[Closed] All those wingeing about public sector workers and pensions

enfht - Member
There's no money me old Marxist mucker
Right, now elaborate why its OK to put future generations into massive debt?
POSTED 3 MINUTES AGO #

Er.. Where did they find the money for this then?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-politics-15878796

Umm, and this?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/education-15901118

So, managed to find what, £1.6 billion?? And in such austere times too!
Prob noooothing to do with the fact is a Tory headline policy or one of the things in the coalition deal that was needed to form a government eh?
Seriously though Enfht, if you were told your monthly wages were being docked by £100 a month (for example) and that you'd also need to work for longer each day, and your salary would be £150 less in total. You'd be happy with that??

 

So Ernie - is that you out of the closet now? was it one you built yourself?

Sorry bout the quoting there! Thought I had the hang of it.

Another in denial, so you think we're NOT in too much debt?

You could get a different job instead of trying to crush your employer who I fund.

Next?

Sorry bout the quoting there! Thought I had the hang of it.

You need a slash in the second quote...........

TJ, maybe it was a workers cooperative that built it?
Seriously,don't see what the major issue is if he's a Marxist? We all have our own philosophies and beliefs on how we live our lives..
Respecting others opinions whether or not I agree with them is prob one of them. Unlike some other folk on here.

Failed bid for a perceived Moral Highground. You must think these strikes are "polite"

Ahh, cheers Ernie.
Enfht, I do think we're spending more as a nation than we should. Not in denial (as you put it) of anything thanks.
I would like you to postulate as to how the govt managed to find the £1.6 billion for the two initiatives noted above if we're so skint tho.
Btw, you're not coming across very well on this. But you prob know that already.

What now? Failed? Only failed if I was trying to achieve something, I'm just responding to your posts in the spirit of the debate.
Jeezo, it's Saturday night for petes sake. No need tobe so pleasant!

Edit: you haven't provided any responses to
my points above btw..

Seriously,don't see what the major issue is if he's a Marxist?

People who are incapable of providing a coherent argument rely instead on slapping labels on people, and then pointing an excusing finger at them. Apparently that's all that is required.

The classic and probably most widely used example of this is the semi-literate rednecks in the US who accuse their president of being a Marxist.

Mcboo on here also has a tendency to do it, when he can't think of anything to say.

You should all spare a thought for whoever else may have to use enfht's spittle-flecked keyboard and stop winding the poor chap up.

Still, luckily for comedy you'll all do no such thing.

Enfht- think you've already made your feelings on the strikes pretty clear.. Don't think there's much point me telling you my perspective on them, is there?

I haven't looked at your links because this is your "proof" that we aren't in too much debt and still have money in the pot.

Che didn't debate, he murdered

You seem somewhat confused Ernest?

Astoundingly, someone on Any Answers made a very good point re' the strike, which was that maybe some of those in the public sector might have been a bit more willing to "take one for the team", had those dishing out the medicine been seen to have done anything themsleves to show that "we are all in this together"

Currently MPs get a pension based on 3/80ths of final salary per year's service as opposed to 1/80th that most people get get + of course they get a ton of support when they are voted out (a nice golden handshake that perfectly demonstrates the "rewards for failure" culture). True they are currently having their salary and conditions "reviewed", but maybe it would have been a good idea to have doen that first, before asking the teachers to do their bit. Maybe then there wouldn't be quite so much resentment?

Also, @THM who said

There is an annoying habit in politics for Labour to blame the bankers

As per the MPs - it's not just the anger at what the bankers did, but at the total lack of contrition since and the fact that to all intents and purposes they have gone back to "business as usual".

Nope, not "proof" of anything really. Just links to the stories on the BBC, that's all..
I'm just asking you to explain why, if as a country we're so skint and need to make such deep and far reaching cuts (etc.) how the coalition can manage to find 1.6 billion squid to fund new initiatives??
That's it, not trying to catch you out, or score points or even mock you (that seems to be your thing).. I'd just like an answer..

You really don't think we're skint do you.

Are you "rich" according to your credit card, is that why you don't grasp the concept of deficit?

You really don't think we're skint do you.
Are you "rich" according to your credit card, is that why you don't grasp the concept of deficit?

Anyway, fed up feeding the troll..
Armageddon outa here!

What makes you assume I even support the spending you mention?

I'll trip trap off too

Night night ladies xx

^^^ You see ? Typical public servant.....no respect for the hard-pressed taxpayers what pay their wages. Shocking.

HA HA HA HAAAAAA!

😆

Well that was fun.. Glad I walked away for a bit..
Er.. Is he/she like that all the time?

Clegg's £1bn is a sham, it's just a poorer version of the Future Jobs Fund that the coalition scrapped. Does that count as a U-turn? If so I'll add it to the list.

althepal - Member
Well that was fun.. Glad I walked away for a bit..
Er.. Is he/she like that all the time?

POSTED 4 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST

Who; Ernie? sometimes.

😀

[url= http://thoughcowardsflinch.com/2011/11/26/why-did-the-bbc-lie-about-cleggs-youth-contract/ ]The figures behind Clegg's 'Youth Contract'[/url]

t seems likely that the overall budget of £1bn has been chosen by the government in order to mirror the last government’s £1bn Future Jobs Fund

enfht - Member

You could get a different job instead of trying to crush your employer who I fund.

The problem is they couldn't get a job in the private sector. No one will have them and they'd have to work for a living.

