I think the IDF has made a pretty convincing case although I think it might help if they actually release the intercepted conversations to the public .
So what has actually happened at this hospital? Blown up by the Israelis but no bomb crater. Blown up by an Islamic Jihad misfire but just a few burnt out cars in the car park. 500 dead, no 300 dead, no "casualties rising".
We have video both of IJ firing rockets and one dipping off path and breaking apart. Broadcast live on Al Jazeera. We have Wild Claims of an Israeli massacre and collapsing buildings - but the buildings are intact. And the morning after images show a load of burnt out cars (and not an EV in sight...) and minimal damage.
So - IJ rocket misfires and breaks up in mid air. Flaming debris is seen falling. And we have an obvious large fire in a car park next to the hospital. So....
But Leon said it was deifinitely a massive Israeli missle.
If you read back on some of the claims made last night and then look at the actual scene there is definitely something amiss.
I don't think many here consider Leon as being a reliable news source.
He is not bad at all as long as you read it as the opposite of what he says.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
Like I say, you’ve made your choice. So have they. It’s a free country.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
It’s more meaningful when you’re 25 than the pension component (worth about 25-30% on top for them btw). I also have some sympathy for being a doctor (or indeed being a nurse) being a yucky job I wouldn’t want to do (seeing all that blood and guts) and having a case (certainly early on when you have to do a bit of everything) for the same sort of “x factor” we assume for the military.
But as I say, I think their union has made some big errors and they can’t have 30%.
It's amazing how quickly doctors and nurses get used to "just dealing with" blood and pus, in the same way that parents (and nurses) quickly get used to "just dealing with" shit and vomit.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
It’s more meaningful when you’re 25 than the pension component (worth about 25-30% on top for them btw). I also have some sympathy for being a doctor (or indeed being a nurse) being a yucky job I wouldn’t want to do (seeing all that blood and guts) and having a case (certainly early on when you have to do a bit of everything) for the same sort of “x factor” we assume for the military.
But as I say, I think their union has made some big errors and they can’t have 30%.
True, it is more meaningful when you are 25, I felt the same when I saw my salary going into a pension, however they will be really glad when they reach their 60s and people who earned more than them when they were 25 have pension provision far lower than theirs.
They also have increments in their work, which many in the private sector do not get.
The BMA have led their staff up to the top of the hill, where do they go from here ? They have no escape route that leaves them with any credibility. They won't get the 36%, they won't consider the same deal the devolved govts gave their junior doctors and the govt wont entertain discussion while they make an absurd demand of 36% so where do they go ?
There was a Doctor from the hospital last night saying that the hospital building had collapsed, yet this morning the video from the scene shows no building collapse, just some burnt out cars.
The BBC are still running with at least 500 people have died, despite there being no evidence of this.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
It’s more meaningful when you’re 25 than the pension component (worth about 25-30% on top for them btw). I also have some sympathy for being a doctor (or indeed being a nurse) being a yucky job I wouldn’t want to do (seeing all that blood and guts) and having a case (certainly early on when you have to do a bit of everything) for the same sort of “x factor” we assume for the military.
But as I say, I think their union has made some big errors and they can’t have 30%.
It's amazing how quickly doctors and nurses get used to "just dealing with" blood and pus, in the same way that parents (and nurses) quickly get used to "just dealing with" shit and vomit.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
It’s more meaningful when you’re 25 than the pension component (worth about 25-30% on top for them btw). I also have some sympathy for being a doctor (or indeed being a nurse) being a yucky job I wouldn’t want to do (seeing all that blood and guts) and having a case (certainly early on when you have to do a bit of everything) for the same sort of “x factor” we assume for the military.
But as I say, I think their union has made some big errors and they can’t have 30%.
True, it is more meaningful when you are 25, I felt the same when I saw my salary going into a pension, however they will be really glad when they reach their 60s and people who earned more than them when they were 25 have pension provision far lower than theirs.
They also have increments in their work, which many in the private sector do not get.
The BMA have led their staff up to the top of the hill, where do they go from here ? They have no escape route that leaves them with any credibility. They won't get the 36%, they won't consider the same deal the devolved govts gave their junior doctors and the govt wont entertain discussion while they make an absurd demand of 36% so where do they go ?
Oh I agree with you on that. This is where I came in. They could have won an argument for perhaps 10% I reckon. They chose to ask for something silly instead. They need to all join ASLEF. Mercenary union. Focuses on getting cash. Bloody good at it and I wish mine was as skilled.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
It’s more meaningful when you’re 25 than the pension component (worth about 25-30% on top for them btw). I also have some sympathy for being a doctor (or indeed being a nurse) being a yucky job I wouldn’t want to do (seeing all that blood and guts) and having a case (certainly early on when you have to do a bit of everything) for the same sort of “x factor” we assume for the military.
But as I say, I think their union has made some big errors and they can’t have 30%.
It's amazing how quickly doctors and nurses get used to "just dealing with" blood and pus, in the same way that parents (and nurses) quickly get used to "just dealing with" shit and vomit.
And piss, don't forget piss. It goes everywhere.
The worst job in the prison service must be Abu Hamza’s bottom wiper.
Just noting that Al Jazeera is rather rowing back from its coverage last night; it was unequivocal about Israel's responsibility last night, and is now much more even handed. Does this suggest that Israel might have a case?
