Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Gonnagle on April 21, 2017, 12:21:29 PM
-
Dear Forum,
My thanks to Jakswan over on the GE thread for this link.
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/how-many-of-jeremy-corbyns-policies-do.html?m=1
The above options in detail can be found in this link.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Forum,
My thanks to Jakswan over on the GE thread for this link.
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/how-many-of-jeremy-corbyns-policies-do.html?m=1
The above options in detail can be found in this link.
Gonnagle.
Problem is that many of these are subjective and also you need to have confidence that he could deliver.
So for example:
'Combat inequality' - sure we can all sign up to this and I suspect all major parties believe this is what they are doing. The question is, how, how will it be paid for and will it work.
I have to laugh on 'Holding the Tories to account on Brexit' - Corbyn has completely failed to do this over the past 10 months, subserviently supporting the government every step of the way. So if he isn't doing this now, why should I believe he will in the future.
-
All that is pointless until the bankers and the financial system is dealt with. That is where the money is, with those fucking parasites and financial terrorists.
-
Dear Gordon,
Cheers old son, that's another pint I owe you, how many is that now :P :P
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Prof and Jack,
Well I have voted for everyone, especially the renationalising of our Railways.
Gonnagle.
-
Corbyn hasn't any clout, he doesn't come across as a person who has what it takes to be a PM.
-
I agree with lots of the aims.
How do we achieve them?
Does he have a clue?
-
I agree with lots of the aims.
How do we achieve them?
Does he have a clue?
Some of his aims are laudable, but he isn't the person who can make them come about.
-
Dear Forum,
My thanks to Jakswan over on the GE thread for this link.
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/how-many-of-jeremy-corbyns-policies-do.html?m=1
The above options in detail can be found in this link.
Gonnagle.
I never posted it I replied to it.
You forgot apple pie and mother love.
Now where is the money coming from?
-
Dear Berational,
How do we achieve them?
One at a time, the good Prof has shown that we can achieve one of them on another thread quite easily, all of the above policies can be achieved if we are all committed to make this country work for everyone, not just the comfortable off.
Go on, change my mind about voting SNP.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Jakswan,
Now where is the money coming from?
From your pocket and my pocket, and the conglomerates who take the piss out of our tax system.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Jakswan,
From your pocket and my pocket, and the conglomerates who take the piss out of our tax system.
Gonnagle.
I see how much?
How are you going to tax the conglomerates?
Take one google....
-
One at a time, the good Prof has shown that we can achieve one of them on another thread quite easily, all of the above policies can be achieved if we are all committed to make this country work for everyone, not just the comfortable off.
Yes we can achieve rail nationalisation pretty easily and at limited cost.
That isn't the case for many others on that list. And the details are lacking. In other cases the statement makes no sense. For example 'renationalise the NHS' - but the NHS is already a public sector nationalised organisation.
The problem is that many of the aspirations will cost very significant amounts of money, with no indication where that money will come from. It is magic money tree territory I'm afraid.
So for example 'Scrap tuition fees' OK - fine, but where will the shortfall of £9250 per student that my institution will lose from 'scrapping tuition fees' come from. Will universities be starved of cash, will Corbyn raise tax, and note that raising top levels of tax doesn't actually achieve an awful lot beyond gesture politics.
-
The Tory party had scrapping tuition fees as a policy under Michael Howard and dropped it when they realised it was unworkable. Similarly I think if the figures could have been made to work Clegg would have got some kind of change in when in the Coalition.
I think that free school meals is gesture politics at its worst. The author of the study the policy is based on has said it is of limited benefit. Why not spend the money raised on more teachers, SEN provision, IT, or just give it to each school to spend as they see fit?
-
Dear Prof,
For example 'renationalise the NHS' - but the NHS is already a public sector nationalised organisation.
The Tory party have been carving up the English NHS and distributing the pieces to the private sector, Jeremy Corbyn has pledged to reverse this process. Are you one of the 84% of people who thinks the NHS should be run as a not for profit public service, or the 7% who agree with the ongoing Tory privatisation agenda?
Taken from the article this thread is linked to, but I see the Tories destroying the NHS first hand, in the past two months we have had four Senior Sisters retiring with no replacements, the other Sisters struggle to keep the unit running with less and less staff, it is becoming the norm in our unit for Nurses to leave or for them to go part time.
