On 08/03/16 16:02, Tim Watts wrote:
On 08/03/16 14:37, The Natural Philosopher wrote:



I miss those elevator captains dont you?

The feeling of power when you said '3rd floor, please' and the sexy
attendant in his smart uniform told you where to get off.

These self service buttons will never really catch on.


And that is similar to a train in what particular way?

In every way except it goes up and down instead of along

It's people transport, its automatic, and it stops at stations


--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On 08/03/16 18:41, Richard wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I miss those elevator captains dont you?

Them **** off back to the US. Your pal Trump needs you.

The feeling of power when you said '3rd floor, please' and the sexy
attendant in his smart uniform told you where to get off.

Only lift attendant I can remember was a one armed ex serviceman. In the
Corps of Commissionaires.

Poor thing. Obviously never been in posh establishments in the past.


These self service buttons will never really catch on.

I see the dreary lefty**** is having trouble getting his sense of
humour up.

It muat be quite an experience to have chips on both shoulders..

--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.

Groucho Marx

"76dr" wrote in message
...
snip

**** off Wodney.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
news
On 08/03/16 12:31, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast majority
of
those who use them are against.


The driverless DLR works well, but there are 2 points:

1) It's not really driverless as there's a conductor who can drive on
board. They just pay him less and he does other jobs most of the time.

Yes. But those who go on and on about driverless trains want to eliminate
that job entirely - not just call it something else, or move the driver
from the cab to elsewhere.

Then they are misguided fools - you will never eliminate a staff presence
from trains with very rare exceptions (Gatwick terminal monorail - that's
short and there are a lot of staff and emergency responders on site all
the time).

Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tion_4_Systems

En el artículo . com,
bm escribió:

"76dr" wrote in message
...
snip

**** off Wodney.

Time to drop indiviual.net a line. His excessive morphing is abuse of
his account.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) Bunny says: Windows 10? Nein danke!
(")_(")

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 12:43, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast
majority
of those who use them are against.

Very funny Dave. Never been on the DLR, then? Driverless most of the
time.

I take it you've never been on it?

I've been on it quite often. Driverless most of the time.


And who was the bloke in uniform who was walking up and down and pressing
the door-close/train-start button at every stop?

Just the result of the usual completely ****ed implementation
that Britain is absolutely notorious for. Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tion_4_Systems

In article ,
Sam Crean wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 12:43, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast
majority
of those who use them are against.

Very funny Dave. Never been on the DLR, then? Driverless most of the
time.

I take it you've never been on it?

I've been on it quite often. Driverless most of the time.


And who was the bloke in uniform who was walking up and down and
pressing the door-close/train-start button at every stop?

Just the result of the usual completely ****ed implementation
that Britain is absolutely notorious for.

It's not the system, but the idiots who use it. When the mesage is "Stand
clear of the doors" they don't - they carry on trying to push in.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

Dave Plowman (News) wrote

I'd ask what makes more sense. Staff on a tube station or
train who give the paying passengers a sense of security.

Or don’t bother like we didn’t with lifts.

Or like these didn’t bother either
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tion_4_Systems

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
But all Leftythinking wants us to return to a noble idealised
hunter-gatherer society where everybody is equal, all property is theft,
and even the stupid can pick a raspberry or club a bunny to death.

A hunter gatherer society is exactly what right wing ******s like you
want. Winner takes all.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you don’t have
a ****ing clue about how hunter gatherer society works either.

You're as bad as the turnip.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 13:57, dennis@home wrote:
On 08/03/2016 00:47, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Waimer wrote:
and still have human drivers given that they are already experimenting
with computer driven cars.

Because the unions get any say on that and there is no one
with any balls like Maggie or Murdoch had to take them on.

Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast
majority of
those who use them are against.


Yet they still use docklands.

Which are not "driverless". They are automated with a train captain on
board who issues the door close/train start sequence - just like the
Victoria Line.

What these people mean is "without staff" which is never going to happen
because the public don't want it too (except on strike days when it suits
them).

How odd that it has with most of these.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tion_4_Systems

"Sam Crean" wrote in message ...

**** off rod

"Sam Crean" wrote in message ...

FOAD rod

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 14:37, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 08/03/16 14:33, Tim Watts wrote:
On 08/03/16 13:57, dennis@home wrote:
On 08/03/2016 00:47, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Waimer wrote:
and still have human drivers given that they are already
experimenting
with computer driven cars.

Because the unions get any say on that and there is no one
with any balls like Maggie or Murdoch had to take them on.

Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast
majority of
those who use them are against.


Yet they still use docklands.

Which are not "driverless". They are automated with a train captain on
board who issues the door close/train start sequence - just like the
Victoria Line.

What these people mean is "without staff" which is never going to happen
because the public don't want it too (except on strike days when it
suits them).

I miss those elevator captains dont you?

The feeling of power when you said '3rd floor, please' and the sexy
attendant in his smart uniform told you where to get off.

These self service buttons will never really catch on.


And that is similar to a train in what particular way?

People still use them even when there is no driver.

Same with these.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tion_4_Systems

"Richard" wrote in message
...
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I miss those elevator captains dont you?

Them **** off back to the US. Your pal Trump needs you.

The feeling of power when you said '3rd floor, please' and the sexy
attendant in his smart uniform told you where to get off.

Only lift attendant I can remember was a one armed ex serviceman. In the
Corps of Commissionaires.

Poor thing. Obviously never been in posh establishments in the past.

They don't let the refugees from Scotland into places like that.

"Richard" wrote in message
...
"Sam Crean" wrote in message ...

**** off rod

Go and **** yourself, gutless.

"Richard" wrote in message
...
"Sam Crean" wrote in message ...

FOAD rod

Go and **** yourself, gutless.

On 08/03/16 19:56, Sam Crean wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 12:43, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast
majority
of those who use them are against.

Very funny Dave. Never been on the DLR, then? Driverless most of the
time.

I take it you've never been on it?

I've been on it quite often. Driverless most of the time.


And who was the bloke in uniform who was walking up and down and
pressing the door-close/train-start button at every stop?

Just the result of the usual completely ****ed implementation
that Britain is absolutely notorious for. Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tion_4_Systems


Perhaps I should have said "will never happen in Britain". But point taken!

On 08/03/16 22:03, Huge wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 12:43, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast
majority
of those who use them are against.

Very funny Dave. Never been on the DLR, then? Driverless most of the
time.

I take it you've never been on it?

I've been on it quite often. Driverless most of the time.


And who was the bloke in uniform who was walking up and down and pressing
the door-close/train-start button at every stop?

In your imagination, mostly.



And Wikipedia's apparantly:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dockla..._rolling_stock

"The trains are fully automated and have no driver, but a Passenger
Service Agent (PSA), titled the "Train Captain" in the system's earlier
years, is in attendance in each train and can take control at a driver's
console if required."

On 08/03/16 22:24, Huge wrote:

Yes they are. They no more require a "driver" than a lift. Anyone
could operate a DLR train after about 15 minutes training.


And would they be competent to deal with all the emergencies and failure
scenarios, eg gapping? I think not.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 19:56, Sam Crean wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 12:43, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast
majority
of those who use them are against.

Very funny Dave. Never been on the DLR, then? Driverless most of the
time.

I take it you've never been on it?

I've been on it quite often. Driverless most of the time.


And who was the bloke in uniform who was walking up and down and
pressing the door-close/train-start button at every stop?

Just the result of the usual completely ****ed implementation
that Britain is absolutely notorious for. Pity about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tion_4_Systems


Perhaps I should have said "will never happen in Britain".

It has actually, with the DLR at night most obviously.

But point taken!

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 22:03, Huge wrote:
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 08/03/16 12:43, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast
majority
of those who use them are against.

Very funny Dave. Never been on the DLR, then? Driverless most of the
time.

I take it you've never been on it?

I've been on it quite often. Driverless most of the time.


And who was the bloke in uniform who was walking up and down and
pressing
the door-close/train-start button at every stop?

In your imagination, mostly.



And Wikipedia's apparantly:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dockla..._rolling_stock

"The trains are fully automated and have no driver, but a Passenger
Service Agent (PSA), titled the "Train Captain" in the system's earlier
years, is in attendance in each train and can take control at a driver's
console if required."

That isn't what happens at night.

On 08/03/2016 16:53, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
I miss those elevator captains dont you?

Them **** off back to the US. Your pal Trump needs you.

The feeling of power when you said '3rd floor, please' and the sexy
attendant in his smart uniform told you where to get off.

