It seem that the EU is adamant that it will appoint Jean-Claude Juncker as president. He is a federalist who is likely not to encourage any reform but to demand closer ties and centralisation of power.
David Cameron is dependant on his pledge to give a referendum on Europe and his hope that he could negotiate changes that would see some of the powers come back to the government. Now it seems those are unlikely to take place although the conservatives are still likely to take a majority win in the election in 2015 with a referendum in 2017.
Many voters in this country will start eyeing an exit.
So here is the conundrum that Cameron is in
Because of his refusal to accept, or his insistence that Junkers should not be president he has become isolated amongst the leaders in the EU, it is unlikely that he will be able to negotiate anything of substance so how will he play it with the British electorate.
Will he withdraw his promise of a referendum
A. Before the election
B. After the election
Or will he proclaim that it wasn't his fault and it would be silly to have a referendum at this time.
Why should the Conservatives take a majority in 2015?
They didn't in 2010 and their popularity has diminished considerably in the five years.
Well not that I am looking forward to it John but the Labour party is in disarray with its leader, the Liberals are in the same mess and UKIP will take votes from all of them. I have read a few political forecasts and they have said we are heading for another coalition or a slight majority in favour of the Conservatives, this maybe down to the fact that it is perceived Cameron is standing up to the EU. (?)
I know there are many variants that could affect the next elections with the biggest being a yes vote on Scottish independence, if Labour did win in that scenario they would have to hold another election when Scotland di become independent because of the 49 MP's with Scottish seats. That would undoubtedly put the Labour party at a disadvantage and ensure a Conservative government for years to come.
The other things that may affect the election is they may decide they need a new leader or continue to be against a referendum on Europe.
The point I was making that the Conservatives did not have a majority in 2010 and are even less likely to in 2015.
The libdems are a spent force and will be in no position to prop up the Conservatives so who will be conned into propping them up?
BTW, the labour party is not against a referendum, they just admit that it is unlikely to happen.
If the Labour party is not against a referendum why would they say it is unlikely to happen? Is it because they wont provide one because they are against it! Or is it because they wont provide one because they know the outcome?
As for your point about 2010 of course you are right, but as Labour cant capitalise on that fact and will be unable to gain a majority themselves I doubt if the government will change in 2015.
I bet labour are praying for a NO vote in the Scottish independence referendum.
Well we're really up against a brick wall here. Whoever gains a majority by combining with whatever other party will produce exactly the same outcome, anther five years of neo liberal policies and another five years of preferential treatment for the haves and five more years of abuse for the rest.
I think it will be quite interesting, as "may you live in interesting times". I'm not looking forward to it.
I think you are right John, whether Labour or the Conservatives take control again it will be pretty much the same old same old.
As I said I was just wondering how the Europhile Cameron will get out of offering the said referendum he promised....
Hopefully he's banking on it not being his problem
None of them have a problem with saying what they think people want to hear and then totally ignoring it, (and that goes for Farage as well).
There is a lot to be said for voting Green if you want out of the EU
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk … party.html
You see John what I take from reading the link is that the greens are running a little scared as well.
People are fed up with what left wing politics have done to this country, that is why they are considering voting for something completely different.
I have to concede UKIP have little chance of winning outright control of parliament and as such would not be able to bring about the Brexit just yet, but in the same instance the green party has little chance of it either.
As for the renationalisation issue I don't think it would be any better than it is now. Who will pay for that renationalisation? And when the workers of those industries once again return to their culture of strikes who will be the ones who will pay?
I personally wouldn't want the renationalisation of any industry, however I would like to see a government who's regulatory bodies seem to have some teeth, Ofgem are like an old women with no teeth trying to bite open a walnut.
I'm puzzled, why should people be fed up with what left wing politics have done to this country when we have not had any left wing politics in this country for over 35 years?
They aren't considering voting for something completely different, people are considering voting for more of the same but more intently.
My point about the Greens is that they offer much of what UKIP offers but without the homage to the bankers.
Who would pay for renationalisation? Why! The very people who are paying and paying again for the denationalised industries.
Why are hours lost to strikes bad while the many more hours lost to unemployment good?
So you say John but then you have a different slant on things then the normal electorate, they believe when they are voting for Labour they are voting for left wing policies and if they vote for the Conservatives they are voting right wing policies.
No John they believe they are voting for someone who is actually listening to them. Whilst in the past when concerns were raised they were called racist or illiterate (usually pertaining to finance).
