Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
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 Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Get ready to pay more tax…" As we would also be if the Tories had stayed in office plus I doubt they would have even tried to end this dispute.. Sometimes pragmatic thinking is needed to resolve disputes.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"about time.... the last government wasted 4 times more money on this strike (projected over the next 10 years) than the cost of settling for 20% two years ago. "How? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"# don't mention taxation under the Tories "Understood and why it is critical we don’t see tax hikes now and giving that much away. That is a double edged sword | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hunt admitted the tax cuts the Tories promised during the election would not have happened in the next year or more. The £20bn could be covered by reversing the NIC cut (they won’t). Apparently the Tories had pay offer recommendations on Minister’s desks and ignored them knowing it would not be their problem. I think it appears to be pragmatic to tell junior doctors we can’t afford 35% but 20% is a good deal better than you have currently. Why can’t they take the same approach with the teachers? The pay deal recommendation is 5.5% but why not say things are tight so offer 4.5% or even 5% to reduce that £20bn? Why not make a deal thar says (in layperson terms) “we can’t afford X% today due to economic conditions. We can offer Y% now and then commit to reaching X% in future if the following economic conditions are met…”" Part of the issue isn’t about what is fair, it’s about what will a) keep people in those professions, and b) attract new people into them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"# don't mention taxation under the Tories
Understood and why it is critical we don’t see tax hikes now and giving that much away.
That is a double edged sword"It's what tends to happen if after 14 years of pay cuts to essential public service workers there unsurprisingly a campaign by them to redress the balance.. Slashing budgets to the services and restrictions upon pay as the scapegoats for the bankers mess which has had huge real effects and created massive issues in those areas which we see now wasn't the right policy by Cameron/ Osborne.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hunt admitted the tax cuts the Tories promised during the election would not have happened in the next year or more. The £20bn could be covered by reversing the NIC cut (they won’t). Apparently the Tories had pay offer recommendations on Minister’s desks and ignored them knowing it would not be their problem. I think it appears to be pragmatic to tell junior doctors we can’t afford 35% but 20% is a good deal better than you have currently. Why can’t they take the same approach with the teachers? The pay deal recommendation is 5.5% but why not say things are tight so offer 4.5% or even 5% to reduce that £20bn? Why not make a deal thar says (in layperson terms) “we can’t afford X% today due to economic conditions. We can offer Y% now and then commit to reaching X% in future if the following economic conditions are met…” Part of the issue isn’t about what is fair, it’s about what will a) keep people in those professions, and b) attract new people into them." Yes but everyone is an adult and pragmatism is essential. No point giving people a pay rise then taking it back off them with tax rises! Hence my interim offer with commitment to increase when certain economic conditions are met approach. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"# don't mention taxation under the Tories
Understood and why it is critical we don’t see tax hikes now and giving that much away.
That is a double edged sword
It's what tends to happen if after 14 years of pay cuts to essential public service workers there unsurprisingly a campaign by them to redress the balance..
Slashing budgets to the services and restrictions upon pay as the scapegoats for the bankers mess which has had huge real effects and created massive issues in those areas which we see now wasn't the right policy by Cameron/ Osborne..
"The core of that problem was under labour's watch, and Gordon Brown has admitted he made a big mistake over the handling of financial regulation in the run-up to the banking crisis of 2008. He also managed to sell off the the gold reserves costing us approx 21 billion in 1999. I have made a conservative estimate that inflation has averaged 2.75% year on year, that 21 billion is equivalent to 41 billion today. On top of that was the total mess the labour government made of NHS funding using PFI in the 2000's up to 2009. 11 billion worth of contracts up to 2009, and with 25 - 30 year to pay this off we have been truly held over a barrel with repayments of 44 billion for the loans and a total liability of 55 billion when we manage to get to the final payment. The tories inherited the debt and needed to introduce austerity measures, which for some reason people have forgotten that it was labour that led us there. That was a longhand version of me saying I think it is rich that labour are saying there is a 20 billion hole in the finances, and throw even more of our money at junior doctors! they could have got that 22% down further but here we are, already getting it wrong with our money. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"about time.... the last government wasted 4 times more money on this strike (projected over the next 10 years) than the cost of settling for 20% two years ago.
How?"Stikes cost money in terms of lost productivity and in the case of NHS stikes lengthen waiting lists resulting in lost working days, and increased costs because more medicines are required until people are treated. The UK tax take is heading towards 37% of each pound generated, so 37% of that settlement will end up coming back to the government anyway. Compare that to Jacob Rees-Mogg's £7million Brexit Bonus, to be paid by Somerset Capital. All goes offshore, no tax paid in the UK. Labour rewards ordinary working people, the Tories reward themselves and do their best to avoid paying UK tax. I sincerely hope they are wiped out forever. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"# don't mention taxation under the Tories
Understood and why it is critical we don’t see tax hikes now and giving that much away.
That is a double edged sword
It's what tends to happen if after 14 years of pay cuts to essential public service workers there unsurprisingly a campaign by them to redress the balance..
Slashing budgets to the services and restrictions upon pay as the scapegoats for the bankers mess which has had huge real effects and created massive issues in those areas which we see now wasn't the right policy by Cameron/ Osborne..
The core of that problem was under labour's watch, and Gordon Brown has admitted he made a big mistake over the handling of financial regulation in the run-up to the banking crisis of 2008. He also managed to sell off the the gold reserves costing us approx 21 billion in 1999. I have made a conservative estimate that inflation has averaged 2.75% year on year, that 21 billion is equivalent to 41 billion today.
On top of that was the total mess the labour government made of NHS funding using PFI in the 2000's up to 2009. 11 billion worth of contracts up to 2009, and with 25 - 30 year to pay this off we have been truly held over a barrel with repayments of 44 billion for the loans and a total liability of 55 billion when we manage to get to the final payment.
The tories inherited the debt and needed to introduce austerity measures, which for some reason people have forgotten that it was labour that led us there.
That was a longhand version of me saying I think it is rich that labour are saying there is a 20 billion hole in the finances, and throw even more of our money at junior doctors! they could have got that 22% down further but here we are, already getting it wrong with our money.
"21? It was 3.5 and yes had it not been pre announced the price might not have fallen but it was pretty much economic policy by most of the central banks at a time when gold had been falling for over ten years.. I'm not in favour of PFI,wasn't when Thatcher started it and Blair continued it.. The gold issue dies have it's faults yes but Osborne also undersold northern rock, browns record is more than one issue and his record 97-08 was a period of growth which the global banking crisis collapsed and again lax regulation started before 97 but continued after was part of that too.. The last 14 years has seen the economy lower than the rest of many of our competitors and the tax rises plus the nations debt grow.. Funny enough as has the wealth of the very richest, not so the case for the rest of us.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"# don't mention taxation under the Tories
Understood and why it is critical we don’t see tax hikes now and giving that much away.
That is a double edged sword
It's what tends to happen if after 14 years of pay cuts to essential public service workers there unsurprisingly a campaign by them to redress the balance..
Slashing budgets to the services and restrictions upon pay as the scapegoats for the bankers mess which has had huge real effects and created massive issues in those areas which we see now wasn't the right policy by Cameron/ Osborne..
The core of that problem was under labour's watch, and Gordon Brown has admitted he made a big mistake over the handling of financial regulation in the run-up to the banking crisis of 2008. He also managed to sell off the the gold reserves costing us approx 21 billion in 1999. I have made a conservative estimate that inflation has averaged 2.75% year on year, that 21 billion is equivalent to 41 billion today.
On top of that was the total mess the labour government made of NHS funding using PFI in the 2000's up to 2009. 11 billion worth of contracts up to 2009, and with 25 - 30 year to pay this off we have been truly held over a barrel with repayments of 44 billion for the loans and a total liability of 55 billion when we manage to get to the final payment.
The tories inherited the debt and needed to introduce austerity measures, which for some reason people have forgotten that it was labour that led us there.
