howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#2
I did not bother reading the article from the link as I thought everybody believes they are underpaid, I know I used to when I worked.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#3
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
#4
They are well deserving of your votes
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
you're a hard hearted lot on here i was bereft after reading of their plight.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#6
well overpaid lot they be
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#7
The difference between Trade Union General Secs and politicians is that as a union member I can directly influence the decisions about the salary my GS gets paid. Unfortunately as a tax payer I have zero influence on what my MP gets paid.
"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
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#8
if your a union member thats true ross
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#9
I don't think so Ross. Try standing up at a union meeting and telling all the bruvvers that Bob Crowe is being paid too much. Your'd be lucky to leave the room with your shirt.
You might think you have that power but you certainly do not otherwise these union barons wouldn't be paid the salary they have.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#10
yep tough,but every one else has to live on what we get handed out,every week/month or whatever.
Guest 774- Registered: 1 Oct 2012
- Posts: 498
#11
£65,000 and they want an increase of £31,000? Jesus, I'm still trying to reach £20,000...
"If it ain't broke, fix it til it is."
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#12
let's not forget the job requires no qualifications.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
#13
I was amazed recently to be told how many councillors Dover has, god only knows what these people do and why we fund them.
From the bottom to the top we have far too many politicians, when parliament goes into recess nothing changes. Make MPs part time, halve their salary and they can meet once a month to have their futile arguments at our expense.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#14
I would far rather make the job of MP entirely full-time, as I would do away the HoL's there would be much more real work for them to do.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
#15
I wouldn't do away with the Lords, they act as a buffer to our stupid, egotistical MPs, but we only need 100 or so.
I'd like to interview a number of MPs after their 5 year term and say:
What have you achieved for your constituency?
For the vast majority the reality is - nothing.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#16
You have fallen for the oldest trick in the book David with your admiration of the old 'duffers' rather than buffers.
And in any case we have (you and I, this very morning) done away with Party poodles.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
#17
Admiration?
Most Lords have achieved something in life, most MPs haven't. In every society in the world communities defer to elders for advice, thats how I see the Lords. We have too many but I'd hate a situation where MPs have no jurisdiction.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#18
I am not against drawing from the pool of expertise we have in the UK. I would instigate far more investigation through committees, boards of enquiry etc. Prof this and that, retired moguls and the 'experienced' from any and all walks of life BUT the HoL's has to go!
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
#19
Why does it have to go?
It seems to me you approve of elders passing on advice and experience, you just don't want to call them Lords.
Bit pedantic to me Tom, theres very few hereditary peers left which is a shame, its the "modern" ones that get sent to jail.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#20
Well David, let's not get too excited. There is no earthly reason why we should see eye to eye on everything.
The hierarchy to which you allude carries with it the answer to just which gets to go to prison. That the law acts against this one and not that is part and parcel of an hereditary hierarchy.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