(BTW though the BBC veered too much last night towards assuming Israel responsibility, as I followed it it just fell short of a definite claim. Its reverse ferret since about 9 pm yesterday has been rapid and is busy defending itself this morning).
Things we learn on PB. There is apparently no higher incidence of things like PTSD in medical staff rotating through emergency medicine or similar, because it’s just like wiping up poo. Sod all the studies that say there is.
Things we learn on PB. There is apparently no higher incidence of things like PTSD in medical staff rotating through emergency medicine or similar, because it’s just like wiping up poo. Sod all the studies that say there is.
Medics, criminal law practitioners, judges, and soldiers see the worst, and suffer accordingly.
At one level, you do get hardened to it, but you can always reach breaking point.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
So what has actually happened at this hospital? Blown up by the Israelis but no bomb crater. Blown up by an Islamic Jihad misfire but just a few burnt out cars in the car park. 500 dead, no 300 dead, no "casualties rising".
We have video both of IJ firing rockets and one dipping off path and breaking apart. Broadcast live on Al Jazeera. We have Wild Claims of an Israeli massacre and collapsing buildings - but the buildings are intact. And the morning after images show a load of burnt out cars (and not an EV in sight...) and minimal damage.
So - IJ rocket misfires and breaks up in mid air. Flaming debris is seen falling. And we have an obvious large fire in a car park next to the hospital. So....
But Leon said it was definitely...
Leon is definite about many things. Occasionally he's correct.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
It’s more meaningful when you’re 25 than the pension component (worth about 25-30% on top for them btw). I also have some sympathy for being a doctor (or indeed being a nurse) being a yucky job I wouldn’t want to do (seeing all that blood and guts) and having a case (certainly early on when you have to do a bit of everything) for the same sort of “x factor” we assume for the military.
But as I say, I think their union has made some big errors and they can’t have 30%.
It's amazing how quickly doctors and nurses get used to "just dealing with" blood and pus, in the same way that parents (and nurses) quickly get used to "just dealing with" shit and vomit.
Parents less likely to get infected by the nasties carried by blood, pus, faeces, and urine, than in a hospital. A lot less likely. Simply because a child is much less likely to carry the, than seeing n random patients.
Things we learn on PB. There is apparently no higher incidence of things like PTSD in medical staff rotating through emergency medicine or similar, because it’s just like wiping up poo. Sod all the studies that say there is.
Medics, criminal law practitioners, judges, and soldiers see the worst, and suffer accordingly.
At one level, you do get hardened to it, but you can always reach breaking point.
I always thought that. But I’ve been assured above that it’s no worse than a parent wiping up poo.
Things we learn on PB. There is apparently no higher incidence of things like PTSD in medical staff rotating through emergency medicine or similar, because it’s just like wiping up poo. Sod all the studies that say there is.
Medics, criminal law practitioners, judges, and soldiers see the worst, and suffer accordingly.
At one level, you do get hardened to it, but you can always reach breaking point.
One might also add firefighters and paramedics, I would think. But quite so.
I think the IDF has made a pretty convincing case although I think it might help if they actually release the intercepted conversations to the public .
PB asks, Israel does its best to provide. Here it is:
Things we learn on PB. There is apparently no higher incidence of things like PTSD in medical staff rotating through emergency medicine or similar, because it’s just like wiping up poo. Sod all the studies that say there is.
Medics, criminal law practitioners, judges, and soldiers see the worst, and suffer accordingly.
At one level, you do get hardened to it, but you can always reach breaking point.
One might also add firefighters and paramedics, I would think. But quite so.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
Israel is where a lot of hard left-wing prejudices converge. Capitalism, colonialism, race, militarism and intersectionality are all ticked for them - and represented by the Jewish people, more broadly - despite being a pretty incoherent belief set to the rest of us.
It explains the blind support for anyone who opposes them, particularly the PLO & Hamas.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
Things we learn on PB. There is apparently no higher incidence of things like PTSD in medical staff rotating through emergency medicine or similar, because it’s just like wiping up poo. Sod all the studies that say there is.
Medics, criminal law practitioners, judges, and soldiers see the worst, and suffer accordingly.
At one level, you do get hardened to it, but you can always reach breaking point.
One might also add firefighters and paramedics, I would think. But quite so.
And, of course, internet forum moderators.
The stuff that gets put on, and stays up if they aren't careful? Quite so. Depressing thing is that PB is probably slighly more sane than the average (which of course is weighted by the inclusion of edit: usually innocuous stuff like cake decorators, allotment gardeners, railway modellers and fossil collectors).
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
Israel is where a lot of hard left-wing prejudices converge. Capitalism, colonialism, race, militarism and intersectionality are all ticked for them - and represented by the Jewish people, more broadly - despite being a pretty incoherent belief set to the rest of us.
It explains the blind support for anyone who opposes them, particularly the PLO & Hamas.
One thing none of them seem to have is an actual understanding of history. I see a lot of people speak as if they was a happy, high functioning Palestinian state, with no Jewish population, until all these Israelis turned up just after the war.
So what has actually happened at this hospital? Blown up by the Israelis but no bomb crater. Blown up by an Islamic Jihad misfire but just a few burnt out cars in the car park. 500 dead, no 300 dead, no "casualties rising".
We have video both of IJ firing rockets and one dipping off path and breaking apart. Broadcast live on Al Jazeera. We have Wild Claims of an Israeli massacre and collapsing buildings - but the buildings are intact. And the morning after images show a load of burnt out cars (and not an EV in sight...) and minimal damage.