But it does my heart proud to see those retired Sisters covering for Nurses to keep numbers up, the NHS is in crisis, we either pay for it to continue or lose it.
Fact, keep the Tories and lose the NHS, get rid of them and reclaim something which makes this little island great.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Prof,
Taken from the article this thread is linked to, but I see the Tories destroying the NHS first hand, in the past two months we have had four Senior Sisters retiring with no replacements, the other Sisters struggle to keep the unit running with less and less staff, it is becoming the norm in our unit for Nurses to leave or for them to go part time.
But it does my heart proud to see those retired Sisters covering for Nurses to keep numbers up, the NHS is in crisis, we either pay for it to continue or lose it.
Fact, keep the Tories and lose the NHS, get rid of them and reclaim something which makes this little island great.
Gonnagle.
The NHS in Scotland is fully devolved.
-
Dear Prof,
Taken from the article this thread is linked to, but I see the Tories destroying the NHS first hand, in the past two months we have had four Senior Sisters retiring with no replacements, the other Sisters struggle to keep the unit running with less and less staff, it is becoming the norm in our unit for Nurses to leave or for them to go part time.
But it does my heart proud to see those retired Sisters covering for Nurses to keep numbers up, the NHS is in crisis, we either pay for it to continue or lose it.
Fact, keep the Tories and lose the NHS, get rid of them and reclaim something which makes this little island great.
Gonnagle.
But privatisation went crackers under New Labour. How is Corbyn going to deal with the money going into private hands because of finance agreements for hospital buildings?
-
The Tory party had scrapping tuition fees as a policy under Michael Howard and dropped it when they realised it was unworkable. Similarly I think if the figures could have been made to work Clegg would have got some kind of change in when in the Coalition.
Tertiary education was expanded massively during the last years of the 20th century. Do you remember Tony Blair saying that he wanted 50% of all school leavers to go to university? The increase in numbers undertaking HE was simply a rather cynical ruse to reduce the levels of unemployment of young people and was supported by both major parties.
Of course, this was expensive - and someone would have to pay for it. Why should "the government" pay for all these students to have super high paying jobs? If they were going to be high earners then the students should pay for it themselves was born. Brilliant. Two problems solved with a single stroke! Reduction in structural unemployment and university expansion self-funded.
There is NO way that student fees will ever be discontinued.
Education continuing beyond school leaving is an excellent conception - but it ought to look at all areas of education, not just higher education.
-
Dear Prof and Jack,
Well I have voted for everyone, especially the renationalising of our Railways.
Gonnagle.
The point being is that if you try to do anything that the bankers and elites don't like they start to trash your economy i.e. they put a gun next to your head and make you an offer you can't refuse. That offer is to continue sucking the wealth out of the people and allow them to rot so they can become richer. That's what they did to Greece and now look at them. Also, essentially the South American countries etc. You have to overcome the "strong man" to add some NT material into it.
-
That isn't the case for many others on that list. And the details are lacking. In other cases the statement makes no sense. For example 'renationalise the NHS' - but the NHS is already a public sector nationalised organisation.
No it's not. It is pretty much 9/10th privatised but it has all been done in the back offices etc. and they all have the NHS logo to hide the fact that they are essentially in private hands.
The problem is that many of the aspirations will cost very significant amounts of money, with no indication where that money will come from. It is magic money tree territory I'm afraid.
And when Carney came out after Brexit and said the bankers were scared and crying that they may lose their £million bonuses he found £250 billion for them. Where did that come from?
So for example 'Scrap tuition fees' OK - fine, but where will the shortfall of £9250 per student that my institution will lose from 'scrapping tuition fees' come from. Will universities be starved of cash, will Corbyn raise tax, and note that raising top levels of tax doesn't actually achieve an awful lot beyond gesture politics.
The same place Carney found £250 billion.
-
Of course, Corbyn would be unable to enact these policies en masse even were he elected with an overall majority. Many off them are beyond Westminster's control, being wholly or partially devolved issues.
-
Dear Forum,
My thanks to Jakswan over on the GE thread for this link.
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/how-many-of-jeremy-corbyns-policies-do.html?m=1
The above options in detail can be found in this link.
Gonnagle.
I think you will find that JK was belittling my post with his well-informed opinion mate - I can't see JK actually reading any of the information given on the link let alone endorse it.
Credit due where credits due...
-
Oh and he won't read this one either - it has JC's name in it:
Political propaganda works by programming intellectually lazy people with very simple tropes that they can rote learn and regurgitate instead of doing the hard work of actually researching and thinking about the issues for themselves.
