FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Tories- You just have to laugh

Jump to newest
 

By *-and-K OP   Couple
over a year ago

Back of Beyond

Listening to radio 2 lunchtime news and a conservative mp was being interviewed over the impending teachers strike.

'I'm outraged that only 38% of teachers can vote for all out strike action for the rest of them' he said.

The interviewer quickly came back with..

'But that's a bigger percentage than voted for you to become the UK government isn't it'

There was a deathly silence at which point the studio cut to another story

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think that's a politician's curse in general. He'll be hauled off to the 'how not to make yourself look a complete twat' lesson down at party HQ in the morning.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eorge17Man
over a year ago

Leven


"I think that's a politician's curse in general. He'll be hauled off to the 'how not to make yourself look a complete twat' lesson down at party HQ in the morning. "

he better take cameron with him after what i saw on the news this morning when he was chucked out that hospital room

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think that's a politician's curse in general. He'll be hauled off to the 'how not to make yourself look a complete twat' lesson down at party HQ in the morning.

he better take cameron with him after what i saw on the news this morning when he was chucked out that hospital room "

Haven't seen that. I'll catch it on the news tonight. As much as I am a Tory he does seem to have an uncanny knack of shooting himself in the foot at times.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There's a tip for peeps like that.

"Don't talk with your mouth open."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *-and-K OP   Couple
over a year ago

Back of Beyond

[Removed by poster at 15/06/11 17:43:19]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hahaha, nice response!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *-and-K OP   Couple
over a year ago

Back of Beyond

Its on Youtube, search for 'Get off my ward'

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Ive just watched it......very funny

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place

a ballsy doctor who cares for his patients more than ingratiating himself to the great and the good ...total respect to that man.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"a ballsy doctor who cares for his patients more than ingratiating himself to the great and the good ...total respect to that man."

The patient quite obviously agreed to be interviewed and I'd hazard a guess hospital admin knew Cameron would be in the hospital, so this doctor is merely bandstanding. What a dick.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Actually much as I despise Comedy Dave, at least he had the sense to put his hands up and comply.

Quite funny seeing his Poodle stood with his hands on his hips looking all indignant.

Fair play to the doc.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place

Evidently it was the sky tv crew who had not adhered to the rules but fair play ..PR opportunity or not ..his patients come first, after all germs are no respecter of who you are.

totally agreed with his call .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *-and-K OP   Couple
over a year ago

Back of Beyond

As an NHS worker I have to say that the doc was wrong. short sleeves and no tie is only for those staff that are in close contact with patients, for cleanliness reasons. Doesn't apply to visitors at all, afterall how many of em at visiting times do you see with rolled up sleeves?

Macaroon and clueless were abiding by those rules to show they had the patients health at heart. It didn't apply to the camera crew. The doc as someone else said was grandstanding.

Don't begrudge him that though with what the condems are doing to the nhs.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I think that's a politician's curse in general. He'll be hauled off to the 'how not to make yourself look a complete twat' lesson down at party HQ in the morning.

he better take cameron with him after what i saw on the news this morning when he was chucked out that hospital room "

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIQWaBbURlY&feature=player_embedded

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"a ballsy doctor who cares for his patients more than ingratiating himself to the great and the good ...total respect to that man.

The patient quite obviously agreed to be interviewed and I'd hazard a guess hospital admin knew Cameron would be in the hospital, so this doctor is merely bandstanding. What a dick. "

If the orthopod had complained in advance there'd have been no opportunity for the world to laugh at Camoron.

I doubt the doctor will be getting a nighthood soon but he'll be up for Life President of the Royal College of Surgeons. Good man. Well done.

PS. I thought I posted this last night

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Lol that is a genius end to an interview!

I watched the "get off my ward" video yesterday it did make me laugh, the visiting rules depend on the hospital your relative is in. The hospital i work in has very very strict rules and the nurses will ask people to roll there sleeves up where possible, only 2 visitors per patient and where possible they're conducted in a visiting room.

Apparently that Dr is no stranger to controversy though, apparently some years ago he complained that none of the theatre nurses he had to work with could speak english :-S not sure how true that is though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Lol that is a genius end to an interview!

I watched the "get off my ward" video yesterday it did make me laugh, the visiting rules depend on the hospital your relative is in. The hospital i work in has very very strict rules and the nurses will ask people to roll there sleeves up where possible, only 2 visitors per patient and where possible they're conducted in a visiting room.

Apparently that Dr is no stranger to controversy though, apparently some years ago he complained that none of the theatre nurses he had to work with could speak english :-S not sure how true that is though."

I'd suggest the fact he's still in post indicated he spoke the truth.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *londieddWoman
over a year ago

fife

[Removed by poster at 17/06/11 00:27:09]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *londieddWoman
over a year ago

fife

I fancy David Cameron

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I fancy David Cameron"

That doesn't make you a bad person.

I'm just reminded of the question posed to Debbie McGhee (in another context) 'So, what first attracted you to the renowned arsehole and multi - millionaire David Cameron'?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

i ment the the truth as to whether he did it not if what he said was true!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"i ment the the truth as to whether he did it not if what he said was true!"

About the claim that his theatre team struggled with English? Probably true.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Tory MP Philip Davies latest 'brainwave' is "that disabled people should offer themselves for work at below the minimum wage.

Philip Davies claimed people with disabilities or mental health problems were disadvantaged in the workplace because they had to compete with able-bodied candidates for jobs and could not offer to accept lower wages."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/06/17/tory-mp-philip-davies-suggests-disabled-people-offer-to-work-for-below-minimum-wage-115875-23207976/

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *arrenPeaceMan
over a year ago

lwork in Ibrox live in Ayr

By that genius piece of reasoning , able bodied people will then offer THEIR services for less so they can get a job...so sod the minimum wage

And wouldnt that just make big business..and thus the tories...very happy

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"Tory MP Philip Davies latest 'brainwave' is "that disabled people should offer themselves for work at below the minimum wage.

Philip Davies claimed people with disabilities or mental health problems were disadvantaged in the workplace because they had to compete with able-bodied candidates for jobs and could not offer to accept lower wages."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/06/17/tory-mp-philip-davies-suggests-disabled-people-offer-to-work-for-below-minimum-wage-115875-23207976/

"

Omg - I had to read that again and again.... any potential empathy I might have had with the Tories in my younger (less sensible days...) just paled into insignificance!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

torries are the biggest liars in the land

still dont understand why they get voted in, an then moan about them after;

why vote for them

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"Tory MP Philip Davies latest 'brainwave' is "that disabled people should offer themselves for work at below the minimum wage.

Philip Davies claimed people with disabilities or mental health problems were disadvantaged in the workplace because they had to compete with able-bodied candidates for jobs and could not offer to accept lower wages."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/06/17/tory-mp-philip-davies-suggests-disabled-people-offer-to-work-for-below-minimum-wage-115875-23207976/

"

surely not - i mean i am a political agnostic -i havent believed a word any of the fuckers say since winston churchill (Tony Benn excepted)

but i really cant believe the Tories sanctioned a story like that to come out just after the cancer cop out,

the paper must have spun it somehow,no one can be that insensitive its against the 2002 disability act for a start

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *-and-K OP   Couple
over a year ago

Back of Beyond

It is true, they showed the clip on Skynews, parliament is recorded at all times.

