politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What a small pensions policy problem says about the current st

Second, like the West Indies!

Excellent thread - for those more interested in the 'Great WASPI Cover Up' Neil Ward Lovat has written extensively on the matter:

http://rwbblog.blogspot.co.id/2017/07/the-great-waspi-cover-up-part-3-not-in.html

The other flaw in the SNP's position was the 'great pivot to the Central Belt' under Nicola Sturgeon was going to scoop up Labour seats - temporarily at least, while imperilling the small 'c' Conservative traditional SNP heartlands of the North East - and under Ruth Davidson the Tories duly retook many of them - including, deliciously, Les Dawson's representative on earth, Fat Eck's.

I'm not sure radical new policies for Scotland can win those back AND work in the Central Belt.

A thoughtful if somewhat long-winded lead. The bottom line is that Labour has captured the "change" vote, whilst the future prospect of independence is along unable to do the same for the SNP, their having been in power north of the border for a long time now.

Alastair makes some important points about pensions equality, which was very widely publicised in the 1990s.

Interesting thread.
As I recall the theory (roughly) was that devolution might strengthen the union by giving Scots the chance to make some of their own decisions and forcing them to stop moaning about Westminster.

I admit I doubted that when the independence campaign came so close. But maybe that was the high watermark in Scotland, and now the SNP have been given enough power to make themselves unpopular.

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

when the title asks if everyone on the other side has a personality disorder - you probably know what you are getting into...

surbiton said:

Sandpit said:

Second, like the West Indies!

Shouldn't that be more like ninth ? As I wrote a few days earlier, Ireland and Afghanistan could give this Windies a good game. I said the Afghans had a better bowling side. Possibly, any test team has a better batting side. To lose 19 wickets in a day is pathetic. On a third day pitch !

I watched the first day of their game against Essex, who didn’t have their strongest bowling line up, and wasn’t very impressed by the batting. Couldn't go for the rest of the game, but the bowlers gave a better account of themselves, although there seem to have been a lot of no-balls (13 in 61 overs).

surbiton said:

Sandpit said:

Second, like the West Indies!

Shouldn't that be more like ninth ? As I wrote a few days earlier, Ireland and Afghanistan could give this Windies a good game. I said the Afghans had a better bowling side. Possibly, any test team has a better batting side. To lose 19 wickets in a day is pathetic. On a third day pitch !

I went out last night and managed to miss seventeen wickets! Was expecting something more of a match than that. To think I was getting nervous about laying the draw when it started raining early in the ‘morning’ session.

As someone noted on here the other day, there was a better WI team in the commentary boxes at the ground than there were on the pitch, even though most of them are in their fifties and sixties now!

Why are these women so anxious to keep their pensions at 60?

They live longer than men on average.

They spend less time in the workforce on average.

More of them have to have NI topped up by their husbands/men of equal distinction than the other way around.

If we are talking about true pension equality, shouldn't they get it later?

This isn't meant to be taken altogether seriously BTW but they do look to me like a load of sexist muppets who want to have their cake and eat it.

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

I think the broader point is about tolerance and control, both socialists and liberals love to control people, despite their claims about setting people free.

The author is an idiot. He states
"The climate and composition of the Earth’s atmosphere, has, for example, been changing ever since the planet was formed 4.5 Billion years ago. But today’s liberals assume that its present exact composition is the ideal."
During most of that time the Earth would not have supported much more than a tiny fraction of the current human population.

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

It could have been titled: Why people I disagree with are inferior to me.

On WASPI:

Alastair knows more about pension law than I ever will, but the only legitimate sounding grievance to me is that WASPI claim that individual notice was not given when the change was brought in. Is this correct?

Generally, it seems that reforming entitlements (WFA, Bus passes, Dementia tax) gets a tremendous reaction from the losers that is not balanced out by political benefit to the winners from the policy. Brexiteers take note!

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

I think the broader point is about tolerance and control, both socialists and liberals love to control people, despite their claims about setting people free.

And conservatives use "freedom" as a way to deny people basic protections and rights. See Republican politicians in the US seeking to remove healthcare coverage from millions in the name of choice, for example.

foxinsoxuk said:

On WASPI:

Alastair knows more about pension law than I ever will, but the only legitimate sounding grievance to me is that WASPI claim that individual notice was not given when the change was brought in. Is this correct?

Generally, it seems that reforming entitlements (WFA, Bus passes, Dementia tax) gets a tremendous reaction from the losers that is not balanced out by political benefit to the winners from the policy. Brexiteers take note!

