Britain/UK to get its 56th prime minister

[B0ycey]

Only you mentioned working to death and 12hrs 7 days a week, I didn't. They get paid a salary in-line with where they live. And without the work they will be back to scratching for food in rubbish piles. Only 10% of the population works in some of these regions so any company like M&S setting up makes their lives better.

India is a funny country given it is an emerging market and there are nations in Africa that of course work for significantly less than people in India, so perhaps there are nations better at explaining there are people out there whose choice is work to death or starving to death.

Nonetheless whether you wrote those words is irrelevant given that is what you implied. The point I was making is that you are saying "the woke" closed down sweatshops and because the poor now can't afford to eat they should have been happy they were being worked to death. No they f**king shouldn't. They should demand the same standards their equalivant in the West gets given they are doing the same f**king work. If that means the West pays more for products they make then that is what we should do. That is the FAIR SYSTEM. Anything else is UNFAIR. Capitalism in its very nature is an unfair system. There are more people on the planet who lose then there are who win given the objective of the system is to profit which defacto means for someone to profit, someone else must lose. That is just a fact.

[Nick]

Nothing to do with the fairness of capitalism then. More to do with highlighting Muslim capitalists. My post ,which post, I'm not Boycey , and though I can't talk for him ,I'm pretty sure he is aware ,as he said so , you don't have to go to Asia, Africa, or elsewhere to find people being abused by the capitalist system.
Do you apply that kind of thinly vailed racist comment to those that buy the produce of sweatshop Labour, or is that reserved for Muslim capitalists abusing Muslim Labour?

Capitalism has nothing to do with exploitation, it's a totally different word with a totally different meaning. 

[Nick]

The problem with your post is it actually making my argument for me. If people in the third work need to work 12 hours a day 7 days a week to eat so someone else can do half the hours, have better conditions and holidays whilst profiting on their labour because they were lucky enough to be born in another country, then the system can only be described as UNFAIR. There is no other argument. You can write nonsense that working to your death is better than starving to death all you want, it doesn't actually explain why the people in rich countries should ever exploit the poor because we all need to eat in order to live. But in any case, people aren't educated enough to understand how they are being exploited in these nations and they rely on instinct to get by. And we in the West have no interest in educating them given even our poor has a better standard than 5 billion people on the planet and that would all change if people revolted. So we have to stamp on our flags on handouts because the system without charity would cause people to wake up and we need people in these countries to believe we are liberators so they continue to be happy by being exploited. What a funny world we live in.

Only you mentioned working to death and 12hrs 7 days a week, I didn't. They get paid a salary in-line with where they live. And without the work they will be back to scratching for food in rubbish piles. Only 10% of the population works in some of these regions so any company like M&S setting up makes their lives better. 

[Good old]

Only a 2 year old link!! And you'll find that it was a Muslim run operation using Muslim labour. Nothing to do with your post that was about 3rd world countries.

Nothing to do with the fairness of capitalism then. More to do with highlighting Muslim capitalists. My post ,which post, I'm not Boycey , and though I can't talk for him ,I'm pretty sure he is aware ,as he said so , you don't have to go to Asia, Africa, or elsewhere to find people being abused by the capitalist system.
Do you apply that kind of thinly vailed racist comment to those that buy the produce of sweatshop Labour, or is that reserved for Muslim capitalists abusing Muslim Labour?

[B0ycey]

And what experience do you have of countries that have 'Sweatshops', I'll tell you, the answer is none because you have no clue how the system works.
M&S operated such a system 30 years ago until the woke got hold of it and boycotted the shop until they pulled out. These people were responsible for an entire area that were being paid the average wage for the region being out of work. No work so no food, an entire community having their earnings removed because people like you deem it a sweatshop. The average wage for a hotel worker in India is £3 a day, a chef £10 a day.

So yes, you use the 'same f**king definition as everyone else' who doesn't understand how valuable the work is to a community. And that's why I asked you because I knew what you would say.

The problem with your post is it actually making my argument for me. If people in the third work need to work 12 hours a day 7 days a week to eat so someone else can do half the hours, have better conditions and holidays whilst profiting on their labour because they were lucky enough to be born in another country, then the system can only be described as UNFAIR. There is no other argument. You can write nonsense that working to your death is better than starving to death all you want, it doesn't actually explain why the people in rich countries should ever exploit the poor because we all need to eat in order to live. But in any case, people aren't educated enough to understand how they are being exploited in these nations and they rely on instinct to get by. And we in the West have no interest in educating them given even our poor has a better standard than 5 billion people on the planet and that would all change if people revolted. So we have to stamp on our flags on handouts because the system without charity would cause people to wake up and we need people in these countries to believe we are liberators so they continue to be happy by being exploited. What a funny world we live in.