He has severely embarassed the party leadership by stating it in public. Even though that sort of talk may fall in with their long term plans to do away with the minimum wage.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

Cameron and his lap dog puppies the 'liberals' have done so many u turns lately they must be fecking dizzy!

'listening' my arse, attempting to implement ill thought out policies more like.

clarke should have been sacked, landsley soon will be and this latest buffoon should be deselected and removed from parliament.

the latest gem is to hand 200 'failing' primary schools over to a mixture of other schools, academies oh and private companies.

the amount of public school millionaires in the cabinet has never been higher

the people who are taking the hits and will do are not 'their own', its the rest of us having services cut and losing jobs to satisfy the hedge fund managers, investment bankers and in the long term the imf.

rant over...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And they say they are no longer The Nasty Party.

Absolutely preposterous and a huge insult to vulnerable people to make that suggestion. This guy should be ashamed of himself though I doubt he will be.

This plonker talks about people with disabilities being less productive. Pop quiz asshole have you ever heard of Sir Richard Branson. A man with dyslexia.

If we are talking about people being "less productive" will this fool be taking a pay cut any time soon?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Tory MP Philip Davies latest 'brainwave' is "that disabled people should offer themselves for work at below the minimum wage.

Philip Davies claimed people with disabilities or mental health problems were disadvantaged in the workplace because they had to compete with able-bodied candidates for jobs and could not offer to accept lower wages."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/06/17/tory-mp-philip-davies-suggests-disabled-people-offer-to-work-for-below-minimum-wage-115875-23207976/

surely not - i mean i am a political agnostic -i havent believed a word any of the fuckers say since winston churchill (Tony Benn excepted)

but i really cant believe the Tories sanctioned a story like that to come out just after the cancer cop out,

the paper must have spun it somehow,no one can be that insensitive its against the 2002 disability act for a start "

Every word is true. I watched him say it on BBC Parliament channel earlier today.

I've heard it suggested he only made such an outrageous suggestion in the hope that would be tomorrow's headlines instead of the nonsense the ginger squirrel was spouting about public service pension reform, the man's a bastard - even by Tory bastard standards.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It is true, they showed the clip on Skynews, parliament is recorded at all times.

He has severely embarassed the party leadership by stating it in public. Even though that sort of talk may fall in with their long term plans to do away with the minimum wage."

Here in Glasgow a lot of us doing what we can to roll out a minimum Glasgow Living Wage for all employees, currently set at £7.15 per hour.

We do our damndest to ensure all our suppliers pay their staff the same amount. It's still not a King's Ransom but it's better than just over 6 quid.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

the tory arsehole is on newsnight this evening

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yep, he's still a bastard

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Wow just wow words escape me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Wow just wow words escape me."

When you've recaptured them - feel free to expand on that thought.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

We shouldn't be so surprised. He's a Tory - that's what Tories do.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Whjat is all the fuss about. All the guy was suggesting was that people who were continually finding the door slammed in their faces because of their 'disability' (bearing in mind that it's illegal to discriminate against someone because they are disabled, but hey, let's not let that get in the way of a good old Tory-bashing session eh?) - should be able to offer to prove themselves at a lower rate of pay than their able bodied counterparts FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME ONLY and that once their probationary period was over (remember those, probationary periods at which workers got less than those long term employees doing the same job) - they would be entitled to the basic minumum wage, or the same as fellow employees, whichever was the greater.

Now what's so wrong with someone taking control of their own life and getting a job whichever way they felt was best.

The minimum wage IS a hindrance to those people because employers have no room to manoevre when faced with two people for one job, one is healthy and one is not. It doesn't take a scientist to work out who is going to be employed and who is going to get yet another rejection letter.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"We shouldn't be so surprised. He's a Tory - that's what Tories do."
tories are a vote of no confidence boot em out

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Whjat is all the fuss about. All the guy was suggesting was that people who were continually finding the door slammed in their faces because of their 'disability' (bearing in mind that it's illegal to discriminate against someone because they are disabled, but hey, let's not let that get in the way of a good old Tory-bashing session eh?) - should be able to offer to prove themselves at a lower rate of pay than their able bodied counterparts FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME ONLY and that once their probationary period was over (remember those, probationary periods at which workers got less than those long term employees doing the same job) - they would be entitled to the basic minumum wage, or the same as fellow employees, whichever was the greater.

Now what's so wrong with someone taking control of their own life and getting a job whichever way they felt was best.

The minimum wage IS a hindrance to those people because employers have no room to manoevre when faced with two people for one job, one is healthy and one is not. It doesn't take a scientist to work out who is going to be employed and who is going to get yet another rejection letter."

BOLLOX.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"BOLLOX."

Typical response from you. You need to live in the real world. Socialism DOES NOT WORK.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

So whats wrong with doing the normal way of working for a trial period with the normal rate of pay Wishy?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

Ok don't lets start getting rude, keep it civil.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"So whats wrong with doing the normal way of working for a trial period with the normal rate of pay Wishy?"

Nothing Ruggers. But employers won't offer a disabled person a job if an able bodied person is available and they're getting the minimum wage for it.

It's the minimum wage that is causing the problem. Disabled people are up against able bodied counterparts prepared to work for the minimum wage. That leaves them hamstrung before they've even started.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

Then what the MP is suggesting isn't fair at all.

We are all on trial when we start jobs, I don't see why someone should get less money for that trial....and if they give less than minimum wage it isn't allowed anyway.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Then what the MP is suggesting isn't fair at all.

We are all on trial when we start jobs, I don't see why someone should get less money for that trial....and if they give less than minimum wage it isn't allowed anyway."

Philip Davies would do away with the National Minimum Wage altogether if he had his way.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Then what the MP is suggesting isn't fair at all.

We are all on trial when we start jobs, I don't see why someone should get less money for that trial....and if they give less than minimum wage it isn't allowed anyway."

True, it is illegal. All the MP was suggesting was that people who are continually finding the door to employment barred to them should be able to go under the rules and negotiate a deal for themselves that lets them get a foot in the door.

Let's face it, many employers are ignorant of the problems disabled people face and are pleasantly surprised when they have taken a risk and found their disabled employee quite capable of doing the job - and then the minimum wage cap comes into play and the employer HAS to give them what they're due.

I'd be mad as hell if I was disabled and couldn't get a job because of a government edict that prevents me from bartering my way in.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Philip Davies would do away with the National Minimum Wage altogether if he had his way."

That is not what he said at all and you know it. You are putting words in his mouth.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"Then what the MP is suggesting isn't fair at all.

We are all on trial when we start jobs, I don't see why someone should get less money for that trial....and if they give less than minimum wage it isn't allowed anyway.

