howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#21
i have very little time for the old "big unions" with their arrogance, all rather similar to the bullies in big business and government.
closed shops were no different to emlployers ruling with no voice to the workers.
whilst the tory government and the unions were doing battle, the average worker suffered and other more enlightened economies moved ahead.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#22
uniions love them or hate them,they are still needed to sort out big bully boys of employers and allso to point the way for hm goverment.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#23
I always find it funny all those professional classes damning trade unions yet belonging to professional associations , such as the Institute of Chartered Accountants or BMA etc, which at the end of the day are nothing more than trade unions.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#24
let us not forget the institute of directors, the confederation of british industry.
most members are also freemasons, that is true militancy.
#25
Barry you make a really good point. I hate hearing that dumb old argument that "if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear" but why does that make it okay for governments to spy on us 24/7/365? Simple answer, it doesn't. If you are law-abiding and have nothing to hide then you should not be on their intrusive surveillance radars. It seems to me that ALL government plots to undermine our freedoms are sold to the masses on the grounds of "security" and frankly I find it all a load of bull.
If you remember, Hitler took control of Germany through a series of aggressive actions such as the Beer Hall Putsch, the rise of the Brownshirts, and then forced through the Enabling Act to grant himself full Plenary power. We'd never stand for that these days, would we? So instead we are led to sleepwalk into a similar state by being sold lies and propaganda based on common fears and security issues.
It's all too common that governments like to keep us scared (and the threat of terrorism is a great one for that at the moment) so that they can introduce these seemingly noble ideas which in reality do nothing but erode basic freedoms. It's the oldest trick in the book. Create a "fear" and then introduce a "solution". Jeez, it's a common sales trick! Like when sales reps make you afraid of fire in order to sell you a new alarm system.
It is all getting very out of hand, and although I have nothing to hide I do NOT want my life being scrutinized by unknown persons in high positions of authority just in case I might one day commit a crime. I don't want my DNA in a database, I don't want every little detail about my life in their database, I don't want my text messages and emails to be traced by them, I don't want to have to carry an ID card, and I am sick to death of being filmed every effing place I go!
For those of you who don't seem to mind all this, let me ask you a question - would you object if a couple of policemen forced their way into your house and observed everything you did for a couple of days? The surveillance society is pretty much the same sort of thing. And I for one am sick to death of being part of their bloody human zoo!
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#26
Rick, I do and always have objected strongly to the erosion of our freedoms by successive governments in the guise of solutions to grossly over-hyped problems, whether this was the public order act that threatened the freedom of association in a public place through to the continued extensions of the (temporary measure) anti-terrorism acts.
There are many more than adequate laws on our statute books to deal with all the imagined problems flagged up by various governments over the last 40-50 years, it just appears that the criminal justice system and local and national authorities have been too lazy, or inept to utilise them and ask and grant new laws to "make it easier" ignoring the impact this has on the decent law abiding majority.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#27
The professional bodies are very differrent to Trade Unions Ross. The BMA has a regulatory role as do many other of these bodies. Also the membership is often self-employed or partners/aspiring partners in their firms. They are not going to go on strike and take other irresponsible industrial action.
#28
Industrial action is not de facto irresponsible!! Sometimes the absolute reverse is the case.
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#29
No they are not Barry they are self interest groups that protect their members rights and earning powers, often even being their own "police, judge and jury" and accreditation body. The other things you mention are roles they carved out for themselves over the course of many years, operating closed shops through their right to award accreditation, maintaining wage rates through competitive exam pass levels etc. etc. Oh and I can guarantee if they were subject to the attacks on their industry/livelihood they too would withdraw their labour/services either through direct action or indirect action (i.e. by leaving the industry or the country)
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#30
or both.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#31
barry
professionals do not go on strike?
tell that to the people that cannot get nhs dental treatment.
it must be remembered that tax payers money funds doctors and dentists, whilst they qualify.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#32
The problem here were the changes to the dentists NHS contracts. Many dentists left the NHS to do private work only, including mine, because of those changes. Hardly a strike, they have not withheld their labour, they are just charging the going rate for it. If you are willing to pay the price you can still access dental treatment.
Incidentally, in these days of tuition fees and students piling up huge debt these arguments about NHS payinmg for training no longer stand up. Besides I am not only paying for my private unsubsidised dental treatment I am also paying for private medical insurance and income tax at 40% on the money I earn to fund this. I should at least get tax relief on that cash.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#33
barryw,so now your reaping the benifits of toryism with no tax relief,tough you will have to grin and bear it like everybody else.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#34
Ah Brian, if only I and everyone else were reaping the 'benefits of Toryism' as you put it, we would all be much, much better off
Guest 643- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,321
#35
Rick -
With you totally in everything your post says. It's good to have you back on the forum because you really are with it when it comes to seeing the other side of things. I will admit that I was one of those "I have nothing to hide" people but not any more. You've made me think and change my mind. It makes me wonder how many other people would change their minds over a lot of things if they took the time to think of the alternatives in life. Maybe we as a nation are getting too lazy and just accept things without thinking because it's easier than arguing.
Well done Rick - we need a voice like yours on this forum.
There's always a little truth behind every "Just kidding", a little emotion behind every "I don't care" and a little pain behind every "I'm ok".
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#36
barryw,yes everybody will be out of pocket,the dead and dieing will be lying in the streets,people with rotting teath,allso people being denied basic health care because they wont be able to afford it,so much for torisam.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#37
Brian, it was 1978 under Labour that the dead were left unburied....
Seriously, that is a pretty daft comment above. Point to any policy that suggests people will have to pay for health care at the point of use, you simply cant and even Mrs T never even dreamt of anything like what you say. If you are going to go into battle over politics why not do so regarding facts and real issues instead of making up your own stories?
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#38
barryw,1948 when the nhs started a labour idea the torys denouced it as folly and voted against but they were out voted,persciption charges came about,torys made cut backs to make pay as you go more attactive because you could get seen and treated faster than nhs.need i go on anymore.
Guest 670- Registered: 23 Apr 2008
- Posts: 573
#39
Barry whether you like it or not even you cannot opt out of the NHS just because you have private medical insurance.
You would need an NHS ambulance if you collapsed in the street, a NHS hospital to diagnose your condition and possibly NHS drugs to keep you alive until you reach your BUPA hospital.
Finally having found out that you could have had the problem for years, your friendly BUPA hospital will kick you back to the NHS because the not so friendly insurance company declines payment.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#40
Dave - I have never suggested opting out of the NHS for exactly the reasons you mention. I think you are mixing this up with a semi-serious comment made by someone else. I have said that those who reduce the burden on the NHS through PMI should be entitled to tax relief on their premiums. This may well encourage more people to take out PMI and in so doing further reduce the burden. This tax relief would not be anywhere near the equivilent to the amount of our tax that goes towards the NHS, PMI holders would still be significant net contributors.
Brian - might I remind you that the NHS resulted from a report by William Beveridge (a Liberal) commissioned in 1941 by the Churchill wartime Government, a Conservative PM. This was supported by many Conservatives and no Conservative Government since has suggested that we move away from the key principal of healthcare for all free at the point of demand.
However much Conservatives believe we need to reform the NHS, and it really does need reform, there is still no suggestion that this key principal be abandoned.