Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Guest BoomBoomCrash

Mcstalin Says: 'we Don't Need No Stinkin' Democracy'

Recommended Posts

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/ma...ection-expenses

Brown epitomises the corrupting influence of power. He's not interested in public service, in doing what is in the best interests of the country, all he cares about is being in power. High office has become an end unto itself for him.

Of course.

That's why all systems based on coercion fail.

Only free markets and free associations solve this problem.

Nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really looking forward to these elections. We are in for some very interesting results, and I have feeling things are not going to end nicely for Mr Brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BoomBoomCrash
Of course.

That's why all systems based on coercion fail.

Only free markets and free associations solve this problem.

Nothing else.

No they don't, only in your banal fantasy world is this true. In the real world the sociopaths always sour the milk of human kindness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Though Brown continued to insist that he would reject any cabinet attempt to persuade him to retire, one leading rebel said yesterday that the weekend's polls confirmed his belief that either "Gordon goes or the Labour party does".

LOL

However, asked on BBC1's Andrew Marr show today whether he would stand aside if cabinet members said it would help Labour's chances at a general election, Brown replied: "No, because I am dealing with the issues at hand. I am dealing with the economy every day."

LOL

Labour on 22 points, 18 behind the Conservatives (on 40 points) and three behind the Liberal Democrats on 25 – the first time since 1985 that Labour has plunged so low in an ICM survey.

LOL

Saying that recent claims had offended his "Presbyterian conscience"

LOL

Backbenchers believe the prime minister's aides are planning to outfox any backbench coup and expect Brown to hold a reshuffle of his cabinet on Friday which would make more difficult the organisation of a challenge.

LOL

Edited by MOP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No they don't, only in your banal fantasy world is this true. In the real world the sociopaths always sour the milk of human kindness.

No, it's true empricaly, in the real world.

Test it and see in your own personal life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BoomBoomCrash
No, it's true empricaly, in the real world.

Test it and see in your own personal life.

Maybe if you left the day centre rather more frequently you may realise how utterly trite your world view is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe if you left the day centre rather more frequently you may realise how utterly trite your world view is.

Maybe if you tested out your theories in your own personal life then you'd stop believing such utter shit.

Really, stop it - what you advocate will get people killed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying that recent claims had offended his "Presbyterian conscience"

You couldn't make it up. He's like the lowest villain in any work of fiction. Uriah Heap ("we are so very very 'umble").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe if you left the day centre rather more frequently you may realise how utterly trite your world view is.

I think anyone who looks at his post count can see this is no great insight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No they don't, only in your banal fantasy world is this true. In the real world the sociopaths always sour the milk of human kindness.

True. Do you have a solution to this?

Maybe if you tested out your theories in your own personal life then you'd stop believing such utter shit.

Really, stop it - what you advocate will get people killed.

As would what you advocate.

But I agree with your first line. The problem is that what often works in the micro never works in the macro because the rare superman who can rise to the top on the national scale is so often both plausible and utterly insane.

*goes offline to deal with sudden awareness of potential anarchist-syndicalist tendencies*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/ma...ection-expenses

Brown epitomises the corrupting influence of power. He's not interested in public service, in doing what is in the best interests of the country, all he cares about is being in power. High office has become an end unto itself for him.

According to your so wildly bright mind - who epitomises the non-corrupting influence of power?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest BoomBoomCrash
According to your so wildly bright mind - who epitomises the non-corrupting influence of power?

You assume a corollary that does not exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is clear that Brown harbours a deep rooted belief in Facism and Nazism. Since the first day when Labour won the elections in 97 Brown has harboured a deep rooted belief that the people are there to be controlled, that they are not fit to be engaged in democracy, that his view of the world is the only view..............there is to be no debate.

I suspect many on here have read their history books and know like many others how dictators rose to power. How their single view became the only and the right view. Browns antics now pose a serious threat to national security, its is completely unthinkable that a man with views such as Gordon Brown could have his finger on the Nuclear trigger, that tens of thousands of our troops are currently fighting around the world and Brown who has not made a single right decision in his life is their leader.

For me its no longer just about the Labour Party, their fraud and corruption, their lies and contempt of the working classes. The problem is not much much bigger, and Brown needs to be kicked out of office before he does something that will subject the working classes to an entire life of servitude and misery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest มร หล&#3
Of course.

That's why all systems based on coercion fail.

Only free markets and free associations solve this problem.

Nothing else.

Correct, 100%.

Anyone who wishes to wield power over others is bonkers in the first place.

Although some regulation is required to prevent/minimise environmental damage, an externalised cost. Take a look at Vietnam, rapid industrialisation without environmental control has wrecked the place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Take a look at Vietnam, rapid industrialisation without environmental control has wrecked the place.

Why should the Vietnamese be prevented from doing what the British people did a hundred and fifty years ago, if they so choose? The industrialisation of Britain certainly created a mess in the short term, but it raised the living standards of the people enough that they could afford to clean up that mess a few decades later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest มร หล&#3
Why should the Vietnamese be prevented from doing what the British people did a hundred and fifty years ago, if they so choose? The industrialisation of Britain certainly created a mess in the short term, but it raised the living standards of the people enough that they could afford to clean up that mess a few decades later.

Correct, yes. Although you lot have been paying through the nose for the clean up of those costs externalised 150 years ago, today.

Without environmental regulation do you think industry would have changed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Without environmental regulation do you think industry would have changed?

Yes. Poor people will put up with living in a shit-hole, but rich people (and the people of Britain were rich until a few years ago, at least by the standards of their ancestors in the mid-1800s) in a relatively free country won't accept it for long; in addition, new technologies tend to be cleaner than old ones as they're normally adopted because they're more efficient.

Whereas the worst examples of environmental destruction have generally occurred in communist nations, where the state is all-powerful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think anyone who looks at his post count can see this is no great insight.

God, I just noticed - you are right! Eff me, 18k posts. Injin you really are a sad ba5tard! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes. Poor people will put up with living in a shit-hole, but rich people (and the people of Britain were rich until a few years ago, at least by the standards of their ancestors in the mid-1800s) in a relatively free country won't accept it for long

Observation suggests that the vast, vast majority of people in Britain are quite happy to live in environmentally-degraded shit holes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   285 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.