I am not to sure what they offer John, no doubt some of it is good but if they are any way to the left I wouldn't really bother voting for them.
The taxpayer again! Then we would have to pay the fantastic wages and pensions of the government workers once more. So it doesn't matter who owns it then does it as it makes no difference to the customer.
Your last statement is quite silly really John. Lost hours through unemployment are not really lost hours and although its not good for the unemployed it doesn't affect those who do have a job. however those hours lost to strike action doesn't only affect the employer, it affects the employee, the unemployed, the man trying to get to work on the train or the bus etc etc.
But you forget that Blair got into power by declaring that he admired Thatcher and would continue with her policies. That is not left wing at all. There is no substantial diffence between Labour and Conservative policies demonstrated by the fact that Labour has supported some of the governments worst and most divisive acts.
If you truly believe that one public school boy and ex banker is any more likely to listen to you than another public school boy and ex banker, you are sadly mistaken.
Have you read the Ragged Trousered Philanthropists? If not you should read it and stop being one.
But you already pay the fantastic wages and pensions of them running the utilities!
The much lower bills without the huge bonuses and the regular shareholder dividends would make a considerable difference to the customer.
Hours lost through unemployment are not lost hours! Good lord! What are they then-buffalo's in tutus?
What hours are lost through unemployment? Who are the hours lost too? As the unemployed get paid (especially in this country) haven't they gained freetime hours?
I must agree John the labour party and its cousin the conservative party are all for the government worker, they don't really care what happens to anyone else.
Not really into socialist rags John, never really liked works with the plot based around the its everyone else's fault idea.
It would undoubtedly be much worse under nationalisation!
Hours lost through unemployment? Per week, 40 x (the number of unemployed). Do it by the year and it's really frightening.
Have you any idea how many government workers have been thrown on the scrap heap during this so called austerity drive? Clue, it's in the hundreds of thousands.
But I thought as a U Kipper you firmly believed that it's everyone else's fault! That is if every one else is an immigrant! There is no "everybody else's fault in the RTP feel free to read it.
Why should it be worse under nationalisation?
There are no hours lost if there are no hours required, or are we talking about your unworkable socialist ideas?
Country has not come to a halt yet, maybe there were just to many government jobs!
Nice one John, Playing the racist card when you have no point at all, next you will be employing Godwin's law I suppose.
History denotes it.
So people lose their jobs but no hours of work are lost! You are really a politician aren't you?
You might not think that the country is grinding to a halt, many would disagree with you.
What racist card? Don't I remember you saying that discussing immigration was not racist?
History denotes what?
Yes John, if there is no job there are no hours lost. Now if their is a job and someone decided to strike then those hours are lost to that job.
The country has not ground to a halt, far from it, it seems to be pulling out of the mire labour left it in, mind you I am not to sure whether its the Tories or whether people in general have decided you don't get something for nothing.
So why imply that UKIP is racist by implying they are against immigration?
Of course discussing immigration is not racist and that's why we should be able to discuss it without the implication that we are racist.
Nationalised industries are strike prone.
But if there is a job and then there isn't a job, those hours of the countries productivity have been lost, or will you argue that they haven't?
I'm no fan of labour but to say that a hugely increased debt is "pulling out of the mire" then the faster we get back into the mire the better! But then I suppose you are another that believes that Brown caused the global recession all on his own!
But UKIP are against immigration, they've stated so time after time. Why did you immediately imply that I was being racist when I made a comment about immigration?
Nationalised industries are no more prone to strike than any others.
There is still no job and there for no hours lost. How would you define the hours of the jobs that are not filled yet then?
Gormless Brown was chancellor years before the crash, some of the policies he employed worsened the effect. If Labour would have been left in control they would have been out of control, inflation would have been rampant and we would have been going begging for high interest loans just to pay off the ever increasing debt to prop up the failure.
See John you have fallen for the old political trick of say something enough times and people begin to think that is the truth.
UKIP are against uncontrolled mass immigration. So I guess by your statement you are for it?
Strikes by nationalised industry workforces paralysed Britain in the winter of discontent which ironically brought Thatcher to power.
There is no job!! So what were all these people doing before they became unemployed? Remember a few posts ago you were celebrating all the government employees who'd lost their jobs. Now you're saying that they didn't!
It is you that has fallen for the say it often enough and it becomes the truth trick. The fact that you believe that things have improved under the Tories demonstrates that better than I ever could.
