|tony blair good bye
|12:56:14 Jun 28th 07 - Mr. Peace War And Suffering:
lots of you may disagree BUT tony blair has been the best labour leader EVER and one of the best p.m's the country has ever had.
what has he done you may be thinking well:
BUT HE HAS HAD HIS DOWN FALLS.
in my veiw to close to bush! (nothing aginst the states only there leader)
war in iraq
war in afghanistan
these are pictures of a leader's mistakes but i belive that the organisations that are ment to help p.m's make decitions got it wrong not blair
so he leaves, leaveing war but not politics what will he do next
|13:49:48 Jun 28th 07 - Mr. Breadlord:
oh shure he spend some on public care wow.
|14:25:25 Jun 28th 07 - Dark Lord Finwe:
You also forget Blair has done a lot of poor things like:
the cash for honours scandel
ofc thier would be more but im lazy :P
Now it only gets worse with mr Brown.. maybe a good politician will appear someday.
|15:18:58 Jun 28th 07 - Mr. Anatoliy Grushkov:
Blair makes no sense! He is rich, and yet he is an a "socialist" Labour Party. He lead his people to war. He let a monarch reign un-democratically. This is what i mean about oppressive rich world leaders! Overthrow them and freedom will be OURS
|15:20:47 Jun 28th 07 - Dark Lord Finwe:
oh shut up (loves monarchy)
|22:09:31 Mar 31st 08 - Mr. Threadlord:
If u let the murderers lead the military you are in trouble.
|22:14:40 Mar 31st 08 - Mr. Killer:
Ummm... you brought this back up, why?
|22:17:17 Mar 31st 08 - Mr. Threadlord:
and doubled increase on miitary?
|22:18:24 Mar 31st 08 - Mr. Threadlord:
Tony Blair a *beep* during war against iraq.
|22:31:20 Mar 31st 08 - Sir Kassius The Brownie Bandito:
hey thare nothin wrong with the cash for honours scheme..........*covers "sir " title up*
|23:22:09 Mar 31st 08 - Mr. Threadlord:
|13:07:02 Apr 15th 08 - General Beaverjuice:
I despise the French!
|13:40:26 Apr 15th 08 - Mr. Elfy:
tony blaire was among the worst prime-ministers to rule the country, how you worked out he was the best i have no idea...
|21:35:31 Apr 15th 08 - Mr. Justanius:
he only wrote this cus hes working in those armies who go pick on those people in the rest of the world claiming "trouble"
|02:21:18 Apr 24th 08 - Mr. Might The God of Cows:
Threadlord, that video was a joke...:P
|20:28:24 Apr 27th 08 - Mr. Jacktheripper:
Threadlord the man who is speaking in that movie is a jacka$$, and a liberal fat-a$$ who believes in 9/11 conspiraces, which makes him a nut case. Which means whoever helped him make it are also the same type of people.
|10:06:47 May 11th 08 - Mr. Reltihfloda:
The introduction of minimum wages is stupid in every way. Only ignorant people support such ridiculous legislation, because to the extent that it actually works, you will have institutional unemployment and a dropping supply of goods and thus a lowered standard of living. To the extend that it doesn't change anything, it is completely unnecessary. Also, it tends to encourage credit expansion. Which, for your information, is a bad thing.
There is no justification what so ever for minimum wage laws.
|10:11:14 May 11th 08 - Mr. Reltihfloda:
And there is nothing "heroic" about increasing public spending in various areas, whatever they may be. There will always be others to foot the bill of the politicians alleged "heroic" monuments.
|10:46:05 May 11th 08 - Dark Lord Osiris:
|14:32:24 May 11th 08 - Mr. Reltihfloda:
The myth that the allegedly omnipotent government must interfere with business so that the "evil capitalists" do not exploit the poor "proletarians" and bring the entire world to the brink of economic ruin is a tiresome one, that has already been crushed numerous times even if we disregard this and the entire last century of economic writings. Those who cling to this shallow dogma merely prove their ignorance and lack of the faculty of logical thinking. A raise in real wages can not be brought about by the politicians legislation, just as they can not illegalize bad weather, but is always brought about by the accumulation of capital employed per capita (assuming there is no unproportional increase in malinvestment). Technology, capital, better methods of production etc. - not parasitic politicians - are the factors that improve the average standard of living. An increase in wage rates that are above that which would have been determined on the unhampered market leads to perpetual unemployment for a portion of the population.
