The Strike

finchy

ihazon303 wrote:

My wife is a science teacher, and my parents were both science teachers. There is a real dearth of talent in the teaching profession, especially in the sciences (real subjects), and the way we both view the proposed changes to teaching is the removal of one significant perk of the job.

Exactly. The government says that it wants to attract better graduates into the profession. Also we have shortages of teachers in several key subjects (maths, sciences, languages). The state will have to compete with the private sector for these workers, who will be increasingly in-demand, and the government's secret plan to recruit them is to.... make conditions worse. :x :roll:

thepeopleschamp

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Good video here for anyone that is interested on how greed of bankers bought this countries economy to it's knees, and how politicians and the public have let them get away with it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhHi4SKMNvA

Can be ars3d to watch that but why do public sector workers always bring up the bankers? It's like you're trying to punish us (the other 99.9% of private sector workers) for what the bankers did.

The public sector on strike who want their unsustainable pensions are every bit as dangerous as the bankers were.

Let's be honest about why they're on strike.
1. They've got the country by the balls and they love it.
2. They can't get higher paying jobs with the benefits they think they deserve, so it's either deal with it or strike and stick it to the masses who'll foot the bill.

Here's some advice - If I was in the public sector right now and I wasn't happy with my current deal I'd go and go a better job. You don't have to work there! And you don't have the right to do the job you want, on the pay you want with the pension you want. You're not special, just leave and let one of the millions of unemployed do your job, they'd probably do it better too :twisted:

EKIMIKE

Mad Roadie wrote:

True - and we should be pi55ed off with them - but like the Strikers they too wrecked the economy, but the strikers want to wreck to recovery too, just so they can have a day off to do christmas shopping

Are you trolling? Or just really really juvenile?

Edit: didn't realise johnfinch basically asked the same question. Funny that. I hope you're trolling tbh.

MaxwellBygraves

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Good video here for anyone that is interested on how greed of bankers bought this countries economy to it's knees, and how politicians and the public have let them get away with it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhHi4SKMNvA

Can be ars3d to watch that but why do public sector workers always bring up the bankers? It's like you're trying to punish us (the other 99.9% of private sector workers) for what the bankers did.

The public sector on strike who want their unsustainable pensions are every bit as dangerous as the bankers were.

Let's be honest about why they're on strike.
1. They've got the country by the balls and they love it.
2. They can't get higher paying jobs with the benefits they think they deserve, so it's either deal with it or strike and stick it to the masses who'll foot the bill.

Here's some advice - If I was in the public sector right now and I wasn't happy with my current deal I'd go and go a better job. You don't have to work there! And you don't have the right to do the job you want, on the pay you want with the pension you want. You're not special, just leave and let one of the millions of unemployed do your job, they'd probably do it better too :twisted:

Perhaps you might understand why people always 'bring up the banks' if you watched the video.

No point directing your Daily Mail fuelled neoliberal rhetoric at me, I don't work in the public sector. Millions of people are angry at being asked to work more, pay more for less whilst the government pays out huge sums of money to the banks (whose profits continue to rise.) They are exercising their democratic right to withdraw their labour.

verylonglegs

johnfinch wrote:

Mad Roadie wrote:

but the strikers want to wreck to recovery too, just so they can have a day off to do christmas shopping

Is this a joke, are you trolling, or do you actually believe this?

FYI, when you go on strike you don't get paid. Also, why the hell would they want to wreck the recovery?

There is no recovery to wreck anyway.

EKIMIKE

GiantMike wrote:

Basically you're saying that people are self-interested. So what's the alternative then?

It's a shame to be so defeatist. I understand your sentiment though.

Maybe i'm idealistic, but i think self-interest doesn't have to operate in isolation to everything else. Then again the commonly used mantra's that say rational self-interest ultimately leads to a greater good are equally idealistic.

Surely we don't have to be so binary. In fact we don't. But if we all think it is so black and white we might be inclined to settle for what we've got. We might ask questions like 'what's the alternative?'. It's ironic really. Propaganda and psychology are powerful tools.

I support the strikes in principle. I don't know enough about the details and reasons why but it's only just that people have the right to express dissent in the face of those in power. Like others have said, a mildly democratic election (objectively speaking) once every 5 years just doesn't cut it.

EKIMIKE

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

why do public sector workers always bring up the bankers?

It's a good question. The financial industry is just one part of the corporate whole that is systematically screwing ordinary people.

The banks are just the most visible target. They're not any more disgusting than say: the food industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the energy industry e.t.c.

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

I'd go and go a better job.

