This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Protests in London following Conservative victory
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Johnny Eagles  berlin 12 May 15 11.02am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 10.45am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 12 May 2015 10.35am
All this furore over pensions from the police, firebrigade, teachers etc when necessary changes to cope with demographics were implemented says it all. Lloyds Bank made a massive change to their pension scheme last year by freezing pensionable salary. This means that all future pay increases don't qualify for your final salary to calculate entitlement. The staff had to accept it, because it was necessary and the company needed to do it to clear the deficit between assets and liabilities. It's going to cost my Mrs about £2K a year on her retirement income and for a lot of her younger colleagues, a hell of a lot more. They didn't strike, but many will move elsewhere to achieve better working conditions/pay/benefits. What your saying essentially is that LloydsTSB offered pension schemes it could not cover, because it couldn't balance assets and liabilities. Its a bank, you'd think someone there would understand accountancy. What galls me is the incompetence in offering unsustainable contracted offers, that are then withdrawn because the first party can't afford it. Especially given the profits and bonuses that the good times brought those industries. They failed in their commitment and responsibility to deliver on their side of the agreement. You'd think financial companies would understand profit and loss, assets and liabilities. People should be angry. Even if the changes have to be made.
The faux-naivete of public servants who pretend their pension scheme is some kind of "contract" which they've been diddled out of, like someone's sold them a dodgy car, is a wonder to behold. Like you say, a bank messes up with its calculations, it has to pay the price.* Until it goes bankrupt, and then everyone just gets pennies in the pound. Which is why we have the rule of law. The idea that public sector pensions can do the same is absurd, because there is no bankruptcy. Just more debt and more taxes. Left up to teachers and firemen, they would just award themselves ever bigger pensions at an ever-earlier retirement date - calling it a "contract" they've entered into with the government - and bleed the taxpayer dry. Then, when the taxpayer says, 'hang on, I think that's enough now, we can't actually afford this', they go on strike! Then the taxpayer votes in someone who's going to take a harder line, because they're getting a bit miffed at paying all this money for a mediocre service run by spoilt people who keep going on strike, they moan like buggery! They act like butter wouldn't melt, poor little consumer lambs who would phone up Watchdog to moan about the nasty old government and its pension scam. But they would bleed the country dry if it meant they got to retire early with a big pension.
...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread... |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
jamiemartin721  Reading 12 May 15 11.03am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 10.46am
Quote imbored at 12 May 2015 10.28am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 10.23am
Quote dannyh at 12 May 2015 9.42am
I will ask again seeing as no one took up the nettle from the left (what a shock) how come there was a distinct lack of riots when Labour came into power ?
I don't know about everyone else, but I come here for the deep, insightful analysis. A lot of left-wing people are morons. Especially the loud ones. The stuff some people I know have come out with since the election is pretty scary. One person - who stood to become a Green councillor - said how marvellous it was that someone had thrown a bucket of water over a Tory MP. Someone said actually no, it's not on in a peaceful democracy to go round doing stuff like that. He said, and I quote, without a hint of irony: "well as a Tory he is literally responsible for all the deaths resulting from their policies so deserves everything he gets." It's people like that who create the Gulags and Tianenmen-esque massacres. Admittedly there are a lot of right-wing morons. But the left-wing ones are more dangerous because they're so convinced that what they're doing is for the Greater Good. Not really, morons are morons, irrespective of their political flavor, a quick scout around history will evidence plenty of right wing juntas, paramilitary death squads and brutal tyrants. Although the right generally prefers 'disappearances' and concentration camps. Never underestimate the power that stupid people will grant to people in power if they also give them what they think they want. Stupid people, with a 'cause' are the greatest threat to humanity. Especially as stupid is generally 'inherited'.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hoof Hearted 12 May 15 11.04am | |
|---|---|
|
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 11.02am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 10.45am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 12 May 2015 10.35am
All this furore over pensions from the police, firebrigade, teachers etc when necessary changes to cope with demographics were implemented says it all. Lloyds Bank made a massive change to their pension scheme last year by freezing pensionable salary. This means that all future pay increases don't qualify for your final salary to calculate entitlement. The staff had to accept it, because it was necessary and the company needed to do it to clear the deficit between assets and liabilities. It's going to cost my Mrs about £2K a year on her retirement income and for a lot of her younger colleagues, a hell of a lot more. They didn't strike, but many will move elsewhere to achieve better working conditions/pay/benefits. What your saying essentially is that LloydsTSB offered pension schemes it could not cover, because it couldn't balance assets and liabilities. Its a bank, you'd think someone there would understand accountancy. What galls me is the incompetence in offering unsustainable contracted offers, that are then withdrawn because the first party can't afford it. Especially given the profits and bonuses that the good times brought those industries. They failed in their commitment and responsibility to deliver on their side of the agreement. You'd think financial companies would understand profit and loss, assets and liabilities. People should be angry. Even if the changes have to be made.
