Public Sector Pension Strikes – A JOKE !

sheffield_lad

worldwheeler wrote: »

And you are suffering Stockholm syndrome if you do not realise the banks are parasites on the economy. The money system that they run where all money is borrowed into existence and has to be repaid with interest, which all has to be repaid from the original loan. Mathematically impossible, bankruptcy is built into the system.

Nope I go with Dunston, the last decade has been fueled by debt, we spent tomorrows pay check today and this only got messy when the credit crunch happened. People blame the banks for lending but we are all responsible for our own debts. It will be a long time before we are recovering but I doubt we will ever get back to the consumer boom of the 00's

J_i_m

Indeed.... Banks may have taken full advantage yet most of us only have ourselves to blame for taking out loans that we probably didn't strictly need to. I'm guilty as charged on that one, no one held a shotgun to my held forcing me to take a loan. All my own choice.

Ladywriter1968

2gorgeousgirls wrote: »

I'm a public sector worker who will be retiring (according to the pension forecast I got last year and depending on me retiring at 63) with a pension of £5000 after 40 years service - hardly gold plated.

Yes there are sections of the public sector who will get a large pension, namely senior civil servants, senior health service workers, senior teachers but for someone like me who is at the lower end of the scale it is not that generous.


As someone previously stated, it's only partly to do with money. The fact is many of us signed a civil service contract with the promise of a final salary pension. Government is now trying to change that - that is why the majority of those who voted, voted for strike action.

I can understand people told one thing and then another is not right of fair, also believe people should stand up for what they believe etc, but the problem is I think, it does not matter what we do in life, we never win, the goverment alway get the upper end all the time. Look at when people marched against other issues. Once they were brought in, they stayed in, regardless of how people felt about it, cause the government simply do not give a rats !!!! about people.

Turnbull2000

Rumour has it that the Tories are set to back track even further, with the pension reforms being minimal at best.

paparossco

Andy_L wrote: »

AIUI the contributions only increase to cover shortfalls for pensions accrued in-year, they don't go up to cover any shortfalls to cover past pension accrual

Sorry I don't get it. If the scheme has been in surplus since 1948 and it is agreed that contributions go up to cover any future shortfall then what past pension accrual? I'm not contradicting you, I just don't know what you mean. Oh while I'm here what is AIUI?

BobQ

Turnbull2000 wrote: »

Rumour has it that the Tories are set to back track even further, with the pension reforms being minimal at best.

Why would they do that?

pjala

WhiteHorse wrote: »

Jeremy Clarkson? Well, he's entitled to his opinion, and so is anyone who says he's a jerk.

However, when an organisation like UNISON tries to stop an individual from voicing an opinion, no matter how ridiculous, that is a matter for concern.

But surely on the same level, Unison are allowed to voice their opinion too? UNISON saying he should be sacked is different and more harmful than JC saying he would take a striker out and shoot them in front of their families.

By the way this is a joke - it may not be funny, but because I say it is a joke, no one can disagree with me.

Jeremy Clarkson should be taken out and shot in front of his family.
Ha!!

pjala

And just to provide balance, I think Jeremy Clarkson is actually Jesus Christ, and can literally do no wrong.

ystalyfera

J_i_m wrote: »

Well plainly people should learn to take whatever Jermery Clarskson says with a gallon of salt. Deliberately offending people is what he does, I doubt he either believes or means much of what he says.

doesn't make what he says right though does it.if it was any other group there'd be riots.Let's hope that if he's unfortunate enough to have a crash in one of his super cars, the Ambulance and Fire services aren't on strike....

Moby

dshart wrote: »

The banks may have been the straw that broke the camels back but it is incorrect to blame the banks for the country's debt. For years there has been talk of the growing country debt and ways to tackle it, in good times it is not a noticeable as everyone is making money there is plenty of work, tax revenues are high and the government can get loans at cheap rates.

But since the financial crisis things are different, it exposed the weak financial state of the country and how the overspend in the public sector in the boom years is now coming home to roost. People say the government managed to find money to bail out the banks, but the reality was they could not afford not to bail them out as the repercussions would have been huge. Millions of people would have lost everything and the knock on effect on the economy would have been huge. So when you look at bank bailouts think about how many ordinary peoples savings, pensions and mortgages have been saved.

I disagree that public money should be used to bail out private companies but sometimes it is necessary for the general good. Just the same way that some of the Eurozone countries need bailing out, if they were left to go bankrupt then the knock on effect for our own economy would be much worse.

You've said nothing new there. The banks are not to blame in isolation I know. We are all to blame in many ways for the way in which 'we' have been prepared to take out unsustainable credit. The point I'm making though is it starts at the top and the changes need to be made at the top first. For far too long this country has been dependent on a financial services industry which is not sufficiently regulated. Interestingly Sarkozy today is leading the calls for international co-operation on these issues but our lot continually fall back on the financial services protectionist position. We need a complete change in attitude and values. Public service pensions are not the issue ....they are a distraction from the real issues!

dunstonh wrote: »

And the public sector in the form of the Govt and the regulators didnt encourage them to do so and the significant tax raised in that period didnt get used?

You have to be blinkered beyond belief if you just point the blame at the banks.

See my comment above.

worldwheeler wrote: »

And you are suffering Stockholm syndrome if you do not realise the banks are parasites on the economy. The money system that they run where all money is borrowed into existence and has to be repaid with interest, which all has to be repaid from the original loan. Mathematically impossible, bankruptcy is built into the system.

Totally right.

The thing about Clarkson is....his so called 'humour' is always directed at the same groups in society. He is in effect giving voice to his own bigotry on a public stage. He is a right wing buffoon who presses the buttons of bigotry to appeal to his constituency.