I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
It's not a pure market, but equally it's not pure command economy either. I mean, the government could introduce a kind of National Service, but I doubt it would be popular, except with people who wouldn't have to do it.
Bottom line is simple. There are lots of sectors where the government is responsible and potential employees are saying "at those rates, you're having a laugh".
How far do you think crossing your arms and saying "you simply shouldn't demand more money" is going to get you?
The irony is that the government has now spent a billion on NHS medical strike cover and related expenses, which exceeds the cost of settling, and shows no sign of settling.
It would have been less inflationary to have settled...
When can we expect HYUFD to go on about "English" inflation and commend the deflationary actions of the Scottish Government, then?
Discrimination is against protected classes that you can't control.
People who choose to pay extra by using an inferior, insecure and more expensive medium are responsible for paying for their own choices. If you make a choice, take responsibility for your own choices.
My Mum is 75, and gets horribly frustrated by newfangled parking meters. Don’t underestimate the effect of these changes on groups like the elderly.
We've spent the last month living the easy life around Dorset and the New Forest. Probably spent 100-120 quid on parking. It's effing expensive, but the place is rammed so no real alternative. What's bugged me is the inconsistencies and sheer hard work involved in payment methods. Cash/card/phone app. A few times I've had no cash, only to find the parking is cash only, other times I've had a crap signal so app wont work and no cash, or not enough cash but the phone app isn't working and the machine doesn't like my card. Royal pain in the arse!
Speaking as a 'young pensioner', it's a complete pain to have to download an App for parking (and for lots of other things now). Those who have weaker phone skills must find it virtually impossible. It's worth remembering that poor eyesight is a feature of the elderly as well, making it even harder when out and about. Where I live, it seems to have fuelled an increase in the (probably illegitimate) use of disabled parking badges.
Parking anywhere should offer a choice of cash, or card tap. We could all manage one of those.
Point of order - having a disabled parking badge (I've got one) rarely exempts you from carpark parking charges these days. For me the big plus is a parking space wide enough to get in and out of the car from a wheelchair.
The point about apps and eyesight is a good one. Since disability is a protected characteristic someone might want to take a council to court for discriminating based on a hard to use app.
I think I have four apps for parking, and they are all horrible to use, even for someone with decent eyesight (and a familiarity with apps, given my age). Why don't they just use contactless, which has the benefit of working when you don't have signal?
When they don't work, I just message the offending council on twitter and let them know my registration plate. They usually apologise and appreciate the message. The worse ones are for hillwalking, and you spend the whole day wondering if your car will still be there at the end.
The one advantage of a well-designed parking app is one where you can pay for additional parking time in the app, if you happen to be enjoying yourself wherever you are for longer than expected, saving you the trouble of dashing back to the car park to buy another ticket to stick on the dashboard of the car.
This is an area where one world government is required. One UN-mandated app called “global park” applying to all paid parking on the planet. Ideally the same app could be used to book public transport, pay road tolls and organise babysitters.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
Last time I was in Copenhagen I irritated many of you by moaning about the inconvenience of the non EU passport queue and the gentle micro-aggression of being quizzed on my intentions in the country.
Well this evening things are much more exciting. The man in front of me has been undergoing interrogation (annoyingly at the cubicle not in a side room) for 15 minutes. I’m in a position where I can’t move out of the queue and join another one. I don’t know what immigration faux pas he’s committed but it is certainly causing the border officer much consternation.
In my experience, at least in Amsterdam and Stockholm, if you tell them that you are going on to another country, then thats it, end of questions. They only carry out an interrogation if you tell them that you are staying in the country you have landed at. It is starting to get really annoying though. At Helsinki I had to wait 45 minutes. Such a contrast with the UK where people from the EU can just go through automated gates in a few minutes, same as British citizens.
One of a number of hopefully quick wins for Starmer:
- Make the Schengen travel limit 182 days in 365 rather than 90 in 180, to allow for seasonal work in skiing or summer holiday resorts. Reciprocal for UK so a win-win - Ease up the rules for travelling musicians as was originally offered - Allow ID cards at Uk border again, so the school trips come back - Join the EEA and customs Union - Rejoin EU - Join Schengen - join the Euro - Form an EU army Etc
The musicians thing is egregiously stupid. Dismissed even by old musicians ("oh how did we ever tour Europe before" - obviously the current rules didn't exist you pillock).
We could have fixed it. But we're such shit negotiations we didn't even know there was an issue to fix. Then haughtily denied the problem.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
It's not a pure market, but equally it's not pure command economy either. I mean, the government could introduce a kind of National Service, but I doubt it would be popular, except with people who wouldn't have to do it.
Bottom line is simple. There are lots of sectors where the government is responsible and potential employees are saying "at those rates, you're having a laugh".
How far do you think crossing your arms and saying "you simply shouldn't demand more money" is going to get you?
The irony is that the government has now spent a billion on NHS medical strike cover and related expenses, which exceeds the cost of settling, and shows no sign of settling.
It would have been less inflationary to have settled...
When can we expect HYUFD to go on about "English" inflation and commend the deflationary actions of the Scottish Government, then?
And indeed the people of Scotland, for being so stereotypically parsimonious. They didn't take that into account in GERS, did they!?
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
A Tory who doesn't claim to love the NHS and believes the pre1948 health system was better. Fair play.
No I support some state healthcare, especially for low and average earners. I am not myself a pure free marketeer
That's only because you are desperate to justify the regressive income tax laughingly called "National Insurance Class 1" and stop it being applied to pensioners to avoid damaging your voters' finances and inheritances.
You know, the one you pretend is actually insurance and a subscription to the NHS.
There is no reason National Insurance could not be hypothecated and ringfenced solely to pay for state healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits which was what it originally was only supposed to fund
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
Why would the guy in the pic not be effected by the “ culture wars”. You’re making the same mistake you accuse Khan of as in jumping to conclusions .
Last time I was in Copenhagen I irritated many of you by moaning about the inconvenience of the non EU passport queue and the gentle micro-aggression of being quizzed on my intentions in the country.
Well this evening things are much more exciting. The man in front of me has been undergoing interrogation (annoyingly at the cubicle not in a side room) for 15 minutes. I’m in a position where I can’t move out of the queue and join another one. I don’t know what immigration faux pas he’s committed but it is certainly causing the border officer much consternation.
In my experience, at least in Amsterdam and Stockholm, if you tell them that you are going on to another country, then thats it, end of questions. They only carry out an interrogation if you tell them that you are staying in the country you have landed at. It is starting to get really annoying though. At Helsinki I had to wait 45 minutes. Such a contrast with the UK where people from the EU can just go through automated gates in a few minutes, same as British citizens.
One of a number of hopefully quick wins for Starmer:
- Make the Schengen travel limit 182 days in 365 rather than 90 in 180, to allow for seasonal work in skiing or summer holiday resorts. Reciprocal for UK so a win-win - Ease up the rules for travelling musicians as was originally offered - Allow ID cards at Uk border again, so the school trips come back - Join the EEA and customs Union - Rejoin EU - Join Schengen - join the Euro - Form an EU army Etc
Aye, fuck it. Might as well join Schengen and the Euro now, for the lolz. Who cares what currency we are in anyway when nobody in their right mind uses pointless slips of paper and stupid shards of metal to pay for stuff anymore?