Keep guessing, by the law of averages one of your guesses will be correct one day.
You do realise that it wasn't only nationalised businesses that went on strike during the so called winter of discontent. Don't be swayed by the reluctance of the right wing press to report this, remember, if they say it often enough it doesn't make it the truth.
Then there was a job and if for some reason they didn't turn up for it those are lost hours, also those jobs that are available and not filled can be counted as lost hours. The loss of the Whale oil boilers job can not be counted as lost hours year after year.
I haven't fallen for it John but you certainly have, that's what you get from listening to people who think they are entitled to all the benefits just because they were born.
I don't have to guess you are one of the nutty socialists.
I do realise that if Mr jones in the corner shop goes on strike it doesn't affect me as much as the train drivers or the power workers of at the time the coal miners. The difference is that strikers in private business don't normaly look to bring down governments.
The trouble is that the lost jobs are not redundant jobs, they are jobs that could still be profitably filled. The fact that they aren't is a permanent loss, not a short term one.
I'm afraid that you have fallen for it, you believe that the Tories don't tax as much as the Labour lot whereas the truth is that the Tories tax much higher. The debt has increased hugely under the Tories not decreased as you seem to want to believe.
What is the point of your meaningless rant about people on benefits? I think that's you being taken in by all he lies as well.
I'd rather be a nutty socialist than a blind anti socialist.
You liken Ford, Vauxhall, Esso and road transport with Mr Jones in his corner shop! Are you sure it's me that's nutty?
The Jobs you talk about have gone to other countries to be profitably filled as we started to unprofitably fill them ( I suppose you will tell me no jobs went abroad). I see you have conveniently overlooked the profitably filled jobs that have been created.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/the-t … 22498.html
Disposable income in 2012/13 was found to remain unchanged from the year before and remains lower than at the start of the economic downturn. In real terms, households have £1,200 less spare money than in 2007/08.
"The biggest winners during this period seems to be pensioners - the average disposable income of retired households has risen 7.9%, equivalent to £1,700, over the past five years.
The bottom fifth of retired households have also seen their overall income rise by 14% during this period.
In comparison, the income of the richest fifth of households has dropped 5.2% since the downturn. At the same time, the average income for the poorest fifth has grown by 3.5%"
Its not a meaningless rant John its about fairness, I don't see that its fair for one person to work for 50 years of their life and struggle doing it while another spends his life knocking out kids for everyone else to pay for. Now you say that its only a few but how do you know, the figures are certainly not published and you don't work for the DWP and I say that even it is only one that's too many!
I am not an anti socialist john, in actual fact if I thought it was feasible I would say that I would be standing side by side with you, however no one seems to be able to tell me what true socialism is or even how it would work so I don't think it would.
Mr Jones wouldn't go on strike, he couldn't afford to. He also probably works twice as many hours for half the pay of the aforesaid mentioned (did Ford Vauxhall or Esso belong to the British people then John?). You could have said BL, BR or NCB whose workers were probably earning 3 times as much as Mr Jones and still saw fit to strike. There the really nutty ones.
Oh yes, plenty of jobs went abroad to places like Germany who seem to manage to build ships and do heavy engineering quite well and without the benefit of a low wage economy.
What exactly are these profitable jobs that have been created? Certainly not super market workers on the minimum wage and zero hour contracts.
Do you realise that people on work fare although still receiving JSA are not counted as unemployed. There's a few more of your profitably filled jobs. Shame they are not profitable for the workers.
You tell me about how families have less money than they did at the start of the recession as if you are proud of it! We should be ashamed.
You are not for fairness, you are a begrudger, rather than lift everybody up you are a good servant of the Government and want to drag everybody down to the lowest level.
No, Ford, Vauxhall and Esso did not belong to the people, that was exactly my point when you claimed thar only nationalised businesses went on strike.
Our shipbuilding Jobs went to Korea! Maybe we would have faired better if the government (of any denomination) brought British. I agree john the Germans have seen to have come out of the great EU experiment quite well...
They must be government Jobs then as they are the least profitable of all jobs in the economy.
Obviously didn't read it properly did you!
People were always going to be worse of with the mess the last lot made of it. Hurt always come after living beyond your means.
Of course I am for fairness but I am not an old fool who would give away everything they have to appear fair. And even fairness should have rules. Nobody gets lifted by giving everything away.