That was a longhand version of me saying I think it is rich that labour are saying there is a 20 billion hole in the finances, and throw even more of our money at junior doctors! they could have got that 22% down further but here we are, already getting it wrong with our money.
21?
It was 3.5 and yes had it not been pre announced the price might not have fallen but it was pretty much economic policy by most of the central banks at a time when gold had been falling for over ten years..
I'm not in favour of PFI,wasn't when Thatcher started it and Blair continued it..
The gold issue dies have it's faults yes but Osborne also undersold northern rock, browns record is more than one issue and his record 97-08 was a period of growth which the global banking crisis collapsed and again lax regulation started before 97 but continued after was part of that too..
The last 14 years has seen the economy lower than the rest of many of our competitors and the tax rises plus the nations debt grow..
Funny enough as has the wealth of the very richest, not so the case for the rest of us.."We lost 21 billion on the sale. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The UK tax take is heading towards 37% of each pound generated, so 37% of that settlement will end up coming back to the government anyway. ." “For 2023/24, UK government raised around £1,095 billion (£1.1 trillion) in receipts – income from taxes and other sources. This is equivalent to around 40% of the size of the UK economy, as measured by GDP, which is the highest level since the early 1980s.” House commons library. 10 May 2024 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The UK tax take is heading towards 37% of each pound generated, so 37% of that settlement will end up coming back to the government anyway. . “For 2023/24, UK government raised around £1,095 billion (£1.1 trillion) in receipts – income from taxes and other sources. This is equivalent to around 40% of the size of the UK economy, as measured by GDP, which is the highest level since the early 1980s.” House commons library. 10 May 2024 " Factor in the tax shortfall characterised by the increase in national debt and its over 40%. Any people are worried about Labour Government debt was equivalent to 99.5% of GDP at the end of June 2024. It was 96.7% of GDP at the end of June 2023 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"# don't mention taxation under the Tories
Understood and why it is critical we don’t see tax hikes now and giving that much away.
That is a double edged sword
It's what tends to happen if after 14 years of pay cuts to essential public service workers there unsurprisingly a campaign by them to redress the balance..
Slashing budgets to the services and restrictions upon pay as the scapegoats for the bankers mess which has had huge real effects and created massive issues in those areas which we see now wasn't the right policy by Cameron/ Osborne..
The core of that problem was under labour's watch, and Gordon Brown has admitted he made a big mistake over the handling of financial regulation in the run-up to the banking crisis of 2008. He also managed to sell off the the gold reserves costing us approx 21 billion in 1999. I have made a conservative estimate that inflation has averaged 2.75% year on year, that 21 billion is equivalent to 41 billion today.
On top of that was the total mess the labour government made of NHS funding using PFI in the 2000's up to 2009. 11 billion worth of contracts up to 2009, and with 25 - 30 year to pay this off we have been truly held over a barrel with repayments of 44 billion for the loans and a total liability of 55 billion when we manage to get to the final payment.
The tories inherited the debt and needed to introduce austerity measures, which for some reason people have forgotten that it was labour that led us there.
That was a longhand version of me saying I think it is rich that labour are saying there is a 20 billion hole in the finances, and throw even more of our money at junior doctors! they could have got that 22% down further but here we are, already getting it wrong with our money.
21?
It was 3.5 and yes had it not been pre announced the price might not have fallen but it was pretty much economic policy by most of the central banks at a time when gold had been falling for over ten years..
I'm not in favour of PFI,wasn't when Thatcher started it and Blair continued it..
The gold issue dies have it's faults yes but Osborne also undersold northern rock, browns record is more than one issue and his record 97-08 was a period of growth which the global banking crisis collapsed and again lax regulation started before 97 but continued after was part of that too..
The last 14 years has seen the economy lower than the rest of many of our competitors and the tax rises plus the nations debt grow..
Funny enough as has the wealth of the very richest, not so the case for the rest of us..
We lost 21 billion on the sale."If we sold it when? It's a bit like saying if I hadn't married your mum I would have a Porsche and a villa now.. Hindsight..  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also get annoyed by the narrative seemingly blaming Gordon Brown for the financial crisis. It is totally disingenuous. Deregulation of financial services started way before New Labour were in Govt. It was the wet dream of neo-liberals in the Reagan-Thatcher era. The world economy was booming in the mid-late 90s and part of the driver was financial services. Imagine the industry and media outcry if New Labour had tried to reintroduce heavier regulation! Imagine how the Tories in opposition would have attacked Labour for reversing what they had achieved! Brown admitted he didn’t fully understand the complexities and issues that led to the crash not that he took the blame for it. Many, including Mervyn King, believe Brown’s actions on the world stage once the crisis was underway provided leadership and ideas that actually were a big reason we averted financial armageddon. P.S. no fan of Brown (pensions) but blame/credit where it is due!" I agree that it wasn't all Labour's fault, but they don't get off the hook just because the Torries 'would've kicked up a stink'. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hunt admitted the tax cuts the Tories promised during the election would not have happened in the next year or more. The £20bn could be covered by reversing the NIC cut (they won’t). Apparently the Tories had pay offer recommendations on Minister’s desks and ignored them knowing it would not be their problem. I think it appears to be pragmatic to tell junior doctors we can’t afford 35% but 20% is a good deal better than you have currently. Why can’t they take the same approach with the teachers? The pay deal recommendation is 5.5% but why not say things are tight so offer 4.5% or even 5% to reduce that £20bn? Why not make a deal thar says (in layperson terms) “we can’t afford X% today due to economic conditions. We can offer Y% now and then commit to reaching X% in future if the following economic conditions are met…” Part of the issue isn’t about what is fair, it’s about what will a) keep people in those professions, and b) attract new people into them. Yes but everyone is an adult and pragmatism is essential. No point giving people a pay rise then taking it back off them with tax rises! Hence my interim offer with commitment to increase when certain economic conditions are met approach." Nurses, in particular, were pragmatic when they accepted 5% in the last round of negotiations. After more than a decade of real terms pay cuts how long do they have to keep paying the price for the bankers mess? Especially as bankers aren’t exactly showing restraint. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"# don't mention taxation under the Tories
Understood and why it is critical we don’t see tax hikes now and giving that much away.
That is a double edged sword
It's what tends to happen if after 14 years of pay cuts to essential public service workers there unsurprisingly a campaign by them to redress the balance..
Slashing budgets to the services and restrictions upon pay as the scapegoats for the bankers mess which has had huge real effects and created massive issues in those areas which we see now wasn't the right policy by Cameron/ Osborne..
The core of that problem was under labour's watch, and Gordon Brown has admitted he made a big mistake over the handling of financial regulation in the run-up to the banking crisis of 2008. He also managed to sell off the the gold reserves costing us approx 21 billion in 1999. I have made a conservative estimate that inflation has averaged 2.75% year on year, that 21 billion is equivalent to 41 billion today.
On top of that was the total mess the labour government made of NHS funding using PFI in the 2000's up to 2009. 11 billion worth of contracts up to 2009, and with 25 - 30 year to pay this off we have been truly held over a barrel with repayments of 44 billion for the loans and a total liability of 55 billion when we manage to get to the final payment.
The tories inherited the debt and needed to introduce austerity measures, which for some reason people have forgotten that it was labour that led us there.
That was a longhand version of me saying I think it is rich that labour are saying there is a 20 billion hole in the finances, and throw even more of our money at junior doctors! they could have got that 22% down further but here we are, already getting it wrong with our money.
21?
It was 3.5 and yes had it not been pre announced the price might not have fallen but it was pretty much economic policy by most of the central banks at a time when gold had been falling for over ten years..
I'm not in favour of PFI,wasn't when Thatcher started it and Blair continued it..
The gold issue dies have it's faults yes but Osborne also undersold northern rock, browns record is more than one issue and his record 97-08 was a period of growth which the global banking crisis collapsed and again lax regulation started before 97 but continued after was part of that too..
The last 14 years has seen the economy lower than the rest of many of our competitors and the tax rises plus the nations debt grow..
