Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector and an annual cull of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
You realise, of course, that automatic pay profession has gone outside of the NHS (and schools?) and “performance related pay” (bonuses too small to motivate but big enough to irritate when badly used) are now the status quo in the public sector? People stuck on the lowest salary point with no prospect of profession so they leave? And your understanding of unions and their relative power is clearly based entirely on Tory party slogans rather than negotiating with them.
It hasn't really for the civil service and much of the NHS and schools and TfL etc they still get annual pay deals with unions involved in negotiations. If unions don't get the pay deals they want for their members they still often go on strike, see especially the RMT and London Underground.
Unions oppose performance related pay on the whole and unions also oppose virtually every job cut. There are no unions in the financial sector however of any real significance, hence pay is more based on performance and bonuses with annual culls of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs
Factually wrong on almost every point, save the lack of unions for the trading end of financial services firms, and tinge oddity that is TfL (through train driver pay issues are hardly unique to TfL).
Edit - Oh and you object to unions being involved in negotiating members’ salaries in principle then there really is no hope for you.
Oh no, factually correct on everything. In fact you even agreed with my key points on the lack of unions in the financial sector and the RMT domination of pay negotiations for TfL.
I have no objection to unions being involved in pay negotiations but the price of that will always be pay generally moves up at the same rate for everyone not PRP and bonuses which unions are ideologically opposed to as the higher the PRP bonuses for the best performers, the more the pay cuts and job losses for the weakest performers
Pay in TfL isn’t a problem. Pay of train drivers is, and the market failure is driven by privatisation and a string of poor decisions. Plus, as ever, good luck to a union and it’s members taking what they can get.
You don’t understand public sector pay on any level, or how it relates to the wider economy. But then you are a Tory and the ones who have been in Government for ten years don’t either. Not deluded enough to think Labour would be much better but at least Starmer has some personal experience.
I do. Public sector pay is largely based on average increases for all, private sector pay, especially in the City is much more performance and bonus based. If you make money for your firm then you get a hefty bonus, if you don't you don't and if you continually fail to deliver you lose your job too.
High stakes, high reward but high risk too, that is the City of London and Canary Wharf. If you want to make the big bucks that is generally the best place to go but with the proviso you get less job security
Sigh…. no it isn’t. Outside of one or two hold outs, public sector pay is based on an occasional below inflation hike to the baseline and no way for staff to get off that baseline.
I mean, even your concept of City pay is quite flakey. Outside of a narrow range of roles it pays much like anyone else, even if everyone is a Vice President of something.
However you also face the fact that if you work for Goldman Sachs for instance they sack the weakest performers every year. No public sector organisation I am aware of does an annual cull of its weakest perfomers in the same fashion, even if your average pay is much lower
It appears to be the Tory equivalent of the Corbynite “just f*** off and join the Tories”. Here it’s “if you are not a rabid right winger we don’t want your vote”.
The problem the Russians always had (back to Soviet times) was not so much technology as production of high technology items. They could hand craft a few awesome machines. But that was it. And their economy has de-industrialised since then, in many crucial areas.
They don't have the productive capacity to make lots and lots of high end weapons.
It does remind me of Bill Hicks on the Gulf War.
Once again though, I was watching the CNN man and they blew it all man, all the anxiety. Remember how it started? They kept talking about the ‘Elite Republican Guard’ in these hushed tones, remember that? Like they where the boogieman, you know; “Yeah, we’re doing well, but we have yet to face… …the ‘Elite Republican Guard’.” Yeah, like these guys are ten feet tall, desert warriors; “NEVER LOST A BATTLE!” “WE SHIT BULLETS!” Well, after two and a half months of continuous carpet bombing and not ONE reaction at all from these fuckers, …they became simply the ‘Republican Guard’, not merely as ‘Elite’ as we may have led you to believe. And after one month of continuous bombing not one reaction AT ALL, they went from the ‘Elite Republican Guard’ to the ‘Republican Guard’ to the ‘Republicans made this shit up about there being guards out there… we hope you enjoyed your firework show.
PJ O'Rourke then asked the question that no-one else did - "These Elite Republican Guards - has anyone checked to see if they are still Republicans?"
Sense O'Rourke becoming the new Man on here - a kind of fusion of Orwell and Wilde.
Betting post here. It might be worthwhile putting a few quid on laying Trump for next GOP nominee for 2024 and / or putting some money on other contenders such as DeSantis. Not so much for the rights or wrongs of whether he hasn’t condemned Putin enough, more for the stupidity of his comment that Putin was a “genius”. I think that comment is going to come back to haunt him, ahem, ‘bigly’ in the nomination race, especially if someone takes him on aggressively. DYOR.
I won't because I already have a big (underwater) short on him but I do agree. Trump 2.0 is feeling less and less likely to me.
His rivals need to really piss him off with a Trump style nickname.
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector and an annual cull of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
That makes my point for me. If a naked Gavin Williamson is illegal, put a fig leaf on it and carry on whipping.
Going back to my boring original away from your delicious metaphor, UK head of armed forces says that despite knowing, as MarkyMarq pointed out, he knows his own troops are in Ukraine fighting for the right cause alongside trained troops from all over the world - so it’s unfair and naive to give Liz Truss and government stick over their “wink wink nudge nudge. GET OVER THERE” messaging.
Please can we all agree not to conjure up images of a naked Gavin Williamson….
Will there be many or indeed any deselections of sitting Tory MPs next time? I can think of hardly any remaining Tory MPs who now properly fit that description apart from maybe Rory Stewart's successor Neil Hudson as a lot of Cameroon types such as Laura Trott have now adapted to Johnson's leadership.
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
You realise, of course, that automatic pay profession has gone outside of the NHS (and schools?) and “performance related pay” (bonuses too small to motivate but big enough to irritate when badly used) are now the status quo in the public sector? People stuck on the lowest salary point with no prospect of profession so they leave? And your understanding of unions and their relative power is clearly based entirely on Tory party slogans rather than negotiating with them.
It hasn't really for the civil service and much of the NHS and schools and TfL etc they still get annual pay deals with unions involved in negotiations. If unions don't get the pay deals they want for their members they still often go on strike, see especially the RMT and London Underground.
Unions oppose performance related pay on the whole and unions also oppose virtually every job cut. There are no unions in the financial sector however of any real significance, hence pay is more based on performance and bonuses with annual culls of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs
Factually wrong on almost every point, save the lack of unions for the trading end of financial services firms, and tinge oddity that is TfL (through train driver pay issues are hardly unique to TfL).
Edit - Oh and you object to unions being involved in negotiating members’ salaries in principle then there really is no hope for you.
Oh no, factually correct on everything. In fact you even agreed with my key points on the lack of unions in the financial sector and the RMT domination of pay negotiations for TfL.
I have no objection to unions being involved in pay negotiations but the price of that will always be pay generally moves up at the same rate for everyone not PRP and bonuses which unions are ideologically opposed to as the higher the PRP bonuses for the best performers, the more the pay cuts and job losses for the weakest performers
Pay in TfL isn’t a problem. Pay of train drivers is, and the market failure is driven by privatisation and a string of poor decisions. Plus, as ever, good luck to a union and it’s members taking what they can get.
You don’t understand public sector pay on any level, or how it relates to the wider economy. But then you are a Tory and the ones who have been in Government for ten years don’t either. Not deluded enough to think Labour would be much better but at least Starmer has some personal experience.
I do. Public sector pay is largely based on average increases for all, private sector pay, especially in the City is much more performance and bonus based. If you make money for your firm then you get a hefty bonus, if you don't you don't and if you continually fail to deliver you lose your job too.
High stakes, high reward but high risk too, that is the City of London and Canary Wharf. If you want to make the big bucks that is generally the best place to go but with the proviso you get less job security
Sigh…. no it isn’t. Outside of one or two hold outs, public sector pay is based on an occasional below inflation hike to the baseline and no way for staff to get off that baseline.
I mean, even your concept of City pay is quite flakey. Outside of a narrow range of roles it pays much like anyone else, even if everyone is a Vice President of something.
However you also face the fact that if you work for Goldman Sachs for instance they sack the weakest performers every year. No public sector organisation I am aware of does an annual cull of its weakest perfomers in the same fashion, even if your average pay is much lower
Would you like me to explain to you how averages work, the pay structure of most other corporates, and why that news story is completely consistent with my post?
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
That makes my point for me. If a naked Gavin Williamson is illegal, put a fig leaf on it and carry on whipping.
Going back to my boring original away from your delicious metaphor, UK head of armed forces says that despite knowing, as MarkyMarq pointed out, he knows his own troops are in Ukraine fighting for the right cause alongside trained troops from all over the world - so it’s unfair and naive to give Liz Truss and government stick over their “wink wink nudge nudge. GET OVER THERE” messaging.
Please can we all agree not to conjure up images of a naked Gavin Williamson….
Point of order! I put a fig leaf on it, so that’s no longer naked. Just cheeky…
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
That makes my point for me. If a naked Gavin Williamson is illegal, put a fig leaf on it and carry on whipping.
Going back to my boring original away from your delicious metaphor, UK head of armed forces says that despite knowing, as MarkyMarq pointed out, he knows his own troops are in Ukraine fighting for the right cause alongside trained troops from all over the world - so it’s unfair and naive to give Liz Truss and government stick over their “wink wink nudge nudge. GET OVER THERE” messaging.
Please can we all agree not to conjure up images of a naked Gavin Williamson….