I didn't claim that only nationalised business went on strike I said they went on strike more and many with the express purpose of trying to bring the government to its knees. The miners never really deserved what they got but neither did the normal man in the street who was affected, some badly by the strike.
Funny, I didn't realise that Hamburg and Italy were in Korea! You've been buying the lie again.
What, the government is running supermarkets then!
Again, this lot have increased taxes, increased the debt and reduced wages. If you really believe that Labour is responsible for that you have really bought the lie.
Yes, fairness should have rules. They should include not giving to some and expecting others to pay as this lot do.Fairness includes not having regressive taxes but fair taxes. You do actually appear to be an old fool who will happily give to those who don't need while begrudging those who do need.
Name me a strike with the stated aim of bringing the government down.
Well there you go, you learn something new everyday. Can you provide me with a link to show we exported our shipbuilding to Germany and Italy, were there no shipyards there in the first place then John? or did they just offer better price and quicker delivery times!
You really do amaze me, first you talk about all the immigrants coming to do skilled job and then you say the government have provided no skilled jobs. So I take it that you retract your first statement about skilled immigrants then? All 3.5 million of them over the last 10 years that would be.
They increased VAT but stopped the fuel duty escalator, they have increased personal allowances. So can you tell me what other taxes they have increased that will directly affect me?
Oh and if you read the article you would know that higher paid pay more tax and get less benefits whilst the lower paid receive a larger proportion of benefits than any one else. I suppose that doesn't suit your ideals though does it John, you would like to see the dustman earn as much as the doctor wouldn't you!
And if you think that its all about giving to the entitled society you are wrong. Everything we have in this country was built on the tax of the well off not the scrounger or even the low paid, if they had any sense they would climb out of their self pitying holes and get something done with their lives instead of blaming the rich for everything that befalls them, sounds like the typical whinging socialist to me.
Any public sector workers strike between 1979 - 1990.
I must admit that you are quite good at moving the topic to suit your argument!
You said that all our industry had moved to countries with low labour costs. I asked what about Germany who are a high wage economy making good money doing what we couldn't.
You raised the subject of government jobs when I asked what profitable jobs had been provided. Your none answer was a none answer. I retract nothing, we don't train people so what option do employers have but to import labour?
Tax as a percentage of GDP was 34.5% in 2009/10 in 2013/14 35.9. And that's with massive cuts in public spending. The advantage that the higher paid have over you and I is that they can afford tax accountants who will drastically reduce the amount of tax they pay
Tell me again how Labour are high taxing whilst Conservatives are low taxing.
I don't think a dustman should be paid as much as a doctor but I think the dustman should be paid well.
Everything we have in this country was built on the toil of the workers, not the rich who just used them.
So just quote me one public sector strike where anybody related to that strike has stated that the ai is to bring down the government.
I didn't move the goal posts at all, Germany protected its market and has a different approach to that of British politicians. The governments of both Germany and France And Italy will always look to procuring goods from their country first which is something the UK doesn't seem to do.
And Giving orders for new ships to other countries with lower costs is exactly what the British government does.
It shows you know nothing about our education system, there are more people in college and university now than at any other time, even though it costs thousands of pounds to attend university. There are also more apprentices being taken up.
Many Jobs are being created in manufacturing, up again for the 3rd year in a row.
The majority of the labour that is imported is unskilled cheep labour.
John the unemployed and the poor pay no taxes, I thought you would be in favour of theat!
Are you saying that all rich people avoid paying tax? Are you saying that the higher paid should not be allowed to have accountants to check the amount of tax they pay is correct, should we trust HMRC?
All governments love tax, its their primary objective.
I also think Dustmen should be paid well, and here in Birmingham they are.
Actually John it took both to build this country.
Take of your blinkers John even Scargill admitted that one of the aims was to change the political direction of the nation http://www.theguardian.com/politics/200 … e-thatcher
Yes Germany has a different approach. It values its manufacturing industry and its manufacturing workers, It doesn't build down to a price but up to a quality.There's is not an internal market, they export plenty.
Lower costs have nothing to do with our procurement policies. We don't like blue collar workers and put them down freely.
What shows that I know nothing about our education system? I haven't even mentioned it before now. However, now you've introduced it into the debate, there are students from less well off backgrounds who will never get out of debt so great is the expense of further education in the UK.
This makes me laugh. One the one hand you point out how many are getting higher education but then you start to complain about immigrants taking all the unskilled jobs. Do you think the low skill/no skill jobs should be reserved for our graduates?
