I can understand striking in Duckmans case.

The Indy artcle is probably the best analysis i’ve read of the current situation both balanced and credible.

….certainly more credible than most responses to this thread 😯

duckman – Member
That article would suggest it is only pensions we are concerned about.

That article suggests you are losing the argument. Every time Mark Serwotka speaks in public, you lose.

hora – Member
Just remember this the next time you are at the ballot box.

All on Labours watch wasn’t it.

PFI was a Tory invention, and the rest were immediately upheld by CallMeDave .

They are based on analysis from John Hutton – a former Labour minister, no less – with the inescapable conclusion that the generosity of the current pension arrangements is simply unsustainable. With people living longer, and the demographic balance tilting towards the elderly, there is no alternative but for individuals to take on more of the financial load that currently rests on taxpayers’ shoulders.

Hutton, who also said:

“We have to avoid a new race to the bottom here.”

“If these reforms have any chance of succeeding then people need to know that they are being treated fairly … there should be full and proper consultation and discussion with the trade unions. That is how we do things in Britain – the public would take a very dim view of any government that fails to honour this basic requirement.

“We must try and avoid the confrontation and division that marked previous decades and must not turn the clock back.”

Remember this?

Danny Alexander jumps the gun

Months of talks to negotiate a new pension deal for public servants are on the brink of collapse after unions reacted with fury to the government’s surprise confirmation of the new scheme weeks before talks had concluded.

Union leaders were incensed after Danny Alexander, the Liberal Democrat chief secretary to the Treasury, appeared to undermine talks by announcing crucial details of the new pension plan for 6 million public servants ahead of a meeting with union representatives this month.

Frodo – Member
The Indy artcle is probably the best analysis i’ve read of the current situation both balanced and credible.

….certainly more credible than most responses to this thread

Of course it is (to you), because it supports your view.

How do you propose we get out of such massive debt?

If the budget deficit is such a serious problem, then why is the basic rate of income tax still lower than it was during the boom years ?

OK, maybe there was a argument back in the boom years which said that the UK could afford to lower the basic rate to 20%, although I would dispute it, but surely there is no justification whatsoever to keep it at that when the deficit is so high ?

Britain today has a basic tax rate considerably lower than it was during the Thatcher years, and people wonder why the government is skint ? …..where do they expect the money to come from ffs ?

You can’t have services without paying for them.

You could also reduce the deficit by getting people back to work. If Britain can’t afford a one day token strike by public sector workers, then it certainly can’t afford to have 2.7 million people unemployed every day.

You could further reduce the deficit by nationalising the utilities and using their vast profits.

Of course I fully realise that those suggestions are ideologically unpalatable for the government, but that is the only reason why they are not implemented. And the only reason why the government persists with their attacks on public sector workers.

Off course it is (to you), because it supports your view.

No I’m saying that as we have a left leaning paper which has presented what appears to be a fair and balanced article. If this appeared say in the mail or telegraph then it may be just as factual but in many peoples eyes less credible.

Some of the vitriol and dogma spouted on here is quite frankly unpleasent and certainly not credible.

Some of the vitriol and dogma spouted on here is quite frankly unpleasent and certainly not credible.

Such as?

hora – Member
Just remember this the next time you are at the ballot box.
All on Labours watch wasn’t it.

his political analysis makes flashearts looks open an impartial- i dont knw why i am surprised he has gone for something simplistic though
PS is everything that happens now the current govts fault or does this sort of deep analysis only hold up for Labour govts? Perhaps its dave fault about the Euro crisis for example?

The ‘Independent’ article raises an interesting point. I’ll be on strike on Wednesday, but i’d prefer we all worked to rule.

PFI was a Tory invention, and the rest were immediately upheld by CallMeDave .

PFI is actually a very useful financial method of funding projects. The fact that it was badly managed by the previous ‘Labour’ government does not mean that used on the right projects with the right risk management and planning cannot provide value for money.

Think of it as a mortgage. Most people cannot afford to buy a house with cash. A mortgage however allows the purchase for little more and less than renting an equivilent house would be. Its a similar principle.

Lifer…..why arent you winning the argument? Why does the Indy (and Guardian) not come out in support of strikes?

Such as?

The opening post onwards! Page 1 is particularly bad.

No specifics?