The main beneficiary of leaving the EU for my firm has been the Dutch accountants we're using to give ourselves an EU VAT presence.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
Huh?
I think the point is that, by calling out a homophobic attack before he knew who the perpetrator was, Khan inadvertently put a charge of evil-doing upon one of his brothers, thereby undermining BLM solidarity.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Let's try again
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
A Tory who doesn't claim to love the NHS and believes the pre1948 health system was better. Fair play.
No I support some state healthcare, especially for low and average earners. I am not myself a pure free marketeer
That's only because you are desperate to justify the regressive income tax laughingly called "National Insurance Class 1" and stop it being applied to pensioners to avoid damaging your voters' finances and inheritances.
You know, the one you pretend is actually insurance and a subscription to the NHS.
There is no reason National Insurance could not be hypothecated and ringfenced solely to pay for state healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits which was what it originally was only supposed to fund
NI would need to be a lot higher if that were the case, further shifting the burden of tax onto working people, and away from the retired and wealthy.
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
A Tory who doesn't claim to love the NHS and believes the pre1948 health system was better. Fair play.
No I support some state healthcare, especially for low and average earners. I am not myself a pure free marketeer
That's only because you are desperate to justify the regressive income tax laughingly called "National Insurance Class 1" and stop it being applied to pensioners to avoid damaging your voters' finances and inheritances.
You know, the one you pretend is actually insurance and a subscription to the NHS.
There is no reason National Insurance could not be hypothecated and ringfenced solely to pay for state healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits which was what it originally was only supposed to fund
But what would you do with all the dead bodies at the Treasury?
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Let's try again
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
Do you not agree with Khan though - that a hate crime should be harshly condemned whoever did it?
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
Why would the guy in the pic not be effected by the “ culture wars”. You’re making the same mistake you accuse Khan of as in jumping to conclusions .
Yes, he looks like a massive reader of Kathleen Stock's philosophical, gender critical oeuvre
Also, I waited, even on PB, until we had some evidence of the culprit's identity - which we have, finally, today. The so-called "Mayor of London" just waded straight into Twitter, without any evidence at all, after about an hour, and blamed it on the right/Rowling
In the history of the UK was there ever a more useless government than the one we have had for the past 13 years?
Haven't we had about seven different governments over the last 13 years? Cameron coalition (Con/Lib Dem) Cameron majority May majority May minority (DUP C&S) Johnson Truss Sunak
The BBC is running another front page article today about how rents are going up at the "fastest rate since 2016", at 5.3%. The media narrative is continuing everywhere it seems that this is in part the fault of interest rates and landlords leaving the market.
There's somewhat of a flaw in this analysis. Inflation to July is 6.8%. Wages (to June so not directly comparable to inflation) are going up by 7.8%.
Can any of our innumerate journalists ever consider if 5.3% is more or less than 6.8%? Or more or less than 7.8%?
For one of the only times in decades real rents, and real house prices, are both falling. Both in real terms prices, and relative to income.
In 2016 by contrast rent rises were higher than today in nominal terms, while inflation was supposedly only 1.6% and wage growth was only 2.2%. So that was a massive price rise in both real terms and as a proportion of income.
For the past two decades rents like house prices have typically risen faster than both inflation and house prices. It's baby steps but excellent news that the opposite is happening today and ideally long may that continue.
We need to build massively more houses still in order to further reduce the real cost of housing in both absolute prices for those buying, and rent for those who can't.
Developers are scaling back their activities at the moment. IE:
Unsuprisingly there isn't a great will to build houses for sale in a falling market. Developers are also complaining about the new rule that you have to build two firefighting staircases and four lifts in every building over 18 metres high - this reduces significantly the space per floor, increases build costs, and all the layouts need revising .
It is funny to hear from so many commentors that we need a massive 'housebuilding drive' to house the masses - could we not just try removing some of the mountain of restrictions preventing the industry from meeting the demand? Ludicrous EU rules (which should have been disapplied by now) concerning additives going into rivers is another one - currently preventing 100,000 houses from being built.
There is pressure to add more regulation on to the building industry from every lobby group imaginable. If they were all accepted then no house would ever be built. What has happened now is that the Conservatives have no policy on housing. In this vacuum they now seem to add in every single new regulation any vaguely favoured group demands. It is a complete reversal of where they started in 2012/2013, when they got rid of regulations to facilitate new housebuilding - although this approach abruptly ended with the Grenfell fire. I suspect that this cycle will just basically repeat itself again several times over my lifetime.
I'm just too cynical - I just don't think they have any intention whatsoever of helping housing supply meet the demand. I'd suggest the opposite in fact. Probably a Davos thing. We are meant to 'own nothing and be happy about it' in a few year's time as the infamous quotation goes.
You think that UK building regulations are part of the "Davos agenda"?
You didn't attend that seminar at Davos?
I think it clashed with the 'Ending the use of cash to empower the Davos elite' seminar I was attending.
I find it very odd that such an obviously intelligent poster is in thrall to these conspiracy theories.
There's another friend of mine on Facebook* who posts conspiracy stuff all the time, about how the UN is about to do [x] or [y], and even though these things never come to pass, he still posts conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory.
* Again, an incredibly bright guy
I have a similar friend.
This isn't a humblebrag but you and I have been near the levers of power, we know people who control the levers of power.
I think we get to see 99.99% of mistakes are cockups/hubris/arrogance/ignorance, not conspiracy made by people like you and I.
I am flattered that you think I'm intelligent, but please don't be concerned, I am not in thrall to a load of conspiracy theories - actually I try to spend as little time as possible complaining about what I can't control. PB gets the me who is cynical and annoyed with politics - poor PB.
Regarding the World Economic Forum; it functions as a public pressure group, and its lists within its ranks most of the powerful politicians and business figures in Europe, and often further afield. Keir Starmer announced his policy of banning further North Sea Oil exploration outside Davos, and it aligns with the WEF's publicly declared goals - are we really saying it's a loony conspiracy to say that his policy was influenced by the group?
UK housing - sure that might be caused by plain incompetency.
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
A Tory who doesn't claim to love the NHS and believes the pre1948 health system was better. Fair play.
No I support some state healthcare, especially for low and average earners. I am not myself a pure free marketeer
That's only because you are desperate to justify the regressive income tax laughingly called "National Insurance Class 1" and stop it being applied to pensioners to avoid damaging your voters' finances and inheritances.
You know, the one you pretend is actually insurance and a subscription to the NHS.
There is no reason National Insurance could not be hypothecated and ringfenced solely to pay for state healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits which was what it originally was only supposed to fund
NI would need to be a lot higher if that were the case, further shifting the burden of tax onto working people, and away from the retired and wealthy.
Tories really do hate the workers.
State pensions would only be paid out based on what had previously been contributed to the pot however when pensioners themselves were working. You could still have some income tax funding for healthcare too
Last time I was in Copenhagen I irritated many of you by moaning about the inconvenience of the non EU passport queue and the gentle micro-aggression of being quizzed on my intentions in the country.
