socialism: are we mad????

dark_knight_ire

I found it interesting to see how many people agree with the socialism theory, a lot agree with a semi communist system as in attempting to bridge the gap between rich and poor.

I'm a young guy 23 years of age, i would like to think i've my head screwed on right (open to debate) but when i look at what these people want (pro socialism) i just cant seem to see how its possible. The gap between rich and poor will never be bridged. Think about it why should some gob****e who goes to all anti war marches and screams about how unequal a country we are and calls bush a war criminal be on the same money as me for not working and only getting his arse out of bed to rant and rave??

A party like sinn fein for example and the socialist workers party scream from the high heavens and these are the guys who would destroy ireland if they ever got high office. Look at the USSR lol what a mess that was. simple fact i agree with a system that rewards people who are unique. A system hat rewards people. My heart does go out to a lot of poor people here and well it is a rut these days with the property prices and all. Still people have the chance to get out of it and build a good life.

People in the like of Tallaght, ballybeg, moyross will be going on how unfair they have it but speaking from experience most of the families who are the worst off are people who wont work, will steal and are dishonest.

Travellers are another crowd who scream to high heavens. Now i know i'm going to get stick for this but there is no such thing as an honest traveller they are all animals who should be jailed they are responcible for most burglaries.

Lol kinda went off the topic a bit but interested to read your posts and views.

Lennoxschips

There's a whole thread about this were you can read our opinions.

fragile

dark_knight_ire wrote:

I found it interesting to see how many people agree with the socialism theory, a lot agree with a semi communist system as in attempting to bridge the gap between rich and poor.

Sounds like a good idea to me

I'm a young guy 23 years of age, i would like to think i've my head screwed on right (open to debate) but when i look at what these people want (pro socialism) i just cant seem to see how its possible. The gap between rich and poor will never be bridged. Think about it why should some gob****e who goes to all anti war marches and screams about how unequal a country we are and calls bush a war criminal be on the same money as me for not working and only getting his arse out of bed to rant and rave??

You are assuming that people who protest aginst war and call Ireland an unequal country don't earn a good living and pay taxes, I disagree

A party like sinn fein for example and the socialist workers party scream from the high heavens and these are the guys who would destroy ireland if they ever got high office. Look at the USSR lol what a mess that was. simple fact i agree with a system that rewards people who are unique. A system hat rewards people. My heart does go out to a lot of poor people here and well it is a rut these days with the property prices and all. Still people have the chance to get out of it and build a good life.

People in the like of Tallaght, ballybeg, moyross will be going on how unfair they have it but speaking from experience most of the families who are the worst off are people who wont work, will steal and are dishonest.

That is a sweeping generalisation, you are stereotyping people from less well off estates because on the actions of a few.

The successive governments of this country found that it would be really easy to place all of the less well off into these sprawling estates with inadequate facilities, and then acted all surprised when a few local thugs take advantage of peoples misfortune and run gangs out of these estates.....in trying to ignore the problem they created an even bigger one....

Travellers are another crowd who scream to high heavens. Now i know i'm going to get stick for this but there is no such thing as an honest traveller they are all animals who should be jailed they are responcible for most burglaries.

again, a sweeping generalisation based on the actions of a few.

Lol kinda went off the topic a bit but interested to read your posts and views.

In your critique of socialism you pointed out a number of issues in Ireland that you have a problem with, but these are problems that exist now, they were created and continue to exist in a capitalist Ireland, so in my opinion your argument against socialism is fairly mute.

BTW: I am not 100% pro socialism, I am just offering my opinion on your post as you requested

Cake Fiend

dark_knight_ire wrote:

Travellers are another crowd who scream to high heavens. Now i know i'm going to get stick for this but there is no such thing as an honest traveller they are all animals who should be jailed they are responcible for most burglaries.

Way to get yourself taken seriously.

omnicorp

dark_knight_ire wrote:

simple fact i agree with a system that rewards people who are unique.

Right, So under Capitalism, a footballer who plays 1 90 minute match and has 3 training sessions a week gets paid £100,000 a week while a doctor who works 45 hours a week in an overcrowded hospital gets paid £350 a week.
Capitalism, a really fair system iff there ever was one(!)

clearz

omnicorp wrote:

Right, So under Capitalism, a footballer who plays 1 90 minute match and has 3 training sessions a week gets paid £100,000 a week while a doctor who works 45 hours a week in an overcrowded hospital gets paid £350 a week.
Capitalism, a really fair system iff there ever was one(!)