The faux-naivete of public servants who pretend their pension scheme is some kind of "contract" which they've been diddled out of, like someone's sold them a dodgy car, is a wonder to behold. Like you say, a bank messes up with its calculations, it has to pay the price.* Until it goes bankrupt, and then everyone just gets pennies in the pound. Which is why we have the rule of law. The idea that public sector pensions can do the same is absurd, because there is no bankruptcy. Just more debt and more taxes. Left up to teachers and firemen, they would just award themselves ever bigger pensions at an ever-earlier retirement date - calling it a "contract" they've entered into with the government - and bleed the taxpayer dry. Then, when the taxpayer says, 'hang on, I think that's enough now, we can't actually afford this', they go on strike! Then the taxpayer votes in someone who's going to take a harder line, because they're getting a bit miffed at paying all this money for a mediocre service run by spoilt people who keep going on strike, they moan like buggery! They act like butter wouldn't melt, poor little consumer lambs who would phone up Watchdog to moan about the nasty old government and its pension scam. But they would bleed the country dry if it meant they got to retire early with a big pension.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Johnny Eagles berlin 12 May 15 11.05am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote imbored at 12 May 2015 10.58am
is such a silly statement it's hard to know where to begin.
...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread... |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| derben 12 May 15 11.24am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 11.03am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 10.46am
Quote imbored at 12 May 2015 10.28am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 10.23am
Quote dannyh at 12 May 2015 9.42am
I will ask again seeing as no one took up the nettle from the left (what a shock) how come there was a distinct lack of riots when Labour came into power ?
I don't know about everyone else, but I come here for the deep, insightful analysis. A lot of left-wing people are morons. Especially the loud ones. The stuff some people I know have come out with since the election is pretty scary. One person - who stood to become a Green councillor - said how marvellous it was that someone had thrown a bucket of water over a Tory MP. Someone said actually no, it's not on in a peaceful democracy to go round doing stuff like that. He said, and I quote, without a hint of irony: "well as a Tory he is literally responsible for all the deaths resulting from their policies so deserves everything he gets." It's people like that who create the Gulags and Tianenmen-esque massacres. Admittedly there are a lot of right-wing morons. But the left-wing ones are more dangerous because they're so convinced that what they're doing is for the Greater Good. Not really, morons are morons, irrespective of their political flavor, a quick scout around history will evidence plenty of right wing juntas, paramilitary death squads and brutal tyrants. Although the right generally prefers 'disappearances' and concentration camps. Never underestimate the power that stupid people will grant to people in power if they also give them what they think they want. Stupid people, with a 'cause' are the greatest threat to humanity. Especially as stupid is generally 'inherited'. A quick scout around history will also show that the body count for left wing governments such as USSR, China, Cambodia etc dwarf all the right wing governments. Of course Stalin and Mao were no slouches in having forced labour slave camps, 'disappearances', along with the manufactured famines that killed millions. Not forgetting the total removal of freedom of thought and expression. All in the name of the ideology that the left still support. These types of governments are exactly what the Socialist Worker placard wielding 'protestors' want. The joke is they too would also be put in the meat grinder in due course after the glorious revolution. When do they want it? Now! Edited by derben (12 May 2015 11.26am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| silvertop Portishead 12 May 15 11.53am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hoof Hearted at 12 May 2015 11.04am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 11.02am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 10.45am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 12 May 2015 10.35am