Two of the most ubiquitous of these glib political propaganda tropes are the "Jeremy Corbyn is unelectable" one and the "Theresa May is a strong leader" one.
I've already written an article ripping the ludicrously counterfactual right-wing "Theresa May is a strong leader" trope to shreds (see here:http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/contrasting-tory-propaganda-with-actual.html (http://:http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/contrasting-tory-propaganda-with-actual.html)) and this article exists to confront the "Jeremy Corbyn is unelectable" one.
If every Labour Party supporter uses this as a reply every single time they see the "unelectable" trope being wheeled out, maybe it might eradicate this vacuous right-wing propaganda nonsense by getting people actually talking about Labour's actual policies, rather than just blibber-blabbering their rote-learned political propaganda tropes all over the place.
Reply to them with a link to this article and politely ask them to explain which of Corbyn's policies they actually oppose, and why.
20 Labour Party policies:
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/how-to-answer-lazy-corbyn-is.html
-
"Jeremy Corbyn is unelectable"
...
20 Labour Party policies
(Number 18)
Holding the Tories to account over Brexit
Labour have said that they won't block Brexit, but they will seek to hold the Tories to account over it. A landslide Tory victory would be a disaster for the UK because it would allow Theresa May to pursue the most right-wing pro-corporate anti-worker Brexit possible with almost no democratic scrutiny. The only way to make sure the Tories don't push a fanatically right-wing Brexit on the nation is to ensure that there are plenty of opposition MPs to hold them to account.
So according to the author of an article on whether JC is electable, the Labour party policy on the defining issue of this election (if MaybeMaybenot is to be believed), is for there to be more Labour MPs on the opposition benches. If the author genuinely believed JC to be electable then he'd be writing about the Tories being on the opposition benches.
-
He does...
Or have you not noticed for some reason?
Just to throw you off track:
The BBC’s Reality Check series – a series purporting to impartially fact-check and debunk claims made by politicians and others in the media — has kicked off the general election in the authentic non-partisan manner we’ve come to expect from the BBC of late. The Beeb have attempted to discredit Labour’s economic credibility using evidence sought only from right-wing neoliberal think tanks headed by ex-Tory cabinet ministers, whilst completely disregarding contrary evidence from truly independent institutions.
One of their recent articles dismissed the Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell’s “claim” that the tax burden has been shifted away from the rich and onto everybody else by using a mishmash of “evidence’ from supposedly independent and non-political think-tanks such as the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) as well as obviously partisan predictions from the Tory government.
The IFS is essentially a neoliberal institution — one which receives donations from a wide range of huge corporations — and is headed by a former Tory cabinet member — yet, the BBC consistently uses information from the IFS as if it is a genuinely independent and impartial organisation — despite the fact that it is clearly biased in the direction of their corporate masters. In the process of doing so, they also fail to look at more independent sources which clearly back up McDonnell’s claim.
The situation perfectly illustrates the institutional right-wing neoliberal bias at the heart of the BBC’s political coverage.
http://evolvepolitics.com/you-probably-wont-believe-just-how-biased-the-bbcs-latest-anti-corbyn-attack-actually-is/
-
Oh and he won't read this one either - it has JC's name in it:
One way that JC could get elected would be if the Tories only get enough seats for a minority forcing the others to form a coalition when the Tories confidence ends.
-
I think you will find that JK was belittling my post with his well-informed opinion mate - I can't see JK actually reading any of the information given on the link let alone endorse it.
Credit due where credits due...
Wrong on both counts, most of those things I would agree with and I read the link.
How is it going to be paid for, Corbyn and his Shadow Cabinet have failed to answer those questions every time I have watched them and I've watched them a lot.
This what makes Corbyn unelectable and that is without mentioning Livingston farce, that Labour is a divided party and the delusions that its all a conspiracy.
I read your second link its almost a moot point, are Labour planning to go after the rich and introduce 90% income tax bands, it doesn't work.
He is a nice man but a terrible potential prime minister.
-
I see Corbyn has promised 4 more bank holidays if Labour gets in, one for each British saints day. They don't say how that will be paid for! ::)
-
The first three fall within weeks of both each other and the Easter and May Day Bank Holidays. I like the idea of extra bank holidays but having them spread out would be useful.