Capitalism is the best system we have got. The thought of a socialiast Ireland makes me shiver. How many footballers are earning that money. And if they are lucky enough to be born with that amount of skill then so what. Also Pro footballers have to go to training and stay off the booze and fags. If the Doctor was born with the same amount of skill and put the same time in then Im sure he/she could open a private business and make the same money. But known this country there is probably a law stopping them from doing this.

ionapaul

clearz wrote:

Capitalism is the best system we have got. The thought of a socialiast Ireland makes me shiver. How many footballers are earning that money. And if they are lucky enough to be born with that amount of skill then so what. Also Pro footballers have to go to training and stay off the booze and fags. If the Doctor was born with the same amount of skill and put the same time in then Im sure he/she could open a private business and make the same money. But known this country there is probably a law stopping them from doing this.

I wouldn't worry too much about doctors - the average doctor makes a hell of a lot more money than the average athlete, and has a much long working life. I agree with Omnicorp that doctors are more deserving of our respect and praise, though. The obsession with celebrity is modern society's problem, rather than Capitalism's problem.

Blame the 'great unwashed'!

chewy

hey gandalk i posted that capitalism thread after he posted this hopeless socialism thread, i was taking the piss you know!!!

Champ

Think about it why should some gob****e who goes to all anti war marches and screams about how unequal a country we are and calls bush a war criminal be on the same money as me for not working and only getting his arse out of bed to rant and rave??

I don't see how being anti-war and in this specific case against a very suspect motivated war equates to been unemployed.

A party like sinn fein for example and the socialist workers party scream from the high heavens and these are the guys who would destroy ireland if they ever got high office.

I don't agree with everything on their agendas; but i don't see them destorying Ireland as such. Could you clarify this a bit more?

People in the like of Tallaght, ballybeg, moyross will be going on how unfair they have it but speaking from experience most of the families who are the worst off are people who wont work, will steal and are dishonest.

That's generalising; i doubt any of us are so naive as to believe there are always a set X number of circumstances that lead to a particular situation.

Travellers are another crowd who scream to high heavens. Now i know i'm going to get stick for this but there is no such thing as an honest traveller they are all animals who should be jailed they are responcible for most burglaries.

Now i'm well acquainted with numerous public mishappenings regarding travellers and those have certainly generated some adverse opinions; but i'm not inclinded to judge them stereotypically as a totality. Condemning a whole for the actions of some isn't just. Regardless in the very least i would consider them more than animals.

arcadegame2004

The true "caring" system is the one that encourages competition and opposes monopolies of either the private and public sector, thereby ensuring that prices are lower than they otherwise would be, since higher bills hurt the poor disproportionately more than they do the rich.

Strange then that the unions oppose greater competition against public-sector companies. If we are fed up with the bills we are paying to the ESB, Bord Gais, and Dublin Bus etc. I feel that we should be allowed the right to choose for ourselves a different company. The Left oppose this since it would reduce the power of the unions.

The unions bosses these days are part of the wealthy middle-class and it seems to me that perhaps some of them oppose the introduction of competition for cynical reasons. I think the preservation of their power and influence may be part of it. As long as there is a lack of competition inflation will be higher than otherwise would be the case. Hence, worker discontent is higher than it otherwise would be, allowing the union-leadership to cling onto their cosy salaries by acting the hard-man and promising to "stand up to the bosses and get higher salaries for our members". When in reality, they are harming the interests of most of their members, especially by misleading them into thinking that the absence of competition is in their interests.

The myth that the Left has a monopoly of "caring" values needs to be smashed because it is not true. I myself am far from rich. In fact I am poor. But one of the things that most annoys me are these ESB bills and I bitterly resent the attempts of SIPTU and co. to deny me the right to choose a competitor to ESB to get lower prices. Why are they insisting on interfering in my life in this way? I am sure I speak for many in asking this.

The politicians of the Left are the enemies of the poor, not their allies. They manipulate the poor for cynical electoral and sectional purposes, promising to improve their lot, while promoting policies that have caused mass unemployment wherever they have been tried. While some left-wing Governments have rightly helped reduce the State's interference in the bedroom, they have substituted it with a State interference in our commercial lives, and the right to choose with whom we do business. In a way then, they are almost just as bad as their counterparts on the Irish religious Right who held sway for so many years.

