| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 21:57 - Nov 20 with 946 views | Chesham_Saint |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 18:35 - Nov 20 by SalisburySaint |
Can’t speak for Hants CC, but have worked for Southampton City Council for over 30 years and in last 10years, as government funding has been reduced, they have made significant redundancies. My specialist section for example used to have 10 professionally qualified members and now had 3. Not only that but many sections are enable to get staff in to replace people leaving because the wages are not competitive with equivalent posts in the private sector. I have several times been close to being one of those being made redundant as part of these cost cutting exercises.
And have had to sack a couple of members of staff myself, not a pleasant situation.
As for the pension I will receive when I retire, I pay around 8.5% of my salary into my pension each month, have done for over 40years and have been prepared to be be paid less in wages compared to others similarly qualified for the of receiving the pension I will receive. But those critical of our pensions seem to think we get this benefit as a perk, but our input in lower wages and personal monthly contribution often ignored. [Post edited 21 Nov 2020 10:04]
|
That’s very unfortunate about the redundancies. I did however refer to mass redundancies meaning where a whole company goes down and everyone loses their jobs. I’m not decrying public sector workers by the way, most are essential and society couldn’t function properly without them. Generally however, they do have greater job security.
As for pension contributions many/most in the private sector contribute to a scheme but there’s no guarantee of the level of rewards they’ll get. Final salary schemes (I think) still apply to many in government but are a thing of the distant past for the private sector who have to make do with a far inferior product.
As to the lower wages - I reckon many would trade the 1% less for more job security. |  |
|  |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 21:59 - Nov 20 with 941 views | Chesham_Saint |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 21:48 - Nov 20 by Sadoldgit |
I appreciate the time that you spent in your response 1885 and don’t disagree with what you say. My point is why now after years of underfunding the armed forces and everything else? We have a navy. We have an Air Force. Yes things need to be replaced. Why now exactly? In the middle of a pandemic when people are struggling financially all of a sudden defence is a concern and billions of pounds have been earmarked for things that really are not essential at this point in time. As for nuclear war, it hasn’t happened since 1945 and there is a reason for that. No one will launch a nuclear missile any more. |
And why is it that no one will launch a nuclear weapon then Sogs? | |
| |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 22:15 - Nov 20 with 922 views | 1885_SFC |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 21:48 - Nov 20 by Sadoldgit |
I appreciate the time that you spent in your response 1885 and don’t disagree with what you say. My point is why now after years of underfunding the armed forces and everything else? We have a navy. We have an Air Force. Yes things need to be replaced. Why now exactly? In the middle of a pandemic when people are struggling financially all of a sudden defence is a concern and billions of pounds have been earmarked for things that really are not essential at this point in time. As for nuclear war, it hasn’t happened since 1945 and there is a reason for that. No one will launch a nuclear missile any more. |
Because governments will always find an excuse not to beef up the armed forces. There's never a "good" time to spend vast sums on the military. Teachers want this. The police want that. The NHS... new rail links... new roads... new houses... new turbines, power stations - the lists go on.
Every government under-spends on defence. They promise healthy budgets in their manifesto's but fail to deliver when they're in No.10. It's been the case ever since my days on HM Ships back in the late 70's and throughout the whole 1980's; the Navy is underfunded.
So for once, from both a personal point & from many generations of family serving in the Navy , it's good to hear a PM say that they're going to increase spending on the Forces. I'll believe it when I see it of course, because MP's of all persuasions are notoriously fibbing bastards - but at least it looks & sounds... "promising". |  |
| |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:14 - Nov 21 with 853 views | SalisburySaint |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 20:46 - Nov 20 by Berber |
So you have accepted a lower wage in order to get a better pension? But are still moaning about it? So far as i know, many parts of the public sector have notably more attractive vacation allowances too, again, accepted a a trade off for perceived lack of pay increases.
The NHS have rightly received much praise in past months. But for decades, every government (all flavours) have put in significant extra funds for new treatments, and almost on every occasion, about 90% has gone on wage increases because Doctors, Nurses and ancillary workers have taken the "me first" approach. It's no wonder governments go for pay freezes after getting their fingers burned.
The head of the fireman's union as good as said. "You can stick your clapping in appreciation, we want more money," recently
It is hardly surprising that those in the private sector (and many are self employed) have little sympathy for public sector workers even when it is merited. That's not a political position, it's a moral one. |
I’m not moaning about anything, just pointing out common misconceptions regards the pensions local government staff receive especially regards the proportion we pay into scheme ourselves
I am happy with what I receive and the flexible leave and final salary pension I’ll get and decided years ago to stay for here rather than go chasing the big buck in order to get those benefits.