-
I see Corbyn has promised 4 more bank holidays if Labour gets in, one for each British saints day. They don't say how that will be paid for! ::)
Well he won't get the Cornish vote unless he includes a St Piran's Day.
-
I see Corbyn has promised 4 more bank holidays if Labour gets in, one for each British saints day. They don't say how that will be paid for! ::)
- 30 November is already a bank holiday in Scotland. I believe similarly that St Patrick'ds day is similarly treated in NI. These are devolved matters.
-
Well he won't get the Cornish vote unless he includes a St Piran's Day.
St Piran?
-
St Piran?
A popular beat combo, m'lud
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cornwall/uncovered/stories/st_piran_background.shtml
-
A popular beat combo, m'lud
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cornwall/uncovered/stories/st_piran_background.shtml
Thanks.
-
Just taking the first one, surely if we dislike tax havens so much we shouldn't be in linked to quite so many offshore tax havens?
-
Dear Prof,
Taken from the article this thread is linked to, but I see the Tories destroying the NHS first hand, in the past two months we have had four Senior Sisters retiring with no replacements, the other Sisters struggle to keep the unit running with less and less staff, it is becoming the norm in our unit for Nurses to leave or for them to go part time.
But it does my heart proud to see those retired Sisters covering for Nurses to keep numbers up, the NHS is in crisis, we either pay for it to continue or lose it.
Fact, keep the Tories and lose the NHS, get rid of them and reclaim something which makes this little island great.
Gonnagle.
Blame the SNP if you are talking about the NHS In Scotland.
-
I see Corbyn has promised 4 more bank holidays if Labour gets in, one for each British saints day. They don't say how that will be paid for! ::)
It's easy. It will be paid for with slightly reduced productivity per person per year.
-
It's easy. It will be paid for with slightly reduced productivity per person per year.
I think we have to be careful about making a direct correlation here. Despite, or possibly because of, having fewer public holidays than most countries, and working longer hours we have an issue with low productivity. The policy itself is a ludicrous sop, particularly for the timing reasons already mentioned, nevermind its harking back to a time when Saints days meant anything. I would've more interested in them putting together a plan looking at increasing productivity through development of clear equitable workers rights treated as a whole rather than piecemeal.
-
I think we have to be careful about making a direct correlation here. Despite, or possibly because of, having fewer public holidays than most countries, and working longer hours we have an issue with low productivity. The policy itself is a ludicrous sop, particularly for the timing reasons already mentioned, nevermind its harking back to a time when Saints days meant anything. I would've more interested in them putting together a plan looking at increasing productivity through development of clear equitable workers rights treated as a whole rather than piecemeal.
Interesting view. Are you saying that taken as a whole they vote conservative and then demonstrate passive aggression in the workplace thus reducing productivity?
Or is it that aspect which is always neglected under Tory administrations.....Shite management.
-
I think we have to be careful about making a direct correlation here. Despite, or possibly because of, having fewer public holidays than most countries, and working longer hours we have an issue with low productivity. The policy itself is a ludicrous sop, particularly for the timing reasons already mentioned, nevermind its harking back to a time when Saints days meant anything. I would've more interested in them putting together a plan looking at increasing productivity through development of clear equitable workers rights treated as a whole rather than piecemeal.
I dunno....If your erstwhile voters are going to take the piss out of you why not take the piss out of them.
You want a Landslide? Vote for more working hours.
Can I see that the whiff of Britain's Ecclesiastical past has turned yer average forum atheist into a Conservative here?
-
Corbyn is undecided about Trident, but the Labour Party wishes to keep the deterrent.
-
I dunno....If your erstwhile voters are going to take the piss out of you why not take the piss out of them.
You want a Landslide? Vote for more working hours.
Can I see that the whiff of Britain's Ecclesiastical past has turned yer average forum atheist into a Conservative here?
No.
-
I think we have to be careful about making a direct correlation here. Despite, or possibly because of, having fewer public holidays than most countries, and working longer hours we have an issue with low productivity. The policy itself is a ludicrous sop, particularly for the timing reasons already mentioned, nevermind its harking back to a time when Saints days meant anything. I would've more interested in them putting together a plan looking at increasing productivity through development of clear equitable workers rights treated as a whole rather than piecemeal.
I was focusing on Floo's specific question about how to pay for the new bank holidays and pointing out that it is relatively easy.
The policy itself is an obvious bribe and it hasn't been thought out, not least because three of the four proposed new holidays fall in a period that is already well served by Easter and the May holidays.