So - IJ rocket misfires and breaks up in mid air. Flaming debris is seen falling. And we have an obvious large fire in a car park next to the hospital. So....
But Leon said it was definitely...
Leon is definite about many things. Occasionally he's correct.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Things we learn on PB. There is apparently no higher incidence of things like PTSD in medical staff rotating through emergency medicine or similar, because it’s just like wiping up poo. Sod all the studies that say there is.
Medics, criminal law practitioners, judges, and soldiers see the worst, and suffer accordingly.
At one level, you do get hardened to it, but you can always reach breaking point.
One might also add firefighters and paramedics, I would think. But quite so.
And, of course, internet forum moderators.
The stuff that gets put on, and stays up if they aren't careful? Quite so. Depressing thing is that PB is probably slighly more sane than the average (which of course is weighted by the inclusion of edit: usually innocuous stuff like cake decorators, allotment gardeners, railway modellers and fossil collectors).
Yes. I was mostly being facetious but I do think that in 2023 you see a lot of the worst of humanity on the internet. Rarely the same as the grim stuff in real life, obviously.
The BBC is a bit..errr.. shit, isn’t it? Major errors in reporting last night
Yes but. Taken as a whole the BBC has been doing a fantastic job in covering the middle east, and in particular in the last couple of weeks.
Just imagine a country where GB News, Fox, Russia Today, Talk, James O'Brien, JRM, Farage, Galloway were the big news media outlets and talking heads online, on radio and live telly.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
“I’m alright, Jack”. Yes, let’s all pull the ladder up behind us.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
Israel is where a lot of hard left-wing prejudices converge. Capitalism, colonialism, race, militarism and intersectionality are all ticked for them - and represented by the Jewish people, more broadly - despite being a pretty incoherent belief set to the rest of us.
It explains the blind support for anyone who opposes them, particularly the PLO & Hamas.
So what has actually happened at this hospital? Blown up by the Israelis but no bomb crater. Blown up by an Islamic Jihad misfire but just a few burnt out cars in the car park. 500 dead, no 300 dead, no "casualties rising".
We have video both of IJ firing rockets and one dipping off path and breaking apart. Broadcast live on Al Jazeera. We have Wild Claims of an Israeli massacre and collapsing buildings - but the buildings are intact. And the morning after images show a load of burnt out cars (and not an EV in sight...) and minimal damage.
So - IJ rocket misfires and breaks up in mid air. Flaming debris is seen falling. And we have an obvious large fire in a car park next to the hospital. So....
But Leon said it was definitely...
Leon is definite about many things. Occasionally he's correct.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky was equally as bad
This is true, but the BBC usually takes days to report a man bites dog story because it's essential that they don't report fake news.
It shows how important the MSM is. A lot of what happens on social media follows from what they say. We're a sceptical bunch on here, but I don't think anyone on here last night said "hold on, are we sure what's being reported has actually happened as described?"
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
“I’m alright, Jack”. Yes, let’s all pull the ladder up behind us.
They're not though? Pulling the ladder up would suggest that senior roles would no longer be made available for juniors who get through their years of qualifications. That isn't the case. Medicine, like many careers, has a very steep earnings curve and having a low start actually helps operationally to separate the best doctors from those who probably need to become GPs.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky too - see Anna Botting's "interview" of Mark Regev
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
This is a massive exaggeration, even though the BBC got it wrong for a time. Just like the massive exaggeration of the Gilligan matter. Live news is hard to do. They do it well.
For proper BBC scandals which should close whole departments look at Savile, Brand, Ross et al. The BBC have been in hock to luvvies but not terrorists. Their news coverage is essential to the sort of society we are.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
Doctors arent staying in their jobs in sufficient numbers on current terms. We need more doctors. This ain't rocket science.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky too - see Anna Botting's "interview" of Mark Regev
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
People go into medicine knowing that they will have to put some graft in for the first few years, but there is a clear pathway to a very nice income followed by a comfortable pension.
And of course it gives their parents to tell every random stranger "My son/daughter is a doctor". Which is the most important thing for many.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
This is a massive exaggeration, even though the BBC got it wrong for a time. Just like the massive exaggeration of the Gilligan matter. Live news is hard to do. They do it well.
For proper BBC scandals which should close whole departments look at Savile, Brand, Ross et al. The BBC have been in hock to luvvies but not terrorists. Their news coverage is essential to the sort of society we are.
Right, on 7 October, I was listening to 5Live and they were talking about Israel. But they didn't really go into any details. It was a bit like that episode of Yes Minister when they all keep saying "it's serious".
Rachel Cunliffe @RMCunliffe I am noticing how so many of the people who were demanding caution when it came to reporting the murder of Israeli infants in case it was “misinformation”are now Hamas’s claim that this was due to an Israeli strike, without verification
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky was equally as bad
This is true, but the BBC usually takes days to report a man bites dog story because it's essential that they don't report fake news.
It shows how important the MSM is. A lot of what happens on social media follows from what they say. We're a sceptical bunch on here, but I don't think anyone on here last night said "hold on, are we sure what's being reported has actually happened as described?"
I definitely did. So did loads of others. Anyone with more than a few braincells could work out it didn't make sense for Israel to bomb a hospital on the eve of POTUS arriving, there obviously had to be another explanation and the most likely ones were an errant missile from Hamas or a staged attack by Hamas. It looks to be one or the other right now.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
So 'people who are no longer in a bad place don't care about those who are in a bad place'?
