Re: o/t What next : Sun Feb 27, 2011 10:07 am  

Mick W. wrote:

"Mistakes of their elders"???
Why should old folk be punished because of the mistakes and greed of those now in work, and in power?
Those old folk have by and large made lots of sacrifices, borne all kinds of tribulations without the whining and crying about their 'rights' and so on that is sadly all too common today.
They DO deserve to have a bit of comfort in their latter years, and they also deserve to be able to live with dignity, and in safety.

Many old folk have made magnificent sacrifices especially those over 82 years old who are old enough to during WW2.

But read my post properly Mick, I'm not saying old people shouldn't have a comfortable life.

My Mum works in the public sector and has been served notice that her position is one that could be being made redundant. Genuinely ask yourself, should we take people's livelihoods off of them before making pensioners pay 20p to get on a bus like they used to a few years back?

Re: o/t What next : Sun Feb 27, 2011 1:08 pm  

I don't agree with making people redundant - we all need a living wage. But I don't think the way to save jobs is necessarily to stick it to the old folks!
I bet most public sector workers could see ways to save money that don't involve job cuts, if anyone bothered to ask and actually take notice of what someone further down the food chain thought.

Re: o/t What next : Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:00 pm  

Mick W. wrote:

But I don't think the way to save jobs is necessarily to stick it to the old folks!

I don't want to stick it to them either, I just think they should be subject to cuts like the rest of us. I just don't see why the youth of this country should be absolutely screwed over, they're our future of this country. Where are all the inventors, scientists and engineers going to come from that will go in to highly paid jobs which will help to pay to look after the increasingly elderly population if you have to pay £27k to go to uni?

Mick W. wrote:

I bet most public sector workers could see ways to save money that don't involve job cuts, if anyone bothered to ask and actually take notice of what someone further down the food chain thought.

This I agree with there is wastage of money in the public sector. Until councils are run like businesses with genuine accountability (not just the ballot box) there will always be a problem. Unfortunately, good managers cost more money than councils can really justify so it's swings and roundabouts really.

Re: o/t What next : Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:48 pm  

I know a lot of people working in the public sector and for a lot of them its money for old rope.Some have had it too good for a long time.

Time for the axe to fall

Re: o/t What next : Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:49 am  

Trouble is, people who lose their jobs have less money to spend. So people who produce stuff end up producing stuff that no-one is buying. So they don't need to produce stuff any more. So they end up out of a job as well!
Or have I missed something???

Re: o/t What next : Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:17 pm  

Mick W. wrote:

Trouble is, people who lose their jobs have less money to spend. So people who produce stuff end up producing stuff that no-one is buying. So they don't need to produce stuff any more. So they end up out of a job as well!
Or have I missed something???

Not really, in essence you've explained the fundamental part of economics that is supply and demand. The problem being that when the demand is based on money people couldn't really afford to borrow you get an economy that's in the state it's in now.

Re: o/t What next : Tue Mar 01, 2011 7:20 am  

Damn this capitalist system of ours!!!

Re: o/t What next : Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:24 am  

Westminster council one of the wealthiest in uk are I kid you not trying to pass a by law to make giving out free food to the unfortunate folk that are homeless the upshot being soup kitchens and the like will cease. If one council does it others will follow suit. On the same page of daily mirror 5 bosses of state owned hsbc are getting bonuses of approx 7 million. I can genuinely see riots on streets by end of year unless things change to help the the people in need of real help.

Re: o/t What next : Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:46 am  

spymaster wrote: On the same page of daily mirror 5 bosses of state owned hsbc are getting bonuses of approx 7 million. I can genuinely see riots on streets by end of year unless things change to help the the people in need of real help. According to the BBC HSBC aren't state owned, and didn't take any government money. By the way why shouldn't the boss of one of the world's biggest banks (bigger than Barclays, RBS and Lloyd's combined) get a bonus that is equivalent to 0.0005% of the company's profit this year? EDIT that should be 0.05%

spymaster wrote: On the same page of daily mirror 5 bosses of state owned hsbc are getting bonuses of approx 7 million. I can genuinely see riots on streets by end of year unless things change to help the the people in need of real help. According to the BBC HSBC aren't state owned, and didn't take any government money. By the way why shouldn't the boss of one of the world's biggest banks (bigger than Barclays, RBS and Lloyd's combined) get a bonus that is equivalent to 0.0005% of the company's profit this year? EDIT that should be 0.05%

Re: o/t What next : Tue Mar 01, 2011 12:01 pm  

Stealth Comic wrote: According to the BBC HSBC aren't state owned, and didn't take any government money. By the way why shouldn't the boss of one of the world's biggest banks (bigger than Barclays, RBS and Lloyd's combined) get a bonus that is equivalent to 0.0005% of the company's profit this year? Because people are jealous

Stealth Comic wrote: According to the BBC HSBC aren't state owned, and didn't take any government money. By the way why shouldn't the boss of one of the world's biggest banks (bigger than Barclays, RBS and Lloyd's combined) get a bonus that is equivalent to 0.0005% of the company's profit this year? Because people are jealous