politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With the campaign just about to start new BES polling sugge
Comments
-
@SkyeHE: Ed Miliband rules out serving first term as Prime Minister http://t.co/Fe6UJB5YMu0
-
Tories need to get some future positives if you vote for the Tories to win this election.RobD said:
Expect more Salmond/Miliband posters.Freggles said:
So you can add SNP and Lab seats together, effectively, in terms of who forms the governmentantifrank said:Alex Salmond has now made explicit what everyone had assumed: the SNP would vote down a Conservative Queen Speech.
http://may2015.com/featured/exclusive-alex-salmond-says-snp-would-vote-down-the-tories-in-a-queens-speech/
More Austerity is not a winner IMO0 -
You would hope somebody at Labour / PR firm who did has checked this out and they didn't just grabbed an image off google. Have to wait and see.dr_spyn said:One for the bone doctors via Guido. That Labour poster with the x-ray.
http://order-order.com/2015/03/24/boneheaded-labour-poster-backfiring/
Is the analysis of the x-ray spot on?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11490702/Labour-accused-of-using-inappropriate-election-poster-image-of-potential-victim-of-child-abuse.html
Edit:- Just quick google searched...and one of the top images...
http://a.abcnews.com/images/Health/gty_broken_femur_bone_xray_thg_120510_wmain.jpg
So the answer probably is, yes the person who put together the poster just grabbed it off google.
0 -
If your book is anything like I think it is then back the Tories in some Lab-Con marginals I reckon.isam said:
Hmmmph... I backed LAB-SNP & LAB-LD-SNP... Looks like they are well underwater now on a technicality (I was warned)antifrank said:
Not quite. The SNP have not committed to vote on every English-only matter. So that bloc may have a majority for UK matters but not for English-only matters. That would suit the SNP very nicely indeed, but not so much Labour.Freggles said:
So you can add SNP and Lab seats together, effectively, in terms of who forms the governmentantifrank said:Alex Salmond has now made explicit what everyone had assumed: the SNP would vote down a Conservative Queen Speech.
http://may2015.com/featured/exclusive-alex-salmond-says-snp-would-vote-down-the-tories-in-a-queens-speech/
On Lab minority too so prepare for 5 more years of DC!0 -
Pretty much. The width of the epiphyseal plates indicate a child. The fracture at the lower end of the leg is older than the central one. For a child to have two breaks a few weeks apart (the first would have been very painful for weightbearing) in the same limb would be very suspicious of "non-accidental injury".dr_spyn said:One for the bone doctors via Guido. That Labour poster with the x-ray.
http://order-order.com/2015/03/24/boneheaded-labour-poster-backfiring/
Is the analysis of the x-ray spot on?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11490702/Labour-accused-of-using-inappropriate-election-poster-image-of-potential-victim-of-child-abuse.html
It is a stock photo, but like the Tory "road to recovery" the add agencies do not always think things through, and get the imaged sourced properly.0 -
That poster isn't more austerity - it's less Ed with Eck.bigjohnowls said:
Tories need to get some future positives if you vote for the Tories to win this election.RobD said:
Expect more Salmond/Miliband posters.Freggles said:
So you can add SNP and Lab seats together, effectively, in terms of who forms the governmentantifrank said:Alex Salmond has now made explicit what everyone had assumed: the SNP would vote down a Conservative Queen Speech.
http://may2015.com/featured/exclusive-alex-salmond-says-snp-would-vote-down-the-tories-in-a-queens-speech/
More Austerity is not a winner IMO0 -
Correct, except that you can't just ignore the starting position, nor the position in the economic cycle. There seems to be a creeping amnesia about the gobsmacking deficit the coalition inherited. I suppose in a way that is a testament to Osborne's success.Barnesian said:If GDP is growing at 3% pa, then government can run a deficit of 3% a year (i.e., borrow £60bn a year) and maintain a constant debt/GDP ratio. There is nothing admirable or desirable about eliminating the deficit if the economy is growing. But it should be invested in the future (education, R&D, infrastructure) rather than consumed now.
0 -
They've made Ed's dance look too elegant.TGOHF said:Missed this poster - featuring Eck as the eyes for pies piper ?
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/tories-unveil-poster-ed-miliband-dancing-alex-salmond-calling-tune0 -
There are many jobs I'd prefer not to do. It doesn't follow that they're poorly paid.SMukesh said:
Have you ever done a nurses` job?I wouldn`t do it for all the money in the world.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in the audience. The hubbub intensified.
Normally Mr Cameron does Q&A sessions in offices and factories, where audiences are on their best behaviour because their bosses are present. Unfortunately for him, retirees don’t have bosses.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.0 -
They are 15% poorer paid than in 2010 in real terms and pension contribution can be as much as 14.9% compared to 7.5% as well.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in the audience. The hubbub intensified.
Normally Mr Cameron does Q&A sessions in offices and factories, where audiences are on their best behaviour because their bosses are present. Unfortunately for him, retirees don’t have bosses.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
Of course if they work for an agency they are very well paid indeed hence the NHS financial problems0 -
CheersPulpstar said:
If your book is anything like I think it is then back the Tories in some Lab-Con marginals I reckon.isam said:
Hmmmph... I backed LAB-SNP & LAB-LD-SNP... Looks like they are well underwater now on a technicality (I was warned)antifrank said:
Not quite. The SNP have not committed to vote on every English-only matter. So that bloc may have a majority for UK matters but not for English-only matters. That would suit the SNP very nicely indeed, but not so much Labour.Freggles said:
So you can add SNP and Lab seats together, effectively, in terms of who forms the governmentantifrank said:Alex Salmond has now made explicit what everyone had assumed: the SNP would vote down a Conservative Queen Speech.
http://may2015.com/featured/exclusive-alex-salmond-says-snp-would-vote-down-the-tories-in-a-queens-speech/
On Lab minority too so prepare for 5 more years of DC!
