... after his latest outburst?
*(he said on The One Show that striking public sector workers should be shot in front of their families)*
imo yes, it's not the first time he's said something controversial and it won't be the last, top gear has a massive market and without jezza there is no top gear.
Lets hope not the prize pr*ck
Thing is I agree with him.
Every worker should get the same pension reward, and the same retirement age.
Why should some be more privileged than another?
Mind you, I also think Top Gear is rubbish!
I'm getting fed up with him. That comment was nothing about 'telling it like it is' and everything about 'look at me, look at me, look at me... I'M JEREMY CLARKSON'
His career will survive because the people who care about his comments don't matter and the people that matter don't care.
In my personal opinion (I am preparing to be shot at for this) public sector should in no way be striking over pensions or anything for that matter.
Striking is actually costing the country money and the country is in dire financial problems as it is. How is striking going to help us all as a
nation long term???
Clarkson is a burk however!
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
I'm getting fed up with him. That comment was nothing about 'telling it like it is' and everything about 'look at me, look at me, look at me... I'M JEREMY CLARKSON'
Sure the 'shoot them' comment was typical Clarkeson rubbish, but his comment regarding 'protected pensions, early retirement and low
stress jobs' was just.
The 'public purse' is protected, why should they be different from the majority who have to work till 65+ on 100 a week?
This thread is useless without video!
Let's face it, he was on to promote his latest book and DVD so he wanted to be controversial. In context he said he thought he strikes were good
as the roads were quiet then said as this is the Bbc we must show both sides so I think they should be taken out and shot.
It wasn't "offensive" to me. Just seen the head of unison describe it as incitement against union workers !
She also said that because others had been sacked for less he should be sacked. I'm sure she would support that sort of rule towards her members
by their employers!
I didnt see the comment about suicide by train.
Latest in a long line of over sensitive reporting if you ask me. Do you think he really wants to execute teachers who strike?
Stupid thing to say on national telly at 7pm though. If you don't like what he said, call him a cock and forget about it.
My 2 penneth.
Rich
quote:
Originally posted by designer
... but his comment regarding 'protected pensions, early retirement and low stress jobs' was just.
Top gear watchers are gay
quote:
Originally posted by CRAIGR
Top gear watchers are gay
quote:
Originally posted by Irony
quote:
Originally posted by CRAIGR
Top gear watchers are gay
Do you have book or a DVD coming out for Christmas?
quote:
Originally posted by scootz
quote:
Originally posted by designer
... but his comment regarding 'protected pensions, early retirement and low stress jobs' was just.
But it's somewhat ridiculous when that comment was made by someone who drives fast cars and spouts sh*te in return for an astronomical salary!
Let's all go and camp in his garden on the Isle of Man and listen to him rant about that How could anybody take anything he says seriously,
he's a big buffoon.
His suicide remarks on the same programme were even more out of order.
Why did the BBC keep Top Gear but chicken out of F1, I would bet Top Gear costs more per hour than full F1 coverage.
For god sake stop whinging about F1. BBC pay out large amounts of money to Bernie to show cars going round in circles. TopGear makes big money for the BBC which is why they put up with Clarkson et al. If they close it down they would go somewhere else and still earn the money, Andy Wilman is very clever about this and they have developed a brand which pays very nicely.
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
His suicide remarks on the same programme were even more out of order.
Why did the BBC keep Top Gear but chicken out of F1, I would bet Top Gear costs more per hour than full F1 coverage.
quote:
Originally posted by jeffw
For god sake stop whinging about F1. BBC pay out large amounts of money to Bernie to show cars going round in circles. TopGear makes big money for the BBC which is why they put up with Clarkson et al. If they close it down they would go somewhere else and still earn the money, Andy Wilman is very clever about this and they have developed a brand which pays very nicely.
quote:
Originally posted by jeffw
For god sake stop whinging about F1. BBC pay out large amounts of money to Bernie to show cars going round in circles. TopGear makes big money for the BBC which is why they put up with Clarkson et al. If they close it down they would go somewhere else and still earn the money, Andy Wilman is very clever about this and they have developed a brand which pays very nicely.