Point of order! I put a fig leaf on it, so that’s no longer naked. Just cheeky…
I didn't know you could get fig leaves that small.
(As an aside, it's actually a joke from Blackadder. Blackadder was getting the worst of an argument with Melchett, and says irritably, 'Perhaps Lord Melchett would like to whip me naked through the streets of Aberdeen.'
'Oh, I don't think we need go that far, Blackadder,' said Melchett.
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
That makes my point for me. If a naked Gavin Williamson is illegal, put a fig leaf on it and carry on whipping.
Going back to my boring original away from your delicious metaphor, UK head of armed forces says that despite knowing, as MarkyMarq pointed out, he knows his own troops are in Ukraine fighting for the right cause alongside trained troops from all over the world - so it’s unfair and naive to give Liz Truss and government stick over their “wink wink nudge nudge. GET OVER THERE” messaging.
Please can we all agree not to conjure up images of a naked Gavin Williamson….
Point of order! I put a fig leaf on it, so that’s no longer naked. Just cheeky…
Incidentally! I did spend a bit of time trawl around the media finding something in support of Gavs K I could link here.
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
You realise, of course, that automatic pay profession has gone outside of the NHS (and schools?) and “performance related pay” (bonuses too small to motivate but big enough to irritate when badly used) are now the status quo in the public sector? People stuck on the lowest salary point with no prospect of profession so they leave? And your understanding of unions and their relative power is clearly based entirely on Tory party slogans rather than negotiating with them.
It hasn't really for the civil service and much of the NHS and schools and TfL etc they still get annual pay deals with unions involved in negotiations. If unions don't get the pay deals they want for their members they still often go on strike, see especially the RMT and London Underground.
Unions oppose performance related pay on the whole and unions also oppose virtually every job cut. There are no unions in the financial sector however of any real significance, hence pay is more based on performance and bonuses with annual culls of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs
Factually wrong on almost every point, save the lack of unions for the trading end of financial services firms, and tinge oddity that is TfL (through train driver pay issues are hardly unique to TfL).
Edit - Oh and you object to unions being involved in negotiating members’ salaries in principle then there really is no hope for you.
Oh no, factually correct on everything. In fact you even agreed with my key points on the lack of unions in the financial sector and the RMT domination of pay negotiations for TfL.
I have no objection to unions being involved in pay negotiations but the price of that will always be pay generally moves up at the same rate for everyone not PRP and bonuses which unions are ideologically opposed to as the higher the PRP bonuses for the best performers, the more the pay cuts and job losses for the weakest performers
Pay in TfL isn’t a problem. Pay of train drivers is, and the market failure is driven by privatisation and a string of poor decisions. Plus, as ever, good luck to a union and it’s members taking what they can get.
You don’t understand public sector pay on any level, or how it relates to the wider economy. But then you are a Tory and the ones who have been in Government for ten years don’t either. Not deluded enough to think Labour would be much better but at least Starmer has some personal experience.
I do. Public sector pay is largely based on average increases for all, private sector pay, especially in the City is much more performance and bonus based. If you make money for your firm then you get a hefty bonus, if you don't you don't and if you continually fail to deliver you lose your job too.
High stakes, high reward but high risk too, that is the City of London and Canary Wharf. If you want to make the big bucks that is generally the best place to go but with the proviso you get less job security
Sigh…. no it isn’t. Outside of one or two hold outs, public sector pay is based on an occasional below inflation hike to the baseline and no way for staff to get off that baseline.
I mean, even your concept of City pay is quite flakey. Outside of a narrow range of roles it pays much like anyone else, even if everyone is a Vice President of something.
However you also face the fact that if you work for Goldman Sachs for instance they sack the weakest performers every year. No public sector organisation I am aware of does an annual cull of its weakest perfomers in the same fashion, even if your average pay is much lower
Would you like me to explain to you how averages work, the pay structure of most other corporates, and why that news story is completely consistent with my post?
No it is completely inconsistent with your post and proves I was correct.
Average pay in the city of London is far higher than average pay not only across the public sector as a whole but across the private sector as a whole as I just proved.
The Brillo weathervane has spaketh. We're all Carole cat women now.
Are we going to flip on a sixpence from being a centre of excellence for money laundering to being dead against it?
Quite something if so. It would show that Germany isn't the only country that can overturn 30 years worth of deeply ingrained policy in response to what Putin is doing.
It would be another clear-up of the Blair-Cameron era.
Mandelson's announcing that the Labour party was "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich" summed up the mentality and strategy.
I was never intensely relaxed about him saying that. There was a need to combat the view that Labour were hairshirted sourpusses who couldn't abide the idea of people having a nice meal out now and again, but it wasn't necessary to bend that far on the rhetoric.
Tories: Labour is the party of envy, of jealousy, of levelling down, of spending other people's money, of class hatred, of not letting people enjoy their well-earned riches.
Same Tories: how dare Mandelson say that he is 'intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich'! Shows that Labour isn't the party of ordinary hard-working people at all.
Yep, the old 'Politics of Envy Class Warrior or Champagne Socialist Hypocrite' dichotomy. And if you somehow avoid either you're 'dull'. There is just no type of Labour that quite passes muster. It's amazing we ever win any elections at all really.
Your recent winning form is about as good as mine on hurdle races.
We had 13 Mandy years and communities levelled down. You may never get a majority again from everyone who remembers it.
Fantasy: embrace the glorious advantages of globalisation says Blair! Reality: like a Putin peace mission has visited the place, this sums up Labours last rare visit to power in just 2 sentences.
A rather jaundiced (!) take on New Labour. That government surely grows in stature as we gaze back from these days of Boris "Boris" Johnson.
“ A rather jaundiced (!) take on New Labour.”
Really? 😂. I just explained exactly why you keep losing. New Labours rhetoric and promise didn’t match the reality that was happening to UK communities. People remember that, hence you have lost their vote, probably for the rest of their lives.
Well it never matches up, does it. I mean, look at this bunch of chancers in office now - aka the Tories. They were supposed to be "unleashing Britain's potential" and "spreading wealth and opportunity throughout the country". Something a touch stronger than LOL is needed to describe how that's going. So I don't know where this leaves the electorate. Last Labour government disappointed. Latest Tory one a joke. Could they even be desperate enough to vote Lib Dem in large numbers?
How's it going ?
Well take a trip back to your old home town and you'll see housing estates being built every half mile and full employment for the first time in a working lifetime.
And go to a restaurant while you're there - you'll have more of a choice than the Indian/Chinese/Berni decision that you had when you left for London.
You've mentioned the 'bargain' Blair and Brown struck with the City.
Well it turned out that 'bargain' included a bailout for the London bankers while the rest of the country was left to sink or swim on their own.
The last Labour government didn't disappoint. It betrayed.
The problem the Russians always had (back to Soviet times) was not so much technology as production of high technology items. They could hand craft a few awesome machines. But that was it. And their economy has de-industrialised since then, in many crucial areas.
They don't have the productive capacity to make lots and lots of high end weapons.
It does remind me of Bill Hicks on the Gulf War.
Once again though, I was watching the CNN man and they blew it all man, all the anxiety. Remember how it started? They kept talking about the ‘Elite Republican Guard’ in these hushed tones, remember that? Like they where the boogieman, you know; “Yeah, we’re doing well, but we have yet to face… …the ‘Elite Republican Guard’.” Yeah, like these guys are ten feet tall, desert warriors; “NEVER LOST A BATTLE!” “WE SHIT BULLETS!” Well, after two and a half months of continuous carpet bombing and not ONE reaction at all from these fuckers, …they became simply the ‘Republican Guard’, not merely as ‘Elite’ as we may have led you to believe. And after one month of continuous bombing not one reaction AT ALL, they went from the ‘Elite Republican Guard’ to the ‘Republican Guard’ to the ‘Republicans made this shit up about there being guards out there… we hope you enjoyed your firework show.
PJ O'Rourke then asked the question that no-one else did - "These Elite Republican Guards - has anyone checked to see if they are still Republicans?"
Sense O'Rourke becoming the new Man on here - a kind of fusion of Orwell and Wilde.
More than since he died, he's popped up into the current flow of conversation. And he seems to have a fair number of fans around here.
I like to think he would have something to say on MasterCard shutting down in Russia.
Will there be many or indeed any deselections of sitting Tory MPs next time? I can think of hardly any remaining Tory MPs who now properly fit that description apart from maybe Rory Stewart's successor Neil Hudson as a lot of Cameroon types such as Laura Trott have now adapted to Johnson's leadership.
I doubt it will lead to the type of deselections Corbynites tried of New Labour MPs pre 2019 or indeed of Tory MPs who voted down Boris' Brexit deal as was the case before the 2019 general election. However it will certainly mean that candidates coming onto the approved Tory candidates list will generally need to be Boris loyalists and accepting of Brexit in particular.
I know Neil Hudson a bit as his family comes from Epping, I am sure he will be fine, he is a good constituency MP
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
That makes my point for me. If a naked Gavin Williamson is illegal, put a fig leaf on it and carry on whipping.
Going back to my boring original away from your delicious metaphor, UK head of armed forces says that despite knowing, as MarkyMarq pointed out, he knows his own troops are in Ukraine fighting for the right cause alongside trained troops from all over the world - so it’s unfair and naive to give Liz Truss and government stick over their “wink wink nudge nudge. GET OVER THERE” messaging.
Please can we all agree not to conjure up images of a naked Gavin Williamson….