But in public sector it is now becoming more difficult to attract new staff as wages are generally lower and people do not see the benefit in a good pension and flexible leave the way I do.
Hence why so many NHS Staff need to be recruited from overseas |  | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:27 - Nov 21 with 841 views | Chesham_Saint |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:14 - Nov 21 by SalisburySaint |
I’m not moaning about anything, just pointing out common misconceptions regards the pensions local government staff receive especially regards the proportion we pay into scheme ourselves
I am happy with what I receive and the flexible leave and final salary pension I’ll get and decided years ago to stay for here rather than go chasing the big buck in order to get those benefits.
But in public sector it is now becoming more difficult to attract new staff as wages are generally lower and people do not see the benefit in a good pension and flexible leave the way I do.
Hence why so many NHS Staff need to be recruited from overseas |
A final salary pension is incredible to have in this day and age and is an utterly massive differentiator between the two sectors. | |
| |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:29 - Nov 21 with 840 views | Sadoldgit |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 21:59 - Nov 20 by Chesham_Saint |
And why is it that no one will launch a nuclear weapon then Sogs? |
You know the answer as much as I do. Because of the amount of destruction they cause. Our so called nuclear deterrent didn’t stop Argentina invading the Falklands. It doesn’t stop ISIS terror attacks. It doesn’t stop Putin sending death gangs abroad. Nuclear weapons did not deter ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. Everyone knows that they will not be used. That is why they are pointless. There are so many more effective ways of waging war now - just look at the chaos and economic effects of covid. Atomic weapons are as yesterday as sending a gunboat. |  | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:35 - Nov 21 with 838 views | Chesham_Saint |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:29 - Nov 21 by Sadoldgit |
You know the answer as much as I do. Because of the amount of destruction they cause. Our so called nuclear deterrent didn’t stop Argentina invading the Falklands. It doesn’t stop ISIS terror attacks. It doesn’t stop Putin sending death gangs abroad. Nuclear weapons did not deter ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. Everyone knows that they will not be used. That is why they are pointless. There are so many more effective ways of waging war now - just look at the chaos and economic effects of covid. Atomic weapons are as yesterday as sending a gunboat. |
Wrong. Are you being deliberately disingenuous? It's not the destruction they cause per se, but the MUTUALLY assured destruction.
Clearly WMD (ask your buddy Alastair, if you've forgotten what that means) are not going to curtail localized wars, particularly if they are in the hands of a responsible country such as the UK. | |
| |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:38 - Nov 21 with 836 views | JaySaint |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:29 - Nov 21 by Sadoldgit |
You know the answer as much as I do. Because of the amount of destruction they cause. Our so called nuclear deterrent didn’t stop Argentina invading the Falklands. It doesn’t stop ISIS terror attacks. It doesn’t stop Putin sending death gangs abroad. Nuclear weapons did not deter ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. Everyone knows that they will not be used. That is why they are pointless. There are so many more effective ways of waging war now - just look at the chaos and economic effects of covid. Atomic weapons are as yesterday as sending a gunboat. |
They have helped us to remain at the top table and preserve our very selfish, self centred way of life...
You could argue what is the point in having any conventional forces, for anyone, anywhere, given these things still happened!
hold on, what was that? these skirmishes took place largely against nations without nuclear weapons and/or strong conventional forces? funny that
The fight against the argies was not a war, it was to liberate the islands. Unless you believed we should have pointed our nukes at buenos airies? [Post edited 21 Nov 2020 10:42]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 11:56 - Nov 21 with 804 views | Sadoldgit |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:38 - Nov 21 by JaySaint |
They have helped us to remain at the top table and preserve our very selfish, self centred way of life...
You could argue what is the point in having any conventional forces, for anyone, anywhere, given these things still happened!
hold on, what was that? these skirmishes took place largely against nations without nuclear weapons and/or strong conventional forces? funny that
The fight against the argies was not a war, it was to liberate the islands. Unless you believed we should have pointed our nukes at buenos airies? [Post edited 21 Nov 2020 10:42]
|
Wasn’t a war? Tell that to those who died or were maimed. It had all of the ingredients so yes, I think we can class it as a war. And a huge nuclear Arsenal didn’t deter the invasion. Conventional forces are something completely different and have a multitude of uses, not least in peacetime. For example they can help with the vaccination programme, something a Trident missile can’t do! 😉 | | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 12:26 - Nov 21 with 791 views | JaySaint |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 11:56 - Nov 21 by Sadoldgit |
Wasn’t a war? Tell that to those who died or were maimed. It had all of the ingredients so yes, I think we can class it as a war. And a huge nuclear Arsenal didn’t deter the invasion. Conventional forces are something completely different and have a multitude of uses, not least in peacetime. For example they can help with the vaccination programme, something a Trident missile can’t do! 😉 |
what ever you say, does not make it a war.