All this furore over pensions from the police, firebrigade, teachers etc when necessary changes to cope with demographics were implemented says it all. Lloyds Bank made a massive change to their pension scheme last year by freezing pensionable salary. This means that all future pay increases don't qualify for your final salary to calculate entitlement. The staff had to accept it, because it was necessary and the company needed to do it to clear the deficit between assets and liabilities. It's going to cost my Mrs about £2K a year on her retirement income and for a lot of her younger colleagues, a hell of a lot more. They didn't strike, but many will move elsewhere to achieve better working conditions/pay/benefits. What your saying essentially is that LloydsTSB offered pension schemes it could not cover, because it couldn't balance assets and liabilities. Its a bank, you'd think someone there would understand accountancy. What galls me is the incompetence in offering unsustainable contracted offers, that are then withdrawn because the first party can't afford it. Especially given the profits and bonuses that the good times brought those industries. They failed in their commitment and responsibility to deliver on their side of the agreement. You'd think financial companies would understand profit and loss, assets and liabilities. People should be angry. Even if the changes have to be made.
The faux-naivete of public servants who pretend their pension scheme is some kind of "contract" which they've been diddled out of, like someone's sold them a dodgy car, is a wonder to behold. Like you say, a bank messes up with its calculations, it has to pay the price.* Until it goes bankrupt, and then everyone just gets pennies in the pound. Which is why we have the rule of law. The idea that public sector pensions can do the same is absurd, because there is no bankruptcy. Just more debt and more taxes. Left up to teachers and firemen, they would just award themselves ever bigger pensions at an ever-earlier retirement date - calling it a "contract" they've entered into with the government - and bleed the taxpayer dry. Then, when the taxpayer says, 'hang on, I think that's enough now, we can't actually afford this', they go on strike! Then the taxpayer votes in someone who's going to take a harder line, because they're getting a bit miffed at paying all this money for a mediocre service run by spoilt people who keep going on strike, they moan like buggery! They act like butter wouldn't melt, poor little consumer lambs who would phone up Watchdog to moan about the nasty old government and its pension scam. But they would bleed the country dry if it meant they got to retire early with a big pension.
To balance that, we do have one financial motivation: a really good pension. Society has deemed that if you spend a life working in the public sector on restricted income then it is only fair that it will look after you in your old age. This covenant has come under sustained attack from governments looking to reduce the eye-watering and increasing debt burden placed by an ever ageing population on future governments. Most public servants appreciate that their current pension arrangement is not sustainable and have accepted a degree of erosion, e.g. final salary morphing into average salary. I suspect there will be more attacks to come. For some reason, teachers and firemen etc. feel they are exempt from these changes which, I suspect, rankles with the rest of us lowly public servants. It certainly does with me. Thus, before you go out to tarnish the whole public sector with the same brush, you might want to temper those views by acknowledging that the vast majority of us have passively accepted the inevitable; and that there was a good reason why our pension used to be so attractive.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 12 May 15 11.53am |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 11.02am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 10.45am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 12 May 2015 10.35am
All this furore over pensions from the police, firebrigade, teachers etc when necessary changes to cope with demographics were implemented says it all. Lloyds Bank made a massive change to their pension scheme last year by freezing pensionable salary. This means that all future pay increases don't qualify for your final salary to calculate entitlement. The staff had to accept it, because it was necessary and the company needed to do it to clear the deficit between assets and liabilities. It's going to cost my Mrs about £2K a year on her retirement income and for a lot of her younger colleagues, a hell of a lot more. They didn't strike, but many will move elsewhere to achieve better working conditions/pay/benefits. What your saying essentially is that LloydsTSB offered pension schemes it could not cover, because it couldn't balance assets and liabilities. Its a bank, you'd think someone there would understand accountancy. What galls me is the incompetence in offering unsustainable contracted offers, that are then withdrawn because the first party can't afford it. Especially given the profits and bonuses that the good times brought those industries. They failed in their commitment and responsibility to deliver on their side of the agreement. You'd think financial companies would understand profit and loss, assets and liabilities. People should be angry. Even if the changes have to be made.