As for increasing productivity through improving workers' rights, I find that an intriguing idea. The UK's per capita productivity is shockingly bad compared with other European countries that have better rights, but correlation is not necessarily causation.
-
Corbyn is undecided about Trident, but the Labour Party wishes to keep the deterrent.
Define "the Labour Party". Do you mean the PLP or the party as a whole including all its members?
-
Corbyn is undecided about Trident, but the Labour Party wishes to keep the deterrent.
-
Which Labourparty?
'Cos even though their Scots leader supported weapons of mass destruction, the Scottis branch voted to get rid of them.
-
Define "the Labour Party". Do you mean the PLP or the party as a whole including all its members?
I should have said the PLP.
-
Dear Jeremyp,
Blame the SNP if you are talking about the NHS In Scotland.
Don't worry old son!! After young Sane informed me that that the NHS had been devolved, I have been having a little read about who and what, seems I have a little catching up on what the Tartan Tories are all about.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Jeremyp,
Don't worry old son!! After young Sane informed me that that the NHS had been devolved, I have been having a little read about who and what, seems I have a little catching up on what the Tartan Tories are all about.
Gonnagle.
-
Actually, the NHS has been separate from that in England since its' creation, long before devolution. It used to be the province of the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Scottish Office.
-
Which Labourparty?
'Cos even though their Scots leader supported weapons of mass destruction, the Scottis branch voted to get rid of them.
Hang don't the SNP want to remain in NATO which has nuclear weapons.
-
Hang don't the SNP want to remain in NATO which has nuclear weapons.
-
Yep
(I'm not a member of any party at the moment, btw)
So what?
Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Norway....need I go on?
None of them harbour weapons of mass destruction, yet are members of Nato.
Why should Scotland be any different?
-
Corbyn is undecided about Trident, but the Labour Party wishes to keep the deterrent.
A "deterrent" against who and/or what exactly??
-
I see Corbyn has promised 4 more bank holidays if Labour gets in, one for each British saints day. They don't say how that will be paid for! ::)
You could have a look here: https://twitter.com/LabourEoin/status/856178772458033153/photo/1
-
You could have a look here: https://twitter.com/LabourEoin/status/856178772458033153/photo/1
Yes, some of those costings are clearly bollocks. For example the increased tax revenue from private schools will almost certainly put many of them out of business. I don't think it's a bad idea, I just think they are being naive about how much money it will rase.
The ban on companies in tax havens bidding for government business is just petty nonsense. |It's also false to say it has zero cost because those companies are no longer bidding for government contracts which reduces competition. Also, I'd like to see where they are going to find a company to build their next destroyers etc if that company is not allowed to pay its CEO more than £350k.
I'm not saying that all those ideas are bad, just that they've costed them very naively.
-
-
Yep
(I'm not a member of any party at the moment, btw)
So what?
Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Norway....need I go on?
None of them harbour weapons of mass destruction, yet are members of Nato.
Why should Scotland be any different?
So your opposition to Trident is a NIMBYism.
-
You could have a look here: https://twitter.com/LabourEoin/status/856178772458033153/photo/1
Some of those will crash the economy. The ban of £350,000 CEO companies working for government is going to be tricky.
Is Google in a tax haven?
-
Dear Jeremyp and Jakswan,
I will really have to get my head around that one, £350,000 :o :o Some Doctors and well qualified Nurses earn a fraction of that hideous sum and work totally insane hours to achieve that, but then the job of Doctors and Nurses is a vocation, they don't work for the money.
Here's a well known fact about Nursing in the 21st century, ( 21st century my arse, the Tories won't be happy until they are sticking our kids back up chimney's ) Nurses are doing 12 hour shifts, that is Victorian >:(
In the 21st century we should be striving for less hours but with the same pay ( they are trialing this in Sweden or Norway, well one of those forward thinking countries ) but I hear you cry!! where will we find the money to pay for this, well that is the head of the viper we really should cut off, how about we tell the more money than sense CEO's to take a massive pay cut, Nah!! that boat has sailed, I will not be your CEO unless you pay me ££££££££££££££ and don't forget the bonus, even if I do a shitty job. >:(
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Jeremyp and Jakswan,
I will really have to get my head around that one, £350,000 :o :o Some Doctors and well qualified Nurses earn a fraction of that hideous sum and work totally insane hours to achieve that, but then the job of Doctors and Nurses is a vocation, they don't work for the money.