It wasn't in 1995, partly because the Inland Revenue didn't have current addresses for large numbers of women. It was in 2011 but they complained the lead in notice was too short to compensate.

However, there were over 600 news reports on it, so it's a bit surprising so many are claiming they knew nothing about it.

It's all in the article I link to above.

Edit- Also in that article, a glum statement from a 1983 report - 'it is much easier to confer a benefit than to take it away.'

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Nurses shouldn't need food banks. Most don't, some do. Even if you don't like it.

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Nurses shouldn't need food banks. Most don't, some do. Even if you don't like it.

They don't need them.

His point about pensioners and nurses is a very good one.

Now that we've had a UK general election, is there any reason why the next Scottish Parliament election shouldn't be held in 2020?

foxinsoxuk said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Normally they do not, but it is quite possible that some are in financial circumstances where they do. Generally foodbank usage helps when someone is in a financial gap. Employees are paid a month in arears, but rent is usually paid in advance for example, so anyone can fall in that gap if they have no savings and cannot easily access credit.

A friend of mine volunteers at a food bank, she deals with a lot of very needy people. She, along with others, gets very cross at people who turn up for food drunk and smoking.

Of course the luvvies will reply with a lot of yeah buts.......

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Normally they do not, but it is quite possible that some are in financial circumstances where they do. Generally foodbank usage helps when someone is in a financial gap. Employees are paid a month in arears, but rent is usually paid in advance for example, so anyone can fall in that gap if they have no savings and cannot easily access credit.

I'm surprised if a nurse can't get an overdraft on reasonable terms. Her salary should be high enough for the bank to be willing to stretch a point. Mine is, for example, and it's comparable to a nurse's pay.

It's possible that there are some nurses lying and playing the system. It's also possible that they are not and that, for whatever reason, they have a genuine need. Perhaps a good definition of a liberal is that he/she would tend to go for the latter scenario.

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Normally they do not, but it is quite possible that some are in financial circumstances where they do. Generally foodbank usage helps when someone is in a financial gap. Employees are paid a month in arears, but rent is usually paid in advance for example, so anyone can fall in that gap if they have no savings and cannot easily access credit.

I'm surprised if a nurse can't get an overdraft on reasonable terms. Her salary should be high enough for the bank to be willing to stretch a point. Mine is, for example, and it's comparable to a nurse's pay.

It's possible that there are some nurses lying and playing the system. It's also possible that they are not and that, for whatever reason, they have a genuine need. Perhaps a good definition of a liberal is that he/she would tend to go for the latter scenario.

Yep, let's use nurses as an example because its emotive, vulnerable young people trying to care for those in society.

Why not mention young mechanics or groundworkers who will earn comparable wages?

Liberals are too busy wringing their hands and pretending to care, which is the gist of the original article.

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

I'm surprised if a nurse can't get an overdraft on reasonable terms. Her salary should be high enough for the bank to be willing to stretch a point. Mine is, for example, and it's comparable to a nurse's pay.

It's possible that there are some nurses lying and playing the system. It's also possible that they are not and that, for whatever reason, they have a genuine need. Perhaps a good definition of a liberal is that he/she would tend to go for the latter scenario.

Then I'm no Liberal, as my first reaction would be 'how the hell are you unable to afford food?'

I've lived on non-contributory unemployment benefit and I know the real meaning of poverty - at one point I could only eat one meal a day and I had to wear extra clothes because it was so cold (this being before food banks became widespread - indeed my first job was fundraising for one to be set up).

Nobody on over £20,000 a year should be in that position unless they've made some very stupid mistakes. In which case, fine to help them in the short term but it's surely more important to get those sorted out than just have them turning up for food destined primarily for those who are not in work at all?

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

I'm surprised if a nurse can't get an overdraft on reasonable terms. Her salary should be high enough for the bank to be willing to stretch a point. Mine is, for example, and it's comparable to a nurse's pay.

It's possible that there are some nurses lying and playing the system. It's also possible that they are not and that, for whatever reason, they have a genuine need. Perhaps a good definition of a liberal is that he/she would tend to go for the latter scenario.

Then I'm no Liberal, as my first reaction would be 'how the hell are you unable to afford food?'

I've lived on non-contributory unemployment benefit and I know the real meaning of poverty - at one point I could only eat one meal a day and I had to wear extra clothes because it was so cold (this being before food banks became widespread - indeed my first job was fundraising for one to be set up).

Nobody on over £20,000 a year should be in that position unless they've made some very stupid mistakes. In which case, fine to help them in the short term but it's surely more important to get those sorted out than just have them turning up for food destined primarily for those who are not in work at all?