They invaded the Falklands, not the UK. The Falklands are an over sea's territory. Self governing but with certainly policies determined by the UK (not all).
it. was. not. a. war! | |
| |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 18:13 - Nov 21 with 755 views | Bridders2 |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 12:26 - Nov 21 by JaySaint |
what ever you say, does not make it a war.
They invaded the Falklands, not the UK. The Falklands are an over sea's territory. Self governing but with certainly policies determined by the UK (not all).
it. was. not. a. war! |
Talking to Soppy is like arguing with a 13 year old, it just goes round in circles. Naive or what? | | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 18:28 - Nov 21 with 748 views | Chesham_Saint |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 18:13 - Nov 21 by Bridders2 |
Talking to Soppy is like arguing with a 13 year old, it just goes round in circles. Naive or what? |
That’s a tad harsh..however, Sogs does tend to avoid answering a question when it suits.... | |
| |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 20:28 - Nov 21 with 719 views | Sadoldgit |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 18:13 - Nov 21 by Bridders2 |
Talking to Soppy is like arguing with a 13 year old, it just goes round in circles. Naive or what? |
Do you have problems with people with different opinions? | | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 20:30 - Nov 21 with 718 views | Sadoldgit |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 12:26 - Nov 21 by JaySaint |
what ever you say, does not make it a war.
They invaded the Falklands, not the UK. The Falklands are an over sea's territory. Self governing but with certainly policies determined by the UK (not all).
it. was. not. a. war! |
Google it. It is described every time as The Falklands War. Therefore. It.Was.A.War. | | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 20:32 - Nov 21 with 716 views | Sadoldgit |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 18:28 - Nov 21 by Chesham_Saint |
That’s a tad harsh..however, Sogs does tend to avoid answering a question when it suits.... |
I don’t do it deliberately. I don’t read every post so miss some when asked a question. I also am not desperate to have the last word and there are times when it is just best to leave something there. 😉 | | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 21:49 - Nov 21 with 694 views | JaySaint |
meanwhile....
| |
| |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 22:25 - Nov 21 with 676 views | Saintsforeverj |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 21:49 - Nov 21 by JaySaint |
meanwhile....
|
Starmer seems like a sound and sensible leader. But the party is so influenced and / or full of, "extreme left wingers". With Starmer, Labour have a chance of doing much better than recent years at the next election. But the members and McCluskey want Corbyn back or somebody with extreme left views. The people in the background, trying to remove Labour's best leader in years, is an example of why we have continuous Tory rule. The point is, those who want a Labour government, need to examine why the majority don't vote for them. This again, is another example why. [Post edited 21 Nov 2020 22:27]
| |
| |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 12:50 - Nov 22 with 589 views | Berber |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 10:14 - Nov 21 by SalisburySaint |
I’m not moaning about anything, just pointing out common misconceptions regards the pensions local government staff receive especially regards the proportion we pay into scheme ourselves
I am happy with what I receive and the flexible leave and final salary pension I’ll get and decided years ago to stay for here rather than go chasing the big buck in order to get those benefits.
But in public sector it is now becoming more difficult to attract new staff as wages are generally lower and people do not see the benefit in a good pension and flexible leave the way I do.