Haven't gone too mad anyway
If Ukip break 10% and bt lib dems I prob break even
If they get 3-4 seat prob win a grand or so
If one if the seats is Thurrock then its a decent little earner0 -
A nurse starts at around 24 K per year.Sean_F said:
There are many jobs I'd prefer not to do. It doesn't follow that they're poorly paid.SMukesh said:
Have you ever done a nurses` job?I wouldn`t do it for all the money in the world.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in the audience. The hubbub intensified.
Normally Mr Cameron does Q&A sessions in offices and factories, where audiences are on their best behaviour because their bosses are present. Unfortunately for him, retirees don’t have bosses.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.0 -
It would seem that Labour have to offer the SNP precisely nothing, to form a government.Pulpstar said:
Except it is exactly the same as what Nicola has been saying ?TGOHF said:
Poor old Nicola - leader in name only..antifrank said:Alex Salmond has now made explicit what everyone had assumed: the SNP would vote down a Conservative Queen Speech.
http://may2015.com/featured/exclusive-alex-salmond-says-snp-would-vote-down-the-tories-in-a-queens-speech/
Anyway I think it backs up a point I made - Labour is more likely to put the Conservatives in power than the SNP, PC and Greens are. Specifically some of their backbenchers abstaining on a Tory Queen's speech...
0 -
I agree it means lower interest payments but at the cost of lower growth (assuming the borrowing is invested wisely). Paying down debt means you end up with a smaller cake albeit with a smaller slice taken out of it by the interest payments.RobD said:
Reducing the debt pile does have advantages- lower interest payments. I think we are spending half as much as we do on education on our interest.Barnesian said:
Borrowing is a good thing as long as it is sustainable. Without borrowing there is no saving. It should put funds to better use if properly managed.Richard_Nabavi said:
Have you ever tried renewing an overdraft using that logic?Danny565 said:That still doesn't address why, if it's so impossible to "live on borrowing", why RIGHT NOW we're "living on borrowing" and the sky ISN'T falling in.
This is what blue chip companies do that maintain a constant debt/equity gearing and borrow every year. It makes sense if you are growing and enables you to grow faster if you invest it in growth assets.
If GDP is growing at 3% pa, then government can run a deficit of 3% a year (i.e., borrow £60bn a year) and maintain a constant debt/GDP ratio. There is nothing admirable or desirable about eliminating the deficit if the economy is growing. But it should be invested in the future (education, R&D, infrastructure) rather than consumed now.
One's intuition on debt and deficit can be misleading. You need to do a simple financial model (eg in Excel) to see the effect of different assumptions.0 -
That doesn't sound too bad. That's about the median wage.SMukesh said:
A nurse starts at around 24 K per year.Sean_F said:
There are many jobs I'd prefer not to do. It doesn't follow that they're poorly paid.SMukesh said:
Have you ever done a nurses` job?I wouldn`t do it for all the money in the world.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in the audience. The hubbub intensified.
Normally Mr Cameron does Q&A sessions in offices and factories, where audiences are on their best behaviour because their bosses are present. Unfortunately for him, retirees don’t have bosses.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.0 -
Many nurses and theatre staff prefer to work agency. It is not just about pay, it is so they can work around other commitments such as childcare. Zero hour contracts if you please.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in the audience. The hubbub intensified.
Normally Mr Cameron does Q&A sessions in offices and factories, where audiences are on their best behaviour because their bosses are present. Unfortunately for him, retirees don’t have bosses.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
It suits some Trusts as it works to cover gaps. The extra pay is offset by flexibility and lower overheads. Agency staff do not get holiday, sickness or pension. Think of it as market forces.0 -
Comment on the NS site:
"A conspiracy theorist might wonder whether the Tories have decided just to cut their loses, and give up on the Union... They certainly seem intent on alienating the Scottish vote."
I think people don't realise just how hardcore the remaining Scots Tory vote is.0 -
Honestly, what will it take for EdM to become favourite to be next PM? It's looking pretty tight for most seats, but the Tories have to win that battle by some margin to make it impossible to govern without them. And unless they do it looks increasingly likely there will be some kind of left-wing deal.0
-
TSE gave me the same advice and now my gains/losses are likely to be a bit less unless something very strange happens.Pulpstar said:
If your book is anything like I think it is then back the Tories in some Lab-Con marginals I reckon.isam said:
Hmmmph... I backed LAB-SNP & LAB-LD-SNP... Looks like they are well underwater now on a technicality (I was warned)antifrank said:
Not quite. The SNP have not committed to vote on every English-only matter. So that bloc may have a majority for UK matters but not for English-only matters. That would suit the SNP very nicely indeed, but not so much Labour.Freggles said:
So you can add SNP and Lab seats together, effectively, in terms of who forms the governmentantifrank said:Alex Salmond has now made explicit what everyone had assumed: the SNP would vote down a Conservative Queen Speech.
http://may2015.com/featured/exclusive-alex-salmond-says-snp-would-vote-down-the-tories-in-a-queens-speech/
On Lab minority too so prepare for 5 more years of DC!0 -
That may well be the case - but they'll need to offer milk and honey to get anything through parliament other than the budget.Sean_F said:
It would seem that Labour have to offer the SNP precisely nothing, to form a government.Pulpstar said:
Except it is exactly the same as what Nicola has been saying ?TGOHF said:
Poor old Nicola - leader in name only..antifrank said:Alex Salmond has now made explicit what everyone had assumed: the SNP would vote down a Conservative Queen Speech.
http://may2015.com/featured/exclusive-alex-salmond-says-snp-would-vote-down-the-tories-in-a-queens-speech/
Anyway I think it backs up a point I made - Labour is more likely to put the Conservatives in power than the SNP, PC and Greens are. Specifically some of their backbenchers abstaining on a Tory Queen's speech...
How many votes does Ed want to make confidence ones, is he feeling lucky ?
0 -
And of course they get a pension scheme which, whilst not as massively generous as it used to be, is still very much more generous than anything they'd be likely to get in the private sector.Sean_F said:That doesn't sound too bad. That's about the median wage.
0 -
@tnewtondunn: 'As we settle down at a table, Salmond orders a bottle of pink champagne – “to toast my book”'; @NewStatesman. Man of the people.0
-
Was commenting on Pulpstar's avatar a few days ago. Yours is glorious!Scrapheap_as_was said:Stab me.
