Bob Crow dies at the age of 52

I once was on a train that he was on sat quietly all alone, I think he was on his way back from a Millwall game as it was on a Saturday evening. I didn't speak to him as I thought that he was on his day off as it were.

My first thought on hearing of his death was of four children who have lost their dad, and other members of his family who are bereaved.

Reply 42

meenu89

Original post by the bear

now his council house can go to someone who actually deserves it

Brilliant.

I'm sorry for his family.

Reply 43

InnerTemple

Original post by meenu89

Brilliant.

I'm sorry for his family.

Brilliant? What are you talking about?

He had as much right to live in a council house as anyone else.

I think some of the remarks and attitudes here are incredibly funny. Bob Crow was a man who worked incredibly hard and was very good at what he did. Because of that, he rose through the ranks and ended up in a senior position and earned a wage which reflected that.

The above should be a wet dream to most tories - the idea that someone can work hard and earn a metric butt tonne of money (well, the earning loads of money part anyway). However Bob was a union leader. And it seems as if the right wingers are unable to fathom how one can be a high earner and still care about workers and have other left wing attitudes.

The whole "champagne socialist" card is such a non point. It is depressing to hear people use it so much. Especially people who are supposed to be just a little bit intelligent. But, and more importantly, it seems to sum up the attitude of the Tory sort. That material things - wealth, is the be all and end all. It is disturbing to see this and reaffirms my belief that the Tory party will never be for me.

That aside, RIP Bob. A real gem. He said that had he not gone into union work, he may have been a weather expert. What luck that he went down the path he did.

Reply 44

meenu89

Original post by InnerTemple

Brilliant? What are you talking about?

I was referring to the bears' post, not brilliant that he died, I wouldn't stoop that low. Like I said I'm sorry for his family.

Reply 45

InnerTemple

Original post by meenu89

I was referring to the bears' post, not brilliant that he died, I wouldn't stoop that low. Like I said I'm sorry for his family.

Yeah, I was asking why you thought bears' post was brilliant. Why did he not deserve the house?

Reply 46

TheDimpleboy

4

The fact that certain people on this thread are glad he's dead doesn't bother me - it's the fact that those that celebrated the death of Thatcher are being used as justification that bemuses me.

You are celebrating the death of Bob Crow because you didn't like his politics - he was a brilliant union leader whether or not you liked him.

People celebrated Thatcher's death because she destroyed communities and people's lives.

Surely you can see the difference? It would be a bit like me celebrating when John Major dies; petty and small-time.

Reply 47

Original post by InnerTemple

Yeah, I was asking why you thought bears' post was brilliant. Why did he not deserve the house?

Maybe because he earned a massive wage, enough to afford a house of his own with a mortgage. He should have been turfed out of that council house long ago and it should have been given to a family that actually needed it. In that sense, by not moving out, he was being incredibly selfish and greedy.

Reply 48

DaveSmith99

14

Original post by thunder_chunky

Maybe because he earned a massive wage, enough to afford a house of his own with a mortgage. He should have been turfed out of that council house long ago and it should have been given to a family that actually needed it. In that sense, by not moving out, he was being incredibly selfish and greedy.

And whose fault is that there is a lack of public housing in this country? Bob Crows?

Reply 49

noobynoo

6

Highly Suspicious.

Obviously somebody wanted him out of the way.

So they used one of their electric nerve devices to induce a heart attack. They did it to John Smith, Robin Cook and David Kelly and now this guy. They thought, well he's a big guy, the public will believe a heart attack. But he was a healthy person, like a sumo wrestler.

The truth is out there.

Reply 50

Original post by DaveSmith99

And whose fault is that there is a lack of public housing in this country? Bob Crows?

There were plenty of houses available for him to peruse and eventually buy, plenty. To believe otherwise is sheer folly. By staying in the council house he was occupying a house that could have been used by a family that actually needed it, thus showing he was selfish and also greedy because he probably also did it to ensure he saved the most amount of money whilst being a selfish *******.