Point of order! I put a fig leaf on it, so that’s no longer naked. Just cheeky…
Incidentally! I did spend a bit of time trawl around the media finding something in support of Gavs K I could link here.
Couldn’t find anything.
Do you think he will gain enough awareness to realise that he is a laughing stock and that the knighthood has actually increased the contempt with which he is regarded?
The Brillo weathervane has spaketh. We're all Carole cat women now.
Are we going to flip on a sixpence from being a centre of excellence for money laundering to being dead against it?
Quite something if so. It would show that Germany isn't the only country that can overturn 30 years worth of deeply ingrained policy in response to what Putin is doing.
It would be another clear-up of the Blair-Cameron era.
Mandelson's announcing that the Labour party was "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich" summed up the mentality and strategy.
I was never intensely relaxed about him saying that. There was a need to combat the view that Labour were hairshirted sourpusses who couldn't abide the idea of people having a nice meal out now and again, but it wasn't necessary to bend that far on the rhetoric.
Tories: Labour is the party of envy, of jealousy, of levelling down, of spending other people's money, of class hatred, of not letting people enjoy their well-earned riches.
Same Tories: how dare Mandelson say that he is 'intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich'! Shows that Labour isn't the party of ordinary hard-working people at all.
Yep, the old 'Politics of Envy Class Warrior or Champagne Socialist Hypocrite' dichotomy. And if you somehow avoid either you're 'dull'. There is just no type of Labour that quite passes muster. It's amazing we ever win any elections at all really.
Your recent winning form is about as good as mine on hurdle races.
We had 13 Mandy years and communities levelled down. You may never get a majority again from everyone who remembers it.
Fantasy: embrace the glorious advantages of globalisation says Blair! Reality: like a Putin peace mission has visited the place, this sums up Labours last rare visit to power in just 2 sentences.
A rather jaundiced (!) take on New Labour. That government surely grows in stature as we gaze back from these days of Boris "Boris" Johnson.
“ A rather jaundiced (!) take on New Labour.”
Really? 😂. I just explained exactly why you keep losing. New Labours rhetoric and promise didn’t match the reality that was happening to UK communities. People remember that, hence you have lost their vote, probably for the rest of their lives.
Well it never matches up, does it. I mean, look at this bunch of chancers in office now - aka the Tories. They were supposed to be "unleashing Britain's potential" and "spreading wealth and opportunity throughout the country". Something a touch stronger than LOL is needed to describe how that's going. So I don't know where this leaves the electorate. Last Labour government disappointed. Latest Tory one a joke. Could they even be desperate enough to vote Lib Dem in large numbers?
How's it going ?
Well take a trip back to your old home town and you'll see housing estates being built every half mile and full employment for the first time in a working lifetime.
And go to a restaurant while you're there - you'll have more of a choice than the Indian/Chinese/Berni decision that you had when you left for London.
You've mentioned the 'bargain' Blair and Brown struck with the City.
Well it turned out that 'bargain' included a bailout for the London bankers while the rest of the country was left to sink or swim on their own.
The last Labour government didn't disappoint. It betrayed.
The other side of the coin being how the Conservatives have damaged aspiration and become addicted to unearned income.
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
The problem the Russians always had (back to Soviet times) was not so much technology as production of high technology items. They could hand craft a few awesome machines. But that was it. And their economy has de-industrialised since then, in many crucial areas.
They don't have the productive capacity to make lots and lots of high end weapons.
It does remind me of Bill Hicks on the Gulf War.
Once again though, I was watching the CNN man and they blew it all man, all the anxiety. Remember how it started? They kept talking about the ‘Elite Republican Guard’ in these hushed tones, remember that? Like they where the boogieman, you know; “Yeah, we’re doing well, but we have yet to face… …the ‘Elite Republican Guard’.” Yeah, like these guys are ten feet tall, desert warriors; “NEVER LOST A BATTLE!” “WE SHIT BULLETS!” Well, after two and a half months of continuous carpet bombing and not ONE reaction at all from these fuckers, …they became simply the ‘Republican Guard’, not merely as ‘Elite’ as we may have led you to believe. And after one month of continuous bombing not one reaction AT ALL, they went from the ‘Elite Republican Guard’ to the ‘Republican Guard’ to the ‘Republicans made this shit up about there being guards out there… we hope you enjoyed your firework show.
I saw Bill Hicks late on Channel 4 late one night when I was about 14. Blew me away, thought the man was a genius. Expected to hear a lot more of him.
Which never materialised. In the early internet days it took me a while to learn that Hicks died around the time I turned 16.
Some of his stuff has, inevitably, aged but in so many ways he is still fucking spot on.
Would’ve been good to see Bill eviscerate Trump and contemporary Republicans. I bet he’d have had an interesting take on Woke as well.
He was brilliant, as clever as he was funny. Somewhere I have about 4 of his early tour albums on CD, I used to listen to them a lot, my favourite being Arizona Bay which I would recommend to anyone wanting to discover him.
Yeah thanks to teh interwebs they’re all there. I listen to them every now and again.
Guy Faulconbridge @GuyReuters U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BLINKEN SAYS U.S. IS TALKING TO EUROPEAN PARTNERS TO LOOK AT THE PROSPECT OF BANNING THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL
France’s interior minister has accused the British government of showing a “lack of humanity” when it comes to helping the Ukrainian refugees who have fled the Russian invasion and are now waiting in Calais for permission to join their families in the UK.
Hundreds of Ukrainians have come to the northern French port in the last few days in the hope of crossing the Channel so they can be with relatives who are already established in the UK.
According to the French interior minister, Gérald Darmanin, 400 Ukrainian refugees have presented themselves at Calais border crossings in recent days – only for 150 of them to be told to go away and obtain visas at UK consulates in Paris or Brussels.
I thought the whole problem was that it was only limited to those with families in the UK? If they all had relatives established in the UK they should have been admitted.
They still need to get a visa, having proved that they have relatives in the UK, paid the relevant fees and had their biometrics scanned.
A bureaucratic nightmare was created in the before times for the purpose of making it as hard as possible for people to obtain visas, and ministers haven't been able or willing to cut through all the crap to let people get here as simply and easily as possible.
There arn’t still fees? We arn’t still swelling UK coffers exploiting Ukraine peoples misery? ☹️
Betting post here. It might be worthwhile putting a few quid on laying Trump for next GOP nominee for 2024 and / or putting some money on other contenders such as DeSantis. Not so much for the rights or wrongs of whether he hasn’t condemned Putin enough, more for the stupidity of his comment that Putin was a “genius”. I think that comment is going to come back to haunt him, ahem, ‘bigly’ in the nomination race, especially if someone takes him on aggressively. DYOR.
I won't because I already have a big (underwater) short on him but I do agree. Trump 2.0 is feeling less and less likely to me.
His rivals need to really piss him off with a Trump style nickname.
Moscow Donnie?
Comrade Trump?
Mini-Putin?
Agent Orange?
The Great Loser?
You're Fired
IMPOTUS
Works great on the page, but will sound like "impetus" when giving a speech.
France’s interior minister has accused the British government of showing a “lack of humanity” when it comes to helping the Ukrainian refugees who have fled the Russian invasion and are now waiting in Calais for permission to join their families in the UK.
Hundreds of Ukrainians have come to the northern French port in the last few days in the hope of crossing the Channel so they can be with relatives who are already established in the UK.
According to the French interior minister, Gérald Darmanin, 400 Ukrainian refugees have presented themselves at Calais border crossings in recent days – only for 150 of them to be told to go away and obtain visas at UK consulates in Paris or Brussels.
Admittedly, the UK government, slow on these things in the past, can move quickly here and redeem themselves.
There's no reason a visa office can't be set up in Calais tomorrow.
Alternatively, someone could just charter a boat for them. They are refugees, they don't need visas.
The Brillo weathervane has spaketh. We're all Carole cat women now.
Are we going to flip on a sixpence from being a centre of excellence for money laundering to being dead against it?
Quite something if so. It would show that Germany isn't the only country that can overturn 30 years worth of deeply ingrained policy in response to what Putin is doing.
It would be another clear-up of the Blair-Cameron era.
Mandelson's announcing that the Labour party was "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich" summed up the mentality and strategy.
I was never intensely relaxed about him saying that. There was a need to combat the view that Labour were hairshirted sourpusses who couldn't abide the idea of people having a nice meal out now and again, but it wasn't necessary to bend that far on the rhetoric.
Tories: Labour is the party of envy, of jealousy, of levelling down, of spending other people's money, of class hatred, of not letting people enjoy their well-earned riches.
Same Tories: how dare Mandelson say that he is 'intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich'! Shows that Labour isn't the party of ordinary hard-working people at all.
Yep, the old 'Politics of Envy Class Warrior or Champagne Socialist Hypocrite' dichotomy. And if you somehow avoid either you're 'dull'. There is just no type of Labour that quite passes muster. It's amazing we ever win any elections at all really.
Your recent winning form is about as good as mine on hurdle races.
We had 13 Mandy years and communities levelled down. You may never get a majority again from everyone who remembers it.
Fantasy: embrace the glorious advantages of globalisation says Blair! Reality: like a Putin peace mission has visited the place, this sums up Labours last rare visit to power in just 2 sentences.
A rather jaundiced (!) take on New Labour. That government surely grows in stature as we gaze back from these days of Boris "Boris" Johnson.
New Labour embraced the idea that, with globalisation, all the non white collar jobs would be offshored.