His populist right wing drivel is tiring, but as with our own Don Cherry (who is a lot milder than JC), some people love him. Funny til you are on the
receiving end; then it's not so funny. I think the Nazis did similar things, with the same effect, although, of course, I am in no way comparing
Mr. Clarkson to a band of German/Austrian thugs from the 1930's and 40's.
I tend to agree with Mr. Scootz (again, sadly).
[Edited on 1/12/11 by RK]
If he meant (and I suspect he did) that the public sector workers bang out of order and should be ashamed of themselves then he was right - he just
has this way of saying stuff in an OTT way and probably in bad taste sometimes too which is fine with me.
He is totally harmless and a bit of a comedian doing his particular brand of 'comedy'
I agree with Clarkson's general view, maybe not shooting though and as for top gear, yes he is a knob, the Hamster is a waste of space, mind you
a very small space, but it does make good entertainment as opposed to serious car stuff.
Oh, and being a watcher of top gear makes me "gay", nothing against gays, but that deserves a smack, happy to oblige any time.
quote:
Originally posted by spiderman
quote:
Originally posted by designer
Thing is I agree with him.
Every worker should get the same pension reward, and the same retirement age.
Why should some be more privileged than another?
Mind you, I also think Top Gear is rubbish!
It is a well known fact that civil servants are paid well below what the public sector are paid. I work for the MOD and I get job satisfaction knowing that what I do is worthwhile and is actually of benefit to our serving soldiers, but the pay is crap and the only saving grace is that there may be a reasonable pension at the end of all the dedication I have put in to helping out those who's lives may depend upon what I do.
Not all civil servants are on £100,000+pa in actual fact most of use earn about 20% of that so do not paint us all with the same brush, thinking that we are only after a free ride and looking for a guilt edged retirement.
I am a technician of 30 years experience and 10 years ago I was earning 50% more than I am now but hated the fact that I was just making the Board of Directors and the shareholders rich and not really contributing to society in any useful way apart from paying tax.
My pension after over 20 years of service, at 65, will be around £6000pa, hardly a fortune, as long as the Government do not retrospectivly change the rules which is what they have done to some workers and probably will again before my time is up.
Lastly, No I did not go on strike.
quote:
Originally posted by spiderman
quote:
Originally posted by designer
Thing is I agree with him.
Every worker should get the same pension reward, and the same retirement age.
Why should some be more privileged than another?
Mind you, I also think Top Gear is rubbish!
It is a well known fact that civil servants are paid well below what the public sector are paid. I work for the MOD and I get job satisfaction knowing that what I do is worthwhile and is actually of benefit to our serving soldiers, but the pay is crap and the only saving grace is that there may be a reasonable pension at the end of all the dedication I have put in to helping out those who's lives may depend upon what I do.
Not all civil servants are on £100,000+pa in actual fact most of use earn about 20% of that so do not paint us all with the same brush, thinking that we are only after a free ride and looking for a guilt edged retirement.
I am a technician of 30 years experience and 10 years ago I was earning 50% more than I am now but hated the fact that I was just making the Board of Directors and the shareholders rich and not really contributing to society in any useful way apart from paying tax.
My pension after over 20 years of service, at 65, will be around £6000pa, hardly a fortune, as long as the Government do not retrospectivly change the rules which is what they have done to some workers and probably will again before my time is up.
Lastly, No I did not go on strike.
quote:
Originally posted by Irony
quote:
Originally posted by CRAIGR
Top gear watchers are gay
Do you have book or a DVD coming out for Christmas?
quote:
Originally posted by angliamotorsport
Oh, and being a watcher of top gear makes me "gay", nothing against gays, but that deserves a smacker, happy to oblige any time.
quote:
Originally posted by angliamotorsport
I agree with Clarkson's general view, maybe not shooting though and as for top gear, yes he is a knob, the Hamster is a waste of space, mind you a very small space, but it does make good entertainment as opposed to serious car stuff.
Oh, and being a watcher of top gear makes me "gay", nothing against gays, but that deserves a smack, happy to oblige any time.
Yes he will survive, hes a comedian, comedians dont get sacked for racist jokes! Its his job......
And yes i dont think the strikers should be on strike because our country is having to cut back lots of various things to allow us the chance to
improve our economy and they should realise this.
scoots, Yes! I just love it, now got zx in it, AB did a great job.
Sorry, nothing to do with Clakson, I would not let him within a million miles of it
Actually Clakson does sound better!
I've no sympathy with them going on strike either. The simple fact is the government employs too many jobsworths anyway and it can no longer afford them. Jezza for Prezza then. At least it'd keep him away from cars.
He was invited on to the programme precisely because he makes outrageous right wing comments. If they had wanted a loony left wing apologist for the
strikers they would have asked Polly Toynbee, who would have elicited different but equally sanctimonious responses
If you want to blame anybody, blame the programme producers... they are out to make good television and don't care about the consequences.
though i do have some sympathy for public sector workers they are probs going to have to pay for the mess the city has got us into like everyone else
would have more sympathy if tax office worked, defra and csa worked most gov departments seem to be badly run what can we say i am having to work
harder and longer to get my business to survive .
Thats maby what cameron means by big socity all in the sh..t together
I find it very saddening that some of the comments imply that public sector workers, like myself, are over paid: lazy: inline for gilt edged pensions
and as one post says jobsworths.
I fully understand that the economic situation is very bad ( some of it due to recent mismanagement ) . However a lot of the changes that are taking
place to public sector pensions and wages are an over response to the situation and a clear attack and TAX aimed at the public sector.
Lord Hutton and the governments own audit office clearly state that the public sector pensions require less radical changes to ensure they reduce in
cost as a % of the GDP.
This is how it affects me… A teacher with 22 years pension contributions already and looking to do another 16 years so that I can retire at 60.
I get no pay rise for 3 years ( I understand that)
then only 1% not the 2% that we had agreed.
Change to average earnings - ok no problems Ill take a knock.
get significantly less pension - ( starting to to get a little )
pay in significantly more – almost double my monthly contribution ( This is just a tax to help the government - it does not pay my pension fund)
Work till I am 67 - not possible as a teacher in a state school.
Do you want 67 year old teachers or fire-fighters or nurses.
I think rich bastards like Clarkson should pay more taxes instead pf paying accountants to avoid them.
Paul ( pissed off teacher with 22 years experience)
Proud to have been on strike with all the other public sector workers.
[Edited on 1/12/11 by Paul (Notts)]
This whole thing has been blown out of proportion by professional offence takers. EVERYONE knows how Clarkson speaks, and Unison spokesmen have
whipped it all up for publicity for their selfish cause.
Public sector pensions are amazing and totally unreasonable, they will reap double what I will get when I retire, and will have paid half into the
scheme, and Joe Muggins here is paying the bloody difference!
Its about time they got real and realise how lucky they are, get back to work and start working as hard as the rest of us have to.
Why do you think rich = overpaid then Paul? What makes you think Clarkson deserves his money less than you deserve yours? He is an extremely bright man using what he enjoys to make money. You could have done what he did and gone into journalism knowing what it could lead to, but you chose to become a teacher. You earn what you earn, he earns what he earns.
"Thing is I agree with him.
Every worker should get the same pension reward, and the same retirement age.
Why should some be more privileged than another?
Mind you, I also think Top Gear is rubbish!"
+1
quote:
Originally posted by Paul (Notts)
I find it very saddening that some of the comments imply that public sector workers, like myself, are over paid: lazy: inline for gilt edged pensions and as one post says jobsworths.
I fully understand that the economic situation is very bad ( some of it due to recent mismanagement ) . However a lot of the changes that are taking place to public sector pensions and wages are an over response to the situation and a clear attack and TAX aimed at the public sector.
Lord Hutton and the governments own audit office clearly state that the public sector pensions require less radical changes to ensure they reduce in cost as a % of the GDP.
This is how it affects me… A teacher with 22 years pension contributions already and looking to do another 16 years so that I can retire at 60.
I get no pay rise for 3 years ( I understand that)
then only 1% not the 2% that we had agreed.
Change to average earnings - ok no problems Ill take a knock.
get significantly less pension - ( starting to to get a little )
pay in significantly more – almost double my monthly contribution ( This is just a tax to help the government - it does not pay my pension fund)
Work till I am 67 - not possible as a teacher in a state school.
Do you want 67 year old teachers or fire-fighters or nurses.
I think rich bastards like Clarkson should pay more taxes instead pf paying accountants to avoid them.
Paul ( pissed off teacher with 22 years experience)
Proud to have been on strike with all the other public sector workers.
[Edited on 1/12/11 by Paul (Notts)]
phelpsa
No I don’t equate rich with being over paid
I do object to a tax system that allows people with money to avoid paying tax because they have money.
I have a close relative who I would class as very well off ( rich compared to most public sector workers ) who pays less tax and NI than I do !
The government are using the current climate to attack the public sector because they don’t believe in it. They feel the private sector can provide
better services at lower costs.
Well it has not so we are now in a bigger mess.
quote:
Originally posted by Paul (Notts)
phelpsa
No I don’t equate rich with being over paid
I do object to a tax system that allows people with money to avoid paying tax because they have money.
I have a close relative who I would class as very well off ( rich compared to most public sector workers ) who pays less tax and NI than I do !
The government are using the current climate to attack the public sector because they don’t believe in it. They feel the private sector can provide better services at lower costs.
Well it has not so we are now in a bigger mess.
jeffw
I don’t expect to be insulated from the current situation. I can fully accept the need for changes to public sector pensions.
What I do object to is the use of the current climate to attack the public sector and try to blame the countries problem our the size of our
pensions.
I am happy to PAY MORE or TAKE LESS but not both at the same time.
I accepted 3 years ago a big change to my pension that the government audit commission said would make it sustainable for the next 20 years.
If the government wants me keep teaching to 67 then it needs to find a role for me as a state teacher of that age and not just sack me at 60 ish
because I cant keep up with the kids any more.
quote:
So those nasty Tories are using the global financial meltdown to at last reap revenge on all those left wing public servants? right....
Now I am a supply teacher, and haven't paid enouh attention to the pensions stuff detail.
Paul, are these changes retrospective? If so that is EXTREMELY unfair. That is like the government raiding private pension pots, which would cause
outcry everywhere.
I don't understand why they can't use the new rules for new entrants into jobs. And at the same time not have the pension scheme compulsory.
Actually, that may not be a good idea.
And I reiterate, striking is a legal right. People lose their wages when on strike.
Daughter in law was the biggest Clarkson fan till she met him at the recent TG show at the NEC, she reckons he is the rudest most arrogant @rsewipe
she has ever met insulted everyone around him apparently for no valid reason.
Me Ive always thought he is a t!t.
Cheers,
Bob
cliftyhanger
What you have already put into your pension keeps its original rights and value.
( at least that’s the current situation.)
Any contributions paid after 2012 I think fall under the new rules.
If you have a teachers pension number then log into the teachers pension web site and it will tell you your current pension situation.
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
This whole thing has been blown out of proportion by professional offence takers. EVERYONE knows how Clarkson speaks, and Unison spokesmen have whipped it all up for publicity for their selfish cause. nasty
Public sector pensions are amazing and totally unreasonable, they will reap double what I will get when I retire, and will have paid half into the scheme, and Joe Muggins here is paying the bloody difference!
Its about time they got real and realise how lucky they are, get back to work and start working as hard as the rest of us have to.
quote:
Originally posted by Paul (Notts)
jeffw
I don’t expect to be insulated from the current situation. I can fully accept the need for changes to public sector pensions.
What I do object to is the use of the current climate to attack the public sector and try to blame the countries problem our the size of our pensions.
I am happy to PAY MORE or TAKE LESS but not both at the same time.
I accepted 3 years ago a big change to my pension that the government audit commission said would make it sustainable for the next 20 years.
If the government wants me keep teaching to 67 then it needs to find a role for me as a state teacher of that age and not just sack me at 60 ish because I cant keep up with the kids any more.
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
This whole thing has been blown out of proportion by professional offence takers. EVERYONE knows how Clarkson speaks, and Unison spokesmen have whipped it all up for publicity for their selfish cause. nasty
Public sector pensions are amazing and totally unreasonable, they will reap double what I will get when I retire, and will have paid half into the scheme, and Joe Muggins here is paying the bloody difference!
Its about time they got real and realise how lucky they are, get back to work and start working as hard as the rest of us have to.
Clarkson didn't just say "shoot the strikers" he might have got away with that but he said "shoot the strikers in front of their families", he also made an incredibly nasty comment on suicide in such bad taste the producers of the show issued an apology for at the end of the show.
Not saying anyone's a jobsworth or lazy and overpaid but I have heard of some crackingly useless jobs that councils and governments have created. I can't think of any right now but I'm sure we all know one.. Head of car park usage research or something like that.
Reading this thread from afar, here's my take on it: (from the perspective of 1. a ret'd RAF officer with 18 yrs served, 2. a pensions and
tax planner in the City for 12 years). So I have peered through both ends of the looking glass.
1. "What we've got her is a failure to communicate." (Strother Martin as the Captain in 'Cool Hand Luke'
2. The public sector are woefully ill-informed as to the cost of provding their contractual benefits.
3. The Government are appallingly inept at putting their (our, private sector) message across.
4. We will all be enveloped by the same shit-storm, public and private sector alike.
5. As JP Donleavy said in 'The Ginger Man' : " We'll be o'roight so long as there's drink."
Bob.
[Edited on 1/12/11 by bobinspain]
This country owes 492% of GDP. That is personal, commercial, banking and government debt. So we owe 5 times as much as we make in a year....Which is
the 2nd highest level of debt in the world (only Japan owes more). This is not sustainable and something has to give.
We can't borrow more money so the choice is to either increase tax revenues, increase GDP or reduce costs (or all three). One of the biggest
bills that our Government pays is public sector wages & pensions. There are more than 20000 public sector workers on more than £170000 per
annum.
It can't continue as it is.
No maybe not, but as long as Splitrivet keeps putting that avatar up, I'll be tuning in.
quote:
Originally posted by jeffw
This country owes 492% of GDP. That is personal, commercial, banking and government debt. So we owe 5 times as much as we make in a year....Which is the 2nd highest level of debt in the world (only Japan owes more). This is not sustainable and something has to give.
We can't borrow more money so the choice is to either increase tax revenues, increase GDP or reduce costs (or all three). One of the biggest bills that our Government pays is public sector wages & pensions. There are more than 20000 public sector workers on more than £170000 per annum.
It can't continue as it is.
Clarksons comment with context.......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HJP0WXyeaA&feature=youtube_gdata_player
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
When you are in the poo due to over borrowing, the best solution is to borrow more!! Makes sense (to someone)
We borrowed an additional £157,000,000,000 last week, that amount is so big we cannot comprehend, a Radio4 presenter said it was enough to double glaze every building in britain - even if it had double glazing to begin with.
Amazing variety of responses here.
Some reasonably informed, some not so much so.
quote:
Originally posted by Ninehigh
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
When you are in the poo due to over borrowing, the best solution is to borrow more!! Makes sense (to someone)
We borrowed an additional £157,000,000,000 last week, that amount is so big we cannot comprehend, a Radio4 presenter said it was enough to double glaze every building in britain - even if it had double glazing to begin with.
I can't go into real detail but the basic idea is that we borrow like buggerie right now in order to keep us services like buses, post, daycare and helping people stay (and get) in jobs.
Then when the going's good and we "have cash to spare" we pay back those loans because we can afford to.
The method that's going on now is stopping money going round because the government need to hoard it so no-one has any, thus none gets spent anywhere, then business slows down and jobs get cut, so no-one has any money...
The Roman Empire was run by 10,000 people... Apparently we have 40,000 running the UK alone. I agree there is fat to be cut but at the moment we're cutting fat, flesh, bone and still expecting it to work harder than ever.
quote:
Originally posted by Ninehigh
The Roman Empire was run by 10,000 people... Apparently we have 40,000 running the UK alone. I agree there is fat to be cut but at the moment we're cutting fat, flesh, bone and still expecting it to work harder than ever. [/quote
A large part of the problem lies in two facts of western society; nobody wants to do the dirty or manual jobs and nobody is prepared to pay a fair price for anybody else to do the jobs, when combined with our open borders the results is we suck in huge numbers of immigrants and imported manufactured goods.
The roman empire may have been run by 10,000 Romans but that doesn't count the vast numbers of local chieftains the running of the empire was in effect sub-contracted to or the legions that kept the lid on it.
onenastyviper - 2/12/11 at 01:23 PMFunny how people complain about public sector workers striking to try and protect what they have.
The irony is that those in the private sector are only jealous so instead of supporting a right to have something, they are arguing as to why should they (public) have it if we can't (private).