Labour aren’t in power anymore, one of my suggestions of how to save money was to renegotiate it. Who started it, and who did what to it is inconsequential.

PS is everything that happens now the current govts fault or does this sort of deep analysis only hold up for Labour govts? Perhaps its dave fault about the Euro crisis for example?

The really sad this is you CANT tear up PFI contracts. They tend to be longterm and to buy out of them, well.

Its not like me with bike frames, you can’t flip flop and change your mind in the real world!

Very difficult to renegotiate contracts that have alraedy been signed. You don’t have a legal leg to stand on. You could use repeat business as leverage but many of the problems were projects that were rushed without the full risks been known.

Hence the high price tag, now on some of these projects the risks may have been realised and hence the contractor would not have made anything more than a modest profit.

Where the contractor sucessfully managed these risks large profits could be made.

The onus must be on the client to define and manage risks and liability to maximise value for money. The government of the day failed. I’m not saying any other administartion would have done better but they surely could not have done any worse.

Perhaps one of the hard done to strikers can look after my son whilst school is shut yet again

How about popping him round to the local Liberal or conservative club and getting them to look after him? I think you’ll find its their fault theres going to be a strike. If they would stop a moment and actually discuss the matter with the unions you’ll find they will cancel it in favour of talks.

How about popping him round to the local Liberal or conservative club

You are suggesting leaving him in a pub?

jota180 you missed out 1 group there

MPs final salary scheme…..

Taxpayer……..Employee
28% …………..11.9, 7.9 or 5.9%

Why does the Indy (and Guardian) not come out in support of strikes?

I’m not sure that the Guardian has ever supported a strike, although to be fair I very rarely waste my time reading their editorials.

The Guardian is always quick to create a sing and dance about ‘social injustice’ and express their displeasure at government policy, but when push comes shove they always fall on the wrong side of the fence.

They can talk the talk but have been proved to be totally incapable to walk the walk.

They are the paper for ‘after dinner activists’ who prefer to waffle than do anything.

And I’ll remind you that the Guardian urged their readers to vote LibDem last election. ****.

I wonder how many public sector STW’ers on strike will be posting on here on strike day?…

jota180 you missed out 1 group there

I didn’t miss out anything, I copied and pasted from a gov site and simply asked if the figures were correct

I still don’t know, are they?
I’ve got no angle here, I’m just interested to know the correct figures

Very difficult to renegotiate contracts that have alraedy been signed

PMSL : Apparently it isn’t, apparently CallmeDave and the lads can do it at the drop of a hat when it suits them. Haven’t you understood any of what this is about????

Posted 5 minutes ago # Report-Posternie_lynch – Member

Why does the Indy (and Guardian) not come out in support of strikes?

I’m not sure that the Guardian has ever supported a strike, although to be fair I very rarely waste my time reading their editorials.

The Guardian is always quick to create a sing and dance about ‘social injustice’ and express their displeasure at government policy, but when push comes shove they always fall on the wrong side of the fence.

etc etc

I don’t think you really care to win the argument for public opinion Ernie. Everybody out, mass action and so on……in the real world you can’t force the taxpayer to do what you want.

I wonder how many public sector STW’ers on strike will be posting on here on strike day?

What’s that got to do with anything?

Ernie wrote – They are the paper for ‘after dinner activists’ who prefer to waffle than do anything.

…….you could also add that they are as financially detached and insulated from the ‘real world’ as most of those making the decisions.

I wonder how many public sector STW’ers on strike will be posting on here on strike day?…

A strike is a withdrawal of labour Hora, not a boycott of an interweb site. I think a few of the revolting peasants might just be able to afford one of these new fangled phone thingies which let you access said interweb, even when not sat at an office desk in front of a PC.

I wonder how many public sector STW’ers on strike will be posting on here on strike day?..

says the hard working private sector worker at work today without any sense of irony or self awareness 🙄

What’s that got to do with anything?

Hora likes to concern himself with the more pressing problems which everyone else ignores.

If the budget deficit is such a serious problem, then why is the basic rate of income tax still lower than it was during the boom years ?

OK, maybe there was a argument back in the boom years which said that the UK could afford to lower the basic rate to 20%, although I would dispute it, but surely there is no justification whatsoever to keep it at that when the deficit is so high ?

