Good luck to state workers picketing today

scooby75

Dismissing them? Who was doing that? I was merely pointing out that it is not applicable to everyone. The headline in the Torygraph is sensationalist and the figures meaningless.

Just one example, the article states that only 100 councils were asked, and of them only 41 fully responded, yet this is supposed to give an "average"? What private sector businesses have they asked? Have they included the self employed? There's a word for it. Begins with B and ends in ollocks.

wymondham

Well, looking at the various press it seems today has been a failure. No real problems caused nationwide as predicted, just inconvienience to patients and schoolchildren - nice easy target audience....

Lets see how public support goes for this with future action....

Wobblydeb

ruggedtoast wrote: »

This day of action is almost at an end. It will probably not be the last.

Millions have voted with their feet and fired a powerful warning shot across the bows of the hateful neo-liberal ideologues who seek to assault our treasured public services.

The public sector is the backbone from which Britain stands tall and strong and our public sector workers have shown today that they have fortitude by the bucketful, and are prepared to face down short sighted and destructive coalition policy.

Hahhahaha brilliant :rotfl: I never realised I was a neo-liberal ideologue. What does it mean? :rotfl:

Fortitude by the bucketful? Well Greggs was doing a roaring trade here today, but even that only kept people going for an hour or two

Thrugelmir

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The public sector is the backbone from which Britain stands tall and strong and our public sector workers have shown today that they have fortitude by the bucketful, and are prepared to face down short sighted and destructive coalition policy.

Times have moved on since the 1940's. I wouldn't complain as there may be far worse to come in the years ahead.

Too many years of a Nanny state have made people soft.

julieq

It would appear that the annual pension subsidy from the taxpayer to public sector pensions actually exceeds the entire net cost of UK bank bailouts so far.

That's certainly something Unison don't mention

grizzly1911

julieq wrote: »

It would appear that the annual pension subsidy from the taxpayer to public sector pensions actually exceeds the entire net cost of UK bank bailouts so far.

That's certainly something Unison don't mention

Any chance of posting where that came from I am curious?

julieq

Well it depends on what you define as the cost of the bailout, and that's difficult because much of it is loans and guarantees. I had in my head £75B, but when you check it's very difficult to determine, but as no losses have been incurred from the lending it's simply the difference in value between the nationalised banks at the time of the bailout and now, which is fairly low, about £22B.

The subsidy is clear, it's in Hutton at £32B.

grizzly1911

julieq wrote: »

Well it depends on what you define as the cost of the bailout, and that's difficult because much of it is loans and guarantees. I had in my head £75B, but when you check it's very difficult to determine, but as no losses have been incurred from the lending it's simply the difference in value between the nationalised banks at the time of the bailout and now, which is fairly low, about £22B.

The subsidy is clear, it's in Hutton at £32B.

No I can't remember the figures either and I guess it is difficult to know the quantity of debt that is underwritten and still toxic.

I wonder if the Hutton figure is Gross or net as I am sure a lot of any gross subsidy will come back to the HMRC by way of tax, VAT, duty many times over as the pension is repeatedly spent along the food chain a bit like fractional banking. Unless they are living in Spain of course.

Generali

What was it like living in a country for a day without celebrating diversity? It must have been like an anti-Christmas.

NHS Doctors striking for better pensions is rather like the French striking for more cheese IMHO.

Generali

julieq wrote: »

Well it depends on what you define as the cost of the bailout, and that's difficult because much of it is loans and guarantees. I had in my head £75B, but when you check it's very difficult to determine, but as no losses have been incurred from the lending it's simply the difference in value between the nationalised banks at the time of the bailout and now, which is fairly low, about £22B.

The subsidy is clear, it's in Hutton at £32B.

To be fair, that excludes the cost of borrowing the money to bail out the banks. I guess you could argue that all the money came from QE so there is no borrowing cost.

Still it's an excellent point.