Can anyone see a big war kicking off? I hope not, as no doubt our government will be stupid enough to get involved, don't want to see more of our troops killed http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...it-will-launch-nuclear-attack-on-america.html
A nuclear war against North Korea is fundamental to the survival of the capitalist West. The threat to South Korea, a long time ally of the West, is obvious and the USA and her allies (that's us folks) would step in should there be any attacks launched by the North Koreans. Because of the constraints of the United Nations it is unlikely that America would carry out any pre-emptive strikes but would act quickly should a nuclear device be deployed against another nation. China and Russia would no doubt rattle their sabres but would not want to engage in a nuclear war on behalf of a country run by lunatic dictators. How this would save the West would be to show the likes of Iran that America would not shy away from turning a deterent into an offensive weapon and although Iran might be able to get one or two missiles off to the likes of Israel the response would be total ruin for their country. By striking against a small enemy the USA would be assured victory and it will lay the foundations for the next global threat of resource wars, putting America in the driving seat for negotiations over access to minerals, land and water. The oil is going to run out but with the run away increase to the world's population it is access to land and water that will be what future wars are fought for. I made all this up by the way, if you want another conflicting opinion I'll be happy to change my tune.
The West is ****ed. Crippled by huge debts and even bigger liabilities through an over generous welfare and public sector pensions system coupled by an ever ageing and workshy society, the "East" will be the richest part of the planet within the next 20 years. It's a monumental shift in power not seen since Europe started exploring the world. But the South East Asians are attaining better qualifications, making more stuff and patenting more inventions than Europe and soon the USA. I blame this all very simply at the door of the baby-boomers and the ******ed left. Rant over. Anyone got any pics of boobies?
Public sector pensions are not the cause of the current economic crisis. Just because a civil servant is on a final salary pension instead of an average salary pension doesn't add up to the trillions in debt around the world. Agreed we are getting older, this is being taken into account by all political parties who will do away with final salary pensions after the next election (won't have the balls to make it part of the manifesto though in case the grey vote gets angry) and it will soon be up to the individual to sort themselves out in their old age because what the state provides will be worthless in a few years. No prosecutions were made following the collapse of the major financial institutions in the US which caused this (Fanny Mae and Bob's yer Uncle and all that), no increase in lending following the Bank of England making cash available to the banks to promote borrowing, only a relative few bank workers sacked from some of the more high profile culprit organisations. The cause of the global financial crisis is based in Wall Street and the Square Mile, not in schools, hospitals, town halls, fire stations and the like. Bert the binman getting a decent pension after 40 years of lugging rubbish around isn't the problem. CEO's used to get paid an average of 15 times their average staff salary. This is now nearer 200 times more in many of our larger institutions and not all of them public sector by the way. The Swiss have just kicked off about this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21657831 I like workers, what ever their class or level of earnings and I wouldn't deny someone who has grafted their whole life on a low wage the chance to benefit when they retire. Same as I don't mind if the uber-wealthy get stinking rich, fair play if they have the cohones to do well in the cut throat world of business. And yes I do have pictures of boobies but I am unable to post them directly on here. Maybe when I retire on my fat public sector pension I can invest in a decent perving PC and flood Not 606 with filth.
I never said that pensions were the sole reason, but I think that final salary pensions are a wholly unfair burden on the tax payers. These were dreamed up and agreed on the 'never never' and now we'll live through the reality of funding pensioners who own their own homes and are being paid £30k+ a year by the state even though they haven't worked in 5/10/15/20+ years. The global financial crisis is just a symptom of the West's last hurrah at trying to keep ahead of the rest. Government encouraged lax lending to businesses and individuals. Without the abundance of easily gained money, the Western economies would've ground to a halt like the 'sluggish' growth we see now. Two world wars, delusions of grandeur and an over generous welfare system has ****ed the West who effectively has been bankrupt since the 60's. If a private firm, through its shareholders decides to pay it's CEO £1trn then that's up to that companies shareholders. Bert can get a decent pension if he saves up like the rest of us. The "you put a quid in and we'll put £4 in" public pensions are a joke. The pension liabilities which this country will be obliged to pay for the next 50 years could potentially undermine growth because of the vastness of the amount the tax payer will have to pay. I have no problem with anyone getting a decent pension as long as they've contributed most of the cash themselves. Not FUCKING good enough!!
No-one gives a **** about N Korea. All they do is pump out **** propaganda bollocks threatening the world and it's dog without ever backing it up. Bunch of dreamy wet gob jobs who don't have the means to carry out their dramatic plans. And they know it. Hope the Yanks flatten the ****s.
I love it when people come up with ****e like this Few points to make: - When you pay money to people on benefits/people in the council/etc, it pretty much all goes back into the economy. People on benefits will spend it mostly on food/booze shopping, and people earning more in the council will be spending it on things like university fees and holidays abroad. - When the country lives on artificial money, lent to us by banks, it's normal that it runs out at some point. The ridiculous interest on a loan or credit card goes into the banks' coffers, and it's this cash that's being sucked out of the economy and sitting in an account in a tax haven somewhere. - Same for the super rich, recent stats have proved that while the poor have even worse living conditions nowadays than 5 years ago, the richest have got even richer. And what's happening to this money? ****all, and it's raping our economy. - What the **** has it got to do with the left? There have hardly been any lefty/communist/etc...*rightwing bullshit* governments in major western countries for ages. New Labour Democrats in the US? The right have raped our economy, and then ****s like you have the cheek to blame it on the people that actually work, rather than suckle off the teat of their weathly parents, like most of the rich/politicians have done for ages. The only reason the economy is ****ed is the greed of the rich, not because some **** in Newcastle is getting 100 a quid to help him survive </rant> <EdgeFail>
Out of the West, the USA will do better than the rest of us. They continue to grow, the emergence of shale gas will mean that the 'should' be able to more self sufficient for their energy needs. China will overtake the US by 2017 in terms of wealth, but China has a huge problem itself in that so much (30-40%) will be pensioners in 30 years time, thanks to the one child policy. China also has a red hot housing bubble that has threatened to burst a few times now without happening. The best way to stop that happening is to keep up the 10% year on year growth, but that will be difficult to keep up as the years go on.