The faux-naivete of public servants who pretend their pension scheme is some kind of "contract" which they've been diddled out of, like someone's sold them a dodgy car, is a wonder to behold. Like you say, a bank messes up with its calculations, it has to pay the price.* Until it goes bankrupt, and then everyone just gets pennies in the pound. Which is why we have the rule of law. The idea that public sector pensions can do the same is absurd, because there is no bankruptcy. Just more debt and more taxes. Left up to teachers and firemen, they would just award themselves ever bigger pensions at an ever-earlier retirement date - calling it a "contract" they've entered into with the government - and bleed the taxpayer dry. Then, when the taxpayer says, 'hang on, I think that's enough now, we can't actually afford this', they go on strike! Then the taxpayer votes in someone who's going to take a harder line, because they're getting a bit miffed at paying all this money for a mediocre service run by spoilt people who keep going on strike, they moan like buggery! They act like butter wouldn't melt, poor little consumer lambs who would phone up Watchdog to moan about the nasty old government and its pension scam. But they would bleed the country dry if it meant they got to retire early with a big pension. When you take a job the conditions of that job and the perks are part of the agreement. Of course the situation is that the pensions can't be honored, that's not in dispute, it why they were offered in the first place, and used continually as an incentive (Private or Public) and the lack of any compensation for the abandonment of the scheme. Of course they went on strike, they had the capacity to do so, but then Fujitsu staff voted for industrial action and went on strike in Manchester (where they had sufficient staff membership to do so) over pension changes with the rest of the unite staff electing to protest and engage in work to rule. That question would be why were they offered in the first place?
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 12 May 15 12.02pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote derben at 12 May 2015 11.24am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 11.03am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 10.46am
Quote imbored at 12 May 2015 10.28am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 10.23am
Quote dannyh at 12 May 2015 9.42am
I will ask again seeing as no one took up the nettle from the left (what a shock) how come there was a distinct lack of riots when Labour came into power ?
I don't know about everyone else, but I come here for the deep, insightful analysis. A lot of left-wing people are morons. Especially the loud ones. The stuff some people I know have come out with since the election is pretty scary. One person - who stood to become a Green councillor - said how marvellous it was that someone had thrown a bucket of water over a Tory MP. Someone said actually no, it's not on in a peaceful democracy to go round doing stuff like that. He said, and I quote, without a hint of irony: "well as a Tory he is literally responsible for all the deaths resulting from their policies so deserves everything he gets." It's people like that who create the Gulags and Tianenmen-esque massacres. Admittedly there are a lot of right-wing morons. But the left-wing ones are more dangerous because they're so convinced that what they're doing is for the Greater Good. Not really, morons are morons, irrespective of their political flavor, a quick scout around history will evidence plenty of right wing juntas, paramilitary death squads and brutal tyrants. Although the right generally prefers 'disappearances' and concentration camps. Never underestimate the power that stupid people will grant to people in power if they also give them what they think they want. Stupid people, with a 'cause' are the greatest threat to humanity. Especially as stupid is generally 'inherited'. A quick scout around history will also show that the body count for left wing governments such as USSR, China, Cambodia etc dwarf all the right wing governments. Of course Stalin and Mao were no slouches in having forced labour slave camps, 'disappearances', along with the manufactured famines that killed millions. Not forgetting the total removal of freedom of thought and expression. All in the name of the ideology that the left still support. These types of governments are exactly what the Socialist Worker placard wielding 'protestors' want. The joke is they too would also be put in the meat grinder in due course after the glorious revolution. When do they want it? Now! Edited by derben (12 May 2015 11.26am) The point was that the left or right weren't much better, not about how many mega deaths. I also think the term dwarfs is incorrect, given both sides of the spectrum is 10s of millions. The truth is murder as part of the apparatus of state policy, directly or by permissive proxy, is unacceptable. Of course if you include death by proxy governments and supported regime, the figures rapidly close.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 12 May 15 12.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Willo at 12 May 2015 10.46am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 10.33am