Funny enough as has the wealth of the very richest, not so the case for the rest of us..
We lost 21 billion on the sale.
If we sold it when?
It's a bit like saying if I hadn't married your mum I would have a Porsche and a villa now..
Hindsight.. "Those underlying Tory vibes coming out again | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"# don't mention taxation under the Tories
Understood and why it is critical we don’t see tax hikes now and giving that much away.
That is a double edged sword
It's what tends to happen if after 14 years of pay cuts to essential public service workers there unsurprisingly a campaign by them to redress the balance..
Slashing budgets to the services and restrictions upon pay as the scapegoats for the bankers mess which has had huge real effects and created massive issues in those areas which we see now wasn't the right policy by Cameron/ Osborne..
The core of that problem was under labour's watch, and Gordon Brown has admitted he made a big mistake over the handling of financial regulation in the run-up to the banking crisis of 2008. He also managed to sell off the the gold reserves costing us approx 21 billion in 1999. I have made a conservative estimate that inflation has averaged 2.75% year on year, that 21 billion is equivalent to 41 billion today.
On top of that was the total mess the labour government made of NHS funding using PFI in the 2000's up to 2009. 11 billion worth of contracts up to 2009, and with 25 - 30 year to pay this off we have been truly held over a barrel with repayments of 44 billion for the loans and a total liability of 55 billion when we manage to get to the final payment.
The tories inherited the debt and needed to introduce austerity measures, which for some reason people have forgotten that it was labour that led us there.
That was a longhand version of me saying I think it is rich that labour are saying there is a 20 billion hole in the finances, and throw even more of our money at junior doctors! they could have got that 22% down further but here we are, already getting it wrong with our money.
21?
It was 3.5 and yes had it not been pre announced the price might not have fallen but it was pretty much economic policy by most of the central banks at a time when gold had been falling for over ten years..
I'm not in favour of PFI,wasn't when Thatcher started it and Blair continued it..
The gold issue dies have it's faults yes but Osborne also undersold northern rock, browns record is more than one issue and his record 97-08 was a period of growth which the global banking crisis collapsed and again lax regulation started before 97 but continued after was part of that too..
The last 14 years has seen the economy lower than the rest of many of our competitors and the tax rises plus the nations debt grow..
Funny enough as has the wealth of the very richest, not so the case for the rest of us..
We lost 21 billion on the sale.
If we sold it when?
It's a bit like saying if I hadn't married your mum I would have a Porsche and a villa now..
Hindsight..
Those underlying Tory vibes coming out again "Ha.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also get annoyed by the narrative seemingly blaming Gordon Brown for the financial crisis. It is totally disingenuous. Deregulation of financial services started way before New Labour were in Govt. It was the wet dream of neo-liberals in the Reagan-Thatcher era. The world economy was booming in the mid-late 90s and part of the driver was financial services. Imagine the industry and media outcry if New Labour had tried to reintroduce heavier regulation! Imagine how the Tories in opposition would have attacked Labour for reversing what they had achieved! Brown admitted he didn’t fully understand the complexities and issues that led to the crash not that he took the blame for it. Many, including Mervyn King, believe Brown’s actions on the world stage once the crisis was underway provided leadership and ideas that actually were a big reason we averted financial armageddon. P.S. no fan of Brown (pensions) but blame/credit where it is due!" The point is the shitty stick is being passed on from one government to the other…… So I find it rich, that Reeves is coming out with the 20 billion hole in funding, that is small change to the last handover | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I also get annoyed by the narrative seemingly blaming Gordon Brown for the financial crisis. It is totally disingenuous. Deregulation of financial services started way before New Labour were in Govt. It was the wet dream of neo-liberals in the Reagan-Thatcher era. The world economy was booming in the mid-late 90s and part of the driver was financial services. Imagine the industry and media outcry if New Labour had tried to reintroduce heavier regulation! Imagine how the Tories in opposition would have attacked Labour for reversing what they had achieved! Brown admitted he didn’t fully understand the complexities and issues that led to the crash not that he took the blame for it. Many, including Mervyn King, believe Brown’s actions on the world stage once the crisis was underway provided leadership and ideas that actually were a big reason we averted financial armageddon. P.S. no fan of Brown (pensions) but blame/credit where it is due! The point is the shitty stick is being passed on from one government to the other…… So I find it rich, that Reeves is coming out with the 20 billion hole in funding, that is small change to the last handover" It's also a hole she would've been well aware of. She's either chatting shit or fucking useless. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A few weeks in government and Labour likely to end doctors industrial action. “The British Medical Association’s (BMA) junior doctors committee has recommended an offer that includes a backdated pay rise of 4.05 per cent for 2023-24, on top of an existing increase of between 8.8 per cent and 10.3 per cent.” Junior doctors will be given a further pay rise of 6 per cent for 2024-25, which will be topped up by a consolidated £1,000 payment. This is equivalent to a pay rise of between 7 per cent and 9 per cent. The overall package represents a pay rise of about 20 per cent. The BMA’s committee has agreed to put the offer to its members, and if it is accepted it will bring an end to industrial action." Oh I hate it when it's lumped together. It was the same when nurses got a 3 year deal of approx 2% a year, but hailed as a 6% pay rise. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"# don't mention taxation under the Tories
Understood and why it is critical we don’t see tax hikes now and giving that much away.
That is a double edged sword
It's what tends to happen if after 14 years of pay cuts to essential public service workers there unsurprisingly a campaign by them to redress the balance..
Slashing budgets to the services and restrictions upon pay as the scapegoats for the bankers mess which has had huge real effects and created massive issues in those areas which we see now wasn't the right policy by Cameron/ Osborne..
The core of that problem was under labour's watch, and Gordon Brown has admitted he made a big mistake over the handling of financial regulation in the run-up to the banking crisis of 2008. He also managed to sell off the the gold reserves costing us approx 21 billion in 1999. I have made a conservative estimate that inflation has averaged 2.75% year on year, that 21 billion is equivalent to 41 billion today.
On top of that was the total mess the labour government made of NHS funding using PFI in the 2000's up to 2009. 11 billion worth of contracts up to 2009, and with 25 - 30 year to pay this off we have been truly held over a barrel with repayments of 44 billion for the loans and a total liability of 55 billion when we manage to get to the final payment.
The tories inherited the debt and needed to introduce austerity measures, which for some reason people have forgotten that it was labour that led us there.
That was a longhand version of me saying I think it is rich that labour are saying there is a 20 billion hole in the finances, and throw even more of our money at junior doctors! they could have got that 22% down further but here we are, already getting it wrong with our money.