True, it is illegal. All the MP was suggesting was that people who are continually finding the door to employment barred to them should be able to go under the rules and negotiate a deal for themselves that lets them get a foot in the door.

Let's face it, many employers are ignorant of the problems disabled people face and are pleasantly surprised when they have taken a risk and found their disabled employee quite capable of doing the job - and then the minimum wage cap comes into play and the employer HAS to give them what they're due.

I'd be mad as hell if I was disabled and couldn't get a job because of a government edict that prevents me from bartering my way in."

I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

the mp should resign his post

he has no clue in what he is doing

bet he is fiddling the expenses

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place

i am frankly shocked any party would suggest this as a viable solution to discrimination ,it is so fundamentaly devisive no matter how well intended.

I am now seriously worried about what is currently controlling the country rampant ideology gone wrong seems to be at the reigns .

A sad day for any decent member of The commons, and i would say that no matter what party it came from

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Philip Davies would do away with the National Minimum Wage altogether if he had his way.

That is not what he said at all and you know it. You are putting words in his mouth."

That's precisely what he said. Check it on BBC iPlayer.

There's no room in his mouth for my words - it's full of his foot.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say."

But it exists. It always has and always will until such time that we live in cashless society and money going into one's bank account from one's employer can be automatically calculated to show if someone is being underpaid.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"i am frankly shocked any party would suggest this as a viable solution to discrimination ,it is so fundamentaly devisive no matter how well intended.

I am now seriously worried about what is currently controlling the country rampant ideology gone wrong seems to be at the reigns .

A sad day for any decent member of The commons, and i would say that no matter what party it came from "

We shouldn't be so surprised. He's a Tory - that's what Tories do.

Theresa 'kitten heels' May was, and is, correct - they're the Nasty Party and no amount of weasel words will change that.

The No.10 Press Office is frantically trying to distance itself from this bastard's comments in the House.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say.

But it exists. It always has and always will until such time that we live in cashless society and money going into one's bank account from one's employer can be automatically calculated to show if someone is being underpaid."

Yes, by someone from the Tory party now.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say.

But it exists. It always has and always will until such time that we live in cashless society and money going into one's bank account from one's employer can be automatically calculated to show if someone is being underpaid."

Bollox.

Not just ordinary bollox but irrelevant, non-M&S bollox.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say.

But it exists. It always has and always will until such time that we live in cashless society and money going into one's bank account from one's employer can be automatically calculated to show if someone is being underpaid.

Bollox.

Not just ordinary bollox but irrelevant, non-M&S bollox."

Ok thats twice now.....be civil or stay off the thread.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say.

But it exists. It always has and always will until such time that we live in cashless society and money going into one's bank account from one's employer can be automatically calculated to show if someone is being underpaid.

Bollox.

Not just ordinary bollox but irrelevant, non-M&S bollox.

Ok thats twice now.....be civil or stay off the thread."

Might I enquire what terminology, conveying the same level of disgreement, disapproval and disgust, would be acceptable?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There is legislation that says a person MUST earn the basic minimum wage.

And then there are 'employers' who completely disregard that law and cut pay for the slightest transgression. I know people, and it's mainly women working in shops, who are the silent victims of this practice.

On paper they earn the minimum wage. In reality they regularly earn a lot less.

That is the real world.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well i think we should have a minimum wage and stick to it. As far as i know employers above a certain size have by law to take on 3% disabled staff. Also an employer can claim some benefits for taking on people with disabilities. Why not just provide a financial incentive for employers doing so.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is legislation that says a person MUST earn the basic minimum wage.

And then there are 'employers' who completely disregard that law and cut pay for the slightest transgression. I know people, and it's mainly women working in shops, who are the silent victims of this practice.

On paper they earn the minimum wage. In reality they regularly earn a lot less.

That is the real world."

That's the Tory world.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Might I enquire what terminology, conveying the same level of disgreement, disapproval and disgust, would be acceptable?"

I disagree, disapprove and am digusted... perhaps???

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say.

But it exists. It always has and always will until such time that we live in cashless society and money going into one's bank account from one's employer can be automatically calculated to show if someone is being underpaid.

Bollox.

Not just ordinary bollox but irrelevant, non-M&S bollox.

Ok thats twice now.....be civil or stay off the thread.

Might I enquire what terminology, conveying the same level of disgreement, disapproval and disgust, would be acceptable?"

If you don't know then you might be in trouble.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is legislation that says a person MUST earn the basic minimum wage.

And then there are 'employers' who completely disregard that law and cut pay for the slightest transgression. I know people, and it's mainly women working in shops, who are the silent victims of this practice.

On paper they earn the minimum wage. In reality they regularly earn a lot less.

That is the real world.

That's the Tory world."

That's in Luton - and it's been Labour controlled for eons.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say.

But it exists. It always has and always will until such time that we live in cashless society and money going into one's bank account from one's employer can be automatically calculated to show if someone is being underpaid."

i dont want to pop at you wishy as you always because of your current political stance having to defend and PR innept government .

But instead of negative discrimination to help disabled people into work ,how about positive discrimination as has been used in other sections of society.

i dont want to be melodramatic but a country is only as strong as it treats its weakest people,and to advocate further discrimination against those people can not be right in any right thinking democracy .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"There is legislation that says a person MUST earn the basic minimum wage.

And then there are 'employers' who completely disregard that law and cut pay for the slightest transgression. I know people, and it's mainly women working in shops, who are the silent victims of this practice.

On paper they earn the minimum wage. In reality they regularly earn a lot less.

That is the real world."

Yes, and it is illegal. And now we have an MP saying that some potential employees should be asking for wages below the minimum wage, which is illegal.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

never like the torries n never will trust a torrie

after what maggie did in the 80s to scotland

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say.

But it exists. It always has and always will until such time that we live in cashless society and money going into one's bank account from one's employer can be automatically calculated to show if someone is being underpaid.

Bollox.

Not just ordinary bollox but irrelevant, non-M&S bollox.

Ok thats twice now.....be civil or stay off the thread.

Might I enquire what terminology, conveying the same level of disgreement, disapproval and disgust, would be acceptable?

If you don't know then you might be in trouble.

"

Then I'm almost certainly in trouble. I consider myself to have an extensive vocabulary (in several languages) and have used the term which seems to be causing problems on this thread on other threads on a number of occassions without comment.

In truth, I simply don't know where the difficulty lies or which alternative would be acceptable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"never like the torries n never will trust a torrie

after what maggie did in the 80s to scotland

"

She was on one hand innovating and on the other a nasty piece of work. I do wonder what Britain would be like now without her ever going into politics.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"never like the torries n never will trust a torrie

after what maggie did in the 80s to scotland

"

Don't forget it was the SNP voting against Labour in a vote of confidence which gave Scotland Thatcherism.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"I would be as mad as hell if I was disabled and knew I was capable of doing a job but had to barter and take less wages on a trial period than someone not disabled.

Discrimination at it's best I would say.

