Riots in the UK?

[Sam]

Then you and you're friends are part of the problem, not the solution. Your narrowminded attempts to prove how civilised you can be only allows yourselves to be used as tools and door mats for anybody who decides to push you around, because you aren't going to do anything to defend yourselves and you rely on the power of remote government and police to protect yourself.. and if they decide not to help you, then you're fucked.

You seem to confuse a desire for peaceful protest over a political issue with some kind of cowardice.

In all honesty, it seems to me that this is because you have some long ingrained impression of your self as some kind of activist and quasi-revoloutionary. The fact is, that the government has every right to propose changes to higher education funding, in turn, the students have evry right to protests against them. When a few self-centered morons start to fancy themselves as rioters the whole issue becomes a joke.

There are different situations which demand different attitudes Cerrone, if the government were proposing removing some of our human rights I'd probably take a more aggresive stance but they're not. Your supporting the actions of a few because they acted in accordance with your outmoded views.

Why you little worm you.. lolz

Resorting to childish little jabs already?

To be honest though, students and younger generations are a slightly different case when it comes to the media- it's not simply that they believe something when it's pushed on them, quite the opposite sometimes, they're young impressionable people who want to have a world view, but the only place they go to "research the facts" are from facets of the media, so the eventually fall for the same bullshit that other people do. My advice would be, as always, gain some perspective about what you're talking about before asserting your right to an opinion.

What? So now even those of us who do validate our opinions based on reports from various sources are 'falling for the same bullshit'?

Why don't you try and justify your opinion before claiming I don't have any perspective for mine.

Cheers

Sam

[Cerrone]

When a few self-centered morons start to fancy themselves as rioters the whole issue becomes a joke.
There are different situations which demand different attitudes Cerrone, if the government were proposing removing some of our human rights I'd probably take a more aggresive stance but they're not. Your supporting the actions of a few because they acted in accordance with your outmoded views.

Ok, so you're happy to do nothing while they chip away at you and then consider direct action when you've got nothing left?

Doesn't make sense to me. I don't even know why you're continuing this line of debate, if you're happy with the government and the laws it dictates then why bother questioning anything? Just sit back, do nothing.. reconvert to christianity while you're at it, since you like delusions of saftey.

You may consider my views on this to be "outmoded" but time will tell.

Resorting to childish little jabs already?

Ah I was only joking; making light of your attempt to ingratiate yourself diplomatically with the site owner/admin whatever Adrian is. Seems like it worked anyway lol

What? So now even those of us who do validate our opinions based on reports from various sources are 'falling for the same bullshit'?

It depends on the source obviously.. at least cross referance with another source before taking anything as fact. And actually if you do think there's any truth or good intent behind anything in the mainstream media you probably are falling for the same shit.

Why don't you try and justify your opinion before claiming I don't have any perspective for mine.

To know means to record in one's memory; but to understand means to blend with the thing and to assimilate it oneself.

Karnak

But take my previous advice anyway, I didn't mean for you to perceive it as an attack. Remember, just because you have the right to freedom of speech, it doesnt mean you should ethically talk just to be talking, it's your duty to gain perspective before forming your thoughts, otherwise you're just going to say and do the wrong things. Try and be one of the few people who realises this early in life, instead of wasting 20 or 40 years before it dawns on them.

[Tiberius]

Evidently those students were very uninformed then. Its symptomatic of the way society here is that people disregard the wisdom behind the concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and because of that it's no wonder nobody achieves anything in terms of political activism or basic organisation.

People disregard the "wisdom" behind such a concept because they tend to look how well it has worked in the past...i.e. not very. Basing an alliance on a common enemy is extremely problematic, since when that enemy is defeated, the alliance has no reason to trust each other. Just look at World War II; America, the UK, and the Soviet Union all fighting for the same side...that sure lasted. </sarcasm>

To quote cartoonist Howard Taylor on the issue, "The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. No more. No less."

Do whaaat? What member of the public is against them? Everyone i've spoken to -aside from armchair critics on the internet- agrees with the students, applauded them for their efforts and mentioned how the government and police were bastards who deserve whatever they get pelted with.. be it eggs, fire extinquishers or bags of medical waste.

Erm...the tax paying members of the public who have already had to suffer rises in taxes in order to curb the country's debt, and who don't want to see more of their money being spent on university education for people who don't need or deserve it. Places at university are already oversubscribed, and a lot of students see the whole experience as a chance to skip work for 3 more years. Handing out 3 years of education for free would only increase the problems for everyone, with the actual education of those who want to learn suffering.