The odds of you being able to do that are really, really unfavourable. That's a mathematical fact not an opinion.

forward_loop

EKIMIKE wrote:

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

why do public sector workers always bring up the bankers?

It's a good question. The financial industry is just one part of the corporate whole that is systematically screwing ordinary people.

The banks are just the most visible target. They're not any more disgusting than say: the food industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the energy industry e.t.c.

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

I'd go and go a better job.

The odds of you being able to do that are really, really unfavourable. That's a mathematical fact not an opinion.

Their "investment arms" are the most visible, they have a large number of highly aid workers who can still make lots of money even if they are loosing other peoples - effectively not doing their jobs properly, their contribution to society is questionable, they are very powerful lobbyists (see how they have influenced the activities around St Pauls) and effectively have the government in their pockets. Their "greed" is also one of the key instigators in the unparalleled instability in Europe which also conversely may lead to their downfall in several cases.. I dont think the food,pharma or energy industry are even in the same league.

GiantMike

TheStone wrote:

I agree on the unions too. Unions and peoples right to strike are very important. I have no problem with the public sector strikes, just on this occasion I don't agree with what they're arguing for.

If we were running a surplus and had money saved for these pensions, then my opinion would be different. At the moment we're just adding liabilities to our children who won't be able to afford anywhere near what we as generation think we deserve ... but can't afford.

Once the Public Sector Pension arrangements are changed they will stay that way forever. If you have a pension with a private sector provider it is likely to be linked to the Stock Market or other investment vehicle. So, when the recession ends and we have another boom in 10 or so years the value of these private sector pension pots will rise. The Public sector pensions will not improve.

EKIMIKE

See this:

viewtopic.php?f=30005&t=12813962

or how about the drugs companies who used victims of the Bhopal disaster to be their lab rats:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ccuHy0EM8U

What about the Bhopal disaster itself? What about the mining companies who let toxic bi-products leak into ecosystems affecting not only the environment but also people? What about the weapons industry accountable for millions of deaths worldwide?

Come on. The financial industry is bad but it's not alone. It's doesn't make their greed any less distasteful but by vilifying the banks alone we do a huge disservice to ourselves as victims of corporate interests.

GiantMike

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Good video here for anyone that is interested on how greed of bankers bought this countries economy to it's knees, and how politicians and the public have let them get away with it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhHi4SKMNvA

Can be ars3d to watch that but why do public sector workers always bring up the bankers? It's like you're trying to punish us (the other 99.9% of private sector workers) for what the bankers did.

The public sector on strike who want their unsustainable pensions are every bit as dangerous as the bankers were.

Let's be honest about why they're on strike.
1. They've got the country by the balls and they love it.
2. They can't get higher paying jobs with the benefits they think they deserve, so it's either deal with it or strike and stick it to the masses who'll foot the bill.

Here's some advice - If I was in the public sector right now and I wasn't happy with my current deal I'd go and go a better job. You don't have to work there! And you don't have the right to do the job you want, on the pay you want with the pension you want. You're not special, just leave and let one of the millions of unemployed do your job, they'd probably do it better too :twisted:

Was this a dire attempt at humour or a dire attempt at trolling? I've highlighted the bits where you make yourself look like an idiot.

MaxwellBygraves

GiantMike wrote:

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Good video here for anyone that is interested on how greed of bankers bought this countries economy to it's knees, and how politicians and the public have let them get away with it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhHi4SKMNvA

Can be ars3d to watch that but why do public sector workers always bring up the bankers? It's like you're trying to punish us (the other 99.9% of private sector workers) for what the bankers did.

The public sector on strike who want their unsustainable pensions are every bit as dangerous as the bankers were.

Let's be honest about why they're on strike.
1. They've got the country by the balls and they love it.
2. They can't get higher paying jobs with the benefits they think they deserve, so it's either deal with it or strike and stick it to the masses who'll foot the bill.

Here's some advice - If I was in the public sector right now and I wasn't happy with my current deal I'd go and go a better job. You don't have to work there! And you don't have the right to do the job you want, on the pay you want with the pension you want. You're not special, just leave and let one of the millions of unemployed do your job, they'd probably do it better too :twisted:

Was this a dire attempt at humour or a dire attempt at trolling? I've highlighted the bits where you make yourself look like an idiot.

Haha touché

thepeopleschamp

EKIMIKE wrote:

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

I'd go and go a better job.

The odds of you being able to do that are really, really unfavourable. That's a mathematical fact not an opinion.

That's partly my point. If they can't get better elsewhere what makes them think striking until they get what they want is right?