Another thread confirming the Tories can't win here.
0 -
It won't, whilst Warwick and Leamington is longer than Tory most seats. The overall market is 50 shades of wrong.Quincel said:Honestly, what will it take for EdM to become favourite to be next PM? It's looking pretty tight for most seats, but the Tories have to win that battle by some margin to make it impossible to govern without them. And unless they do it looks increasingly likely there will be some kind of left-wing deal.
0 -
I agree. You need to model it. I was keeping it simple. But the point (if not the exact numbers) is the same. It makes sense to continue to borrow if you invest it wisely in the future and maintain it at a sustainable level (which depends on growth, inflation, starting debt, impact of borrowing on future growth).rcs1000 said:
The maths are slightly more complicated than that :-)Barnesian said:
Borrowing is a good thing as long as it is sustainable. Without borrowing there is no saving. It should put funds to better use if properly managed.Richard_Nabavi said:
Have you ever tried renewing an overdraft using that logic?Danny565 said:That still doesn't address why, if it's so impossible to "live on borrowing", why RIGHT NOW we're "living on borrowing" and the sky ISN'T falling in.
This is what blue chip companies do that maintain a constant debt/equity gearing and borrow every year. It makes sense if you are growing and enables you to grow faster if you invest it in growth assets.
If GDP is growing at 3% pa, then government can run a deficit of 3% a year (i.e., borrow £60bn a year) and maintain a constant debt/GDP ratio. There is nothing admirable or desirable about eliminating the deficit if the economy is growing. But it should be invested in the future (education, R&D, infrastructure) rather than consumed now.
If your debt-to=GDP is 50%, and you run a 3% deficit, and growth is 3% and inflation 1%, then your nominal GDP increases 4% and therefore reduces your debt-to-GDP to 48%. If you then add on the 3% deficit, you get to 51% of GDP.
You need to consider both the starting debt level and the underlying level of inflation.
I feel the usual debate on the debt and deficit, led by Osborne, is quite naive economically, though probably not politically as it fools many people.0 -
From that comment it appears you are not well informed how much extra agency rates are compared to NHS Gross Cost. Unless Leicester has cracked the problemfoxinsoxuk said:
Many nurses and theatre staff prefer to work agency. It is not just about pay, it is so they can work around other commitments such as childcare. Zero hour contracts if you please.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in the audience. The hubbub intensified.
Normally Mr Cameron does Q&A sessions in offices and factories, where audiences are on their best behaviour because their bosses are present. Unfortunately for him, retirees don’t have bosses.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
It suits some Trusts as it works to cover gaps. The extra pay is offset by flexibility and lower overheads. Agency staff do not get holiday, sickness or pension. Think of it as market forces.
I suggest you go visit your DOF and ask him how much a Thornbridge shift costs.0 -
And where are the interest payments going? A lot of it to pension funds and other UK financial institutions and some of it back to the BoE (100% owned by HMG).RobD said:
Reducing the debt pile does have advantages- lower interest payments. I think we are spending half as much as we do on education on our interest.Barnesian said:
Borrowing is a good thing as long as it is sustainable. Without borrowing there is no saving. It should put funds to better use if properly managed.Richard_Nabavi said:
Have you ever tried renewing an overdraft using that logic?Danny565 said:That still doesn't address why, if it's so impossible to "live on borrowing", why RIGHT NOW we're "living on borrowing" and the sky ISN'T falling in.
This is what blue chip companies do that maintain a constant debt/equity gearing and borrow every year. It makes sense if you are growing and enables you to grow faster if you invest it in growth assets.
If GDP is growing at 3% pa, then government can run a deficit of 3% a year (i.e., borrow £60bn a year) and maintain a constant debt/GDP ratio. There is nothing admirable or desirable about eliminating the deficit if the economy is growing. But it should be invested in the future (education, R&D, infrastructure) rather than consumed now.
Interest payments are not lost money.0 -
A friend of mine is a mortgage broker, he was asked to do a mortgage for a couple that both worked for the NHS, one a nurse and the other a physio. Their joint earnings are just below £75,000, not exactly breadline is it?bigjohnowls said:
They are 15% poorer paid than in 2010 in real terms and pension contribution can be as much as 14.9% compared to 7.5% as well.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in the audience. The hubbub intensified.
Normally Mr Cameron does Q&A sessions in offices and factories, where audiences are on their best behaviour because their bosses are present. Unfortunately for him, retirees don’t have bosses.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
Of course if they work for an agency they are very well paid indeed hence the NHS financial problems0 -
So a taxpayer bung to the banks? Great!BenM said:
And where are the interest payments going? A lot of it to pension funds and other UK financial institutions and some of it back to the BoE (100% owned by HMG).RobD said:
Reducing the debt pile does have advantages- lower interest payments. I think we are spending half as much as we do on education on our interest.Barnesian said:
Borrowing is a good thing as long as it is sustainable. Without borrowing there is no saving. It should put funds to better use if properly managed.Richard_Nabavi said:
Have you ever tried renewing an overdraft using that logic?Danny565 said:That still doesn't address why, if it's so impossible to "live on borrowing", why RIGHT NOW we're "living on borrowing" and the sky ISN'T falling in.
This is what blue chip companies do that maintain a constant debt/equity gearing and borrow every year. It makes sense if you are growing and enables you to grow faster if you invest it in growth assets.
If GDP is growing at 3% pa, then government can run a deficit of 3% a year (i.e., borrow £60bn a year) and maintain a constant debt/GDP ratio. There is nothing admirable or desirable about eliminating the deficit if the economy is growing. But it should be invested in the future (education, R&D, infrastructure) rather than consumed now.
Interest payments are not lost money.
0 -
It is certainly expensive to fill some gaps (market forces...) and my Trust prefers to use zero hours bank staff where possible.bigjohnowls said:
From that comment it appears you are not well informed how much extra agency rates are compared to NHS Gross Cost. Unless Leicester has cracked the problemfoxinsoxuk said:
Many nurses and theatre staff prefer to work agency. It is not just about pay, it is so they can work around other commitments such as childcare. Zero hour contracts if you please.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in '
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
It suits some Trusts as it works to cover gaps. The extra pay is offset by flexibility and lower overheads. Agency staff do not get holiday, sickness or pension. Think of it as market forces.
