Beers needed.
U OK HUN? XX
If you can find any examples of me being so personally nasty to any particular individual I’d be interested to see it
I’m happy to make generic piss-take comments about the PFJ or whatever but I don’t target individuals with snidey nastiness like that
As I’ve described, I’m one of the 3.5 million who haven’t received a single penny of government support in the last year when all my work dried up.
If you think that and the obvious implications of that present fair game as an opportunity to mock me then that says an awful lot about you.
Doesn’t feel very socialist, does it comrade? Rejoicing in other people’s misfortune
I'm starting to worry I won't get a xmas card from binners this year.
I am actually gonna take a break from this thread and maybe STW generally for a while. I don't want to upset anyone, but I'm bored and grumpy and stressed out and a sarky **** at the best of times, so....
Edit: Whoa an ernielynch comeback!
Well, Binners isn’t buying the beers then. I’ll get the first round in…
binners you said U OK HUN in a mocking way to someone who has told you they have been struggling with mental health issues. If I chose to take that personally I could see that as being pretty personal and unpleasant. Get a grip.
Id buy Binners or grum a beer anytime. All of you actually, if I won the lottery.😉
Take a step back lads you have far more in common than you might think and I mean that in a good way.
The way I see it you are both arguing about the best way to save a patient but you are both trying to save said patient which is all that counts.
In the red mist of the moment you might not see that but that doesn't change it being so.
I’m happy to make generic piss-take comments about the PFJ or whatever but I don’t target individuals with snidey nastiness like that
That's exactly how you come across to me: snide and nasty. Earlier, when you asked me to substantiate something, you could've done so without a mouthful of abuse.
So, as I say, try treating people how you wish to be treated. If you do so, I'll respond in kind.
.
These beers are getting warm… where is everyone?
So, as I say, try treating people how you wish to be treated. If you do so, I’ll respond in kind.
I never ever personally insult people, so you can think what you like.
Perhaps you should experiment with the concept? You never know, you might get to like it?
I never respond in kind to you personally attacking me, though I’ve had plenty of opportunities. It’s your default.
@ kelvin,
I'm off to watch Tribes of Europa in a bit, no, that's not some clever political comment. A rather adult SF series as it turns out on Netflix.
Pretty good story line more to the point.
@kelvin I’ll have a glass of red
And it’s good to see that everyone’s favourite Marxist postman is back on the scene. Welcome back comrade. And I am ok hon 😃 xx
Wine?!? Class traitor.
Kelvin called me sucker. I suppose I should be offended but this isn’t real life and I’ve had 30 years of people calling me far worse due to my politics. Someone even tried to kill me once (seriously!) so you lot really need to get some perspective.
I never ever personally insult people, so you can think what you like.
I think that judgement is best left to the people on the receiving end. To me, you're snide and nasty, and a bully at times.
Once again, you've proven that you're unwilling to modify your behaviour, so I'll remind you of this exchange the next time you get all pissy after you've been given a taste of your own medicine.
I suppose I should be offended but this isn’t real life and I’ve had 30 years of people calling me far worse due to my politics.
Sucker was because of your supporting comments about Johnson having “implemented a lot of the Corbyn agenda”. If you actually meant them, he’s played you. I doubt you do though.
To me, you’re snide and nasty, and a bully at times.
People in glass houses. Just satin’
U OK HUN? XX
The Croydon Communist returns....
To me, you’re snide and nasty, and a bully at times.
If it’s worth anything, from a fellow 6th form PFJ ‘comrade’, I can promise you that’s not the case. Binners doesn’t need me to to defend him though. Everyone on here really needs to separate fact from internet fiction.
If you actually meant them
I mean everything I say here.
Good to see the Croydon communist back 😃
[img] 
[/img]
So Keir is wiping the slate clean and reneging on all promises made during leadership election. Honestly this won't bother me if he lays out an ambitious plan going forward.
Electoral reform
Massive infrastructure plan (green)
What else would people like to see?
People in glass houses. Just satin’
I've already said that I'm prepared to modify how I talk to you. But you're not, so it's business as usual.
What else would people like to see?
Electoral reform, more localised devolved power, universal basic income for starters.
Well done for trying to move the conversation forward. Let's see if big hitters allow it.
Let’s see if big hitters allow it.
In that case - has anyone asked Reg?
(Sorry couldn't resist)...
I suppose 'trot' sounds suitably offensive and dismissive even if you have't a clue what it means.
Electoral reform, more localised devolved power, universal basic income for starters.
All three for me please. But then those aren’t policies that will win more seats for Labour (in England). If they were proposed by a proven Labour government when seeking re-election, the public might go for them… but that isn’t a platform to win over the voters who currently don’t trust Labour (despite all the evidence that the alternative are the ones who can not be trusted). I’d be very happy for a Labour to have all three in their next GE manifesto, but I fear it would just result in more arguments “won”, rather than an election won.
UBI is pretty pointless without a job guarantee scheme which would establish a living wage and generate a productive capacity for state spending/ infrastructure etc.
UBI is just another way of controlling benefits/wage subsidies. But I'm not totally against it - just not in isolation.
If you think Keir is giving you anything groundbreaking - you haven't been paying attention to the last 12 months.
So Keir is wiping the slate clean and reneging on all promises made during leadership election. Honestly this won’t bother me if he lays out an ambitious plan going forward.Electoral reform
Massive infrastructure plan (green)What else would people like to see?
They'll do bugger-all - they haven't got the balls to shake things up. As Angela Rayner proved on Breakfast this morning the main Labour policy is bash the Tories on every interview. It's getting tiresome.