Well this evening things are much more exciting. The man in front of me has been undergoing interrogation (annoyingly at the cubicle not in a side room) for 15 minutes. I’m in a position where I can’t move out of the queue and join another one. I don’t know what immigration faux pas he’s committed but it is certainly causing the border officer much consternation.
In my experience, at least in Amsterdam and Stockholm, if you tell them that you are going on to another country, then thats it, end of questions. They only carry out an interrogation if you tell them that you are staying in the country you have landed at. It is starting to get really annoying though. At Helsinki I had to wait 45 minutes. Such a contrast with the UK where people from the EU can just go through automated gates in a few minutes, same as British citizens.
One of a number of hopefully quick wins for Starmer:
- Make the Schengen travel limit 182 days in 365 rather than 90 in 180, to allow for seasonal work in skiing or summer holiday resorts. Reciprocal for UK so a win-win - Ease up the rules for travelling musicians as was originally offered - Allow ID cards at Uk border again, so the school trips come back - Join the EEA and customs Union - Rejoin EU - Join Schengen - join the Euro - Form an EU army Etc
Aye, fuck it. Might as well join Schengen and the Euro now, for the lolz. Who cares what currency we are in anyway when nobody in their right mind uses pointless slips of paper and stupid shards of metal to pay for stuff anymore?
Who the hell are you to dictate to us whether or not we use cash???
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Let's try again
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
Do you not agree with Khan though - that a hate crime should be harshly condemned whoever did it?
One must assume he was condemning fundamentalist Islam too of course
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Let's try again
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
Honestly, I can't see what you're wetting the bed about. Lambeth Police called it a homophobic attack; Kahn rightly points out that people who stoke culture wars against LBTQ+ people are part of the problem too.
Last time I was in Copenhagen I irritated many of you by moaning about the inconvenience of the non EU passport queue and the gentle micro-aggression of being quizzed on my intentions in the country.
Well this evening things are much more exciting. The man in front of me has been undergoing interrogation (annoyingly at the cubicle not in a side room) for 15 minutes. I’m in a position where I can’t move out of the queue and join another one. I don’t know what immigration faux pas he’s committed but it is certainly causing the border officer much consternation.
In my experience, at least in Amsterdam and Stockholm, if you tell them that you are going on to another country, then thats it, end of questions. They only carry out an interrogation if you tell them that you are staying in the country you have landed at. It is starting to get really annoying though. At Helsinki I had to wait 45 minutes. Such a contrast with the UK where people from the EU can just go through automated gates in a few minutes, same as British citizens.
One of a number of hopefully quick wins for Starmer:
- Make the Schengen travel limit 182 days in 365 rather than 90 in 180, to allow for seasonal work in skiing or summer holiday resorts. Reciprocal for UK so a win-win
Schengen travel limit has nothing to do with permission to work.
Yes, it would be nice if the EU reciprocated our 180/365 for travel, but since they don't allow it for any country in the world, I wouldn't hold out much hope. Most countries don't reciprocate either: Canada and Mexico are two notables which do.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
Why would the guy in the pic not be effected by the “ culture wars”. You’re making the same mistake you accuse Khan of as in jumping to conclusions .
Yes, he looks like a massive reader of Kathleen Stock's philosophical, gender critical oeuvre
Also, I waited, even on PB, until we had some evidence of the culprit's identity - which we have, finally, today. The so-called "Mayor of London" just waded straight into Twitter, without any evidence at all, after about an hour, and blamed it on the right/Rowling
You and Khan are indistinguishable when it comes to jumping to conclusions.
Last time I was in Copenhagen I irritated many of you by moaning about the inconvenience of the non EU passport queue and the gentle micro-aggression of being quizzed on my intentions in the country.
Well this evening things are much more exciting. The man in front of me has been undergoing interrogation (annoyingly at the cubicle not in a side room) for 15 minutes. I’m in a position where I can’t move out of the queue and join another one. I don’t know what immigration faux pas he’s committed but it is certainly causing the border officer much consternation.
In my experience, at least in Amsterdam and Stockholm, if you tell them that you are going on to another country, then thats it, end of questions. They only carry out an interrogation if you tell them that you are staying in the country you have landed at. It is starting to get really annoying though. At Helsinki I had to wait 45 minutes. Such a contrast with the UK where people from the EU can just go through automated gates in a few minutes, same as British citizens.
One of a number of hopefully quick wins for Starmer:
- Make the Schengen travel limit 182 days in 365 rather than 90 in 180, to allow for seasonal work in skiing or summer holiday resorts. Reciprocal for UK so a win-win - Ease up the rules for travelling musicians as was originally offered - Allow ID cards at Uk border again, so the school trips come back - Join the EEA and customs Union - Rejoin EU - Join Schengen - join the Euro - Form an EU army Etc
The musicians thing is egregiously stupid. Dismissed even by old musicians ("oh how did we ever tour Europe before" - obviously the current rules didn't exist you pillock).
We could have fixed it. But we're such shit negotiations we didn't even know there was an issue to fix. Then haughtily denied the problem.
It really felt like the disinterest in this issue shown by the government was a kick in the teeth to the music industry, which presumably was just regarded at the time as a bastion of remain. I hope they get their revenge in some way.
More broadly - thinking back to 2016 - one of the things that really annoys me about certain Brexiteers... people assuming that the world would just go back to how it was in the 1970s. Also, the prevailing belief that 'things would sort themselves out'. I don't think people appreciated the enormity of what they were doing. It is fair to say that on a personal level it has caused massive issues for some of my family and friends.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Let's try again
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
Honestly, I can't see what you're wetting the bed about. Lambeth Police called it a homophobic attack; Kahn rightly points out that people who stoke culture wars against LBTQ+ people are part of the problem too.
Which, for what it is worth, has salaried employees. Unlike the big ones, Medicare and the 52 Medicaid systems.
(I have been thinking about its problems for some time now, and have been unable to come up with any politically practical solutions, partly because of identity politics problems. It's not just whites versus Indians, either; many of the tribes don't get along well with neighboring tribes.)
In the history of the UK was there ever a more useless government than the one we have had for the past 13 years?
Haven't we had about seven different governments over the last 13 years? Cameron coalition (Con/Lib Dem) Cameron majority May majority May minority (DUP C&S) Johnson Truss Sunak
Technically maybe but in effect it all smears into one very long turd of a government, in my mind. In the majority of voters' too, I suspect.
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
A Tory who doesn't claim to love the NHS and believes the pre1948 health system was better. Fair play.
No I support some state healthcare, especially for low and average earners. I am not myself a pure free marketeer
That's only because you are desperate to justify the regressive income tax laughingly called "National Insurance Class 1" and stop it being applied to pensioners to avoid damaging your voters' finances and inheritances.
You know, the one you pretend is actually insurance and a subscription to the NHS.
There is no reason National Insurance could not be hypothecated and ringfenced solely to pay for state healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits which was what it originally was only supposed to fund
Except for the fact its nowhere near enough to pay for those. 🤦♂️
In the history of the UK was there ever a more useless government than the one we have had for the past 13 years?