If you honestly believe that it is acceptable to throw fire extinguishers and bags of medical waste at innocent people (innocent because they are doing their fricken' jobs) then you are one of the worst human beings I have met. Do you always throw morality out the window when you want to get your way? I honestly wouldn't be surprised if you were posting your messages from inside a jail cell. It isn't the government or the police that are the problem with this country, it is people like you who think that because they have an idea, they are somehow above the law.

We live in a democracy so that people with ideas can speak about them, get them popular, and then mount campaigns to get their voices heard in parliament. You want an example? A few years ago Simon Singh was sued by the British Chiropractic Association for writing an article that described Chiropractic as bogus science, which it is. The libel laws in this country allowed for the BCA to sue him for it. A massive peaceful campaign was launched, and slowly built up momentum until the government promised to reform libel laws, and all evidence points to them being dedicated to that goal.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11471378

I think you meant to say Adrian, that the MEDIA is trying to influence public opinion against them, as the media are puppets of puppets and so on.

No, those are your words and yours alone. Did you spot many working adults on the march? No? I didn't think so. It is pretty clear from all the campaigning who the protests are organised by, and who they are supported by.

Quite personally, it seems that each generation has to find out for themselves that peaceful protest is ineffective and seem to need education on the subject. You're under some delusion if you think peaceful protest has ever achieved anything; look at the massive anti-war demonstrations in london for a recent example, then look back through history and see how every single attempt has proved to be completely useless.

I already listed one peaceful protest that is leading to reform, so your assertion that "every single attempt has proved to be completely useless" is completely false. If you want some more, here are a few that have happened in modern times:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Offe...)_Act_2000 (After peaceful protests by pro-gay groups)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunting_Act_2004 (After peaceful protests by anti-fox-hunting groups)

the crucial point is that "violent" action forces the people in power to do something because the don't understand "peace" as you or I do, they take "peace" to mean pacified and harmless i.e not worth paying attention to anymore.

A completely unjustified assertion. The majority of bills passed through the government are "pacified and harmless", yet they seem to get attention. Some issues touch a public nerve, and in some cases the public wins; in others, they lose. Whichever way it goes, the government are elected by the people, and the people can easily change their mind. You mentioned the protests against the War in Iraq, and how they didn't achieve anything...well if you recall, Labour lost a large number of seats in the next election, and blamed their actions over the war for it.

Ah I was only joking; making light of your attempt to ingratiate yourself diplomatically with the site owner/admin whatever Adrian is. Seems like it worked anyway lol

People don't need to kiss my ass, nor do I want it. If someone agrees with my opinion, they have every right to say so, and they don't deserve to be called a 'worm' because of it. Nor do people deserve to be called names for disagreeing with my opinion. We're all individuals here; sometimes we agree, sometimes we disagree. The polite man accepts that.

[Cerrone]

People disregard the "wisdom" behind such a concept because they tend to look how well it has worked in the past...i.e. not very. Basing an alliance on a common enemy is extremely problematic, since when that enemy is defeated, the alliance has no reason to trust each other. Just look at World War II; America, the UK, and the Soviet Union all fighting for the same side...that sure lasted. </sarcasm>

In this case there is massive common ground, since the students all want the same thing and the government and police will continue to oppose them. When the government is pressured into giving them what they want the common enemy won't exist anymore and they can go back to argueing about the artic monkeys or whatever. Not exactly comparable to the soviets, yankees and nazi germany is it.

To quote cartoonist Howard Taylor on the issue, "The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. No more.

Good thing Howard Taylor was never in politics or commanding an army then is all can say.

Erm...the tax paying members of the public who have already had to suffer rises in taxes in order to curb the country's debt, and who don't want to see more of their money being spent on university education for people who don't need or deserve it.

Eh we already went off track discussing the hypotheticals where the funding could come from for this.

If you honestly believe that it is acceptable to throw fire extinguishers and bags of medical waste at innocent people (innocent because they are doing their fricken' jobs) then you are one of the worst human beings I have met. Do you always throw morality out the window when you want to get your way?

