Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

For Jimmy B and Greek

Dispatches!

If you missed it, have a look.

Interesting:

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/episode-guide/series-72/episode-1

Hi Fred,

Watched it. Must be getting calmer as I get older. Only had steam coming out of my ears a couple of times.
As has been said many times, Tax avoidance is legal, but it shows how hypocritical our rulers are when they continually spout forth about how immorally wrong it is for those who are rich to avoid paying their dues. I have nothing against capitalism, in fact I think it is the only system that can work, it is just that the rich have to be as accountable as everyone else.
I do not blame those who can legally make the system work, I would if I could, but I would not be two faced about it. It is the system itself that is wrong. And of course we know who is in charge of the system.

If we were not so over taxed from when we start work to the day after we die there wouldn't be so much avoidance, and the report's on the waste at the MOD, NHS and in the civil service doesn't help.

Aldwickk,

Totally agree. Most people are not so much annoyed about the amount of tax they pay, as to how it is wasted.
Whenever I read about waste in any area where my tax goes, especially to areas such as to pay for people with massive families, who don't work and live entirely on benefits, in big houses, with multiple bedrooms, I feel that I have worked a fair percentage of my working life to keep these parasites. Why should we get up to go to work, whilst these spongers turn over in bed and go back to sleep.
Several years ago there was a story about an illegal immigrant who had a large family. It gave the total amount that it cost to keep him and his family on benefits and the projected amount over the next ten years. The amount was over 1,000,000. Seems exaggerated, but he had lived here for around 20 years so he would only (sic) have needed to be paid around 33,000 per year for 30 years to reach that amount. This huge amount did not include any NHS cost, education for his many kids etc.
So I worked out that over my working life of 40 years all my tax did not come to the amount to keep just one family, and there are many more such examples.
No wonder most people feel sick to the stomach about where our hard earned money goes.

I think Osborne is doing a good job, in fact if he carries on like this, I'll turn into a fan !.

As bad as the EU.
It appears from todays Telegraph that the house of Commons has lost (no don't laugh this is serious) several documents that show justification of several MP's expenses. Due to this the annual accounts can not be signed off by the auditor. Instead they will be formally 'qualified' which means that they can not be verified to show a 'true and completely fair' account. In other words, these accounts are worthless.
Can you just imagine the action that HMRC would take if they received a tax account from a member of the public that could not be proven.
Still I suppose they did not loose them intentionally and will no doubt be making a thorough in depth search for said papers (look you have to stop treating this as a joke, it's serious I tell you).
And our government has the gaul to criticize the EU for failing to have their accounts pass auditing.
I think it was Robert Mugabe that said a few months ago when he was asked about corruption in his country, 'Yes we are corrupt, but at least we are honest about it'.

G,

"I do not blame those who can legally make the system work".

Part of criminality is due to those committing crimes justifying their actions on what they perceive as "unfairness".

Ie. the "legislators" able to use and "manipulate" the "law" for their to their own benefit, at the expense of those in less privileged positions.

The "said" proposed cut backs, if implemented will produce more social disharmony and "criminality" of one form or another.


It will be interesting to see the effects on "social" services on the middle classes. I don't think the majority realise how much of the "quality" of their lives are dependant on them.

Unnecessary waste is generally wrong, but I wonder how much the "Private sector" has be screwing the "public services" by over charging for their services.

Good business strategy in a society based on capitistalism.

I thought George and Dave were protectors of the Armed Services and "law and order".

Greek will admit the police services should be pruned, personel should work until 67years old and of course their pensions could be reduced to "reasonable" levels. (Not to mention any perks.)

.

Oh dear! The Defence Cuts:

Lots and lots of people, particularly those in our armed forces, are not going to be happy with this.

Ark Royal and Harrier jump jets scrapped immediately
UK to have no working aircraft carrier for a decade
Army to lose 7,000 troops, RAF 5,000 and Navy 4,000
Trident renewal delayed for five years, saving 750m
Cameron insists: 'We'll still be front rank military power' (Hmmm?)
Angry Harrier pilot challenges him about job losses

Two new carriers will be built because penalty clauses in the contracts mean it would be more expensive to scrap one.
But the first carrier will be a 3billion white elephant that will never carry any aircraft and will be mothballed or sold after just three years in service.