[Nick]

Is this what you are looking for?
https://www.euronews.com/green/2020/07/09/inside-the-leicester-sweatshops-accused-of-modern-slavery
Well recorded and there are more. Just up to now little cared about.

Only a 2 year old link!! And you'll find that it was a Muslim run operation using Muslim labour. Nothing to do with your post that was about 3rd world countries. 

[Nick]

What do you mean "my definition"? I use the same f**king definition as everyone else. Sweatshops are pretty much found in very country, including the UK as it happens. But I guess in terms of my post I am talking about the third world in particular where wages are only livable if you work 12 hour shifts 7 days a week.

And what experience do you have of countries that have 'Sweatshops', I'll tell you, the answer is none because you have no clue how the system works. 
M&S operated such a system 30 years ago until the woke got hold of it and boycotted the shop until they pulled out. These people were responsible for an entire area that were being paid the average wage for the region being out of work. No work so no food, an entire community having their earnings removed because people like you deem it a sweatshop. The average wage for a hotel worker in India is £3 a day, a chef £10 a day. 

So yes, you use the 'same f**king definition as everyone else' who doesn't understand how valuable the work is to a community. And that's why I asked you because I knew what you would say. 

[Good old]

What's your definition of a sweatshop and where are they?

Is this what you are looking for?
https://www.euronews.com/green/2020/07/09/inside-the-leicester-sweatshops-accused-of-modern-slavery
Well recorded and there are more. Just up to now little cared about.

[B0ycey]

What's your definition of a sweatshop and where are they?

What do you mean "my definition"? I use the same f**king definition as everyone else. Sweatshops are pretty much found in very country, including the UK as it happens. But I guess in terms of my post I am talking about the third world in particular where wages are only livable if you work 12 hour shifts 7 days a week.

[Nick]

Fairer than Communism, the system most of humanity have used in our existance and those societies that are off grid still use today. I don't see how any system where bankers get more money than doctors can be described as fair. There is an argument it has enhanced technology and growth but never fair.

I wonder, if those who work in sweatshops, who are in fact the very people who create "wealth", understand they are more productive than the very people who buys their shit and that Capitalism has artificially moved wealth to the West at their expense.

What's your definition of a sweatshop and where are they?

[B0ycey]

Not all Tories, all capitalists, and that's because it's the only fair system there is.

Fairer than Communism, the system most of humanity have used in our existance and those societies that are off grid still use today. I don't see how any system where bankers get more money than doctors can be described as fair. There is an argument it has enhanced technology and growth but never fair. 

I wonder, if those who work in sweatshops, who are in fact the very people who create "wealth", understand they are more productive than the very people who buys their shit and that Capitalism has artificially moved wealth to the West at their expense.

[Nick]

All Tories. What do you expect.

Not all Tories, all capitalists, and that's because it's the only fair system there is. 

[B0ycey]

Take every Prime Minister in my adult life in order of succession.....

Thatcher
Major
Blair
Brown
Cameron
May
Johnson
Truss?

I detect a continuous decline in competence, and/or integrity with every one worse than the last in at least one of those factors if not both.

All Tories. What do you expect.

[patman post]

Actually, there have been 7 more US presidents than British prime ministers.

The US had 16 presidents before George Washington and the Americans count Grover Cleveland twice because he served two, non consecutive terms

According to my history books there have been 45 Presidents of the United States of America.

And I did say presidents of, not presidencies, or presidents in.

Those leaders prior to Washington were Presidents of the Continental Congress, not of the United States of America. Because of this, when Washington was elected, there was debate over whether the title President was deferential enough...

[Sheepy]

Teeny weeny flaw in your argument is that there will always be voters, if only because a minority are happy with the way things are. If you imagine 100 percent disengagement you are dreaming. Far more effective would be for everyone en masse to find an anti-establishmentarian candidate of their choice and vote for that person. You wouldn't need 100 percent to do so, just enough to count.

Your problem and mine is essentially the same - the millions of sheeple who keep on voting for the same old shite no matter what. It is these who need to be woken up to reality.

I just happen to think that large numbers of people voting against the establishment is likely to be more effective than large numbers of people not voting at all.

As I said, you carry on, nobody is stopping you, but I won't be telling people to vote for their own downfall, which they might well have worked out for themselves.