Hence why so many NHS Staff need to be recruited from overseas |
Fair enough,  |  | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 12:52 - Nov 22 with 588 views | Sadoldgit |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 22:25 - Nov 21 by Saintsforeverj |
Starmer seems like a sound and sensible leader. But the party is so influenced and / or full of, "extreme left wingers". With Starmer, Labour have a chance of doing much better than recent years at the next election. But the members and McCluskey want Corbyn back or somebody with extreme left views. The people in the background, trying to remove Labour's best leader in years, is an example of why we have continuous Tory rule. The point is, those who want a Labour government, need to examine why the majority don't vote for them. This again, is another example why. [Post edited 21 Nov 2020 22:27]
|
This will surprise you but I totally agree with you. I have been having an exchange of views elsewhere with left wingers who are attacking Starmer. A very old friend of mine who would describe himself as a Marxist is dead set against Starmer. They are likening him to Blair, which to me is totally ridiculous. If the different factions can’t come together for the overall good of the Labour Party, then perhaps it is time that the party split and the far left to go its own way. This, for better or worse, is a very conservative country. We accept socialism when it is wrapped up in centerist rhetoric by far left dogma scares the crap out of the voters. Starmer is the best chance Labour have of getting back into power. Ok, it will be watered down Labour to a number of supporters, but that has to be better than the appalling government who clearly have no regard to for people who voted for them and spend their time protecting each other and making their buddies richer. | | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 14:52 - Nov 22 with 564 views | Saintsforeverj |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 12:52 - Nov 22 by Sadoldgit |
This will surprise you but I totally agree with you. I have been having an exchange of views elsewhere with left wingers who are attacking Starmer. A very old friend of mine who would describe himself as a Marxist is dead set against Starmer. They are likening him to Blair, which to me is totally ridiculous. If the different factions can’t come together for the overall good of the Labour Party, then perhaps it is time that the party split and the far left to go its own way. This, for better or worse, is a very conservative country. We accept socialism when it is wrapped up in centerist rhetoric by far left dogma scares the crap out of the voters. Starmer is the best chance Labour have of getting back into power. Ok, it will be watered down Labour to a number of supporters, but that has to be better than the appalling government who clearly have no regard to for people who voted for them and spend their time protecting each other and making their buddies richer. |
And that is the problem with the lack of opposition at the moment. Any of my arguments against Labour, is more against the extreme left or Marxist idiolology running through it. Although I lean more towards the right, I just want "middle ground" policies that are sensible, with a "likeable" enough leader. Starmer actually comes across as sound, but those trying to remove him or those causing trouble will again cost Labour the election, so they are destroying themselves. These people just can't see that the majority don't want "extreme left". The majority in this country work hard and fear that amongst other things, an extreme left government would allow the lazy to thrive.
So, in the end, although they are nowhere near perfect, they vote Tory, because the alternative, especially as it was under Corbyn, was just unthinkable to most people. So, if Labour want to be elected, they need to look at themselves. Starmer is doing exactly that, but will he survive is the question. Hope so as the country needs an effective opposition but these people arn't going to go away. [Post edited 22 Nov 2020 14:57]
| |
| |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 15:36 - Nov 22 with 542 views | Berber |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 14:52 - Nov 22 by Saintsforeverj |
And that is the problem with the lack of opposition at the moment. Any of my arguments against Labour, is more against the extreme left or Marxist idiolology running through it. Although I lean more towards the right, I just want "middle ground" policies that are sensible, with a "likeable" enough leader. Starmer actually comes across as sound, but those trying to remove him or those causing trouble will again cost Labour the election, so they are destroying themselves. These people just can't see that the majority don't want "extreme left". The majority in this country work hard and fear that amongst other things, an extreme left government would allow the lazy to thrive.
So, in the end, although they are nowhere near perfect, they vote Tory, because the alternative, especially as it was under Corbyn, was just unthinkable to most people. So, if Labour want to be elected, they need to look at themselves. Starmer is doing exactly that, but will he survive is the question. Hope so as the country needs an effective opposition but these people arn't going to go away. [Post edited 22 Nov 2020 14:57]
|
This is the nub of what is wrong with the Labour Party. Under Blair and Brown, public spending, taxes and employment all increased. But this wasn't enough for those who think that the Arthur Scargill approach is the right way. | | | |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 18:51 - Nov 22 with 506 views | Chesham_Saint |
| Rashford's 5 luxury houses on 12:52 - Nov 22 by Sadoldgit |
This will surprise you but I totally agree with you. I have been having an exchange of views elsewhere with left wingers who are attacking Starmer. A very old friend of mine who would describe himself as a Marxist is dead set against Starmer. They are likening him to Blair, which to me is totally ridiculous. If the different factions can’t come together for the overall good of the Labour Party, then perhaps it is time that the party split and the far left to go its own way. This, for better or worse, is a very conservative country. We accept socialism when it is wrapped up in centerist rhetoric by far left dogma scares the crap out of the voters. Starmer is the best chance Labour have of getting back into power. Ok, it will be watered down Labour to a number of supporters, but that has to be better than the appalling government who clearly have no regard to for people who voted for them and spend their time protecting each other and making their buddies richer. |
"We accept socialism" ...I thought you were on the south coast Sogs, not Havana! | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