What are these manufacturing jobs that are being created? How many of them are jobs assembling components made in other counties?
If you think that the unemployed and poor pay no taxes would you please explain to me how they avoid that? My shopping bill always has items rated for VAT on it, VAT that this low taxing government increased by over 14%. What about the unemployed who lose 25% of their benefit because they have an empty bedroom? Think of somebody in a minimum wage that needs a car to get to work, they will be paying a major part of their income in taxes to keep their car on the road.
Stop your adoration of the rich, they pay a lot less of their income in tax than the poor and middle earners do. We have a regressive tax system in this country. Multi million pound income, you pay no more in NI than somebody in middle management. Live in a mansion worth tens of millions and pay no more than somebody living in a three bedroom semi in some parts of the country.
You claim all governments love tax, I'd modify that to say that all governments love taxing the lower orders so that them and their pals do not have to pay taxes. Look at the corporations that avoid paying tax, the tax that bankers avoid paying,
Talking of bankers, do you realise that the bail out cost the country over 80% of GDP increasing our debt much more than the "high spending" labour government ever did. And talking of debt, when the Conservatives weaselled their way into power in 2010 they inherited a debt of £0.76 trillion this debt is now over £1.2 trillion, that's nearly double after years of austerity!
The average pay for a dustman in the UK is £17,500, I'm glad you think that is good pay.
Ye, it took both to build this country, something that Germany recognises and we don't British management works on the basis of "just flipping do it" flipping substituted for another word beginning with "f".
Nowhere in that article does Scargill claim that the miners wanted to bring down the government. You did notice the headline though, didn't you? "We agreed deal with Thatcher".
Lower costs have lots to do with our procurement procedures the same as trade deals do and we still make and export plenty of products and many in the aerospace industries. The government love any worker that pays tax.
Students fro less well off backgrounds can still go to college John and don't pay the money back until they can afford it.
You can laugh all you like but your mind has twisted it to suit your own personal outlook. There are many unskilled people here without jobs so do you think importing unskilled workers have given those people more of a chance to obtain work or not? Now do you think it would be a good idea to limit the number of skilled jobs by importing workers into those jobs or training our own graduates to do them?
How many engineers work in the Aerospace industry? How many work in vehicle manufacturing? How many companies are associated with the supply of parts to these industries in this country? How many scientist are employed in the research and development sector in the country, contrary to what you would have us believe we are not a nation of cleaners and security guards.
We have had this conversation before.
If I give you £100 and you give me back £50 YOU have not lost anything, You Have not paid me anything either.
The lowest paid receive benefits in all shapes and forms and also don't actually contribute anything to the tax pot.
It is well know that the top earners pay more in income tax and continue to do so. As for NI they use no more services supposedly provided by NI contributions than the man who pays nothing in NI.
I don't mind the guy up the road having a bigger house than me and I see no reason why he should pay more for the services the local council provides unless he is using extortionate amounts more than I do. That's why I think the poll tax was a better idea, the more people who live in the house then the more they should pay.
As we have talked about the bankers before I shall just reiterate that I think people like Fred Godwin should have been hanged in parliament square, Not because he was rich but because like many they were winging spineless twats.
What are they doing with all that money John, are we still paying for the mistakes of the last parliament?
£17.500 isn't all that bad John although its not great its still £2,71 an hour above minimum rate. I know a few security guards who would love that sort of money.
Well John not everything is good with Germany, it also has a different approach to worker management relations and employ the works council system, something the unions rejected out of hand over here.
Here is another for you John
I was quite surprised by what the former NUM had to say.
Wow! All those silly miners and shipbuilders and other metal bashers who missed the chance to retrain as Aerospace engineers!
A debt is a debt even if you can never afford to repay it.
You tell me how many people are employed in high tech industries. I want to know. Then you can go on to tell me how many people are employed in minimum wage zero hour contract jobs.
So if I give you a £100 and you give me back £50, you have lost nothing, you still have £100 to spend!That's very clever, you must tell me how you do that. By the same token, your high earning tax payers do not actually lose anything by paying taxes. I'm sure they'll be pleased to know that.
It really doesn't matter if you are happy to pay 5% of your income on community charge and the fellow up the road only pays 0.5% of his income. It is still a regressive tax, you pay more for the same services as the other man does.
No, we are not paying for the "mistakes" of the previous government, we are paying for the total mismanagement of the economy by this one.