Except for the small fact that they forgot about productivity - a very good case can be made that jobs in "high cost" locations can *cost less* per unit of actual work done. In fact, once you take productivity into account, quite a lot of low cost locations - aren't.
When offshoring failed to deliver the goods (ha) the next step was on-shoring the offshore workers. Who would work cheaply, in your highly productive economy. For a time. After as while they tend to demand something fascist, like a pay rise. But they could be replaced....
Nothing particularly "New Labour" about that wheeze. Unless we're going to start using the term as shorthand for trends observed in the 90s/00s. But, yes, "offshoring", what always struck me about that was how somehow, kind of magically, it always turned out it wasn't feasible to move executive and management functions to a lower cost location. Something about those jobs meant the same type of people had to keep doing them in the same type of places. I remember - going a bit 'you' for a second - once asking at a bank I was with, during a cost cutting review, "why aren't we looking at moving the front office to somewhere like Sheffield?" - and I was shouted down, and that's only by those who weren't laughing their socks off.
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
You realise, of course, that automatic pay profession has gone outside of the NHS (and schools?) and “performance related pay” (bonuses too small to motivate but big enough to irritate when badly used) are now the status quo in the public sector? People stuck on the lowest salary point with no prospect of profession so they leave? And your understanding of unions and their relative power is clearly based entirely on Tory party slogans rather than negotiating with them.
It hasn't really for the civil service and much of the NHS and schools and TfL etc they still get annual pay deals with unions involved in negotiations. If unions don't get the pay deals they want for their members they still often go on strike, see especially the RMT and London Underground.
Unions oppose performance related pay on the whole and unions also oppose virtually every job cut. There are no unions in the financial sector however of any real significance, hence pay is more based on performance and bonuses with annual culls of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs
Factually wrong on almost every point, save the lack of unions for the trading end of financial services firms, and tinge oddity that is TfL (through train driver pay issues are hardly unique to TfL).
Edit - Oh and you object to unions being involved in negotiating members’ salaries in principle then there really is no hope for you.
Oh no, factually correct on everything. In fact you even agreed with my key points on the lack of unions in the financial sector and the RMT domination of pay negotiations for TfL.
I have no objection to unions being involved in pay negotiations but the price of that will always be pay generally moves up at the same rate for everyone not PRP and bonuses which unions are ideologically opposed to as the higher the PRP bonuses for the best performers, the more the pay cuts and job losses for the weakest performers
Pay in TfL isn’t a problem. Pay of train drivers is, and the market failure is driven by privatisation and a string of poor decisions. Plus, as ever, good luck to a union and it’s members taking what they can get.
You don’t understand public sector pay on any level, or how it relates to the wider economy. But then you are a Tory and the ones who have been in Government for ten years don’t either. Not deluded enough to think Labour would be much better but at least Starmer has some personal experience.
I do. Public sector pay is largely based on average increases for all, private sector pay, especially in the City is much more performance and bonus based. If you make money for your firm then you get a hefty bonus, if you don't you don't and if you continually fail to deliver you lose your job too.
High stakes, high reward but high risk too, that is the City of London and Canary Wharf. If you want to make the big bucks that is generally the best place to go but with the proviso you get less job security
Sigh…. no it isn’t. Outside of one or two hold outs, public sector pay is based on an occasional below inflation hike to the baseline and no way for staff to get off that baseline.
I mean, even your concept of City pay is quite flakey. Outside of a narrow range of roles it pays much like anyone else, even if everyone is a Vice President of something.
However you also face the fact that if you work for Goldman Sachs for instance they sack the weakest performers every year. No public sector organisation I am aware of does an annual cull of its weakest perfomers in the same fashion, even if your average pay is much lower
Would you like me to explain to you how averages work, the pay structure of most other corporates, and why that news story is completely consistent with my post?
No it is completely inconsistent with your post and proves I was correct.
Average pay in the city of London is far higher than average pay not only across the public sector as a whole but across the private sector as a whole as I just proved.
Who said anything about “as a whole”? I didn’t? I also certainly didn’t say average City pay wasn’t higher. Do try and read all of the words in the order they are written.
Also, you clearly do need to be taught about averages.
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
I was curious and found this from ITV: Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said on LBC: "I think actually it's illegal to go and fight in a foreign war these days". He pointed to the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870 which bans Britons from fighting in the "military or naval service of any foreign state" that is at war with a country that the UK is "at peace" with. "There are certainly laws restricting who you can go and fight for already," he told the radio show. However, he added: "People fought on various sides of the Spanish Civil war without being penalised when they came back".
“These days” citing in the 1870 act? How old is he? 😆
Bottom line is that no British politician with any foresight, integrity and honesty should have been enjoying any Russian hospitality or ‘free’ $$$ for some years now. Hopefully those that have continued to cash in regardless will soon be exposed…
Guy Faulconbridge @GuyReuters U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BLINKEN SAYS U.S. IS TALKING TO EUROPEAN PARTNERS TO LOOK AT THE PROSPECT OF BANNING THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
"Putin tells Erdogan: Kyiv must cease fighting and fulfill all of Moscow’s demands in order for the Russian invasion of Ukraine to stop."
Lol.
I tend to think of Erdogan as the Turkish Putin, but even he wouldn't swallow that.
He is probably too busy counting all the money Turkey is getting from the US and others for as many drones as they can make. You can argue whether it was Ngorney Karaback or this war but the 100 year reign of the MBT as king of the battlefield is over. You might as well paint targets on them.
Bottom line is that no British politician with any foresight, integrity and honesty should have been enjoying any Russian hospitality or ‘free’ $$$ for some years now. Hopefully those that have continued to cash in regardless will soon be exposed…
It does not matter if they are exposed as both the establishment and its voters have deemed it acceptable and continue to do so. People challenging Putin related political donations are shut down with accusations of racism, being against the rule of law and somehow wanting internment of all Russians.
Guy Faulconbridge @GuyReuters U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BLINKEN SAYS U.S. IS TALKING TO EUROPEAN PARTNERS TO LOOK AT THE PROSPECT OF BANNING THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
In which case we may as well also scrap Holyrood, Cardiff Bay and Stormont and the London Mayoralty and Assembly and return everything to Westminster.
It would be a complete reversal of localism, make government far less responsive to local concerns and require a huge transfer of civil servants from local councils to Whitehall control and one national council tax rate. However if you are going to do it that is what you would have to do
"Putin tells Erdogan: Kyiv must cease fighting and fulfill all of Moscow’s demands in order for the Russian invasion of Ukraine to stop."
Lol.
I tend to think of Erdogan as the Turkish Putin, but even he wouldn't swallow that.
He is probably too busy counting all the money Turkey is getting from the US and others for as many drones as they can make. You can argue whether it was Ngorney Karaback or this war but the 100 year reign of the MBT as king of the battlefield is over. You might as well paint targets on them.
It has a role, in the context of a combined arms force with electronic warfare capabilities. These tactical drones also have a role, but they are limited. Horses for courses.
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
In which case we may as well also scrap Holyrood, Cardiff Bay and Stormont and the London Mayoralty and Assembly and return everything to Westminster.
It would be a complete reversal of localism, make government far less responsive to local concerns and require a huge transfer of civil servants from local councils to Whitehall control and one national council tax rate. However you are going to do it that is what you would have to do
The Brillo weathervane has spaketh. We're all Carole cat women now.
Are we going to flip on a sixpence from being a centre of excellence for money laundering to being dead against it?
Quite something if so. It would show that Germany isn't the only country that can overturn 30 years worth of deeply ingrained policy in response to what Putin is doing.
It would be another clear-up of the Blair-Cameron era.
Mandelson's announcing that the Labour party was "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich" summed up the mentality and strategy.
I was never intensely relaxed about him saying that. There was a need to combat the view that Labour were hairshirted sourpusses who couldn't abide the idea of people having a nice meal out now and again, but it wasn't necessary to bend that far on the rhetoric.
Tories: Labour is the party of envy, of jealousy, of levelling down, of spending other people's money, of class hatred, of not letting people enjoy their well-earned riches.
Same Tories: how dare Mandelson say that he is 'intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich'! Shows that Labour isn't the party of ordinary hard-working people at all.
Yep, the old 'Politics of Envy Class Warrior or Champagne Socialist Hypocrite' dichotomy. And if you somehow avoid either you're 'dull'. There is just no type of Labour that quite passes muster. It's amazing we ever win any elections at all really.
Your recent winning form is about as good as mine on hurdle races.
We had 13 Mandy years and communities levelled down. You may never get a majority again from everyone who remembers it.
Fantasy: embrace the glorious advantages of globalisation says Blair! Reality: like a Putin peace mission has visited the place, this sums up Labours last rare visit to power in just 2 sentences.
A rather jaundiced (!) take on New Labour. That government surely grows in stature as we gaze back from these days of Boris "Boris" Johnson.
New Labour embraced the idea that, with globalisation, all the non white collar jobs would be offshored.
Except for the small fact that they forgot about productivity - a very good case can be made that jobs in "high cost" locations can *cost less* per unit of actual work done. In fact, once you take productivity into account, quite a lot of low cost locations - aren't.
When offshoring failed to deliver the goods (ha) the next step was on-shoring the offshore workers. Who would work cheaply, in your highly productive economy. For a time. After as while they tend to demand something fascist, like a pay rise. But they could be replaced....