Ohhhh hahaha define morality atheist! No I don't throw "personal standards" away for the sake of accomplishing goals, if a situation can be resolved diplomatically then you should make every effort to do so, but for diplomacy to happen the party trying to achieve their ends must have something that the other party wants or theres no reason why that party is going to pay mind to the request of the other.

The government aren't going to listen- as they never have- to the demands of peaceful protests, nor do police care what happens since they're, as you said, just doing their job.

We live in a democracy so that people with ideas can speak about them, get them popular, and then mount campaigns to get their voices heard in parliament. You want an example? A few years ago Simon Singh was sued by the British Chiropractic Association for writing an article that described Chiropractic as bogus science, which it is.

I already listed one peaceful protest that is leading to reform, so your assertion that "every single attempt has proved to be completely useless" is completely false. If you want some more, here are a few that have happened in modern times:

Oh excuse me, I meant to say an example of peaceful protest regarding anything meaningful that would go against the interests of those in power. I assumed you realised i was talking about "actual relevant issues" and not about Simon Singh scribbling rubbish about Chiropractors.

Whichever way it goes, the government are elected by the people, and the people can easily change their mind. You mentioned the protests against the War in Iraq, and how they didn't achieve anything...well if you recall, Labour lost a large number of seats in the next election, and blamed their actions over the war for it.

So Labour lost seats, so what? We;re still at war and nothing was changed. All we've done is replace one bad CEO with another bad CEO while their toxic product is still being mass produced and sold.

Even under the modern standard of "democracy" the elected governments are hardly held accountable for the actions they take and people can't just change their minds when they don't like whoever's in charge, that'd require some form of revolution to happen. Remember Gordon Browns term as PM? He wasn't even elected, nobody wanted him in charge, people called for him to resign but he just sat there and nobody took any steps to get rid of him.. with the only "legal" steps to do so being to elect the fucking conservatives.

The government and it's legal methods Do Not Work in bringing change, the only reason they exist and were brought into existance was tp maintain the status quo. And it needs changing, by peaceful methods if possible, but you've got to be prepared to take direct action if they don't listen. I have the foresight of knowing that they won't listen, which is why i'm forced to take the position i've taken on the subject.

As Malcolm X said..

"if you and I would just realize, that once we learn to talk the language that they understand, they will then get the point. You can't ever reach a man if you don't speak his language. If a man speaks the language of brute force, you can't come to him with peace. Why goodnight! He'll break you in two, as he has been doing all along. If a man speaks French, you can't speak to him in German. If he speaks Swahili, you can't communicate with him in Chinese. You have to find out, what does this man speak? Once you know his language, learn how to speak his language. He'll get the point, there will be some dialogue, some communication, and some understanding will be developed."

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archiv...everse.mp3

If someone agrees with my opinion, they have every right to say so, and they don't deserve to be called a 'worm' because of it. Nor do people deserve to be called names for disagreeing with my opinion. We're all individuals here; sometimes we agree, sometimes we disagree. The polite man accepts that.

To quote Douglas Adams
All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.

[theVOID]

I agree, socialism is like going on a shopping spree in a nick-nakcs store... You get boring pointless shit you don't want or need and no chance of making your money back on it. You sound like you should be supporting the government on this one no? They're the ones who are fixing the spending blow outs. It always hurts to throw out the big investments that you've decades on but are bleeding you dry, but it's got to be done. The country just doesn't generate enough GDP to sustain those numbers, not these days with massive socio-economic shifts going on.

Supporting them doesnt even come into the equation, they're wasteful and incompetant and undeserving of the power they've -through no actual merit- accumulated. I'd say however, that to save our tax money they could stop dropping bombs in the middle east, stop sending poorly equiped soldiers out to get blown up in the middle east, and stop investing billions in the nuclear weapons program which is probably the most useless thing our little nation has got. Then with the trillions saved there we could reform the education system (most crucially), rebuild our energy plants to something which doesnt rely on external trade then let the rest of it fall nicely into place.

No actual merit? You don't think the opinion of the millions of British voters doesn't have merit?

And wasteful? Like fuck they are, they're cutting their spending rapidly! It's one thing to have an opinion, it's another thing to stare facts in the face and still make arguments despite them.

Are you under some illusion that these governments are inherently shit and some fella like you could take over and solve anything? It certainly seems like you are. That's usually a clear indicator that you don't actually have a fucking clue what the limits of government are. If it was possible to sort everything our in no time at all and keep everyone happy, have free services for all, low taxes AND a strong economy then there wouldn't be a single politician in the west who wouldn't do it. Too bad it's not so simple as that.