Reply 51

Algorithm69

5

Original post by thunder_chunky

There were plenty of houses available for him to peruse and eventually buy, plenty. To believe otherwise is sheer folly. By staying in the council house he was occupying a house that could have been used by a family that actually needed it, thus showing he was selfish and also greedy because he probably also did it to ensure he saved the most amount of money whilst being a selfish *******.

He was a trade union baron. I don't think it's required for you to argue he was greedy and selfish.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 52

DaveSmith99

14

Original post by thunder_chunky

There were plenty of houses available for him to peruse and eventually buy, plenty. To believe otherwise is sheer folly. By staying in the council house he was occupying a house that could have been used by a family that actually needed it, thus showing he was selfish and also greedy because he probably also did it to ensure he saved the most amount of money whilst being a selfish *******.

I said public not private.

Reply 53

Original post by DaveSmith99

I said public not private.

The point is that he shouldn't have occupied a council house when he could afford to own his own and when there were more deserving and desperate people waiting for such a house.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 54

Bulbasaur

17

Original post by Ripper-Roo

OK, but maybe he was born into a working class family, so that why he identifies with the proletariat. Lots of actors/actresses, singers, celebrities, are left leaning. Whether that's for publicity, I don't know, but you can't claim it's hypocritical for high earners and the wealthy to be left leaning.

I think they're only hypocritical if they weren't willing to sacrifice much of their wealth in a more socialist context...whether or not they'd happily pay an 80% tax rate for example. But as someone very much on the left, I do sometimes feel like if wealthy people truly had these views and stuck to their convictions, they would donate much of their wealth to good causes rather than keeping it (or indeed accumulating it) for personal consumption, which is what breeds inequality...

Reply 55

DaveSmith99

14

Original post by thunder_chunky

The point is that he shouldn't have occupied a council house when he could afford to own his own and when there were more deserving and desperate people waiting for such a house.

He supposedly didn't want to uproot his family which is fair enough. Anyone who has any real concern for the problem of lack of public housing would probably be better served campaigning to increase the supply rather than attack individuals.

Reply 56

jammy4041

18

I'll declare I am a centrist (in terms of libertarians vs authoritarianism and in terms of communism vs classical liberalism) right off the bat.

I didn't always agree with his reasonings or his politics. But his motives were sound. If our politicians had an ounce of his conviction and backbone, then Britain would be much better for it. Bob Crow did what he though was right for the common working class Briton. He attacked the EU when it was not in the worker's interests. He wasn't afraid to speak his mind.

The situation with the unions doesn't really change. The baton will pass to someone else with the interests of the working people at heart. But there will not be another Bob Crow.

Reply 57

Original post by DaveSmith99

He supposedly didn't want to uproot his family which is fair enough. Anyone who has any real concern for the problem of lack of public housing would probably be better served campaigning to increase the supply rather than attack individuals.

I think that's a poor excuse. It hardly would have been uprooting if they had stayed in the area. Moving house is a chore bit it is possible.
The wider picture on public housing is irrelevant, in this individual case he was selfish.

Reply 58

InnerTemple

Original post by thunder_chunky

I think that's a poor excuse. It hardly would have been uprooting if they had stayed in the area. Moving house is a chore bit it is possible.
The wider picture on public housing is irrelevant, in this individual case he was selfish.

Would you have preferred that Bob purchase his council house for a knockdown rate?

Because of course many home owners are actually living in what used to be council homes. Now removed from the council's stock, some owned by people who'll charge extortionate rates in rent.

Are the people who took advantage of Thatcher's right to buy scheme selfish? For they have denied an affordable home to someone.

Makes me laugh how some here will accuse the poor of being feckless when it comes to money yet in the same breath will critique a person who saves money by living in affordable accommodation.

Reply 59

Observatory