Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Wed Mar 12, 2014 2:37 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Adam Boulton made a comment on the ridiculous "champagne socialist" tag (is champagne really only reserved for capitalists ?) which was on the lines of those who criticise him for living in social housing on a salary that would afford a private house purchase should ask themselves if they avail themselves of public services such as the NHS when surely they should be paying for BUPA and leaving the NHS for the poor ?

‘This trade union fights for the right of our members to enjoy the finer things in life. Why should it just be the bankers, politicians and the idle rich who get all the best things? As a militant trade union we demand a standard of living for our members that enables them to share in the fine wines and fine times that the likes of David Cameron and his Old Etonian mates take for granted.’ -Bob Crowe

Its the oldest trick in the right-wing book (and god knows how it fools people) is to pretend that if you want to demand a greater share for a greater number of people, you should be living in absolute poverty otherwise you are a ‘champagne socialist’.

I may think that someone hoarding billions in offshore tax havens is wrong. It doesn’t make me a hypocrite to have a holiday.

Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Wed Mar 12, 2014 11:10 pm  

rumpelstiltskin wrote:

His response, when asked why given his salary, he did not buy his own house says it all about this guy's mindset. He choose to reside in a subsidised Housing Association property, thus denying a lower wage earner family, (who could possibly be members of his Union), the chance of a decent home, on the pretence that as he was born in a council house, he would die in one. He did not feel he had a moral duty to move out, and "Where, complained our chubby Comrade, is it written that Council Housing is only for the poor?"

Up the Workers? More like Right up the Workers, eh Bob?

Subsidised by whom?

Where does it state that only the poor can live in council housing?

Bob Crow felt he had a moral duty to fight to increase council housing stock, to make truly affordable housing available to all, paying rents that reflected the true cost of the housing, not some "market value" that has been uprated out of all sensible proportion by government meddling in that self-same market.

Any comment on the huge subsidies being paid to private landlords? No? Thought not

Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:08 am  

A sad loss to the union movement. We could do with more like him.

Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Thu Mar 13, 2014 12:40 am  

If Crow had bought himself a big house the likes of The Daily Mail would have run a "Union leader lives 1n £1/2 million house!" story.

Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Thu Mar 13, 2014 8:55 am  

Mintball wrote:

We're still waiting for your idea of what a 'socialist' should expect to get paid for whatever job they do.

Have you worked out the equation yet?

As I said on numerous ocassions I have no issues with a socialist earning £1m as long as they don't spout fairness from such a lofty position - hypocritical IMO.

We go back to McClusky - borderline communist if you listen to him sat in his comfy office with final salary scheme, health care etc funded by members who are sadly not party to such benefits spouting fairness and 'we are all in it together'.

[DaveO]

Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:24 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

As I said on numerous occasions I have no issues with a socialist earning £1m as long as they don't spout fairness from such a lofty position - hypocritical IMO.

I know you have mentioned this absolute nonsense on numerous occasions but all that does in confirm your ignorance of what hypocrisy means. It is the pretence to have beliefs that they don't actually posses. Just because someone has a well paid job doesn't mean their beliefs are a pretence.

It is not and never has been hypocritical for those in lofty positions to campaign for reform and fairness. What a completely moronic stance to take to suggest it is.

[DaveO]

Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:35 pm  

XBrettKennyX wrote:

He was famous as he is was leader of perhaps the only union where industrial action had leverage in 2014.

£50k a year for a train driver is an absolute joke. They don't even have to steer!

It is market forces as you have so nicely illustrated. They have leverage and used it. It would be hypocritical of those on the right to be nothing other than pleased to see the market in action. After all there are cries of "jealousy" if anyone suggests a curb on executive pay.

Those on the right can't have it both ways.

Still they will soon be replaced by robots (that's how difficult the job is) and in 20 years will be looked upon in much the same way as bus conductors.

Still conductors on the train I will use on Saturday to Manchester. I'd like to see them return on buses as well at least on urban services as that would reduce congestion in towns and stop the situation where a gaggle of buses are all parked up for ages while the driver takes the fares. Be interesting to know how many more passengers could be carried and how much less pollution there would be if buses moved off quickly rather than sat there belching out diesel fumes.

Progress eh?

Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Thu Mar 13, 2014 1:53 pm  

DaveO wrote:

It is not and never has been hypocritical for those in lofty positions to campaign for reform and fairness. What a completely moronic stance to take to suggest it is.

Good job. People like Bill Gates would be royally f***ed if it was.

Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:08 pm  

DaveO wrote:

It is the pretence to have beliefs that they don't actually posses.

Exactly, just like your average Labour voter. Particularly those who bitch and whine about NHS privatisation, ATOS, cuts, rich donors etc etc.

Re: Bob Crow - RMT Union leader : Thu Mar 13, 2014 3:55 pm  

BobbyD wrote:

Exactly, just like your average Labour voter. Particularly those who bitch and whine about NHS privatisation, ATOS, cuts, rich donors etc etc.

So you think the average labour voter is favour of NHS privatisation, ATOS, CUTS, and rich donors?