You say that like it would make a fucking difference who was in power right now.

Well there you go, certianly the three parties need hauling out of parliament by a meathook through the nose.

*facepaml* No... the world economy is on an IV and there isn't a fucking thing these 3 parties or any other party you could imagine could possibly to do remedy that in any short term solution. You want unemployment to do down then you need to grow the economy, and to do that you need to trim the deficit, make more assets exchangeable, cut spending and give businesses intensive to develop.

Actually i'm personally more inclined to do what Cromwell did and just take over by force, then hand over power to reformed local citizen councils that're actually comprised of people instead of politicians, and having a new "government" existing only in a vanguard capacity.

And these totally inexperienced amateurs will likely cock it up, it's not the 1600s any more, the society we live in is a far more complex system than the one that existed then, and as such it requires far more effort to maintain it. And that is if you manage to avoid having a bullet put through your face, which is really what you deserve for trying to bypassing democracy.

And politicians aren't people? Give me a fucking break.

[Sam]

Ok, so you're happy to do nothing while they chip away at you and then consider direct action when you've got nothing left?

You make the assumption that the governemnt is constantly trying to reduce personal rights? Are you so paranoid?

The point I was making was that I appreciate how a democratic system of government work. The government proposes a law, the populus accept or oppose it. Peacful protest is one vehicle of opposition.

You seem so invested in your mis-interpretation of the goverment as some sort of Orwellian state that you can't recognise the difference between a (relatively) minor issue and something major.

Doesn't make sense to me. I don't even know why you're continuing this line of debate, if you're happy with the government and the laws it dictates then why bother questioning anything? Just sit back, do nothing.. reconvert to christianity while you're at it, since you like delusions of saftey.

Where exactly did I say this? Oh, right, I didn't. You decided that because I don't share your views I must be silently complicit. This is despite the fact that our discussion is largely about the operation of opposition to these reforms.

Again, you can't accept any position other than you're own without trying to belittle it as a cowardly action. I have no delusions of safety, I see things in terms of relevant response. In this case the relevant response to a proposed law is to oppose through civil means.

Ah I was only joking; making light of your attempt to ingratiate yourself diplomatically with the site owner/admin whatever Adrian is. Seems like it worked anyway lol

I suppose it never occured to you that I was simply stating my agreement with his position. If you see this as so form of disingenous ingratiation, well, I guess I'm sorry you're such a closed-minded asshole.

But take my previous advice anyway, I didn't mean for you to perceive it as an attack. Remember, just because you have the right to freedom of speech, it doesnt mean you should ethically talk just to be talking, it's your duty to gain perspective before forming your thoughts, otherwise you're just going to say and do the wrong things. Try and be one of the few people who realises this early in life, instead of wasting 20 or 40 years before it dawns on them.

So, now its assumptions about how I'm basing my thought process? I find it rather insulting you presume to tell me how to think, ot about my duties. On what basis have you come to the conclusion that I do not actively seek perspective before forming my thoughts?

Cheers

Sam

[Tiberius]

In this case there is massive common ground, since the students all want the same thing and the government and police will continue to oppose them. When the government is pressured into giving them what they want the common enemy won't exist anymore and they can go back to argueing about the artic monkeys or whatever. Not exactly comparable to the soviets, yankees and nazi germany is it.

The "allies" that the students need are the general public...the taxpayers. These are the people that could be said to share a "common enemy" with (i.e. the government). The only problem is, the public want less taxes, and the students want free education. With the government trying to cut spending in order to save the economy, the public know that the two goals are on opposite sides of a pair of scales. If you want free education, you need higher taxes. If you want lower taxes, you'll have to cut spending (and in this case, the cut is education).

Ohhhh hahaha define morality atheist! No I don't throw "personal standards" away for the sake of accomplishing goals, if a situation can be resolved diplomatically then you should make every effort to do so, but for diplomacy to happen the party trying to achieve their ends must have something that the other party wants or theres no reason why that party is going to pay mind to the request of the other.

I define morality the same way everyone defines it. As I've said, in this case, the parties involved are the students, and the working public. The students want free education, and that can only come at a cost to the working public. The government don't want to anger the public anymore than they already are, so they can't bow to the demands of the students (who, by the way, make up a far smaller percentage of the electorate than the rest of the public).