You reckon £17.5 K is not bad! Let's see, that would allow him to buy a house costing no more than just over £61,000 lots of houses around for that price isn't there?
No, works councils were not rejected by the unions "The TUC and virtually all the unions have welcomed the introduction of Works Councils, claiming they will change the face of industrial relations in Britain. The unions argue that the introduction of Works Councils will offer workers a significant say in the running of companies."
For more read the rest http://www.solfed.org.uk/out-of-the-fry … s-councils
The German's strength is that they view workers and management as equal but different, not as one superior to the other. Back in 1970s there was a company making vehicle batteries in Manchester. They had a sister factory in Germany. Both plants were of similar size. Production of the German plant exceeded that of the UK plant. The UK management blamed this on the out dated equipment and the lazy British worker. The owners conducted a very simple experiment. They swapped management, UK to Germany, Germany to UK. Literally within days not only was the UK plant exceeding the output of the German factory, they were exceeding the average output.
You link still does not prove that any strike in the UK was with the express intent of bringing down the government.
Yes all those silly miners, shipbuilders and metal bashers who priced themselves out of a job, why didn't they retrain!
Yes a debt is a debt but if you never have to pay it back it makes no difference.
Don't know John why don't you tell me as you seem to know.
And with an abundance of unskilled workers flooding into the country there will always be a market for low paid zero hours contracts.
maybe you are a little mixed up john.... Someone who receives taxpayers money as benefit and then has to pay some tax out of it is still in net receipt of something for nothing..
So you agree then that a community charge should be based on the services received not the size of their house.
What mismanagement is that John? Do you mean the fact that there are less unemployed, that GDP has risen and that the economy has grown?????
£17.5K is not bad compared to £12.4K for someone on minimum wage, lets face it Dustmen don't need any special skill do they. The average for a security guard is £16.2K and that's for 48hrs a week.
And I agree it isn't very much to buy an house with unless you buy ex council stock but I know you are against that so we wont mention it.
Actually John when I was at BMW the union hated the fact that they were left out of the loop, they did everything to get me elected on to the council as I was standing shop steward. And it does offer the workers a say but I doubt if the unions would like it if their members were not voted onto the councils which is a possibility. I am glad you are in favour of a democratic process.
I agree the Germans strength is their workforce (don't forget Managers are part of the workforce too) and this was plainly obvious at BMW when the German management saw both the rover equipment and workforce were unworkable and so got rid of it.
Sorry John they don't provide any information in Brail........
I will never give up trying to uncover the truth John.
Tell me, when you stopped working for BMW why did you not retrain as an aerospace engineer or any other job that would pay you more than you get as a security guard?
If you think that having an unpaid debt makes no difference you obviously unaware of the workings of this world.
I asked you how many were employed in high tech companies because you were telling me all about them. That's why I asked you for figures, I assumed that you would have them at your finger tips.
I'm not at all mixed up, if you give somebody £100 and take £50 back off them, they have £50 and not £100. Pretty plain isn't it?
No, I agree that the community charge should be based on the ability to pay it, not as you claim I said.
There are fewer unemployed because those on work placements are not counted as unemployed, 0.3% growth in the economy is actually shrinkage when inflation is higher than that. The economy has grown 0.8% having shrunk for most of the preceding four years. What about the increase in the national debt, almost doubled in four years, that's some spending!
I'm glad you think £17.5k is not bad, I think to expect a man to look after his family on that is criminal.
Why do you apologise for not providing information in Braille? All I want is evidence of any union striking with the express purpose of bringing down the government, you haven't provided that.
You don't want the truth, it scares you.
Firstly John I worked on BMW, protection team, the wages were very lucrative and the career break money was especially good, it paid off my mortgage. Now I earn similar but have less outgoings. Unfortunately people perception of security guards are mostly wrong, we are not all night watchmen and store security (although I have done that as well). My responsibilities cover a vas range of duties and responsibilities and I am even licenced by the government to do the job.
You obviously don't have much experience of the system, my own daughter in law had a huge debt, it stopped her from doing absolutely nothing, they managed to get both a mortgage and a loan whilst she still owed the debt and now she is a very well paid teacher she has no paid it off.
I do accept that some will never pay it off because they will never reach the earnings limit, but it wont stop them living their lives.
Nothing is life is free, unless you live your life on benefits.