I suggest you go visit your DOF and ask him how much a Thornbridge shift costs.
The reasons people work for agencies are not purely monetary though.0 -
Mr. F, my thoughts exactly [on pay].
We have a very serious problem with the deficit. Public sector workers have far higher job security than the private sector and better pensions (and higher average pay, I think). We need to find more, not fewer, areas to save money.0 -
The two largest areas of Government Spending (by some significant distance) are the NHS and State Pensions. Both are Universal Benefits which disproportionately benefit the wealthy.felix said:
Thick, thick, thick - we have zero inflation and are subject to EU rules on deficits not to mention the IMF etc, - there is no way we can borrow yet more to fund social services for the idle and feckless. You really need to grow up, or better still, move to Greece and try some real austerity.Danny565 said:
"Some voters" meaning three-quarters of the public?Richard_Nabavi said:
Just because some voters are living in cloud-cuckoo land, that doesn't necessarily mean that a political party claiming it is fit to be in power in six weeks' time would be well-advised to agree with them. Quite apart from anything else, politics doesn't end on May 8th 2015. There's a risk, after all, that Labour might actually win the election - and then what would they do?Danny565 said:"BES data, adds Professor Green, shows most voters think cuts in public spending have gone too far. And only 25% consider it ‘absolutely necessary’ to cut the deficit."
It's a good job Labour haven't decided to swallow the whole Tory narrative on the deficit/cuts that only 25% of the public agree with, then. (/sarcasm)
What Labour could do if they win the election is to do what governments have done for something like 100 of the last 150 years (including most of Thatcher's years in office, and indeed the past 5 years): not worry about running a relatively modest deficit, watch the sky NOT fall in despite some initial hysterical scaremongering, and instead focus on looking after the British people and the public services they depend on.0 -
Why do you think NHS agency costs have quintupled since 2010?foxinsoxuk said:
It is certainly expensive to fill some gaps (market forces...) and my Trust prefers to use zero hours bank staff where possible.bigjohnowls said:
From that comment it appears you are not well informed how much extra agency rates are compared to NHS Gross Cost. Unless Leicester has cracked the problemfoxinsoxuk said:
.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in '
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
I suggest you go visit your DOF and ask him how much a Thornbridge shift costs.
The reasons people work for agencies are not purely monetary though.
You do not think better pay rates and NHS rates declining so much in real terms is the most important reason?0 -
Far higher job security in the public sector? A tacit admission the zillions of McJobs created by Osborne are massively insecure?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. F, my thoughts exactly [on pay].
We have a very serious problem with the deficit. Public sector workers have far higher job security than the private sector and better pensions (and higher average pay, I think). We need to find more, not fewer, areas to save money.0 -
Well done the French - they've got the black box of the A320...0
-
Mark Duggan was probably throwing a handgun away when he was shot by officers, the police watchdog has said. Its three-and-a-half-year investigation cleared the Metropolitan Police of any wrongdoing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-32041119
Thug life....0 -
At least they won't be able to retire in their early fifties and cost the country a fortune for the next 30 odd years.bigjohnowls said:
Why do you think NHS agency costs have quintupled since 2010?foxinsoxuk said:
It is certainly expensive to fill some gaps (market forces...) and my Trust prefers to use zero hours bank staff where possible.bigjohnowls said:
From that comment it appears you are not well informed how much extra agency rates are compared to NHS Gross Cost. Unless Leicester has cracked the problemfoxinsoxuk said:
.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in '
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
I suggest you go visit your DOF and ask him how much a Thornbridge shift costs.
The reasons people work for agencies are not purely monetary though.
You do not think better pay rates and NHS rates declining so much in real terms is the most important reason?0 -
Your overdraft can only be repaid with your income (which for most individuals is generally fixed). Government Debt can be repaid from growing it's income, deflating the debt or by paying of chunks of cash.Richard_Nabavi said:
Have you ever tried renewing an overdraft using that logic?Danny565 said:That still doesn't address why, if it's so impossible to "live on borrowing", why RIGHT NOW we're "living on borrowing" and the sky ISN'T falling in.
Fiscally there is no imperative for debt reduction at this time. And given that the max sustainable Debt to GDP ratio for the United Kingdom should be far more like Japan than Greece (which it is already higher than), even external shocks would give the UK plenty of leeway.
Put it this way. The UK government could survive TWO 2008 Recessions and still be able to fund higher fiscal spending than current levels.0 -
Mr. M, I don't think it's a revelation that the odds on a teacher having a job [provided they don't act in some horrendous way] from one year to the next is better than a chap working in a shop.0
-
That Scottish Sun headline:
Wee Mili Winkie.
Best ever.0 -
@JohnRentoul: Not the first time Alex Salmond has compared himself to Nelson Mandela http://t.co/rmNbFkCBoU
Shy, retiring, out of the limelight...0 -
This has been explained to you many, many times on this site. I refuse to believe you are completely incapable of understanding the simple explanations repeatedly given to you using very small words.Danny565 said:
That still doesn't address why, if it's so impossible to "live on borrowing", why RIGHT NOW we're "living on borrowing" and the sky ISN'T falling in.felix said:
You cannot live on borrowing without impoverishing the future. I'm not going to bother arguing further with you as it is clearly pointless. You'll never get it.Danny565 said:
Then how come we're able to borrow RIGHT NOW? Why are MORE cuts necessary when there are no problems securing borrowing for the level of current spending? And I'm afraid I'm not going to buy that the markets have some supreme faith in the mythical powers of George Osborne which means they can swallow fiscal policies that they wouldn't swallow from other governments pursuing the same ones.felix said:
Thick, thick, thick - we have zero inflation and are subject to EU rules on deficits not to mention the IMF etc, - there is no way we can borrow yet more to fund social services for the idle and feckless. You really need to grow up, or better still, move to Greece and try some real austerity.Danny565 said:
"Some voters" meaning three-quarters of the public?Richard_Nabavi said:
Just because some voters are living in cloud-cuckoo land, that doesn't necessarily mean that a political party claiming it is fit to be in power in six weeks' time would be well-advised to agree with them. Quite apart from anything else, politics doesn't end on May 8th 2015. There's a risk, after all, that Labour might actually win the election - and then what would they do?Danny565 said:"BES data, adds Professor Green, shows most voters think cuts in public spending have gone too far. And only 25% consider it ‘absolutely necessary’ to cut the deficit."