Only lift attendant I can remember was a one armed ex serviceman. In the
Corps of Commissionaires.


They used to have a lift attendant in the Greenwich foot tunnel at
Island Garden, which was at the end of the DLR. This was even after the
DLR came. Up until about ten years ago I think.

I never liked having my trains cancelled due to lack of staff (i.e.
drivers) and I never saw a train drive perform any useful service apart
from drive, this is even when trains broke down.

The sooner they get rid of drivers the better as far as I'm concerned.

On 07/03/2016 23:10, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


Secondly why trains are so expensive and still have human drivers given
that they are already experimenting with computer driven cars.

Unions...

They may be part of the problem. But I think it is more than that. More
that there is no commercial pressure to make railways efficient. No
survival of the fittest that occurs in the motor car industry.

In article ,
Sam Crean wrote:

Yet another Wodney.

--
*If God had wanted me to touch my toes, he would have put them on my knees

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Nick wrote:
Secondly why trains are so expensive and still have human drivers
given that they are already experimenting with computer driven cars.

Unions...

They may be part of the problem. But I think it is more than that. More
that there is no commercial pressure to make railways efficient. No
survival of the fittest that occurs in the motor car industry.

Have you any idea of the cost of modifying all trains, signalling and
track to driverless? It would likely make HS2 seem a bargain.

And just imagine the target computer controlled trains would be for a
hacker...

--
*Rehab is for quitters

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Nick" wrote in message
...
On 07/03/2016 23:10, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


Secondly why trains are so expensive and still have human drivers given
that they are already experimenting with computer driven cars.

Unions...

They may be part of the problem. But I think it is more than that. More
that there is no commercial pressure to make railways efficient.

And yet the monopoly phone system did away with operators even
when there was no commercial pressure to make things more efficient.

No survival of the fittest that occurs in the motor car industry.

There wasnt with lifts either.

The main problem with the railways in Britain is that there
is no one with the balls of a Maggie or Murdoch prepared
to take on the unions.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Nick wrote:
Secondly why trains are so expensive and still have human drivers
given that they are already experimenting with computer driven cars.

Unions...

They may be part of the problem. But I think it is more than that. More
that there is no commercial pressure to make railways efficient. No
survival of the fittest that occurs in the motor car industry.

Have you any idea of the cost of modifying all trains, signalling and
track to driverless?

Yep.

It would likely make HS2 seem a bargain.

BULL****.

And just imagine the target computer controlled trains would be for a
hacker...

How odd that none of these has ever been hacked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tion_4_Systems

On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 00:02:19 +0000, Nick wrote:

I never liked having my trains cancelled due to lack of staff (i.e.
drivers) and I never saw a train drive perform any useful service apart
from drive, this is even when trains broke down.

Some years ago before I retired (11 years now) I was in a train which
stopped at a station and couldn't be started again. After a few minutes
the driver appeared, opened a panel in the bulkhead and thumped a row of
plug-in relays. He then returned to the cab and the train moved off. A
true engineer!

--
TOJ.

On 09/03/16 11:46, The Other John wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 00:02:19 +0000, Nick wrote:

I never liked having my trains cancelled due to lack of staff (i.e.
drivers) and I never saw a train drive perform any useful service apart
from drive, this is even when trains broke down.

Some years ago before I retired (11 years now) I was in a train which
stopped at a station and couldn't be started again. After a few minutes
the driver appeared, opened a panel in the bulkhead and thumped a row of
plug-in relays. He then returned to the cab and the train moved off. A
true engineer!


There is quite a bit of that - some of those panels contain breakers
which may need to be reset, or even tripped out to isolate a faulty
system (whereby the train can continue under certain conditions).

Look at Youtube and there are quite a few railway training video online
- very inter

On 09/03/16 11:46, The Other John wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 00:02:19 +0000, Nick wrote:

I never liked having my trains cancelled due to lack of staff (i.e.
drivers) and I never saw a train drive perform any useful service apart
from drive, this is even when trains broke down.

Some years ago before I retired (11 years now) I was in a train which
stopped at a station and couldn't be started again. After a few minutes
the driver appeared, opened a panel in the bulkhead and thumped a row of
plug-in relays. He then returned to the cab and the train moved off. A
true engineer!

Some years ago trains were designed to have drivers that could do that
sort of thing.

