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

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    bb
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paniniception)
    Nah I go to a private school but it's fairly liberal in that sense
    Aha a public school is private chap
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    "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
    Tell that to the Transport companies.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simbasdragon)
    Teaching 'anti-gay marriage' isn't showing another side, it's discrimination and is motivated by the desire to deprive minorities of equal rights. Same as how racist and sexist views shouldn't be taught purely to 'show the other side.' Homophobia has no place in schools or anywhere
    The only problem with your view is it is still technically bigoted, unfair, biassed and is thoroughly against the values of a free, democratic and equal education system. Does because some people take issue with the principle of some thoughts doesnt give anybody the right to pervert and whitewash the education of people.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    Tell that to the Transport companies.
    napp you left or right wing?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=DMcGovern;67733220]No, Keynesianism is a set of economic theories, "cherry-picking good parts" still means they used Keynesianism.


    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.



    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.



    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 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.



    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.



    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.



    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.



    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?

    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".



    Again survivorship bias. And the clear stupidity. All ideologies are old. Progressive Enlightenment ideologies are the way forward.
    "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
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    In English we have to learn inspector calls ( Written by JB priestly , A SOCIALIST) . Why is there so much bias?? I dont see any capitalist propaganda to give kids a balanced view. On top this POLITICAL CORRECTNESS is another a big issue, they tell us by default that gay marriage is right etc. and you CANT speak out against it because of the bias. Its high time we give our kids two sides of the argument. What do you guys think?
    An Inspector Calls is on the syllabus, and it's also a good book. The socialist part is a tiny paragraph at the end. It's mostly about being better to people in general.

    Gay marriage isn't a matter of political correctness, Can you think of one good reason why gay/bisexual men and women should not be allowed to marry? Go ahead.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    napp you left or right wing?
    Both depending on the situation. In this one though i am just acutely aware of how heinously bad the transport companies are axeing bus routes, trains never on time, no seats, grossly over priced tickets and most offensively of all the tax payer still gives them huge tax subsidies and maintains half the infrastructure for them -.-
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    Both depending on the situation. In this one though i am just acutely aware of how heinously bad the transport companies are axeing bus routes, trains never on time, no seats, grossly over priced tickets and most offensively of all the tax payer still gives them huge tax subsidies and maintains half the infrastructure for them -.-
    Ok , there you go Mc Govern , nationalization doesn't really work , Napp you can debate him to , lol
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    Ok , there you go Mc Govern , nationalization doesn't really work , Napp you can debate him to , lol
    No privatization doesnt really work. give one exmple that has benefited the public.
    • 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...'
    Another point , you keep going on about unemployment and the great depression etc. You can't seem to realise that Thatcher still improved the economy by increasing GDP, GDP per capita which means the GENERAL wealth of the country went up. The tories have cut the national debt by the highest in a single term and the deficit.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    No privatization doesnt really work. give one exmple that has benefited the public.
    Nationalizing the national grid made it more efficient. By privatizing royal mail , (lloyds in the future and more companies) may cause taxes to be reduced or investments in other sectors such as the NHS , defense etc.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    Another point , you keep going on about unemployment and the great depression etc. You can't seem to realise that Thatcher still improved the economy by increasing GDP, GDP per capita which means the GENERAL wealth of the country went up. The tories have cut the national debt by the highest in a single term and the deficit.
    You cannot improve an economy by causing huge unemployment. She did not help GDP, her economic policy caused a decline in GDP growth over her last 4 years back down to nearly -1% GDP growth, undoing all her efforts.

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    You cannot improve an economy by causing huge unemployment. She did not help GDP, her economic policy caused a decline in GDP growth over her last 4 years back down to nearly -1% GDP growth, undoing all her efforts.

    GDP per capita rose , GDP did rise,
    https://measuringworth.com/datasets/ukgdp/result.php
    it started as
    829,484(1979)
    and finished as
    1,074,650( in millions of pounds in 1992
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    Nationalizing the national grid made it more efficient. By privatizing royal mail , (lloyds in the future and more companies) may cause taxes to be reduced or investments in other sectors such as the NHS , defense etc.
    Ah yes selling Britains most important infrastructure to foreign powers, truly brilliant...
    Lloyds is only owned in name only and its only partially owned at any rate.
    If you think the government is ever going to reduce taxes for ordinary joe sope you must be living in a cloud somewhere.
    Are we forgetting how much of a **** up privatising RM turned out to be?

    Why would we want to give money to the MoD? It isn't fit for purpose! The only people we'd ever actually have to defend against would obliterate every square inch of Britain from thousands of miles away and we couldnt touch them :rolleyes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    GDP per capita rose , GDP did rise,
    https://measuringworth.com/datasets/ukgdp/result.php
    it started as
    829,484(1979)
    and finished as
    1,074,650( in millions of pounds in 1992
    By the way eventhough the current tory government is awful as they increased debt , you refuse to welcome the unemployment figures which are very low.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    Ah yes selling Britains most important infrastructure to foreign powers, truly brilliant...
    Lloyds is only owned in name only about nd its only partially owned at any rate.
    If you think the government is ever going to reduce taxes for ordinary joe sope you must be living in a cloud somewhere.
    Are we forgetting how much of a **** up privatising RM turned out to be?

    Why would we want to give money to the MoD? It isn't fit for purpose! The only people we'd ever actually have to defend against would obliterate every square inch of Britain from thousands of miles away and we couldnt touch them :rolleyes:
    How was Royal Mail a **** up? it would be nice if the government would give the average joe a tax cut and if the big corporations paid tax we could have a flat tax
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    You cannot improve an economy by causing huge unemployment. She did not help GDP, her economic policy caused a decline in GDP growth over her last 4 years back down to nearly -1% GDP growth, undoing all her efforts.


    Mc govern and you said a flat tax wouldn't work . it would work of the big corporations pad their fair share of tax !!!!!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    How was Royal Mail a **** up? it would be nice if the government would give the average joe a tax cut and if the big corporations paid tax we could have a flat tax
    Lets start with it being grossly undersold at a firesale price shall we? We can now move on job losses and the probability that it will cut its services to remote areas. Finally the fact it's now owned by a foreign company.

    Companies will never pay any tax if they can and if the government tries to make them they will simply move...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nathan1276)
    Mc govern and you said a flat tax wouldn't work . it would work of the big corporations pad their fair share of tax !!!!!
    It sounds great in theory but the problem is if you push them too hard they'll just up sticks and operate from somewhere else taking thousands of jobs with them.

    This problem of multinationals avoiding tax needs international consensus to solve, which will never happen as we're all competitors. There's no incentive for countries to help each other collect taxes when they can steal business from each other instead(and subsequently boost their own economies as a result).
 
 
 
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

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.