Toby, this is basic economy fail. Your logic is totally flawed. If you work for me, and I pay you £10 a week, and you spend that £10 in my shop, what happens to the value of that £10? Eventually the £10 becomes worthless both to you and to me, meanwhile I need to process the payments and overheads to give you your £10 which means I'm losing money, meaning you'll be out of a job etc. The whole capitalist economy runs on tic, Toby. It always has and always will. It's how it works and it's part of the reason that the economy isn't working now, because people and companies can't get tic. Get the stats out then, Toby. Recent stats that I seen showed that the poor are generally scummier than the rich and God has decreed this as acceptable. I see the left in general as unrealistic and stupid. Europe has seen many left wing governments, not Ãber left in most cases, but nevertheless leftist, who promise the electorate the world, then **** the economy and the right comes in and tries and sorts it out, the left then squeal about the horrid right cutting all the unaffordable benefits granted to them by the left, so on blah blah. We had a leftist government who presided over a period of unmatched growth in the UK, not seen since the Victorians innovated the world, and they STILL ran up a huge debt, but the right ****ed up the economy? The rich create wealth, Toby. When the UK has no rich left, then we'll all be ****ed.
Woohoo! I haven't had a Rebel-style multiquote argument in ages How does that work? If you pay someone £10 a week, and they buy £10 a week of stuff off you, you make profit off that £10. That's how shops work? I know, and I have no issue with that. It's the fact that money is stagnating in accounts that belong to the super-rich, who have so much money now they are worth more than the GDP of some countries. http://www.leftfootforward.org/2013...-saw-bigger-fall-in-living-standards-than-uk/ Standard of living is down. Saw an article the other day with stats about income for the rich compared to standard of living/austerity pushing inflation up, and the rich come off way better. Will get you some more links when I'm not at work. Please give me a few names? I can't honestly think of anyone in power the last 20 years of any major countries? If you're implying New Labour ****ed our economy? The Tories are solely to blame that we have such an issue with unemployment. No, the workforce creates wealth, the rich were just born into an unfair system that gives them a free pass to life.
Well **** off then!! Some of us have **** to do Profit is making money, not regurgitating the same capital over and over. You implying that giving some poor sod £35 a week, which they spend on ***s and booze is keeping that money in the economy is bollocks. Also, by the time that money comes back into the economy, it's sliced and diced by umpteen middle men and the £35 is down to £5ish. It doesn't stagnate. Or it shouldn't. The banks should be using that money to fund people and businesses. But they're not, for a multitude of reasons. I'm no fan of the banks, they've not been kind to me of late, but I understand that if they lend, they're damned as the FSA and BoE say that they need to bolster their reserves to insulate themselves from another credit crunch, but they're being told to lend to people. But if someone has earned a **** load of cash, then it's their right to keep it, use it in whatever way they want. No, I believe you. I just don't begrudge someone getting richer during a time when the general populous isn't. Recessions are when the folks with cash can make a killing. Obviously people's incomes haven't went up with inflation but that's the hangover of the Labour years. Tax receipts were up year on year, and Gordon Brown used the cash to bribe the electorate. France and Spain have had many brushes with Socialism, and most of Eastern Europe were socialist up until the 90's. The Tories came in when the economy was already ****ed. No, the workforce creates wealth, the rich were just born into an unfair system that gives them a free pass to life.[/QUOTE] The rich create the wealth, the workforce can create more wealth for the individual but that's an argument for another day. Moral of the story, multi quoting is boring and wrong!!
So back in the day you worked as a nurse, polis man, council gritter etc and the wages weren't the best. Most of the time you'd be on pretty much the same pay scale and salary while you were there as not many climbed up the ladder to a top job. It has always been the case that public sector workers were paid less than their private sector equivalents but this was always offset by a better holidays, terms and conditions and a decent pension. I started off as an apprentice on £60 a week, mates of mine who left school at the same time were on double what I got and they worked in retail. College mates used to take the piss about how low my wedge was and were happy to boast that they got paid more and would always be doing cash jobs on the side. The long view was better job security and a final salary pension was available and expected from day dot. We are living longer but what do you expect people to do? Hook up to the Doctor Kervorkian machine and self euthanise at 70? And as for the sob story about paying for pensioners who have alread bought their own homes I'd point out that many of them would only have been able to have afforded to buy property as a direct result of Thatcher allowing them to buy their council house which you and I have had to fund ever since. Housing shortage? Complaints about too many immigrants taking what's left of council flats? Private rents going through the roof? It all goes back to the policy of the Tory government in the 1980's. I agree that there is a "pension time bomb" as the press would describe it. An end to final salary pensions is inevitable but it can't be backdated or else millions of current and future pensioners will be affected. There needs to be a cut off where after a certain date these sorts of policies are stopped so that employers and employees know what they are signing up to when they join the company pension. It might not sound fair but unless you are going to back pay everyone to raise their wages to the equivalent private sector levels for their career there isn't much else that would work.
It's a bluff, they just want to scare the US into lifting the sanctions. It's going to be a pretty **** pre-emptive strike if you warn them first.
