Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Travel] Virgin Atlantic to cut 3,000 jobs and quit Gatwick



Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,530
The arse end of Hangleton
No. Part of the parents allowance would move to the childrens.

I have an inheritance that is set a side for my retirement.

Don’t need to worry about pensions.

So you're OK so sod everyone else ? Obviously I'm assuming here, but it's a tad hypocritical to punish those with children when you will be OK in retirement exactly because your parents had you.

Maybe take it a step further - people who cohabit, either married or not, only get one persons allowance ?
 




ATFC Seagull

Aberystwyth Town FC
Jul 27, 2004
5,359
(North) Portslade
Maybe my understanding of the population demographics is wrong - but we do need people to have SOME children, don't we? I.e. to defend the country, provide medical care, prevent crime, grow food, provide entertainment - or to generate wealth to pay for those that do those jobs. Unless you are one of those people that actually believe we should allow the human race to die out quickly.

I would argue parents make huge sacrifices anyway (financially and other - I would imagine on average people with kids already travel a HUGE amount less than those that do not), why penalise them further?
 


Icy Gull

Back on the rollercoaster
Jul 5, 2003
72,015
After this is over airlines will be completely in the driving seat

That FOC name change? Now £100 - there will be no GOGW anymore.

You want us to fly to Barbados? The fees doubled for the local government.

Less comp more monopoly.

Be interesting to see how airlines react towards travel agents once this is over. Will there still be the same desire to drive everything online with useless call centres or will they actually decide to use travel agents knowledge and expertise to rebuild rather than try and squeeze them out of the loop as they have been doing for years now.
 


worthingseagull123

Well-known member
May 5, 2012
2,688
So you're OK so sod everyone else ? Obviously I'm assuming here, but it's a tad hypocritical to punish those with children when you will be OK in retirement exactly because your parents had you.

Having kids is basically saying sod everyone else.

People have know for decades about the population explosion.

People need to be rewarded for not having children, and what better way than not restricting carbon usage for the childless?

It is the fairest way to do things.
 


Weststander

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2011
69,399
Withdean area
We all seem to think we are in this protective bubble because of TB (m|b)illions but are we really? I'm not suggesting for a second anything underhand is going to happen and I'm eternally grateful to that man for every single penny he has put in but if your so called safe hands in certain verticals are in danger over this are we in a position to be so laid back about the predicament of football in general but also much closer to home?

I’ll with TB and PB on this. Never nonchalantly crossing my mind that “Ah well, just an additional and unexpected £40m loss, TB will cover it”. Why should he, when they might be able to work a solution with the broadcasters? It’s a big business, not a charity for our benefit.
 




Arthur

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
8,762
Buxted Harbour
And they of course would be employer credits to go and play Ruskyteam so the trip to Dubai could be fine.

Do flights that are taken from your employer credit pollute less than personal ones?

I assume that your allowance is based on your profession as well? Pure hypothetical of course but lets say you are Lewis Dunk, you play for Brighton therefore your business travel is limited to this country as a rule of thumb so you get 50 credits. But then Manchester United come and buy you who go on to get to a European final and then off the back of that you get an England call up. Could said person potentially not be allowed to play football because they've used up all of their credits?
 


Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,530
The arse end of Hangleton
Having kids is basically saying sod everyone else.

People have know for decades about the population explosion.

People need to be rewarded for not having children, and what better way than not restricting carbon usage for the childless?

It is the fairest way to do things.

You've yet to answer how pensions will be paid ( obviously for those of us not hoping for a parents to die and leave us loads of money ) ?
 


worthingseagull123

Well-known member
May 5, 2012
2,688
You've yet to answer how pensions will be paid ( obviously for those of us not hoping for a parents to die and leave us loads of money ) ?

Additional taxation.

Most of us will be working less in the future as automation kicks in.

I assume though after reading the Guardian article you agree with me that the greenest thing to do is not have children and therefore those that do not have children, should get larger carbon allowances?
 




Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,530
The arse end of Hangleton
Do flights that are taken from your employer credit pollute less than personal ones?

I assume that your allowance is based on your profession as well? Pure hypothetical of course but lets say you are Lewis Dunk, you play for Brighton therefore your business travel is limited to this country as a rule of thumb so you get 50 credits. But then Manchester United come and buy you who go on to get to a European final and then off the back of that you get an England call up. Could said person potentially not be allowed to play football because they've used up all of their credits?

No, of course they don't pollute less. IMHO it would somewhat harsh to expect individuals to use their own allowance for business reasons. So in your example, Man Utd would have to make sure they had enough credits left to take their employees to the European final and for the FA to ensure they had enough credits to get the England team to wherever they needed to go.
 


Weststander

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2011
69,399
Withdean area
Be interesting to see how airlines react towards travel agents once this is over. Will there still be the same desire to drive everything online with useless call centres or will they actually decide to use travel agents knowledge and expertise to rebuild rather than try and squeeze them out of the loop as they have been doing for years now.

I’ve friends/clients who’ve loyally used the same firm of travel agents (somewhere in the SE, I can’t remember where) for many years. With several holidays and travel arrangements for 2020 cancelled due to covid-19, they found the travel agents customer service incredible. Receiving almost straight away, full refunds for all the cancelled holidays and flights. They said it was a lesson in loyalty, relieved that they hadn’t gone for the ‘cheapest’ option by booking direct.
 


Beach Seagull

New member
Jan 2, 2010
1,310
It's a massive blow for Gatwick Airport and their staff as it is hard to see this recovering for a very long time.

However it may well prove the right thing for the environment and our planet. Nature finds a way.

