Tedious.
As are people who slate capitalism without understanding they’d not be where they are without it.
Tedious.
As are people who slate capitalism without understanding they’d not be where they are without it.
I hope you are not including me in that, because if you care to look back and educate yourself, you will find that I haven't.
It is just tedious and lazy to extol the virtues of capitalism without considering that it might have outlived its utility or being able to articulate what it is that is so great about it or being able to put up even a cursory defence of it.
Just resort to calling me a thickie for not being able to see what you can't articulate ; that'll win an argument in your book.
Modern Britain, eh ?
You clearly don’t understand the virtues of capitalism anywhere near as well as you think you know the downsides, given you didn’t understand my original comment. I suggest it’s actually you who needs to educate yourself.
Does anyone else have anything to say on the subject of the next Labour Leader?
A capitalist economy has obviously allowed us to develop to the level we’re at now.
However, us and the government should realise that capitalism promotes inequality and that the state should step in to try and remedy that.
Surely they’d just give everyone else a knighthood? The whole point is to level things downwards after all...Wouldn't Keir Starmer be the first Labour leader with a knighthood? Would others seek to use this fact to undermine him?
You missed war from that list. It is a very sad fact that in the course of human history, war and conflict have driven development.Disagree. Inequality, competition and conflict are drivers of human development and growth. The government should ensure a minimum, dignified standard of living - and the same rights - for all its citizens but it should not strive to make them equal.
Looks like Jess Phillips is about to withdraw from the leadership race, having committed seppuku by going on Mumsnet and insisting to the mums that trans women are women.
or, perhaps, more likely because she doesn't have the endorsement of any CLP or unions ( or I think affiliates). But yeah, mumsnet.
( and she didn't attend the GMB hustings thus giving up any chance they might back her)
It does look increasingly likely that Labour will be out of power for a considerable time. I've cooled a lot on Starmer - his campaign has been tepid; Long-Bailey is a nutcase.
I'm really not sure about Burnham. I voted for him in 2015, but as GM mayor he seems to be all mouth and no trousers. Sadiq Khan similarly.I must confess none of them fill me with any confidence - I wish Andy Burnham was an MP as he seems sound.
I've cooled a lot on Starmer - his campaign has been tepid; Long-Bailey is a nutcase.
I agree.Starmer is least damaging. It has got that bad.
The Hard Left clearly didn't get the message this time.
He and others could talk for a year or more - and still fail to convince the militants that they are the main reason why Labour lost the election.Does he need over an hour?...
They never will "get it" - they think that Labour lost because there wasn't enough crackpot Corbynism. They are a cult.