advertisement


What does it mean to you to be English?

Bob McC said:
Of course it does. We need to know the extent of your bigotry.
Click to expand...
That unfair. He hasn't said anything thats bigotry, its just what he's observed.
To deny, his observations, is bigotry.

Myself, having lived in many districts of Birmingham, most of my life, have seen the changes. Noticing the changes, doesnt make me a racist, or a bigot, unless I denigrate, those that have changed the scenery. But to deny that there is a change, is just naive, at best.
 
PaulMB said:
I was surprised to learn that Kellog's, Tide and Palmolive were not British. Can remember British TV celebs (ladies) lathering their hands with Palmolive and passing them over their faces with a dreamy, slightly orgasmic look in their eyes.
Click to expand...
Nope.
That was Camay.

 
I think of myself as British not English. It’s a reference to my home. People are pretty similar overall wherever they are from.
 
Bob McC said:
Nope.
That was Camay.

Click to expand...
The one I had in mind was from the late '50s, early '60s, (B&W) and you only saw the face, hands and a bit of shoulders. But it may well have been Camay. I was about 8 or 10. Maybe Palmolive was more health and hygene, while Camay was luxury and sensuality. I shall investigate!
 
stevec67 said:
I didn't say it happened overnight. As I said earlier, it has to be viewed in the light of history and the cultural norms of the time. Of course if you bring someone out of a field where they are indentured labour and only have a home in exchange for X hours work a week and put them in a factory that you have just built, you won't immediately change them to being a homeowning skilled worker with autonomy over where they ply their trade. That takes time, and that's why it was a revolution. It involved decades, a century, of societal change.
Click to expand...

The problem was often skilled workers who's personal skills were replaced by a machine and the people left to starve.

Bit like what is now looming as the wealthy realise they can use 'AI' to get rid of far more jobs.
 
Jim Audiomisc said:
No. It is that we fall for the cover-stories the Tories (in all parties) trot out as they let their wealthy mates leech off it, and fail to invest in either facilities or staff.
Click to expand...
No excuses any longer. Labour are being quite open about increasing privatisation in the NHS. Anyone who votes Labour is voting for further decline (or they believe that privatisation is the cure)

If anyone says they’re proud of the NHS and is voting for one of the two main parties, their words and actions and in contradiction.
 
ks.234 said:
If anyone says they’re proud of the NHS and is voting for one of the two main parties, their words and actions and in contradiction.
Click to expand...
First past the post. You might rationally vote for the lesser evil while preferring a candidate with no chance of being elected.
 
stevec67 said:
I didn't say it happened overnight. As I said earlier, it has to be viewed in the light of history and the cultural norms of the time. Of course if you bring someone out of a field where they are indentured labour and only have a home in exchange for X hours work a week and put them in a factory that you have just built, you won't immediately change them to being a homeowning skilled worker with autonomy over where they ply their trade. That takes time, and that's why it was a revolution. It involved decades, a century, of societal change.
Click to expand...
The industrial revolution was hardly about increasing worker autonomy. It was much more about exploitation.
 
onlyconnect said:
First past the post. You might rationally vote for the lesser evil while preferring a candidate with no chance of being elected.
Click to expand...
You can do that if you still believe in the lesser evil argument. But if you do vote for Labour you are voting against the NHS
 
ks.234 said:
You can do that if you still believe in the lesser evil argument. But if you do vote for Labour you are voting against the NHS
Click to expand...
No because lesser evil is still evil. It means only that you don’t want to assist the most evil to be elected. All according to one’s views of course.
 
onlyconnect said:
No because lesser evil is still evil. It means only that you don’t want to assist the most evil to be elected. All according to one’s views of course.
Click to expand...
My comment was about the NHS. Labour are not the lesser evil, they will bring more privatisation to the NHS, not less. If you vote for Labour you vote to make the NHS worse. If you have any pride in the NHS, then it is the Tories who are the lesser evil. It is not the Tories who have declared they will “hold the doors wide open” to privatisation.
 
ks.234 said:
My comment was about the NHS. Labour are not the lesser evil, they will bring more privatisation to the NHS, not less. If you vote for Labour you vote to make the NHS worse. If you have any pride in the NHS, then it is the Tories who are the lesser evil. It is not the Tories who have declared they will “hold the doors wide open” to privatisation.
Click to expand...
So what you’re suggesting is that it is labour policy to privatise the NHS more than a conservative government would/is?

Hard to believe, but I don’t know enough facts to either agree or disagree with your position.

.sjb
 
ks.234 said:
less.
Click to expand...
Do you know of only one country in the world still going the way of less privatisation in healthcare ? This is not a government thing. Want to go back the other way ? Welcome back to 70s level. There is no miracle.
 
Cheese said:
Do you know of only one country in the world still going the way of less privatisation in healthcare ? This is not a government thing. Want to go back the other way ? Welcome back to 70s level. There is no miracle.
Click to expand...
what do you mean by “there is no miracle”? Privatisation is a political choice, nothing to do with miracles. The UK has voted for that choice for half a century, it could vote against it at any time. If anyone believes that voting against privatisation is something miraculous, then they have merely bought into the lies and myths that they have been told for half a century.

Keynes was not a messiah, all he did 80 years ago was demonstrate that creating a state for the benefit of human beings was not only possible here on earth, but was also economically efficient as well and socially beneficial.

That we turned away from human ends and back to the supposed benefits of market ends in the 70’s is down to an economic theory, albeit one based on a quasi religious belief in an “invisible hand” a belief that gained prominence during the pre-democratic industrial revolution and very much served the ends of the exploitation upon which it depended. The greater equality created by democracy and then the Welfare was not conducive to industrial scale exploitation, so had to go.

Privatisation is a political choice based on belief in an ancient and broken and corrupted ideology. Privatisation is not written on tablets of stone. Belief is privatisation is just that, a belief, and a belief contradicted by observation, experience, common sense and the greater good.

More Privatisation will be bad for the NHS. Voting for more privatisation is voting to further weaken the NHS

Of all the things that we could be proud of about our history, the creation of the NHS should be top of the list. Not Empire, not Crusades, not the industrial revolution, but the one thing we created that was wholly and unequivocally good; socially good, morally good and not least, economically good.

But instead of pride in that achievement, we have voted to kill it by the death of a thousand cuts.

The NHS is an simple choice, not a miracle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top