It's a good job Labour haven't decided to swallow the whole Tory narrative on the deficit/cuts that only 25% of the public agree with, then. (/sarcasm)
What Labour could do if they win the election is to do what governments have done for something like 100 of the last 150 years (including most of Thatcher's years in office, and indeed the past 5 years): not worry about running a relatively modest deficit, watch the sky NOT fall in despite some initial hysterical scaremongering, and instead focus on looking after the British people and the public services they depend on.
0 -
Apparently Lynton Crosby appearing in a live Q&A tomorrow morning
@SamCoatesTimes: A Labour source said they are "deciding how to staff" the Crosby event0 -
And this from the poster who believes that the UK is bankrupt in the long-run because it cant afford its pension obligations. The mind boggles.Dair said:
Put it this way. The UK government could survive TWO 2008 Recessions and still be able to fund higher fiscal spending than current levels.0 -
A qualified Physio and a qualified nurse would both typically be band 5.nigel4england said:
A friend of mine is a mortgage broker, he was asked to do a mortgage for a couple that both worked for the NHS, one a nurse and the other a physio. Their joint earnings are just below £75,000, not exactly breadline is it?bigjohnowls said:
They are 15% poorer paid than in 2010 in real terms and pension contribution can be as much as 14.9% compared to 7.5% as well.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in the audience. The hubbub intensified.
Normally Mr Cameron does Q&A sessions in offices and factories, where audiences are on their best behaviour because their bosses are present. Unfortunately for him, retirees don’t have bosses.'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
Of course if they work for an agency they are very well paid indeed hence the NHS financial problems
Unless they work unsocial hours their salary each would range from £21,478 to£27,901, the latter after 7 years qualifed. Still some way short of what your friend says unless they are boosting pay with agency shifts0 -
duplicate0
-
SMukesh said:
Have you ever done a nurses` job?I wouldn`t do it for all the money in the world.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
”
“We are!” shouted a man in the audience. The hubbub intensified.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
Is the dim left getting dimmer? I cannot imagine what it must be like to have the mindset of someone who thinks that either of those points, is actually a point.BenM said:
And where are the interest payments going? A lot of it to pension funds and other UK financial institutions and some of it back to the BoE (100% owned by HMG).RobD said:
Reducing the debt pile does have advantages- lower interest payments. I think we are spending half as much as we do on education on our interest.Barnesian said:
Borrowing is a good thing as long as it is sustainable. Without borrowing there is no saving. It should put funds to better use if properly managed.Richard_Nabavi said:
Have you ever tried renewing an overdraft using that logic?Danny565 said:That still doesn't address why, if it's so impossible to "live on borrowing", why RIGHT NOW we're "living on borrowing" and the sky ISN'T falling in.
This is what blue chip companies do that maintain a constant debt/equity gearing and borrow every year. It makes sense if you are growing and enables you to grow faster if you invest it in growth assets.
med now.
Interest payments are not lost money.
0 -
Maybe Alex is a good choreographer and skilled coach.Richard_Nabavi said:
They've made Ed's dance look too elegant.TGOHF said:Missed this poster - featuring Eck as the eyes for pies piper ?
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/tories-unveil-poster-ed-miliband-dancing-alex-salmond-calling-tune0 -
"Fiscally there is no imperative for debt reduction at this time."Dair said:
Your overdraft can only be repaid with your income (which for most individuals is generally fixed). Government Debt can be repaid from growing it's income, deflating the debt or by paying of chunks of cash.Richard_Nabavi said:
Have you ever tried renewing an overdraft using that logic?Danny565 said:That still doesn't address why, if it's so impossible to "live on borrowing", why RIGHT NOW we're "living on borrowing" and the sky ISN'T falling in.
Fiscally there is no imperative for debt reduction at this time. And given that the max sustainable Debt to GDP ratio for the United Kingdom should be far more like Japan than Greece (which it is already higher than), even external shocks would give the UK plenty of leeway.
Put it this way. The UK government could survive TWO 2008 Recessions and still be able to fund higher fiscal spending than current levels.
What? Weren't you saying a few weeks ago that the UK is bankrupt?0 -
@BJO
I am not saying pay is not part of the explanation, but there are other reasons.
I mentioned the desire to work zero hours and flexibly. In addition there are skill shortages in particular areas, particularly less glamorous areas.
It is now very difficult for non -EU staff to get visas, and even EU staff find it difficult to navigate the bureaucracy so prefer to work via an agency that handles all that hassle.
Good staff are in demand, and even indifferent staff are needed to keep the wheels turning in Grimetown casualty on Saturday night.
Better pay is only part of the story. There are a number of other ways to recruit and retain staff, including being flexible and respectful of their desires. The same is true of all employers.
0 -
I think the problem with the Scottish Tory vote is not how solid it is. It's the size. In Politics, much as the rest of life, size matters.Pulpstar said:Comment on the NS site:
"A conspiracy theorist might wonder whether the Tories have decided just to cut their loses, and give up on the Union... They certainly seem intent on alienating the Scottish vote."
I think people don't realise just how hardcore the remaining Scots Tory vote is.0 -
On topic. That final statistic is shocking. Further convinces me that a majority of the public don't have a decent understanding of economics/politics/public policy.
