Jump to content

The years of discontent, 2022/23


101

Recommended Posts

Quote

 

'Price worth paying for freedom'

Jens Stoltenberg

He says that sanctions imposed on Russia are the price worth paying for freedom.

The Nato chief acknowledged most people in the West were paying higher energy prices as a result but said an even higher price was being paid by Ukrainians.

The world would be more insecure if Putin won, Stoltenberg says, so it is in our interest to support Ukraine.

 

Psycho Stoltenberg says close the thread now and hand over billions more to Kiev! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I remember rightly, she was also able to import coal from Poland to bypass the UK coal unions and undermined their power that way.
The lorry convoys with the metal grills over the windows bringing the imported coal from the ships at Hunterston used to go right passed our house in Ardrossan at the time. Still remember the image every time I see a Yuill & Dodds lorry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Melanius Mullarkay said:

 

 

Matthew Lesh of the Institute of Economic Affairs. 

Author of such cutting edge research as:

Blockchain offers an innovative solution to the brexit customs puzzle.

 

The only affair that cùnt will ever have is an economic one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Matthew Lesh of the Institute of Economic Affairs. 
Author of such cutting edge research as:
Blockchain offers an innovative solution to the brexit customs puzzle.
 

This is the exact problem with the economics area of studies. It is inherently filled by well off (white) people who have lived in different bubble to the majority of the rest of the Uk and get jobs based off their family. They have no idea what is actually happening to the people in poverty yet will still be the go to people for the media to ask them questions on what is wrong and how to fix it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, scottsdad said:

It was a cycle of inflation running at about 10-15%, unions striking because they wanted their staff to be paid at the same rate, big pay rises which fuelled inflation - a vicious cycle. 

Well, inflation this time round has absolutely nothing to do with pay rises, so we are in the clear there. And if they want to strangle money supply again, after years of pumping hundreds of billions in, they could always try a wealth tax.

Edited by Ross.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck to every workforce brave enough to unionise and take action.

Not all of them will win, not all of them will be reasonable.

Every. Single. One of them, has the right to do it, and that right should be protected at all costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, virginton said:

Those big organisations like, err, the public sector that is ultimately paying for Scotrail employees, NHS staff, teachers etc.? Where is the money going to come from to pay for this? What impact do you think that rolling strike action will have on the economy and therefore the public finances? 

The reality is that people should have thought a lot more carefully about the domestic consequences, before lolloping along with the yellow and blue flag brigade into a full-blown economic war with Russia. The erosion of living standards is a direct and completely unavoidable consequence of that decision. 

Taxation and borrowing. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

Going by the communication from my union my sector is ready to strike as soon as we get our first derisory offer from ScotGov

Assuming you are with PCS, have the same vibes coming from them at my work via the three unions we have - PCS/Prospect and F something or other. PCS told us in 2019 that we were roughly 25% behind inflation over the past 10 years. With 2 years of freezes and no offer on the table for this year yet, it will obviously be a much wider gap. On top of that there is the illegal theft of wages disguised as pension contributions which are never added to the pot - The Firefighters Union challenged this and won their battle in court plus quashed the attempts at overturning a couple of years ago. However, they have still refused to payout to anyone. 

Alot of my colleagues are jumping ship on level transfers to ScotGov because the wages are effectively what we get with London weighting added on, so it is a no brainer for folk up here. 

You will also find in the UK Civil Service (not sure if ScotGov are the same) that the SCS level staff have still had their pay rises over the past couple of years. The very people telling us we are all in this together with the cost of living rises and we should add to our expenses with unnecessary journeys back into the office because they like to see people. Alot of very very angry people now on our internal message boards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aufc said:


This is the exact problem with the economics area of studies. It is inherently filled by well off (white) people who have lived in different bubble to the majority of the rest of the Uk and get jobs based off their family. They have no idea what is actually happening to the people in poverty yet will still be the go to people for the media to ask them questions on what is wrong and how to fix it.

I'm not sure that's true of economics as a discipline. It does seem to be true of influential positions for economists though. A disproportionate number of people from privileged backgrounds get influential positions in all disciplines. 

You could argue (as many economists currently do) that there is no reason for economics to have more influence on government than, say, sociology. 

But rubbishing a whole discipline based on your personal prejudice is part of the whole "had enough of experts", anti-science axis of dumb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not necessarily.
That will only be true if you are buying things which make up the "basket" they use to calculate inflation.
An inflation rate of 7% doesn't mean your outgoings are automatically increased by 7%.

“For certain bands”
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Not necessarily.

That will only be true if you are buying things which make up the "basket" they use to calculate inflation.

An inflation rate of 7% doesn't mean your outgoings are automatically increased by 7%.

So long as they don't waste their money on fuel, food or transport they should be fine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a long time Union avoider, due to their connection with the Labour Party and general uselessness.

However, I joined last year and am itching for a proper strike which actually affects the public, not this useless one-day here and there nonsense which serves no purpose whatsoever.

These c***s in power need to learn a lesson and this is the only option I can think of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ross. said:

Well, inflation this time round has absolutely nothing to do with pay rises, so we are in the clear there. And if they want to strangle money supply again, after years of pumping hundreds of billions in, they could always try a wealth tax.

High Inflation didn't start in the 1970's because of wages either.  It started because oil prices tripled.  Wages then took over because of union demands and caused the wage-price spiral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a long time Union avoider, due to their connection with the Labour Party and general uselessness.
However, I joined last year and am itching for a proper strike which actually affects the public, not this useless one-day here and there nonsense which serves no purpose whatsoever.
These c***s in power need to learn a lesson and this is the only option I can think of.
The whole country needs to be ground to a full stop at some point. Strikes, motorway blockades etc just for that reason.

A very loud, stop taking the piss message.

f**k it lets have a general strike. There must be enough unions fighting atm to join up.

Also, you shouldn't avoid the Union because you disagree with their politics. Think of it ona purely local, workplace level.

If your workforce is collectivised but you are not a member, not only do you personally have no voice or seat at the table for anything that falls under the collective agreement, you also weaken the position of the collective meaning that you are likely to get less. Once your workplace is unionised, being a member us no less than common sense and should be unhitched from politics.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...