Simple question, asked many times - "If 1% payrise is too low, what % payrise would the Labour Party give nurses" - Angela Rayner just kept banging on about wasted NHS Covid contracts given last year.
If they'd just clearly explain what they would do they'd wipe the floor with them.
I had high hopes for Kier Starmer, but he's proving to be a bit of a wet lettuce.
If they’d just clearly explain what they would do they’d wipe the floor with them.
Not necessarily true given the 'demographic' and opinions of their lost 'Red Wall' voters....
There is already an arms length body that proposes across the board pay increases. The Unions want more. The government has overridden the existing proposals and slashed the pay “increase” to 1%. The media questions are aimed at pulling Labour into either a “people versus the unions” or alternatively a “Labour versus the unions” distracting narrative, which is why the front bench are being very careful not to set a top down figure, but to support the arms length body (with likely reform). They are trying to avoid the big bleedingly obvious trap, while keeping the focus on the 1% imposed by the Tories against recommendations and the existing NHS pay plan and recent Conservative promises. The latest line about getting a vote in Parliament on the 1% “increase” is an attempt to pressure the Government into a change in policy this year… to be seen as an “effective opposition”… there is no need for Labour to make commitments on numbers themselves now, when there is no way they can be in government for years.
'If they’d just clearly explain what they would do they’d wipe the floor with them.'
Only if they proposed to do things any differently. If they don't name a figure they don't have to fight for it.
I know they're playing the game and trying to avoid Tory traps. But they just aren't very good at the game. It's like Accrington Stanley -v- Man City at the minute.
Being dictated to by 'avoiding the weekly Tory traps' is a guaranteed losing strategy.
I would say at least 52% of the population think politics is just circus like PMQs and so is basically just like a plot thread on Hollyoaks.
Labour could press the nuclear button and just market themselves as the "Party for People who aren't ****s". Ready and waiting to take in anyone who is grown up enough to know that the rest of the world does not wake up every day saying "thank god for Spitfires and Hurricanes". Policies? Forget those, those boxes can be filled in later.
A lot of anti Brexit feelings were about unelected bureaucrats and waste so scrapping the Lord's or reducing its numbers plus all this wasted money on T&T should be vote winners.
Problem is, once you sign up to the Osborne-style 'fiscal responsibility', 'paying back the debt', 'can't just print money' etc you've shown yourself to be a tory. To put a percentage on it would leave him open to the accusation of having principles so we're stuck with 'fair pay', 'the future will be different to the past', 'be nice to animals' etc. Even Osborne did have the decency to admit that austerity wasn't about paying back the debt but maybe Starmer missed that bit.
I suppose ‘trot’ sounds suitably offensive and dismissive even if you have’t a clue what it means.
Trot is extremely offensive to anyone who ascribes to libertarian socialist ideas. All you need to know is a little history.
Simple question, asked many times – “If 1% payrise is too low, what % payrise would the Labour Party give nurses” – Angela Rayner just kept banging on about wasted NHS Covid contracts given last year.
Exactly what I was saying yesterday. Labour criticise the tories but they wouldn't do much different. If a 1% rise is an insult then so is 5%. In reality nurses and other public sector workers like them should get something like a 30-50% pay rise. Will labour say that? Of course they won't, because when it comes down to it they agree with the tories on all the important stuff.
If a 1% rise is an insult then so is 5%
I'd like to explore that concept further. Can you please elaborate?
I’d like to explore that concept further. Can you please elaborate?
I don't know the exact figures but I'm sure I read that for the typical nurse a 1% pay rise equates to about £3.50 a week. 5% would then be £17.50 a week. What major difference is 17 quid a week going to make to anyone? Mrs Daz is a senior social worker which is fairly similar to a nurse in pay terms. She had to study for longer, has to maintain her professional qualifications, has a more responsible job, is more professional, works far harder, and undoubtedly provides far more value to society in her job than I do. Yet she gets paid less than half than I do. This is pretty typical across the board. One of my mates is a paramedic, again he gets paid half of what I do. Same for police, firefighters etc. Labour should be addressing this ridiculous imbalance but instead they talk in terms of single figure percentages. It's pathetic.
In reality nurses and other public sector workers like them should get something like a 30-50% pay rise. Will labour say that?
In one year? Would sir like his moon on a stick gold plated?
In one year? Would sir like his moon on a stick gold plated?
It could be phased in over a parliament. The message would be that by the time a labour goverment is finished, public sector workers/professionals would be paid the same as their private sector peers. I don't that's at all unrealistic or controversial. The only reason it is perceived to be unrealistic is because labour are no different to the tories on the central issue of government spending and finances.
So, you could be backing, say, 5% (or even 3.5%) this year, rather than 1%, and also be talking about a much more significant cumulative rise by 2030? They're not incompatible. But you can see why keeping the media message simple... "1% this year is an insult"... seems to be the aim. Voters are thinking about now, not even the next election, never mind where we could be once a "Labour government is finished"... that needs to be spelled out in an election year, based on what is known then.
I saw the figures the other day of stagnant wages vs inflation. I think in line with inflation of the last 10 years would be a good starting point.
So 10% rise minimum.
I think you both have it right... a series of pay rises that over the next 8 years brings their wages at least up to where they would have been had they tracked inflation while the Conservatives have been in power, but ideally more to bring them closer to private sector wages. All paired with a retention and recruitment programme (including funding nurse training/education again, along with all other post A-level age education). That should be long term policy.
This month is should all be about how the Government promised one thing, and then delivered far less, with a cut to their planned wage increases, at a time when the country has relied on and cheered on health and care staff, and their hardwork, dedication, and their willingness to do what had to be done for all of us at increased risk to themselves. Keep that running in all media channels by all possible means. Make it stick.
