All teachers are biased and try to convert to left wing socialists

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Again refusing to answer my points. Fiscal austerity is a failed policy and cannot work.

    Friedman's political philosophy extolled the virtues of a free market economic system with minimal intervention, which was the cause of the Great Depression and Great Recession. This is neoclassical economics.
    You fail to answer my point several times about 1951-1964. Look back
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    MADURO IS FROM A LEFT WING PARTY . Nationalisation is a left wing policy
    By itself, nationalization has nothing to do with socialism, having been historically carried out for various different purposes under a wide variety of different political systems and economic systems.

    (Original post by nathan1276)
    You dont answer my points as you can't seem to accept the fact the tories between 1951 and 1964 did a better job clement and they had a centre right adegenda. THEY CUT TAXES AND PUBLIC SPENDING. They adapted
    Keynesianism to make it work in a capitalist society.
    Go away to your mother, clearly you have GCSEs to swot up on.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    MADURO IS FROM A LEFT WING PARTY . Nationalisation is a left wing policy
    No, a left wing policy is collective ownership in a worldwide Socialist society. Having a Left-Wing party in government doesn’t guarantee Left-Wing policies. For example, Reagan, a conservative, advocated for employee ownership, a Communist ideal.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slaven)
    And I will repeat you again you anti-white and anti-european left-wing racist. It if you that have been always making damages even before New Labour. You were always silly uthopian for which you would damage the condition of the nation.

    Again, will you apologise to the Rotherham victims because the people with whom you agree installed political correctness and imported the perpetrators on British soil?
    I am white, I am european, I am not racist.

    If you would pause your hate rant for a moment before you go full retard on someone who doesn't even hold the views you're criticising.

    I am not pro-immigration, neither am I in support of the irrational fear of political correctness.

    You have no proof that I am a racist, however claiming that immigration was the cause of the Rotherham abuses exposes you as a xenophobic bigot.
    Members of the British-Pakistani community condemned the sexual abuses and the cover-up by authorities out of fear of "giving oxygen" to racism.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    By itself, nationalization has nothing to do with socialism, having been historically carried out for various different purposes under a wide variety of different political systems and economic systems.



    Go away to your mother, clearly you have GCSEs to swot up on.
    Oh wait , YOU JUST LOST becasue you didnt answer my point which means Im right because 1951-1964 proves everything your saying is WRONG. Centre right politics works and know you will go cry. Taxes were cut and public spending was cut. A centre right adaptaion of Keynesian economics is the most effective. Debate finished !
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slaven)
    No wonder the average Brit and US is so uneducated as feminisits, lewt-wingers and other strange being are teaching their kids.
    It's a good thing right-wingers aren't teaching them because look at the state of their spelling.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    Oh wait , YOU JUST LOST becasue you didnt answer my point which means Im right
    In that case you lost the argument long ago.
    You've made no valid points, your shambling wreck of an argument consists of unsubstantiated statements pulled off some right-wing meme Facebook page.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    In that case you lost the argument long ago.
    You've made no valid points, your shambling wreck of an argument consists of unsubstantiated statements pulled off some right-wing meme Facebook page.
    Still can't admit that from 1951-1964 centre right policy was better than any of your delusional socialist ones
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    Still can't admit that from 1951-1964 centre right policy was better than any of your delusional socialist ones
    Except that I already stated that they continued with Keynesian economic policy instead of hard right neoliberalism.

    'mustn't... show... ideological... weakness... all... hail... the free market...'
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Except that I already stated that they continued with Keynesian economic policy instead of hard right neoliberalism.

    'mustn't... show... ideological... weakness... all... hail... the free market...'
    Yes but it was a centre right adaption , they cut taxes and public spending. So it was CENTRE-right. Not SOCIALIST. Your digging yourself a bigger hole every time you respond. This puts a big hole in logic so take a blow
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    Yes but it was a centre right adaption , they cut taxes and public spending. So it was CENTRE-right. Not SOCIALIST. Your digging yourself a bigger hole everytime you respond
    Again, not reinforcing your point. Keynesianism is a mid-left to centre economic theory set.

    You have the debating skills of a pint of Smithwick's.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Again, not reinforcing your point. Keynesianism is a mid-left to centre economic theory set.