The fact that wages fixed above the market rate bring about institutional unemployment is logically and necessarily true and can not be refuted; Economics is a deductive science and it's theorems are valid for all concrete cases insofar as they are not incorrectly deducted and that one acknowledges the fact that there is regularity in the occurence of market phenomena thus laws.
There's no room for your polylogism here.
As for the assertion that my knowledge of "british histroy" is lacking, I'll have you know that besides the fact that it is quite irrelevant, you are also quite wrong.
|16:43:07 May 11th 08 - Mr. Clamps The Redeemed:
And you've talked our ears off without telling us why having a portion of the population unemployed is such a bad thing. The classroom obviously hasn't shown you that in any system some people can't be made to survive without similar pitfalls to those you described. Do you not think that (communication and transportation) technology and better production methods will lead to unemployment for the working class?
|17:22:33 May 11th 08 - Dark Lord Osiris:
why we all know how fun life in totaly poverty earning nothing at all is right? working for hours just to be able to afford a loaf of bread is everyones idea of paradise. 50pence an hour ftw!
|21:44:30 May 11th 08 - Mr. Reltihfloda:
"And you've talked our ears off without telling us why having a portion of the population unemployed is such a bad thing"-Mr. Clamps The Redeemed
I did mention the fact that chronic unemployment leads to a decrease in the output in goods and services. That means a lower standard of living for those who are not among the privileged.
"The classroom obviously hasn't shown you that in any system some people can't be made to survive without similar pitfalls to those you described."-Mr. Clamps The Redeemed
I never said that was the case. How does this justify worsening the situation?
"Do you not think that (communication and transportation) technology and better production methods will lead to unemployment for the working class?"-Mr. Clamps The Redeemed
Do you, really? This is one of the most shallow fallacies there is. Others have refuted it numerous times already, if you're too lazy to study the science of economics, that's your problem. But then, don't come here and act as if you have a clue what you are actually talking about; You obviously haven't.
|21:58:17 May 11th 08 - Mr. Imma Chargin Mah Lazer:
|22:00:05 May 11th 08 - Mr. Reltihfloda:
Could you please substantiate your claim by means or rational arguments?
|00:08:37 May 12th 08 - Mr. Clamps The Redeemed:
Why do people here assume someone has no education in a field just because someone disagrees with them? It's fine if you disagree with my opinion but first off you haven't substantiated any of yours so I didn't realize this was a debate lol. Also I don't think you even know what fallacy means. Lastly just because some people have refuted a claim doesn't mean the discussion is done with. I'll bother continuing to debate this with you if you bother to offer a shred of proof other than just saying "Others have refuted it numerous times already." If that doesn't happen, then my final statement is "I disagree with you. Get over it."
|08:52:20 May 13th 08 - Mr. Menger:
You have clearly demonstrated your lack of economic knowledge by asserting that technology and better methods of production leads to unemployment. In fact, this idea can not even be thought to it's ultimate logical consequences; Its unavoidable implication is that there is a static amount of work to be done and a static amount of wealth to be "distributed" (which merely indicates that your knowledge regarding most basic concepts of the market economy is close to zero) . Three centuries ago, the majority of the populace toiled in the agricultural sector. Of course, the output was not higher, or even remotely as high as it is today with the help of a larger supply of tools, better technology and fertilizer. Did this put 90% of the populace out of work and death by slow starvation? No, they moved to other industries, such as for example the mass production of textile, increasing the output of clothing for the masses as well as the output of food, with no loss in opportunity for work. In fact new industries unheard and unthought of before were born. Now, centuries later, it would be sheer madness to deny the fact that we have an incomparably higher standard of living and more than twice the life expectancy for a immensely large population while 90% of the populace is obviously not out of work.