Quote Willo at 12 May 2015 10.18am
These anarchists are planning a summer of protests which of course will result in wanton violence.Lets hope the Police act very firmly against these hoodlums. I'd rather the police acted in accordance with the law in situations, with correct oversight, and not directly intervening for political expediency - and act responsibly to avoid unnecessary risks to the public or provoking an escalation in trouble. I believe that the Police will need to act firmly to achieve these objectives against these darned hoodlums hell-bent on wanton violence.
Given the way the Conservatives have been at the 'Police force', will they have enough staff, or will the PSCO's be sent in....
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Johnny Eagles berlin 12 May 15 12.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 11.53am
Of course they went on strike, they had the capacity to do so, but then Fujitsu staff voted for industrial action and went on strike in Manchester (where they had sufficient staff membership to do so) over pension changes with the rest of the unite staff electing to protest and engage in work to rule. That question would be why were they offered in the first place?
How do you feel about governments who aren't just incompetent, but deliberately for the sake of their own popularity, refuse to reform something which they know is desperately unaffordable, because they're afraid of the political fall out? Like the Blair government did in 1999? And then again in 2001? How do you feel about politicians who make people too young to vote liable for promises they make now, which will be redeemed long after they have gone?
...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread... |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hoof Hearted 12 May 15 12.19pm | |
|---|---|
|
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 12.14pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 11.53am
Of course they went on strike, they had the capacity to do so, but then Fujitsu staff voted for industrial action and went on strike in Manchester (where they had sufficient staff membership to do so) over pension changes with the rest of the unite staff electing to protest and engage in work to rule. That question would be why were they offered in the first place?
How do you feel about governments who aren't just incompetent, but deliberately for the sake of their own popularity, refuse to reform something which they know is desperately unaffordable, because they're afraid of the political fall out? Like the Blair government did in 1999? And then again in 2001? How do you feel about politicians who make people too young to vote liable for promises they make now, which will be redeemed long after they have gone?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 12 May 15 12.50pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Johnny Eagles at 12 May 2015 12.14pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 12 May 2015 11.53am
Of course they went on strike, they had the capacity to do so, but then Fujitsu staff voted for industrial action and went on strike in Manchester (where they had sufficient staff membership to do so) over pension changes with the rest of the unite staff electing to protest and engage in work to rule. That question would be why were they offered in the first place?
How do you feel about governments who aren't just incompetent, but deliberately for the sake of their own popularity, refuse to reform something which they know is desperately unaffordable, because they're afraid of the political fall out? Like the Blair government did in 1999? And then again in 2001? How do you feel about politicians who make people too young to vote liable for promises they make now, which will be redeemed long after they have gone? I think my feelings about the so called New Labour and the war criminal Tony 'Betrayer' Blair are fairly well known. The primary pursuit of self interest in leadership, at any level, is ultimately detrimental to the group - whether they're the electorate or shareholders. What I asked is why were these pensions offered in the first place, so freely and widely, both in the public and private sector. I accept that they were unsustainable, but the realization of that seemed only to occur once those companies and the economy saw a downturn. I don't like the conservatives, but I've grown to really hate Labour.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.