I think some do, some don't.
After a career in IT and Finance I have a very comfortable retired life but I still have etched on me what it was like to be piss-poor as I was growing up. If I'm honest, I probably feel it too deeply - maybe not helped by seeing people week in week out in a similar position coming for help at Citizens Advice.
It's what guides my political perspective, but I equally accept that having made good in my life it could be argued I should be a Tory stalwart. But I'm not.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
It’s more meaningful when you’re 25 than the pension component (worth about 25-30% on top for them btw). I also have some sympathy for being a doctor (or indeed being a nurse) being a yucky job I wouldn’t want to do (seeing all that blood and guts) and having a case (certainly early on when you have to do a bit of everything) for the same sort of “x factor” we assume for the military.
But as I say, I think their union has made some big errors and they can’t have 30%.
True, it is more meaningful when you are 25, I felt the same when I saw my salary going into a pension, however they will be really glad when they reach their 60s and people who earned more than them when they were 25 have pension provision far lower than theirs.
They also have increments in their work, which many in the private sector do not get.
The BMA have led their staff up to the top of the hill, where do they go from here ? They have no escape route that leaves them with any credibility. They won't get the 36%, they won't consider the same deal the devolved govts gave their junior doctors and the govt wont entertain discussion while they make an absurd demand of 36% so where do they go ?
Oh I agree with you on that. This is where I came in. They could have won an argument for perhaps 10% I reckon. They chose to ask for something silly instead. They need to all join ASLEF. Mercenary union. Focuses on getting cash. Bloody good at it and I wish mine was as skilled.
Same here. Full of admiration for Mick Whelan. My union was useless. When I was in a redunancy situation I contacted it for advice. Was promised calls back. Never happened. Soon became my ex-union.
Things we learn on PB. There is apparently no higher incidence of things like PTSD in medical staff rotating through emergency medicine or similar, because it’s just like wiping up poo. Sod all the studies that say there is.
Medics, criminal law practitioners, judges, and soldiers see the worst, and suffer accordingly.
At one level, you do get hardened to it, but you can always reach breaking point.
One might also add firefighters and paramedics, I would think. But quite so.
And, of course, internet forum moderators.
The stuff that gets put on, and stays up if they aren't careful? Quite so. Depressing thing is that PB is probably slighly more sane than the average (which of course is weighted by the inclusion of edit: usually innocuous stuff like cake decorators, allotment gardeners, railway modellers and fossil collectors).
Yes. I was mostly being facetious but I do think that in 2023 you see a lot of the worst of humanity on the internet. Rarely the same as the grim stuff in real life, obviously.
A look at the Mail Online rather raises questions about their editorial policy and techniques - never mind the content, or the website design. Panic! Brace! Plague! Invasion!
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky was equally as bad
This is true, but the BBC usually takes days to report a man bites dog story because it's essential that they don't report fake news.
It shows how important the MSM is. A lot of what happens on social media follows from what they say. We're a sceptical bunch on here, but I don't think anyone on here last night said "hold on, are we sure what's being reported has actually happened as described?"
I definitely did. So did loads of others. Anyone with more than a few braincells could work out it didn't make sense for Israel to bomb a hospital on the eve of POTUS arriving, there obviously had to be another explanation and the most likely ones were an errant missile from Hamas or a staged attack by Hamas. It looks to be one or the other right now.
There was plenty of discussion about who did it but not much discussion of did it happen? The claims of 500 dead were swallowed by all.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
Doctors arent staying in their jobs in sufficient numbers on current terms. We need more doctors. This ain't rocket science.
That's a completely different discussion, if the market rate for doctors needs to change then sure let's do that but medicine in this country isn't a market economy. The doctors want there to be a state monopoly but this is what state monopoly provision results in, if they want many hospitals and medical companies competing for their work in the same way banks do for financial workers then the whole system has got to be reformed.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
So 'people who are no longer in a bad place don't care about those who are in a bad place'?
I think some do, some don't.
After a career in IT and Finance I have a very comfortable retired life but I still have etched on me what it was like to be piss-poor as I was growing up. If I'm honest, I probably feel it too deeply - maybe not helped by seeing people week in week out in a similar position coming for help at Citizens Advice.
It's what guides my political perspective, but I equally accept that having made good in my life it could be argued I should be a Tory stalwart. But I'm not.
Ditto here. For me it's university fees and the Student Loans system. Really upsets me. I could study without worrying about money, and I'm all the more conscious of it.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky was equally as bad
This is true, but the BBC usually takes days to report a man bites dog story because it's essential that they don't report fake news.
It shows how important the MSM is. A lot of what happens on social media follows from what they say. We're a sceptical bunch on here, but I don't think anyone on here last night said "hold on, are we sure what's being reported has actually happened as described?"
I definitely did. So did loads of others. Anyone with more than a few braincells could work out it didn't make sense for Israel to bomb a hospital on the eve of POTUS arriving, there obviously had to be another explanation and the most likely ones were an errant missile from Hamas or a staged attack by Hamas. It looks to be one or the other right now.
It could just as easily have been a mistake by the IAF. Anyone assuming anything last night was just sounding out their prejudices.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky was equally as bad
This is true, but the BBC usually takes days to report a man bites dog story because it's essential that they don't report fake news.
It shows how important the MSM is. A lot of what happens on social media follows from what they say. We're a sceptical bunch on here, but I don't think anyone on here last night said "hold on, are we sure what's being reported has actually happened as described?"
