portslade seagull
Well-known member
Yeah a sense of entitlement without working for it. Why were these issues caused by the older generation unless your still harping on about losing
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Brexit
- Thread starter KingstonSeagull
- Start date
Yeah a sense of entitlement without working for it. Why were these issues caused by the older generation unless your still harping on about losing
I go to the football with my mate's dad who was the dean of a university business school. He is now retired. He has explained to me that his generation has ruined it for all future generations. it is impressive that they have managed to be the first generation who will have a higher standard of living than their kids.
This has nothing to do with the referendum. They have triple lock pensions and could retire at a young age. My old man could have retired in full navy pension at 53 ffs. Now teachers are expected to work until they are about 70. Seems fair.
Trouble is, much of the time it doesn't happen. Our wonderful NHS people (and I mean they're wonderful; it wasn't sarcasm) have it in their DNA to save someone's life first, and ask about who's going to pay for it later. By which time, of course, matey has discharged himself (or been discharged to try and meet the government targets for a quick turnaround of bed occupancy).
But that is because so many people argue the NHS should not have business managers and bureaucrats. They miss the point that a byssinosis manager will save far more money than they cost. Possibly the easiest way to get a cheer on question time is to make the point that "we need fewer bureaucrats and more nurses"
It is a complete false economy.
portslade seagull
Well-known member
A Dean of a university so what that's his take on it. If he's that worried about it ask him to give half his pension away to all those in need. I think I know what the answer would be. I think you'll find population growth has something to do with this and in a lot of cases automation replacing jobs hence less money being paid into pension pots/funds. When I started at BT in the 80s they has 190,000 workers. Due to automation this is now 80,000 or there abouts. Less workers less pension payments,this is repeated in all industries.
Unless he's somewhere in his 90s, this is unlikely to be true. Those of us who are now embarking on life as a pensioner have worked hard to get where we are, and have got where we are due to rules and regulations set down by our father's' - or even our grandfathers' - generation. We didn't make the rules, or set the limits, or the pay rates, but kindly do not get on some high horse and blame me for claiming my OAP.
I do feel sorry for younger people - particularly those in their 50s - for whom the goalposts - the day when they can finally give up doing jobs they hate, just to keep themselves and their families - keep moving. I just got to 65 in time. I'm glad; I'm grateful; but I'm not f**king guilty of anything, right. I didn't wangle or fiddle anything to get there.
Nail, on head!
.....and, of course, keeping teachers (and others) working until they're 70 is just going to reduce the opportunities for young people to get a proper job, buy a house, etc...............
No they don't - and they won't.
Sorry you have lost me. You say there is a larger population which is correct but then say fewer people paying pensions. There are several million more working now than in say 1960 so your point is completely wrong. In fact about 24 million worked in 1960 compared to c32 million now. It has been a reasonably steady upward trend for over a century. Yes some jobs are being automated but new jobs are created hence the number of people in employment has increased.
Final salary pension schemes have stopped. That is for sure. Lucky old lot retired now.
They do. It is the same in schools where a good finance director/business manager can save several times their salary with improved procurement and efficient use of staff. Doctors are trained to make people better and not to run multi million pound organisations. The same as teachers.
I know from first hand experience that there are far too many managers, directors and administrators in the NHS (I was one myself!) No matter how good or otherwise Finance Directors/Business managers are, if bills don't get paid, they don't get paid. Other countries have found that if they just don't pay up, their citizens will be treated anyway (just more invoices for them to ignore).
Unless we get our medical staff to let people die if they haven't paid (unlikely, and morally unacceptable) this will just go on. Alternatively, with proper border controls, we can say you can't come in unless you've got valid medical insurance - which, I believe, is what some (non EU) countries pretty much do anyway.
Oh you little stereotyper, you! Didn't you ever learn that stereotyping is an essential component of prejudice?
Mental Lental
Well-known member
You seem to be operating under a misunderstanding that we are all on either side of a national debate whereby there are people with different points of view that should be considered and respected. But you're wrong, because Leaver's opinions are misinformed and your views on the topic come from reading shit sources that you don't bother to examine because they immediately agree with your world view. A lot of leavers on this forum think we're debating on a quid pro quo type situation, where every source or lets say "evidence" a leaver puts up is somehow of equal value to the sources from the remain camp. The problem is that it's easy for anyone with a modicum of intelligence to check the sources on both sides and find out which ones stand up to scrutiny, and which ones don't. Let me teach you a lesson......
