All in this together?
Discussion
“We can and will as a society bear hardship if we are confident that it is being fairly shared; and we shall have that confidence only if there are signs that everyone is committed to their neighbour, that no-one is just forgotten, that no interest group or pressure group is able to opt out.”
“That confidence isn’t in huge supply at the moment, given the massive crises of trust that have shaken us all in the last couple of years and the lasting sense that the most prosperous have yet to shoulder their load.”
The Arch B of C
“That confidence isn’t in huge supply at the moment, given the massive crises of trust that have shaken us all in the last couple of years and the lasting sense that the most prosperous have yet to shoulder their load.”
The Arch B of C
Ozzie Osmond said:
“We can and will as a society bear hardship if we are confident that it is being fairly shared; and we shall have that confidence only if there are signs that everyone is committed to their neighbour, that no-one is just forgotten, that no interest group or pressure group is able to opt out.”
“That confidence isn’t in huge supply at the moment, given the massive crises of trust that have shaken us all in the last couple of years and the lasting sense that the most prosperous have yet to shoulder their load.”
The Arch B of C
Would that be the Arch Broadcaster of Communism “That confidence isn’t in huge supply at the moment, given the massive crises of trust that have shaken us all in the last couple of years and the lasting sense that the most prosperous have yet to shoulder their load.”
The Arch B of C
Williams has been emitting various degrees of anti-capitalist information pollution from his episcopal motormouth for some time.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2174086/dr-...
http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/2172131/face...
Given that the majority of the people involved (if not all) were wealthy before being elected to power, it is not on our tax payers money, so why the hell not....
We elected these people to be our representatives in government (though we didnt quite elect a the current joint parliament), and if they choose to spend some money in the time that they are not directly working then fine. I suspect their jobs are quite stressful and they are entitled to a little time off and a holiday.
Though to be fair, my wifes boss is going on a holiday to the US theme parks in 5 months. Not an extravant thing, but when you add up the flights, theme park passes and accomodation for 4, it comes to just under £8k - sounds a lot and it is, but it does quickly add up and that was on a discount! So it would be easy to burn money on a nice holiday.
We elected these people to be our representatives in government (though we didnt quite elect a the current joint parliament), and if they choose to spend some money in the time that they are not directly working then fine. I suspect their jobs are quite stressful and they are entitled to a little time off and a holiday.
Though to be fair, my wifes boss is going on a holiday to the US theme parks in 5 months. Not an extravant thing, but when you add up the flights, theme park passes and accomodation for 4, it comes to just under £8k - sounds a lot and it is, but it does quickly add up and that was on a discount! So it would be easy to burn money on a nice holiday.
HundredthIdiot said:
off_again said:
Given that the majority of the people involved (if not all) were wealthy before being elected to power, it is not on our tax payers money, so why the hell not....
...because 50% of the electorate are of below-average intelligence.
pacman1 said:
As if on cue, enter the wail..
Dear God. Who on earth voted for Zac Goldsmith? Seriously?!?!2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
HundredthIdiot said:
off_again said:
Given that the majority of the people involved (if not all) were wealthy before being elected to power, it is not on our tax payers money, so why the hell not....
...because 50% of the electorate are of below-average intelligence.HundredthIdiot said:
2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
HundredthIdiot said:
off_again said:
Given that the majority of the people involved (if not all) were wealthy before being elected to power, it is not on our tax payers money, so why the hell not....
...because 50% of the electorate are of below-average intelligence.
Notice I used the word conspicuous in my opening. With Cameron anxious about the image of the Conservatives (publicly) I would think a few Senior Members may have a few choice words whispered in their lugholes. Can't blame these people for enjoying their wealth but it irks somewhat. See what 'The Guardian' has to say.
Rocksteadyeddie said:
pacman1 said:
As if on cue, enter the wail..
Dear God. Who on earth voted for Zac Goldsmith? Seriously?!?!Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff