Huguenot

Clearly the EU deals with many macro economic and security issues which may feel a little bit beyond the ordinary Joe, but just from the point of view of the average consumer, here's some of the things the EU does for you.

Well there you go, I proved you wrong. First of all she was voted for in 2009 through proportional representation, and regarding her general electability she was voted into Hereford and Worcester county council first in 1977 and has been ever since. Regarding your complaint about what MEPs do, this is no more or less valid that a complaint about what MPs do in general, so I shan't bore myself in responding to it. Suffice to point out that you obviously don't know, so you should look it up before expressing an opinion to avoid looking silly.

Can you find me a reference to that please UDT? The only report that I can find on public sector pensions from May of this year says nothing of the sort. Instead, by questioning the government's GDP forecasts going forward, it effectively questions whether the governments forcasts on costs are too optimistic. It also suggests that the figures currently put forward are the only ones that meet concerns regarding affordability.

Racial harassment is a different offence to general public order offences for a very good reason. And racial harrassment is not simply expressing an opinion, and not something worthy of defending: what Voltaire actually said was "Not only is it extremely cruel to persecute in this brief life those who do not think the way we do, but I do not know if it might be too presumptuous to declare their eternal damnation." In this respect, the persecutor was the despicable woman abusing the black passengers. Voltaire would have kicked her off, or prosecuted her under part 3 of the public order act, section 18. As for the damage done to the kids in the brief absence of mum, I suspect that this will be more than compensated by her unwillingness to launch into verbal attacks on people for their skin colour in the future.

Just in case there's anyone else out there willing to tell lies to reinforce prejudice... European seats are elected on a proportional representation basis - you don't vote for the candidate, you vote for the party. The votes for this seat were made in 2009, but McIntyre wasn't appointed to an MEP role until all countries had signed the Lisbon treaty which created the roles. Hence this was not only reasonable, but entirely fair and saved money. McIntyre will cost no additional money because it comes out of previously allocated European budgets. The calculation of 2 million per MEP is childish, as it includes the fixed costs and overheads divided by total number of MEPs. Adding an additional MEP does not add 2 million to the bill. Not only this, but the other 18 previously elected and finally appointed MEPs are from other countries, not Britain. So it could not be 36 million to the British taxpayer under any circumstances. I'm only surprised at myself how frustrated I get with people like silverfox telling lies for undisclosed motivations.

Rubbish from the beginning to the end, but hey silverfox, you believe anything that suits you, and nothing that doesn't, so what do you care?

I don't think Britain is ready for closer ties with Europe yet either, and I think the consequences will be very damaging for Britain. Cameron's distancing approach to Europe strangely reveals his anxiety about the economic strength of united Europe. Even though ne wants fewer ties, he wants to remain at the top table in order to prevent the other nations from uniting. It's a silly short sighted strategy, as he can't prevent them forming ties and judging by newspaper reports he's just pissing them off by carping from the sidelines. The only likely outcome is that Britain loses political and economic influence in Europe and the world.

I agree with Delors. I'll say it again Quids, just for you. The Euro has its challenges, we're having one now, but European integration is a critical objective to fight the UK's position in a world of diminishing resources and energy insecurity. The Euro is not dead, and neither are Europeans implacably opposed to it or further integration.

Eh? There's nothing there that says I think public sector pensions should be reduced. You made that up. I said private sector workers are likely to be unimpressed with the demands, that's all. You've made some wild and inappropriate jumps to turn that into reducing public sector pensions. That's like d_c claiming I want to strip workers of their rights. It's an illustration of the weakness of the public sector case that they need to fabricate arguments to knock down.

You're trying to move the goalposts because you've lost the argument Chippy. It's currently quarter to ten on a Saturday night, and I'm sat in front of a training deck... It's not about me, it's about public sector pensions, and whether your union chums will finally fess up and let joe public know what their pension and retirement demands will mean to the moths in their wallets. Remember, in a few years time when there's only two workers for every retiree, each one of them will be paying half the bill for each of these self-righteous ingrates.

