http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26527325

 

Only 52, love him or hate him 52 is no age to die, RIP.

nasty person

 

I will generalise for the sake of argument but folk like yourself are always moaning about what a bad deal the working class get yet despise the unions who try to better the lot of their ordinary, bloke in the street members.

He got them a good deal at the publics expense

 

Quadruple pay for driving a tube on Boxing Day is ridiculous

 

Getting a council house when you earn £150k is also ridiculous

 

Why? He'd always lived in a council house. Why should he move out?

Why? He'd always lived in a council house. Why should he move out?

Council houses are for people who can't afford their own.

He can't win though - he moved out he'd be a 'champagne socialist'

Edited March 11, 201412 yr by mickbrown

He can't win though - he moved out he'd be a 'champagne socialist'

No, if he'd moved out he'd have let someone less fortunate be able to live in it. Like it or not, he lived in a Capitalist country.

No, if he'd moved out he'd have let someone less fortunate be able to live in it. Like it or not, he lived in a Capitalist country.

 

So if he'd bought the council house he lived in that would have been ok?

So if he'd bought the council house he lived in that would have been ok?

Personally, I don't agree with the sale of council houses, especially to people with a salary higher than the prime minister.

He could've bought a lot more champagne with his expendable income due to paying very little in rent than if he'd had a mortgage

Maybe he did.

 

He didn't earn more than the Prime Minister, by the way

Edited March 11, 201412 yr by mickbrown

Maybe he did.

 

He didn't earn more than the Prime Minister, by the way

 

Cameron's Prime Minister's wage - £145k

Crow's reported in the Guardian - £145

 

Sorry, same

Aye but Cameron's total 'package' for want of a better word is way, way more than that.

So it should be for running the country, rather than shouting "all out" every other fucking week.

Aye but Cameron's total 'package' for want of a better word is way, way more than that.

He runs the country, not a shit load of militants.

So should he get paid less than a banker?

 

Or a footballer?

Edited March 11, 201412 yr by mickbrown

So should he get paid less than a banker?

 

Or a footballer?

You're losing your way now. A bloke earning that sort of money cannot morally justify living in a council house, even if he tried to, which he did.

You're losing your way now. A bloke earning that sort of money cannot morally justify living in a council house, even if he tried to, which he did.

Cameron doesn't pay for his house. Or the weekend place in the country. Someone tell the Mail.

You're losing your way now. A bloke earning that sort of money cannot morally justify living in a council house, even if he tried to, which he did.

 

If he'd been a good capitalist and bought the place, that's one less house up for the needy public. Maybe you could argue it's still a council house to be used once he no longer lives there.

If he'd been a good capitalist and bought the place, that's one less house up for the needy public. Maybe you could argue it's still a council house to be used once he no longer lives there.

I don't think Capitalists have anything against subsidising folk less fortunate having a roof over their head. Those more fortunate paying practically fuck all rent, I imagine that irks a little. This was a guardian article a little over a month ago. In his view, those who disagree with him are trying to "humiliate me, and try and make me basically look bad, and try and make me small."

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/07/bob-crow-interview-nothing-to-defend

 

No, they were just disagreeing with his moral compass, as did I.

Good to see Boris and others from the right (correct) side of politics showing the good grace and sheer class to pay tribute to the man's negotiating skills and concede that he was a respected opponent, and even though he was at the other end of the political scale (he was a CPGB member) they were able to resist embarking on a similar route to those classless scumbags who felt the need to 'celebrate' when Mrs. Thatcher passed.

 

I do have a problem with a bloke who holidayed on the Copacabana and earns what he earned taking up a council house which could be used by a far more deserving case.

 

All that said, 52 is far too young to die. It would be easy to say 'better dead than red' but the bloke has family, relatives and a fair amount of people who had genuine affection for him. Fair play - RIP.

He was basically another cockney gangster

 

Getting his way by holding guns to peoples heads asking for extreme demands whilst lining his own pockets massively whilst doing so

Why? He'd always lived in a council house. Why should he move out?

 

BECAUSE HE EARNED ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND POUNDS A YEAR

Getting his way by holding guns to peoples heads asking for extreme demands whilst lining his own pockets massively whilst doing so

 

Or was it merely using 'market forces' in London town to get his members the best deal?? Good on him..

Or was it merely using 'market forces' in London town to get his members the best deal?? Good on him..

Would utilising such a capitalist notion not be rather ironic at best and hypocritical at worst from a socialist

 

Using the system in that way is perpetuating it is it not??

 

Smash the system....unless it works for me and my lot Jack

Edited March 12, 201412 yr by jules_darby

He lived in a council house because, as a communist he didnt believe in private ownership.

 

That said, he did want better wages and better quality of life for his members, most Leftys these days want to suppress ambition, and knock the greed and hunger for wealth out of the working class.

BECAUSE HE EARNED ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND POUNDS A YEAR

 

So what? Don't get me wrong, I don't understand why he choose to live in a council house, but are we getting to the point where you have to move when you hit an income threshold? Creating economic ghettos?

So what? Don't get me wrong, I don't understand why he choose to live in a council house, but are we getting to the point where you have to move when you hit an income threshold? Creating economic ghettos?

Not getting to the point, it is the point. Council housing was created exactly for that purpose.