"The govt shouldn't have to be paying the docs two years of pay rises if the previous govt had at least settled last year's dispute. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hunt admitted the tax cuts the Tories promised during the election would not have happened in the next year or more. The £20bn could be covered by reversing the NIC cut (they won’t). Apparently the Tories had pay offer recommendations on Minister’s desks and ignored them knowing it would not be their problem. I think it appears to be pragmatic to tell junior doctors we can’t afford 35% but 20% is a good deal better than you have currently. Why can’t they take the same approach with the teachers? The pay deal recommendation is 5.5% but why not say things are tight so offer 4.5% or even 5% to reduce that £20bn? Why not make a deal thar says (in layperson terms) “we can’t afford X% today due to economic conditions. We can offer Y% now and then commit to reaching X% in future if the following economic conditions are met…” Part of the issue isn’t about what is fair, it’s about what will a) keep people in those professions, and b) attract new people into them. Yes but everyone is an adult and pragmatism is essential. No point giving people a pay rise then taking it back off them with tax rises! Hence my interim offer with commitment to increase when certain economic conditions are met approach. Nurses, in particular, were pragmatic when they accepted 5% in the last round of negotiations. After more than a decade of real terms pay cuts how long do they have to keep paying the price for the bankers mess? Especially as bankers aren’t exactly showing restraint." Nurses were just under 20% down in real terms before inflation soared, but we didn't hold the government to ransom (more's the pity). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i see close up everyday junior drs work what the are getting today does not make up for all they have lost over the years with no pay increase also the hard work junior drs do at the same time as studying its non stop ... if we want good drs then yes it should be tough but the pay should recognise this as well.. plenty of nhs staff who do bugger all can be sacrifice to claw back money .. and yes ive work both adult nursing and mental health theres lots of waste ie non essential workers" They went on strike in the non too distant past. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i see close up everyday junior drs work what the are getting today does not make up for all they have lost over the years with no pay increase also the hard work junior drs do at the same time as studying its non stop ... if we want good drs then yes it should be tough but the pay should recognise this as well.. plenty of nhs staff who do bugger all can be sacrifice to claw back money .. and yes ive work both adult nursing and mental health theres lots of waste ie non essential workers They went on strike in the non too distant past." is that not obvious ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A few weeks in government and Labour likely to end doctors industrial action. “The British Medical Association’s (BMA) junior doctors committee has recommended an offer that includes a backdated pay rise of 4.05 per cent for 2023-24, on top of an existing increase of between 8.8 per cent and 10.3 per cent.” Junior doctors will be given a further pay rise of 6 per cent for 2024-25, which will be topped up by a consolidated £1,000 payment. This is equivalent to a pay rise of between 7 per cent and 9 per cent. The overall package represents a pay rise of about 20 per cent. The BMA’s committee has agreed to put the offer to its members, and if it is accepted it will bring an end to industrial action." Have they accepted this offer does anyone know. If they are offered this how long before other public sector workers demand the same. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A few weeks in government and Labour likely to end doctors industrial action. “The British Medical Association’s (BMA) junior doctors committee has recommended an offer that includes a backdated pay rise of 4.05 per cent for 2023-24, on top of an existing increase of between 8.8 per cent and 10.3 per cent.” Junior doctors will be given a further pay rise of 6 per cent for 2024-25, which will be topped up by a consolidated £1,000 payment. This is equivalent to a pay rise of between 7 per cent and 9 per cent. The overall package represents a pay rise of about 20 per cent. The BMA’s committee has agreed to put the offer to its members, and if it is accepted it will bring an end to industrial action. Have they accepted this offer does anyone know. If they are offered this how long before other public sector workers demand the same. " Why should it be limited to public sector workers? Private sector workers should also demand 20%. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A few weeks in government and Labour likely to end doctors industrial action. “The British Medical Association’s (BMA) junior doctors committee has recommended an offer that includes a backdated pay rise of 4.05 per cent for 2023-24, on top of an existing increase of between 8.8 per cent and 10.3 per cent.” Junior doctors will be given a further pay rise of 6 per cent for 2024-25, which will be topped up by a consolidated £1,000 payment. This is equivalent to a pay rise of between 7 per cent and 9 per cent. The overall package represents a pay rise of about 20 per cent. The BMA’s committee has agreed to put the offer to its members, and if it is accepted it will bring an end to industrial action. Have they accepted this offer does anyone know. If they are offered this how long before other public sector workers demand the same. " The BMA have recommended accepting the offer, and the chancellor has said that she will honour the recommendations from the independent pay review bodies for other public sector workers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"i see close up everyday junior drs work what the are getting today does not make up for all they have lost over the years with no pay increase also the hard work junior drs do at the same time as studying its non stop ... if we want good drs then yes it should be tough but the pay should recognise this as well.. plenty of nhs staff who do bugger all can be sacrifice to claw back money .. and yes ive work both adult nursing and mental health theres lots of waste ie non essential workers They went on strike in the non too distant past. is that not obvious ?" 2016 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A few weeks in government and Labour likely to end doctors industrial action. “The British Medical Association’s (BMA) junior doctors committee has recommended an offer that includes a backdated pay rise of 4.05 per cent for 2023-24, on top of an existing increase of between 8.8 per cent and 10.3 per cent.” Junior doctors will be given a further pay rise of 6 per cent for 2024-25, which will be topped up by a consolidated £1,000 payment. This is equivalent to a pay rise of between 7 per cent and 9 per cent. The overall package represents a pay rise of about 20 per cent. The BMA’s committee has agreed to put the offer to its members, and if it is accepted it will bring an end to industrial action. Have they accepted this offer does anyone know. If they are offered this how long before other public sector workers demand the same. Why should it be limited to public sector workers? Private sector workers should also demand 20%." Oh bless | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A few weeks in government and Labour likely to end doctors industrial action. “The British Medical Association’s (BMA) junior doctors committee has recommended an offer that includes a backdated pay rise of 4.05 per cent for 2023-24, on top of an existing increase of between 8.8 per cent and 10.3 per cent.” Junior doctors will be given a further pay rise of 6 per cent for 2024-25, which will be topped up by a consolidated £1,000 payment. This is equivalent to a pay rise of between 7 per cent and 9 per cent. The overall package represents a pay rise of about 20 per cent. The BMA’s committee has agreed to put the offer to its members, and if it is accepted it will bring an end to industrial action. Have they accepted this offer does anyone know. If they are offered this how long before other public sector workers demand the same. Why should it be limited to public sector workers? Private sector workers should also demand 20%." They should join a union and fight for what they are worth. They need to be prepared to lose pay during strikes in order to make more in the long term though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A few weeks in government and Labour likely to end doctors industrial action. “The British Medical Association’s (BMA) junior doctors committee has recommended an offer that includes a backdated pay rise of 4.05 per cent for 2023-24, on top of an existing increase of between 8.8 per cent and 10.3 per cent.” Junior doctors will be given a further pay rise of 6 per cent for 2024-25, which will be topped up by a consolidated £1,000 payment. This is equivalent to a pay rise of between 7 per cent and 9 per cent. The overall package represents a pay rise of about 20 per cent. The BMA’s committee has agreed to put the offer to its members, and if it is accepted it will bring an end to industrial action. Have they accepted this offer does anyone know. If they are offered this how long before other public sector workers demand the same. Why should it be limited to public sector workers? Private sector workers should also demand 20%." What’s stopping them? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surprised nobody already mentioned this but looks like the BMA are saying they may still strike next year (despite members getting 22% rise). May have my facts a but skew whiff there but if true then fuck me! I have had sympathy for public sector workers getting a good deal when they have faced pay freezes (ie cuts) and below inflation rises for many years. But if this goes ahead my sympathy for doctors will be gone because that is a) not dealing with reality and b) fucking greedy!" They will lose a lot of support. It's a decent deal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surprised nobody already mentioned this but looks like the BMA are saying they may still strike next year (despite members getting 22% rise). May have my facts a but skew whiff there but if true then fuck me! I have had sympathy for public sector workers getting a good deal when they have faced pay freezes (ie cuts) and below inflation rises for many years. But if this goes ahead my sympathy for doctors will be gone because that is a) not dealing with reality and b) fucking greedy!" I am surprised people still believe that public sector unions will be happy and content when you give them pay rises. Here is the news link: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/junior-doctors-strike-again-despite-pay-rise/ It's from a leaked WhatsApp message: "I would consider striking with a low threshold for 25/26 when Labour’s honeymoon period ends and they make some sort of mistake that leaves them politically vulnerable" These unions are more about power and politics and less about getting "fair pay" whatever it means. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surprised nobody already mentioned this but looks like the BMA are saying they may still strike next year (despite members getting 22% rise). May have my facts a but skew whiff there but if true then fuck me! I have had sympathy for public sector workers getting a good deal when they have faced pay freezes (ie cuts) and below inflation rises for many years. But if this goes ahead my sympathy for doctors will be gone because that is a) not dealing with reality and b) fucking greedy! I am surprised people still believe that public sector unions will be happy and content when you give them pay rises. Here is the news link: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/junior-doctors-strike-again-despite-pay-rise/ It's from a leaked WhatsApp message: "I would consider striking with a low threshold for 25/26 when Labour’s honeymoon period ends and they make some sort of mistake that leaves them politically vulnerable" These unions are more about power and politics and less about getting "fair pay" whatever it means." Robert Laurenson loves nothing more than treating people as bargaining chips, enough is never enough for these types and he will keep squeezing every last drop until it breaks. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Surprised nobody already mentioned this but looks like the BMA are saying they may still strike next year (despite members getting 22% rise). May have my facts a but skew whiff there but if true then fuck me! I have had sympathy for public sector workers getting a good deal when they have faced pay freezes (ie cuts) and below inflation rises for many years. But if this goes ahead my sympathy for doctors will be gone because that is a) not dealing with reality and b) fucking greedy! I am surprised people still believe that public sector unions will be happy and content when you give them pay rises. Here is the news link: https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/junior-doctors-strike-again-despite-pay-rise/ It's from a leaked WhatsApp message: "I would consider striking with a low threshold for 25/26 when Labour’s honeymoon period ends and they make some sort of mistake that leaves them politically vulnerable" These unions are more about power and politics and less about getting "fair pay" whatever it means. Robert Laurenson loves nothing more than treating people as bargaining chips, enough is never enough for these types and he will keep squeezing every last drop until it breaks. " Then it may come down to the morality and realism of the BMA members and whether they really think it ethical to still strike despite such a good deal. If they do then I say fuck em as one less supporter here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why train for a job then complain about how much they earn? Surly they knew the salary before they started training?" You've heard of inflation? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"These are not the only people who have had to deal with inflation. They are still on a very good salary for training." You understand that a ‘junior’ doctor is pretty much any doctor below the grade of consultant, yeah? They could be ‘training’ for over a decade, or indeed their entire career. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You can earn more as a Social Influencer than a Consultant. Why put in 6 years at Med School + decades of training? Ditto Architecture, Engineering, Science etc." I suppose we should be grateful that these people who perform the exceptionally well academically, and could earn far more money elsewhere, want to save lives. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You can earn more as a Social Influencer than a Consultant. Why put in 6 years at Med School + decades of training? Ditto Architecture, Engineering, Science etc." Social influencer earnings are overblown tbh. For every successful influencer, there are numerous failed ones. It's pretty much like arts and sports - high risk high reward, granted that being social influencer doesn't require as much hard work as other fields. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You can earn more as a Social Influencer than a Consultant. Why put in 6 years at Med School + decades of training? Ditto Architecture, Engineering, Science etc. Social influencer earnings are overblown tbh. For every successful influencer, there are numerous failed ones. It's pretty much like arts and sports - high risk high reward, granted that being social influencer doesn't require as much hard work as other fields." Agreed, but easy earnings for celebs, sportsmen/women and influencers instils the wrong work ethic in the young I feel. They can't be blamed for thinking "why bother" when 6 episodes of Love Island could enrich them for a lifetime. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You can earn more as a Social Influencer than a Consultant. Why put in 6 years at Med School + decades of training? Ditto Architecture, Engineering, Science etc. I suppose we should be grateful that these people who perform the exceptionally well academically, and could earn far more money elsewhere, want to save lives." Yes, there's any element of altruism in medicine and indeed in other professions. But a meritocracy is the fairest reward system. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You can earn more as a Social Influencer than a Consultant. Why put in 6 years at Med School + decades of training? Ditto Architecture, Engineering, Science etc. Social influencer earnings are overblown tbh. For every successful influencer, there are numerous failed ones. It's pretty much like arts and sports - high risk high reward, granted that being social influencer doesn't require as much hard work as other fields. Agreed, but easy earnings for celebs, sportsmen/women and influencers instils the wrong work ethic in the young I feel. They can't be blamed for thinking "why bother" when 6 episodes of Love Island could enrich them for a lifetime." That's true. Remember reading some survey about how majority of kids want to become influencers. Hopefully it's just because they are too young and will change their minds after they grow up. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing?" At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again!" Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking" You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking" They never did they wouldn't abide by the recommendations of the independent pay review bodies before the election so how have they broken their word? Using your logic with the current state of the countries finances should they stop all expenditure to pay down the interest on the massive debt we have? We saw in real terms that public sector workers bore more than their fair share of the mess caused by the bankers in 08/09 during the austerity imposed post 2010.. And people wonder why doctor, teachers and nurses are leaving.. I know four fire service personnel who have left and gone to Australia .. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted." A realist would say that, if you think the independent pay body always recommends less than is deserved, perhaps it's your perception of those workers' value that is at fault. What is it that leads you to suggest that the independent pay body is not independent? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough?" doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways " The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. A realist would say that, if you think the independent pay body always recommends less than is deserved, perhaps it's your perception of those workers' value that is at fault. What is it that leads you to suggest that the independent pay body is not independent?" "Although the NHS Pay Review Body is positioned as an independent group, the members of the Body are chosen by government – specifically the Prime Minister (for the Chair position) and Secretary of State for Health (for the other positions)." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking" Ok, time to ignore your questions then. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve." I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking Ok, time to ignore your questions then." Ignore me yes, mi.nah care | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable " Sorry what is going on. The doctors will be happy and waiting lists will be cut. All good no. If people can't afford children don't have them. Like all things in life. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable Sorry what is going on. The doctors will be happy and waiting lists will be cut. All good no. If people can't afford children don't have them. Like all things in life. " Clearly you're missing the point. So where is the 22% pay rise coming from to pay the doctors when the government you voted for told the country the finances are in a mess but they promised not to increase taxes. Unless they going back on their word about raising taxes to pay for it which makes them liars if they did | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Clearly you're missing the point. So where is the 22% pay rise coming from to pay the doctors when the government you voted for told the country the finances are in a mess but they promised not to increase taxes. Unless they going back on their word about raising taxes to pay for it which makes them liars if they did" Before the election Labour clearly stated they would re-start negotiations with the Junior Doctors. The Tories had given up. Labour has offered the JDs an additional 4.4% (average) over what the Tories have paid for the pay years 2022/3 and 2023/4. This is expected to cost an additional £530 million which is unfunded, but relates to the two pay settlement year's before Labour was elected. Labour has also agreed to honour the independent pay recommendations for all public sector workers for 2024/5 the cost of which is in their funding plans. About 40% of the unfunded £530 million cost will come back to the government via taxation, so the net cost will be about £300 million. The funding budget for NHS England is about £170 billion, so the percentage cost to settle the strikes is negligible in overall terms. Labour hasn't misled voters. Banding around figures like a 22% pay increase, as you are doing is misleading, as that figure covers many annual pay settlements. And as others posters have repeatedly tried to explain to you, the cost of the strikes has negatively impacted the NHS, the general economy and prolonged peoples pain and suffering and no doubt led to increased deaths. The JDs also are concerned about their numbers leaving due to poor pay, which seems to supported by the facts. I understand your agenda is to try to make Labour look bad, but you may be surprised to learn that voters have a much better understanding of the issues than you have, hence why we now have a competent government. Get used to it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Clearly you're missing the point. So where is the 22% pay rise coming from to pay the doctors when the government you voted for told the country the finances are in a mess but they promised not to increase taxes. Unless they going back on their word about raising taxes to pay for it which makes them liars if they did" Labour said, specifically and pointedly, they would not raise Income Tax, National Insurance, and VAT. They didn’t mention any other taxes. This was spotted, widely debated and Labour were repeatedly asked about other taxes rising which they would not deny. If you did not see this you were not paying much attention. In October budget many expect IHT and CGT at the very least to rise. Probably fuel duty too. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable " Our public services and infrastructure have gone to shit due to a lack of investment, if you want functioning public services you have to make that investment. The national budget is not like your weekly pay packet, the over simplistic notion that the government has maxed out its credit card is not how it works. They have time to balance the books and need to be flexible around where they invest and where they save. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Clearly you're missing the point. So where is the 22% pay rise coming from to pay the doctors when the government you voted for told the country the finances are in a mess but they promised not to increase taxes. Unless they going back on their word about raising taxes to pay for it which makes them liars if they did Before the election Labour clearly stated they would re-start negotiations with the Junior Doctors. The Tories had given up. Labour has offered the JDs an additional 4.4% (average) over what the Tories have paid for the pay years 2022/3 and 2023/4. This is expected to cost an additional £530 million which is unfunded, but relates to the two pay settlement year's before Labour was elected. Labour has also agreed to honour the independent pay recommendations for all public sector workers for 2024/5 the cost of which is in their funding plans. About 40% of the unfunded £530 million cost will come back to the government via taxation, so the net cost will be about £300 million. The funding budget for NHS England is about £170 billion, so the percentage cost to settle the strikes is negligible in overall terms. Labour hasn't misled voters. Banding around figures like a 22% pay increase, as you are doing is misleading, as that figure covers many annual pay settlements. And as others posters have repeatedly tried to explain to you, the cost of the strikes has negatively impacted the NHS, the general economy and prolonged peoples pain and suffering and no doubt led to increased deaths. The JDs also are concerned about their numbers leaving due to poor pay, which seems to supported by the facts. I understand your agenda is to try to make Labour look bad, but you may be surprised to learn that voters have a much better understanding of the issues than you have, hence why we now have a competent government. Get used to it!" No Labour are bad, you just don't see it yet but I like said previously give it a year and you'll see what I was talking about all along | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I understand your agenda is to try to make Labour look bad, but you may be surprised to learn that voters have a much better understanding of the issues than you have, hence why we now have a competent government. Get used to it! No Labour are bad, you just don't see it yet but I like said previously give it a year and you'll see what I was talking about all along " I am 30 years older than you and have lived through 28 governments, 17 Tory, 10 Labour and 1 Coalition. I was one year old when the Tories made the biggest fuck up of foreign policy ever by attacking Egypt helped by Israel and France. I was sixty-one when the Tories went down the same policy route of international isolation with Brexit. Both of these decisions have had severe longterm consequences for the UK. All governments make mistakes, but in my lifetime the Tories have made the biggest fuck ups but I fully respect your views of course. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable Our public services and infrastructure have gone to shit due to a lack of investment, if you want functioning public services you have to make that investment. The national budget is not like your weekly pay packet, the over simplistic notion that the government has maxed out its credit card is not how it works. They have time to balance the books and need to be flexible around where they invest and where they save." The management of money we do not have over the long term is what got us in this position under the last labour government, they spent what they didn’t have to uplift public services and hey ho we have seen austerity measures since., and now they get a second bite of the cherry…. You must recognise that people have memories and will be cautious, rightly, of labours over spending, they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I understand your agenda is to try to make Labour look bad, but you may be surprised to learn that voters have a much better understanding of the issues than you have, hence why we now have a competent government. Get used to it! No Labour are bad, you just don't see it yet but I like said previously give it a year and you'll see what I was talking about all along I am 30 years older than you and have lived through 28 governments, 17 Tory, 10 Labour and 1 Coalition. I was one year old when the Tories made the biggest fuck up of foreign policy ever by attacking Egypt helped by Israel and France. I was sixty-one when the Tories went down the same policy route of international isolation with Brexit. Both of these decisions have had severe longterm consequences for the UK. All governments make mistakes, but in my lifetime the Tories have made the biggest fuck ups but I fully respect your views of course." You forgot to mention when Labour bankrupted the country and we had to go cap-in-hand to the IMF for a bailout. The UK was know as the 'sick man' of Europe, reduced to third world living standards, and working a three-day week. It took the 'Iron Lady' to reverse our fortunes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable Our public services and infrastructure have gone to shit due to a lack of investment, if you want functioning public services you have to make that investment. The national budget is not like your weekly pay packet, the over simplistic notion that the government has maxed out its credit card is not how it works. They have time to balance the books and need to be flexible around where they invest and where they save. The management of money we do not have over the long term is what got us in this position under the last labour government, they spent what they didn’t have to uplift public services and hey ho we have seen austerity measures since., and now they get a second bite of the cherry…. You must recognise that people have memories and will be cautious, rightly, of labours over spending, they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government. " I think you missed out “…then grossly exacerbated by the Tories pushing through Brexit and massively over-extending during the pandemic and allowing the biggest transfer of public assets into private hands in history with insufficient regulation to ensure this was not via spurious or illegal means!” Let’s ensure we tell the entire story, it’s not like 14 yrs of Tory has been economic management nirvana now is it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable Our public services and infrastructure have gone to shit due to a lack of investment, if you want functioning public services you have to make that investment. The national budget is not like your weekly pay packet, the over simplistic notion that the government has maxed out its credit card is not how it works. They have time to balance the books and need to be flexible around where they invest and where they save. The management of money we do not have over the long term is what got us in this position under the last labour government, they spent what they didn’t have to uplift public services and hey ho we have seen austerity measures since., and now they get a second bite of the cherry…. You must recognise that people have memories and will be cautious, rightly, of labours over spending, they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government. I think you missed out “…then grossly exacerbated by the Tories pushing through Brexit and massively over-extending during the pandemic and allowing the biggest transfer of public assets into private hands in history with insufficient regulation to ensure this was not via spurious or illegal means!” Let’s ensure we tell the entire story, it’s not like 14 yrs of Tory has been economic management nirvana now is it!" I will keep repeating the fact that we never recovered from the position of the last labour government. For them to “now” go 9.5 billion in debt within 25 days, and take winter payments off pensioners sets my alarm bells ringing very loudly | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable Our public services and infrastructure have gone to shit due to a lack of investment, if you want functioning public services you have to make that investment. The national budget is not like your weekly pay packet, the over simplistic notion that the government has maxed out its credit card is not how it works. They have time to balance the books and need to be flexible around where they invest and where they save. The management of money we do not have over the long term is what got us in this position under the last labour government, they spent what they didn’t have to uplift public services and hey ho we have seen austerity measures since., and now they get a second bite of the cherry…. You must recognise that people have memories and will be cautious, rightly, of labours over spending, they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government. I think you missed out “…then grossly exacerbated by the Tories pushing through Brexit and massively over-extending during the pandemic and allowing the biggest transfer of public assets into private hands in history with insufficient regulation to ensure this was not via spurious or illegal means!” Let’s ensure we tell the entire story, it’s not like 14 yrs of Tory has been economic management nirvana now is it! I will keep repeating the fact that we never recovered from the position of the last labour government. For them to “now” go 9.5 billion in debt within 25 days, and take winter payments off pensioners sets my alarm bells ringing very loudly " I don’t have the figures but didn’t the Tories double or triple the national debt? Are you honestly trying to pin that on Labour? Yep in 2010 the finances were very bad. In 2024 they were exponentially worse and don’t try to mid anyone that that was simply them trying to pay down the existing debt! Tories continued borrowing, use QE extensively which combined with Brexit devalued the £ over time. Nah, Labour were shit. Tories were shit. Oh and a few exogenous events didn’t help either much! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable Our public services and infrastructure have gone to shit due to a lack of investment, if you want functioning public services you have to make that investment. The national budget is not like your weekly pay packet, the over simplistic notion that the government has maxed out its credit card is not how it works. They have time to balance the books and need to be flexible around where they invest and where they save. The management of money we do not have over the long term is what got us in this position under the last labour government, they spent what they didn’t have to uplift public services and hey ho we have seen austerity measures since., and now they get a second bite of the cherry…. You must recognise that people have memories and will be cautious, rightly, of labours over spending, they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government. I think you missed out “…then grossly exacerbated by the Tories pushing through Brexit and massively over-extending during the pandemic and allowing the biggest transfer of public assets into private hands in history with insufficient regulation to ensure this was not via spurious or illegal means!” Let’s ensure we tell the entire story, it’s not like 14 yrs of Tory has been economic management nirvana now is it! I will keep repeating the fact that we never recovered from the position of the last labour government. For them to “now” go 9.5 billion in debt within 25 days, and take winter payments off pensioners sets my alarm bells ringing very loudly I don’t have the figures but didn’t the Tories double or triple the national debt? Are you honestly trying to pin that on Labour? Yep in 2010 the finances were very bad. In 2024 they were exponentially worse and don’t try to mid anyone that that was simply them trying to pay down the existing debt! Tories continued borrowing, use QE extensively which combined with Brexit devalued the £ over time. Nah, Labour were shit. Tories were shit. Oh and a few exogenous events didn’t help either much!" Labour let the good times slide, did they not? And the point I’m making is the fact that we never recovered, got worse? Of course it did with world events and referendum own goals. You’re missing the point…. They have said they won’t introduce anything that doesn’t meet their fiscal targets, and with 25 days take 9.5 billion of extra debt after crying about a 20 billion deficit. We are going to be in for a very bad ride under this government | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable Our public services and infrastructure have gone to shit due to a lack of investment, if you want functioning public services you have to make that investment. The national budget is not like your weekly pay packet, the over simplistic notion that the government has maxed out its credit card is not how it works. They have time to balance the books and need to be flexible around where they invest and where they save. The management of money we do not have over the long term is what got us in this position under the last labour government, they spent what they didn’t have to uplift public services and hey ho we have seen austerity measures since., and now they get a second bite of the cherry…. You must recognise that people have memories and will be cautious, rightly, of labours over spending, they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government. " I think you’re forgetting the world wide financial crisis. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable Our public services and infrastructure have gone to shit due to a lack of investment, if you want functioning public services you have to make that investment. The national budget is not like your weekly pay packet, the over simplistic notion that the government has maxed out its credit card is not how it works. They have time to balance the books and need to be flexible around where they invest and where they save. The management of money we do not have over the long term is what got us in this position under the last labour government, they spent what they didn’t have to uplift public services and hey ho we have seen austerity measures since., and now they get a second bite of the cherry…. You must recognise that people have memories and will be cautious, rightly, of labours over spending, they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government. I think you’re forgetting the world wide financial crisis." No, I’m certainly not and I could go into that but I won’t…. No point discussing this, time will prove me right or you wrong | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government can't plead the finances are bad but at the same time can offer public sector workers over 5% pay rise and offer Junior Doctors 22%. At what point do.we ask ourselves how is the math mathing? At what point do you give the NEW govt time to do governing. Stop the bleating!. A cynic would say, since the independent pay award panel (remembering "independent" is misnomer) under value public sector workers and recommend pay awards less than they should be, that they should not be accepted. Nah, you'd be happy if we had our pay frozen again and again and again! Not sorry but I warned people I will never give this government a chance when it comes to decision making when it seems they going back on their word or can't be trusted. I be happy for pay rises if it's affordable but they said it themselves the finances are bad so I ask again how can they afford pay rises when finances are poor. Until someone gives me a logical answer I keep asking You can’t have a healthy economy without a healthy workforce, is that logical enough? doesn't answer my question in fact it's just another sorry excuse to give it but thank you anyways The more people are on the waiting list for treatment, the more people there are unfit for work. Making the NHS a more attractive place to work, thereby filling the 100k plus vacancies, the quicker people get treatment. Sometimes you have to invest in order to improve. I get that investment is needed but my point is the government is spending money that they said we don't have, the finances are worse then expected (their words not mine) despite saying they don't have money to lift the 2 child benefit cap and cutting pension credit. If people don't or pretend not to see what's going on, quite frankly it's unbelievable Our public services and infrastructure have gone to shit due to a lack of investment, if you want functioning public services you have to make that investment. The national budget is not like your weekly pay packet, the over simplistic notion that the government has maxed out its credit card is not how it works. They have time to balance the books and need to be flexible around where they invest and where they save. The management of money we do not have over the long term is what got us in this position under the last labour government, they spent what they didn’t have to uplift public services and hey ho we have seen austerity measures since., and now they get a second bite of the cherry…. You must recognise that people have memories and will be cautious, rightly, of labours over spending, they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government. I think you missed out “…then grossly exacerbated by the Tories pushing through Brexit and massively over-extending during the pandemic and allowing the biggest transfer of public assets into private hands in history with insufficient regulation to ensure this was not via spurious or illegal means!” Let’s ensure we tell the entire story, it’s not like 14 yrs of Tory has been economic management nirvana now is it! I will keep repeating the fact that we never recovered from the position of the last labour government. For them to “now” go 9.5 billion in debt within 25 days, and take winter payments off pensioners sets my alarm bells ringing very loudly I don’t have the figures but didn’t the Tories double or triple the national debt? Are you honestly trying to pin that on Labour? Yep in 2010 the finances were very bad. In 2024 they were exponentially worse and don’t try to mid anyone that that was simply them trying to pay down the existing debt! Tories continued borrowing, use QE extensively which combined with Brexit devalued the £ over time. Nah, Labour were shit. Tories were shit. Oh and a few exogenous events didn’t help either much! Labour let the good times slide, did they not? And the point I’m making is the fact that we never recovered, got worse? Of course it did with world events and referendum own goals. You’re missing the point…. They have said they won’t introduce anything that doesn’t meet their fiscal targets, and with 25 days take 9.5 billion of extra debt after crying about a 20 billion deficit. We are going to be in for a very bad ride under this government " I am not arguing for or against you later/actual point, I am just ensuring the oft trotted misleading narrative is not left unchallenged. By far the primary reason for state of govt finances in 2010 was the fallout of the global financial crisis. Hardly Labour’s fault and widely agreed that, despite his many flaws, Gordon Brown ‘s leadership and action on the global stage actually helped us avert financial armageddon. But that came with a cost. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government" Also this seems selective. You blame Labour for state of govt finances in 2010 and seemingly excuse Tories for having to sort that out with austerity (and a lot of borrowing actually) but don’t apply the same argument when the Tories have left the govt finances in an even worse state for Labour to now sort out with austerity (winter fuel allowance is an example) and borrowing. Just feels rather disingenuous. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government Also this seems selective. You blame Labour for state of govt finances in 2010 and seemingly excuse Tories for having to sort that out with austerity (and a lot of borrowing actually) but don’t apply the same argument when the Tories have left the govt finances in an even worse state for Labour to now sort out with austerity (winter fuel allowance is an example) and borrowing. Just feels rather disingenuous." I blame Labour for moaning endlessly about a 20 billion shortfall and lying they knew nothing about it, then adding nearly 50% of that shortfall as payout of above inflation rises to the public sector workforce. This is not going to end well | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government Also this seems selective. You blame Labour for state of govt finances in 2010 and seemingly excuse Tories for having to sort that out with austerity (and a lot of borrowing actually) but don’t apply the same argument when the Tories have left the govt finances in an even worse state for Labour to now sort out with austerity (winter fuel allowance is an example) and borrowing. Just feels rather disingenuous. I blame Labour for moaning endlessly about a 20 billion shortfall and lying they knew nothing about it, then adding nearly 50% of that shortfall as payout of above inflation rises to the public sector workforce. This is not going to end well" Again though, that is a little disingenuous. Labour didn’t have the full picture did they. Seems Tory Ministers were sitting on public sector pay recommendations and kicking the can down the road to be someone else’s problem. Pretty sure, unless I have missed something, that the OBR have said they too did not have full picture. Even Hunt ha admitted the tax cuts promised by Tories during election were not deliverable. And it is all rather ironic that the £20bn black hole cod be filled by reversing the NIC cut the Tories gave us earlier in the year. Hmmm wonder how they funded that? Oh yeah, ignoring the pay deals for public sector covers a chunk! Come on…why shouldn’t Labour ensure the public know about the £20bn black hole in this year’s finances? The Tories dined out for 14 years blaming Labour! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government Also this seems selective. You blame Labour for state of govt finances in 2010 and seemingly excuse Tories for having to sort that out with austerity (and a lot of borrowing actually) but don’t apply the same argument when the Tories have left the govt finances in an even worse state for Labour to now sort out with austerity (winter fuel allowance is an example) and borrowing. Just feels rather disingenuous. I blame Labour for moaning endlessly about a 20 billion shortfall and lying they knew nothing about it, then adding nearly 50% of that shortfall as payout of above inflation rises to the public sector workforce. This is not going to end well" They knew they had to improve on the Tory offer to junior doctors. They knew they had to match what the review board stated. The last payout was far below the inflation point, but that doesn't matter does it  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government Also this seems selective. You blame Labour for state of govt finances in 2010 and seemingly excuse Tories for having to sort that out with austerity (and a lot of borrowing actually) but don’t apply the same argument when the Tories have left the govt finances in an even worse state for Labour to now sort out with austerity (winter fuel allowance is an example) and borrowing. Just feels rather disingenuous. I blame Labour for moaning endlessly about a 20 billion shortfall and lying they knew nothing about it, then adding nearly 50% of that shortfall as payout of above inflation rises to the public sector workforce. This is not going to end well They knew they had to improve on the Tory offer to junior doctors. They knew they had to match what the review board stated. The last payout was far below the inflation point, but that doesn't matter does it "22% is a labour thank you to the BMA and the BMA are already planning on more strike next year. That is not okay, selfish and an organisational that has no morals. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government Also this seems selective. You blame Labour for state of govt finances in 2010 and seemingly excuse Tories for having to sort that out with austerity (and a lot of borrowing actually) but don’t apply the same argument when the Tories have left the govt finances in an even worse state for Labour to now sort out with austerity (winter fuel allowance is an example) and borrowing. Just feels rather disingenuous. I blame Labour for moaning endlessly about a 20 billion shortfall and lying they knew nothing about it, then adding nearly 50% of that shortfall as payout of above inflation rises to the public sector workforce. This is not going to end well They knew they had to improve on the Tory offer to junior doctors. They knew they had to match what the review board stated. The last payout was far below the inflation point, but that doesn't matter does it
22% is a labour thank you to the BMA and the BMA are already planning on more strike next year.