As a liberal, I believe in a State that stays out of people's private AND commercial lives, except as a very last resort. I disapprove of State intervention in industrial-disputes, since historically it has been shown to only encourage strikes in the future, as the unions bank on the Government pressuring the management - irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the industrial action.

Socialism is about:

A: Maintaining the privileges of semi-state companies by denying competition in their markets. This harms the poor like me by denying us the right to choose competitors that might charge lower prices. In a small minority of cases, competition could not be effectively introduced e.g. the rail-sector, but this is pretty much the only sector where I feel it could not work in some form.

B: Denying people the right to their inheritance from their parents, e.g. the rumoured plans of New Labour in Britain (which previously I thought might not be truly socialist) to apply a 50% tax on inheritance.

C: Denying people the right to most of the sale-price of their assets, including their houses. Labour wanted to retain the 40% Capital-Gains-Tax, for example. They are fixated with taxing people. They should remember it is OUR money not theirs. But then, the rich Labour elite/champagne socialists like a certain former leader don't have as many money worries of course.

Punishing enterpreunership with punitive taxes , which also serve to deter those on social-welfare from trying to start off in business and move off of social-welfare.

I cannot possibly support the above, and as such I urge people in this country not to support Socialist parties.

Sparks

arcadegame2004 wrote:

As a liberal, I believe in a State that stays out of people's private AND commercial lives

Except where we need them to declare that these durty foreigners aren't really Irish citizens and deport them, right arcade?
You're about as liberal as I am martian, going by your posts here...

arcadegame2004

Except where we need them to declare that these durty foreigners aren't really Irish citizens and deport them, right arcade?

Well I think I'm a lot more liberal than you on most issues!

I said "except as a very last resort.". I do not use the crude language you are ascribing to my motivations for my views. In particular I have never called anyone a "durty foreigner". I just don't see why a Third World immigrant living in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, or the UK needs to come here for a better life. Why don't they look for a job in one of those far larger countries, with far greater numbers of taxpayers to help them out? Why should a small country be expected to bear the burden?

gandalf

dark_knight_ire wrote:

People in the like of Tallaght, ballybeg, moyross will be going on how unfair they have it but speaking from experience most of the families who are the worst off are people who wont work, will steal and are dishonest.

Travellers are another crowd who scream to high heavens. Now i know i'm going to get stick for this but there is no such thing as an honest traveller they are all animals who should be jailed they are responcible for most burglaries.

Well your not getting stick your getting banned for both those crass generalisations.

If I see anymore rubbish like this on the politics forums I will be handing out permanent bans.

gandalf

chewy wrote:

hey gandalk i posted that capitalism thread after he posted this hopeless socialism thread, i was taking the piss you know!!!

Next time you take the piss on the politics forum you won't be able to post on it again for a week.

Exterminator

arcadegame2004 wrote:

The myth that the Left has a monopoly of "caring" values needs to be smashed because it is not true. I myself am far from rich. In fact I am poor. But one of the things that most annoys me are these ESB bills and I bitterly resent the attempts of SIPTU and co. to deny me the right to choose a competitor to ESB to get lower prices. Why are they insisting on interfering in my life in this way? I am sure I speak for many in asking this.

In answer to your query, Ireland had the second cheapest electricity in the EU, the market is currently undergoing privatisation. However no private company wished to enter the market as they did not believe they could make a profit, so the ESB was made increase their prices to allow competition. The reason given was security of supply from a diverse market. If workers in the private sector chose the same union as other ESB workers then this aim wont be achieved. We will have to wait and see.

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Socialism is about:

A: Maintaining the privileges of semi-state companies by denying competition in their markets. This harms the poor like me by denying us the right to choose competitors that might charge lower prices. In a small minority of cases, competition could not be effectively introduced e.g. the rail-sector, but this is pretty much the only sector where I feel it could not work in some form.

B: Denying people the right to their inheritance from their parents, e.g. the rumoured plans of New Labour in Britain (which previously I thought might not be truly socialist) to apply a 50% tax on inheritance.

C: Denying people the right to most of the sale-price of their assets, including their houses. Labour wanted to retain the 40% Capital-Gains-Tax, for example. They are fixated with taxing people. They should remember it is OUR money not theirs. But then, the rich Labour elite/champagne socialists like a certain former leader don't have as many money worries of course.

Punishing enterpreunership with punitive taxes , which also serve to deter those on social-welfare from trying to start off in business and move off of social-welfare.