My wife works for the civil service and we had a bit of food poisoning over the weekend, on Monday I went out to work (pubic sector) keeping a very close eye on where the toilets were, she had 2 days off sick.

She only had the 2 days off because if she went in ill she would have been riduculed by those around here and her bosses, who are always off sick.

...instead of trying to crush your employer who I fund.

You see with that one line all Public Sectors will be staring opened mouth at their computer screens. I can't believe people come out with that line. Do they think that public sector workers work tax free and have tax free spendings too.

DoctorNick, Ambulance A+E staff are working to rule which suits me as I'd not take full industrial action, sorry Ernie, because of the service I provide.

The problem is they couldn't get a job in the private sector. No one will have them and they'd have to work for a living.

[s]Oh Christ another one. Yeah yeah that's right I've done nothing this week, I've gone to work and skived hidden away just let people forget they called for an Ambulance.[/s]

Awww! Crap I really must read all the post.

I'm probably 2 days late, and my opinion is either going to be a rep-eat of some one else or ignored, but heres my 5 cents.....

What people seem to fail to realise is that the pensions given to the public sector, were given in a time of growth by a Labour government, assuming that the growth was going to continue. We are now in a time where the growth is much slower (having come from a recession (or are we still in it?)) so the 'guarantees' made by a previous government are worthless and irrelevant.

I've worked in both sectors BTW (not that it matters)....

What people seem to fail to realise is that the pensions given to the public sector, were given in a time of growth by a Labour government

Oh dearie me.

My wife works for the civil service and we had a bit of food poisoning over the weekend, on Monday I went out to work ([b]pubic[/b] sector) keeping a very close eye on where the toilets were, she had 2 days off sick.

😯

What people seem to fail to realise is that the pensions given to the public sector, were given in a time of growth by a Labour government

You think the pension arrangements were put in place in 1997?

Also worked in both sectors. I now (in the NHS) have to work longer/harder to get paid less, but have slightly more security.

I'm sure there are jobs in both the private + public sector which allow you to put your feet up, but you have to go up into middle management to find anyone in our health board who isn't grafting hard. Frontline services have been squeezed allot over the last couple of years.

The NHS pension scheme is a net contributor to the treasury.

What people seem to fail to realise is that the pensions given to the public sector, were given in a time of growth by a Labour government

Must try harder.

Was more referring to Enfht.. Wonder what that stands for..
Yeah Drac, I had a nice quiet night.. Spent 45 min shovelling food down myself cos I wasn't sure if the phone was about to ring, oh aye, and about 11 and a quarter hours dealing with the sick, the needy, and the drunks..
Horrible night to be out too!
Guess I'm lucky to still have a job at all!! Glad about Wednesday, I share your sentiments regarding the whole thing. I am a bit worried about there being some conflict between us and control tho.. See how it goes I guess.
Getting back on topic, were the pensions not reviewed four years ago when things were starting to go downhill?
And is it not the case that the gvmt takes about 2 billion (yep, billion I think it was?) revenue off the top of our Nhs pension fund every year to go into the public purse and folk are still moaning that we're not paying our way, never mind our contributions?
Hmmph, I'm off to bed, gotta go out again tonight so prob need some sleep!

The NHS pension scheme is a net contributor to the treasury.

Can you explain that?

Because that phrase makes it sound like they (the pension/Treasury whatever) pay out less than they take in. So either

1) Individuals get out less than they put in, so where's the sense in paying into it?

2) They are taking more in from current [i]employees[/i] than they are paying out to current [i]pensioners[/i], but that doesn't automatically mean that the current employees are paying enough to cover the cost of their own pensions. Which is the crux of the issue is it not?

Thanks

(Genuine query BTW, not saying you're wrong, it just isn't wholly clear to me).

Also worked in both sectors. I now (in the NHS) have to work longer/harder to get paid less, but have slightly more security.

Poor show emailing me Drac.

Don't abuse your position because I don't agree with you. As if I've been sexist ffs.

Ban me, like I give a shit.

What people seem to fail to realise is that the pensions given to the public sector, were given in a time of growth by a Labour government, assuming that the growth was going to continue. We are now in a time where the growth is much slower (having come from a recession (or are we still in it?)) so the 'guarantees' made by a previous government are worthless and irrelevant.

Roll back to 1991 Tory gov. John major is the mannie in charge.

I [b]had[/b] to join my pension scheme, it was compulsory when I started my employment.

I was ever so slightly anti-strike/whinging public sector/insult of choice before readinbg this thread.

Now...not so sure. Is there anywhere where the real, unspun figures are available for all and sundry to research without the slant of either side?

We all hear the 'gold-plated' argument but we also hear the 'pay/conditions better in private sector' argument, but at least on here we hear the views of people on both sides without it getting all shouty.

I am (and have always been) private sector...I haven't had any payrise since I started current job in Jul 09, and infact took a considerable pay cut when I got made permanent in Feb.

I was ever so slightly anti-strike/whinging public sector/insult of choice before readinbg this thread.

Now...not so sure. Is there anywhere where the real, unspun figures are available for all and sundry to research without the slant of either side?

This is what leaves me unable to get off the fence.

[i]If[/i] things are as the Government says, I am quite prepared to work longer or pay a bit more for my pension. No problem, in principle, doing so if the circumstances require it.

[i]If[/i] things are as the unions suggest, and these pension cuts will not help or are not necessary, then I'm not happy to have mine changed where there is no good reason for doing so.

You can read source after source after source of information, and you still don't know what the truth really is.