Confused by Brendan Barber

Fella

u704446 wrote: »

And because a rich person says it - it's therefore not an accurate description?

It wouldn't be accurate whoever said it. When he says it it's hypocrisy too.

Increasing spending won't stop the rich getting richer, it'll just increase the debt the next generation has to pay back. Only liars or morons will tell you different.

u704446

Fella wrote: »

It wouldn't be accurate whoever said it. When he says it it's hypocrisy too.

Increasing spending won't stop the rich getting richer, it'll just increase the debt the next generation has to pay back. Only liars or morons will tell you different.

'..."the rich" & how under the coalition they'll get richer while the poor suffer ' - you don't think that is accurate?

chewmylegoff

u704446 wrote: »

'..."the rich" & how under the coalition they'll get richer while the poor suffer ' - you don't think that is accurate?

if you remove the words highlighted, which appear to imply that the current coalition are somehow unique in this respect and replace it with "any party capable of getting elected in this country", then it seems a reasonable enough statement...

Fella

u704446 wrote: »

'..."the rich" & how under the coalition they'll get richer while the poor suffer ' - you don't think that is accurate?

In context, no not at all.

Brendan Barber is saying it's austerity that will cause it.

In fact we don't even have austerity, we're still spending far too much. If we did have real austerity it'd be the single biggest thing that might make the poor suffer less in future. Like all greedy union bosses though, he'd happily heap untold debt on future generations. They don't have a vote yet & don't pay him any fees.

u704446

"If you remove the words highlighted"... blimey.

Graham_Devon

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

We could enlist the armed forces to provide security.

They'd be on strike...

robmatic

Fella wrote: »

Very confused. Heard him on the TV literally 2 minutes ago spitting bile about "the rich" & how under the coalition they'll get richer while the poor suffer.

And yet Brendan Barber is on a salary of £117,000 (paid for by his poor members).

I'm confused, £117,000 a year makes him rich by most standards.



All I can think of is that he's lowlife hypocritical scum living large off the poor whilst simultanously pretending to hate the rich.

As he would be quite keen to remind you, pensions are a fundamental part of pay... so he's actually going to be earning considerably more than £117000 per year given that union pension arrangements are fairly generous.

He's also a complete hypocrite as he should be well aware on that salary that the top rate of tax is higher now than under 12 years of the recent Labour government.

withabix

Then there is the extremely obnoxious Mark 'fatcat' Serwotka, who receives an annual pension contribution of £28,000 from his union, which is £5000 more than the average salary of his members.

That's on top of the £100,000 salary he also gets paid.

When trying to get elected leader of the PCS, he said he would only draw the average salary of the membership....

Not bad for someone who is supposed to be somewhere to the left of Marx.

C_Mababejive

Generali wrote: »

It makes him one of the 1% in fact!

http://www.ifs.org.uk/wheredoyoufitin/

:money::money::money::money::money::money::money::money::money::money::money:

What a great tool.

I'm not sure whether it made me feel happy,grateful or a bit of both and it drives home how little money people manage to scrape by on.

Norfolk_Jim

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

But if it's 'steriotyped' then it's definitely the Guardian. For Daily Mail, it's 'stereotyped'.

As I read neither rag, I will continue to give my own responses.

Well your own responses are pretty disappointing in this case and are not very, if all, different from the Daily Mail's. Maybe you could get a job writing for them; I think they would enjoy your points of view.
You come out with such sweeping generalisations that at times I think you do so in search of nothing more than a response in the same way that a troll does - except that you clearly are not a troll. Still...