The community charge is based on the ability to pay, if you can pay the whole amount you get no discount, if you are on benefits or a low income you can get some help.
But there are still fewer unemployed, no mater how you look at it.
As for the economy at least it is growing rather than the shrinking it done for the previous 6 years.
Labour would have tripled the debt if not quadrupled it.
It all according what their circumstances are John, because a man on £17.5k with two children will get help. probably in the form of working tax credits.
Its simple John you obviously don't accept the evidence because it doesn't suit your personal perspective.
The truth doesn't scare me John but it obviously scares the hell out of you.
But I was only going off what you constantly repeated about how little security workers were paid. If I've got it wrong I have only you to thank.
You say a huge debt stopped your daughter in law from doing nothing! How about restricting her self to a low paid job to avoid pay back, that's not nothing. You claim she is well paid! If she is earning over £16,910 she should be repaying. But then you think that is well paid!
The community charge is not based on the ability to pay, it is based on the value of the property that you occupy up to a point where it stops increasing and you pay less in effect.
As for less unemployed, yes, the figure has dropped back to where it was five years ago. Remind me who was in government then. That's five years of increased unemployment, or as you would have it, five years of increased scroungers.
What proof do you have that labour would have increased the national debt at all, let alone by the figures you quote.
Do you really think it right that a man with two children should have to throw himself at the mercy of this government to be able to support his family? It fact ultimately it isn't the government, it is his fellow workers.
I do accept the evidence but you are right, it does scare the hell out of me, how could it not? I see people being thrown on the scrap heap and then demonised by those that have thrown them there. I see a society where hatred for one's fellow man instead of being discouraged and frowned upon by our leaders (!) is positively encouraged. I see a society where the worship of money is running rampant to the extent where those without worship those who have it and demand that they have more taken off them.
Yes, you're right, I am scared. But I'm not scared for myself, I'm scared for my grandson and his peers who will be oppressed.
Like most Jobs there are different levels of pay for different levels of ability, however the norm for security guards in the midlands is about £6.50. As these workers have to be licenced at a personal cost of around £250 every three years and regular CRB checks I think this is rather a poor wage considering refuse collectors are on a lot more, however I think you have gotten the wrong end of the stick with this john, I don't think the refuse collectors should earn less I thing security guards and anyone else for that matter should be on a NMW of around £8 an hour at least.
Yes John she is well paid, she obviously took the right degree and got a good job in teaching, she has managed to pay her debt of after 3 yrs. Her friend didn't take the same degree, she works in an office and hasn't serviced any of her debt.
So you agree that the unemployment figures have dropped then. back to before the recession (which happened under a labour government) and are now slowly climbing month on month.
It stands to reason john, they have said they would not have employed a policy of austerity measures, in actual fact I am sure they said they would borrow their way out of the recession!
Maybe they would have eaten the rich like the French have tried, many have exported themselves to London I believe to avoid the blatant discrimination.
I am sort of with you on this one John. I doubt if you will agree with me though. I would rather my hard earned tax money go to someone who is trying to support his family than a man who thinks everyone else should support them. However although your figure comes from an average not all refuse collectors are on such low amounts, our own council pays its men fairly well and extra's and a good pension is on offer also. I know its not the refuse collectors fault that the council is almost bankrupt and in £2.6 billion of debt.
I am with you on this thought John, however we have different ideas of how to achieve the best for our grandchildren and future generations.
If I thought socialism could bring world peace, stop starvation and afford me and my offspring a comfortable life I would be right by your side, banner in hand.
However I am not convinced, why? Because as far as I am concerned no one has told me how it could work without force, oppression and dictatorship. I have heard so many different ideas of what socialism is I have come to the conclusion that even socialists don't know exactly what it is.
Back to the original post though.
Do you think that Cameron's performance last week leaves us very close (possibly 3 years away) from our eventual exit from the EU?
A bit of an about face here! You were saying that dustmen should be happy as they were paid more than security guards! Now you're saying that neither of them earn enough!
Good on your D-I-L paying off her debt, you gave the impression that she hadn't and never would!
No, I don't agree that unemployment figures have dropped back to pre recession figures, they've dropped back to 2010 figures, the recession started in 2008.
Austerity measures have helped to increase the national debt. Had they spent money to buy ourselves out of the recession.- well it worked for Roosevelt in 1930s America, and it worked in post war Sweden, why wouldn't it have worked here?