I cannot possibly support the above, and as such I urge people in this country not to support Socialist parties.

Im going to take two examples of a right wing/capitalist country and how socialism is needed; one obvious, one relevant.
Obvious: USA. Socialism is used in the USA when ever it suits them and abandoned when it does not, they call it interventionism. Look up the New Deal. It saved the US. Look up the Marshal Plan iy helped save europe.
When the chips were down there waws only one way to make things better, socialism.

Relevent example: Ireland.
There would be no industry or employment in Ireland if it were not for the socialist policies of the past.
The infrastructure of the country was built by the state, the banks and builing societies which funded growth started by the state, basic services and social amenities all provided by the state.
The state is the largest employer in Ireland today: over 200,000 persons directly employed.

At the moment Ireland is shifting right, many analists believe this is what cost FF and the PDs the local election.

When I (and I beleive most people here on boards) say socialist I (think we) mean a mixed economy. The flaws with planned and free economies are evident to all willing to see them in the USA and what was the USSR. The EU is a mixed economy and I beleive it is the fairest and most prosperous society in the history of the world.

In a mixed economy rules are set as to how business can behave and operate. Independant watch dogs are set up and funded by the state. Desirable services that would not other wise operate are set up and funded.
Let us compare the EU to the US. In the EU:
There is a more equal distribution of wealth.
There is a higher average take home pay.
There are generally better standards of Education and Health.
There is a better service.

The disadvantages? Some say higher taxes, im not sure of this and would like to see the figures that take into account the average incomes and stealth taxes.

I can think of few examples where privatisation have benifited either the coinsumer or the workers but they do exist. The only one that springs to mind is the finance market: TSB and EBS etc.
The government had little say left in the market and there was enough growth in the market at the time to capture the employees and market share. Privatisation cannot work during a recession.

Deregulation is not capitalism per say, it is an essential part of a mixed economy and promoted very much by the EU. It allows a private company to compete with a state one WITHOUT the need to dissolve the state one.
The problem is that nobody wants to compete against an efficent state company.

ESB is ahead of the competition. It is one of the best, if not the best, energy company in the world.

Aer Lingus' business plan is to close down its freight service and other services to cut costs, not because they make a loss but because a higher rate of return can be got else where. Who benifits from this?
By the same logic many routs to Ireland could go because they dont make enough money. Thats why we need a national airline, to provide a service a private firm doesnt want to do.

Who would want An Post? Can we live without such a basic service?

Are you aware that CIE offered to build the new metro E700m cheaper than the proposed metro with twice as many routes? Being a state company fares would be cheaper. Should they get the contract?

Please explain to me how many privatisations in Irish history have been a success.

arcadegame2004

Look up the New Deal. It saved the US.

No. Unemployment did not substantially reduce during the New Deal. WW2 is what revived the US economy through armaments-production.

In answer to your query, Ireland had the second cheapest electricity in the EU, the market is currently undergoing privatisation. H

I contend that they are STILL too high and would be lower in a properly regulated competitive environment, which is NOT what we have now. In spite of what you say I still believe that in the LONG-TERM, competition in the electricity-market would keep prices down.

Relevent example: Ireland.
There would be no industry or employment in Ireland if it were not for the socialist policies of the past.
The infrastructure of the country was built by the state, the banks and builing societies which funded growth started by the state, basic services and social amenities all provided by the state.
The state is the largest employer in Ireland today: over 200,000 persons directly employed.

I contend that while State-intervention may have been necessary in the early decades of Irish independence, in order to establish foundations, that having established them it is less and less necessary, and in fact is now a barrier to the nation's interests, for the reasons explained in my earlier post.

ionapaul

Exterminator wrote:

Let us compare the EU to the US. In the EU:
There is a more equal distribution of wealth.
There is a higher average take home pay.
There are generally better standards of Education and Health.
There is a better service.

The disadvantages? Some say higher taxes, im not sure of this and would like to see the figures that take into account the average incomes and stealth taxes.

Have to query your statements:

-Firstly, a more equal distribution of wealth means nothing (to me) if everyone has the same low level of wealth. Secondly, I don't believe inequality in wealth is a bad thing at all, I think it is a very healthy thing.