That is not okay, selfish and an organisational that has no morals. "You know, you're an intelligent person, it's not a 22% increase. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government Also this seems selective. You blame Labour for state of govt finances in 2010 and seemingly excuse Tories for having to sort that out with austerity (and a lot of borrowing actually) but don’t apply the same argument when the Tories have left the govt finances in an even worse state for Labour to now sort out with austerity (winter fuel allowance is an example) and borrowing. Just feels rather disingenuous. I blame Labour for moaning endlessly about a 20 billion shortfall and lying they knew nothing about it, then adding nearly 50% of that shortfall as payout of above inflation rises to the public sector workforce. This is not going to end well They knew they had to improve on the Tory offer to junior doctors. They knew they had to match what the review board stated. The last payout was far below the inflation point, but that doesn't matter does it
22% is a labour thank you to the BMA and the BMA are already planning on more strike next year.
That is not okay, selfish and an organisational that has no morals. "But its not 22% is it? Why are you incapable of forming a balanced view? Poster after poster patiently explains why your views aren't supported by the facts but yet you carry on making yourself look more and more silly. I repeat my previous post: Before the election Labour clearly stated they would re-start negotiations with the Junior Doctors. The Tories had given up. Labour has offered the JDs an additional 4.4% (average) over what the Tories have paid for the pay years 2022/3 and 2023/4. This is expected to cost an additional £530 million which is unfunded, but relates to the two pay settlement year's before Labour was elected. Labour has also agreed to honour the independent pay recommendations for all public sector workers for 2024/5 the cost of which is in their funding plans. About 40% of the unfunded £530 million cost will come back to the government via taxation, so the net cost will be about £300 million. The funding budget for NHS England is about £170 billion, so the percentage cost to settle the strikes is negligible in overall terms. Labour hasn't misled voters. Banding around figures like a 22% pay increase, as you are doing is misleading, as that figure covers many annual pay settlements. And as others posters have repeatedly tried to explain to you, the cost of the strikes has negatively impacted the NHS, the general economy and prolonged peoples pain and suffering and no doubt led to increased deaths. The JDs also are concerned about their numbers leaving due to poor pay, which seems to supported by the facts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Labour has offered the JDs an additional 4.4% (average) over what the Tories have paid for the pay years 2022/3 and 2023/4. This is expected to cost an additional £530 million About 40% of the unfunded £530 million cost will come back to the government via taxation, so the net cost will be about £300 million. " £300m net is money well spent. That is the annual cost, and equivalent to one days interest on the national debt, which the tories trebled | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Labour has offered the JDs an additional 4.4% (average) over what the Tories have paid for the pay years 2022/3 and 2023/4. This is expected to cost an additional £530 million About 40% of the unfunded £530 million cost will come back to the government via taxation, so the net cost will be about £300 million. £300m net is money well spent. That is the annual cost, and equivalent to one days interest on the national debt, which the tories trebled " Exactly this but can someone explain why the Tories and other right wing posters on here appear to be utterly incapable to understand the issues? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government Also this seems selective. You blame Labour for state of govt finances in 2010 and seemingly excuse Tories for having to sort that out with austerity (and a lot of borrowing actually) but don’t apply the same argument when the Tories have left the govt finances in an even worse state for Labour to now sort out with austerity (winter fuel allowance is an example) and borrowing. Just feels rather disingenuous. I blame Labour for moaning endlessly about a 20 billion shortfall and lying they knew nothing about it, then adding nearly 50% of that shortfall as payout of above inflation rises to the public sector workforce. This is not going to end well They knew they had to improve on the Tory offer to junior doctors. They knew they had to match what the review board stated. The last payout was far below the inflation point, but that doesn't matter does it
22% is a labour thank you to the BMA and the BMA are already planning on more strike next year.
That is not okay, selfish and an organisational that has no morals.
But its not 22% is it? Why are you incapable of forming a balanced view? Poster after poster patiently explains why your views aren't supported by the facts but yet you carry on making yourself look more and more silly.
I repeat my previous post:
Before the election Labour clearly stated they would re-start negotiations with the Junior Doctors. The Tories had given up.
Labour has offered the JDs an additional 4.4% (average) over what the Tories have paid for the pay years 2022/3 and 2023/4. This is expected to cost an additional £530 million which is unfunded, but relates to the two pay settlement year's before Labour was elected.
Labour has also agreed to honour the independent pay recommendations for all public sector workers for 2024/5 the cost of which is in their funding plans.
About 40% of the unfunded £530 million cost will come back to the government via taxation, so the net cost will be about £300 million.
The funding budget for NHS England is about £170 billion, so the percentage cost to settle the strikes is negligible in overall terms.
Labour hasn't misled voters. Banding around figures like a 22% pay increase, as you are doing is misleading, as that figure covers many annual pay settlements.
And as others posters have repeatedly tried to explain to you, the cost of the strikes has negatively impacted the NHS, the general economy and prolonged peoples pain and suffering and no doubt led to increased deaths. The JDs also are concerned about their numbers leaving due to poor pay, which seems to supported by the facts.
"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" they racked up 9.5 billion they don’t have on day 25 of their government Also this seems selective. You blame Labour for state of govt finances in 2010 and seemingly excuse Tories for having to sort that out with austerity (and a lot of borrowing actually) but don’t apply the same argument when the Tories have left the govt finances in an even worse state for Labour to now sort out with austerity (winter fuel allowance is an example) and borrowing. Just feels rather disingenuous. I blame Labour for moaning endlessly about a 20 billion shortfall and lying they knew nothing about it, then adding nearly 50% of that shortfall as payout of above inflation rises to the public sector workforce. This is not going to end well They knew they had to improve on the Tory offer to junior doctors. They knew they had to match what the review board stated. The last payout was far below the inflation point, but that doesn't matter does it
22% is a labour thank you to the BMA and the BMA are already planning on more strike next year.
That is not okay, selfish and an organisational that has no morals.
You know, you're an intelligent person, it's not a 22% increase."The government have spent 9.5 billion on public sector pay rises, the government have offered above inflation pay rises and the governments package to the JD’s is worth 22.3% over 2 years. The BMA are planning to strike again next year. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