But it exists. It always has and always will until such time that we live in cashless society and money going into one's bank account from one's employer can be automatically calculated to show if someone is being underpaid.

Bollox.

Not just ordinary bollox but irrelevant, non-M&S bollox.

Ok thats twice now.....be civil or stay off the thread.

Might I enquire what terminology, conveying the same level of disgreement, disapproval and disgust, would be acceptable?

If you don't know then you might be in trouble.

Then I'm almost certainly in trouble. I consider myself to have an extensive vocabulary (in several languages) and have used the term which seems to be causing problems on this thread on other threads on a number of occassions without comment.

In truth, I simply don't know where the difficulty lies or which alternative would be acceptable. "

Give up...you are looking silly now.

If you can't think of another description or debate like an adult, then maybe you shouldn't be joining in an adult thread.

N

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

They just want to work and to feel they are a part of society, not a drain on it. If someone can come up with a better way of getting these people jobs then great, but they say it themselves - they feel acceptance that they'll be passed over for a job if an able bodied person is also in the running for it. They've given up on current legislation designed to help them get a job because that legislation doesn't work. Employers are sidestepping it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There is legislation that says a person MUST earn the basic minimum wage.

And then there are 'employers' who completely disregard that law and cut pay for the slightest transgression. I know people, and it's mainly women working in shops, who are the silent victims of this practice.

On paper they earn the minimum wage. In reality they regularly earn a lot less.

That is the real world.

That's the Tory world.

That's in Luton - and it's been Labour controlled for eons."

Yet another irrelevant contribution designed to disrtact attention from the matter in hand.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

distract. Sorry.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"They just want to work and to feel they are a part of society, not a drain on it. If someone can come up with a better way of getting these people jobs then great, but they say it themselves - they feel acceptance that they'll be passed over for a job if an able bodied person is also in the running for it. They've given up on current legislation designed to help them get a job because that legislation doesn't work. Employers are sidestepping it."

I admire your loyalty to a degree wishy...but surely even you can see this is a real bad move.

You don't always have to stick up for them whatever crap they come up with...I don't stick up for everything the party I vote for do.

Disagree, be a devil

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"i dont want to pop at you wishy as you always because of your current political stance having to defend and PR innept government .

But instead of negative discrimination to help disabled people into work ,how about positive discrimination as has been used in other sections of society.

i dont want to be melodramatic but a country is only as strong as it treats its weakest people,and to advocate further discrimination against those people can not be right in any right thinking democracy . "

PD, I never consider myself 'popped at' if someone is debating like an adult.

Positive discrimination is still discrimination. ID cards have been mooted and shot down yet an ID card for a disabled person could include such information that they are able to work to a competent level under a given set of circumstances. An employer could examine the ID card and include that person in his final delibaerations on who gets the job and at the going rate of pay.

The problem is -- people don't like the idea of ID cards in this country. Big brother, nanny state etc.

What's the answer if employers are skirting with the rules and, in some cases, ignoring them completely?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"They just want to work and to feel they are a part of society, not a drain on it. If someone can come up with a better way of getting these people jobs then great, but they say it themselves - they feel acceptance that they'll be passed over for a job if an able bodied person is also in the running for it. They've given up on current legislation designed to help them get a job because that legislation doesn't work. Employers are sidestepping it."

no wishy the legislation does work if allowed to work ,any organisation using approved governance methods will be required to keep full and detailed records of all interviews and if a applicant can show they were dicriminated using those and there own records ,they can seek compensation ,the trouble is the govt have made access to the law for the normal working classes unviable and they plan to make it even worse.I have not marched since i was at the battle of Saltley in 1972 with the miners ,but on this one principle ,i would get off my arse because its the thin edge of the wedge.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I admire your loyalty to a degree wishy...but surely even you can see this is a real bad move.

You don't always have to stick up for them whatever crap they come up with...I don't stick up for everything the party I vote for do.

Disagree, be a devil"

Ruggers, I do disagree with any attempt to get rid of the minimum wage. I know what employers used to do before it came into effect.

What I'm saying is that I understand what this MP is saying and why he said it. It is a reality that disabled people cannot get a job if the minimum wage is the going rate because able bodied people are favoured over them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?"
the torries think they should be treated differently

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?"

I love you ruggers xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Um just one slight problem though Wishy.

You're saying the person with disabilities should compete on (let's face it) price for a probationary period.

And then they are going back to what your not-so learned friend would call wages identical to society's "more productive" other members right?

How pray tell will their disability have disappeared to then make make them as "productive" once they end their probation?

How exactly will that happen. How will your straw man with a disability suddenly propel himself to the productive capacity of the straw man without?

Presumably you would tell him to take a lifetime pay cut or maybe not to take any holidays so he can churn out as many widgets as the guy who hasn't got a disability.

Why not treat people with a bit of decency instead of the me,me,me Gordon Gekko society? His comments are rightly condemned by groups like MIND and I notice even his colleagues distanced themselves from them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?

I love you ruggers xx"

* holds cross up at the L word !! "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"any organisation using approved governance methods "

There. That's the crux of it. Some companies do not use approved governance methods. They sidestep the rules.

I'm not talking about big companies, they have no choice but to follow the rules, it's the little ones with maybe 5 employees or less. They'll give someone a job and pay them as little as they can get away with, I know it because I've seen it. Little corner shops, launderettes, etc etc.. it does happen, under a Tory govt or a Labour one, but it definately happens and the minimum wage at places like those is nothing more than a pipedream to the unfortunate sods that end up working there.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?"

Because some professional politician on a big wedge thinks they aren't very useful or productive.

He's wrong.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"any organisation using approved governance methods

There. That's the crux of it. Some companies do not use approved governance methods. They sidestep the rules.

I'm not talking about big companies, they have no choice but to follow the rules, it's the little ones with maybe 5 employees or less. They'll give someone a job and pay them as little as they can get away with, I know it because I've seen it. Little corner shops, launderettes, etc etc.. it does happen, under a Tory govt or a Labour one, but it definately happens and the minimum wage at places like those is nothing more than a pipedream to the unfortunate sods that end up working there."

But Wishy, we are not talking about the people who are already doing it and hopefully not getting away with it forever, we are talking about an MP who is telling people to do it

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?"

They shouldn't be treated differently. Jesus, I'm with you on this one!!

But the fact is... they ARE. And legislation hasn't combatted the problem.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"any organisation using approved governance methods

There. That's the crux of it. Some companies do not use approved governance methods. They sidestep the rules.

I'm not talking about big companies, they have no choice but to follow the rules, it's the little ones with maybe 5 employees or less. They'll give someone a job and pay them as little as they can get away with, I know it because I've seen it. Little corner shops, launderettes, etc etc.. it does happen, under a Tory govt or a Labour one, but it definately happens and the minimum wage at places like those is nothing more than a pipedream to the unfortunate sods that end up working there."

well call me thick ,but how can forcing the disabled into that world be useful to them....go on wishy ....disgree with him...you know you want to .....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?