I wonder what would happen if every private sector worker went on strike for a day to protest about the total financial mismanagement of the UK economy as a whole?
Oh wait, that's right - it would be called Civil Unrest!
But we won't strike because we are afraid of loosing our jobs, houses, careers etc. - isn't that nice how things are tied up together?
Clarkson is just the bow on top reminding us that if we play within the system one day we may be "rich" like him and become a minor TV star.
Clarkson is a "rich" idiot who likes to run his mouth off - he is a cartoon character: treat him and his ilk as such.
chris mason - 2/12/11 at 01:59 PMquote:
Originally posted by plentywahalla
quote:
Originally posted by Ninehigh
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
When you are in the poo due to over borrowing, the best solution is to borrow more!! Makes sense (to someone)
We borrowed an additional £157,000,000,000 last week, that amount is so big we cannot comprehend, a Radio4 presenter said it was enough to double glaze every building in britain - even if it had double glazing to begin with.
I can't go into real detail but the basic idea is that we borrow like buggerie right now in order to keep us services like buses, post, daycare and helping people stay (and get) in jobs.
Then when the going's good and we "have cash to spare" we pay back those loans because we can afford to.
The method that's going on now is stopping money going round because the government need to hoard it so no-one has any, thus none gets spent anywhere, then business slows down and jobs get cut, so no-one has any money...
Good theory .... But it just doesn't work like that. Remember Gordon Brown? He was chancellor when 'the going was good' but he was still borrowing money as he was spending more than he was getting in taxes. That's how we got to be where we are. Even if we got back to the level of GDP we had in 2006, we would still be borrowing to sustain present levels of spending.
We have to cut spending ... No choice
Makes you wonder is the Uk is now so over populated that it will ever change?
Makes you wonder if robots have taken/are taking over the world? (1 machine does the work of 10 men etc)
Makes you wonder are we now living too long? (with an increase in births, an increase in life expectancy)
On the surface, it's easy to see that we will never return to the glory days of easy money, have we exceeded the population the world can support? (Famine, flooding, supposed global warming, etc)
The public sector though is always going to be a problem, technically they don't earn profit for the country in the same sense a FTSE 100 company would or many others for that matter, so it's always going to cause conflict in hard times as they have nothing too offset their financial burden against.
What Doctors, Nurses, Teachers etc do is equally important to the country as what the top sucessful business men do, just it can't be shown on a balance sheet.
scootz - 2/12/11 at 02:24 PMI couldn't quite work out the wording of his 'apology'... "If the BBC and I have caused any offence, then I'm quite happy to apologise alongside them."
Until now that is, as it transpires the 'joke' was scripted and approved by The One Show!
JoelP - 2/12/11 at 05:57 PMimagine if labour had won the last election and tried to spend their way out of recession. We would probably have had our credit rating cut, and we might have found ourselves in the situation that Italy and Spain are now in, with borrowing costs spiralling up.
I myself am sick of hearing 'bankers' being blamed. For every person lending money, there were 10 quite happy to borrow cheap money and 'roll with the good times'. How did all the recent goverments ever think it was acceptable to spend more than they were taking? Even when you know the economy is riding high? Maybe borrow through the bad times and repay when all is well, but you cant just borrow indefinately! Even with all these austerity measures, IIRC it will be 2014 before we actually stop spending more than we earn. How many years uncounted will we be paying it off for?
Ninehigh - 2/12/11 at 06:06 PMquote:
Originally posted by onenastyviper
But we won't strike because we are afraid of loosing our jobs, houses, careers etc. - isn't that nice how things are tied up together?
Yeah that's why I'm being tortured for minimum wage
se7ensport - 2/12/11 at 09:07 PMquote:
Originally posted by onenastyviper
Funny how people complain about public sector workers striking to try and protect what they have.
The irony is that those in the private sector are only jealous so instead of supporting a right to have something, they are arguing as to why should they (public) have it if we can't (private)......
If the money was there then fine. I'm sick of the arguement of "dragging the public sector benfits/pension down to meet the private sector".
So... lets bring the private sector pension funds and benefits up to the same level by taxing the public sector a "public sector bonus tax", this tax is to reflect the additional job security. Don't like the suggestion? what a surprise. And please don't quote "we get paid less in the public sector... blah, blah, blah" because numerous studies have found this to be complete bo 11 ox.
Yes Clarkson is a tw@.
onenastyviper - 2/12/11 at 10:38 PMquote:
Originally posted by se7ensport
quote:
Originally posted by onenastyviper
Funny how people complain about public sector workers striking to try and protect what they have.
The irony is that those in the private sector are only jealous so instead of supporting a right to have something, they are arguing as to why should they (public) have it if we can't (private)......
If the money was there then fine. I'm sick of the arguement of "dragging the public sector benfits/pension down to meet the private sector".
So... lets bring the private sector pension funds and benefits up to the same level by taxing the public sector a "public sector bonus tax", this tax is to reflect the additional job security. Don't like the suggestion? what a surprise. And please don't quote "we get paid less in the public sector... blah, blah, blah" because numerous studies have found this to be complete bo 11 ox.
Yes Clarkson is a tw@.
Err, I don't work in the public sector. I have seen my prospective pension quotes from numerous different companies and they are basically cloud-cuckoo bits of financial bull excrement.
besides, who exactly are we going to tax in the public sector, teachers, nurses, doctors, civil servants, politicians (yes they are public sector workers too)?
I have a problem with the entire system - it is completely bolloxed, based on assumptions, ruses etc.
Remember most if not all economies are based upon this salient fact: growth.
However, growth for the sake of growth is the economics of a cancer cell.
Another problem is that ideologies, morality and economics are inherently tied together so basically you are either screwing or getting screwed.
se7ensport - 2/12/11 at 11:08 PMquote:
Originally posted by onenastyviper
quote:
Originally posted by se7ensport
quote:
Originally posted by onenastyviper
Funny how people complain about public sector workers striking to try and protect what they have.
The irony is that those in the private sector are only jealous so instead of supporting a right to have something, they are arguing as to why should they (public) have it if we can't (private)......
If the money was there then fine. I'm sick of the arguement of "dragging the public sector benfits/pension down to meet the private sector".
So... lets bring the private sector pension funds and benefits up to the same level by taxing the public sector a "public sector bonus tax", this tax is to reflect the additional job security. Don't like the suggestion? what a surprise. And please don't quote "we get paid less in the public sector... blah, blah, blah" because numerous studies have found this to be complete bo 11 ox.
Yes Clarkson is a tw@.
Err, I don't work in the public sector. I have seen my prospective pension quotes from numerous different companies and they are basically cloud-cuckoo bits of financial bull excrement.
besides, who exactly are we going to tax in the public sector, teachers, nurses, doctors, civil servants, politicians (yes they are public sector workers too)?
I have a problem with the entire system - it is completely bolloxed, based on assumptions, ruses etc.
Remember most if not all economies are based upon this salient fact: growth.
However, growth for the sake of growth is the economics of a cancer cell.
Another problem is that ideologies, morality and economics are inherently tied together so basically you are either screwing or getting screwed.
I didn't suggeest you did work in the public sector.
You are still missing the fundamental point that there is a complete lack of money, the government is in debt and the deficit is growing.
I agree with you that the entire system is bo 11 ox, but do I feel sympathy for "teachers, nurses, doctors, civil servants, politicians"? not a chance as there is fkall chance that it would be reciprocated.
Regarding morality and economics; I'm being shafted, the sand on the massively intrusive strap-on that L(ie)bour set in motion smarts like hell, I'm further pi55 ed that friends of the Bullingdon club are currently skimming the cream.
Dangle_kt - 3/12/11 at 02:50 AMseems people are artfully missing the point about strikes, whilst spouting what the papers say.
If said public sector workers were working for say...sony, doing, I don't know... telephone sales, and their employer tried to alter terms and conditions beyond what the union that represented them thought was reasonable and fair, and a majority of union members voted to withhold their labour (which is right under UK law - except certain public sector workers who arn't allowed, ever) then no one would care.
It wouldnt be in the news, and no one would be telling anyone to "work hard like the rest of us..."
Fact is, its not some worthless sales people, but people who keep each and every one of our lives ticking over very well, and so when the same thing happens to them, and they react the same way (first headteachers strike in 20+ years...so guess they have to have been pushed pretty hard to act finally) everyone throws their hands up, and blames them for excercising a right in law, which other less vital workers can use and not raise any eye brows.