-I don't believe this, and though anything can be proved/referenced on the Interweb, where are your figures? I assume you are talking about the EU 15 and not the EU 25, for starters! A quick search shows the EU 15 average GDP per capita in 2002 at $22,840. US average GDP per capita in 2002 at $36,429. I am sure US PPP is even higher again. US average take home pay must be twice as high at the EU 25 average. Got my figures from OECD Main Economic Indicators, Sept 2003.

A linky to more recent data

-Agreed, there is on average better standards of Health and Education in the EU 15. However the US third-level system is not as bad as some like the make out, many scholarships and much financial aid available, and the system is home to most of the finest universities on Earth IMO.

-What service are you talking about? If you are referring to services such as utilities and the like, you are wrong wrong wrong. Phones are connected same-day. Electricity available same-day. Broadband activated in half the time. Shops open 24/7. Amazing infrastructure - pot-hole free highways from coast to coast and from Mexico to Canada. One of the things returning immigrants (coming home to Ireland or elsewhere in Europe) are warned to prepare for are the difficulties in adapting/re-adapting to the delays and inefficiencies of utility and service supply compared to the US. We are improving, but the customer is not king just yet over here!

AngelofFire

People in the like of Tallaght, ballybeg, moyross will be going on how unfair they have it but speaking from experience most of the families who are the worst off are people who wont work, will steal and are dishonest.

Im from tallaght, and im goin into my 3rd year in university, how dare you denounce people because of their place of residence. The majority of people in tallaght are honest decent hard working people. Yes we do have social problems but what do expect when authorities build hundreds of houses all sprawled together with poor planning and lack of social facilities. These factors have added to poverty and social exclusion, they didnt choose crime for the craic you know.

Your classist and abhorrent snobbish attitude will not hold the water on this thread.

Still people have the chance to get out of it and build a good life.

Not without social protections,do you think that without free education,right to housing,proper affordable healthcare(all of which are based on SOCIALIST Ideology), that a child from a disadvantaged background is going to be able to have the same chance to to fulfill his human potential as a child from a privaledged background?

Oh and im dying to see the statistics that support your claims that the majority of buglaries are committed by travellers.

Zombrex

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Socialism is about:

A: Maintaining the privileges of semi-state companies by denying competition in their markets. This harms the poor like me by denying us the right to choose competitors that might charge lower prices. In a small minority of cases, competition could not be effectively introduced e.g. the rail-sector, but this is pretty much the only sector where I feel it could not work in some form.

One glaringly obvious problem with that Arcade. If you are poor the companies don't care about you. Why you ask? Because you don't have any money!!

It is constantly seen in "capitalist" countries, such as the US, where companies such as electricity, transport and health care simply leave poor areas, completely abandom them. And why not? It is not profitable to stay in markets full of poor people. This then leads to a break down of services which only increases the poverty of the areas.

Do you honestly think that a private electricity company will supply electricity to areas that it is un-profitable to?

But then again I suppose you think these poor people don't deserve electricity because they don't work hard enough or are not enterprising enough :rolleyes:

I have said it before and I will say it again. Pure capitalist systems only work if everyone starts off rich. If you are poor people in a pure capitalist system then they are completely screwed. That is why socialism was invented FFS!

I have said it before and I will say it again. Pure capitalist systems only work if everyone starts off rich. If you are poor people in a pure capitalist system then they are completely screwed. That is why socialism was invented FFS!

I think most people will agree that a complete system of either socialism or capitalism won't work. there needs to be a combination of the two. the problem is how far you're willing to take them.

I believe in capatilism, however, i know that capitalism on its own wouldn't work, just as socialism on its own has failed.

lers are another crowd who scream to high heavens. Now i know i'm going to get stick for this but there is no such thing as an honest traveller they are all animals who should be jailed they are responcible for most burglaries.

Oh and im dying to see the statistics that support your claims that the majority of buglaries are committed by travellers.

I don't know if the majority of buglaries are commited by Travellers. Frankly I doubt it.

However, Travellers as a community have generated their own reputation, which cause distrust from other people. I've my own distrust of travellers from personal experience, of growing up near them. They do scream for equality without any real desire to either join society or obey society's rules. Some do, but the majority of travellers that I knew from growing up, and from going to school with, had more interest in crime, than living within the boundaries that most other people live in (i.e. the law, education, careers etc)

bonkey

arcadegame2004 wrote:

I contend that they are STILL too high and would be lower in a properly regulated competitive environment, which is NOT what we have now.

Dear Lord man...did you even read the post you were responding to???