Haven't we had about seven different governments over the last 13 years? Cameron coalition (Con/Lib Dem) Cameron majority May majority May minority (DUP C&S) Johnson Truss Sunak
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
Over the past few days, it's been quite bizarre, reading and listening to "economists" who actually think it a bad thing that pay rises are now exceeding inflation.
On the contrary, it is a very good thing.
How on earth is capitalism expected to survive, if pay does not outpace inflation, most of the time?
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
A Tory who doesn't claim to love the NHS and believes the pre1948 health system was better. Fair play.
No I support some state healthcare, especially for low and average earners. I am not myself a pure free marketeer
That's only because you are desperate to justify the regressive income tax laughingly called "National Insurance Class 1" and stop it being applied to pensioners to avoid damaging your voters' finances and inheritances.
You know, the one you pretend is actually insurance and a subscription to the NHS.
There is no reason National Insurance could not be hypothecated and ringfenced solely to pay for state healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits which was what it originally was only supposed to fund
NI would need to be a lot higher if that were the case, further shifting the burden of tax onto working people, and away from the retired and wealthy.
Tories really do hate the workers.
State pensions would only be paid out based on what had previously been contributed to the pot however when pensioners themselves were working. You could still have some income tax funding for healthcare too
So you want to cut back state pensions, rather than have the Triple Lock, and restrict them to what people have contributed? Surely that would penalise low earners, the chronic sick and also mother's who stayed at home for child care?
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
Why would the guy in the pic not be effected by the “ culture wars”. You’re making the same mistake you accuse Khan of as in jumping to conclusions .
Yes, he looks like a massive reader of Kathleen Stock's philosophical, gender critical oeuvre
Also, I waited, even on PB, until we had some evidence of the culprit's identity - which we have, finally, today. The so-called "Mayor of London" just waded straight into Twitter, without any evidence at all, after about an hour, and blamed it on the right/Rowling
You and Khan are indistinguishable when it comes to jumping to conclusions.
No, Khan jumped to the right conclusion, that the attack needed immediate condemnation.
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
A Tory who doesn't claim to love the NHS and believes the pre1948 health system was better. Fair play.
No I support some state healthcare, especially for low and average earners. I am not myself a pure free marketeer
That's only because you are desperate to justify the regressive income tax laughingly called "National Insurance Class 1" and stop it being applied to pensioners to avoid damaging your voters' finances and inheritances.
You know, the one you pretend is actually insurance and a subscription to the NHS.
There is no reason National Insurance could not be hypothecated and ringfenced solely to pay for state healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits which was what it originally was only supposed to fund
NI would need to be a lot higher if that were the case, further shifting the burden of tax onto working people, and away from the retired and wealthy.
Tories really do hate the workers.
State pensions would only be paid out based on what had previously been contributed to the pot however when pensioners themselves were working. You could still have some income tax funding for healthcare too
So you want to cut back state pensions, rather than have the Triple Lock, and restrict them to what people have contributed? Surely that would penalise low earners, the chronic sick and also mother's who stayed at home for child care?
Quite a radical position for a modern Tory.
There is pension credit for the lowest income pensioners
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
He doesn’t look like Joanna Cherry either, so that’s two Jo’s he looks unlike
(Yes, I’m as lost as you are)
I think he thinks the first set of tweets indicate that Khan thinks the murder was committed by "Tories and Terfs", and the second set depicts a suspect who cannot be either because he (the suspect, not Leon) is black. Not sure I agree, but that appears to be the logic chain
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Let's try again
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
Honestly, I can't see what you're wetting the bed about. Lambeth Police called it a homophobic attack; Kahn rightly points out that people who stoke culture wars against LBTQ+ people are part of the problem too.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
Why would the guy in the pic not be effected by the “ culture wars”. You’re making the same mistake you accuse Khan of as in jumping to conclusions .
Yes, he looks like a massive reader of Kathleen Stock's philosophical, gender critical oeuvre
Also, I waited, even on PB, until we had some evidence of the culprit's identity - which we have, finally, today. The so-called "Mayor of London" just waded straight into Twitter, without any evidence at all, after about an hour, and blamed it on the right/Rowling
You and Khan are indistinguishable when it comes to jumping to conclusions.
No, Khan jumped to the right conclusion, that the attack needed immediate condemnation.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Let's try again
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
Do you not agree with Khan though - that a hate crime should be harshly condemned whoever did it?
So if it turns out the culprit is a Muslim fired by traditional Islamic homophobia, or an African with a similar cultural motive - as seems likely from the photo (but far from proved) - you will be out in force condemnding these cultural traits and demanding some form of apology from those concerned?
Yknow, I REALLY REALLY doubt you will do this. You will contort yourself so as to blame ANYONE ELSE
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
"Should" doesn't cut it. The labour market isn't values based. It's a market.
Healthcare isn’t, if it was there would be no state healthcare and patients would pay the going rate for drugs and surgery either themselves or via private health insurance
A Tory who doesn't claim to love the NHS and believes the pre1948 health system was better. Fair play.
No I support some state healthcare, especially for low and average earners. I am not myself a pure free marketeer
That's only because you are desperate to justify the regressive income tax laughingly called "National Insurance Class 1" and stop it being applied to pensioners to avoid damaging your voters' finances and inheritances.
You know, the one you pretend is actually insurance and a subscription to the NHS.
There is no reason National Insurance could not be hypothecated and ringfenced solely to pay for state healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits which was what it originally was only supposed to fund
NI would need to be a lot higher if that were the case, further shifting the burden of tax onto working people, and away from the retired and wealthy.
Tories really do hate the workers.
State pensions would only be paid out based on what had previously been contributed to the pot however when pensioners themselves were working. You could still have some income tax funding for healthcare too
So you want to cut back state pensions, rather than have the Triple Lock, and restrict them to what people have contributed? Surely that would penalise low earners, the chronic sick and also mother's who stayed at home for child care?
Quite a radical position for a modern Tory.
There is pension credit for the lowest income pensioners
So you want to abolish the triple lock, dramatically slash pensions to bring them down to what NI funds and then have pension credit for those who are struggling?
Glad you've been convinced that Triple Lock should go etc
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Which, for what it is worth, has salaried employees. Unlike the big ones, Medicare and the 52 Medicaid systems.
(I have been thinking about its problems for some time now, and have been unable to come up with any politically practical solutions, partly because of identity politics problems. It's not just whites versus Indians, either; many of the tribes don't get along well with neighboring tribes.)
Lots of rather intractable problems with drugs, alcohol and violence too as I understand. A challenging place to work.
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
The easiest way to resolve this is to accept that public sector salaries rise with inflation each year and not applying the 'austerity' pay freeze followed by the 'stopping inflation' pay freeze that has cumulatively resulted in a 15% real pay cut over the last decade and large numbers of good people walking out upon realisation that they are being screwed over and have other options. Build up good will with the people who work for you and resource the public sector properly then you won't waste massive amounts of money on contractors and short term training, and performance will also improve.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Let's try again
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
Do you not agree with Khan though - that a hate crime should be harshly condemned whoever did it?
