Off Topic Political Debate

You often say "I think we need to move forward" To me that is just saying I don't like your argument and want it on different terms. What is moving forward?
I think recent strikes in the NHS and Education prove Unions still are prepared to put the public second to their own demands. I would not allow stirkes in either and do not find either sectors work especially well. Another - longer argument I suspect.
Local authorities are terribly inefficient. I currently have building work under way - the hours I have lost talking to the council trying to get building inspectors here etc. I took over as Finance Director of London Luton Airport when it was privatised. An accounts office of 77 people with jobs of pushing paper without any organisation or meaning. I cut it to 17 people withiin a year and it functioned much better. Try speaking to anyone in a local council after 4 pm. etc etc I cannot comment on your sister's local authority but have seen others where it was politically a good move to cut a service for political clout rather than have people work without 7 weeks holiday a year and a 35 hour week. My job was always about creating efficiencies in whatever organisation I joined - and it was always easier in ones where previously there had been government run working.

Idlers etc - goes without saying - it is how you deal with those people - I could sack people - the state rarely can or does.

It is easy to use politically motivated phrases like bullying or scapegoats - prevents having to address facts. Junior doctors had no business striking. They are paid up to £80,000 per year and it is not for them to devise what is or is not safety of the public. That became a convenient phrase to use to justify their strike when it was really about not wanting to give up excessive overtime - with generous payments by having a proper structure in place. They arenow actually at odds with their own organisation the BMA. My son in law was at the timea "junior doctor" on £80k+ and he admitted it was a very poliical issue

 

What a pleasure to return to this thread and find such a lively and interesting discussion, showing respect for all shades of opinion. Thanks to those who've persisted and shown what it should be about.

 

Teachers didn't strike for personal gain but rather to wake up society to the incredible damage being done to our nation's future. Why are the arguments not being discussed at national level, why do only teachers know how our future is being f-ed up in a wholesale manner, as a matter of ideology rather than research? It is a national scandal and teachers tried to bring this to the attention of the country, from whom it is hidden by the media.
Junior doctors didn't strike for personal gain either, and to be clear most junior doctors are not on £80k, they start on late £20k , and 'junior' doesn't mean young, or those just starting out, it refers to the majority of hospital doctors.

 

What I mean is move forward from the old arguments about
Unions good and bad
Nationalised/Local Authority workers being inefficient etc

It would be interesting to discuss your view of why local authorities are terribly efficient? is it that all the decent hard working people work in the private sector? Is it that all the idlers become social workers or street cleaners?

I have had no problem speaking to a council dept after 4.00 ... a mystery to me? Unless it is a dept which starts before 9.00 in the morning?

We have a responsibility to create the best possible society we can.

I can see your view as an accountant... bit it is not always about efficiencies... a library and a youth service or a home for people with dementia are in my view an asset for our society and worth paying for....

Junior Drs struck for their conditions of service... i.e working hours..... a govt proposal to streamline was filled with pitfalls... for example the rights of Drs with families etc etc. It was not about pay. This is from the telegraph.... so cannot be biased can it:
"Trainee doctors currently have a starting salary of £22,636 - at Foundation Year 1 (F1) - rising with experience to reach £30,000 within four years. Doctors in specialist training (ST) receive a salary of between £30,002 and £47,175, while those who make the grade can earn up to £69,325.16 Mar 2016" and remember that it takes at least 5 years.. or six if you have to do a conversion type course to even become a trainee....

It always amazes me how any profession which exercises it's right to strike is immediately demonised in the media . As I have said previously teachers were a very Conservative voting group until they stood up against changes to service and conditions etc..... become the subject of abuse etc..... and now most teachers vote Labour/LIbDem.....

 

I would love to have a discussion that did not mention the media. Let us not talk about the media demonising anyone unless one of us uses that media as their source. I do not read a single newspaper as they all have their own bias and slant. So my opinions are my own - thought out and what I happen to believe. OK so TV news and the internet may not be perfect but on the whole it has more of a duty to try to be even handed and as criticism of the BBC shows - whichever way you lean you think they are biased the other way - tends to make me think they broadly get it about right.
I am in a minority but consider strikes merely a form of blackmail. They were needed perhaps in the days of dark satanic mills but should now form no part of a civilised society. Do not give me the "right to strike of a working man" argument. Americans do the same for carrying guns. Bothare immoral and should be outlawed. A strike is a violence - it says you will do what I want or face bad consequences. Too often the public who have no part are those inconvenienced. Make strikes illegal and replace them with compulsorary arbitration. Unions in theory are good but are often run by people who care about their politics more thna their members. LIke Corbyn's Labour they get a minority to infiltrate and take control and then speak for 100% of their members - wothout ever having 100% support. Post war we helped set up the Unions in Germany - and they actually are a positive force.