Nothing particularly "New Labour" about that wheeze. Unless we're going to start using that term as shorthand for trends observed in the 90s/00s. But, yes, "offshoring" what always struck me about that was how somehow, kind of magically, it always turned out it wasn't feasible to move executive and management functions to a lower cost location. Something about those jobs meant that the same type of people had to keep doing them in the same type of places. I remember - going a bit you for a second - once asking at a bank I was with, during a cost cutting review, "why aren't we looking at moving the front office to somewhere like Sheffield?" - and I was shouted down, and that's only by those who weren't laughing,
Indeed, yes. Outsourcing is only contemplated for those 2 levels below the people doing the outsourcing, typically. Funny that.
Then we have the failure to understand that productivity is a function of the individual, the company and the societal infrastructure around them. When you factor all of that in, wages are actually rather flat, in even moderately skilled jobs, around the world.
For example, I worked in a company, that due to mergers had IT development centres around the world. The most expensive was in Mumbai. The first-equal in cheapness - London. Cheapest in terms of functionality delivered per dollar spent.
The idea of moving to lower cost locations within the UK has actually arrived, finally, incidentally. A bunch of banks are setting up shop in Manchester, Liverpool and Birmingham. I haven't heard of Cardiff and surroundings, yet, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Collaboration yes, complete takeover by another which has no connection to the area, no
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
I’d do it the other way around completely. Get as much out of central government as possible, and make decisions much closer to the people those decisions affect. Let local authorities raise more of their own income, and let them compete with each other for residents and businesses.
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
That makes my point for me. If a naked Gavin Williamson is illegal, put a fig leaf on it and carry on whipping.
Going back to my boring original away from your delicious metaphor, UK head of armed forces says that despite knowing, as MarkyMarq pointed out, he knows his own troops are in Ukraine fighting for the right cause alongside trained troops from all over the world - so it’s unfair and naive to give Liz Truss and government stick over their “wink wink nudge nudge. GET OVER THERE” messaging.
Please can we all agree not to conjure up images of a naked Gavin Williamson….
Point of order! I put a fig leaf on it, so that’s no longer naked. Just cheeky…
Incidentally! I did spend a bit of time trawl around the media finding something in support of Gavs K I could link here.
Couldn’t find anything.
Do you think he will gain enough awareness to realise that he is a laughing stock and that the knighthood has actually increased the contempt with which he is regarded?
Guy Faulconbridge @GuyReuters U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BLINKEN SAYS U.S. IS TALKING TO EUROPEAN PARTNERS TO LOOK AT THE PROSPECT OF BANNING THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL
How do people feel about £15 per gallon? (Smug gits with electric cars aside.)
We've just had a big dress rehearsal of a dramatic reduction in fuel consumption thanks to covid.
Well, I suppose we could go down the 'work from home route' again. I doubt however if it will bring fuel prices back under control quite so dramatically as it did in lockdown.
Betting post here. It might be worthwhile putting a few quid on laying Trump for next GOP nominee for 2024 and / or putting some money on other contenders such as DeSantis. Not so much for the rights or wrongs of whether he hasn’t condemned Putin enough, more for the stupidity of his comment that Putin was a “genius”. I think that comment is going to come back to haunt him, ahem, ‘bigly’ in the nomination race, especially if someone takes him on aggressively. DYOR.
I won't because I already have a big (underwater) short on him but I do agree. Trump 2.0 is feeling less and less likely to me.
His rivals need to really piss him off with a Trump style nickname.
Moscow Donnie?
Comrade Trump?
Mini-Putin?
Agent Orange?
The Great Loser?
You're Fired
IMPOTUS
Works great on the page, but will sound like "impetus" when giving a speech.
Guy Faulconbridge @GuyReuters U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BLINKEN SAYS U.S. IS TALKING TO EUROPEAN PARTNERS TO LOOK AT THE PROSPECT OF BANNING THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL
How do people feel about £15 per gallon? (Smug gits with electric cars aside.)
We've just had a big dress rehearsal of a dramatic reduction in fuel consumption thanks to covid.
Well, I suppose we could go down the 'work from home route' again. I doubt however if it will bring fuel prices back under control quite so dramatically as it did in lockdown.
I’m quite surprised that there isn’t a high-profile organisation, pushing hard the environmental benefits of WFH.
Yes but I accepted Brexit and voted for Boris in 2019
Not good enough. You cast a vote to bring about a situation that would now be an absolute anathema to Boris's Tories. Mr Penning needs to assess where you sit on the 'Traditional Tory Values' scale. He will then decide what will become of you.
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
What about competitive local authorities all the way down to the village council - multiple organisations competing for business?
Competitive government - if your tax office is shit, switch to another one? Your local hospital killing old people? send Granny to the one across the road. St Thickchilds not educating your children? - send them to St WackEms......
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector and an annual cull of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I think you are confusing elected councillors, who can be replaced, with non elected local government officers, who are officially apolitical and unlikely to be replaced.
Betting post here. It might be worthwhile putting a few quid on laying Trump for next GOP nominee for 2024 and / or putting some money on other contenders such as DeSantis. Not so much for the rights or wrongs of whether he hasn’t condemned Putin enough, more for the stupidity of his comment that Putin was a “genius”. I think that comment is going to come back to haunt him, ahem, ‘bigly’ in the nomination race, especially if someone takes him on aggressively. DYOR.
I won't because I already have a big (underwater) short on him but I do agree. Trump 2.0 is feeling less and less likely to me.
His rivals need to really piss him off with a Trump style nickname.
Moscow Donnie?
Comrade Trump?
Mini-Putin?
Agent Orange?
The Great Loser?
You're Fired
IMPOTUS
Works great on the page, but will sound like "impetus" when giving a speech.
Yes but I accepted Brexit and voted for Boris in 2019
Not good enough. You cast a vote to bring about a situation that would now be an absolute anathema to Boris's Tories. Mr Penning needs to assess where you sit on the 'Traditional Tory Values' scale. He will then decide what will become of you.
Like Liz Truss, Sajid Javid, Therese Coffey, Ben Wallace and a few other 2016 Remainers in Boris' Cabinet I am a 'born again Brexiteer.'
I supported both May and Boris' deal and would have voted for both had I been an MP so I expect I will be OK.
I don't think anything I post here really makes me a 'closet LD' either
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector and an annual cull of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I think you are confusing elected councillors, who can be replaced, with non elected local government officers, who are officially apolitical and unlikely to be replaced.
Yes but the direction of the council and its policies is set by the councillors and Cabinet, the officers then implement those proposals
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
That makes my point for me. If a naked Gavin Williamson is illegal, put a fig leaf on it and carry on whipping.
Going back to my boring original away from your delicious metaphor, UK head of armed forces says that despite knowing, as MarkyMarq pointed out, he knows his own troops are in Ukraine fighting for the right cause alongside trained troops from all over the world - so it’s unfair and naive to give Liz Truss and government stick over their “wink wink nudge nudge. GET OVER THERE” messaging.
Please can we all agree not to conjure up images of a naked Gavin Williamson….
Point of order! I put a fig leaf on it, so that’s no longer naked. Just cheeky…
Incidentally! I did spend a bit of time trawl around the media finding something in support of Gavs K I could link here.
Couldn’t find anything.
Putin just pipped him for Worst Decision Of The year So Far......
Yes but I accepted Brexit and voted for Boris in 2019
Not good enough. You cast a vote to bring about a situation that would now be an absolute anathema to Boris's Tories. Mr Penning needs to assess where you sit on the 'Traditional Tory Values' scale. He will then decide what will become of you.
Like Liz Truss, I am a 'born again Brexiteer.'
I supported both May and Boris' deal and would have voted for both had I been an MP so I expect I will be OK.
I don't think anything I post here really makes me a 'closet LD' either
If you are either a liberal or a democrat you have definitely kept it in the closet.
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
What about competitive local authorities all the way down to the village council - multiple organisations competing for business?
Competitive government - if your tax office is shit, switch to another one? Your local hospital killing old people? send Granny to the one across the road. St Thickchilds not educating your children? - send them to St WackEms......
Let a thousand, different, flowers bloom....
Why shouldn’t that apply to national government too? The idea of non-geographic states has been explored in speculative fiction quite a lot in recent years such as Neal Stephenson’s Snow Crash and The Diamond Age, and Ada Palmer’s Terra Ignota series.
Not that long ago Tories used to mock the pretensions of Corbynites seeking ideological uniformity.
If your grouping is strong you don't need to launch a crusade to seek out the enemy within, you attrach the ones you want and the strength of your values wins out anyway.
A retreat into internal spite is a sign of weakness, to shore up support for a leader among one faction.
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
What about competitive local authorities all the way down to the village council - multiple organisations competing for business?
Competitive government - if your tax office is shit, switch to another one? Your local hospital killing old people? send Granny to the one across the road. St Thickchilds not educating your children? - send them to St WackEms......
Let a thousand, different, flowers bloom....
Why shouldn’t that apply to national government too? The idea of non-geographic states has been explored in speculative fiction quite a lot in recent years such as Neal Stephenson’s Snow Crash and The Diamond Age, and Ada Palmer’s Terra Ignota series.
"Honey, I'm changing our nuclear deterrent"
"Why?"
"Virgn MegaDeath have a special on the 24 month contract - first 12 months are half price and I've done the figures. Still works out cheaper than Britannia Overkill"
Quite a realistic portrayal of someone holding his guts in after being done over by an MG 42. The tanks are a bit odd, Sherman chassis with what looks like a Valentine or BT-5 turret?