So if it turns out the culprit is a Muslim fired by traditional Islamic homophobia, or an African with a similar cultural motive - as seems likely from the photo (but far from proved) - you will be out in force condemnding these cultural traits and demanding some form of apology from those concerned?
Yknow, I REALLY REALLY doubt you will do this. You will contort yourself so as to blame ANYONE ELSE
No, I am afraid that you are wrong. I have often condemned the institutional homophobia and misogyny within those communities.
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
HYUFD wants to ringfence National Insurance to pay for pensions, NHS and unemployment benefits.
Pensions cost over £300bn per annum. Healthcare £211bn per annum. Unemployment now is integrated within Universal Credit.
NICs bring in £178bn per annum
So simple way to do that. Abolish Pensions, cut Healthcare by 16% and abolish unemployment benefits.
Or maybe its not a serious proposal?
No they could certainly fund the state pension, JSA and some basic healthcare. While income tax and other taxes could find universal credit, pensions credit and the rest of state healthcare
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
I do like this headline purely for the humour of the writer for people who did not know what the story was about - people would be surprised at the honesty.
HYUFD wants to ringfence National Insurance to pay for pensions, NHS and unemployment benefits.
Pensions cost over £300bn per annum. Healthcare £211bn per annum. Unemployment now is integrated within Universal Credit.
NICs bring in £178bn per annum
So simple way to do that. Abolish Pensions, cut Healthcare by 16% and abolish unemployment benefits.
Or maybe its not a serious proposal?
No they could certainly find the state pension, JSA and some basic healthcare. While income tax and other taxes could find universal credit, pensions credit and the rest of state healthcare
OK, so you have £178bn in NICs.
So how much of that are you going to budget for each of pensions, healthcare and unemployment?
How much are you planning to reduce pensions by in order to fit within that budget?
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
The easiest way to resolve this is to accept that public sector salaries rise with inflation each year and not applying the 'austerity' pay freeze followed by the 'stopping inflation' pay freeze that has cumulatively resulted in a 15% real pay cut over the last decade and large numbers of good people walking out upon realisation that they are being screwed over and have other options. Build up good will with the people who work for you and resource the public sector properly then you won't waste massive amounts of money on contractors and short term training, and performance will also improve.
The problem is that the public sector package has actually been well ahead of the private sector equivalent for some years and the current restrictions are bringing them into line, or at least closer.
I fully appreciate it may not feel like that, because so much of the public sector package is not cash on hand. But with the collapse of final salary pensions in the private sector, the ridiculous maternity rights of a full year on full pay, the incredibly generous sickness benefits and the security of employment comparing wages alone does not come close. For women in their twenties and thirties in particular, contemplating family, there is simply no comparison.
A few years where the average wage is being clawed back a bit does not change this disparity.
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
Jeez. Aren’t you being somewhat melodramatic . You’ll be back in a few days!
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
PBexit then, I am sure you hold all the cards.
I hold zero cards. Like Brexit, this will negatively impact my life, at the start
I've enjoyed my time here, and made friends, and sometimes lost money
But I fail to see the standard of commentary or argumentation that I did. It is just the case. Too much filler, too much Woke left canting, very little fresh talent. This is probably why we no longer get the grade A russian bots
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
PBexit then, I am sure you hold all the cards.
I hold zero cards. Like Brexit, this will negatively impact my life, at the start
I've enjoyed my time here, and made friends, and sometimes lost money
But I fail to see the standard of commentary or argumentation that I did. It is just the case. Too much filler, too much Woke left canting, very little fresh talent. This is probably why we no longer get the grade A russian bots
Seriously? When did we ever get the grade A Russian bots? (apart from @eadric of course).
Don't go - you have a message (it's a crap message but hey?) You just have to accept that you can't win every argument. Just think of that huge Told You So moment when the aliens are finally confirmed!
PS 'PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years' since I joined in December 2020 ;-)
Leon. If you do go, the whole idea you are off to a Saudi free discussion site and after some your PB musings on Islam is beyond surreal. Even in jest, that is a wonderfully tangled tale; you have obliterated your own timeline more in a few short sentences than Moffat managed across several series of Doctor Who.
Leon. If you do go, the whole idea you are off to a Saudi free discussion site and after some your PB musings on Islam is beyond surreal. Even in jest, that is a wonderfully tangled tale; you have obliterated your own timeline more in a few short sentences than Moffat managed across several series of Doctor Who.
Brilliant stuff.
Thanks, I wanted to go with a hallucinatory but amusing flourish, in keeping with my time here, I hope
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
PBexit then, I am sure you hold all the cards.
I hold zero cards. Like Brexit, this will negatively impact my life, at the start
I've enjoyed my time here, and made friends, and sometimes lost money
But I fail to see the standard of commentary or argumentation that I did. It is just the case. Too much filler, too much Woke left canting, very little fresh talent. This is probably why we no longer get the grade A russian bots
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
PBexit then, I am sure you hold all the cards.
I hold zero cards. Like Brexit, this will negatively impact my life, at the start
I've enjoyed my time here, and made friends, and sometimes lost money
But I fail to see the standard of commentary or argumentation that I did. It is just the case. Too much filler, too much Woke left canting, very little fresh talent. This is probably why we no longer get the grade A russian bots
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
PBexit then, I am sure you hold all the cards.
I hold zero cards. Like Brexit, this will negatively impact my life, at the start
I've enjoyed my time here, and made friends, and sometimes lost money
But I fail to see the standard of commentary or argumentation that I did. It is just the case. Too much filler, too much Woke left canting, very little fresh talent. This is probably why we no longer get the grade A russian bots
I expect a similar offer in England would stop the strikes. Barclay needs to negotiate.
Absolutely not.
This government has shown fiscal discipline to get inflation down to just under 8% this week from over 11% last year. If the Scottish government wants to be fiscally irresponsible and award massively above inflation pay rises not tied to longer worker hours and improved productivity leading to an inflationary wage spiral in Scotland that is their basis, the UK government should have no part in it. The Scottish government can increase Scottish taxes to pay for it too.
If nurses, physios and porters and ambulance workers in England can accept a 5% pay deal when they earn much less than doctors and surgeons already, so can junior doctors!
At some point it will surely sink in to the blinkered Conservative mindset that it is not a good idea to control inflation by cutting the salaries of public sector workers, particularly public sector workers who can walk out and go in to a higher paying private sector job or return as a contractor getting 3x salary. This is not sensible or prudent, it is just reckless and irresponsible.
No it won't, because unlike economic illiterates like it seems you we know that pushing wages above inflation leads to inflation surging further, as well as higher interest rates hitting mortgage holders and borrowers as well as hitting savers.
Yeah but the problem is that it is against a backdrop of pay not following inflation for a decade, so it is actually year on year of pay cut. I earned £38k per year in London as a local government employee in 2013. The same job now pays about £42k, had pay followed inflation according to the bank of england, it should be £50k. Unsuprisingly no one is happy with this and there is no one applies for these jobs when they are advertised, so the Council has to pay the same people £45 per hour plus 10% agency fee to do the job as a contractor, about £80k. This process in itself is inflationary, even if it is not tracked in the pay stats because the employee gets recategorised.