No wonder the magic-money tree party gets in every now and again....0 -
Indeed. One of the more intelligent remarks I have seen on this especially when compared with some of the tripe being spouted by the Tories. There are some interesting subtleties which emerge from that start, for instance the increased pressure to define what is an English-only matter and what isn't, and how the solution might (or might not) differ for Labour and the Tories if they become English'n'Welsh parties as far as Westminster is concerned. But we have to be in that position first before we need worry about it.antifrank said:
Not quite. The SNP have not committed to vote on every English-only matter. So that bloc may have a majority for UK matters but not for English-only matters. That would suit the SNP very nicely indeed, but not so much Labour.Freggles said:
So you can add SNP and Lab seats together, effectively, in terms of who forms the governmentantifrank said:Alex Salmond has now made explicit what everyone had assumed: the SNP would vote down a Conservative Queen Speech.
http://may2015.com/featured/exclusive-alex-salmond-says-snp-would-vote-down-the-tories-in-a-queens-speech/
0 -
Has he blown up the Flying Scotsman yet? If he does he'd better hope for someone like Margaret Thatcher who persuaded the African Government not to dispose of him.Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Not the first time Alex Salmond has compared himself to Nelson Mandela http://t.co/rmNbFkCBoU
Shy, retiring, out of the limelight...0 -
Salmond is playing his role in this so damn well. It's working perfectly.Scott_P said:@tnewtondunn: 'As we settle down at a table, Salmond orders a bottle of pink champagne – “to toast my book”'; @NewStatesman. Man of the people.
Right now the Westminster media should be 100% focused on how well Sturgeon is playing with average English votes (highest rated leader UK wide) and how intelligent yet still popular she comes across.
But they're completely taken in by the McGuffin.
They won't even see Nicola coming.0 -
Mr. Mortimer, quite.0
-
No, they won't, cause Salmond won't get off the telly!Dair said:
Salmond is playing his role in this so damn well. It's working perfectly.Scott_P said:@tnewtondunn: 'As we settle down at a table, Salmond orders a bottle of pink champagne – “to toast my book”'; @NewStatesman. Man of the people.
Right now the Westminster media should be 100% focused on how well Sturgeon is playing with average English votes (highest rated leader UK wide) and how intelligent yet still popular she comes across.
But they're completely taken in by the McGuffin.
They won't even see Nicola coming.0 -
Big enough to deny Labour heading into the 30s if the SNP are over 42 or so ;pDair said:
I think the problem with the Scottish Tory vote is not how solid it is. It's the size. In Politics, much as the rest of life, size matters.Pulpstar said:Comment on the NS site:
"A conspiracy theorist might wonder whether the Tories have decided just to cut their loses, and give up on the Union... They certainly seem intent on alienating the Scottish vote."
I think people don't realise just how hardcore the remaining Scots Tory vote is.0 -
Politics of Envy? Perhaps you should be putting more into your pension pot.nigel4england said:
At least they won't be able to retire in their early fifties and cost the country a fortune for the next 30 odd years.bigjohnowls said:
Why do you think NHS agency costs have quintupled since 2010?foxinsoxuk said:
It is certainly expensive to fill some gaps (market forces...) and my Trust prefers to use zero hours bank staff where possible.bigjohnowls said:foxinsoxuk said:
.Sean_F said:
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.bigjohnowls said:
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.isam said:Cameron avoided the debates to do Q&A's didn't he?
Hasn't done all that well today...
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in '
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
I suggest you go visit your DOF and ask him how much a Thornbridge shift costs.
The reasons people work for agencies are not purely monetary though.
You do not think better pay rates and NHS rates declining so much in real terms is the most important reason?
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work0 -
Even what little I can see of that article makes it clear that that is not the comparison - and may be an old article from last year anyway.Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Not the first time Alex Salmond has compared himself to Nelson Mandela http://t.co/rmNbFkCBoU
Shy, retiring, out of the limelight...
0 -
Well they will be if Labour get in.BenM said:
Far higher job security in the public sector? A tacit admission the zillions of McJobs created by Osborne are massively insecure?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. F, my thoughts exactly [on pay].
We have a very serious problem with the deficit. Public sector workers have far higher job security than the private sector and better pensions (and higher average pay, I think). We need to find more, not fewer, areas to save money.0 -
I thought you worked in finance? Isnt there a requirement to be numerate in such a position?bigjohnowls said:
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work0 -
It is bankrupt in the long run. We aren't in the long run, we are in the short run and talking about the ability of the UK to borrow money.Neil said:
And this from the poster who believes that the UK is bankrupt in the long-run because it cant afford its pension obligations. The mind boggles.Dair said:
Put it this way. The UK government could survive TWO 2008 Recessions and still be able to fund higher fiscal spending than current levels.
The unfunded pension obligations however will bankrupt the UK whether national debt is 80% of GDP or 220% like Japan or 0%. Because they are currently 450%.0 -
<
'The speech passed without incident. His problems began during the subsequent Q&A, just as he was breezing his way through an answer about NHS agency staff.
“Excuse me!” cut in the man who’d asked him about it. “You haven’t answered my question!”
Mildly startled – as if a sleepy old tabby he was stroking had hissed at him – Mr Cameron tried not answering the question in a different way. But the heckle seemed to have awoken something in the audience. There was now a growing hubbub of unrest.
“Rubbish!” shouted a voice. “Answer the question!” harrumphed another. “I am, sir!” blurted the Prime Minister. The audience didn’t seem convinced. A man with white hair sat irately shaking his stick.
“Look, I’ll be frank,” said Mr Cameron, switching tone from “harassed customer services” to “paternal authority”. “If you’re not satisfied with how elderly people are being looked after by this Government, don’t blame other ministers – blame me.”
“We are!” shouted a man in '
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron/11492472/Sketch-You-havent-answered-my-question-David-Cameron-gets-mugged-by-pensioners.html
I see the bloke who asked the original question raised the exact point that I have been banging on about for months. Drs and nurses leaving the NHS in massive numbers and only working via agencies at highly inflated rates.
5 years of pay freezes means people aren't prepared to work for NHS rates when can earn double prostituting their labour via agencies.
Tory solution 5 more years of pay freezes. They still don't get it.
Doctors and nurses aren't poorly paid.
.
I suggest you go visit your DOF and ask him how much a Thornbridge shift costs.
