You're right. I can hear the crowds outide now, Cameron and Clegg are resigning, they're saying they got it all wrong and the people have spoken.............

Dream on Minty.

You said: "Look at the facts rather than making silly, personal comments. The facts are as I said. Where is the "Labour Movement" in all this? Answers: Nowhere; it doesn't care sufficiently to be bothered; it's members (such as they are) are even less bothered; it isn't capable of co-ordinating a tipple in a distillery. Face facts, the world ain't as you'd like it to be or think it ought to be."

What you said was factually incorrect. You claimed that "the labour movement" (it does not require capital letters) was nowhere on the issues.

There are unions that have been trying to tackle the coalition's privatisation plans for the judicial services since they were announced well over a year ago. They have been warning about this and they are now facing a further struggle over it.

But obviously I don't have a clue about some of the work I've been involved with over the last year or so ...

"Dream on" that you have a clue.

In essence you have agreed with me. The point I was making (capital letters were deliberate) that resistance is fragmented just like every other response has been since Thatcher broke the miners' union members' wills. It was a case then, as now, of "divided we fall." As I said, there is an insufficient number of people prepared to stand together and battle.

It wasn't just Thatcher's taking-on of the unions that has emasculated the British workforce. Her "right to buy" policy had far more to do with producing mortgage slaves than it ever did allowing people to become home-owners. The vast majority of the workforce are too cowed to even contemplate industrial action or civil disobediance. It's a situation that won't last forever because as more people realise that they'll never join the band of home owners, they'll come to realise that they've little left to lose anyway.

Can't really disagree with that.

Although, I would have thought inability to cover the rent was just as risky as inability to cover the mortgage now council housing is scarce and councils are more strict at collecting rent.

No I have not, you twisting, squirming, inconsistent dolt.

You claimed, as fact, that the "Labour Movement" [sic] per se was not interested or involved.

This is factually incorrect bølløcks.

Simple as.



To show that you're barely literate?



That is not what you said at all. Learn to actually post what you mean rather than spouting factually incorrect, misinformed cr@p and then squirming like mad to claim you wrote something more specific than your wild generalisation.

Anyone else remember vbfg's fabulous word 'fucktard'?

Why are you so foul-mouthed? These tirades seem to spout forth whenever anyone questions your irrational, pre-conceived ideas.

Before "right to buy" all rents were lower, as a percentage of income. Councils were also more tolerant of recalcitrant payers than private landlords and certainly mortgage providers. But in those days a house was viewed as somewhere to live and not an asset to borrow against

Stupidity irritates me.

And imbeciles who make grandiose, sweeping statements that are therefore factually incorrect, and then squirm and pretend otherwise when this is pointed out by people who actually know some of what is going on in a given situation, irritate me even more.

You claimed something in a sweeping statement. It was not factually accurate. This was pointed out to you. You persisted, claiming that the person who'd pointed out that what you'd posted actually meant something different. You can't even read and understand what you post yourself.

And I do not get "foul mouthed" at anyone who disagrees with me - as can be seen, right now, with any number of threads on this forum.

But thank you for, yet again, illustrating how you've never been one to let facts get in the way.

And now you call the fact that I know about something because I've actually worked on it as "irrational, per-conceived ideas" ...

So, have I missed something, is Ed Milliband leading a united Labour Movement in an all all out war against these policies? Are the union members fully united and leading a bottom up movement, which culminates in Ed and his shadow cabinet marching shoulder to shoulder with Mrs Mop?