Personally I would never do that. If I'm undervalued at work I'd move somewhere better. If no one in the job market was willing to meet my demands then I'm sure I'd realise that what I was asking for was unreasonable. At no stage would I hold the country to ransom until I get what I want. It's just wrong.

thepeopleschamp

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Perhaps you might understand why people always 'bring up the banks' if you watched the video.

No point directing your Daily Mail fuelled neoliberal rhetoric at me, I don't work in the public sector. Millions of people are angry at being asked to work more, pay more for less whilst the government pays out huge sums of money to the banks (whose profits continue to rise.) They are exercising their democratic right to withdraw their labour.

Two wrongs don't make a right. The majority of us aren't greedy bankers or public sector workers (or even daily mail readers!) I don't see why we should suffer so public sector workers get something that's completely unsustainable and then use bankers greed to justify it. Without the banking crisis their pensions would still be unsustainable.

random man

GiantMike wrote:

Once the Public Sector Pension arrangements are changed they will stay that way forever. If you have a pension with a private sector provider it is likely to be linked to the Stock Market or other investment vehicle. So, when the recession ends and we have another boom in 10 or so years the value of these private sector pension pots will rise. The Public sector pensions will not improve.

Why would they stay that way forever? The current pension agreements were made when the country could afford them but now the government wants to change them, so they weren't set in stone and neither should they be IMO.

As worthy as the pension issue is, I believe that the unions are using it politically to call a big strike to show dissatisfaction with this government's management of the economy. I don't believe that going up against a reactionary government will achieve anything positive for the public sector, but neither would not taking action. Catch 22.

GiantMike

random man wrote:

GiantMike wrote:

Once the Public Sector Pension arrangements are changed they will stay that way forever. If you have a pension with a private sector provider it is likely to be linked to the Stock Market or other investment vehicle. So, when the recession ends and we have another boom in 10 or so years the value of these private sector pension pots will rise. The Public sector pensions will not improve.

Why would they stay that way forever? The current pension agreements were made when the country could afford them but now the government wants to change them, so they weren't set in stone and neither should they be IMO.

I can't imagine a future Govt deciding they would raise Public sector pensions. Even a Labour one. I think the Unions think the same way which is why they're so adamant that they won't cave in.

random man

GiantMike wrote:

I can't imagine a future Govt deciding they would raise Public sector pensions. Even a Labour one. I think the Unions think the same way which is why they're so adamant that they won't cave in.

I wasn't suggesting a future govt would raise them, just that I didn't see why they should stay that way forever. I can't imagine this govt agreeing to an inflexible scheme, just in case they want to alter them again.

Frank the tank

IMHO, the top and bottom of it is there is plenty of money but the few want to make sure they retain it. There is no real need for the attack on peoples pensions at all. If individuals and corporations paid all the tax they should I would think the defecit would be nothing like it is.

The whole ecconomic downturn is being used as an excuse to give the working masses (public and private sector) a good kicking.

Perhaps a simplistic view, but until we all pull together the process will continue.

MaxwellBygraves

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Perhaps you might understand why people always 'bring up the banks' if you watched the video.

No point directing your Daily Mail fuelled neoliberal rhetoric at me, I don't work in the public sector. Millions of people are angry at being asked to work more, pay more for less whilst the government pays out huge sums of money to the banks (whose profits continue to rise.) They are exercising their democratic right to withdraw their labour.

Two wrongs don't make a right. The majority of us aren't greedy bankers or public sector workers (or even daily mail readers!) I don't see why we should suffer so public sector workers get something that's completely unsustainable and then use bankers greed to justify it. Without the banking crisis their pensions would still be unsustainable.

Not exactly the peoples champ, are you?!

MaxwellBygraves

Frank the tank wrote:

IMHO, the top and bottom of it is there is plenty of money but the few want to make sure they retain it. There is no real need for the attack on peoples pensions at all. If individuals and corporations paid all the tax they should I would think the defecit would be nothing like it is.

The whole ecconomic downturn is being used as an excuse to give the working masses (public and private sector) a good kicking.

Perhaps a simplistic view, but until we all pull together the process will continue.

Boom, nailed it.

'Never be deceived that the rich will permit you to vote away their wealth' - Lucy Parsons

pipipi

From my viewpoint, there are very few maths teachers left in the system. They find the lure of banking etc too good to resist. And making retirement 68 isn't going to help recruitment.

Last place I worked needed 6 maths teachers and only had 2. The kids got a rubbish deal.