Only seen clips of Der Brücke, is it worth watching if one only has minimal German?
Yes but I accepted Brexit and voted for Boris in 2019
Not good enough. You cast a vote to bring about a situation that would now be an absolute anathema to Boris's Tories. Mr Penning needs to assess where you sit on the 'Traditional Tory Values' scale. He will then decide what will become of you.
Like Liz Truss, I am a 'born again Brexiteer.'
I supported both May and Boris' deal and would have voted for both had I been an MP so I expect I will be OK.
I don't think anything I post here really makes me a 'closet LD' either
If you are either a liberal or a democrat you have definitely kept it in the closet.
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
I was curious and found this from ITV: Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said on LBC: "I think actually it's illegal to go and fight in a foreign war these days". He pointed to the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870 which bans Britons from fighting in the "military or naval service of any foreign state" that is at war with a country that the UK is "at peace" with. "There are certainly laws restricting who you can go and fight for already," he told the radio show. However, he added: "People fought on various sides of the Spanish Civil war without being penalised when they came back".
“These days” citing in the 1870 act? How old is he? 😆
I don't know whether his legislative references are correct or not, but the age of the act is not itself necessarily a sign he is wrong - if the law was sufficient it could have survived through amendment without the act being amended.
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector and an annual cull of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I think you are confusing elected councillors, who can be replaced, with non elected local government officers, who are officially apolitical and unlikely to be replaced.
Yes but the direction of the council and its policies is set by the councillors and Cabinet, the officers then implement those proposals
Efficiently or otherwise. I’m sure many of us know of councils that are poorly run irrespective of their political makeup. For example, from 2007-2012 South Ayrshire was run by a Con minority administration, from 2012-2017 by Con-Lab-Ind and since 2017 by SNP-Lab-Ind. Council administration has remained poor under all the above.
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector and an annual cull of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I think you are confusing elected councillors, who can be replaced, with non elected local government officers, who are officially apolitical and unlikely to be replaced.
Yes but the direction of the council and its policies is set by the councillors and Cabinet, the officers then implement those proposals
Efficiently or otherwise. I’m sure many of us know of councils that are poorly run irrespective of their political makeup. For example, from 2007-2012 South Ayrshire was run by a Con minority administration, from 2012-2017 by Con-Lab-Ind and since 2017 by SNP-Lab-Ind. Council administration has remained poor under all the above.
Yes. And while setting the policy can be important, there are many instances where there really is no 'political' or ideological reason to go for policy X or Y on in respect of service provision or the like, so the decisions being on merit are very likely not to change depending on the party. Local Plans can be a case in point, as national rules drive them and so typically whoever is in opposition just seeks to hoover up discontent about the administration 'giving in' to the building of houses in the 'wrong place', but they know they'd have very little option. In many councils there's no disagreement about the level of precept, just the budget, so to the public it's only the obvious stuff - libraries, leisure centres, waste provision - that gets attention.
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
What about competitive local authorities all the way down to the village council - multiple organisations competing for business?
Competitive government - if your tax office is shit, switch to another one? Your local hospital killing old people? send Granny to the one across the road. St Thickchilds not educating your children? - send them to St WackEms......
Let a thousand, different, flowers bloom....
Why shouldn’t that apply to national government too? The idea of non-geographic states has been explored in speculative fiction quite a lot in recent years such as Neal Stephenson’s Snow Crash and The Diamond Age, and Ada Palmer’s Terra Ignota series.
"Honey, I'm changing our nuclear deterrent"
"Why?"
"Virgn MegaDeath have a special on the 24 month contract - first 12 months are half price and I've done the figures. Still works out cheaper than Britannia Overkill"
Well in Ken MacLeod’s “Fall Revolution” series, the staff of the Russian space port at Baikonur in Kazakhstan declare independence as the “International Scientific and Technical Workers’ Republic” and offer a nuclear umbrella to any country that wants one.
Guy Faulconbridge @GuyReuters U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BLINKEN SAYS U.S. IS TALKING TO EUROPEAN PARTNERS TO LOOK AT THE PROSPECT OF BANNING THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL
How do people feel about £15 per gallon? (Smug gits with electric cars aside.)
We've just had a big dress rehearsal of a dramatic reduction in fuel consumption thanks to covid.
Well, I suppose we could go down the 'work from home route' again. I doubt however if it will bring fuel prices back under control quite so dramatically as it did in lockdown.
I’m quite surprised that there isn’t a high-profile organisation, pushing hard the environmental benefits of WFH.
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector and an annual cull of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I think you are confusing elected councillors, who can be replaced, with non elected local government officers, who are officially apolitical and unlikely to be replaced.
Yes but the direction of the council and its policies is set by the councillors and Cabinet, the officers then implement those proposals
Efficiently or otherwise. I’m sure many of us know of councils that are poorly run irrespective of their political makeup. For example, from 2007-2012 South Ayrshire was run by a Con minority administration, from 2012-2017 by Con-Lab-Ind and since 2017 by SNP-Lab-Ind. Council administration has remained poor under all the above.
South Ayrshire will be quite interesting in May as it could produce the first ever Conservative majority under STV.
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
That makes my point for me. If a naked Gavin Williamson is illegal, put a fig leaf on it and carry on whipping.
Going back to my boring original away from your delicious metaphor, UK head of armed forces says that despite knowing, as MarkyMarq pointed out, he knows his own troops are in Ukraine fighting for the right cause alongside trained troops from all over the world - so it’s unfair and naive to give Liz Truss and government stick over their “wink wink nudge nudge. GET OVER THERE” messaging.
Please can we all agree not to conjure up images of a naked Gavin Williamson….
Point of order! I put a fig leaf on it, so that’s no longer naked. Just cheeky…
Incidentally! I did spend a bit of time trawl around the media finding something in support of Gavs K I could link here.
Couldn’t find anything.
I though quite a few would be applauding. It finally and utterly discredits the honours system.
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
I was curious and found this from ITV: Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said on LBC: "I think actually it's illegal to go and fight in a foreign war these days". He pointed to the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870 which bans Britons from fighting in the "military or naval service of any foreign state" that is at war with a country that the UK is "at peace" with. "There are certainly laws restricting who you can go and fight for already," he told the radio show. However, he added: "People fought on various sides of the Spanish Civil war without being penalised when they came back".
“These days” citing in the 1870 act? How old is he? 😆
I don't know whether his legislative references are correct or not, but the age of the act is not itself necessarily a sign he is wrong - if the law was sufficient it could have survived through amendment without the act being amended.
The oldest act of parliament still partially in force is the Statute of Marlborough from 1267.
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I'm afraid in some respect you are wrong. A number of councils already collaborate on back office functions such as payroll, council tax collection and professional services such as legal, finance and property management.
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
What about competitive local authorities all the way down to the village council - multiple organisations competing for business?
Competitive government - if your tax office is shit, switch to another one? Your local hospital killing old people? send Granny to the one across the road. St Thickchilds not educating your children? - send them to St WackEms......
Let a thousand, different, flowers bloom....
Why shouldn’t that apply to national government too? The idea of non-geographic states has been explored in speculative fiction quite a lot in recent years such as Neal Stephenson’s Snow Crash and The Diamond Age, and Ada Palmer’s Terra Ignota series.
"Honey, I'm changing our nuclear deterrent"
"Why?"
"Virgn MegaDeath have a special on the 24 month contract - first 12 months are half price and I've done the figures. Still works out cheaper than Britannia Overkill"
Well in Ken MacLeod’s “Fall Revolution” series, the staff of the Russian space port at Baikonur in Kazakhstan declare independence as the “International Scientific and Technical Workers’ Republic” and offer a nuclear umbrella to any country that wants one.
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
I was curious and found this from ITV: Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said on LBC: "I think actually it's illegal to go and fight in a foreign war these days". He pointed to the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870 which bans Britons from fighting in the "military or naval service of any foreign state" that is at war with a country that the UK is "at peace" with. "There are certainly laws restricting who you can go and fight for already," he told the radio show. However, he added: "People fought on various sides of the Spanish Civil war without being penalised when they came back".
“These days” citing in the 1870 act? How old is he? 😆
I don't know whether his legislative references are correct or not, but the age of the act is not itself necessarily a sign he is wrong - if the law was sufficient it could have survived through amendment without the act being amended.
The oldest act of parliament still partially in force is the Statute of Marlborough from 1267.
yes and actually the Distress Act part of it is pretty relevant and central law
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
I was curious and found this from ITV: Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said on LBC: "I think actually it's illegal to go and fight in a foreign war these days". He pointed to the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870 which bans Britons from fighting in the "military or naval service of any foreign state" that is at war with a country that the UK is "at peace" with. "There are certainly laws restricting who you can go and fight for already," he told the radio show. However, he added: "People fought on various sides of the Spanish Civil war without being penalised when they came back".
“These days” citing in the 1870 act? How old is he? 😆
I don't know whether his legislative references are correct or not, but the age of the act is not itself necessarily a sign he is wrong - if the law was sufficient it could have survived through amendment without the act being amended.
It is still in force all right, not so much by being sufficient as by being irrelevant. It is a revision, in response to the Franco prussian war of an 1819 Act in response to goings on in South America. Nobody much seems to have been prosecuted under either.
The point being that "these days" usually implies the speaker remembers a time when things were different
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
There's the thorny question of paying for it all - you'd have to increase Income Tax or VAT or add a Local Income Tax or Sales tax or whatever.