It is certainly expensive to fill some gaps (market forces...) and my Trust prefers to use zero hours bank staff where possible.
The reasons people work for agencies are not purely monetary though.
Why do you think NHS agency costs have quintupled since 2010?
You do not think better pay rates and NHS rates declining so much in real terms is the most important reason?
At least they won't be able to retire in their early fifties and cost the country a fortune for the next 30 odd years.
Politics of Envy? Perhaps you should be putting more into your pension pot.
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work
Why are there so many agency workers then? Something doesn't add up.0 -
How date you imply such a thing about St Mark of TottenhamFrancisUrquhart said:Mark Duggan was probably throwing a handgun away when he was shot by officers, the police watchdog has said. Its three-and-a-half-year investigation cleared the Metropolitan Police of any wrongdoing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-32041119
Thug life....0 -
On what would you say a Government should 'invest' the higher borrowing?Barnesian said:
I agree it means lower interest payments but at the cost of lower growth (assuming the borrowing is invested wisely). Paying down debt means you end up with a smaller cake albeit with a smaller slice taken out of it by the interest payments.RobD said:
Reducing the debt pile does have advantages- lower interest payments. I think we are spending half as much as we do on education on our interest.Barnesian said:
Borrowing is a good thing as long as it is sustainable. Without borrowing there is no saving. It should put funds to better use if properly managed.Richard_Nabavi said:
Have you ever tried renewing an overdraft using that logic?Danny565 said:That still doesn't address why, if it's so impossible to "live on borrowing", why RIGHT NOW we're "living on borrowing" and the sky ISN'T falling in.
This is what blue chip companies do that maintain a constant debt/equity gearing and borrow every year. It makes sense if you are growing and enables you to grow faster if you invest it in growth assets.
If GDP is growing at 3% pa, then government can run a deficit of 3% a year (i.e., borrow £60bn a year) and maintain a constant debt/GDP ratio. There is nothing admirable or desirable about eliminating the deficit if the economy is growing. But it should be invested in the future (education, R&D, infrastructure) rather than consumed now.
One's intuition on debt and deficit can be misleading. You need to do a simple financial model (eg in Excel) to see the effect of different assumptions.0 -
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/24/labour-scotland-scots-snp-nationalism-18-yearsScott_P said:Interesting article on Labour's woes in Scotland. Written with an SNP slant, but it does contain this gem
Labour is trying to play two games at once, and losing. Jim Murphy’s leadership has failed to budge the polls, while Ed Miliband – lacking in integrity and full of air – continues to project as much clout as a BHS bag flapping on a branch.
Thanks - had missed that. To be precise, it's not a SNP slant, more a Radical Independence one (i.e. from the other side from Labour and the LDs).
0 -
Your posts are consistently entertaining.Dair said:
It is bankrupt in the long run. We aren't in the long run, we are in the short run and talking about the ability of the UK to borrow money.Neil said:
And this from the poster who believes that the UK is bankrupt in the long-run because it cant afford its pension obligations. The mind boggles.Dair said:
Put it this way. The UK government could survive TWO 2008 Recessions and still be able to fund higher fiscal spending than current levels.
The unfunded pension obligations however will bankrupt the UK whether national debt is 80% of GDP or 220% like Japan or 0%. Because they are currently 450%.
0 -
In case you haven't seen it, here is the video from the crash site:RodCrosby said:Well done the French - they've got the black box of the A320...
http://www.francetvinfo.fr/faits-divers/accident/crash-dans-les-alpes/video-francetv-crash-dans-les-alpes-les-premieres-images-des-debris_857811.html0 -
Pilot/Computer error (again) would surely be the kiss of death for these birds...weejonnie said:
It will take some time to analyse. What would be worse for Lufthansa - explosive decompression to weakness caused by age of aircraft (24 years old) or a terrorist attack?RodCrosby said:Well done the French - they've got the black box of the A320...
0 -
Live as a gangsta, die as a gangsta...isam said:
How date you imply such a thing about St Mark of TottenhamFrancisUrquhart said:Mark Duggan was probably throwing a handgun away when he was shot by officers, the police watchdog has said. Its three-and-a-half-year investigation cleared the Metropolitan Police of any wrongdoing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-32041119
Thug life....0 -
@sunny_hundal: House of Commons Library: The SNP voted with the Tories 64% of the time between 2001 and 2005 and 71% of the time between 2005 and 20100
-
I have to say that's the first time the Tories (by which I think bigjohn means the coalition) has been accused of making the NHS scheme more generous. The unions seem to have been most ungrateful for this largesse.Neil said:
I thought you worked in finance? Isnt there a requirement to be numerate in such a position?bigjohnowls said:
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work0 -
removed0
-
I am sure the investigation will be quicker than MH17.RodCrosby said:Well done the French - they've got the black box of the A320...
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/14/us-intel-stands-pat-on-mh-17-shoot-down/0 -
@May2015NS: Tory HQ's response to Salmond. (Re @NewStatesman's story: "SNP will vote against Tories" http://t.co/zwlu8tbNZv) http://t.co/otcsL1waUV0
-
Be interesting to know what the equivalent for other parties is. Many of thise would have been to protect fluffy kittens, allow gay marriage, etc.Scott_P said:@sunny_hundal: House of Commons Library: The SNP voted with the Tories 64% of the time between 2001 and 2005 and 71% of the time between 2005 and 2010
(Who is Mr Hundai anyway?)
0 -
It's almost as if they were both in opposition at the time.Scott_P said:@sunny_hundal: House of Commons Library: The SNP voted with the Tories 64% of the time between 2001 and 2005 and 71% of the time between 2005 and 2010
0 -
Charming. So Tories are 'democratic' when they have power with fewer seats than other parties?Scott_P said:@May2015NS: Tory HQ's response to Salmond. (Re @NewStatesman's story: "SNP will vote against Tories" http://t.co/zwlu8tbNZv) http://t.co/otcsL1waUV
0 -
-
Why?Neil said:
I thought you worked in finance? Isnt there a requirement to be numerate in such a position?bigjohnowls said:
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work
What are you talking about?0 -
That was a minority administration open to being voted out.Scott_P said:
Like the SNP in Holyrood. Or were they not 'democratic'?Carnyx said:So Tories are 'democratic' when they have power with fewer seats than other parties?