Yokes definitely did around 8pm. I remember a few others being sceptical too.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky was equally as bad
This is true, but the BBC usually takes days to report a man bites dog story because it's essential that they don't report fake news.
It shows how important the MSM is. A lot of what happens on social media follows from what they say. We're a sceptical bunch on here, but I don't think anyone on here last night said "hold on, are we sure what's being reported has actually happened as described?"
I definitely did. So did loads of others. Anyone with more than a few braincells could work out it didn't make sense for Israel to bomb a hospital on the eve of POTUS arriving, there obviously had to be another explanation and the most likely ones were an errant missile from Hamas or a staged attack by Hamas. It looks to be one or the other right now.
Pretty much all the posts I saw were keeping an open mind whilst also having an open debate.
Yup, agreed. BBC needs to get rid of him today, he's giving his own opinion as fact to millions of people worldwide and he's very much not an expert and clearly has an agenda to blame Israel.
From the review, it seems to blame the housing crisis everything and everyone except the root cause - NIMBYs and the statist planning system.
But that could of course be the Guardian reviewer seeing what he wanted to see.
I find the housing debate entertaining. The effort people put into trying to prove the problem isn’t that the population is rising faster than you build accommodation for said population…
Which would be down to immigration given we have a below replacement level birthrate in the UK now
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
Doctors arent staying in their jobs in sufficient numbers on current terms. We need more doctors. This ain't rocket science.
That's a completely different discussion, if the market rate for doctors needs to change then sure let's do that but medicine in this country isn't a market economy. The doctors want there to be a state monopoly but this is what state monopoly provision results in, if they want many hospitals and medical companies competing for their work in the same way banks do for financial workers then the whole system has got to be reformed.
And more private healthcare and private health insurance, with private healthcare providers paying higher salaries to top doctors
No. I disagree. Whoever he is was reporting what we knew at the time. Seems quite measured to me.
"it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike" well it was. He said this to millions of people live on air under the BBC banner. That clip is going to be used as propaganda against Israel for years. He could have just reported the situation but he chose to interject his own uninformed opinion into it. For that he needs to go, he's not reporting the news, he's creating it.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
Doctors arent staying in their jobs in sufficient numbers on current terms. We need more doctors. This ain't rocket science.
That's a completely different discussion, if the market rate for doctors needs to change then sure let's do that but medicine in this country isn't a market economy. The doctors want there to be a state monopoly but this is what state monopoly provision results in, if they want many hospitals and medical companies competing for their work in the same way banks do for financial workers then the whole system has got to be reformed.
And more private healthcare and private health insurance, with private healthcare providers paying higher salaries to top doctors
There *is* a market - between NHS England and other employers. I can't believe this is being denied. It's almost a tautology given that people are moving abroad.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
Doctors arent staying in their jobs in sufficient numbers on current terms. We need more doctors. This ain't rocket science.
That's a completely different discussion, if the market rate for doctors needs to change then sure let's do that but medicine in this country isn't a market economy. The doctors want there to be a state monopoly but this is what state monopoly provision results in, if they want many hospitals and medical companies competing for their work in the same way banks do for financial workers then the whole system has got to be reformed.
And more private healthcare and private health insurance, with private healthcare providers paying higher salaries to top doctors
Typo towards the end of your post. You have "top" in place of "money-grabbing".
Work your day off in a private hospital and double your income. Then have the nerve to complain about long working hours.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
It’s the same with most professions, except for perhaps the very top law firms. A few years of relatively low salaries while gaining experience and qualifications, followed by a sharp ramp up in earnings over time. Public sector workers also have a pension that’s now pretty much impossible to get in the private sector.
Yup, agreed. BBC needs to get rid of him today, he's giving his own opinion as fact to millions of people worldwide and he's very much not an expert and clearly has an agenda to blame Israel.
You need to listen again - properly.
His first words are that the the Israeli military has been contacted and that they are investigating. His last words are that the video still has to be verified. In between he makes the perfectly valid point that rocket attacks haven't been seen to cause that much damage.
All this at 20:08. At the same time on here most posters were assuming it was most probably a terrible mistake by the Israelis.
The previous night we ate at a Sardinian restaurant - http://sannas1.co.uk/ - and it too was delicious and the staff wonderfully friendly.
I am now stuffed after a cooked breakfast and will have to embark on some serious dieting/exercising when I get home later today. But first Tullie House then St Mary's Church Wreay - https://www.stmaryswreay.org/.
Well worth a visit to Carlisle for those who have not been.
No. I disagree. Whoever he is was reporting what we knew at the time. Seems quite measured to me.
"it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike" well it was. He said this to millions of people live on air under the BBC banner. That clip is going to be used as propaganda against Israel for years. He could have just reported the situation but he chose to interject his own uninformed opinion into it. For that he needs to go, he's not reporting the news, he's creating it.
This is one of the big problems that 24h news channels produce when they need to pad out reporting with huge swathes of opinion, and that opinion often comes from their own staff. When you have several different journalists all from the same organisation reiterating the view they think is most likely it starts to feel as though that view is a fact.
In this instance such low standards may precipitate more death and destruction. The news channels should all be headlining substantial retractions - what the IDF have provided isn't proof, but it looks far more reliable than the hearsay of Hamas and their friends.