Here's a well known fact about Nursing in the 21st century, ( 21st century my arse, the Tories won't be happy until they are sticking our kids back up chimney's ) Nurses are doing 12 hour shifts, that is Victorian >:(
In the 21st century we should be striving for less hours but with the same pay ( they are trialing this in Sweden or Norway, well one of those forward thinking countries ) but I hear you cry!! where will we find the money to pay for this, well that is the head of the viper we really should cut off, how about we tell the more money than sense CEO's to take a massive pay cut, Nah!! that boat has sailed, I will not be your CEO unless you pay me ££££££££££££££ and don't forget the bonus, even if I do a shitty job. >:(
Gonnagle.
Ignoring the Daily Mail style rant you. A way to effectively lower CEO salary is to raise taxes on high earners and to use the "money raised" to pay nurses more, it won't work and won't get voted for but it is a fair position to hold.
Maybe tone down the sanctimonious drivel though, I know you think your better than everyone else but don't think anyone is buying it.
-
Ignoring the Daily Mail style rant you. A way to effectively lower CEO salary is to raise taxes on high earners and to use the "money raised" to pay nurses more, it won't work and won't get voted for but it is a fair position to hold.
Maybe tone down the sanctimonious drivel though, I know you think your better than everyone else but don't think anyone is buying it.
Does Gonzo think he is better than everyone else?
-
Dear Sane,
Yes I do, I am on one massive ego trip :o
Dear Jakswan,
Yes!! excuse me it was a rant, and I think justifiable.
Gonnagle.
-
A way to effectively lower CEO salary is to raise taxes on high earners and to use the "money raised" to pay nurses more, it won't work and won't get voted for but it is a fair position to hold.
Problem is, of course, that CEO's will be closely involved in negotiating a package, and they will ensure that the package they receive is most attractive in tax terms. There are loads of ways to minimise tax liabilities and shifting money from direct salary to other elements is common. A classic approach would be to shift a big chunk straight into a pension, which is more tax efficient. Another is dividend from share options.
So you need to completely reorganise the tax system, and it isn't easy to hit others who aren't high earners - for example those relying on incomes from pension funds that include substantial dividend elements. Or acting to disincentive individuals from putting money into pensions.
-
I will really have to get my head around that one, £350,000 :o :o Some Doctors and well qualified Nurses earn a fraction of that hideous sum and work totally insane hours to achieve that, but then the job of Doctors and Nurses is a vocation, they don't work for the money.
And your point is?
CEOs get paid lots because that is what they are worth to the companies that employ them. For a company like BAe Systems (a big government supplier) employing a CEO who can increase their margin by only 0.1% of revenue, gives them an extra 18 million pounds a year. If the CEO demands a million pounds to do that, it's still a good deal.
Here's a well known fact about Nursing in the 21st century, ( 21st century my arse, the Tories won't be happy until they are sticking our kids back up chimney's ) Nurses are doing 12 hour shifts, that is Victorian >:(
You don't tackle the problems of the nursing profession by beating up people in unrelated areas.
In the 21st century we should be striving for less hours but with the same pay ( they are trialing this in Sweden or Norway, well one of those forward thinking countries ) but I hear you cry!! where will we find the money to pay for this
By increasing productivity. Sweden reckons that they will get the same amount of work in six hours that they currently get in eight hours. It's credible, in my opinion. Most countries in Europe already have better productivity than us even with an eight hour day.
-
So you need to completely reorganise the tax system, and it isn't easy to hit others who aren't high earners - for example those relying on incomes from pension funds that include substantial dividend elements. Or acting to disincentive individuals from putting money into pensions.
And it really isn't worth the effort. There aren't that many CEOs earning such enormous sums and we need thousands of nurses and doctors, policemen, teachers etc etc etc. Personally, I think we need higher taxation in general. But you have to be careful because raising taxes by (say 5%) won't give you an extra 5% in the government coffers because of the braking effect it would have on the economy.
-
Dear Jeremyp,
By increasing productivity. Sweden reckons that they will get the same amount of work in six hours that they currently get in eight hours. It's credible, in my opinion. Most countries in Europe already have better productivity than us even with an eight hour day.
