! They don't need me to tell them how to do it, they know, but they won't do it! Because sticking their heads above the parapet would be taking on the establishment and consequently the death knell to their political career, they only get on in politics if they do as they are told and sacrifice any beliefs they may hold in the interests of, or to the will of the party (gangs) hierarchy!

 

If you press me, rooting out corruption in all its forms would be a good start!

I agree with rooting out corruption at every level in all its forms but don't agree with the statement on poverty. It's a percentage of the average wage, not a set of specifics. I would also challenge the "10 people that hold 90% of the wealth"

 

I know 3 millionaires, one was a chippy that started his own building firm. One was an accountant who has done very well and grown his own business. The third was a market stall holder that now heads up a massive frozen food business.

 

All three did it by themselves and the smallest has created over 350 jobs It's there if you want it. They are both wealth and job creators

 

The nice thing is, all 3 are the most humble chaps you will ever come across.

 

Blame labour and the EU for opening borders and allowing cheap labour.

 

Certain jobs will pay more which is why we pay cleaners less than doctors if you artificially increase the salary at the bottom it passes up the chain and then we get inflation. Remember the 1970s?

I am not naive enough to believe in a socialist utopia, human nature would never allow it to happen, and I wholeheartedly applaud businesses that contribute to the their owners/shareholders and the countries wealth providing they are honest pay their taxes and treat their employees and customers fairly!.........But corruption and greed seldom allows this to happen either.

Seldom? I have yet to work for a bad company. Sony was one of the best! You were welcomed into the "Sony family" and they really looked after you.

[grrclark]

I am not naive enough to believe in a socialist utopia, human nature would never allow it to happen, and I wholeheartedly applaud businesses that contribute to the their owners/shareholders and the countries wealth providing they are honest pay their taxes and treat their employees and customers fairly!.........But corruption and greed seldom allows this to happen either.

I won't argue with that, there is far too much greed at the top of the tree.

 

Thing is i'm really not sure that even if all corporate taxes were paid in full it would make any difference to those at the bottom.

 

From experience in my last business as an employee, albeit a senior one, even if we had put every bit of net profit back into wages it would have meant something like 50p per hour across the 6000 people. The lowest wage rate in the UK was £7.70 so already above minimum wage, but it does give an indication of the level of the challenge to get to £9/hour by 2020.

 

I expect by then there will be no significant employment in the UK for that business it will all have moved to low cost emergent economies.

[keg]

It's already happening now i think.

[Diceman]

Nope..haven't misunderstood it at all.

 

Read No-2

 

http://butterbeliever.com/fat-free-dairy-skim-milk-secrets/

 

Well gosh, thanks for the link. I'm convinced. I'm going to throw away 25 years experience in the food industry and direct detailed knowledge of the formulation and processing of literally hundreds of household name food products and get all my information from the web from now on. Especially foreign sites that reveal killer facts like the secret ingredient in milk that they don't want you to know about is, um, milk.

 

None of it matters anyway because the world is going to end in 2012. I read it on the web.

[keg]

Well gosh, thanks for the link. I'm convinced. I'm going to throw away 25 years experience in the food industry and direct detailed knowledge of the formulation and processing of literally hundreds of household name food products and get all my information from the web from now on. Especially foreign sites that reveal killer facts like the secret ingredient in milk that they don't want you to know about is, um, milk.

 

None of it matters anyway because the world is going to end in 2012. I read it on the web.

[panoma1]

Typical socialist answer, it is someone else responsibility to fix the problem. Same as it's someone else who has responsibility to foot the bill for all the fair things that should happen.

 

If you feel hugely passionate about it campaign for it, you as an individual can make a difference. Every single person in any elected position had to make a decision to stand for something they believe in and be prepared to fight their corner for their opinion, they had to face down the naysayers and the doubters to win support and backing.

 

You are obviously a passionate guy about many things, stick your head above the parapet and try to make a difference based on your beliefs. You may just be tilting at windmills, but you might actually achieve something too.

If I employ and pay a builder to build a wall for me I do not expect to build that wall myself......I suppose that is a typical socialist response too?

 

I would not last a minute in party politics because I would be frozen out as I would not follow the party line if I felt it was wrong! And as an independent I would be ground down because I would have no influence in anything and constantly be urinating into the wind!

