Talk Of The Town Posted June 13, 2013 Report Share Posted June 13, 2013 Plus 4 million in bonuses and shares. That's one hell of a contract he must have negotiated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted June 13, 2013 Report Share Posted June 13, 2013 Plus 4 million in bonuses and shares. That's one hell of a contract he must have negotiated! ......all at taxpayers' (our) expense. These banksters are more of a threat to Western Capitalism than the Communists ever were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 thats because he's George Osborne's mate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nause Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 Plus 4 million in bonuses and shares. That's one hell of a contract he must have negotiated! Robbing scumbag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambridge Batch Red Posted June 14, 2013 Report Share Posted June 14, 2013 ......all at taxpayers' (our) expense. These banksters are more of a threat to Western Capitalism than the Communists ever were. Hardly capitalism when the bank was nationalised. Proper capitalism would have seen RBS go under wiping out everyone's savings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted June 15, 2013 Report Share Posted June 15, 2013 Hardly capitalism when the bank was nationalised. Proper capitalism would have seen RBS go under wiping out everyone's savings. These piccies are worth a thousand words....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshy Posted June 15, 2013 Report Share Posted June 15, 2013 That's a very bleak definition of Capitalism RG; I'm sure it's not one that Adam Smith in his book 'The Theory of Moral Sentiments', precursor to 'Wealth of Nations', would have adhered to. To modify Churchill's 1947 dictum on Democracy; 'Capitalism is the worst form of economic system, except for all those other systems that have been tried.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 That's a very bleak definition of Capitalism RG; I'm sure it's not one that Adam Smith in his book 'The Theory of Moral Sentiments', precursor to 'Wealth of Nations', would have adhered to. To modify Churchill's 1947 dictum on Democracy; 'Capitalism is the worst form of economic system, except for all those other systems that have been tried.' I'm not sure Churchill would know much about it. Living entirely on inherited wealth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 That's a very bleak definition of Capitalism RG; I'm sure it's not one that Adam Smith in his book 'The Theory of Moral Sentiments', precursor to 'Wealth of Nations', would have adhered to. To modify Churchill's 1947 dictum on Democracy; 'Capitalism is the worst form of economic system, except for all those other systems that have been tried.' Churchill's dictum is correct in many ways and as it was 1947 it was probably a swipe at the economic systems of Soviet Russia and Communist China and the emerging Communist states of the period. In my opinion, the major current benefit of Capitalism and the free market economy - that spawns from it - is that it will bring down the hopelessly corrupt and criminal led European Union project with all it's unecessary regulations and controls and its Frankfurt based €Euro bankster currency project that's designed to benefit German industry and nothing else. The EU's unelected despots like Labour's Lady Catherine Ashton and Lord Neil Kinnock live like Kings and Queens at the moment and at our expense - this situation must end as they are nothing more than elitist state scroungers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshy Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 I'm not sure Churchill would know much about it. Living entirely on inherited wealth. Not quite entirely Robbo as I'm sure you know. He was quite well off though ! So well off it's a wonder he didn't embark for the USA during the war and live a life of self-indulgence. The cigars and brandy would probably have been cheaper as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshy Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 Churchill's dictum is correct in many ways and as it was 1947 it was probably a swipe at the economic systems of Soviet Russia and Communist China and the emerging Communist states of the period. In my opinion, the major current benefit of Capitalism and the free market economy - that spawns from it - is that it will bring down the hopelessly corrupt and criminal led European Union project with all it's unecessary regulations and controls and its Frankfurt based €Euro bankster currency project that's designed to benefit German industry and nothing else. The EU's unelected despots like Labour's Lady Catherine Ashton and Lord Neil Kinnock live like Kings and Queens at the moment and at our expense - this situation must end as they are nothing more than elitist state scroungers. Hear, hear ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 Not quite entirely Robbo as I'm sure you know. He was quite well off though ! So well off it's a wonder he didn't embark for the USA during the war and live a life of self-indulgence. The cigars and brandy would probably have been cheaper as well. Indeed, Winston Churchill's Mum was American. Churchill could have left England to lead the high life in the U.S. Churchill served in the British military and helped lead this country to victory against the odds - he didn't have to do either. Lesser men would have fled to the U.S. and left this country to be subjugated by Hitler's regime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 Indeed, Winston Churchill's Mum was American. Churchill could have left England to lead the high life in the U.S. Churchill served in the British military and helped lead this country to victory against the odds - he didn't have to do either. Lesser men would have fled to the U.S. and left this country to be subjugated by Hitler's regime. I can't quite go along with this "Churchill won the war" idea. Millions of ordinary people 'won' the war, most of them Russian. That, along with the Charlie Chaplin lookalike's alarmingly bad decision making. What I meant in my original post Marshy was that the message "capitalism works" is slightly devalued when delivered by someone who never had to work for any of their capital! It rings as hollow as Cameron telling us "we're all in this together". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 I can't quite go along with this "Churchill won the war" idea. Millions of ordinary people 'won' the war, most of them Russian. That, along with the Charlie Chaplin lookalike's alarmingly bad decision making. What I meant in my original post Marshy was that the message "capitalism works" is slightly devalued when delivered by someone who never had to work for any of their capital! It rings as hollow as Cameron telling us "we're all in this together". Indeed, "millions of ordinary people 'won' the war, most of them Russian" - that's not in dispute. It was leaders like Sir Winston Churchill that galvanized people into a common cause against German militarism and expansionism. What if you had a traitor like Tony Blair, Gordon Brown or David Camoron as leader during the war ????!!!!! Tony Blair especially would have sold England down the river of subjugation for a few £million backhander from Herr Adolf Hitler just as Blair sold us out to the hopelessly corrupt and criminal led European Union project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshy Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 I can't quite go along with this "Churchill won the war" idea. Millions of ordinary people 'won' the war, most of them Russian. That, along with the Charlie Chaplin lookalike's alarmingly bad decision making. What I meant in my original post Marshy was that the message "capitalism works" is slightly devalued when delivered by someone who never had to work for any of their capital! It rings as hollow as Cameron telling us "we're all in this together". To be fair to Churchill, Robbo, I did modify (apologies Winston) his quote about Democracy, as I stated in my post. I somehow think he wouldn't have disagreed. I can't remember the percentage but didn't someone do some research as to the number of threads on internet forums that eventually get round to a mention of 'the Charlie Chaplin lookalike'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 To be fair to Churchill, Robbo, I did modify (apologies Winston) his quote about Democracy, as I stated in my post. I somehow think he wouldn't have disagreed. I can't remember the percentage but didn't someone do some research as to the number of threads on internet forums that eventually get round to a mention of 'the Charlie Chaplin lookalike'? :laugh: - it's usually when two people disagree over - say - the efficiency of 4-4-2 over 4-3-3 - then after a few heated exchanges it ends up with one forum member comparing the other to Hitler/Stalin/the Nazis/Pol Pot etc etc. Gobbers. Agree about the inspiring nature of Churchill's wartime oration. A truly great public speaker and an iconic figure, whatever other failings he had as a politician. In a way, a bit like the famous quote about Kitchener. "He might not have been that good as a general, but he was a great poster". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy31 Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 - it's usually when two people disagree over - say - the efficiency of 4-4-2 over 4-3-3 - then after a few heated exchanges it ends up with one forum member comparing the other to Hitler/Stalin/the Nazis/Pol Pot etc etc. Gobbers. Agree about the inspiring nature of Churchill's wartime oration. A truly great public speaker and an iconic figure, whatever other failings he had as a politician. In a way, a bit like the famous quote about Kitchener. "He might not have been that good as a general, but he was a great poster". He only posts complete b*ll*cks on here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Mosquito Posted June 16, 2013 Report Share Posted June 16, 2013 - it's usually when two people disagree over - say - the efficiency of 4-4-2 over 4-3-3 - then after a few heated exchanges it ends up with one forum member comparing the other to Hitler/Stalin/the Nazis/Pol Pot etc etc. Gobbers. Agree about the inspiring nature of Churchill's wartime oration. A truly great public speaker and an iconic figure, whatever other failings he had as a politician. In a way, a bit like the famous quote about Kitchener. "He might not have been that good as a general, but he was a great poster". Just a few downsides to Winston Churchill and this is what my Grandad said about him and that was that he was overly harsh towards Trades Unionists during the 1920s General Strike - I believe Churchill may have wanted them shot. Winston Churchill also failed to give the necessary praise in his post war speeches to RAF Bomber Command for their part in winning the war. As my Grandfather served in RAF Bomber Command during the war and he was an avid Trades Unionist after the war these sentiments don't surprise me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted June 17, 2013 Report Share Posted June 17, 2013 Just a few downsides to Winston Churchill and this is what my Grandad said about him and that was that he was overly harsh towards Trades Unionists during the 1920s General Strike - I believe Churchill may have wanted them shot. Winston Churchill also failed to give the necessary praise in his post war speeches to RAF Bomber Command for their part in winning the war. As my Grandfather served in RAF Bomber Command during the war and he was an avid Trades Unionist after the war these sentiments don't surprise me. Just a few downsides to Winston Churchill and this is what my Grandad said about him and that was that he was overly harsh towards Trades Unionists during the 1920s General Strike - I believe Churchill may have wanted them shot. Winston Churchill also failed to give the necessary praise in his post war speeches to RAF Bomber Command for their part in winning the war. As my Grandfather served in RAF Bomber Command during the war and he was an avid Trades Unionist after the war these sentiments don't surprise me. There are a load of negatives you could give Churchill - from the Siege of Sydney Street to Gallipoli to opposition to the NHS (etc). By WW2, the military had learned to disregard Winston's clueless strategic advice. However we both agree that he was a great figurehead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted June 23, 2013 Report Share Posted June 23, 2013 Under capitalism man exploits man - under communism it's the other way around... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.