I'm glad that you are happy that your taxes go to help others in need, but really, are the employers in so much need that they can't afford to pay a living wage and must rely on taxpayers to subsidise them?
Indeed it's not the refuse collectors fault that the council is almost bankrupt, just as it's not the fault of the unemployed that the country pretends to be almost bankrupt. It doesn't stop them being expected to pay though does it.
I'm not actually promoting socialism when I say that I am scared for my grandchildren, I'd be quite happy with the consensus politics that saw this country at it most generally prosperous in history.
BTW, you seem to think that a referendum would see us out of the EU.
What would you feel if the referendum kept us in, which actually seems very likely?
Of course a referendum is not an automatic withdrawal from the EU and that's why I support UKIP because they are not looking for a referendum.
Its not as clear cut as you make it sound either.
I don't suggest that it's clear cut, on the contrary it is entirely open either way.
So you're a U Kipper because they would deny us the right to decide fairly whether we stay or go!! I wonder what else they would do without approval?
No John they wouldn't deny anyone anything, like any political party they have a policy or policies and if they suit your political slant then you vote for them, that's sort of having your say.
Its simple, if you don't want to mess about with a referendum but you want out of Europe then vote UKIP. If you want the promise of a referendum then vote Conservatives or Greens, if you want more of the same, the loss of more powers to Brussels and higher taxes vote labour.
Sort of having your say! Right.
Your comment about labour and higher taxes is what scares me about those as politically uninformed as your self deciding on the future of the country. The only taxes the Tories have reduced are those for the super rich, everybody else (including the unemployed) are paying more in taxes. And frankly if we are going to have the sort of thinking typical of the average U Kipper ruling the country I think we would be much better off with Brussels.
Its obvious that you have forgotten all the tax increases under the Labour government which held up their false economy that then came tumbling down through the bad credit crunch...All presided over by a labour government. I also believe it was Gormless Brown (labour) who signed the Lisbon treaty which effectively signed away Britain's control of its borders. I also believe it was Labour who gave the hard won rebate back to the EU fraudsters.......... And still Toy Blair hasn't got his promised job in the EU...
"Its simple, if you don't want to mess about with a referendum"
The more I read this the more outraged I become.
What you are saying is "if you don't want to mess around with democracy. . .".
No9 what I am saying is if you don't want to vote for politicians that mess about with democracy.
Voting for UKIP is after all a referendum to get out of Europe. (maybe Nigel should use that as his campaign message)
Lets face it no other party would offer a referendum anyway!
So how is saying if you don't want to bother with politicians that mess around with democracy any better than saying if you don't want to mess around with a referendum?
If UKIP were a one policy party I would agree that a vote for them is a vote to leave the EU. Unfortunately that is not their only policy.
Ok maybe I didn't make it clear. If you don't want to mess around waiting for a referendum that will never materialise because of undemocratic politicians then go straight to a party that wants out of the EU. You have a choice.
We don't need a referendum, we have a democratic choice, vote for parties that want to stay in the EU or vote for one that wants out.
It is their main underlying policy, its a major one, other policies may have to change if there was a vote to leave the EU.
Well Siverspeeder, given up trying to deny the truth have you? Well done.
by Charles James 6 years ago
A poster produced by the Labour Party.
by Ralph Schwartz 14 months ago
I've read countless numbers of threads about partisan political talking points over the years. They range from abortion, gun control, immigration, social justice, healthcare, protected classes of people, voting rights, and national defense; just off the top of my head. About half of...
by Ralph Schwartz 19 months ago
Should Trump extend an olive branch to Theresa May to save her job as PM ?Trump might be able to help her stay put by talking to her about a great trade deal with America- thus calming those calling for her to be ousted.
by James Packard 3 years ago
Should voting be mandatory in the U.S.?President Obama said Wednesday mandatory voting would be "transformative", referencing a potential change in how money is spent in campaigns. There might be less vying to get certain groups to come to the polls, but more to get certain groups to...
by Lame stream media 7 years ago
Some may say that fascism is on the left of center but when you take all of the 14 points they seem to fit the republican leaders to a T. I believe that they started to try to get women in to thwart the obvious fact that they are extreme fascistsFascist issues and how it relates to...
by Doug Hughes 7 years ago
“Today's tight race in New York's 26th Congressional District has become a referendum on the Republican plan to transform Medicare,” the AP writes. “The western New York district is among the most conservative in the state. Nevertheless, the latest poll shows Democrat Kathy Hochul with a...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|