ot jeremy corbyn

[rolymiller]

Wow, mr kemp, I thought I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by suggesting that you said that wealth created by the rich would tricklo down to the poor so it seems that you are now suggesting wealth created by the rich doesn't get to the poor not even as a trickle. So are you saying the rich keep it all then?

Nice deflection on the caipitalist pie comment by the way just a glib answer to something which is very serious. Millions starving/ homeless/war torn etc. in the world and the best you can come up with is a flippant comment. Plainly you don't care. So lets put it more simply for you: how do we stop these problems in the world (if you do care)_?

[KerrAvon]

Wow, mr kemp, I thought I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by suggesting that you said that wealth created by the rich would tricklo down to the poor so it seems that you are now suggesting wealth created by the rich doesn't get to the poor not even as a trickle. So are you saying the rich keep it all then?

Nice deflection on the caipitalist pie comment by the way just a glib answer to something which is very serious. Millions starving/ homeless/war torn etc. in the world and the best you can come up with is a flippant comment. Plainly you don't care. So lets put it more simply for you: how do we stop these problems in the world (if you do care)_?

You were not giving me the benefit of the doubt when you said that I claimed a trickle-down effect - you were making it up.

What have you done about millions starving/ homeless/war torn etc. in the world? Do you find calling people fascist on this website helps?

[rolymiller]

Answer my question first eh? How do we stop the problems in the world? Prove you at least care even if you don't know the answer. The trickle down comment by the way was not contested by you the last time i made it but in any case you are avoiding my point.

How wealthy should people be allowed to be in a world where there is poverty? Its a straight forward question? Do people need excess wealth? Why? Whats your view?

Do you deserve the wealth you have? Why? Are you more valuable to society than other people who work a lot harder and are a lot more valuable but earn a lot less?eg nurses. teachers, careworkers etc.

[Shark27]

Just one other thing before I go about my day.

You think the Mail is only targeting immigration to sell papers to the bigots? If we sidestep the debate about whether we're happy if, as you say, one of our largest news sources is simply pandering to the tastes of a "particular mind set" (just say bigots Kerr, for the love of God!), I disagree that this is their motive. I think that the owner shares the political motives of Mogg and friends in the ERG who are currently using their private capital and privilege in parliament, to campaign for a hard Brexit. I don't think it is about trying to stop immigration affecting native workers, it is simply about removing us from EU legislation so that we can redefine our own position on rights, environmental and safety standards so that we can further maximise business profits. This is really what the owner wants. The stance on immigration, increasing pressure on May from the public, is just a means to that end I'm afraid.

Why should he say bigots?

[great_fire]

He's chosen Islington over Rotherham and these suckers are still supporting him!

[great_fire]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...hasnt-12093689

[ragingpup]

A bigot is a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions to theirs. Given your willingness to brand all Mail readers as being bigots simply because many of them will hold different views on immigration to you, I think you may see one in the mirror.

I see that you have a least tried to square the circle that I gave you, but the fact remains that you are trying to argue in one breath that the Tories and ‘big business’ favour immigration as a source of cheap labour, whilst being forced in the next breath to acknowledge that the supposedly pro Tory ‘big business’ that runs the Mail is vehemently anti-immigration. That you are reduced to a somewhat fanciful impenetrable conspiracy theory to explain that away smacks of desperation.

I haven't called all Mail readers bigots Kerr - I was pulling you up on your statement that the Mail is "simply pandering to the tastes of a particular mind set" - in other words saying why don't you just call them bigots?! (hence "just say .bigots Kerr, for the love of God"). So don't put words in my mouth fella when you don't like that from others.

In my opinion Mogg and a minority of extremely wealthy individuals are bucking the general trend of business (that support the current status quo, a SMALL PART of which is the use of immigration as a means of cheap labour (I accept that this is quite small scale, very few employers do it but it still needs tackling for those that do) by weighing up that if we leave the EU, even in an economically damaging hard Brexit, Mogg et al stand to make a relatively large difference to their ability to make profits by stripping away work, environmental and health standards at home and by cutting deals with any sweatshop market willing to trade with us.

In short, I don't think that Mogg and the Mail owner's stance on a hard Brexit is for our economic and cultural good. Their proposals are the worst possible move for the majority of people in our country but they are capable of using their privilege and power to push us in that direction, first of all forcing the Brexit in the first place (some of which I agree would be a good thing) but then going further and forcing us over an economic cliff, damaging the vast majority of people (businesses too) for the free gain of the super wealthy.

[ragingpup]

I rather hoped that we could leave Chomsky out of it. You misunderstand him and misuse his words.

Chomsky is an anarcho-syndicalist, who disagrees with the notion of government as we know it. If you believe that he would support The Great Leader, you are mistaken; he would see little if any difference between Labour and the Tories and between The Great Leader and May. He would argue that they both represent a political elite who hoard economic power and withhold it from the masses. When he talked within your quote about other devices [being] required to prevent the ignorant masses from interfering with public affairs he wasn’t taking a shot at the Tories or the political right. He was taking a shot at politics and the notion of government generally.

If you believe that Chomsky would support your desire for an element of political control of the press then you really need to look more closely at his writings. Nothing could be further from the truth.

If you don’t believe me ask IBS, who is a massive Chomsky fan.

Meanwhile, in the real world, or at least in liberal democracies like the UK, there are a wide range of political views freely available within the media for those who want it. animal can continue to read The Guardian and gf can continue to read The Daily Mail. Long may that remain, even if Chomsky would find little difference between them.

Oh my God - look at what you have just said: "in liberal democracies like the UK, there are a wide range of political views freely available within the media for those who want it. animal can continue to read The Guardian and gf can continue to read The Daily Mail. Long may that remain, even if Chomsky would find little difference between them".

So you are arguing that the huge range of views between the Guardian (who advised us to vote Lib Dem as recently as 2010 amd slaughtered Corbyn in his first 2 years actively encouraging the PLP to depose him) is the full scope of political opinion that you are delighted with??! You are saying that this is the range of mass media views to be celebrated?

I know Chomsky's over arching views and what he would ideally like in his society. But as you say, he knows he has to live in the real world and accepts that we are no where near that now. It's about direction of travel. Unlike you, he would not accept that our mass media is as good as we can get it where there are "a wide range of political views freely available" - he's trying to influence a long term game, a movement away from the illusion of free press that we are under.

You say: "If you believe that he would support The Great Leader, you are mistaken; he would see little if any difference between Labour and the Tories and between The Great Leader and May."

Oh really?

Why did he say that he would vote for Corbyn if he was British? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7729526.html

Chompers knows that he lives in "the real world" and that to get to where he would like to be (which will never happen in his and even my lifetime) then you have to make whatever small strides that would at least stop the movement in the other direction. To start us going in the way that we think is better for greater society.

Maybe a bit of research before you make such completely wrong assertions on a person/subject, you try desperately to appear knowledgeable on?

[one_a_day]

9 pages on a man who has just sold the vast majority of his voters down the river for political gain.

[ragingpup]

Why should he say bigots?

See earlier response to Kerr on this. Just trying to get him to express what he means by the people who he terms as having a "particular mind set" (namely Daily Mail readers!). Maybe bigot is the wrong one by Kerr's definition but Kerr certainly used it to describe Great Fire so it sprang to mind!