They shouldn't be treated differently. Jesus, I'm with you on this one!!

But the fact is... they ARE. And legislation hasn't combatted the problem."

So because some people still treat them illegally, the MP decides in his wisdom to back them up and do it all the more

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

Anyway bedtime...be good all, keep it civil xxx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Not really the party of law and order any more are they???

If they ever were.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?

They shouldn't be treated differently. Jesus, I'm with you on this one!!

But the fact is... they ARE. And legislation hasn't combatted the problem."

wishy trust me for one reason or another i wont go into, i am an expert on the 2002 discrimination act as amended 2004 ..and trust me not many companies do not know it or fear it if they come to the attention of anyone using it ,the great thing about the act is its about reasonable adjustment ,in other words they do not want to cripple companies for one employee ,but they will not allow flouting of the act.

if people are allowed to use it ,it has made an incredible difference to disabled and other groups ,but this guy is advocating wavers ...saying its ok to treat the diabled differently ,with government sanction ...surely no tory in the bright blue britain can support that ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago

glasgow


"Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?

I love you ruggers xx

* holds cross up at the L word !! " "

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmm.

cut the bullshit.

lets just bring back slavery.

send the 10 year olds,back up chimneys.

lets make britain great again.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"Wishy.....disabled people are the same as us, they just have limitations.

Why should they be treated any different ?

I love you ruggers xx

* holds cross up at the L word !! "

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmm.

cut the bullshit.

lets just bring back slavery.

send the 10 year olds,back up chimneys.

lets make britain great again.

"

lmfao

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ok, let's diffuse this as you seem to think that I agree with Phillip Davies. I don't. I think he should have run his idea past Tory HQ before opening his mouth but he didn't.

To my mind, he threw his hat into a very public ring and said, "this is my idea, if you don't like it, fine, but find a system that works because the one we're using now doesn't."

When disabled people apply for a job advertsied at the basic minimum wage they are being discriminated against by employers in favour of able bodied people. Even the disabled community agree with that statement.

The answer is quite easy actually but it's unpalletable.

If the govt have decided that a person - any person - requires a minimum amount of money in order to subsist then that amount is applicable to all. Honest disabled people who want to work but cannot find a job should be given benefits amounting to at least the minimum wage. Agreed?

Here's the unpalletable bit.

Dishonest benefits cheats have made it impossible to give honest jobseekers what they deserve without means testing them to determine that they are actually honest and trying to look for work.

Find a system that works but be prepared to have big brother looking over your shoulder to make sure it's working properly.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

if they want to cut back there wages

then they have to cut back everything else

how are they suppose 2 live on

its not on

i thought this was an april fool joke comon torries get a grip with your self's.

with prices have rocketed the last month alone no 1 can live on that sort of wage, this is not the 80s

this is the year 2011

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford


"

In truth, I simply don't know where the difficulty lies or which alternative would be acceptable. "

Not being personal to you at all The Accomodating Voyeur but you might find the following phrase acceptable :

FUCK RIGHT OFF FUDFACE ( it has to be capitals )

Unless it's use is only allowable by women, but wouldn't that be sex discrimination.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"

In truth, I simply don't know where the difficulty lies or which alternative would be acceptable.

Not being personal to you at all The Accomodating Voyeur but you might find the following phrase acceptable :

FUCK RIGHT OFF FUDFACE ( it has to be capitals )

Unless it's use is only allowable by women, but wouldn't that be sex discrimination. "

Mushroom....people banter all the time....The posts you are talking about where banter between people who you saw in chat last night still bantering.

If you don't like their banter then report it to Admin....but please keep any issues away from the forums.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place

But dishonest benefit cheats are a minority ..most people on benefits are previously hard working people made unemployed ,as for being watched they are ,they have to sign on every 2 weeks and show what they have done to get a job ..you show a little book with all the attempts written down ,what papers they looked at ..what applications they made.incidently most only get less than 60 quid a week for everything. electric ,gas ,food . its not a lot you know

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"BOLLOX.

Typical response from you. You need to live in the real world. Socialism DOES NOT WORK."

its not socialism to treat people with dignity.

to expect one person for whatever reason to do the job for a lower rate of pay is a downward spiral.

Wishy mate in that 'real world' it leads to wage slavery which if thats what you want for you n yours fine, but not for me.

yes we live in a free market economy with its benefits and failings, but some tories are so dogmatic in their outlook they would have most of us tugging our forelocks to 'their class' whilst their school chums slice up the country for profit.

thatcher said there was no such thing as society, some of the present tory party despite the spin appear to be no different and that is wrong.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It doesn't matter that they are a minority, it's the fact that they exist that causes problems for honest people out of work. How many times have we all rattled our sabres at Mrs. XYZ and her 6 kids by 7 different father's (yeah, you work it out cos I can't lol) claiming more money than an able bodied person earning £30k per annum. We've all read about them, and they may well be the minority but public outrage demands politican's act and do something about it, and that makes it even harder for honest jobseekers to get something akin to a decent level of living whilst unemployed. Now compound that with the additional problems a disabled person has finding work.

Davies shouldn't have said what he said without going through his party first, but I get why he said it. He's put the spotlight on disabled people and the brick wall they face when trying to find a job and take care of themselves. And he was right to do that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

Shipley, Bradford MP to boot.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Davies shouldn't have said what he said without going through his party first, but I get why he said it. He's put the spotlight on disabled people and the brick wall they face when trying to find a job and take care of themselves. And he was right to do that."
he said it an who is next going to get it

fire service?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Well personally i am fed up with paying my taxes and see no reason why the government shouldn’t encourage people back into work. Granted there are many genuine disabled people but the malingerers and work shy far outnumber them. Any pro-actively in getting people back to work is a positive one. I for one do not see why society should support people who aren’t prepared to do something about their situation. Going into your latter stages in life with no prospects, no job and little money isn’t good for anyone.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

he said it an who is next going to get it

fire service?"

what?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

he said it an who is next going to get it

fire service?

what? "
the cuts

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

he said it an who is next going to get it

fire service?

what? the cuts "

How is that pertinent to this conversation? This thread isn't about cuts, it's about the problems disabled people have finding work.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

To be fair, it isn't about dole scroungers either but you brought that up

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

he said it an who is next going to get it

fire service?

what? the cuts

How is that pertinent to this conversation? This thread isn't about cuts, it's about the problems disabled people have finding work. "
yes it is about the cuts in wages to disable people.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"To be fair, it isn't about dole scroungers either but you brought that up"

I thought it relevant to include dole scroungers when putting forward my idea for a possible solution. They are a problem when it comes to dealing with unemployed people who are genuinely looking for work and the benefits they should receive.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place

so why the disabled there is at least legislation ,what about ageism there is no legislation to protect people in the uk and wont be for at least 10 years ?

its incoherent and to be honest obscene to suggest its a good idea to put a whole section of society on sub minimum wage on the promise they may get a job.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"so why the disabled there is at least legislation ,what about ageism there is no legislation to protect people in the uk and wont be for at least 10 years ?

its incoherent and to be honest obscene to suggest its a good idea to put a whole section of society on sub minimum wage on the promise they may get a job.