Spot on

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Nurses shouldn't need food banks. Most don't, some do. Even if you don't like it.

They don't need them.

His point about pensioners and nurses is a very good one.

It's good to know that there are some absolute cerainties in this highly complex world in which individuals face a variety of very individual challenges. :-D

Of course, in reality you have absolutely no way of knowing that there are no nurses in the UK who might need to use food banks. You've just decided that's the case. Luckily, others take a more nuanced view of things and understand that there are many ways in which people can run into the kind of difficulties that might lead them into not having enough money to buy food for a period of time.

In which case just about everybody I've ever met has needed a food bank at some stage or other.

You might like to check the definition of need as compared with want.

foxinsoxuk said:

It is a feature of life on the margin. Many Britons have no savings and are maxed out on debt. It may well be their own fault in poor financial planning, but it doesn't take much to tip them into crisis.

I don't think nurses are more vulnerable than others, and the tens of thousands of nursing vacancies in the land make agency or bank work freely available if outside commitments like carers responsibilities make this possible.

The poor performance of Leicester's Emergency dept is down to impossibility to recruit and retain ward nurses for example. The problem is the backdoor to the department rather than the front door..

As you will see above, I have experience of life on the financial margin.

Nurses are not on it. Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. That is in no way to suggest that they are feather-bedded or have easy lives, but their salaries should be enough to live on. As mine is.

While I see the problems about recruitment and retention are an issue for you in your work, I'm also struggling to see how the fact that they can earn more money either overtime or working elsewhere is germane to this discussion.

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Normally they do not, but it is quite possible that some are in financial circumstances where they do. Generally foodbank usage helps when someone is in a financial gap. Employees are paid a month in arears, but rent is usually paid in advance for example, so anyone can fall in that gap if they have no savings and cannot easily access credit.

A friend of mine volunteers at a food bank, she deals with a lot of very needy people. She, along with others, gets very cross at people who turn up for food drunk and smoking.

Of course the luvvies will reply with a lot of yeah buts.......

So some people who work in food banks are controlling liberals with personality disorders and some are your friends? Or is your friend a liberal with a personality disorder?

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

I'm surprised if a nurse can't get an overdraft on reasonable terms. Her salary should be high enough for the bank to be willing to stretch a point. Mine is, for example, and it's comparable to a nurse's pay.

It's possible that there are some nurses lying and playing the system. It's also possible that they are not and that, for whatever reason, they have a genuine need. Perhaps a good definition of a liberal is that he/she would tend to go for the latter scenario.

Then I'm no Liberal, as my first reaction would be 'how the hell are you unable to afford food?'

I've lived on non-contributory unemployment benefit and I know the real meaning of poverty - at one point I could only eat one meal a day and I had to wear extra clothes because it was so cold (this being before food banks became widespread - indeed my first job was fundraising for one to be set up).

Nobody on over £20,000 a year should be in that position unless they've made some very stupid mistakes. In which case, fine to help them in the short term but it's surely more important to get those sorted out than just have them turning up for food destined primarily for those who are not in work at all?

Yep, people do make mistakes. Surely the food in food banks is for people who, for whatever reason, cannot afford to buy enough food for themselves and their families.

Yes, but as a short term measure. One to two months would be what we would aim for if someone was in work. The nurse we are all thinking about claimed it was a long term thing.

To my mind, there is something very strange indeed about that claim. It doesn't add up (literally).

I am not thinking about a specific nurse.

This whole thing arises because one nurse in Scotland claimed she had to use a food bank because her salary was so low.

It isn't and she shouldn't have to. I think there is more to that story than met the eye.

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Normally they do not, but it is quite possible that some are in financial circumstances where they do. Generally foodbank usage helps when someone is in a financial gap. Employees are paid a month in arears, but rent is usually paid in advance for example, so anyone can fall in that gap if they have no savings and cannot easily access credit.

A friend of mine volunteers at a food bank, she deals with a lot of very needy people. She, along with others, gets very cross at people who turn up for food drunk and smoking.

Of course the luvvies will reply with a lot of yeah buts.......

So some people who work in food banks are controlling liberals with personality disorders and some are your friends? Or is your friend a liberal with a personality disorder?

She has suffered with issues yes, part of the reason she wants to help those in need. She gets frustrated when aggressive drunks bully her colleagues and those in genuine need miss out.