The government aren't going to listen- as they never have- to the demands of peaceful protests, nor do police care what happens since they're, as you said, just doing their job.

I gave examples of the government listening, so stop trying to use that old excuse...it won't work. Your last line is interesting though. Despite the fact that you've now admitted that the police are only doing their job, you still think it is perfectly fine and moral to try and kill them by throwing heavy pieces of metal at them? You sicken me.

Oh excuse me, I meant to say an example of peaceful protest regarding anything meaningful that would go against the interests of those in power. I assumed you realised i was talking about "actual relevant issues" and not about Simon Singh scribbling rubbish about Chiropractors.

So free speech isn't meaningful? Bullshit. Numerous governments have tried to stomp on free speech, and it arguably goes against the interests of those in power. Why you chose to ignore my other two examples (which dealt with sexual liberation and animal rights...two other important issues) is very telling though. Did you have a rebuttal to them, or did you ignore them and think I wouldn't notice?

So Labour lost seats, so what? We;re still at war and nothing was changed. All we've done is replace one bad CEO with another bad CEO while their toxic product is still being mass produced and sold.

Even under the modern standard of "democracy" the elected governments are hardly held accountable for the actions they take and people can't just change their minds when they don't like whoever's in charge, that'd require some form of revolution to happen. Remember Gordon Browns term as PM? He wasn't even elected, nobody wanted him in charge, people called for him to resign but he just sat there and nobody took any steps to get rid of him.. with the only "legal" steps to do so being to elect the fucking conservatives.

The government and it's legal methods Do Not Work in bringing change, the only reason they exist and were brought into existance was tp maintain the status quo. And it needs changing, by peaceful methods if possible, but you've got to be prepared to take direct action if they don't listen. I have the foresight of knowing that they won't listen, which is why i'm forced to take the position i've taken on the subject.

I'm in complete agreement; the government needs to change, but the fact remains that your points are completely empty in that I have demonstrated that your assertions are simply untrue; that enough people can change the law and bring about a referendum, and that the people are the ones with all the power.

If enough people wanted it, they could elect an entirely new government. Have you ever wondered why it hasn't happened? It's because right now, at this moment in time, despite the people being angry at the government, they still vote them in.

That may annoy people like you and me, but rather than deny reality like you, and make up ridiculous claims about what the people want, I accept the fact, and hope for change in the future. Just because the masses don't agree with you doesn't mean you aren't wrong, but it doesn't give you the right to make up lies about people in order to convince everyone that you are in the majority, because you clearly aren't.

[Cerrone]

No actual merit? You don't think the opinion of the millions of British voters doesn't have merit?

It's hardly a free opinion though is it? Given the choice between three rotten bits of meat that you're forced to swallow you end up picking the one that's got the least flies buzzing around it, but that doesnt mean its gormet.

And wasteful? Like fuck they are, they're cutting their spending rapidly! It's one thing to have an opinion, it's another thing to stare facts in the face and still make arguments despite them.

Urghh they're cutting public spending sure, but they're still wasting trillions on nuclear weapons and futile wars.

Are you under some illusion that these governments are inherently shit and some fella like you could take over and solve anything? It certainly seems like you are. That's usually a clear indicator that you don't actually have a fucking clue what the limits of government are.

You want unemployment to do down then you need to grow the economy, and to do that you need to trim the deficit, make more assets exchangeable, cut spending and give businesses intensive to develop.

And these totally inexperienced amateurs will likely cock it up, it's not the 1600s any more, the society we live in is a far more complex system than the one that existed then, and as such it requires far more effort to maintain it.

Riiight, so we need to retrace our steps to the point we fucked up society and rebuild from that point onwards. Back to basics. But the only solutions you've offered are just piling more shit ontop of shit, whereas we recognise our ability to not only clean up the fucking mess caused by governments, corporations and the brainwashed civilians such as .. well anybody in disagreement.. and create something infinately better. And fuck it whether we succeed or not, at least we're trying. Which is more than I can for the narrowminded petty intellectualists who do nothing but talk a lot of shit.

---

You seem so invested in your mis-interpretation of the goverment as some sort of Orwellian state that you can't recognise the difference between a (relatively) minor issue and something major.