Driverless trains are designed not to need it.

--
Bureaucracy defends the status quo long past the time the quo has lost
its status.

Laurence Peter

On 09/03/16 13:33, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 12:54:08 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 09/03/16 11:46, The Other John wrote:
On Wed, 09 Mar 2016 00:02:19 +0000, Nick wrote:

I never liked having my trains cancelled due to lack of staff (i.e.
drivers) and I never saw a train drive perform any useful service apart
from drive, this is even when trains broke down.

Some years ago before I retired (11 years now) I was in a train which
stopped at a station and couldn't be started again. After a few minutes
the driver appeared, opened a panel in the bulkhead and thumped a row of
plug-in relays. He then returned to the cab and the train moved off. A
true engineer!

Some years ago trains were designed to have drivers that could do that
sort of thing.

Driverless trains are designed not to need it.

Tannoy announcement "This is the first driverless train to go into
general service. The traveling public have absolutely no cause to be
alarmed. It has multiple safety devices to protect you. Nothing can go
wrong...go wrong...go wrong...go wrong..


Tannoy announcement "This is the first unmannd3ed elevator to go into
general service. The travelling public have absolutely no cause to be
alarmed. It has multiple safety devices to protect you. Nothing can go
wrong...go wrong...go wrong...go wrong..


--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

In article ,
Sam Crean wrote:
They may be part of the problem. But I think it is more than that.
More that there is no commercial pressure to make railways efficient.

And yet the monopoly phone system did away with operators even
when there was no commercial pressure to make things more efficient.

Yes - and we got rid of the man with the red flag walking in front of cars
at about the same time.

No survival of the fittest that occurs in the motor car industry.

There wasn‘t with lifts either.

The main problem with the railways in Britain is that there
is no one with the balls of a Maggie or Murdoch prepared
to take on the unions.

Balls? Quite amazing the people you admire, Wodney. But then the content
of the Murdoch empire is aimed at the mentally challenged.

--
*If a parsley farmer is sued, can they garnish his wages?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Have you any idea of the cost of modifying all trains, signalling and
track to driverless?

Yep.

OK. Gives us a figure.

--
*If God dropped acid, would he see people?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:

No - but apparently we cannot VAT exempt a class of items as we wish (eg
like books, children's clothes other "essential" items used to be zero
VAT rated).

As a matter of interest, why should books be zero rated? They are hardly
an essential item. And why children's clothes? Are all parents
necessarily poorer than adults who buy clothes?

IIRC, the UK government can set the individual VAT rate anyway.

The minimum EU rate for most things is 15% - yet it's 20% in the UK. Which
of course must be the fault of the EU. There are individual items which
can be rated lower. Can't be bothered to look them up.

VAT is a very convenient tax for a Tory government as it allows them to
have lower income tax rates. Thus moving the tax burden to the lower paid.

So why do you want to make it worse by adding vat to children's clothes
books etc?
AIUI once an item has been rated for VAT it cannot subsequently be
de-rated. A national government can set its own national rate above the
minimum (doesn't the EU get a cut?) but cannot reduce the rate on
anything rated below that. So for example energy is rated at 5%. We
cannot reduce that to zero but we could increase it to say 10% or even
20% BICBW
There is (or was?) a subtle difference between "exempt" and "zero rated"
but I cannot now remember what it was.
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
On 07/03/16 18:39, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:

No - but apparently we cannot VAT exempt a class of items as we wish
(eg like books, children's clothes other "essential" items used to be
zero VAT rated).

As a matter of interest, why should books be zero rated?

Because it was viewed as an education item and therefore essential (in a
wider sense).

So is a TV then.

They are hardly
an essential item. And why children's clothes?

Are all parents necessarily
poorer than adults who buy clothes?

If an adult goes without that's up to them, but the idea was that
children should not - or at least not due to taxation pushing the price
up.

Children buy their own clothes from their own income?

Remember that it started out as a luxury purchase tax - an ethos I agree
with, although defining "luxury" vs "essential" is hard as you just
pointed out.

VAT is not the same sort of tax as purchase tax. In that it's levied on
services too.

Certainly, IMO, things like food, water, electricity, gas and
educational items should be zero rated.

If you reduce the tax on one thing it will have to be raised in another
way.
Or you reduce government spending
Something most here don't seem to grasp.