When was the last time you helped out at a food bank?

foxinsoxuk said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Normally they do not, but it is quite possible that some are in financial circumstances where they do. Generally foodbank usage helps when someone is in a financial gap. Employees are paid a month in arears, but rent is usually paid in advance for example, so anyone can fall in that gap if they have no savings and cannot easily access credit.

A friend of mine volunteers at a food bank, she deals with a lot of very needy people. She, along with others, gets very cross at people who turn up for food drunk and smoking.

Of course the luvvies will reply with a lot of yeah buts.......

Smoking, drinking and drug taking rates are highest in homeless people. 90% of homeless people smoke.

Indeed smoking strongly correlates with poverty. Homeless,prisoners, single parents, etc. It is in part familial, part institutional (many homeless people started when in children's homes, jail or in the forces). Smoking is generally attractive to people with little else to look forward to, as is bingedrinking and drug addiction.

I remember John Reid opposed punitive measures against smoking because a single mother with three children in a council flat wouldn't have any other form of pleasure.

I must confess I wondered how she'd had three children if smoking was her only form of pleasure, but he did have a point.

Meanwhile things are not getting better in the Gulf:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/08/qatar-files-complaint-icao-al-arabiya-report-170819204047155.html

freetochoose said:

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

freetochoose said:

foxinsoxuk said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

IanB2 said:

freetochoose said:

https://misesuk.org/2017/08/19/do-modern-liberals-suffer-from-a-personality-disorder/

Well worth a read

A rather lame attempt to fit some cod science to the author's prejudices. Even the most basic understanding would see that his conclusions, such as they are, could be matched with other sorts of government including right wing dictatorships and those under the control of religious leaders, both today and through the centuries.

I think that's his point actually, that modern liberals are every bit as controlling as dictators or religious nutters.

He doesn't understand that liberal and socialist mean very different things. Indeed there isn't much that he does understand, judged from what he has written.

The article is utter garbage. Personality disorder is when a personality trait interferes with social functioning with adverse consequences.

The author also doesn't seem to understand that the Lefts obsession with food banks is not a desired to have state distribution of food, but rather for poor people to have enough resources to not need them!

I like his point about nurses and pensioners. Nurses don't need food banks.

Normally they do not, but it is quite possible that some are in financial circumstances where they do. Generally foodbank usage helps when someone is in a financial gap. Employees are paid a month in arears, but rent is usually paid in advance for example, so anyone can fall in that gap if they have no savings and cannot easily access credit.

A friend of mine volunteers at a food bank, she deals with a lot of very needy people. She, along with others, gets very cross at people who turn up for food drunk and smoking.

Of course the luvvies will reply with a lot of yeah buts.......

So some people who work in food banks are controlling liberals with personality disorders and some are your friends? Or is your friend a liberal with a personality disorder?

She has suffered with issues yes, part of the reason she wants to help those in need. She gets frustrated when aggressive drunks bully her colleagues and those in genuine need miss out.

When was the last time you helped out at a food bank?

I never have. But it's not me saying that the people who get involved in food banks are controlling liberals with personality disorders. That was the author of the piece that you told us was so good.

ydoethur said:

tlg86 said:

Now that we've had a UK general election, is there any reason why the next Scottish Parliament election shouldn't be held in 2020?

If there's a general election in 2020 in the first months of 2020 as well, yes.

Otherwise, no.

I think that's how the Act works, although if I'm right it must have been written by a moron.

What happens if a General Election is called for May 2021? Would the Scottish election be put back a year?

@foxinsox

Yes, drug abuse and mental health issues are massively linked, its a chicken and egg scenario that must be addressed. However its far more comfortable to project concerns about the tiny % of nurses who supposedly need food banks.

This is my point about liberalism, it skirts around real issues, thousands of people are seemingly trapped in a world of both legal and illegal drugs, wrecking lives and costing us a fortune.

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

It is a feature of life on the margin. Many Britons have no savings and are maxed out on debt. It may well be their own fault in poor financial planning, but it doesn't take much to tip them into crisis.

I don't think nurses are more vulnerable than others, and the tens of thousands of nursing vacancies in the land make agency or bank work freely available if outside commitments like carers responsibilities make this possible.

The poor performance of Leicester's Emergency dept is down to impossibility to recruit and retain ward nurses for example. The problem is the backdoor to the department rather than the front door..

As you will see above, I have experience of life on the financial margin.

Nurses are not on it. Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. That is in no way to suggest that they are feather-bedded or have easy lives, but their salaries should be enough to live on. As mine is.

While I see the problems about recruitment and retention are an issue for you in your work, I'm also struggling to see how the fact that they can earn more money either overtime or working elsewhere is germane to this discussion.