It is interesting there is no film of the destroyed hospital this morning, the BBC reporting last night that there was a huge rescue attempt going to pull people from the rubble of the hospital, yet this morning video shows the hospital is still standing and the only damage is in the car park. Maybe the BBC should mention this.
No. I disagree. Whoever he is was reporting what we knew at the time. Seems quite measured to me.
"What we knew at the time"? All we knew is what Hamas were saying.
Well that and the videos of course. And the fact that the Israelis didn't immediately deny it.
"And the fact that the Israelis didn't immediately deny it." They said they were looking into it. Is non-denial some kind of evidence that they did it?
No. I disagree. Whoever he is was reporting what we knew at the time. Seems quite measured to me.
"it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike" well it was. He said this to millions of people live on air under the BBC banner. That clip is going to be used as propaganda against Israel for years. He could have just reported the situation but he chose to interject his own uninformed opinion into it. For that he needs to go, he's not reporting the news, he's creating it.
Look, if you're going to do this don't mis-quote. He does not say 'it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike'.
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky was equally as bad
Indeed. I sent that clip round last night of that moronic presenter really losing her cool, to be told she’s a Sky veteran of 20 years. I can only conclude there’s deep unwitting institutional antisemitism in our media. It just seems to be instinctive that they rushto condemn Israel without evidence and then makes the most obscene logical contortions to try and excuse a death cult. While there’s plenty to criticise the Israeli govt for theres not much to absolve Hamas.
Public sector workers also have a pension that’s now pretty much impossible to get in the private sector.
I keep forgetting wealthy people think all public sector employees have gold-plated defined benefit pensions. They haven't been available to new joiners since Blair was Prime Minister
Roger is correct that very many people will believe that Israel deliberately bombed a hospital, because they want to believe it.
We saw that last night when media outlets rushed to print word for word everything Hamas said about the alleged attack without a single iota of fact checking, double sourcing or simply just looking at the bloody footage. Too many people wanted this to be Israel because they want to believe that Israel is the same as Hamas, so they can justify supporting the murder of 1400 people, kidnapping hundreds and parading kidnapped children on social media. It turns out that Hamas or another terrorist organisation is responsible for this because, as I said yesterday, they give zero fucks about Palestinian civilians.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
Sky was equally as bad
Indeed. I sent that clip round last night of that moronic presenter really losing her cool, to be told she’s a Sky veteran of 20 years. I can only conclude there’s deep unwitting institutional antisemitism in our media. It just seems to be instinctive that they rushto condemn Israel without evidence and then makes the most obscene logical contortions to try and excuse a death cult. While there’s plenty to criticise the Israeli govt for theres not much to absolve Hamas.
Now that clip was shocking. The Israeli spokesperson was very measured in response.
Yup, agreed. BBC needs to get rid of him today, he's giving his own opinion as fact to millions of people worldwide and he's very much not an expert and clearly has an agenda to blame Israel.
You need to listen again - properly.
His first words are that the the Israeli military has been contacted and that they are investigating. His last words are that the video still has to be verified. In between he makes the perfectly valid point that rocket attacks haven't been seen to cause that much damage.
All this at 20:08. At the same time on here most posters were assuming it was most probably a terrible mistake by the Israelis.
Most posters on here aren’t supposed to be impartial news organisations with access to huge resources on the ground and elsewhere.
Most posters on here don’t have an obligation to be cautious with their pronouncements because if we get it “wrong” nobody in the world gives a shit. If we get it wrong it doesn’t risk riling someone up so badly that they decide to drive a van through a crowd outside a place of worship for one side or the other. If we get it wrong we don’t destroy trust in news where - for example - if the BBC find out that this was actually a fuck up by a Hamas missile and have to row back then the “other side” decide that the BBC have been leant on by the Jewish world controllers or the CIA etc and refuse to believe it.
The BBC and fellow news orgs could have said “there has been an explosion at or near a Gaza hospital. We are told that there are large casualties but we cannot verify the cause of the explosion or the casualties and will investigate and report when the situation is clear”.
Job done, impartial reporting, patience, sense and not making themselves hostage to events and propaganda.
No. I disagree. Whoever he is was reporting what we knew at the time. Seems quite measured to me.
"it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike" well it was. He said this to millions of people live on air under the BBC banner. That clip is going to be used as propaganda against Israel for years. He could have just reported the situation but he chose to interject his own uninformed opinion into it. For that he needs to go, he's not reporting the news, he's creating it.
Look, if you're going to do this don't mis-quote. He does not say 'it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike'.
No. I disagree. Whoever he is was reporting what we knew at the time. Seems quite measured to me.
"it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike" well it was. He said this to millions of people live on air under the BBC banner. That clip is going to be used as propaganda against Israel for years. He could have just reported the situation but he chose to interject his own uninformed opinion into it. For that he needs to go, he's not reporting the news, he's creating it.
This is something media organisations have been doing for years. “We don’t know details BUT” [insert supposition based on what you’ve been told so far].
It is a peeve of mine because it is a clear shaping of the narrative - you, viewer, should listen to my views and shape your opinion on this because this is what I think, though I can’t back it up yet. I would like to say this isn’t commonplace at the BBC and other media outlets, but it is.
No. I disagree. Whoever he is was reporting what we knew at the time. Seems quite measured to me.
"What we knew at the time"? All we knew is what Hamas were saying.
Well that and the videos of course. And the fact that the Israelis didn't immediately deny it.