    You have the debating skills of a pint of Smithwick's.
    Jesus , they didn't even implement it exactly , as I told yo they cut taxes and public spending. This is right wing , the markets were also free and they did't use
    Keynesianism , they only cherry picked some good parts . You just keeping digging a bigger hole for yourself, maybe just be quiet and let the voters decide in 2020, me arguing against you doesn't gain each of us anything. If just makes you look more delusional than people already think socialists like corbyn are. Come back in 2020 and try fight your case for labour as we know your party is finished.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    Jesus , they didn't even implement it exactly , as I told yo they cut taxes and public spending. This is right wing , the markets were also free and they did't use
    Keynesianism , they only cherry picked some good parts . You just keeping digging a bigger hole for yourself, maybe just be quiet and let the voters decide in 2020, me arguing against you doesn't gain each of us anything. If just makes you look more delusional than people already think socialists like corbyn are. Come back in 2020 and try fight your case for labour as we know your party is finished.
    Again, not a Labour supporter. I'm not even from Britain, nor do I live there. You're not even referring to your original point that the Tories would have done better than Brown in the global financial crisis when they continue to irrationally worship neoclassical economics.

    "let the voters decide in 2020" is a sign you're veering off into irrelevance.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Got along with my teacher because he supported Labour. He didn't give any ****s, used to cuss out the Tories in our politics class lol.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Again, not a Labour supporter. I'm not even from Britain, nor do I live there. You're not even referring to your original point that the Tories would have done better than Brown in the global financial crisis when they continue to irrationally worship neoclassical economics.

    "let the voters decide in 2020" is a sign you're veering off into irrelevance.
    Jesus , they didn't even implement it exactly , as I told yo they cut taxes and public spending. This is right wing , the markets were also free and they did't use
    Keynesianism , they only cherry picked some good parts . You didn't respond too this point so ill state it again, socialism doesn't work and it never will get anywhere near downing street or the white house or power in India and China. Your cause is old, you live in the past, free market economics is the way forward and perhaps a right wing adaption of Keynesianism would be even better. The fact is Thatcher was good for the country overall. There booms and recessions. No government will be able to stop recessions, its best we move on. I believe in a land of equal opportunity and hopefully that will become a reality some day but I do not believe in penalising people for doing well and earning money. We should all pay the same amount of tax , percentage wise as that is fair. Even religions such as Islam say Muslims should donate a certain percentage of their salary to charity as it is unfair to ask for a certain amount or a higher percentage from others. Most economists agree that free trade is the way to go.
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/freee...onomic-history.
    Only time will tell but you live in the past and capitalism is winning, there is a reason there are elections and that is to put people into power that the people
    want. Only further elections will be able to see whether your utopia comes true or mine. But at the end of the day whether we are right or left wing , we are all human and lets live in peace. Thank you for the insight you have given me as you have made me think more and have furthered my understanding of politics and economics.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    You've never been to a Public school have you.. Half of the teachers are ex military or city types and are insanely conservative.
    Nah I go to a private school but it's fairly liberal in that sense
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    In that case you lost the argument long ago.
    You've made no valid points, your shambling wreck of an argument consists of unsubstantiated statements pulled off some right-wing meme Facebook page.
    would rep but can’t.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    Jesus , they didn't even implement it exactly , as I told yo they cut taxes and public spending. This is right wing , the markets were also free and they did't use
    Keynesianism , they only cherry picked some good parts .
    No, Keynesianism is a set of economic theories, "cherry-picking good parts" still means they used Keynesianism.

    You didn't respond too this point so ill state it again, socialism doesn't work
    Clearly it does and as I said before, dismissing socialism as not working and praising capitalism because one of them is still here is survivorship bias.

    it never will get anywhere near downing street or the white house or power in India and China.
    How many times has the Labour party been in power? The USA is increasingly looking like a failed state with the daily riots, shootings and killings, and rise of Trump.
    Your amazing Indian state continues to face the challenges of poverty, corruption, malnutrition and inadequate public healthcare.
    China is under the rule of the largest Communist Party in the world.

    Your cause is old, you live in the past,
    What cause? Again, this rhetoric of left wingers having old ideals is nonsense, neoclassical economics and conservatism is a pre-Enlightenment ideology - who is really living in the past?