A more inventive solution would be to have individual households opt in or out to a range of services. If you want your refuse collected weekly, fine but if you manage with a fortnightly collection, you can take a discount on your Council Tax and get your rubbish collected less frequently.
National provision of some local services does happen - schools teach to a nationally-agreed curriculum, residential homes should operate to nationally-agreed standards. Building regulations apply nationally and there's far more co-operation between authorities providing services than you might imagine.
Local Government isn't just about services either - issues such as planning have a local dimension or would every application for a loft extension have to go to the National Planning Authority?
The Brillo weathervane has spaketh. We're all Carole cat women now.
Are we going to flip on a sixpence from being a centre of excellence for money laundering to being dead against it?
Quite something if so. It would show that Germany isn't the only country that can overturn 30 years worth of deeply ingrained policy in response to what Putin is doing.
It would be another clear-up of the Blair-Cameron era.
Mandelson's announcing that the Labour party was "intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich" summed up the mentality and strategy.
I was never intensely relaxed about him saying that. There was a need to combat the view that Labour were hairshirted sourpusses who couldn't abide the idea of people having a nice meal out now and again, but it wasn't necessary to bend that far on the rhetoric.
Tories: Labour is the party of envy, of jealousy, of levelling down, of spending other people's money, of class hatred, of not letting people enjoy their well-earned riches.
Same Tories: how dare Mandelson say that he is 'intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich'! Shows that Labour isn't the party of ordinary hard-working people at all.
Yep, the old 'Politics of Envy Class Warrior or Champagne Socialist Hypocrite' dichotomy. And if you somehow avoid either you're 'dull'. There is just no type of Labour that quite passes muster. It's amazing we ever win any elections at all really.
Your recent winning form is about as good as mine on hurdle races.
We had 13 Mandy years and communities levelled down. You may never get a majority again from everyone who remembers it.
Fantasy: embrace the glorious advantages of globalisation says Blair! Reality: like a Putin peace mission has visited the place, this sums up Labours last rare visit to power in just 2 sentences.
A rather jaundiced (!) take on New Labour. That government surely grows in stature as we gaze back from these days of Boris "Boris" Johnson.
“ A rather jaundiced (!) take on New Labour.”
Really? 😂. I just explained exactly why you keep losing. New Labours rhetoric and promise didn’t match the reality that was happening to UK communities. People remember that, hence you have lost their vote, probably for the rest of their lives.
Well it never matches up, does it. I mean, look at this bunch of chancers in office now - aka the Tories. They were supposed to be "unleashing Britain's potential" and "spreading wealth and opportunity throughout the country". Something a touch stronger than LOL is needed to describe how that's going. So I don't know where this leaves the electorate. Last Labour government disappointed. Latest Tory one a joke. Could they even be desperate enough to vote Lib Dem in large numbers?
How's it going ?
Well take a trip back to your old home town and you'll see housing estates being built every half mile and full employment for the first time in a working lifetime.
And go to a restaurant while you're there - you'll have more of a choice than the Indian/Chinese/Berni decision that you had when you left for London.
You've mentioned the 'bargain' Blair and Brown struck with the City.
Well it turned out that 'bargain' included a bailout for the London bankers while the rest of the country was left to sink or swim on their own.
The last Labour government didn't disappoint. It betrayed.
No option, sadly, except to bail out the City once it'd slipped past the point of no return. But I'm still to this day surprised and disappointed how the public accepted the Conservative narrative that it was down to too much "Labour" spending and the remedy was to squeeze the life out of local authorities and public services and benefit claimants.
As for up there being miles better than when I left, yes, but has it progressed as much as London & the Home Counties in that same time? The data says not. Also the place was so trashed under Thatcher it *had* to bounce back to some extent over time. Anyway, I like your bullishness about your (our) area - it's rare for you to be sunny-side up about anything. And all this 'grim up north' stuff can become a patronizing trope.
Doctors get paid more than the average person because they contribute more than the average person to things that matter - its simple really
This doesn't really account for the financial services 'industry' who are handsomely renumerated while being a malignantly destructive to society.
They invest in business which help them to grow, they are pivotal to the economy. Financial services is also high risk, high reward. If you make a lot of money for your firm you get paid a lot in return, if you don't you are out
You must have worked in a different financial services sector to the one I worked in, Hyufd.
I haven't but my father did for about 50 years.
You can make a lot of money in financial services and as a stockbroker or banker if you in turn pull in money. However you are also more likely to lose your job if you don't.
Hence while the average City worker is paid more than the average public sector worker, their job is generally less secure.
There was discussion of GPs pay earlier. Plenty of GPs also make 6 figure salaries like those in financial services but they have more job security as well (albeit they have to do a lot of study and training to get their jobs in the first place)
Ah, so if job security makes the difference I’ll do a deal with you. Most public sector employees would love to get rid of the 20% who are crap at their jobs, but this Government has shown no interest in doing so (every public sector reform since 2010 has been excellent at making good people leave and doing nothing to crap people). If we introduce such a system, can public sector workers get FS pay?
No as by definition the public sector is always taxpayer funded and less prone to the growth or decline of businesses and the market economy as financial services is.
There might be a case for some performance related pay and bonuses in the public sector like financial services in the private sector and an annual cull of the weakest performers a la Goldman Sachs but generally unions are opposed to them wanting pay to rise equally for all. As unions are much stronger in the public than private sector now it therefore rarely happens
Should poorly performing local authorities be permitted to be taken over and run by better performing local authorities, e.g. South Ayrshire taken over by North Ayrshire or Glasgow taken over by East Ayrshire. Who would decide? The Council Tax payers in a ballot?
No, as it is impractical. If voters want a change they can elect a different party to run the council
I think you are confusing elected councillors, who can be replaced, with non elected local government officers, who are officially apolitical and unlikely to be replaced.
Yes but the direction of the council and its policies is set by the councillors and Cabinet, the officers then implement those proposals
Efficiently or otherwise. I’m sure many of us know of councils that are poorly run irrespective of their political makeup. For example, from 2007-2012 South Ayrshire was run by a Con minority administration, from 2012-2017 by Con-Lab-Ind and since 2017 by SNP-Lab-Ind. Council administration has remained poor under all the above.
Yes. And while setting the policy can be important, there are many instances where there really is no 'political' or ideological reason to go for policy X or Y on in respect of service provision or the like, so the decisions being on merit are very likely not to change depending on the party. Local Plans can be a case in point, as national rules drive them and so typically whoever is in opposition just seeks to hoover up discontent about the administration 'giving in' to the building of houses in the 'wrong place', but they know they'd have very little option. In many councils there's no disagreement about the level of precept, just the budget, so to the public it's only the obvious stuff - libraries, leisure centres, waste provision - that gets attention.
There are often disagreements about the size of any council tax rise or cut along party lines.
Parties will also obviously often prefer to put most new housing in areas represented by other parties' councillors rather than their own as far as possible
Guy Faulconbridge @GuyReuters U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BLINKEN SAYS U.S. IS TALKING TO EUROPEAN PARTNERS TO LOOK AT THE PROSPECT OF BANNING THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL
How do people feel about £15 per gallon? (Smug gits with electric cars aside.)
We've just had a big dress rehearsal of a dramatic reduction in fuel consumption thanks to covid.
Well, I suppose we could go down the 'work from home route' again. I doubt however if it will bring fuel prices back under control quite so dramatically as it did in lockdown.
I’m quite surprised that there isn’t a high-profile organisation, pushing hard the environmental benefits of WFH.
Well the Russian army would be better WFH
I dunno if they work from home or offices, but before the invasion started there were many doom-laden predictions that Russian cyberwarfare would swiftly bring Ukraine and maybe the West in general to their knees, but that doesn’t seem to have happened either. Seems that the only thing the Russians have been really good at in recent years is “disinformatsiya”.
Quite a realistic portrayal of someone holding his guts in after being done over by an MG 42. The tanks are a bit odd, Sherman chassis with what looks like a Valentine or BT-5 turret?
Only seen clips of Der Brücke, is it worth watching if one only has minimal German?
I haven't had a chance to make sense of the tanks myself - but some look like mockups on wheeled cars, look at 2:30 where the "M5" has little wheels like a cheapo toy tank with rigid tracks.
And the pair at 3:45 are just plain weird - one has T-34 track but the other has something different, possibly old Pz II or III stuff. I think the tracks are any old junk mocked up to go round and round without actually doing anything.
Re the film as a whole, it seems possible to watch it in chunks with English subtitles though
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
I was curious and found this from ITV: Former Brexit Secretary David Davis said on LBC: "I think actually it's illegal to go and fight in a foreign war these days". He pointed to the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870 which bans Britons from fighting in the "military or naval service of any foreign state" that is at war with a country that the UK is "at peace" with. "There are certainly laws restricting who you can go and fight for already," he told the radio show. However, he added: "People fought on various sides of the Spanish Civil war without being penalised when they came back".
“These days” citing in the 1870 act? How old is he? 😆
I don't know whether his legislative references are correct or not, but the age of the act is not itself necessarily a sign he is wrong - if the law was sufficient it could have survived through amendment without the act being amended.
It is still in force all right, not so much by being sufficient as by being irrelevant. It is a revision, in response to the Franco prussian war of an 1819 Act in response to goings on in South America. Nobody much seems to have been prosecuted under either.