"

huh? sub-minimum? I said honest disabled jobseekers should get the equivalent of the minimum wage didn't I?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"so why the disabled there is at least legislation ,what about ageism there is no legislation to protect people in the uk and wont be for at least 10 years ?

its incoherent and to be honest obscene to suggest its a good idea to put a whole section of society on sub minimum wage on the promise they may get a job.

huh? sub-minimum? I said honest disabled jobseekers should get the equivalent of the minimum wage didn't I?"

well it wasnt pointed at you wishy i was refeering to what the mp said tbh,

i am not going to get into a tit for tat of your defence your entitled to your opinion and to hold it ,however it is a step too far even taking out the political divide..its exactly what happened in germany in 1933 very slowly very insiduously and very nasty.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ushroom7Man
over a year ago

Bradford

To repost an amusing item from Radio 4

Sandi Toksvig said something like

"Who was it who put the N in Tory Cuts"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"

To repost an amusing item from Radio 4

Sandi Toksvig said something like

"Who was it who put the N in Tory Cuts""

seems to have stirred up a hornets nest all over the place, talk about treading on a political landmine ..i think he is in the bag of knob of the month with ken clarke lol

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle-Miss-MuffetCouple
over a year ago

Chester / North Wales


"

he said it an who is next going to get it

fire service?

what? the cuts

How is that pertinent to this conversation? This thread isn't about cuts, it's about the problems disabled people have finding work. "

So you think the answer is to exploit these people for a few weeks? Are you really so blind? You say that you KNOW that this sort of things goes on, yet you seem to be agreeing that it's allright to ignore the law or change it to supposedly help those that find difficulty finding employment? The mind boggles.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago

glasgow

benefit scroungers,cost this country between 1 and 2 billion pounds a year.

to many undeserving people,receive benefits,scroungers.

last year barclays bank, made 11 billion pounds profit,and paid considerably less than 2 hundred million tax,thieves.

they are both wrong,but if we target those who cost the country the least.

we should also target those who cost the country the most,tax evaders.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

he said it an who is next going to get it

fire service?

what?

the cuts

How is that pertinent to this conversation? This thread isn't about cuts, it's about the problems disabled people have finding work.

So you think the answer is to exploit these people for a few weeks? Are you really so blind? You say that you KNOW that this sort of things goes on, yet you seem to be agreeing that it's allright to ignore the law or change it to supposedly help those that find difficulty finding employment? The mind boggles."

I've explained my position quite clearly.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"last year barclays bank, made 11 billion pounds profit,and paid considerably less than 2 hundred million tax,thieves

....we should also target those who cost the country the most,tax evaders."

You're absolutely correct, the banks DO need their corporation tax loopholes closed, and they SHOULD be forced to pay the correct level of tax.

Barclays tried to wriggle off the hook by claiming they'd paid £2.4b in tax last year but it was pointed out that 80% of that figure was PAYE tax levied on their employees.

It going to take a chancellor with a huge set of gonads to bring them to book and I hope Osbourne takes on that challenge.

I'm sick of hearing that a Tory chancellor will look after his rich Tory friends when Alistair Darling, and Brown before him, had the opportunity to sort the banks out and failed to do so. It should be a cross-party endeavour to le out the corporate law that large companies hide behind to avoid paying the tax they should be paying, and if Osbourne, as the man in the job at the moment, does take on this challenge, then he should have the full support of the Houses of Parliament, the House of Lords and the electorate in general.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"

It going to take a chancellor with a huge set of gonads to bring them to book and I hope Osbourne takes on that challenge.

I'm sick of hearing that a Tory chancellor will look after his rich Tory friends when Alistair Darling, and Brown before him, had the opportunity to sort the banks out and failed to do so. It should be a cross-party endeavour to le out the corporate law that large companies hide behind to avoid paying the tax they should be paying, and if Osbourne, as the man in the job at the moment, does take on this challenge, then he should have the full support of the Houses of Parliament, the House of Lords and the electorate in general."

Unfortunately wishy Osbourne has already committed to taking on the baqnks in 2009 when in opposition he said the torys would limit the bonuses to 2k in cash and force the banks to spend and borrow more to small business .

What we got was a weak project merlin which the banks have reneiged on there commitments already in terms of lending.

Take a look at the recent events (below) the banks caused the resession and are now stifling growth.

8 Jun 2011: The business secretary, Vince Cable, as expected, issued vague threats about higher taxes. But then he added: 'It is hard to imagine that we could penalise individual banks', writes Nils Pratley

--------------------------------

Outrage at the banks is everywhere, so why aren't there riots on the streets?

30 May 2011:Madeleine Bunting:

Anger about bankers from left and right is muddled by the City's mantra that banking is too complex for people like us

---------------------------------

Bankers caused the crash and now they strangle recovery

27 May 2011: Polly Toynbee: Instead of lending to small businesses, bankers are lining their own pockets. And yet we look the other way

--------------------------------

Project Merlin needs to be less woolly and more wizard

23 May 2011: Is the government really going to be able to dock Stephen Hester's pay if Royal Bank of Scotland fails to hit its lending targets to small businesses? And by how much?

-----------------------------------

RBS investors protest at high executive salaries at rowdy annual meeting

19 Apr 2011: Ken Cram, a private RBS shareholder, was met by a loud round of applause when he accused board members of having an "inflated idea of their own importance"

------------------------------------

New Lloyds boss receives 'golden hello' worth £4.6m

30 Mar 2011: New chief executive António Horta-Osório has been bought out of pay deals at his previous employer Santander

-------------------------------------

Top five bankers at RBS earn total of £20m

17 Mar 2011: US-based Ellen Alemany is highest paid of five top staff reporting to chief executive, getting almost £6m

-----------------------

Seems after his tough talking commitments in 2009 Osbourne is not the man for the job.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 18/06/11 18:31:55]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If he doesn't do something about greedy bankers I really do feel that a return to the riots of the 80s is on the cards.

Fuel prices up

Food prices up

Wages stagnant

VAT up

Energy prices about to rise 20%+

It doesn't take much to work out that when interest rates go up to combat inflation people are going to be squeezed on all sides, and that's a recipe for public discontent.

What really boils my piss though is that it is Labour's fault all this is happening due to 13 years of ineptitude, yet it's the Tories who will carry the can for it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"If he doesn't do something about greedy bankers I really do feel that a return to the riots of the 80s is on the cards.

Fuel prices up

Food prices up

Wages stagnant

VAT up

Energy prices about to rise 20%+

It doesn't take much to work out that when interest rates go up to combat inflation people are going to be squeezed on all sides, and that's a recipe for public discontent.

What really boils my piss though is that it is Labour's fault all this is happening due to 13 years of ineptitude, yet it's the Tories who will carry the can for it. "

i agree with everything you say there ,except the bit about it ALL being labours fault .If you look at it analytically ,we have the worst global recession since the great depression 70 odd years ago only one american guy predicted it and no one listened ,the tories never saw it ,labour nor the libs saw it ,the yanks never saw it ,russions chinese ,Europe etc etc..