    Conservatism is essentially the right wing, and favours tradition, opposing progressive views. But if you prohibit progress how is a society or state to develop and progress? If the right wing had their way we would still be living in a society where women and non-English ethnicities would be second class citizens.

    free market economics is the way forward and perhaps a right wing adaption of Keynesianism would be even better
    Free market economics is capitalism - you're not actually saying anything here. I assume you mean neoliberalist economics. Again, Keynesianism is a set of theories that ranges across the left and right spectrum, you cannot "adapt" Keynesianism into a "right wing" form. A right wing form would be neoclassical economics. You are clearly displaying that you have no idea what you are talking about.

    The fact is Thatcher was good for the country overall.
    As I have constantly pointed out along with others here, she was not good for Britain overall. She was the direct cause of levels of unemployment unseen since the Great Depression.

    There booms and recessions. No government will be able to stop recessions, its best we move on.
    1. No government may be able to stop a recession but they can prevent a serious aftermath with left-wing economic policy - government intervention, unlike with neoclassical laissez-faire economics which was used in the Great Depression, which consists of just sitting there waiting for the market to right itself which does not work.

    2. If you lived with someone as unstable as capitalism you would've moved out years ago or insisted they seek psychiatric help. But you live with an economic system that is exactly the same and imagine it's your job to adapt. That is insane.

    I believe in a land of equal opportunity and hopefully that will become a reality some day
    Clearly you don't if you believe in systems and leaders that have implemented policies that have reinforced class divisions and seriously reduced social mobility.

    but I do not believe in penalising people for doing well and earning money. We should all pay the same amount of tax , percentage wise as that is fair.
    The myth that flat taxes are simple and would raise tax revenue is just that: a myth.
    It's also a myth that a great deal of the UK tax code could be eliminated. That is not true unless we wanted to scrap whole taxes and lose the money they raise.

    It is that last point that provides the real clue to what flat taxes are all about. It is not chance that they are always promoted by people who also argue for small government and massive cuts in public spending. That is what they are intended to deliver, and I have to agree, they would.
    But there's even a sting in the tail in that.
    Currently the top 10% of all income tax payers in the UK pay about 59% of all income tax. They also pay tax at higher rates than anyone else. That is why they pay so more, but that's also because they earn more than most, of course.
    Under a flat tax system they would enjoy substantial - maybe massive - tax cuts.
    Those on low incomes would almost certainly pay more because around the world flat tax systems are associated with high National Insurance contributions - that hit the lowest paid hardest.
    So flat taxes are really about cutting taxes for the best off, cutting services (like the NHS) massively and requiring payment for their use instead, and increasing tax, overall, for the least well off. That's the reality.
    So flat tax would simplify almost nothing, but leave you paying to see the doctor or educate you children. That's what the flat taxers fail to mention.

    [QUOTE] Even religions such as Islam say Muslims should donate a certain percentage of their salary to charity as it is unfair to ask for a certain amount or a higher percentage from others.[QUOTE]

    So you reject socialism and taxation because people are selfish but you encourage private charity because people are generous?
    Do you not see the huge argumental flaw there?

    [QUOTE] Most economists agree that free trade is the way to go.
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/freee...onomic-history.

    Economists are generally pro-free market because they study the free market, that's a stupid argument. Also, that web link says "Marxist theory is right".

    Only time will tell but you live in the past and capitalism is winning, there is a reason there are elections and that is to put people into power that the people
    want. .
    Again survivorship bias. And the clear stupidity. All ideologies are old. Progressive Enlightenment ideologies are the way forward.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by frankielogue)
    would rep but can’t.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    "Again, Keynesianism is a set of theories that ranges across the left and right spectrum"
    Ok so you just admitted that it wasn't socialist policy , thankyou , it was to the right of clement atlee, and the tory government from 1951 to 1964 was much better . They cut taxes( RIGHT WING) and reduced public spending(right wing) , this is not neoclassical economics but it is slightly right of center.

    The top 10% pay 59% of tax , this is unfair , a flat tax would be fair as everyone pays a certain percentage , the NHS only benefits the poorest and its inefficient anyway. The top 10 % would still pay the most tax is it were a flat system. The average person still has to pay for glasses and dentistry in the UK. We could privatize more stuff and private companies are more efficient than state run companies , perhaps , invite the TSR capitalist professional to this debate so its fair as he'll have better facts than me. Your a political ambassador so get a political ambassador to argue with
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: January 2, 2017
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Which is the best season?
Useful resources
Study resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.