The point being that "these days" usually implies the speaker remembers a time when things were different
It seems, also, that the original intent wasn't to actually prosecute people, but to be able to say, if the Spanish complained about the South America (for example) that any British citizens involved were nothing to do with the British government and were in fact criminals under the said Act.
Some of us would abolish local Government all together and provide identical services to all residents everywhere, with central government accountable for it…..
There's the thorny question of paying for it all - you'd have to increase Income Tax or VAT or add a Local Income Tax or Sales tax or whatever.
A more inventive solution would be to have individual households opt in or out to a range of services. If you want your refuse collected weekly, fine but if you manage with a fortnightly collection, you can take a discount on your Council Tax and get your rubbish collected less frequently.
National provision of some local services does happen - schools teach to a nationally-agreed curriculum, residential homes should operate to nationally-agreed standards. Building regulations apply nationally and there's far more co-operation between authorities providing services than you might imagine.
Local Government isn't just about services either - issues such as planning have a local dimension or would every application for a loft extension have to go to the National Planning Authority?
operationally Local Government makes sense , local knowledge and affinity is important in many services. Far too much politics in it though - the standard of politicians at local level is appalling . No need for political parties to get involved in local politics and no need for it to be partisan - a bin is a bin, a care home a care home no matter if you are tory ,LD or Lab
“Defence chief contradicts Liz Truss over idea of Britons going to fight in Ukraine Sir Tony Radakin says it would be unlawful for individuals to travel to offer military help”
Utter tosh. Liz Truss and the government is right on this, she speaks for the people on this. The people of Ukraine are fighting for FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY not just for Ukraine, but for the whole of Europe because that’s what President Putin is challenging. And they need real help, not just the rusted unusable junk everyone is praising Germany for sending over. Of course it is something the government in a liberal democracy should trust it’s people to make their own decisions about, they want us to believe in freedom and democracy and that it needs to be fought for or else you lose it don’t they?
Confused mixed messages from military (almost like they want it all over quick) unlike clear message from government. What a proper liberal country is all about isn’t it?
Whether something is popular and whether it is lawful are two different things.
For example, it would be very popular to whip Gavin Williamson naked through the streets of Aylesbury, but it would also be indecent exposure and therefore illegal.
In this case, I do not know whether British nationals are permitted to serve in foreign armies without official approval, but if they are not that might be the point he is making.
That makes my point for me. If a naked Gavin Williamson is illegal, put a fig leaf on it and carry on whipping.
Going back to my boring original away from your delicious metaphor, UK head of armed forces says that despite knowing, as MarkyMarq pointed out, he knows his own troops are in Ukraine fighting for the right cause alongside trained troops from all over the world - so it’s unfair and naive to give Liz Truss and government stick over their “wink wink nudge nudge. GET OVER THERE” messaging.
Please can we all agree not to conjure up images of a naked Gavin Williamson….
Point of order! I put a fig leaf on it, so that’s no longer naked. Just cheeky…
Incidentally! I did spend a bit of time trawl around the media finding something in support of Gavs K I could link here.
Couldn’t find anything.
I though quite a few would be applauding. It finally and utterly discredits the honours system.
I ❤️ The honours system.
I want to see Thomas Shelby get a knighthood, for services to industry and British ambition.
Comments
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1532521/Average-City-salary-for-a-man-breaks-100000.html
However you also face the fact that if you work for Goldman Sachs for instance they sack the weakest performers every year. No public sector organisation I am aware of does an annual cull of its weakest perfomers in the same fashion, even if your average pay is much lower
Noted.
(As an aside, it's actually a joke from Blackadder. Blackadder was getting the worst of an argument with Melchett, and says irritably, 'Perhaps Lord Melchett would like to whip me naked through the streets of Aberdeen.'
'Oh, I don't think we need go that far, Blackadder,' said Melchett.
'Why thank you.'
'No, Aylesbury's quite far enough.')
It's going to quite some purge of the current MPs!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6-YPiqOh_w
Couldn’t find anything.
Average pay in the city of London is far higher than average pay not only across the public sector as a whole but across the private sector as a whole as I just proved.
Well take a trip back to your old home town and you'll see housing estates being built every half mile and full employment for the first time in a working lifetime.
And go to a restaurant while you're there - you'll have more of a choice than the Indian/Chinese/Berni decision that you had when you left for London.
You've mentioned the 'bargain' Blair and Brown struck with the City.
Well it turned out that 'bargain' included a bailout for the London bankers while the rest of the country was left to sink or swim on their own.
The last Labour government didn't disappoint. It betrayed.
I like to think he would have something to say on MasterCard shutting down in Russia.
I know Neil Hudson a bit as his family comes from Epping, I am sure he will be fine, he is a good constituency MP
https://twitter.com/fbkinfo/status/1500475469581402115?t=q7mlRMcC1bnuPcczlYbrOw&s=19
Seems to be less police at the St Petersburg protests, but similar scale.
https://twitter.com/fbkinfo/status/1500469889064218625?t=RkWaEMWMzRBzwUUkKX63uQ&s=19
An example - one authority has a well developed energy management an procurement team, another does not. The second authority agrees to a merger of the two functions and derives the benefit of the former being able to achieve better energy deals for schools, residential homes etc.
The merging of senior roles is also happening - I know of one County authority whose head of Finance does the same job at one of the District Councils and the two finance functions are effectively merged.
@GuyReuters
U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BLINKEN SAYS U.S. IS TALKING TO EUROPEAN PARTNERS TO LOOK AT THE PROSPECT OF BANNING THE IMPORT OF RUSSIAN OIL
https://twitter.com/GuyReuters/status/1500476931174809602
Alternatively, someone could just charter a boat for them. They are refugees, they don't need visas.
Also, you clearly do need to be taught about averages.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t7v7mm/its_started_in_russia_in_nizhnekamsk_workers_of/
Tick tock, Vladimir.
How do people feel about £15 per gallon? (Smug gits with electric cars aside.)
It would be a complete reversal of localism, make government far less responsive to local concerns and require a huge transfer of civil servants from local councils to Whitehall control and one national council tax rate. However if you are going to do it that is what you would have to do
Then we have the failure to understand that productivity is a function of the individual, the company and the societal infrastructure around them. When you factor all of that in, wages are actually rather flat, in even moderately skilled jobs, around the world.
For example, I worked in a company, that due to mergers had IT development centres around the world. The most expensive was in Mumbai. The first-equal in cheapness - London. Cheapest in terms of functionality delivered per dollar spent.
The idea of moving to lower cost locations within the UK has actually arrived, finally, incidentally. A bunch of banks are setting up shop in Manchester, Liverpool and Birmingham. I haven't heard of Cardiff and surroundings, yet, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Competitive government - if your tax office is shit, switch to another one? Your local hospital killing old people? send Granny to the one across the road. St Thickchilds not educating your children? - send them to St WackEms......
Let a thousand, different, flowers bloom....
Amazing scenes from occupied Nova Kakhovka (pop: 45k). Looks like something out of a Ukrainian victory rally than a town under occupation.
https://twitter.com/hackingbutlegal/status/1500465032966062082?s=20&t=_IlRLfBcAN8rgcKQYUxb_A
I supported both May and Boris' deal and would have voted for both had I been an MP so I expect I will be OK.
I don't think anything I post here really makes me a 'closet LD' either
Until my dying day, sir,
That whatsoever Tory may reign
Still I'll be the Epping Forest Bray, sir.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkD33X9_HhE
If your grouping is strong you don't need to launch a crusade to seek out the enemy within, you attrach the ones you want and the strength of your values wins out anyway.
A retreat into internal spite is a sign of weakness, to shore up support for a leader among one faction.
"Why?"
"Virgn MegaDeath have a special on the 24 month contract - first 12 months are half price and I've done the figures. Still works out cheaper than Britannia Overkill"
Only seen clips of Der Brücke, is it worth watching if one only has minimal German?
It finally and utterly discredits the honours system.
The point being that "these days" usually implies the speaker remembers a time when things were different
A more inventive solution would be to have individual households opt in or out to a range of services. If you want your refuse collected weekly, fine but if you manage with a fortnightly collection, you can take a discount on your Council Tax and get your rubbish collected less frequently.
National provision of some local services does happen - schools teach to a nationally-agreed curriculum, residential homes should operate to nationally-agreed standards. Building regulations apply nationally and there's far more co-operation between authorities providing services than you might imagine.
Local Government isn't just about services either - issues such as planning have a local dimension or would every application for a loft extension have to go to the National Planning Authority?
As for up there being miles better than when I left, yes, but has it progressed as much as London & the Home Counties in that same time? The data says not. Also the place was so trashed under Thatcher it *had* to bounce back to some extent over time. Anyway, I like your bullishness about your (our) area - it's rare for you to be sunny-side up about anything. And all this 'grim up north' stuff can become a patronizing trope.
Parties will also obviously often prefer to put most new housing in areas represented by other parties' councillors rather than their own as far as possible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pcaHyYs8f4
And the pair at 3:45 are just plain weird - one has T-34 track but the other has something different, possibly old Pz II or III stuff. I think the tracks are any old junk mocked up to go round and round without actually doing anything.
Re the film as a whole, it seems possible to watch it in chunks with English subtitles though
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Die+Brücke+1959+Part+7
only a few years earlier the Czechs did a rather better job with plenty of real wartime armour from both sides in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rv0nFM_UjxQ
And of course that French film the Train blew up lots of old German armour when they crashed it.
I want to see Thomas Shelby get a knighthood, for services to industry and British ambition.