[panoma1]

I agree with rooting out corruption at every level in all its forms but don't agree with the statement on poverty. It's a percentage of the average wage, not a set of specifics. I would also challenge the "10 people that hold 90% of the wealth"

 

I know 3 millionaires, one was a chippy that started his own building firm. One was an accountant who has done very well and grown his own business. The third was a market stall holder that now heads up a massive frozen food business.

 

All three did it by themselves and the smallest has created over 350 jobs It's there if you want it. They are both wealth and job creators

 

The nice thing is, all 3 are the most humble chaps you will ever come across.

 

Blame labour and the EU for opening borders and allowing cheap labour.

 

Certain jobs will pay more which is why we pay cleaners less than doctors if you artificially increase the salary at the bottom it passes up the chain and then we get inflation. Remember the 1970s?

Seldom? I have yet to work for a bad company. Sony was one of the best! You were welcomed into the "Sony family" and they really looked after you.

The 90% and 10% was merely rhetorical as I'm sure you would have realised? Though I would be interested to know the true numbers!

 

It is naive to believe because you think you know someone or that as an ordinary employee you know what goes on higher up the ladder! Corruption has many forms and it is always hidden from general view by those who perpetrate it!

 

Who would have thought Jimmy Savile was a paedophile Lol!

Edited August 5, 2015 by panoma1

[grrclark]

If I employ and pay a builder to build a wall for me I do not expect to build that wall myself......I suppose that is a typical socialist response too?

 

I would not last a minute in party politics because I would be frozen out as I would not follow the party line if I felt it was wrong! And as an independent I would be ground down because I would have no influence in anything and constantly be urinating into the wind!

The reasons that you suggest would freeze you out party politics is probably the best justification to stand, a dissenting voice isn't a bad thing.

 

I'm not really advocating that you do actually stand, but your opinions are reasoned based on your own value system and although I may disagree with some of them we need people to fight their corner because that's the only way we can challenge convention and accepted wisdom.

 

As for those whi swim against the stream being frozen out, Corbyn is the perfect example of why this isn't always true. I really dont agree with his politics, but i admire and respect the man hugely for having the courage of his convictions.

[bruno22rf]

Arla seem to be doing well-3000 british farmers co-own the business and don't appear to be selling their Range Rover's anytime soon

[panoma1]

The reasons that you suggest would freeze you out party politics is probably the best justification to stand, a dissenting voice isn't a bad thing.

I'm not really advocating that you do actually stand, but your opinions are reasoned based on your own value system and although I may disagree with some of them we need people to fight their corner because that's the only way we can challenge convention and accepted wisdom.

As for those whi swim against the stream being frozen out, Corbyn is the perfect example of why this isn't always true. I really dont agree with his politics, but i admire and respect the man hugely for having the courage of his convictions.

But Corbyn was frozen out! He has sat twiddling his thumbs on the back benches of the Labour Party for years! It's only by circumstances he finds himself where he is now!

[grrclark]

But Corbyn was frozen out! He has sat twiddling his thumbs on the back benches of the Labour Party for years! It's only by circumstances he finds himself where he is now!

Circumstance, persistency and an unwavering belief? The telling thing is that he is leading in the polls and appears to have the largest amount of support from the grass roots.

 

He may have been a lone wolf in New Labour, but obviously he speaks on behalf of a much bigger number nationally. They are all wrong and completely mental of course

 

I'm not sure that he will win and if he does then so many in the party will likely make his position untenable, but for good or bad he has instigated a wholesale review of what the Labour party actually stands for to so many people and I have genuine admiration for him because of that.

 

It's interesting that Burnham and Cooper have also split left and right too, the unashamed politicking of both should give people enough reason to dismiss their ambition as nothing other than a self motivated, ego fuelled power play, but it won't as too many don't fight for what they believe in, they just leave it to someone else and then bitch and crow about it afterwards.

[bostonmick]

Arla seem to be doing well-3000 british farmers co-own the business and don't appear to be selling their Range Rover's anytime soon

It's actually owned by 13500 farmers of which 3000 are British.And they are not just producing milk.they are into all the top end high price products.Not all family dairy farms have the option of this.And you to could have a range rover just keep making the payments as most of those do.What you see on the surface is not what lies beneath.