 

It's the definition of 'essentials' that get to me. I had to replace our hot water boiler recently - £3500 of which 20% went to the VAT man. Is hot water a luxury or an essential? Four years ago I had to replace attic windows at either end of the house + a velux window in the middle as all three were the source of both water leaks and heat loss. £4000 of which 17.5% went to the VAT man - luxury or essential? Last year I had to replace roof tiles which had been blown off in a storm, as well as guttering and re-point gable end edging. Only £600, but of which 20% went to the VAT man - luxury or essential? My wife suffers from achalasia & I have a hiatus hernia - neither of us can sleep on a normal, flat bed. An appropriate bed cost us £3000, of which 17.5% went to the VAT man - luxury or essential?

 

I do not disagree with you. I would prefer to see a tiered system of VAT. Why not have 5%,10%, 15%,20% and 25% bands. I know it would take a bit of organisation but it would be far fairer. At least you could then debate whether a BMW was as essential as a boiler.

 

1) I will always give you the right to strike of a working man argument!.... if working men and women hadn't stood up for their rights..... people would be working in much worse conditions. I for one would support a striking nurse teacher or social worker in most cases as none of those folk do such things lightly

2) Agreed

 

Well it is an easy argument isn't it? We all have to pay our PAYE but we can defer buying new furniture. So we tend to look more at income tax and vote on that more - but you are totally correctindirect taxes impact much more on those who are lower paid - and that is regressive. We would be better with a 25% basic rate of tax and an 8% VAT.
Also a good point on things like libraries which are good for society as a whole - and so deserve state funding. NHS is good - but some things should not be available - like non essential cosmetic surgery. I suspect most people have far worse teeth than they would if it were actually possible to get an NHS dentist.
How can you leave the disgusting little comic the S*n out of your papers to be state owned - anyway I disagree with state ownership s let's just delete them altogether

 

Yorkie - I thought you might - but how pleasant that we are now able to debate points backwards and forwards with genuine arguments and respect - what a difference a week makes. Striking was once valid and necessary - are we really now so feeble as a society that we still allow people to harm innocent others who just want to go about their daily business rather than compel people to sit down and submit to arbitration. How can something that is reliant on force be prefereable to negotiating?

 

I am not sure you can directly construe it as harm... on the other hand the RMT southern railways strike and working to rule etc.... has impacted on many people... so yes it can adversely damage..

However I agree that a robust form of arbitration is the best route...

A challenge to do fairly I am sure

 

Leo, can you get your facts straight about Germany. The plan in the British military sector was that workers would be allowed to contact each other informally and then obtain permission from the military government - only after one and a half years had elapsed after 'permission', were they then able to collect membership fees - 2 years more were required before they could organize on a regional or national level. Strikes were banned until October 1948. Laws in the American sector were the same. Despite this fees were collected illegally from the beginning, secret regional conferences were held and a network of undercover contacts between zones were established. It appears that the Trade Union movement reformed itself in spite of the occupying powers. not because of them.

Are you against all strike action Leo ? Under what circumstances would you say that such action is legitimate ? Is for example the 'political' strike ok. , in circumstances similar to eg. when the dockyard workers in Antwerp refused to handle US. military equipment ? If the latter is ok. then where is the dividing line ? When is it not ok. to strike ?

 

My facts come from my studies of the German constitution when studying Politics at Uni. Perhaps the Unions have a different slant but I stick by what I was taught. I suspect there was lots of work done to get to the position that finally emerged and lots of parties claimed some credit for it. The Brits and Americans wanted Germany to have factory based unions.
I cannot think of a legitimate reason to strike in a free society that is governed by the rule of law with an independent and competent judiciary. Political strikes are no different - why should a person cause harm to another uninvolved party - and Yorkie - not being able to go about earning your living IS harm in my book - and is defined that way in law too - damages have been awarded for such conduct - albeit not as a result of a strike where our laws are still mired in the 19th C

 

Or... Should society sponsor BB's decadence?

please log in to view this image

 

Rose petals, wine and virgins - if only. <sigh>

 

Maybe in:

 

Watford Ladies?

 

Bloody hell, there's a jolly bunch. Rugby League though, surely?
Those were the days when one of the players would use the Club Dildo as a hair decoration...