Something which lefties never seem to grasp.
And I'm really surprised all the right wingers here don't seem to like it,
as it is proportionally unfair to the poor, and benefits the rich.

Another leftie distortion. The poor spend proportionally more on zero or
lower vat rated items such as food and energy.
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
As a matter of interest, why should books be zero rated?

Because it was viewed as an education item and therefore essential
(in a wider sense).

So is a TV then.

Well yes. But I did say it's a bit arbitrary and someone had to draw a
line, and they drew a line at books.

IMO reading books is more likely to enrich than a TV as it helps reading
skills, spelling and vocabulary even if the reader only buys fiction. A
TV has a lesser guarantee of educational enrichment.

Make it a mobile phone, then. Kids who had no interest in reading etc,
soon realise they have to for SMS and so on.

I say it again. Whinging on about such things being 'essential' is
nonsense. Food is essential. Books ain't.

SO despite claiming that Vat penalises the poor and favours the rich you
still want to add it to additional things which are currently no vat.
Typical leftie. Never let practicality get in the way of ideology.
--
bert

In article , Tim Watts
writes
On 08/03/16 16:34, Tim Streater wrote:

Well, there's Sid the Sexist and the two Fat Slags.


If you want to see what the Fat Slags look like in real life, go to
Micklegate (road) in York on a Saturday afternoon.

I used to think Viz did an extreme caricature, but no, these creatures
really exist!

(Saturday lunchtime onwards, the more reprobate members of the north
east descend on York for stag and hen parties, or a general all day
****up. Micklegate is the closest road into the city centre with the
most pubs/etc. Hence they rarely get as far as the actual city centre.
Often found at the station at 2am wondering when the next train to
Newcastle is.)

It's a new thing - never happened much in 1986 - I think they used to
go abroad more (Majorca et al). Now austerity means they can't get
further than York and I suspect Edinburgh is less of an option as the
locals would kick the **** out of them once they started becoming a
nuisance.
York is the new Blackpool when it comes to hen parties.
--
bert

In article , Waimer
writes


"Tim Streater" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Waimer
wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Frankly apart from Schengen - which isnt EU anyway,. there is
nothing about the EU I like.

What's not to like about no more wars in almost every
generation between western european countries ?

This has nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with NATO.

In fact it was a progression, initially NATO, then the EEC, then the EU
etc.
In fact it was a progression, Nato then Nato and still Nato.
--
bert

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Every time driverless trains or tubes are brought up, the vast majority of
those who use them are against.


The driverless DLR works well, but there are 2 points:

1) It's not really driverless as there's a conductor who can drive on
board. They just pay him less and he does other jobs most of the time.

Yes. But those who go on and on about driverless trains want to eliminate
that job entirely - not just call it something else, or move the driver
from the cab to elsewhere.

It's standard fare. Eliminate all jobs where possible.
It's called productivity and the UK is seriously behind. That is the
problem with the idea that increased migration has improved the economy.
It may have increased GDP but there is no universal benefit unless
productivity is increased.
Apart from those
who decide what jobs there will be, of course. And anyone in a job - that
job is always essential.


--
bert

On 09/03/16 14:47, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes


It's standard fare. Eliminate all jobs where possible.
It's called productivity and the UK is seriously behind. That is the
problem with the idea that increased migration has improved the economy.
It may have increased GDP but there is no universal benefit unless
productivity is increased.
Apart from those
who decide what jobs there will be, of course. And anyone in a job - that
job is always essential.

The real point is that the classical analysis of Narx and the Left is
that Labour is necessary for wealth creation, and therefore that the
working man ought to share in that wealth. Or he might not work,.

Today, almost no human activity results in wealth creation, its all done
by machines, and there is no working class left, hence the morphing of
Leftism into heterosexual champagne socialists and scabby arsed Greens
and the like.

The Left is simply living in the Luddite past, dreaming of an impossible
future. To maximise wealth we want to eliminate labour as far as
possible. That solves the problem of wealth creation, but not wealth
distribution. And true to their inbred idiocy,. the Left has merely come
up with the idea of massive taxation + state as employer to relocate
wealth from where its made, to where its consumed by people who now have
no respect for it, and whose consumption can really not be tolerated
when they produce nothing of value.

I don't have an answer for this, but the point is, that the Left doesn't
even recognise the problem.



--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.