The cuts will also see:

The Army lose 7,000 soldiers, more than 100 tanks and 200 armoured vehicles. An armoured brigade will go and the British presence in German will ultimately be withdrawn

The RAF will lose at least 5,000 service personnel and two RAF bases are to close;

Navy warships will fall from 24 to 19 and 4,000 personnel will go. Harrier jump jets are being scrapped next year and no F35 Joint Strike Fighters will replace them until 2015

The cuts have raised questions about Britains ability to defend its interests and provoked anger in Tory ranks that Mr Cameron has bowed to Lib Dem demands to delay Trident. The delay means Britains ageing fleet of Vanguard-class Trident nuclear submarines will have to stay in service longer.
The first submarine is due to go out of service in 2022. But the delay means the first new boat will not enter service until 2028 or 2029.

Former Navy chiefs Admiral Lord West and Admiral Sir Jonathon Band have both warned that the absence of jets on board the carriers would make it impossible to retake the Falklands if the Argentinians chose to invade.
For the next ten years the UK will have just one active carrier, armed with helicopters, with HMS Queen Elizabeth entering service in 2016. That will leave the UK dependent on the French or Americans to help in the event of a new Falklands crisis over the next decade.

In 2019, when the second carrier Prince of Wales arrives, the Queen Elizabeth will be put into extended readiness - military terminology for mothballing - and may even be sold abroad.
The Prince of Wales will also carry just helicopters for a year before the American Joint Strike Fighter jets come into service in 2020.

Special forces will be handed a funding boost to allow the purchase of sophisticated weapons and communications equipment.

Helicopters on a fecking aircraft carrier!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dont usualy get much chance to post on my creation thread here these days but thought I had to mention that.

Even worse Im going to reveal I love the labour party.

A lot think Im from priveledged rich, .................... not so.

I was brought up in a rented private house with my ass hanging out of my trousers and wearing big green gum boots even in summer to school.

My father was a engineering pattern maker a very skilled job but didnt pay that much in them days.

I worked my bollocks off to get to uni and I did and after 6 years and a phd in economics.

But I fear for young kids today, i also went through Thatcher tory cuts and just made it.

I fear that the young uns today wont.

Hope that hasnt upset anyone just my personal take (no matter what your political party is) on whats going on.

cheers GF.

Hi Fred,

Whilst I will not argue that the Police have a very good pension, what is often forgotten is that a Police Officer pays over 11% of their pay packet into their pension pot. Just look at how much less other public servants pay in contributions.
As to working to 67, I feel that this could not be possible as a front line officer for obvious reasons.
I read the other day that some Police Officers had take their pensions, then continued in the same job as civilians. This was stated as if it was wrong, but there is nothing wrong with taking your pension in any job, then continuing past the pension age in the same job. Also there was mention of Officers being paid a minimum of time and a half for at least 4 hours for working on a canceled rest day, even if they only worked for 30 minutes. I wonder how many would give up their rest day to work for less than 4 hours, when it often resulted in a whole day lost. I have been called in on a rest day many times and never for less than 2 hours that I can remember.
I know of Officers that have had their annual holidays canceled due to so called unavoidable duty commitments
It was mentioned that some Officers were claiming this minimum of 4 hours just for taking a phone call on their day off. I don't know abut other forces but my old colleagues never did so as they knew this would back fire, causing other so called perks to stop.
Another so called perk was to be rewarded for specialist posts or for 'dirty jobs', IE decayed bodies.
Most forces do not pay extra for specialist posts and quite right to. As for dirty jobs, no one I knew really wanted this and I myself have dealt with many so called dirty jobs, which I accepted as 'part of the job'. There are many other examples quoted in the media, such as special payments for performance. I only know of this occurring once in my career, and this caused so much resentment it was soon dropped.
So I do fully agree that things should change, especially in the upper ranks, but I have read so much rubbish in the media, being spouted about all the extras Officers get, I urge you not to believe at least half of what you read.
If you want to list so called 'perks I will endeavor to answer them in defense or (and there are a few) condemn them.
Please don't think I am having a go at you, as having read my post a couple of times, it could come over that way, which is not intended.