£38k is above the UK average salary let alone £42k,I expect many would gladly work for that
Yeah but so what? This is completely irrelevant. Because of supply and demand you can walk out and back in the next day doubling your money, working as a contractor. This is what happens when you try and control inflation by freezing public sector salaries when there is a skilled labour shortage.
Local authorities should also slash the number of contractors they use I agree. Average earners should not be paying higher council tax to give public sector workers a higher percentage pay rise than they are getting
OK so your policy is basically that Councils are going to have to employ highly skilled people at a fraction of what they can earn in the private sector. And then they will also be banned from using contractors, and presumably also outsourcing firms.
The only way that this can work is if you completely crash the economy and wipe out the private sector, creating a skill surplus rather than a skill shortage, at which point employment in local government or the civil service may become an attractive proposition again. Well, that may well be what happens, the way things are going.
No you just pay the most skilled jobs in the public sector an above average salary but not private sector equivalent salary.
Average earners should not be paying higher taxes so public sector professional workers and managers can be paid private sector wages
The easiest way to resolve this is to accept that public sector salaries rise with inflation each year and not applying the 'austerity' pay freeze followed by the 'stopping inflation' pay freeze that has cumulatively resulted in a 15% real pay cut over the last decade and large numbers of good people walking out upon realisation that they are being screwed over and have other options. Build up good will with the people who work for you and resource the public sector properly then you won't waste massive amounts of money on contractors and short term training, and performance will also improve.
The problem is that the public sector package has actually been well ahead of the private sector equivalent for some years and the current restrictions are bringing them into line, or at least closer.
I fully appreciate it may not feel like that, because so much of the public sector package is not cash on hand. But with the collapse of final salary pensions in the private sector, the ridiculous maternity rights of a full year on full pay, the incredibly generous sickness benefits and the security of employment comparing wages alone does not come close. For women in their twenties and thirties in particular, contemplating family, there is simply no comparison.
A few years where the average wage is being clawed back a bit does not change this disparity.
A few comments...
Pension - on a £50k salary on the current terms this is worth about an extra £9k. Not bad but not as good as it used to be. Many people at the start of their career, ie those trying to buy a house, would just rather have the cash. If you want to build up a pension it is more lucrative to do it as a contractor with a SIPP.
Maternity Rights - I've never heard of 12 months, usually it is 3 months then reduced pay.
security of employment - I've seen employers make people redundant through restructures immediately after they completed their probationary period. It isn't that secure. You only get a pay off if you have many years continuous service.
sickness - You can take 6 months off on full pay this way yes, and then another 6 months on half pay. But no one takes a job planning to get sick.
Some people do stay in the public sector 'because of the pension' but more often than not ambitious people leave and don't look back.
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
PBexit then, I am sure you hold all the cards.
I hold zero cards. Like Brexit, this will negatively impact my life, at the start
I've enjoyed my time here, and made friends, and sometimes lost money
But I fail to see the standard of commentary or argumentation that I did. It is just the case. Too much filler, too much Woke left canting, very little fresh talent. This is probably why we no longer get the grade A russian bots
I am due to give a talk on using the new 'AI' APi's etc to our IT teams. I'd given some example scripts to someone who works in 'the real world' (I'm in H.E) and asked them if it was ok to share.
---
* 8 part-time staff (3 FTE) in a month produced 300 'outputs'. Script has produced 3 million of equal accuracy/quality in a couple of weeks. * GPT/local models have transformed our insights output from several large reports a month, to as many as we can/want to spend. bottleneck completely removed. * our lead times with clients were usually weeks, now they're minutes * we used to pay $120k/year on infra, now we pay $120/mo * we've had our most profitable quarter ever, and it's not even the end of our quarter * I have way more ideas than I have time. * our KPIs are all meaningless now
Being pedantic, but there's a little point in that anecdote that throws up warning signs in my mind. It is this:
"Script has produced 3 million of equal accuracy/quality"
How do you know the 3 million are of equal accuracy/quality? Have they all been checked, and if so, how? Were only a small sample checked, in which case how cure can you be of the overall quality?
Things like 'three million' are really large and impressive numbers in this context. They should also be treated with scepticism. It doesn't mean they're wrong, but I'm always wary.
Also, the clients get results in minutes. That indicates that the AI's output is *not* being human-checked. I ight suggest that there are certain dangers in that, especially if the dataset sitting under the AI changes.
No idea to any of your questions. I'm just reporting what an enterprise CTO has told me.
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
PBexit then, I am sure you hold all the cards.
I hold zero cards. Like Brexit, this will negatively impact my life, at the start
I've enjoyed my time here, and made friends, and sometimes lost money
But I fail to see the standard of commentary or argumentation that I did. It is just the case. Too much filler, too much Woke left canting, very little fresh talent. This is probably why we no longer get the grade A russian bots
Don’t let the door hit your arse on the way out.
Isn't @Leon worried that the Saudis take a... sectional approach to journalists who upset them?
I am due to give a talk on using the new 'AI' APi's etc to our IT teams. I'd given some example scripts to someone who works in 'the real world' (I'm in H.E) and asked them if it was ok to share.
---
* 8 part-time staff (3 FTE) in a month produced 300 'outputs'. Script has produced 3 million of equal accuracy/quality in a couple of weeks. * GPT/local models have transformed our insights output from several large reports a month, to as many as we can/want to spend. bottleneck completely removed. * our lead times with clients were usually weeks, now they're minutes * we used to pay $120k/year on infra, now we pay $120/mo * we've had our most profitable quarter ever, and it's not even the end of our quarter * I have way more ideas than I have time. * our KPIs are all meaningless now
Being pedantic, but there's a little point in that anecdote that throws up warning signs in my mind. It is this:
"Script has produced 3 million of equal accuracy/quality"
How do you know the 3 million are of equal accuracy/quality? Have they all been checked, and if so, how? Were only a small sample checked, in which case how cure can you be of the overall quality?
Things like 'three million' are really large and impressive numbers in this context. They should also be treated with scepticism. It doesn't mean they're wrong, but I'm always wary.
Also, the clients get results in minutes. That indicates that the AI's output is *not* being human-checked. I ight suggest that there are certain dangers in that, especially if the dataset sitting under the AI changes.
No idea to any of your questions. I'm just reporting what an enterprise CTO has told me.
I would ask those questions of the CTO. Unless you are worried about upsetting him/her, of course.
I am due to give a talk on using the new 'AI' APi's etc to our IT teams. I'd given some example scripts to someone who works in 'the real world' (I'm in H.E) and asked them if it was ok to share.
---
* 8 part-time staff (3 FTE) in a month produced 300 'outputs'. Script has produced 3 million of equal accuracy/quality in a couple of weeks. * GPT/local models have transformed our insights output from several large reports a month, to as many as we can/want to spend. bottleneck completely removed. * our lead times with clients were usually weeks, now they're minutes * we used to pay $120k/year on infra, now we pay $120/mo * we've had our most profitable quarter ever, and it's not even the end of our quarter * I have way more ideas than I have time. * our KPIs are all meaningless now
Being pedantic, but there's a little point in that anecdote that throws up warning signs in my mind. It is this:
"Script has produced 3 million of equal accuracy/quality"
How do you know the 3 million are of equal accuracy/quality? Have they all been checked, and if so, how? Were only a small sample checked, in which case how cure can you be of the overall quality?