Orwell? No no no that's the mistake you make.. to consider1984 as the ultimate evil state, when in fact you should read a little more Aldous Huxley. As its clear from my position here, i regard indifferance and information confusion in you guys to be more dangerous than anything else.

http://www.oesquema.com.br/trabalhosujo/...orwell.jpg

Here is a huge picture demonstrating the differance.. and i'll get to rest of the replies tommorrow

[Sam]

Okay, maybe you're not big proponent of Orwell. Your comments regarding an ever encrotching government "chipping away" at me made it seem that way.

Indifference and Information Confusion in 'Us Guys'?

If anything this thread indicates the strong posistions held on the issues by the posters. How you have related that to a Huxley-esque recession of society is beyond me.

Did I say I accept everything in the media blindly? No. Everything else in that post is irrelevant. You don't know how I live my life for shit. You've created this entire viewpoint based on the fact I don't share your penchant for uneccesary violence and self righteous image of myself as some sort of social revolutionary.

[theVOID]

No actual merit? You don't think the opinion of the millions of British voters doesn't have merit?

It's hardly a free opinion though is it? Given the choice between three rotten bits of meat that you're forced to swallow you end up picking the one that's got the least flies buzzing around it, but that doesnt mean its gormet.

Anyone is free to establish a party, the reason there are no new major parties is because most people realise that there is no super group who's going to come fix everything, nor could this fantasy party that you have possibly exist.

The choices are applied ideologies, and as far as political ideologies that have any practical application go there aren't any many more possible choices. Given the nature of humanity and the structure of society both socially, politically and economically if any party was to form they would have to take pretty much the exact same measures as either of the two existing ideologues because you're still going to have the same challenges and the same limited tools to deal with them.

You have some fantasy idea of politics where the people and environment bend at the whim of the government, it's the other way around.

And wasteful? Like fuck they are, they're cutting their spending rapidly! It's one thing to have an opinion, it's another thing to stare facts in the face and still make arguments despite them.

Urghh they're cutting public spending sure, but they're still wasting trillions on nuclear weapons and futile wars.

War does cost money, and yes it is largely futile, but was it realistically better than the alternative? It's not so clear. Afghanistan was definitely justified, so there is some necessary cost, possibly the largest portion of the military spending. Iraq is not as justified, it was nice to depose Sadam but the actual total cost is too high.

And trillions? Who's ass did you pull those figures from? I did a quick check and the year on year costs are around a billions dollars for the UK. Wasted money? Some of it certainly, but I still doubt not going to war would have had better long term implications.

Are you under some illusion that these governments are inherently shit and some fella like you could take over and solve anything? It certainly seems like you are. That's usually a clear indicator that you don't actually have a fucking clue what the limits of government are.

You want unemployment to do down then you need to grow the economy, and to do that you need to trim the deficit, make more assets exchangeable, cut spending and give businesses intensive to develop.

And these totally inexperienced amateurs will likely cock it up, it's not the 1600s any more, the society we live in is a far more complex system than the one that existed then, and as such it requires far more effort to maintain it.

Riiight, so we need to retrace our steps to the point we fucked up society and rebuild from that point onwards. Back to basics. But the only solutions you've offered are just piling more shit ontop of shit, whereas we recognise our ability to not only clean up the fucking mess caused by governments, corporations and the brainwashed civilians such as .. well anybody in disagreement.. and create something infinately better. And fuck it whether we succeed or not, at least we're trying. Which is more than I can for the narrowminded petty intellectualists who do nothing but talk a lot of shit.

Brainwashed? No, just informed, unlike you.

The government doesn't have the resources to do what you want so even if you did take over by force and try and change everything you would completely fail, and it would be a testament to the fact that you didn't have a fucking clue about the dynamics of the situation to begin with.

The only valid solutions are ones that can actually be applied here and now and cutting spending is going to lower the deficit, the lower that is the lower the costs to service the loans, which are far higher than any war costs, this leads to more capital to spend on streamlining necessity services and cutting taxes to restore economic momentum which will create jobs. Spending money on completely inefficient services like free university is the only way to cut the deficit and the service costs.

Not to mention that lowering the deficit and gaining momentum in business will increase the Credit rating for the country, which makes the loans even cheaper. Spending more and more money has the exact opposite approach.

And who cares whether or not you succeed? How about the people who's lives will be crushed by an incompetent fuck-wit with a "who gives a shit" attitude?

These are solutions that are going to get our inherently complex socio-political system back into any sort of positive movement, not the fucking la-de-da fantasy your hooked on.