Note... Pension contributons. The second percentage mentioned is employer contributions

Police
9.5% - 11% (It was 11% for Police Officers)
24.2%
55
14,000

Teacher
6.4%
14.1%
60 or 65
10,000

Military
0%
29.4%
55
8,693


NHS
5% - 8.5%
14%
60 or 65
7,000

Civil servant
1.5% - 3.5%
3% - 18.9%
60 or 65
6,200

Local government
5.5% - 7.5%
13.20%
65
4,044

Greek, sorry mate but Fred is an armchair know - all, knows fuck all wind up merchant. He has these throw away opinions on every subject under the sun, glad you put him right. Far better to just ignore the prick imo.

Hi Chris,

Must admit, he has wound me up in the past, but I will usually answer him once if he post, otherwise we do go round in circles.

Cheers Greek.

GF.

I knew many from similar backgrounds as you seem to have had. Many of them were lucky enough to go to Universities and benefit in a similar way to you.

They were able to do this because of their "ability" and the university grant system, without the fear of acquiring massive debts as a consequence.

The majority of those individuals paid that debt back to society, by choosing to teach, lecture or carry out research, etc., and some by paying higher taxation as related professionals.

In general, they contributed to society and help to oil its functioning.

However, I don't love the labour party, but I love the Conservative party even less.

I respect the altruistic ethos of the Labour party, but not the way it sometime attempts to achieve those ideals.

The Liberal party has been betrayed by its present leadership and is betraying those who voted for it in the recent election.

===========

I have grandchildren and have some fears for their future well being because of disharmony which I think is being engineered unconsciously by the present government.

They will be able to go to university without debt, if they so wish, but that is due to their LUCK in having parents and family who are financially able to provide tha amount of cash to provide for their needs.

============

The proposed reforms to the education financing system are appalling, punitive and retrograde.

============================

Greek.

I was baiting you a little.

But you have to admit you could manage to pay 11% into the pot.

Also the amount paid on top by the State is pretty good.

Many lower earners, if they paid 11% of salary into a pension scheme would have to apply for wealthfare, benefits in order to survive reasonably.


Also, think many in Manual workers are physically worked out by the time they reach 55-60years of age. "Flogging" this group of individuals for another 10 to 12 years does remind me of the Big State. (The USSR)

Not begrudging your retirement, as I am enjoying mine.

But some of you colleagues could be dried out and slimmed down a little and worked for another 10years or so. 8-)

===========================

Anyway this government has "managed" to retain enough Military Force to be able to protect the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands, when its members retire there.

Also, may have a luxury Aircraft Carrier with heli-ports to float them around the West Indies .
=========

By the way, didn't Cameron con the Forces in the lead up to the election.

Always, trust a conman.

Greek - Stand by your statement, he really isn't worth the bother. Cheers Chris :O)

Fred,

I had no augment in paying 11% from my salary and yes the employer contribution was generous. Due to the general population living longer, it is only fair that contributions to all pensions should be paid longer, but as for a Police Officer working the streets at plus 55, it is a no go. I always stayed fairly fit (my nickname was Road Runner) but even at the age of 45, I found the yobs were harder to chase and even harder to arrest if they resisted.
I do agree though that many officers are unfit and over weight.

Greek.

I found some yobs a bit harder, but!

Pensions in some areas of employment were set up as an inducement to get tje "workers".

Ie. low paid Public service areas.

Just asking, if you are not fit enough at 50 to apprehend a 17 year with a grudge. would you be fit enough with "rests" to work as a labourer underground, steel works or areas of heavy engineering.

Those areas are still there.

Not attacking you, but having experienced those areas very happy to have escaped them.

I am trying to point out the complexity of "Fair" policies.

I am glad that as a youth that during vacations I was exposed to many areas of industry and experiences of the "lower" classes.

Also, remember the humour of "Rhondda Grey".

Fred,

Nowhere did I mention that at 50 you are not fit enough to apprehend a yob, although it is increasingly far more difficult as you get older. What I said was, "As to working to 67, I feel that this could not be possible as a front line officer for obvious reasons".
Many physical jobs do not involve chasing after people and tackling them. You can slow down in most physical jobs with not much effect. You slow down as a Police Officer, the bad guys get away more, which is serious, plus you end up with more assault related injuries.

Winston Churchill: I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.