Let's go with remain first. Let's find a remain article to scrutinise. A quick google of the keywords "Guardian" and "immigration" allows you to find this article about the detrimental effects of reduced immigration on the labour pool.....
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/19/uk-needs-more-immigrants-to-avoid-brexit-catastrophe
The article claims that labour shortages and an ageing population means that the UK is going to need to INCREASE inwards migration by 200,000 a year. This will already have most of you leavers frothing at the mouth, some of whom will attempt to discredit the article within seconds of reading the headline before they've even read the article (red flag there for the guys who do this). Let's check their sources. Well they've put a link to their source so that's immediately handy. It's this report by a group called Global Future. So, my first reaction here is "who the hell are they?" Let's check em out...
http://ourglobalfuture.com/about-us/
Ok, so they're a "global think tank" but they clearly aren't impartial based on their homepage. Black mark for them there but hey-ho let's read the article and check their sources....Ok they've given us 17 references for their article. Some don't stand up too well, the first reference is to another article they wrote before this one. However, some of the others seem legit, let's list them:
ONS (Office of National Statistics)
OBR (Office of Budget Responsibility)
An academic paper by a professor of economics which itself has a detailed list of references - http://data.parliament.uk/writtenev...fairs-committee/immigration/written/45077.pdf
An academic paper regarding the effects of immigration in the US, again with it's own list of references - http://www.nber.org/papers/w15507
A survey from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
A report from the Construction Industry Training Board
This government report from the UK Commission for Employment and Skills - https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...allenges-in-the-health-and-social-care-sector
This report from The Migration Observatory at The University of Oxford - http://www.migrationobservatory.ox....-older-people-and-demand-for-migrant-workers/
This report from the Royal College of Nursing regarding the amount of EU nationals in the nursing sector - https://my.rcn.org.uk/__data/assets...pation_Lists_for_the_UK_and_for_Scotland..pdf
This government report from The House of Lords regarding long term sustainability of the NHS - https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldnhssus/151/151.pdf
A report for the British Hospitality Association regarding labour migration in the hospitality sector - https://dip9shwvohtcn.cloudfront.ne...igration-in-the-hospitality-sector-report.pdf
There was also a link to a report by the National Farmers Union regarding shortages in the labour market but that link doesn't appear to be working anymore.
Ok I think I've made my point. Most of those references also have their own list of references that can be checked which basically opens up a rabbit hole of other scientific papers to read on the subject if you wanted to take it further.
Now, lets have a look at a leave article regarding the same topic. A similar google search for the Express and immigration lead me to this little gem........
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/ex...tion-awful-British-workers-migration-pensions
EU immigration has been an economic catastrophe costing us 30 BILLION pounds a year apparently. Well my alarm bells are already ringing, that seems a huge amount there must be some pretty solid evidence backing this one up...let's check it.
Ok cool, this article is citing a source. This time another think tank called Global Britain. For some reason they declined to provide a direct link to the evidence provided by this think tank but I'm sure that was just an oversight. Let's see if we can find it ourselves on the Global Britain site.......
http://globalbritain.co.uk/
Ok well this clearly isn't an impartial group. I'll hold up my hands, the Guardian article source clearly wasn't either but compared to these guys....woah. They better have a pretty solid list of references on their article about EU immigrants costing us 30 billion quid a year. Let's find it..........wait.......mmmmmmm.........well I've reached a dead end already. Can't find the specific article The Express is talking about. They have a number of articles all offering up evidence that leaving the EU is the bees knees though so let's pick one...How about this "report" about how we're better off with NO deal than a bad deal.....
http://globalbritain.co.uk/wp-conte...he-single-market-is-failing-britain-Final.pdf
This looks very high brow doesn't it? Like the Guardian source it's full of graphs and statistics and stuff. I hope their references stand up to scrutiny......Errrr wait a minute. There are no references. All there is a section "about the authors" who are these two guys who are two of the three members that make up this "think tank". It's basically a summary of these guys' "Linked In" page showing how they really are experts honestly because (as an example) one of them "worked for major investment banks as a Strategist (capital S?)".