In hindsight everyone should of ,but no one did.so lets look at where the money labour spent went ,new schools program, new hospitals built , job schemes to expand the work force so they become tax payers instead of tax takers , etc etc etc i am not going to sound off about how great labour were ,but my one regret is they didnt raid the banks more and rebuild the transport system ...if you want to see labours legacy it is not all bad you only have to look at the new schools kids now sit in,But the greed on the global banking system caused the mess we are in and that by chance happened on labours watch .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

i agree with everything you say there ,except the bit about it ALL being labours fault .If you look at it analytically ,we have the worst global recession since the great depression 70 odd years ago only one american guy predicted it and no one listened ,the tories never saw it ,labour nor the libs saw it ,the yanks never saw it ,russions chinese ,Europe etc etc..

In hindsight everyone should of ,but no one did.so lets look at where the money labour spent went ,new schools program, new hospitals built , job schemes to expand the work force so they become tax payers instead of tax takers , etc etc etc i am not going to sound off about how great labour were ,but my one regret is they didnt raid the banks more and rebuild the transport system ...if you want to see labours legacy it is not all bad you only have to look at the new schools kids now sit in,But the greed on the global banking system caused the mess we are in and that by chance happened on labours watch ."

That's some spin there PD. Brown said during the televised debates that the only way out of the recession was to keep spending, and he meant money we didn't have. He said himself during that election that he should have regulated the banks but succumbed to pressure from the City and left them alone. The hospitals, schools etc that were sorely needed should have been financed through an effective programme of savings elsewhere and a trimming of natural wastage. Brown as chancellor, and then as PM tried to spend his way into the hearts and minds of the electorate and they saw through him.

It is basic economics: you cannot spend what you don't have or cannot repay therefore you must make efficiency cutbacks.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

trouble is most of the new schools, hospitals etc were built and still being done so through PFI.

and that is the economic policy of cowards, started by thatcher, accelerated by blair.

ite the 'never never' the 'tallyman', it makes no sense and will bite our childrens and future generations on the arse.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"

That's some spin there PD. Brown said during the televised debates that the only way out of the recession was to keep spending, and he meant money we didn't have. He said himself during that election that he should have regulated the banks but succumbed to pressure from the City and left them alone. The hospitals, schools etc that were sorely needed should have been financed through an effective programme of savings elsewhere and a trimming of natural wastage. Brown as chancellor, and then as PM tried to spend his way into the hearts and minds of the electorate and they saw through him.

It is basic economics: you cannot spend what you don't have or cannot repay therefore you must make efficiency cutbacks."

I think history after this summer will prove he was probably right in his approach. most countries are investing in education and infrastructure to create jobs and get the money rolling around the system again ,but the coallition is playing possum and chucking half a million people on the dole over the summer ...is this what you meant by "natural wastage" turn a tax paying employed worker into a benefit claiming unemployed person and also reduce the services to the weak and poor.

Unfortunately for the coalition all those people have names and they have votes and it will bite them at the next election

Its interesting that the britsh electorate even in the midst of a global banking crisis never gave the tories outright power ,they simply can not be trusted,their allegance is to big business and not the people they claim to represent.The poor old liberals are sitting in a meltdown of tory making with no way out

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" Its interesting that the britsh electorate even in the midst of a global banking crisis never gave the tories outright power ,they simply can not be trusted,their allegance is to big business and not the people they claim to represent.The poor old liberals are sitting in a meltdown of tory making with no way out "

I think the outcome of the election was more to do with a basic mistrust of politicans right across the political divide. Many people watched those live debates and saw Brown agree with Clegg and Clegg agree with Cameron. There was no clear victor in those debates and it was reflected at the ballot box. Clegg looked as though he was finally going to take the LibDems back into mainstream opposition but his deal with the Tories basically sold his grass root support to the devil. Brown could have held onto a very tentative grip on power if he'd caved in to Libdem demands but he refused and the rest is history.

It is no fluke that many leading economists from all over the globe have stated that they think Osbourne's policies are the correct approach to tackling the deficit. The global economic turnaround is going to take more than policy making by one particular country, or chancellor, it's going to take a concerted effort by all the major markets around the world.

I'll be voting Tory again even if George doesn't achieve all he has set out to achieve because I simply don't trust a Labour govt at the helm again - it's too soon and this country needs a change, and that's going to take more than one term to accomplish.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *UNCHBOXMan
over a year ago

folkestone


"If he doesn't do something about greedy bankers I really do feel that a return to the riots of the 80s is on the cards.

Fuel prices up

Food prices up

Wages stagnant

VAT up

Energy prices about to rise 20%+

It doesn't take much to work out that when interest rates go up to combat inflation people are going to be squeezed on all sides, and that's a recipe for public discontent.

What really boils my piss though is that it is Labour's fault all this is happening due to 13 years of ineptitude, yet it's the Tories who will carry the can for it. "

Ehh, wasn't it the conservatives who privatised all the utilities, promised us competition, and it turns out there is no real competition between them?.

And wasnt the conservatives who wasted the billions this raised by cutting income tax for the very wealthy?. Labour did waste money, but considering the conservatives also had billions from all the privatisations and north sea, they didnt exactly to a lot with it(i dont remember many new hospitals and schools being built).

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andy muncherMan
over a year ago

Nottingham


"If he doesn't do something about greedy bankers I really do feel that a return to the riots of the 80s is on the cards.

Fuel prices up

Food prices up

Wages stagnant

VAT up

Energy prices about to rise 20%+

It doesn't take much to work out that when interest rates go up to combat inflation people are going to be squeezed on all sides, and that's a recipe for public discontent.

What really boils my piss though is that it is Labour's fault all this is happening due to 13 years of ineptitude, yet it's the Tories who will carry the can for it.

Ehh, wasn't it the conservatives who privatised all the utilities, promised us competition, and it turns out there is no real competition between them?.

And wasnt the conservatives who wasted the billions this raised by cutting income tax for the very wealthy?. Labour did waste money, but considering the conservatives also had billions from all the privatisations and north sea, they didnt exactly to a lot with it(i dont remember many new eand schools being built). "

all i say if greece goes tits up we are in up to our necks i say know more

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Ehh, wasn't it the conservatives who privatised all the utilities, promised us competition, and it turns out there is no real competition between them?."

What constitutes competition in your opinion?

The old institutions of what was The Gas Board and the British Electricity Authority (BEA) couldn't have possibly been capable of taking those industries into the new era of mass rollout of the gas & electricity supply that a growing country needed - so they were nationalised. The Gas Board was comprised of 1062 independant companies, and the BEA was made up of some 600 different electricity suppliers.