Things like 'three million' are really large and impressive numbers in this context. They should also be treated with scepticism. It doesn't mean they're wrong, but I'm always wary.
Also, the clients get results in minutes. That indicates that the AI's output is *not* being human-checked. I ight suggest that there are certain dangers in that, especially if the dataset sitting under the AI changes.
No idea to any of your questions. I'm just reporting what an enterprise CTO has told me.
I would ask those questions of the CTO. Unless you are worried about upsetting him/her, of course.
I only asked them if it was ok if I mentioned passing them some OpenAI scripts and they gave me that feedback.
Sorry - seems to have pissed people off. That wasn't my intention.
Leon. If you do go, the whole idea you are off to a Saudi free discussion site and after some your PB musings on Islam is beyond surreal. Even in jest, that is a wonderfully tangled tale; you have obliterated your own timeline more in a few short sentences than Moffat managed across several series of Doctor Who.
Brilliant stuff.
Thanks, I wanted to go with a hallucinatory but amusing flourish, in keeping with my time here, I hope
I am due to give a talk on using the new 'AI' APi's etc to our IT teams. I'd given some example scripts to someone who works in 'the real world' (I'm in H.E) and asked them if it was ok to share.
---
* 8 part-time staff (3 FTE) in a month produced 300 'outputs'. Script has produced 3 million of equal accuracy/quality in a couple of weeks. * GPT/local models have transformed our insights output from several large reports a month, to as many as we can/want to spend. bottleneck completely removed. * our lead times with clients were usually weeks, now they're minutes * we used to pay $120k/year on infra, now we pay $120/mo * we've had our most profitable quarter ever, and it's not even the end of our quarter * I have way more ideas than I have time. * our KPIs are all meaningless now
Being pedantic, but there's a little point in that anecdote that throws up warning signs in my mind. It is this:
"Script has produced 3 million of equal accuracy/quality"
How do you know the 3 million are of equal accuracy/quality? Have they all been checked, and if so, how? Were only a small sample checked, in which case how cure can you be of the overall quality?
Things like 'three million' are really large and impressive numbers in this context. They should also be treated with scepticism. It doesn't mean they're wrong, but I'm always wary.
Also, the clients get results in minutes. That indicates that the AI's output is *not* being human-checked. I ight suggest that there are certain dangers in that, especially if the dataset sitting under the AI changes.
No idea to any of your questions. I'm just reporting what an enterprise CTO has told me.
I would ask those questions of the CTO. Unless you are worried about upsetting him/her, of course.
I only asked them if it was ok if I mentioned passing them some OpenAI scripts and they gave me that feedback.
Sorry - seems to have pissed people off. That wasn't my intention.
Not pissed off - just curious about some interesting data you reported.
All new technologies have positives and negatives. It's interesting finding where the balance is.
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
IshmaelZ is here in another guise. I didn't realise StuartDickson had been banned. And Isam is a shame. Not sure he'd want to come back now, but it would be good if he were allowed.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
He was likely gallery playing. My comment wasn't saying otherwise. What I was doing was making a distinction between abusive anti trans rhetoric and gender critical feminism (since you seemed to be conflating them).
Anyway you seem to have moved on to a general moan about the site now. I do hope this little confusion hasn't triggered that. Be a bit silly if it has. You should keep the faith. I don't know about others but I sense a lively intelligence. Logic is your achilles but we don't want wall to wall mr spocks.
Speaking of people going, we lost Cyclefree after an extremely cutting (and rather funny) Dura Ace put down. She called him a cow's anus (or similar) in Italian and then went. Which was very sudden for someone who posted above and below the line a lot. Someone should send her a box of chocs and ask her back.
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
That's the nicest thing anyone has ever said about @IshmaelZ, I will pass it on to him.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
You've got a like from HY, which pretty much sums up your comment.
Let's try again
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
Do you not agree with Khan though - that a hate crime should be harshly condemned whoever did it?
So if it turns out the culprit is a Muslim fired by traditional Islamic homophobia, or an African with a similar cultural motive - as seems likely from the photo (but far from proved) - you will be out in force condemnding these cultural traits and demanding some form of apology from those concerned?
Yknow, I REALLY REALLY doubt you will do this. You will contort yourself so as to blame ANYONE ELSE
No, I am afraid that you are wrong. I have often condemned the institutional homophobia and misogyny within those communities.
Did Sadiq Khan really think the homophobic murders in Clapham were most likely stoked by gender-critical feminism rather than some more "traditional" beliefs typically found in BAME communities? or was he just being a showboating Woke micro-twat as always?
Answers on a non-existent postcard
I think he meant anti trans rhetoric not gender critical feminism. These aren't the same thing. And you know the difference when you see it.
Does that guy in the photo look like J K Rowling? Really? @kinabalu?
Does he??
You've lost me, I'm afraid.
OK, let's make it simpler for you
Do you think it was wise for the Mayor of London, following the Clapham attacks, to leap into the Twitter about 2 hours later and blame them on people who "stoke the culture wars against LGBTQ people" (ie Tories and Terfs, because who else did he mean) when a moment's thought might have given him pause, to consider that there are surely other, equally likely or likelier suspects with very different reasons?
Do you agree that this was 1 ill advised and 2 typically wanky of people like him?
Why would the guy in the pic not be effected by the “ culture wars”. You’re making the same mistake you accuse Khan of as in jumping to conclusions .
Yes, he looks like a massive reader of Kathleen Stock's philosophical, gender critical oeuvre
Also, I waited, even on PB, until we had some evidence of the culprit's identity - which we have, finally, today. The so-called "Mayor of London" just waded straight into Twitter, without any evidence at all, after about an hour, and blamed it on the right/Rowling
You and Khan are indistinguishable when it comes to jumping to conclusions.
No, Khan jumped to the right conclusion, that the attack needed immediate condemnation.
A pity he failed to condemn a man publicly threatening to punch women in the face at a rally Khan publicly supported.
That needed immediate condemnation from him but didn't get it. Some victims seem to matter more to him than others.
It is with some regret that I have to announce I've had an offer from Saudi Arabia
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
There IS no competition. Honestly this site is in total decline. I'm not joking
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Glad to see I've got under your skin for completely defeating your arguments earlier today.
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
You did get under my skin, but only in this way: a site that allows a repetitive, unintelligent twat like you to flourish, but kicks out those with actual political nous like @StuartDickson, @IshmaelZ , and @isam and many many many others, has lost it
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
IshmaelZ is here in another guise. I didn't realise StuartDickson had been banned. And Isam is a shame. Not sure he'd want to come back now, but it would be good if he were allowed.
So, Farewell Then, Leon. You liked CAPITAL LETTERS More than full stops You always seemed quite angry For someone who was Paid to go on holiday. We liked seeing pictures Of your drinks, But now you have called time On yourself.