"And the fact that the Israelis didn't immediately deny it." They said they were looking into it. Is non-denial some kind of evidence that they did it?
Public sector workers also have a pension that’s now pretty much impossible to get in the private sector.
I keep forgetting wealthy people think all public sector employees have gold-plated defined benefit pensions. They haven't been available to new joiners since Blair was Prime Minister
The current doctors’ pension arrangements lead to new joiners retiring with a pension income of roughly £68k per year if retiring at 68, index-linked, which would cost around £2m in the private sector.
No. I disagree. Whoever he is was reporting what we knew at the time. Seems quite measured to me.
"it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike" well it was. He said this to millions of people live on air under the BBC banner. That clip is going to be used as propaganda against Israel for years. He could have just reported the situation but he chose to interject his own uninformed opinion into it. For that he needs to go, he's not reporting the news, he's creating it.
Look, if you're going to do this don't mis-quote. He does not say 'it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike'.
"It is hard to see what else this could be."
"It is hard to see what else this could be" ≠ "it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike".
Anyway, I don't know why I'm bothering. He's not going to be sacked, nor does he deserve to be.
It’s encouraging that some deal might be reached with consultants but what about junior doctors.
Won’t this just wind them up even more if consultants get an increase and they don’t .
Agree.
Also, I have to say I was quite dismissive of the union docs’ claim, reacting to nonsense like the “minimum wage” claims, and then I looked in to what they are actually paid on graduating. Now, if they hang around and pass some exams they will be doing well after a few years, but currently they don’t compare well to similarly experienced and skilled grads.
I think that’s the argument the BMA should have made. Compared themselves to engineers, architects, and even civil servants.
The Union has already said it won't settle for the same deal it settled with in the devolved authorities so what exactly do they want. They won't get 35%
I am an Engineer. When I first got my qualifications my salary was relatively low too and I did not get the same level of pension or holidays they get.
A salary is only a part of the package an employee gets.
My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike.
It’s not the medics fault you accepted a silly deal.
I paid my dues, two years ago my wife and I bought a 5 bedroom house in Fortis Green and I only work 35-40h per week now.
Yup. But you won’t get the excess 30 hours a week back from when you were younger. We all make our choices.
Eh I'm still in my 30s and being Indian I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis worrying about what they did in their 20s.
"My first job on finance was £31k per year and about 60-70 hours per week working. I didn't go on strike."
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
My point is that all of those doctors did the route these lot are striking over and yet they don't seem to give a fuck in their early to mid 30s that they worked for £34k per year or whatever it is. Same as I'm not particularly fussed that my first two years in financial services was pretty poorly paid.
Doctors arent staying in their jobs in sufficient numbers on current terms. We need more doctors. This ain't rocket science.
That's a completely different discussion, if the market rate for doctors needs to change then sure let's do that but medicine in this country isn't a market economy. The doctors want there to be a state monopoly but this is what state monopoly provision results in, if they want many hospitals and medical companies competing for their work in the same way banks do for financial workers then the whole system has got to be reformed.
And more private healthcare and private health insurance, with private healthcare providers paying higher salaries to top doctors
And the actual cost of health care in this country would sky rocket (like it has in the US). The most efficient medical system will always be a centrally run one (our inefficiencies are mostly due to internal market related rubbish). We need fewer private suppliers of medical staff, not more. Scrap the Staff Bank system, pay NHS staff well, and focus on outcomes not dogma.
There isn't going to be any agreement reached in this conflict. Either Hamas is destroyed or Israel is destroyed
Or, most likely, it ends with another stalemate after both sides get worn down by violence.
Or they drag us all into it.
Personally I'm inclined to say 'a plague of both your houses', and as to which side is responsible for which atrocity, they are both liars so I believe nothing.
Public sector workers also have a pension that’s now pretty much impossible to get in the private sector.
I keep forgetting wealthy people think all public sector employees have gold-plated defined benefit pensions. They haven't been available to new joiners since Blair was Prime Minister
The current doctors’ pension arrangements lead to new joiners retiring with a pension income of roughly £68k per year if retiring at 68, index-linked, which would cost around £2m in the private sector.
No. I disagree. Whoever he is was reporting what we knew at the time. Seems quite measured to me.
"it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike" well it was. He said this to millions of people live on air under the BBC banner. That clip is going to be used as propaganda against Israel for years. He could have just reported the situation but he chose to interject his own uninformed opinion into it. For that he needs to go, he's not reporting the news, he's creating it.
Look, if you're going to do this don't mis-quote. He does not say 'it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike'.
"It is hard to see what else this could be."
"It is hard to see what else this could be" ≠ "it can't be anything other than an Israeli air strike".
Anyway, I don't know why I'm bothering. He's not going to be sacked, nor does he deserve to be.
Weird interpretation. Because the two are pretty damn similar. But yes, you are right, he won't be sacked. People will hear the BBC say something that may well turn out to have been based only upon one side's version of events but so what, right?
Comments
They also have increments in their work, which many in the private sector do not get.
The BMA have led their staff up to the top of the hill, where do they go from here ? They have no escape route that leaves them with any credibility. They won't get the 36%, they won't consider the same deal the devolved govts gave their junior doctors and the govt wont entertain discussion while they make an absurd demand of 36% so where do they go ?
The BBC are still running with at least 500 people have died, despite there being no evidence of this.