Yes! exactly, the study is all about increasing productivity, less sick leave, which the NHS is rife with, a happy workforce, one finding they have found, people will work harder on six hours than they did on twelve.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Jeremyp,
Yes! exactly, the study is all about increasing productivity, less sick leave, which the NHS is rife with, a happy workforce, one finding they have found, people will work harder on six hours than they did on twelve.
Gonnagle.
It might also mean getting rid of people so that less people do the same amount of work.
Inefficiencies need to be rooted out as well.
-
Dear Berational,
Just heading out but yes that is one area employers need to sharpen up, people, employees are human beings, not some commodity to use and abuse as profits rise or fall.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Berational,
Just heading out but yes that is one area employers need to sharpen up, people, employees are human beings, not some commodity to use and abuse as profits rise or fall.
Gonnagle.
But the business is competing with other businesses, and needs to make a profit, so getting rid of inefficiencies is a way to save cost, and that may mean that people are discarded.
You seem to want a utopia, well me too count me in. How do we achieve it?
-
Yes!! excuse me it was a rant, and I think justifiable.
LOL feel free to rant away its empty rhetoric. I thought you might have been actually advocating some sort of firm policy but as ever once challenged back down.
-
Dear Berational,
How would I achieve it, well I am no business man but.
1. If there is a slump in the market, shareholders and owners take the hit, they are paid nothing, zero, in fact if they are big business, you ask them to foot the bill until better times.
2. Shareholders, now this is being done, all employee's become shareholders, if I was working for company X and had shares I would graft hard to make sure that company stayed viable.
3. Make damn sure all my employee's are happy to come to work, take a look at every practice the employee's are involved in and ask, how can we make it easier, more enjoyable.
4. A bug bear of mine, coffee and tea are free, not a stupid machine, but good quality, oh and a toaster!! I would come in that little bit earlier just to have some time with colleagues over a good cup of coffee and a slice of well buttered toast, a bit of heaven before you begin your daily toil.
5. Take a good look at Sports Direct and do the opposite of everything they do.
6. That numpty who bought BHS, show the working public that he will be branded with the number 666, well after we have fleeced him for every penny that he has, see if he likes standing in a queue at a foodbank.
Apart from the above, see how the Scandinavian experiment works out, learn from it build on it.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Jakswan,
What challenge?? where is the challenge, you yourself came out with tax the high earners more, I don't believe that is the solution, fleece the rich, one policy I disagree on, a fair tax system across the board, that is what I want.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Jakswan,
What challenge?? where is the challenge, you yourself came out with tax the high earners more, I don't believe that is the solution, fleece the rich, one policy I disagree on, a fair tax system across the board, that is what I want.
Gonnagle.
What is it the tories are offering? What are people getting crazy over them about?
-
Dear Vlad,
Nothing, a empty party, we have sausage rolls in the oven, big deal, but they do have hell of a smoke and mirrors party, for the whizz bang crowd, apparently that is what we want, fireworks and display, substance has had its day.
Gonnagle.
-
1. If there is a slump in the market, shareholders and owners take the hit, they are paid nothing, zero, in fact if they are big business, you ask them to foot the bill until better times.
But they do foot the bill in better times.
Better times, of course, mean that the company is profitable, and if so corporation tax will be paid. If the company is profitable it will likely provide a dividend to its shareholders and that dividend income is tax. If the value of the shares rises when shareholders sell them that capital gain is taxed.
And the money that is earned by the shareholders is likely (at least in part) to be spent and therefore VAT will be raised too.
-
Dear Jakswan,
What challenge?? where is the challenge, you yourself came out with tax the high earners more, I don't believe that is the solution, fleece the rich, one policy I disagree on, a fair tax system across the board, that is what I want.
Gonnagle.
No I was looking for some semblance of coherence in your your post, I extrapolated the policy from your post, apologies should have made that clear.
So nurses / CEOs what policy are your advocating?
-
Dear Vlad,
Nothing, a empty party, we have sausage rolls in the oven, big deal, but they do have hell of a smoke and mirrors party, for the whizz bang crowd, apparently that is what we want, fireworks and display, substance has had its day.
Gonnagle.
My irony meter just blew. :)
-
Whilst I don't support Corbyn, I am disgusted that Boris Johnson has made such a complete idiot of himself with his rude name calling!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39727489
-
I was not aware that "mugwump" is a rude word. It means someone who is sitting on the fence with his mug on one side and his "wump" on the other.
-
I was not aware that "mugwump" is a rude word. It means someone who is sitting on the fence with his mug on one side and his "wump" on the other.