What's going on at the moment won't get more maths teachers back in the classroom.

random man

Frank the tank wrote:

IMHO, the top and bottom of it is there is plenty of money but the few want to make sure they retain it. There is no real need for the attack on peoples pensions at all. If individuals and corporations paid all the tax they should I would think the defecit would be nothing like it is.

The whole ecconomic downturn is being used as an excuse to give the working masses (public and private sector) a good kicking.

Perhaps a simplistic view, but until we all pull together the process will continue.

I remember an English teacher at school saying that you won't find a Tory government that wants to see full employment.

sfichele

Frank the tank wrote:

IMHO, the top and bottom of it is there is plenty of money but the few want to make sure they retain it. There is no real need for the attack on peoples pensions at all. If individuals and corporations paid all the tax they should I would think the defecit would be nothing like it is.

Not to mention the billions that are being p1ssed up the wall due PFI initiatives which simply line the pockets of the rich.

The whole ecconomic downturn is being used as an excuse to give the working masses (public and private sector) a good kicking.

+1

anto164

I'm not reading all the pages on this topic, but i've got one thing to say..

I do hope that everyone striking loses a days pay.

RichN95.

anto164 wrote:

I do hope that everyone striking loses a days pay.

That's generally how strikes work. If it wasn't, I'd go on strike every day.

anto164

RichN95 wrote:

anto164 wrote:

I do hope that everyone striking loses a days pay.

That's generally how strikes work. If it wasn't, I'd go on strike every day.

I don't know about strikes tbh.. I'm fairly young, and in the private sector. IMO, what the public sector is getting offered is a bloody good offer.

I don't think the government should offer a better offer, it's great as it is. People will never be happy. They have to understand that a lot of the private sector is currently in the same position, but aren't getting offers like these.

verylonglegs

EKIMIKE wrote:

See this:

viewtopic.php?f=30005&t=12813962

or how about the drugs companies who used victims of the Bhopal disaster to be their lab rats:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ccuHy0EM8U

What about the Bhopal disaster itself? What about the mining companies who let toxic bi-products leak into ecosystems affecting not only the environment but also people? What about the weapons industry accountable for millions of deaths worldwide?

Come on. The financial industry is bad but it's not alone. It's doesn't make their greed any less distasteful but by vilifying the banks alone we do a huge disservice to ourselves as victims of corporate interests.

I feel we are reaching the crux of the real debate here, our relationship with corporatism. Do you think you can persuade people to give up what the corporates have made available for the masses? It's everything, from the computers we use to post on here, our nice shiny new bike bits and apparel...all the way to the films we watch and nice shiny tv's we use to watch them on. Can you imagine extolling the evils of the large companies to the masses and then telling them the things they'd miss out on if they didn't exist? I don't think it's an argument you'd win in all honesty.

EKIMIKE

verylonglegs wrote:

I feel we are reaching the crux of the real debate here, our relationship with corporatism. Do you think you can persuade people to give up what the corporates have made available for the masses? It's everything, from the computers we use to post on here, our nice shiny new bike bits and apparel...all the way to the films we watch and nice shiny tv's we use to watch them on. Can you imagine extolling the evils of the large companies to the masses and then telling them the things they'd miss out on if they didn't exist? I don't think it's an argument you'd win in all honesty.

Let me get this straight you are saying:

a) It's ok to murder people so long as you invent something cool or useful?
OR
b) To invent something cool or useful you have to murder people?
OR
c) The world would be a worse place if we didn't screw the majority of humanity aka the 'third world'?


Why do we have to accept any of the above? There are plenty of decent, moral and socially conscious corporations out there who are successful and have contributed great things.

The reciprocity argument ("he's doing it, so i will too") is lame, weak, it stinks and it's morally bankrupt. So is the all or nothing argument.

The all or nothing/black and white argument is typical neo-liberal doctrine. "You're not for free-markets? You're a communist". No, it's just patently obvious that in life a considered, mixed approach tends to work better. Why does it have to be all or nothing? That's like having an ideological monopoly! Ironically a neo-liberal free marketeer knows and preaches that monopolies are bad - because they are.

daviesee

ThePeoplesChamp wrote:

Without the banking crisis their pensions would still be unsustainable.

That unfortunately is the rub.

People (private sector and public) have been sold a false dawn for so long that they actually believed that it would work.
The kind of pensions, final salary etc, that have been promised for the past 25 years was never going to be sustainable in the long run.
We have all been sold a pup.

fast as fupp

I don't know about strikes tbh.. I'm fairly young, and in the private sector. IMO, what the public sector is getting offered is a bloody good offer.

its NOT an offer- they are increasing our contributions for smaller pensions-how on earth can that be a good offer?