Britain today has a basic tax rate considerably lower than it was during the Thatcher years, and people wonder why the government is skint ? …..where do they expect the money to come from ffs ?

You can’t have services without paying for them.

You could also reduce the deficit by getting people back to work. If Britain can’t afford a one day token strike by public sector workers, then it certainly can’t afford to have 2.7 million people unemployed every day.

You could further reduce the deficit by nationalising the utilities and using their vast profits.

Of course I fully realise that those suggestions are ideologically unpalatable for the government, but that is the only reason why they are not implemented. And the only reason why the government persists with their attacks on public sector workers.

Ernie – I’m assuming you lean towards the left politically? Why are you advocating a rise in taxation for the people who earn the least?

The economy is screwed because there is too much public and private debt, and the resultant deleveraging is squeezing disposable incomes. Do you really think raising the basic rate of tax will solve that?

Everyone knows you have to pay taxes to get public services – can’t you at least recognise the viewpoint that a decent proportion of the taxpaying population thinks they are paying too much for too little? Even worse, they feel like they are paying through their noses not just for services, but to keep public sector employees more comfortable in retirement than they will be!

I also love your proposal that the 2.7m unemployed should be placed in work to reduce the deficit…perhaps some public sector jobs could be created?

kimbers – Member

jota180 you missed out 1 group there

MPs final salary scheme…..

Taxpayer……..Employee
28% …………..11.9, 7.9 or 5.9%

my point wasnt that you had been lax in your research its simply that MPs get at least 10% more taxpayer contribution than any other public sector worker, not to mention their benefits scheme ….

Even worse, they feel like they are paying through their noses not just for services, but to keep public sector employees more comfortable in retirement than they will be!

dave and the right wing press thanks you for getting on message and not wanting better conditions for yourself but worse/equally bad conditions for others …WELL DONE

dave and the right wing press thanks you for getting on message and not wanting better conditions for yourself but worse/equally bad conditions for others …WELL DONE

You’ve reached the final stage – accusations of false consciousness…

Do you think it is conceivable that every working person in the UK economy could have the same entitlements as those in the public sector? How would we fund this? I don’t need a costed proposal, just a basic idea so I can tell George Osborne.

Ernie – I’m assuming you lean towards the left politically?

Ever so slightly.

my point wasnt that you had been lax in your research its simply that MPs get at least 10% more taxpayer contribution than any other public sector worker, not to mention their benefits scheme ….

And my point is I can’t find a list of figures from somewhere I can trust not to put a spin on it – hence the question and the attached jpg

Are those number correct? or spun – I accept that other numbers may well of been omitted from that table of given a confrontational column heading

The economy is screwed because there is too much public and private debt, and the resultant deleveraging is squeezing disposable incomes. Do you really think raising the basic rate of tax will solve that?

Under the proposed pension changes, my take home pay will be reduced by 5%. That’s money I’ll not be spending on stuff. Is this a good time to be reducing the spending power of public sector workers?

Is this a good time to be reducing the spending power of public sector workers?

I’d say so. They’ll only go spanking it on organic veg and hemp clothing

They’ll only go spanking it on organic veg and hemp clothing

Our local mung bean supplier is really struggling.

Why are you advocating a rise in taxation for the people who earn the least?

A rise in the basic rate of tax will affect everyone, and those who earn more will end up paying the most, albeit there will be cap. If you think about it is the fairest way of increasing the tax take because it really will impact just about everyone and in a propoortional way; those that earn the most will pay the most. It also gets round the rather small minded of attitute of “raise taxes for group X because I don’t belong to group X”

I’m not going to read all of this thread (no time at the moment althoguh I read most of the previous one ref pensions) but it seems a real shame that most people on this thread are genuine working people, be they public or private. The reality and truth is that most of are being shafted by those in the upper echelons of society. The only people profiting out of the current turmoil are the politicians and thier buddys, the party that happens to be in power doesn’t make much difference, especially in todays modern society. I don’t know the best cure for our ills but if all of us, whether we are being shafted by the government or our private employers could find some common harmony and work together only then do we have any chance of ridding society of the giant leeches that are sucking us dry whilst gorging themselves on our toils.

I am not allowed to strike or even talk about striking in my job and I already pay more than pretty much anyone into my pension (12 percent), is this fair? To top it off I have also had a day off cancelled so that everyone else can have a voice next week and strike!

Trevor.