But wait a minute.......What the hell is THIS?!?!?!?!......
They've had to add a DISCLAIMER to the bottom of their piece of cutting edge research that proves that NO deal is better than a bad deal. I particularly liked the part that says "Although the information compiled in our research is produced to the best of our ability, its accuracy is not guaranteed. Any persons using Global Britain research or communication material does so solely at their own risk and Global Britain and their publisher shall be under no liability whatsoever in respect thereof.
Why would they have to add such a disclaimer to their articles (in small print that I had to blow up to read)? I'll tell you why. Because IT'S COMPLETE AND TOTAL BOBBINS!
So the Express article claims that EU migrants cost us 30 billion a year, claims an article by this Global Britain as a source, doesn't link to said article. Said article can't be found on the Global Britain site but a quick delve into one of their other "reports" finds a report with no references and a disclaimer which is tantamount to meaning "yeah all this may not actually be true, don't quote us on it".
So there you have it. This is why you lot posting up pro-brexit articles from charlatans like The Express in some kind of quid pro quo attempt to counter the remain sources (most of which have government sponsored reports by experts backing them up) displays your complete lack of critical thinking skills with regards to articles that instantly agree with your point of view. It just takes a few clicks of a mouse and a bit of googling to check these things yet for some reason you DON'T DO IT!
Cognitive Dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling I understand but you really need to get through it. Stop reading this shit and start looking at articles that provide evidence and references for their claims. It's your lack of ability to do this that has us branding you thickos. It's why I have most of you on ignore, the ones that can't think critically are worse than the out and out confessed racists like PPF (who I don't have a problem with and admire his honesty). Most of you others are not only lying to us, you're lying to yourselves as well.
Wake up.
Last edited:
That's interesting because one of my best mates is an assistant director (or some such title) in the NHS and he has to save several hundred thousand a year (I can't remember precise figure). I also do a lot of work with schools and many tell me that the business manager is one of the most important people, especially in multi academy trusts.
It doesn't matter if the individual has discharged him or herself. The debt is due by the individual's government, not the individual himself. But the point is, there is a vast swathe of people who somehow blame the EU (or EU citizens) for using our NHS for free, when this is not the case.
A fantastic post that I fear won't be read by those that need to read it the most. Except maybe Pastafarian who will read it and call you a liar.
However, best post on here for a very long time. I urge the Brexit thickos to give it a read.
nicko31
Well-known member
You can call me a stereotyper but that's the facts for many, the boomers and war babies have had it good and are taking more out than they ever put in, and after being sheltered from the GFC whilst many have suffered, they are now sheltered again against from the consequences of Brexit, at least in the short to medium term
Now I'm not saying I blame this generation for being in such a fortuitous situation, but given the opportunity to vote on something that doesn't really effect them, they should at least be grateful for what you've had, or should have listened to their kids or grand kids what they think.
In the case of my own parents, both myself and my two sisters made our feelings known, none of us wanted out, but they ignored us. One deeply regrets it, the other is starting to
This is an opinion piece but still describes a very possible and very depressing scenario regarding the ECJ.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-brexit-european-union-surrendering-influence
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-brexit-european-union-surrendering-influence
nicko31
Well-known member
The problem is your average Brexiteer thinks the ECJ is the same as the European Court of Human Rights. They think leaving will mean no more Abdul Hamzas
Mental Lental
Well-known member
It's also the opinion of a professor of EU law at Trinity College, Cambridge. A branch of Cambridge University that has produced 32 Nobel prize winners (out of the 91 that've been won by the University in total).
This should therefore carry some weight. But I fear it won't. No I predict some Brexit muppet will come up with a Sun article or something written by a bloke who just barely passed GCSE English and somehow claim that it bears equal weight in the never ending point scoring (or actually failing to score any points at all really if your a Brexiter) black hole this thread has become. It would be nice if we could have a point scoring system that reflects the credibility of the source material. I don't know something like.......
Source from a professor at Cambridge = 10 points.
Source from an article in The Express with no references other than the hack that wrote it = 1 (we'll give you a freebie) point.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,992
what is depressing about a scenario where the ECJ is involved in trade arrangements with the EU? or is this simply about our "influence" on the laws of EU, which we know is diminished since qualified majority voting means all we have is voice, no actual say in those laws.