What about a nurse living as a single mother with several young children, paying off loans, getting no financial help from the father and having trouble accessing financial support from the state? It's not a hugely unlikely scenario.

Can you give us ONE example?

Nope. Can you demonstrate it doesn't happen? Nope.

As I say downthread, maybe a big difference between liberals like me and conservatives like you is that I would tend to believe someone using a food bank - whoever they are - has genuine need, while you would be a lot more sceptical.

So I give real, factual evidence and you concoct a hypothetical scenario.

I rest my case.

And for the umpteenth time it really doesn't matter how many times you say I'm a conservative it still isn't true. Your willingness to tell lies to support your argument is pathetic, frankly.

foxinsoxuk said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

It is a feature of life on the margin. Many Britons have no savings and are maxed out on debt. It may well be their own fault in poor financial planning, but it doesn't take much to tip them into crisis.

I don't think nurses are more vulnerable than others, and the tens of thousands of nursing vacancies in the land make agency or bank work freely available if outside commitments like carers responsibilities make this possible.

The poor performance of Leicester's Emergency dept is down to impossibility to recruit and retain ward nurses for example. The problem is the backdoor to the department rather than the front door..

As you will see above, I have experience of life on the financial margin.

Nurses are not on it. Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. That is in no way to suggest that they are feather-bedded or have easy lives, but their salaries should be enough to live on. As mine is.

While I see the problems about recruitment and retention are an issue for you in your work, I'm also struggling to see how the fact that they can earn more money either overtime or working elsewhere is germane to this discussion.

My point about the availability of bank work is that nurses are probably less vulnerable in this regard, though the inherently antisocial hours of nursing makes childcare particularly problematic. The poorest nurses I know are the single mothers, but that is not a very unusual circumstance for a young, fertile and female workforce.

Thanks, I was wondering.

Teaching workforce can of course have the same problem of being young, female and fertile but of course childcare is less of an issue especially in the holidays.

ydoethur said:

tlg86 said:

ydoethur said:

tlg86 said:

Now that we've had a UK general election, is there any reason why the next Scottish Parliament election shouldn't be held in 2020?

If there's a general election in 2020 in the first months of 2020 as well, yes.

Otherwise, no.

I think that's how the Act works, although if I'm right it must have been written by a moron.

What happens if a General Election is called for May 2021? Would the Scottish election be put back a year?

That's what we couldn't know and that's why the person who wrote that clause is a moron.

However I think it may apply only to scheduled elections. So 2022 would be the clash rather than 2020, even though the latter date is more plausible for an election.

Edit - but that wouldn't matttr as the next SP elections will be scheduled for 2020, so there shouldn't be elections for it in 2021.

Nope the next SP elections are scheduled for 2021. The bill to extend the SP to 2021 already received royal assent and thus became law before the 2017 election was called.

Philip_Thompson said:

ydoethur said:

tlg86 said:

ydoethur said:

tlg86 said:

Now that we've had a UK general election, is there any reason why the next Scottish Parliament election shouldn't be held in 2020?

If there's a general election in 2020 in the first months of 2020 as well, yes.

Otherwise, no.

I think that's how the Act works, although if I'm right it must have been written by a moron.

What happens if a General Election is called for May 2021? Would the Scottish election be put back a year?

That's what we couldn't know and that's why the person who wrote that clause is a moron.

However I think it may apply only to scheduled elections. So 2022 would be the clash rather than 2020, even though the latter date is more plausible for an election.

Edit - but that wouldn't matttr as the next SP elections will be scheduled for 2020, so there shouldn't be elections for it in 2021.

Nope the next SP elections are scheduled for 2021. The bill to extend the SP to 2021 already received royal assent and thus became law before the 2017 election was called.

Then the electoral commissions are morons.

Also it's rather insulting to the Scottish and Welsh to suggest they would be confused by having three ballot papers.

freetochoose said:

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

It is a feature of life on the margin. Many Britons have no savings and are maxed out on debt. It may well be their own fault in poor financial planning, but it doesn't take much to tip them into crisis.

I don't think nurses are more vulnerable than others, and the tens of thousands of nursing vacancies in the land make agency or bank work freely available if outside commitments like carers responsibilities make this possible.

The poor performance of Leicester's Emergency dept is down to impossibility to recruit and retain ward nurses for example. The problem is the backdoor to the department rather than the front door..

As you will see above, I have experience of life on the financial margin.