Yes I'm sure 'nature finding it's way' must be a huge comfort to those in the travel industry who have lost their jobs in it. I'm sure tonight the conversation is 'well we've no income coming in, we are going to have to sell up and make other huge sacrifices to out standard of living but hey look out of the window and smell the environmental benefits' .
 




Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,530
The arse end of Hangleton
Additional taxation.

Most of us will be working less in the future as automation kicks in.

Hang on, so you suggest we will be working less thus lowering the tax take. Yet in the same post you suggest increasing taxation thus making people poorer and even more so because they will also be working less. Even if an increase in taxation did allow the state pension to be paid how does that cover company pensions ?

I assume though after reading the Guardian article you agree with me that the greenest thing to do is not have children and therefore those that do not have children, should get larger carbon allowances?

I accept having children is not a 'green' activity but I don't accept that children, that we as a race do actually need, should not get their own carbon allowance. I assume you'd be happy for the human race to die out ? And just to be clear, YOU need children to pay for you in your old age whether you like it or not.
 


Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patron
Jul 16, 2003
58,794
hassocks
Be interesting to see how airlines react towards travel agents once this is over. Will there still be the same desire to drive everything online with useless call centres or will they actually decide to use travel agents knowledge and expertise to rebuild rather than try and squeeze them out of the loop as they have been doing for years now.

I never understood why vhols stopped using TA, mind blowing.

They are only cutting 7 retail
Shops so unlikely the process will
Change
 


worthingseagull123

Well-known member
May 5, 2012
2,688
Hang on, so you suggest we will be working less thus lowering the tax take. Yet in the same post you suggest increasing taxation thus making people poorer and even more so because they will also be working less. Even if an increase in taxation did allow the state pension to be paid how does that cover company pensions ?



I accept having children is not a 'green' activity but I don't accept that children, that we as a race do actually need, should not get their own carbon allowance. I assume you'd be happy for the human race to die out ? And just to be clear, YOU need children to pay for you in your old age whether you like it or not.

I never said people should not have children. I’ve said those that chose not to should get additional rewards with carbon allowances. It is their own choice whether to have kids or not.

I also said that when people have children, part of the individual carbon allowance goes to their child.

I could add that when the child reaches 18, they would get a full carbon allowance that will only reduce if they chose to have children.

But it the greenest thing is to not have children, then that is where attention is needed first.
 




Guinness Boy

Tofu eating wokerati
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Jul 23, 2003
37,384
Up and Coming Sunny Portslade
Look at the figures in the article.

Why should the childless be expected to sacrifice because breeders have to have children?

Good luck getting your state and, if you have one, company pension. They both require something like a 5:1 quota of people paying in to people being paid a pension thus meaning each generation needs to be bigger.

I agree the childless in this country should be rewarded


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Japan's labour market and pensions system is in severe trouble due to its aging population. So if you want to earn less and work until you're 80...

https://thediplomat.com/2019/11/how-does-japans-aging-society-affect-its-economy/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...l-80-ageing-population-pensions-a7132331.html
 


worthingseagull123

Well-known member
May 5, 2012
2,688


LlcoolJ

Mama said knock you out.
Oct 14, 2009
12,982
Sheffield
Additional taxation.

Most of us will be working less in the future as automation kicks in.

I assume though after reading the Guardian article you agree with me that the greenest thing to do is not have children and therefore those that do not have children, should get larger carbon allowances?

I'm really trying to #benice but I just can't let your tirade of absolute nonsense on this thread go without saying....... I disagree.

One newspaper article has shaped your entire view of the World? Probably not a good idea.

Pensions, you've not answered that question, just said "well I've got a load of cash that I received for doing nothing so I don't care". Which is at the more "offensive and ignorant" end of the spectrum regarding posts I've seen on here. Perhaps you're just on a wind up, whatever.

I guess your end game scenario is that you live comfortably off your non earned income and the human race then ceases to exist.

Nice.
 


worthingseagull123

Well-known member
May 5, 2012
2,688
I'm really trying to #benice but I just can't let your tirade of absolute nonsense on this thread go without saying....... I disagree.

One newspaper article has shaped your entire view of the World? Probably not a good idea.

Pensions, you've not answered that question, just said "well I've got a load of cash that I received for doing nothing so I don't care". Which is at the more "offensive and ignorant" end of the spectrum regarding posts I've seen on here. Perhaps you're just on a wind up, whatever.

I guess your end game scenario is that you live comfortably off your non earned income and the human race then ceases to exist.

Nice.

I have addressed the pension situation. As more automation comes in, we will have to increase taxes to cover things like pensions.

https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2019/03/how-family-size-shapes-your-carbon-footprint/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...-to-cut-a-person-s-carbon-footprint-1.5090786

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/201...tprint-one-government-isn-t-telling-you-about


Lots of other sources for you to learn about the subject matter.

If you need any more, let me know. Or use Google???
 




Arthur

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2003
8,762
Buxted Harbour
So in your example, Man Utd would have to make sure they had enough credits left to take their employees to the European final and for the FA to ensure they had enough credits to get the England team to wherever they needed to go.

But the same individual is an employee of Manchester United and an England player. Lets say United to get the final of a European competition the same year as a world cup. The player has enough credits to do one or the other. Who wins? No one is the answer.

You could have a European final between two youth teams or more likely a world cup with a second rate national side.
 


Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,530
The arse end of Hangleton
I have addressed the pension situation. As more automation comes in, we will have to increase taxes to cover things like pensions.

https://www.yaleclimateconnections.org/2019/03/how-family-size-shapes-your-carbon-footprint/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...-to-cut-a-person-s-carbon-footprint-1.5090786

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/201...tprint-one-government-isn-t-telling-you-about


Lots of other sources for you to learn about the subject matter.

If you need any more, let me know. Or use Google???

You seem to have missed post #72 entirely.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here