There we had competition, but Clement Atlee's Labour govt nationalised them in 1948 and created monopolies of both industries. And those industries were then stifled by the unions that controlled them. Do you remember the Winter of Discontent in 78-79 in which the unions held the country to ransom over pay? It was that dispute - between Callaghans Labour govt and the Unions that allowed Thatcher to sweep to victory in 79, and it was because of that dispute that she vowed to break the unions - and her weapon to do that was privatisation of the industries where union power was at it's strongest.


"

And wasnt the conservatives who wasted the billions this raised by cutting income tax for the very wealthy?.

"

Heath's Labour govt was elected in 1970 with the doctrine of rolling back the frontiers of the state yet it left office in 1974 with more state-owned assets than that with which it had begun. In 1979, Thatcher's govt set about adopting a reversal of those policies and returned those utilities to the private sector. An estimated £28b was raised through the programme of privatisation between 1987-90 - less than £10b per year. This country needs a darned sight more than £10b to run it's affairs.


" Labour did waste money, but considering the conservatives also had billions from all the privatisations and north sea, they didnt exactly to a lot with it(i dont remember many new hospitals and schools being built). "

You were born in 1977 yes? Thatcher won in 79 and remained in office until 1990. You would have been 13. I doubt very much that your life was focused on politics at such a tender young age so it's hardly surprising you don't remember new schools and hospitals being built. I do however. I was 25 in 1990 and I remember it as a time of prosperity. I had money in my pocket, a good job and a comfortable lifestyle for a 25y/o.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ertnbeckyCouple
over a year ago

oldham

we should never have entered the eec or built the chunnel and as a disabled man how insulting i find that tory pillock.maybe go back to the good old days n put us in a cage n charge people to poke us with a stick

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


" cut....

of privatisation between 1987-90 - less than £10b per year. This country needs a darned sight more than £10b to run it's affairs.

Labour did waste money, but considering the conservatives also had billions from all the privatisations and north sea, they didnt exactly to a lot with it(i dont remember many new hospitals and schools being built).

You were born in 1977 yes? Thatcher won in 79 and remained in office until 1990. You would have been 13. I doubt very much that your life was focused on politics at such a tender young age so it's hardly surprising you don't remember new schools and hospitals being built. I do however. I was 25 in 1990 and I remember it as a time of prosperity. I had money in my pocket, a good job and a comfortable lifestyle for a 25y/o."

Now Wishy come on ...you said i was spinning earlier... this reads like a tory newpaper sunday suppliment.You cant be advocating that Thatchers era was actually good for the country,if it was why did the Tories chuck the mad cow out.?

New schools ,New hospitals i lived through that time and i can tell you it wasnt like that at all,I remember kids being in classrooms what wouldnt look out of place in the 3rd world ,it was right wing political dogma and idealism gone mad, she sold everything but the crown jewels and distributed it to the city,she put lamont in charge who for example lost 13billion quid meddling in the EMF IN ONE DAY !! (I remember some of the city people jumping from there offices rather than face the future,I remember the use of the police to break the miners union, police men waving there overtime money at starving miners,road blocks on the streets stopping people from taking the pickets food and who can remember the famous cavalry charge clubbing peaceful protesting miners to the ground,look at the pole tax riots, a direct reaction back by "the people" against a govt who had gone too far,I remember the inner city breakdown of law and order,keith Blakelock,handsworth,bristol in flames..I remember people seriously ill stuck on trolleys in corridors through lack of resources not enough doctors ,not enough nurses ,not enough anything,my own mother lying on a trolley in the entrance at A+E for 13 hours with a brain haemorrage and being given nothing but 2 asprins .

Oh dont worry a price was paid for the so called Thatcher economic miracle,maybe it just wasnt paid by you ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *UNCHBOXMan
over a year ago

folkestone


"Ehh, wasn't it the conservatives who privatised all the utilities, promised us competition, and it turns out there is no real competition between them?.

What constitutes competition in your opinion?

The old institutions of what was The Gas Board and the British Electricity Authority (BEA) couldn't have possibly been capable of taking those industries into the new era of mass rollout of the gas & electricity supply that a growing country needed - so they were nationalised. The Gas Board was comprised of 1062 independant companies, and the BEA was made up of some 600 different electricity suppliers.

There we had competition, but Clement Atlee's Labour govt nationalised them in 1948 and created monopolies of both industries. And those industries were then stifled by the unions that controlled them. Do you remember the Winter of Discontent in 78-79 in which the unions held the country to ransom over pay? It was that dispute - between Callaghans Labour govt and the Unions that allowed Thatcher to sweep to victory in 79, and it was because of that dispute that she vowed to break the unions - and her weapon to do that was privatisation of the industries where union power was at it's strongest.

And wasnt the conservatives who wasted the billions this raised by cutting income tax for the very wealthy?.

Heath's Labour govt was elected in 1970 with the doctrine of rolling back the frontiers of the state yet it left office in 1974 with more state-owned assets than that with which it had begun. In 1979, Thatcher's govt set about adopting a reversal of those policies and returned those utilities to the private sector. An estimated £28b was raised through the programme of privatisation between 1987-90 - less than £10b per year. This country needs a darned sight more than £10b to run it's affairs.

Labour did waste money, but considering the conservatives also had billions from all the privatisations and north sea, they didnt exactly to a lot with it(i dont remember many new hospitals and schools being built).

You were born in 1977 yes? Thatcher won in 79 and remained in office until 1990. You would have been 13. I doubt very much that your life was focused on politics at such a tender young age so it's hardly surprising you don't remember new schools and hospitals being built. I do however. I was 25 in 1990 and I remember it as a time of prosperity. I had money in my pocket, a good job and a comfortable lifestyle for a 25y/o."

Competition is meant to benefit the customer. The current gas and electricity companys are a cartel in all but name, so no real competition. It's like a game of poker, they all wait for the first company to show their hand and put their prices up, and the other's then follow suit. The company's arent bothered about their customers - all they are really bothered about is their bottom line, and their shareholders. As most are now owned by foreign corporations - many state owned(do you see the irony in that?), they have no incentive to invest.

Do you know why only £10 billion on average was raised per year?; because the torries sold them less than the market value. All because Thatcher and Joseph wanted to prove their doctrine was right.

Feel free to tell me, where in kent the numerous new schools and hospitals were built from 1979 to 1990. I can tell you from my own experience that here in kent(under a tory controlled council) they invested next to nothing in capital projects in schools. My own school had pre 1950's temporary building that were still being used in the 90's, along with 19th century buildings that were falling down and today you wouldnt be allowed to use under health and safety laws.

Im glad you experienced a comfortable lifestyle under the torries. Maybe i could contrast that with my now deceased gran, who after bringing up my dad on her own from the age of 5(her husband died), and doing 3 jobs at a time, when she retired she found thatcher changed the way her state pension was calculated. They broke the link with average earnings, so in effect she was worse off, after working all her life to pay for it. And of course this removal of the link to average earnings for pensioners would have effected millions of our 1st and 2nd world war heroes who fought for the right for people like you to enjoy boasting about how well off you were, at the same time they were worrying about how to pay for food and heating.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top