Nurses are not on it. Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. That is in no way to suggest that they are feather-bedded or have easy lives, but their salaries should be enough to live on. As mine is.

While I see the problems about recruitment and retention are an issue for you in your work, I'm also struggling to see how the fact that they can earn more money either overtime or working elsewhere is germane to this discussion.

What about a nurse living as a single mother with several young children, paying off loans, getting no financial help from the father and having trouble accessing financial support from the state? It's not a hugely unlikely scenario.

Can you give us ONE example?

Nope. Can you demonstrate it doesn't happen? Nope.

As I say downthread, maybe a big difference between liberals like me and conservatives like you is that I would tend to believe someone using a food bank - whoever they are - has genuine need, while you would be a lot more sceptical.

So I give real, factual evidence and you concoct a hypothetical scenario.

I rest my case.

And for the umpteenth time it really doesn't matter how many times you say I'm a conservative it still isn't true. Your willingness to tell lies to support your argument is pathetic, frankly.

You have given no factual evidence of anything. I have never called you a conservative before. I won't accuse you of lying as I'm sure you believe what you say to be true.

ydoethur said:

Philip_Thompson said:

ydoethur said:

tlg86 said:

ydoethur said:

tlg86 said:

Now that we've had a UK general election, is there any reason why the next Scottish Parliament election shouldn't be held in 2020?

If there's a general election in 2020 in the first months of 2020 as well, yes.

Otherwise, no.

I think that's how the Act works, although if I'm right it must have been written by a moron.

What happens if a General Election is called for May 2021? Would the Scottish election be put back a year?

That's what we couldn't know and that's why the person who wrote that clause is a moron.

However I think it may apply only to scheduled elections. So 2022 would be the clash rather than 2020, even though the latter date is more plausible for an election.

Edit - but that wouldn't matttr as the next SP elections will be scheduled for 2020, so there shouldn't be elections for it in 2021.

Nope the next SP elections are scheduled for 2021. The bill to extend the SP to 2021 already received royal assent and thus became law before the 2017 election was called.

Then the electoral commissions are morons.

Also it's rather insulting to the Scottish and Welsh to suggest they would be confused by having three ballot papers.

I really hope there is a UK GE in May 2021 just to see what happens.

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

It is a feature of life on the margin. Many Britons have no savings and are maxed out on debt. It may well be their own fault in poor financial planning, but it doesn't take much to tip them into crisis.

I don't think nurses are more vulnerable than others, and the tens of thousands of nursing vacancies in the land make agency or bank work freely available if outside commitments like carers responsibilities make this possible.

The poor performance of Leicester's Emergency dept is down to impossibility to recruit and retain ward nurses for example. The problem is the backdoor to the department rather than the front door..

As you will see above, I have experience of life on the financial margin.

Nurses are not on it. Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. That is in no way to suggest that they are feather-bedded or have easy lives, but their salaries should be enough to live on. As mine is.

While I see the problems about recruitment and retention are an issue for you in your work, I'm also struggling to see how the fact that they can earn more money either overtime or working elsewhere is germane to this discussion.

What about a nurse living as a single mother with several young children, paying off loans, getting no financial help from the father and having trouble accessing financial support from the state? It's not a hugely unlikely scenario.

Yes, agreed that is possible, although I am surprised if child benefit is that hard to access (but as I have no children of my own I don't know).

However, isn't that rather distinct from the question of whether or not her salary is at the right level as a general concept? This one was blaming austerity.

Hasn't austerity involved pay freezes in the public sector?

Nigelb said:

An article for freetochoose, about the value of non-pecuniary intangibles...
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/aug/19/huddersfield-town-dean-hoyle-newcastle-united-mike-ashley

Good article, benevolence and philanthropy are virtues. I'm a life long Spurs fan who hopes we sign Messi and Ronaldo this week.

Still have no idea what Huddersfield Town has to do with nurses needing foodbanks.

Re Foodbanks: to what extent are people using them because they are not yet being paid money to which they are entitled, i.e. the problem is a delay and the food bank acts to tide you over?

I forget who said it but this has always seeme a good piece of advice:
The Government is like luck: you can't ignore it but you would be foolish to rely on it.

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

SouthamObserver said:

freetochoose said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

It is a feature of life on the margin. Many Britons have no savings and are maxed out on debt. It may well be their own fault in poor financial planning, but it doesn't take much to tip them into crisis.

I don't think nurses are more vulnerable than others, and the tens of thousands of nursing vacancies in the land make agency or bank work freely available if outside commitments like carers responsibilities make this possible.