I haven't seen a single person claim that public sector pensions should be reduced because private sector ones aren't very good. That's a straw man. People are living longer and there isn't enough in the pot for public sector workers to continue to retire at 60 receive the pensions they do. Full stop. That's it. If they want to receive these unusally substantial benefits they need to increase their payments and retire later, and it's not fair that private sector workers should pay for this through taxation when public sector workers are the benficiary. All the emotional blackmail stuff about how important they are and how difficult their jobs ar is insulting chaff.

Heh heh - I can see what you're doing there taper. If you can't win the argument attack the man eh? Believe it or not taper I'm fiercely proud of Britain, its essential fairness achievements and its society. I'm not the kind of bloke who watches a mugging but say nothing because it doesn't affect me. Are you? What's more, as d_c has pointed out, this is about long term decisions, and what takes place now will be affecting me very personally in the future.

Yay hay! Now taper's going to run with that 'you can't habe an oipinion because you're overseas at the moment' bullshit. Way to go taper - I've never heard that one before!!

I'm not suggesting that anyone follow Stakhanov. The public sector need to be clear that it isn't bankers or the government or Unilever that they're fleecing, it's the tax payer. In simple terms they are simply transferring money from private sector workers to themselves. Fine - go ahead and mug them - but to get all sanctiomnious and self-righteous about it is outrageous. To claim that they need to retire 8 years earlier because either they just don't fancy it or they think they work harder and are more put-upon than private sector workers is insulting. In the real world people are paid because they provide goods and service that other people want, in a highly competitive marketplace. They can't just demand that they get higher salaries or bigger pensions - they have to work for it.

Silly billy Taper - your working day is my evening ;-) When I'm watching 4od the EDF is in the next tab...

Metaphor ;-)

What about Apricocks Green?

That's an offaly good idea. Devilled kidneys

No StraferJack, posts like mine reflect the frustrations of dealing with self righteous public sector workers who are increasingly out of touch with reality and grossly insult the average working man by pretending they're victims whilst stealing from their wallet. As usual you start carping on about bankers. Do you not realise that this is not a war on the bankers, or a war on the government? This is a gross deception, the public sector are involved in a war on the working man. If you misread the tone that's up to you, but it was said in a sense of resigned despair. Starting to 'worry about' me? You jumped up prig. I don't think you'll misunderstand the tone on that. Your claim of 'out of order' is predominantly based upon a changing strategy from claiming money grows on trees to silencing dissenters.

I suspect that LadyD would be 'more equal than others', and be the first to cry 'Fascist!' if she didn't get her way :))

I think it's safe to say that you've entirely missed the point. No better reason to ensure that you don't get too involved in education. :)) Have you not realised yet that the exercise in wearing poppies has nothing to do with wearing poppies? The lesson is not about forcing people to respect the dead?

The bravest animals in the land...

Pugwash, I really don't want you to be offended, but your post is the clearest evidence yet that public sector workers are on another fucking planet. "I get up late and stay late, and IT doesn't always work and there are too few people so I am a public sector martyr". WTF? I mean, really, what do you imagine the real world is really like? Absolutely deluded. Just so you know, I do 80 plus hours a week and haven't had a salary since fucking July because I can't afford to pay both me and my workers. As Chippy pointed out, 59.5% of workers are in companies like mine. You want to retire 7 years early and take money from people like me for your pension because your IT doesn't work and you sometimes stay late?

It's not a race to the bottom - it's perfectly reasonable that those who want early retirement should have it. I don't think it's reasonable that private workers should be taxed to guarantee delivery. That's rude. Save your money, reap the benefits. Don't have a continental holiday, live longer.

No d_c you are still misrepresenting my views. I have limited my opinion to the current pensions dispute and the cost and funding structure for it. I consider the aim of this restructure is to create a fair and equitable solution to the funding crisis. What you are trying to claim is that I'm trying to strip workers of rights and security. If you live longer you need more money that the nation DOES NOT HAVE. This can be mitigated by working longer, by making larger contributions personally, by taxing private sector workers more, or by reducing services in other areas. Instead of addressing this, some fuckwits claim money grows on trees, there is no crisis and that they just don't care because they 'don't fancy it'. Your aggressive binary perspective is both incorrect and destructive. You seem incapable of recognising this as simply trying to balance the books. All the emotional chaff about botty wiping being thrown into the air around it is simply bollocks. Botty wiping won't solve the maths.