Yes, I can say that you have no knowledge about economics. No one would venture to assert that 1+1 = 5 and that it is just a "disagreement of opinions of equal worth" and that it would be wrong to judge ones mathematical knowledge in accordance with this fact. That would be absurd. Yet that is exactly what you want me to do with regard to economics. This is in fact tantamount to a denial of the very existence of the science of economics; If there are no absolute truths regarding the laws describing the regularity of the occurence of market phenomena, there can be no such regularity. And, furthermore, if you think you are unique in your reasoning, you are utterly wrong. This is, in essence, what the "methodenstreit" of the late 19th century between the historicists and the Mengerian school was all about if one traces it back to the abstract principles.
|15:14:43 Jul 28th 08 - Mr. Snirbalakatgolinaa:
|15:20:59 Jul 28th 08 - Mr. Harry The Crazy:
Hell I saw a few posts and decided to skip the rest because I already knew what I was going to put.
Everyone against the war in Iraq should GTFO right now.
|21:21:36 Jul 28th 08 - Dark Lord Osiris:
war is war. i dont like the lies :) if he said Im going in to secure oil and continued fuel for the uk and its economy people might have been more yay!
|23:36:26 Jul 28th 08 - Mr. Sorra:
If the people were actually more "Yay" after he said that, then i guess there one of the most shittiest, greediest people on earth.
Id rather be lied to, and hundreds of thousands of lives be lost, then to be told the truth and support/continue to let hundreds of thousands of lives be lost in a poory planned and excuted war.
|23:40:45 Jul 28th 08 - Sir Caradoc IV:
ok so total death in iraq are at 4.5kish right now. thats quite bad if you ask me
|23:48:07 Jul 28th 08 - Mr. Justin:
For once ill agree with Wilber. Im joining the marines in 2010 and heading for Iraq in 2011 so anyone against that sh*t better not come in here and bad mouth us.
|23:57:04 Jul 28th 08 - Mr. Dreadlord:
hmm here's a morale breaker....
|00:03:31 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Dreadlord:
aldoh i dont really find it funny
|01:44:25 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Harry The Crazy:
Congratulations justin. I'll be hopefully in the Royal Military Police by that time. I genuinely hope you do well :)
|03:50:20 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Justin:
Thanx Wilber. You to =)
|07:18:18 Jul 29th 08 - Dark Lord Osiris:
well if your going to iraq in 2011 then i guess our army really has failed
|07:23:11 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Justin:
Well that sux for the army cuz im joining the MARINES!!!!
|07:30:05 Jul 29th 08 - Dark Lord Osiris:
yeah big woop :D same thing baby ;) if the troops are still in iraq in 2011 then there is a problem
|07:32:07 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Justin:
Hey this is a f-ed up world Osi. there will always be a war. and we will always be Fighting Alqieda or however you spell it. We kill a chief another members fills in his place.
|07:45:45 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Justin:
PLus Osi this is how the line up goes. Navy and Airforce drop smart bombs clearing and LZ. Marine*beep* the LZ and push further into enemy lines. Army comes in and takes credit for what the marines did.
|07:46:43 Jul 29th 08 - Dark Lord Osiris:
but there is no pushing anything in iraq so who are you going to fight :) if they cant fix iraq or get iraq under control by 2011 then vietnam 2?
|07:49:55 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Justin:
They better not get things fixed. im going in as a sniper i wanna shoot my M40
|07:51:21 Jul 29th 08 - Dark Lord Osiris:
im sure there will be plenty of work left to do in the afgans or somewhere else :) maybe even iran by then
|07:52:57 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Justin:
If im training in San Diego then i better be doing my job in the Heat lol. No way am i getting used to the heat and then working in cold ass wheather ;p;
|13:12:16 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Dreadlord:
|17:30:10 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Harry The Crazy:
Justin, i disagree with you on that. Marines don't do all the work (English ones don't at least).
|20:49:40 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Justin:
They kinda do. I mean they go with wat they have and sh*t and the army brings everything. Army dont know how to conserve what they have marines do. Especiall the special forces Recon Marines. No im crazy but you have to be an F-ed up person to want to even consider them. They go further into enemy lines then anyone wants to go.
|21:26:13 Jul 29th 08 - Mr. Attrill:
i find this funni how this forum was left for so long but now a debate is going again lol.
|[Top] Pages: 1 2 (next)
My bookmarksOld forum design