(BTW though the BBC veered too much last night towards assuming Israel responsibility, as I followed it it just fell short of a definite claim. Its reverse ferret since about 9 pm yesterday has been rapid and is busy defending itself this morning).
At one level, you do get hardened to it, but you can always reach breaking point.
Occasionally he's correct.
Edit: police too?
https://twitter.com/IsraelMFA/status/1714546593146249559
Which does not mean the matter is settled. Personally I shall wait and see.
It explains the blind support for anyone who opposes them, particularly the PLO & Hamas.
"I know about zillion doctors who are around my age and believe me, they aren't driving around in Porches and Maseratis"
I'm struggling to understand whether you are arguing for the doctors or against them?
If the latter your 5 bed house in Fortis Green doesn't suggest you stayed on £31k a year for long. Share options and bonuses, I guess... not a lot of those available to most doctors.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1714548973401153766
(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
The reality is the BBC can no longer be viewed as a credible, impartial source on the Gaza conflict. It reported Hamas claims uncritically. Forget the handbags over “terrorists”. That is a terrible place for the organisation to be. There needs to be a serious investigation.
https://twitter.com/IsraeliPM/status/1714550228978712600
And made it down the stairs unaided.
Just imagine a country where GB News, Fox, Russia Today, Talk, James O'Brien, JRM, Farage, Galloway were the big news media outlets and talking heads online, on radio and live telly.
Which doesn't mean I am uncritical of the BBC
It shows how important the MSM is. A lot of what happens on social media follows from what they say. We're a sceptical bunch on here, but I don't think anyone on here last night said "hold on, are we sure what's being reported has actually happened as described?"
For proper BBC scandals which should close whole departments look at Savile, Brand, Ross et al. The BBC have been in hock to luvvies but not terrorists. Their news coverage is essential to the sort of society we are.
And of course it gives their parents to tell every random stranger "My son/daughter is a doctor". Which is the most important thing for many.
Rachel Cunliffe nailed it last night:
https://twitter.com/RMCunliffe/status/1714372065204023643
Rachel Cunliffe
@RMCunliffe
I am noticing how so many of the people who were demanding caution when it came to reporting the murder of Israeli infants in case it was “misinformation”are now Hamas’s claim that this was due to an Israeli strike, without verification
I think some do, some don't.
After a career in IT and Finance I have a very comfortable retired life but I still have etched on me what it was like to be piss-poor as I was growing up. If I'm honest, I probably feel it too deeply - maybe not helped by seeing people week in week out in a similar position coming for help at Citizens Advice.
It's what guides my political perspective, but I equally accept that having made good in my life it could be argued I should be a Tory stalwart. But I'm not.
Along with the leaders of most of the Middle East.
Al Jazeera TV Channel ticker, right now (Freeview 235).
Anyone assuming anything last night was just sounding out their prejudices.
Looks like an explosion on launch.
https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1714475447759544426
And here we have the Beeb saying "I don't see what else it could be".
He couldn't see what else it could be because he believed without question the entire Hamas line on the event.
For me the most telling line from the Israeli guy on Sky was asking: isn't it your job to question everything before you pronounce on things.
Work your day off in a private hospital and double your income. Then have the nerve to complain about long working hours.
His first words are that the the Israeli military has been contacted and that they are investigating. His last words are that the video still has to be verified. In between he makes the perfectly valid point that rocket attacks haven't been seen to cause that much damage.
All this at 20:08. At the same time on here most posters were assuming it was most probably a terrible mistake by the Israelis.
https://www.theguardian.com/food/2023/apr/30/jay-rayner-review-alexandros-carlisle-excellent-greek-family-restaurant
The previous night we ate at a Sardinian restaurant - http://sannas1.co.uk/ - and it too was delicious and the staff wonderfully friendly.
I am now stuffed after a cooked breakfast and will have to embark on some serious dieting/exercising when I get home later today. But first Tullie House then St Mary's Church Wreay - https://www.stmaryswreay.org/.
Well worth a visit to Carlisle for those who have not been.
In this instance such low standards may precipitate more death and destruction. The news channels should all be headlining substantial retractions - what the IDF have provided isn't proof, but it looks far more reliable than the hearsay of Hamas and their friends.
Most posters on here don’t have an obligation to be cautious with their pronouncements because if we get it “wrong” nobody in the world gives a shit. If we get it wrong it doesn’t risk riling someone up so badly that they decide to drive a van through a crowd outside a place of worship for one side or the other. If we get it wrong we don’t destroy trust in news where - for example - if the BBC find out that this was actually a fuck up by a Hamas missile and have to row back then the “other side” decide that the BBC have been leant on by the Jewish world controllers or the CIA etc and refuse to believe it.
The BBC and fellow news orgs could have said “there has been an explosion at or near a Gaza hospital. We are told that there are large casualties but we cannot verify the cause of the explosion or the casualties and will investigate and report when the situation is clear”.
Job done, impartial reporting, patience, sense and not making themselves hostage to events and propaganda.
It is a peeve of mine because it is a clear shaping of the narrative - you, viewer, should listen to my views and shape your opinion on this because this is what I think, though I can’t back it up yet. I would like to say this isn’t commonplace at the BBC and other media outlets, but it is.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/nhs-pension-scheme-proposal-what-it-means-for-doctors
Anyway, I don't know why I'm bothering. He's not going to be sacked, nor does he deserve to be.
Personally I'm inclined to say 'a plague of both your houses', and as to which side is responsible for which atrocity, they are both liars so I believe nothing.