The Tory message is that the Tories have the right to rule never mind if they are voted out by superior numbers. Think about it.
0 -
Because it would be nice if the finance guy understood numbers?bigjohnowls said:
Why?Neil said:
I thought you worked in finance? Isnt there a requirement to be numerate in such a position?bigjohnowls said:
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work
What are you talking about?
0 -
Unbelievable, isn't it? The democratic will of the British people is apparently to have a Tory government even if they do not vote for one. What extraordinary arrogance.Carnyx said:
Charming. So Tories are 'democratic' when they have power with fewer seats than other parties?Scott_P said:@May2015NS: Tory HQ's response to Salmond. (Re @NewStatesman's story: "SNP will vote against Tories" http://t.co/zwlu8tbNZv) http://t.co/otcsL1waUV
0 -
I think the calculation is that the arrogance of the message will be trumped by Tony's Tories and soft UKIPpers being terrified of Alex and Ed by it.Carnyx said:
That was a minority administration open to being voted out.Scott_P said:
Like the SNP in Holyrood. Or were they not 'democratic'?Carnyx said:So Tories are 'democratic' when they have power with fewer seats than other parties?
The Tory message is that the Tories have the right to rule never mind if they are voted out by superior numbers. Think about it.
Classic Crosby.
0 -
Have I ever said that the pension changes were anything other than generous? The unions managed to negotiate a great dealRichard_Nabavi said:
I have to say that's the first time the Tories (by which I think bigjohn means the coalition) has been accused of making the NHS scheme more generous. The unions seem to have been most ungrateful for this largesse.Neil said:
I thought you worked in finance? Isnt there a requirement to be numerate in such a position?bigjohnowls said:
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work
0 -
I do thanksNeil said:
Because it would be nice if the finance guy understood numbers?bigjohnowls said:
Why?Neil said:
I thought you worked in finance? Isnt there a requirement to be numerate in such a position?bigjohnowls said:
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work
What are you talking about?0 -
I notice Salmond is doing a lot of media. Spare a thought for poor Angus Robertson who is supposed to be the SNP leader at Westminster. Clearly not for much longer if Salmond gets his way...Scott_P said:@May2015NS: Tory HQ's response to Salmond. (Re @NewStatesman's story: "SNP will vote against Tories" http://t.co/zwlu8tbNZv) http://t.co/otcsL1waUV
0 -
I'm happy for him to spend 27 years doing hard labour on Robbin Island if he wants to make it a fair comparison....Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Not the first time Alex Salmond has compared himself to Nelson Mandela http://t.co/rmNbFkCBoU
Shy, retiring, out of the limelight...
0 -
I heard yesterday that since this government came to power £88 billion of jobs have transferred from the public to the private sector.
It struck me as a non economist that the only reason for this must be to save money which presumably means the people doing those jobs getting less pay.
Isn't that just a con? And if it is as it sounds wouldn't that explain why this government is shedding votes like a molting Fox when on the surface they seem to be doing well?0 -
You do know he has a book to sell right?Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Not the first time Alex Salmond has compared himself to Nelson Mandela http://t.co/rmNbFkCBoU
Shy, retiring, out of the limelight...
0 -
The accrual tate is better, but the postponement of retirement age, use of career average earnings instead of final salary and reductions in lump sum make the overall scheme less generous than the earlier schemes. Still pretty good, but the 14.7% employee contributions are a lot steeper too.bigjohnowls said:
Have I ever said that the pension changes were anything other than generous? The unions managed to negotiate a great dealRichard_Nabavi said:
I have to say that's the first time the Tories (by which I think bigjohn means the coalition) has been accused of making the NHS scheme more generous. The unions seem to have been most ungrateful for this largesse.Neil said:
I thought you worked in finance? Isnt there a requirement to be numerate in such a position?bigjohnowls said:
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work0 -
In terms of the whole independence argument, it seems very hypocritical to want to leave a country and also attempt to govern it at the same time. The decent thing to do seems to be the line Sinn Fein take: stand for election in order to prove their support, but refuse to take their seats.0
-
The evidence isnt supporting you in this case I'm afraid.bigjohnowls said:
I do thanksNeil said:
Because it would be nice if the finance guy understood numbers?bigjohnowls said:
Why?Neil said:
I thought you worked in finance? Isnt there a requirement to be numerate in such a position?bigjohnowls said:
You realise the changes to the NHS scheme under the Tories make it even more generous do you From April 2015 get 1/54th of salary instead of 1/80th for each year of work
What are you talking about?
0 -
I take it you mean 2007-2011 as 2011 gave the SNP an absolute majority of seats with a share of the vote higher than any UK Government since the 1960s.Scott_P said:
Like the SNP in Holyrood. Or were they not 'democratic'?Carnyx said:So Tories are 'democratic' when they have power with fewer seats than other parties?
The SNP minority administration had 47 seats. Labour had 46, Tories 17, Liberals 16, Greens 2 and Margo MacDonald.
With a C&S agreement with the Greens and VbV support from MacDonald, they had 50 seats in a parliament of 125. They delivered their policies with the support of parties which could have voted them out at any time. They only lost one major fight when the Tories, Labour and Liberals grouped together to continue funding Edinburgh Trams.
The rest of the time they had to work very hard to build consensus for their budgets and policies and succeeded in doing so for the entire 4 years of the parliament. It also meant that every single vote that passed not only had a majority of MPs it had 50% of voters represented by the parties which then voted for the motions. That was an incredible display of democracy in action and consensus building, it was a near miracle.
That alone should have sent a clear message to the Westminster Bubble, their failure to see what was happening makes it no surprise Westminster Parties are were they are today.0 -
Hain, Salmond or Rentoul :P ?Alistair said:
You do know he has a book to sell right?Scott_P said:@JohnRentoul: Not the first time Alex Salmond has compared himself to Nelson Mandela http://t.co/rmNbFkCBoU
Shy, retiring, out of the limelight...0