The poor performance of Leicester's Emergency dept is down to impossibility to recruit and retain ward nurses for example. The problem is the backdoor to the department rather than the front door..

As you will see above, I have experience of life on the financial margin.

Nurses are not on it. Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. That is in no way to suggest that they are feather-bedded or have easy lives, but their salaries should be enough to live on. As mine is.

While I see the problems about recruitment and retention are an issue for you in your work, I'm also struggling to see how the fact that they can earn more money either overtime or working elsewhere is germane to this discussion.

What about a nurse living as a single mother with several young children, paying off loans, getting no financial help from the father and having trouble accessing financial support from the state? It's not a hugely unlikely scenario.

Can you give us ONE example?

Nope. Can you demonstrate it doesn't happen? Nope.

As I say downthread, maybe a big difference between liberals like me and conservatives like you is that I would tend to believe someone using a food bank - whoever they are - has genuine need, while you would be a lot more sceptical.

So I give real, factual evidence and you concoct a hypothetical scenario.

I rest my case.

And for the umpteenth time it really doesn't matter how many times you say I'm a conservative it still isn't true. Your willingness to tell lies to support your argument is pathetic, frankly.

You have given no factual evidence of anything. I have never called you a conservative before. I won't accuse you of lying as I'm sure you believe what you say to be true.

Yes I have, I spoke of my friend's experience at a food bank. You muttered about nurses "with several children".

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

It is a feature of life on the margin. Many Britons have no savings and are maxed out on debt. It may well be their own fault in poor financial planning, but it doesn't take much to tip them into crisis.

I don't think nurses are more vulnerable than others, and the tens of thousands of nursing vacancies in the land make agency or bank work freely available if outside commitments like carers responsibilities make this possible.

The poor performance of Leicester's Emergency dept is down to impossibility to recruit and retain ward nurses for example. The problem is the backdoor to the department rather than the front door..

As you will see above, I have experience of life on the financial margin.

Nurses are not on it. Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. That is in no way to suggest that they are feather-bedded or have easy lives, but their salaries should be enough to live on. As mine is.

While I see the problems about recruitment and retention are an issue for you in your work, I'm also struggling to see how the fact that they can earn more money either overtime or working elsewhere is germane to this discussion.

What about a nurse living as a single mother with several young children, paying off loans, getting no financial help from the father and having trouble accessing financial support from the state? It's not a hugely unlikely scenario.

Yes, agreed that is possible, although I am surprised if child benefit is that hard to access (but as I have no children of my own I don't know).

However, isn't that rather distinct from the question of whether or not her salary is at the right level as a general concept? This one was blaming austerity.

Hasn't austerity involved pay freezes in the public sector?

Yes - and no. Salaries have increased by the official rate of inflation at lower levels (although that's somewhat below the actual real-world level of inflation).

However that follows years of inflation busting increases. So for example a teacher's salary is still around 30% higher in real terms than it was in 1995. And it is also still at or above average pay.

So yes, it has not been sunlight and roses. However when there have been savage actual cuts elsewhere - the Honda workforce in Swindon at one point had a 70% cut in pay - I can't help but feel if we bleat about how badly off we are, we'll make ourselves unpopular.

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

It is a feature of life on the margin. Many Britons have no savings and are maxed out on debt. It may well be their own fault in poor financial planning, but it doesn't take much to tip them into crisis.

I don't think nurses are more vulnerable than others, and the tens of thousands of nursing vacancies in the land make agency or bank work freely available if outside commitments like carers responsibilities make this possible.

The poor performance of Leicester's Emergency dept is down to impossibility to recruit and retain ward nurses for example. The problem is the backdoor to the department rather than the front door..

As you will see above, I have experience of life on the financial margin.

Nurses are not on it. Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. That is in no way to suggest that they are feather-bedded or have easy lives, but their salaries should be enough to live on. As mine is.

While I see the problems about recruitment and retention are an issue for you in your work, I'm also struggling to see how the fact that they can earn more money either overtime or working elsewhere is germane to this discussion.

What about a nurse living as a single mother with several young children, paying off loans, getting no financial help from the father and having trouble accessing financial support from the state? It's not a hugely unlikely scenario.

Yes, agreed that is possible, although I am surprised if child benefit is that hard to access (but as I have no children of my own I don't know).

However, isn't that rather distinct from the question of whether or not her salary is at the right level as a general concept? This one was blaming austerity.

Hasn't austerity involved pay freezes in the public sector?

Yes - and no. Salaries have increased by the official rate of inflation at lower levels (although that's somewhat below the actual real-world level of inflation).