The price at the moment is too high, yes.

It is not too high through ESBs choice.
It is not too high because ESB want to be an attractive takeover option.
It is not too high because the market is not sufficiently regulated.
It is not too high because ESB need funding for additional work.
It is not too high for any reason other than the fact that they had to become artificially uncompetetive in order to attract new investment....which was forced upon them by the regulation you keep (falsely) insisting is missing.***

Is this sinking in yet?

I had a discussion with my Dad about this when I was home last. (For relevance - he's a recently-retired Station Manager.) I pointed out that in the short-to-medium term this makes no economic sense. If it is cheaper for ESB to build new stations than the incumbent competition, then that is what should be done to best benefit the consumer. My Dad pointed out that while this is a valid concern, the long-term is considered to be better served by getting more players into the market. They need a market which is profitable enough to give a decent return on investment for what will effectively be a start-up. Once they are established (say 10 to 15 years down the line), then fair competition will be allowed.

I believe a similar model, incidentally, was used with BT when the phone-market in the UK was opened up. They were prevented from being competitive in order to attract business, so that 10-15 years down the line, real competition could bring real benefits.

In spite of what you say I still believe that in the LONG-TERM, competition in the electricity-market would keep prices down.

And thats what the SHORT-TERM uncompetetiveness is for - to realise a market that will be competetive in the long term.

jc

***Sorry to anyone if I'm labouring the point, but arcade has gone on about this for so long that I'm assuming he must have actually researched it and simply not understood what was happening.

The other options are that he didn't research it at all, and has made a huge deal out of something he is basically uninformed about, or that he knows that what he's saying is false....neither of which I would hope is the case

omnicorp

clearz wrote:

Capitalism is the best system we have got. The thought of a socialiast Ireland makes me shiver. How many footballers are earning that money. And if they are lucky enough to be born with that amount of skill then so what. Also Pro footballers have to go to training and stay off the booze and fags. If the Doctor was born with the same amount of skill and put the same time in then Im sure he/she could open a private business and make the same money. But known this country there is probably a law stopping them from doing this.

So who's going to save your life?
A footballer or a hurler.
I mean, it couldn't be a doctor, he wasn't born with skill.

clearz

omnicorp wrote:

So who's going to save your life?
A footballer or a hurler.
I mean, it couldn't be a doctor, he wasn't born with skill.

I dont expect a footballer to save my life. I expect a doctor to because that is their job. You are missing my point. Doctors become doctors by studying at college. Footballers become footballers by going to training. You cant learn to become a world class footballer. It takes a special kind of athlete to do so and there is nothing wrong with them getting whatever amount they can. Now there is a special kind of doctor also. One that is born with a natural kind of skill for the job. This can be best seen in some surgeons. Now these doctors can make as much money as a pro footballer if they want. My point is there are elites in every profession and under a capitalist system they can make more money than others which is only fair.

omnicorp

Well, you only have to look at the homeless person on the street,
The person dying in an underfunded, understaffed and overcrowded hospital,
Global Warming,
High Crime and,
Then, the Rich in their mansions, with more money and possessions than they'll ever need.
Why do we cheer these usurpers of society?
These Footballers, Actors and Musicians,
When there are Underpayed Doctors, teachers and Nurses.
Do you know their names?
Do you congratulate them for a job well done?
Do you thank them for protecting you?
No, You complain and attack the Gardai, when You should be stopping crime.
You attack the politicians, when you should be attack the people who run them... YOU!



Equality, not Majority Rules

clearz

What you are talking about is human nature. I get your point but socilism would not change any of that. We would not start respecting doctors and the guarda any more than we do now.

AngelofFire

Travellers as a community have generated their own reputation, which cause distrust from other people. I've my own distrust of travellers from personal experience, of growing up near them. They do scream for equality without any real desire to either join society or obey society's rules.

Thats a sweeping generalisation, you`re putting collective judgment on a group of people because of the actions of a few individuals. I know travellers who are decent honest people.Travellers also have very hard lives, those who do not live an halting sites live on the side of the road without even the most basic of faclilities like running water and electricity. The reason why a large minority of them disobey society`s rules is because of the way society treats them. They are people who deserve equity and treatment consistent with the levels of human dignity, they are not subhuman.

omnicorp

Well, we do need a new system,
effing FF have broken their promises.
Inequality is rife.
The rich/poor divide is getting bigger.
And the Rich politicians are doing very little.