Comments
We could have fixed it. But we're such shit negotiations we didn't even know there was an issue to fix. Then haughtily denied the problem.
What do you think about the London Mayor's immediate tweet, blaming the Clapham attack on those who "stoke the culture wars against LBTQ+ people" - ie, Tories and Terfs (because, who else does he mean)? Do you think it was wise? Well advised? Given that we did not know anything about the culprit's identity at that point? And given the high chance that the attacker might have a very different motivation?
I dunno. I thought you "sensitive" types were against people who rush to judgement based on gut instinct and base politicking
Tories really do hate the workers.
Also, I waited, even on PB, until we had some evidence of the culprit's identity - which we have, finally, today. The so-called "Mayor of London" just waded straight into Twitter, without any evidence at all, after about an hour, and blamed it on the right/Rowling
Cameron coalition (Con/Lib Dem)
Cameron majority
May majority
May minority (DUP C&S)
Johnson
Truss
Sunak
Regarding the World Economic Forum; it functions as a public pressure group, and its lists within its ranks most of the powerful politicians and business figures in Europe, and often further afield. Keir Starmer announced his policy of banning further North Sea Oil exploration outside Davos, and it aligns with the WEF's publicly declared goals - are we really saying it's a loony conspiracy to say that his policy was influenced by the group?
UK housing - sure that might be caused by plain incompetency.
WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM?
Yes, it would be nice if the EU reciprocated our 180/365 for travel, but since they don't allow it for any country in the world, I wouldn't hold out much hope. Most countries don't reciprocate either: Canada and Mexico are two notables which do.
More broadly - thinking back to 2016 - one of the things that really annoys me about certain Brexiteers... people assuming that the world would just go back to how it was in the 1970s. Also, the prevailing belief that 'things would sort themselves out'. I don't think people appreciated the enormity of what they were doing. It is fair to say that on a personal level it has caused massive issues for some of my family and friends.
Which, for what it is worth, has salaried employees. Unlike the big ones, Medicare and the 52 Medicaid systems.
(I have been thinking about its problems for some time now, and have been unable to come up with any politically practical solutions, partly because of identity politics problems. It's not just whites versus Indians, either; many of the tribes don't get along well with neighboring tribes.)
#pbpedantry
They say they are setting up a Political Forum "super-league", where amusing, insightful and frankly gifted forum commenters will be cherished (and financially rewarded) rather than being forced to hoof it about with a bunch of geriatric, 30-watt plebs in the farmers' leagues of politicalbetting.com, conservativehome, and guardian "Comment is Free"
They have, specifically, guaranteed that I will be arguing with attractive, mindful, humorous, storied people, who actually go out at night, or indeed during the day, and have an average IQ over 105, which is, if I am honest, rather tempting, in the light of recent commentaries on PB
Finally, they say that utter twats like @kinabalu and @BartholomewRoberts will be totally excluded
I am considering my options, a la Mbappe
On the contrary, it is a very good thing.
How on earth is capitalism expected to survive, if pay does not outpace inflation, most of the time?
Quite a radical position for a modern Tory.
Yknow, I REALLY REALLY doubt you will do this. You will contort yourself so as to blame ANYONE ELSE
Glad you've been convinced that Triple Lock should go etc
Too many excellent commenters have left, or been booted. It's turned into a soft-liberal pensioners' knitting club, vaguely leftwing, and definitely woke. It's kinda over
I really wish that wasn't the case. But WTF are you all on. Talking to you all, is like taking fucking quaaludes
As an example, most people are now just asserting (fairly boring, predictable) opinions, They do not adduce evidence, or provide citations. They just assert, and move on. So what is the fucking point in arguing with someone like that? Yes, I am looking at you @BartholomewRoberts - you reduce the site to some impoverished state of moronic geekery
This is not necessarily a left right thing. But the Left is a big problem. The impossibity of condemning Sadiq Khan for making a clearly ridiculous remark? Because he's on your side? Really?
Pfffffff
Pensions cost over £300bn per annum.
Healthcare £211bn per annum.
Unemployment now is integrated within Universal Credit.
NICs bring in £178bn per annum
So simple way to do that. Abolish Pensions, cut Healthcare by 16% and abolish unemployment benefits.
Or maybe its not a serious proposal?
Goodbye for now, see you next Tuesday.
Purely on the basis of insufficient time to do much (I assume).
https://www.statista.com/statistics/746101/completion-of-new-dwellings-uk/
PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years? This seriously saddens me. But I am not sure there is any way back, now
MP pledges to push for Crooked House law
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-66527229
So how much of that are you going to budget for each of pensions, healthcare and unemployment?
How much are you planning to reduce pensions by in order to fit within that budget?
I fully appreciate it may not feel like that, because so much of the public sector package is not cash on hand. But with the collapse of final salary pensions in the private sector, the ridiculous maternity rights of a full year on full pay, the incredibly generous sickness benefits and the security of employment comparing wages alone does not come close. For women in their twenties and thirties in particular, contemplating family, there is simply no comparison.
A few years where the average wage is being clawed back a bit does not change this disparity.
I've enjoyed my time here, and made friends, and sometimes lost money
But I fail to see the standard of commentary or argumentation that I did. It is just the case. Too much filler, too much Woke left canting, very little fresh talent. This is probably why we no longer get the grade A russian bots
Don't go - you have a message (it's a crap message but hey?) You just have to accept that you can't win every argument. Just think of that huge Told You So moment when the aliens are finally confirmed!
PS 'PB.com has been a big part of my life for 15 years' since I joined in December 2020 ;-)
Brilliant stuff. You exit on a high, sir.
Pension - on a £50k salary on the current terms this is worth about an extra £9k. Not bad but not as good as it used to be. Many people at the start of their career, ie those trying to buy a house, would just rather have the cash. If you want to build up a pension it is more lucrative to do it as a contractor with a SIPP.
Maternity Rights - I've never heard of 12 months, usually it is 3 months then reduced pay.
security of employment - I've seen employers make people redundant through restructures immediately after they completed their probationary period. It isn't that secure. You only get a pay off if you have many years continuous service.
sickness - You can take 6 months off on full pay this way yes, and then another 6 months on half pay. But no one takes a job planning to get sick.
Some people do stay in the public sector 'because of the pension' but more often than not ambitious people leave and don't look back.
Sorry - seems to have pissed people off. That wasn't my intention.
I'll be sorry to see you go.
All new technologies have positives and negatives. It's interesting finding where the balance is.
Anyway you seem to have moved on to a general moan about the site now. I do hope this little confusion hasn't triggered that. Be a bit silly if it has. You should keep the faith. I don't know about others but I sense a lively intelligence. Logic is your achilles but we don't want wall to wall mr spocks.
Don't go.
That needed immediate condemnation from him but didn't get it. Some victims seem to matter more to him than others.
Then, Leon.
You liked CAPITAL LETTERS
More than full stops
You always seemed quite angry
For someone who was
Paid to go on holiday.
We liked seeing pictures
Of your drinks,
But now you have called time
On yourself.
EJ Thribb
17 1/2 thousand posts.