Striking is a right.
And for the record I do work in the public sector, but have spent much more in the private sector - and they are both as bad as each other, with equally lazy/hard working people in my opinion, its just public sector has many more hoops to jump through (none of which were created by them).
I didn't strike
I'm not in a union
I'm not even in the pension scheme.
The public sector strikes had the same impact on me as everyone else - but I still respect the right of workers to withhold labour as a last resort to deal with employers which in their view are not being fair.
JoelP - 3/12/11 at 07:51 AMBut the point is, it isnt sony thats getting shaken upside down for more. No one would care except the shareholders! When the public sector strikes, its ME they are shaking upside down for more, and from my point of view, things arent looking too rosy at the min and i dont really feel like chipping in a bit more for someone elses pension when i dont have one at all myself.
jeffw - 3/12/11 at 09:44 AM+1
bobinspain - 3/12/11 at 11:40 AMThe bottom line (literally), whether public or private sector comes down to affordability.
Private sector pensions, in the majority of cases are based on a pot of money and what that pot'll buy at retirement.
Public sector pensions involve building up an 'entitlement' with the promise to pay that entitlement made by the Gov't but funded by the taxpayers working at the time benefits are claimed.
Assuming an inflation-linked pension of £20k pa at age 65 with a two thirds widows' benefit would require a capital sum in the region of £400k to buy it. So 'monetising' the entitlement of a public sector worker, the 'value' of his benefits is the same.
Given that the retiree worked for 40 years to build his entitlement, he and/or spouse have a 50% chance of being in receipt of benefits for over 20 years. (Given a 3.5% inflation rate over 20 years will double his pension).
Pensions are a dear do! but as Maurice Chevalier said when he reached 80yrs of age: "old age isn't that bad when you consider the alternative."
[Edited on 3/12/11 by bobinspain]
whitestu - 3/12/11 at 12:15 PMquote:
The bottom line (literally), whether public or private sector comes down to affordability.
Private sector pensions, in the majority of cases are based on a pot of money and what that pot'll buy at retirement.
Public sector pensions involve building up an 'entitlement' with the promise to pay that entitlement made by the Gov't but funded by the taxpayers working at the time benefits are claimed.
Assuming an inflation-linked pension of £20k pa at age 65 with a two thirds widows' benefit would require a capital sum in the region of £400 to buy it. So 'monetising' the entitlement of a public sector worker, the 'value' of his benefits is the same.
Given that the retiree worked for 40 years to build his entitlement, he and/or spouse have a 50% chance of being in receipt of benefits for over 20 years. (Given a 3.5% inflation rate over 20 years will double his pension).
Pensions are a dear do! but as Maurice Chevalier said when he reached 80yrs of age: "old age isn't that bad when you consider the alternative."
That's all correct, but it isn't quite that black and white. What is missing is anything about the goverment [i.e the employer] taking pension holidays and not paying into funds as they agreed.
For example, the goverment [from both parties] has literally taken billions from the mineworkers pension scheme it over the years, then they had the nerve to say it was unaffordable.
bobinspain - 3/12/11 at 12:51 PMWhitestu
I was making the generic point, not dealing with specifics.
The privatisation of the mining industry in 1994 and its subsequent impact on the MPS is a whole different 'can of worms.'
You may recall however, that Brown shafted the private sector too in 1997 with the abolition of tax credits on pension fund dividends, to the tune of £5bn a year.
Like I said, we all get enveloped by the same shit-storm.
Bob.
[Edited on 3/12/11 by bobinspain]
whitestu - 3/12/11 at 03:25 PMquote:
Like I said, we all get enveloped by the same shit-storm.
Very true!
Stu
Dangle_kt - 3/12/11 at 04:56 PMquote:
Originally posted by JoelP
But the point is, it isnt sony thats getting shaken upside down for more. No one would care except the shareholders! When the public sector strikes, its ME they are shaking upside down for more, and from my point of view, things arent looking too rosy at the min and i dont really feel like chipping in a bit more for someone elses pension when i dont have one at all myself.
They ain't shaking any for MORE - they are saying the reductions are too much. And are within their rights to make that point via strike if they so wish.