However that follows years of inflation busting increases. So for example a teacher's salary is still around 30% higher in real terms than it was in 1995. And it is also still at or above average pay.

So yes, it has not been sunlight and roses. However when there have been savage actual cuts elsewhere - the Honda workforce in Swindon at one point had a 70% cut in pay - I can't help but feel if we bleat about how badly off we are, we'll make ourselves unpopular.

That may well be true. But if austerity has meant the nurse's wages were frozen it was not unreasonable of her to link her circumstancrs to austerity.

Fysics_Teacher said:

Re Foodbanks: to what extent are people using them because they are not yet being paid money to which they are entitled, i.e. the problem is a delay and the food bank acts to tide you over?

I forget who said it but this has always seeme a good piece of advice:
The Government is like luck: you can't ignore it but you would be foolish to rely on it.

I’d think that most people using food banks have temporarily fallen through the cracks - maybe they’re waiting to sign on, or they’ve just had a big unexpected bill for a new fridge or car repairs.

It’s a sign of a decent society that we are willing to help those less fortunate than ourselves through our own choice. The Big Society, you might say.

Philip_Thompson said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

SouthamObserver said:

ydoethur said:

foxinsoxuk said:

It is a feature of life on the margin. Many Britons have no savings and are maxed out on debt. It may well be their own fault in poor financial planning, but it doesn't take much to tip them into crisis.

I don't think nurses are more vulnerable than others, and the tens of thousands of nursing vacancies in the land make agency or bank work freely available if outside commitments like carers responsibilities make this possible.

The poor performance of Leicester's Emergency dept is down to impossibility to recruit and retain ward nurses for example. The problem is the backdoor to the department rather than the front door..

As you will see above, I have experience of life on the financial margin.

Nurses are not on it. Not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination. That is in no way to suggest that they are feather-bedded or have easy lives, but their salaries should be enough to live on. As mine is.

While I see the problems about recruitment and retention are an issue for you in your work, I'm also struggling to see how the fact that they can earn more money either overtime or working elsewhere is germane to this discussion.

What about a nurse living as a single mother with several young children, paying off loans, getting no financial help from the father and having trouble accessing financial support from the state? It's not a hugely unlikely scenario.

Yes, agreed that is possible, although I am surprised if child benefit is that hard to access (but as I have no children of my own I don't know).

However, isn't that rather distinct from the question of whether or not her salary is at the right level as a general concept? This one was blaming austerity.

Hasn't austerity involved pay freezes in the public sector?

The public sector has had pay freezes at a time of near-zero inflation.

As opposed to pay cuts or job losses in the private sector that pays for the public sector.

Also there are pay freezes and pay freezes. It takes about ten years to get to the top of the main and then upper teaching pay scale, during which time individual teachers are getting annual pay rises, and most teachers don't last that long anyway.

SouthamObserver said:

That may well be true. But if austerity has meant the nurse's wages were frozen it was not unreasonable of her to link her circumstancrs to austerity.

My point being that austerity or no her salary is a good one and should be enough to live on. As it is also very secure work, she should also be able to access short term credit at good rates. (Also you just explained it in terms of her family circumstances - not austerity.)

If therefore she cannot live on it there are underlying issues for her personally and it would be better to sort them out so she can manage without help than have her complain that somehow austerity forces her to attend food banks. Such action would also allow food to go to those who genuinely have no other options.

Quite apart from anything else, such statements must have infuriated those workers at Honda, at Port Talbot, at Falkirk, at Monarch, at Sports Direct, at any others you care to name whose wages, pensions and job security are either under brutal attack or non-existent. I got a lot of grief from parents over that recent pensions demonstration about how we in the public sector don't know we're born.

The gap's becoming worrying - it's almost as though we're splitting into two economies, one public one private, and there is no crossover between them. Which is a bigger worry as one pays for the other.

I have to go. I hope this discussion has been of interest (and I hope France is living up to expectations).

Have a good morning.

Fysics_Teacher said:

Also there are pay freezes and pay freezes. It takes about ten years to get to the top of the main and then upper teaching pay scale, during which time individual teachers are getting annual pay rises, and most teachers don't last that long anyway.

As my very last comment and to support your point it is amusing to reflect that due to promotions and scale changes my salary has increased by 50% in four years, which is definitely inflation-busting.

And in 2008-09 it was £30 a week, and there were no food banks as Brown didn't want to admit people needed them. The real scandal of food banks is not that they exist now but that they weren't set up years before - because anyone can suffer a short term catastrophe.