"Mutton headed mugwump" was the phrase; of course it is impolite. Johnson doesn't half make an idiot of himself generally, especially with his scruffy hairstyle. As Foreign Secretary he is not doing the UK any favours by behaving badly, imo.
-
Nothing wrong with mutton.
Mugwump definition - "a person who remains aloof or independent, especially from party politics"
Not heard word before, quite a good one I think! Not rude.
-
Johnson's main problem is that he is a short-term opportunist. Should it prove necessary, he will change his stance on membership of the EU in a second. It is shallowness in extreme to judge him by his hairstyle. Do you really think that politicians in other countries are bothered by his sartorial decisions?
Mutton-headed mugwump! Translation: not very bright and indecisive. Johnson used it because it is alliterative and memorable
Floo, we are at the beginning of a general election campaign. Wait until the insults really begin ...
-
Nothing wrong with mutton.
Mugwump definition - "a person who remains aloof or independent, especially from party politics"
Not heard word before, quite a good one I think! Not rude.
You know as well I do that the phrase that idiot Johnson used was meant to be insulting! ::)
-
You know as well I do that the phrase that idiot Johnson used was meant to be insulting! ::)
And "idiot Johnson" isn't meant to be insulting?
We are now on the brink of an election. How do you think people on opposite sides of the contest are going to behave? If they can rubbish the other side they will do so, why do you imagine that they will be "polite"?. "Mutton-headed mugwump" is quite gentle, it is just public school boy banter.
-
And "idiot Johnson" isn't meant to be insulting?
We are now on the brink of an election. How do you think people on opposite sides of the contest are going to behave? If they can rubbish the other side they will do so, why do you imagine that they will be "polite"?. "Mutton-headed mugwump" is quite gentle, it is just public school boy banter.
Public school banter of that kind is hardly suitable for our Foreign Secretary to indulge in, when there are so many hot spots in this world at present, on which to focus his attention, and to be treated seriously by other countries.
-
Boris is a buffoon floo. It surprises me that anyone takes him seriously.
-
Corbyn and labour look like losing but that was on the cards no matter who was in charge of labour.
What surprises me is how their opponents have bypassed the Gutter and gone straight to the sewer.
-
Dear Berational,
How would I achieve it, well I am no business man but.
1. If there is a slump in the market, shareholders and owners
The shareholders and the owners are the same people.
take the hit, they are paid nothing, zero, in fact if they are big business, you ask them to foot the bill until better times.
That's exactly what happens. Dividends are paid out of profits. No profits = no dividend. Also, when a company hits hard times, shareholders are frequently asked to stump up more cash to save it. Since it is their money, they are entitled to ask the company to make savings in that situation.
2. Shareholders, now this is being done, all employee's become shareholders, if I was working for company X and had shares I would graft hard to make sure that company stayed viable.
That would be a really nice idea but I think there are problems with doing that in general. It means that, every time you hire a new employee, everybody else's shareholding gets diluted. What do you do with the shares when people leave. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea: people are more motivated when they have a sense of ownership, but the problems not trivial.
3. Make damn sure all my employee's are happy to come to work, take a look at every practice the employee's are involved in and ask, how can we make it easier, more enjoyable.
How are you going to do that? Or rather how could a government legislate for that? Good companies already try to do it and even they frequently fail.
4. A bug bear of mine, coffee and tea are free, not a stupid machine, but good quality, oh and a toaster!! I would come in that little bit earlier just to have some time with colleagues over a good cup of coffee and a slice of well buttered toast, a bit of heaven before you begin your daily toil.
I'm all for free coffee in the work place but you need to be aware that it doesn't grow on trees. If you give it out for free, it's a cost to the company and maybe some of the employees who don't drink coffee are unhappy at a benefit that their colleagues get and they don't - especially if they are shareholders and it cuts in to their dividend.
-
Nothing wrong with mutton.
Describing somebody as "mutton headed" is an insult even if mutton is tasty.
Mugwump definition - "a person who remains aloof or independent, especially from party politics"
Not heard word before, quite a good one I think! Not rude.
I think it would be quite an insult to describe the Labour Party leader as aloof from party politics. He's supposed to be in charge of the party politics.
-
And "idiot Johnson" isn't meant to be insulting?
Foo is not the Foreign Secretary and her comment hasn't been broadcast to the nation.
-
Perhaps we are making too much of it.