Huguenot

Just to add - it's very unlikely that the rules of engagement were literally nailed into your head, otherwise you'd have nails in your head. If you've had the misfortune of encountering an IED this is plausible, but I'll bet they don't have the rules of engagement on them.

acm, you clearly feel very strongly about this - which I respect. Just don't try and use a bunch of idiots in an extremist faction as some flag waving exercise for 'justice'. These guys are clearly prats exercising a bizarre PR stunt in a country that has no respect for human rights.

Everyone's being very nice - and if they weren't then I wouldn't be able to say this, but... It sounds like a protest, a defence mechanism. When you meet people do you say things like "Ooooh look at you , you big fat bitch, bet you like a Mars bar?" People are being too black and white when they talk about being 'two-faced'. We all have a gap between the way we like to think about ourselves and the way we actually are. This gap is a very personal space, and within it we are at our most vulnerable. Invading this space is nothing to be proud of, not only is it insensitive, but it's going to end up with a 'barrier' response that is usually a personal attack. I suspect that 'You're very natural aren't you?' is actually an attempt to cut you down to size and dismiss you because you've unwittingly hurt someone. If you don't like to hear it, then you need to try and be a little bit more sensitive to the 'gap' without losing what it is that makes you great :))

No, I don't think that could be the same reason - it sounds more like you've got some sort of connection problem, or a failsafe kicking in.

"I don't want to be in the classroom until I'm 68" Well that's kind of the issue in a nutshell sophiesofa - you just don't fancy it do you? You'd far prefer that every other b*stard out there works themselves to the bone so you can have a nice early freebie ;-) Stike if you must, but don't expect any sympathy from private sector workers when you're striking because you just don't fancy working, and you'd prefer they paid you for it. Pugwash - you just don't get it do you? "I and my colleagues have good salaries, but under the new proposals will need to pay another ?1000 plus per year and get a lower pension." The point is that the money has to come from somewhere - what you're saying is that YOU don't want to pay it, so you'd prefer a private sector worker pays it for you. You are quite simply taking ?1000 out of their pocket and putting it in yours whilst saying 'I have a really hard life, me'. You can get as self-righteous as you like about how put upon you are. The reality is you're using that as justification for taking money from someone else.

Ah, Thomas - it sounds like you're looking for a little coaching? Here's what Dale Carnegie thought to be the best strategies (and look at how it contrasts with your pushy deceptions and manipulations)... Fundamental Techniques in Handling People Don't criticize, condemn, or complain. Give honest and sincere appreciation. Arouse in the other person an eager want. Six Ways to Make People Like You Become genuinely interested in other people. Smile. Remember that a person's name is, to that person, the sweetest and most important sound in any language. Be a good listener. Encourage others to talk about themselves. Talk in terms of the other person's interest. Make the other person feel important ? and do it sincerely. Twelve Ways to Win People to Your Way of Thinking The only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it. Show respect for the other person's opinions. Never say "You're Wrong." If you're wrong, admit it quickly and emphatically. Begin in a friendly way. Start with questions to which the other person will answer yes. Let the other person do a great deal of the talking. Let the other person feel the idea is his or hers. Try honestly to see things from the other person's point of view. Be sympathetic with the other person's ideas and desires. Appeal to the nobler motives. Dramatize your ideas. Throw down a challenge. Be a Leader: How to Change People Without Giving Offense or Arousing Resentment Begin with praise and honest appreciation. Call attention to people's mistakes indirectly. Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person. Ask questions instead of giving direct orders. Let the other person save face. Praise every improvement. Give the other person a fine reputation to live up to. Use encouragement. Make the fault seem easy to correct. Make the other person happy about doing what you suggest.

"Their pensions are agreed as part of their contracts/terms and conditions" A few people have said this, but I'm not sure it's true. In private sector contracts, the agreement will be to 'take part in the pension scheme', but not specify what the nature of that scheme is. I suspect that public sector is the same, otherwise we'd be seeing legal action, not strike action. So the strike is about a change in expectations, not contracts.

Since lebara only registered on the 18th November and has only posted 6 times, we must assume that to know of that issue s/he is guilty of the no lesser crime of multiple usernames. But it doesn't cause me any rage. :))

Okay here's the latest figures: 450,000 teachers in state schools in the UK, of which 6,300 are over the age of 60. Happy now? ;-)

Of Keef, come off it. The data on teachers working post 60 is in the graph at the bottom of page 2. The law for teachers retirement age only changed for NEW teachers in 2007, when the retirement age changed to 65. This hasn't had time to have any sort of impact. Are you trying to suggest that suddenly in the boom period of the first decade of the 20th century teachers all suddenly started working until they were 65? I come from a family of headteachers from 3 generations. My entire family life revolves around teachers. They nearly all retire at 60.

If you're suggesting that the Labour Party is Daily Mail, taper, then that's the only way you'd be right.

If you've not met them Keef it's probably because they've retired. There are virtually no teachers who continue working after the age of 60.

From TV licensing... "You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder." "No TV Licence is needed if you don't use any of these devices to watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV - for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs or play video games, or you only watch programmes on your computer after they have been shown on TV."

I'm thinking by 'for many people in the private sector it's bonanza time' you actually mean for a tiny minority? But either way that's doing the same thing as d_c does when he tries to reposition this strike as an anti-government one - effectively you're trying to position this strike as an anti-banker one. I don't think it's reasonable to accept either premise.

Commercial monitors...

Public sector employees in general don't generate any tax revenue because their original salary was tax revenue - all they're doing is recycling it. So in effect it's the private sector taxpayers who are paying public sector workers. Private sector taxpayers should be able to rely on the government to spend their money wisely. If the government is using the revenue to give perks to public sector workers that they cannot have themselves (*Bob*'s wellies for the piss puddles) then it's manifestly unfair.

What, you mean in the sense that if you buy a jar of Marmite you're paying the salaries of a Unilever employee? Yes, in that sense, but you have the choice to make the purchase dependent on need and value. Private sector taxpayers don't have any such choice, and they should be able to rely on the government to make sure they're get a fair deal on public sector employees.

I don't understand your question the-e-dealer? Chippy Minton those figures are distorted by the length of time the employee was in the public sector. Typically public sector pensions pay 2/3 of full final salary for a complete career. This obviously doesn't mean that this can be claimed by people who suddenly move into teaching at the age of 59. So the 'average' comes down

Of course I was being selective d_c: I was proving that the OBR doesn't uniformly hold up your assertions. ;-) "In fact, it will be the biggest since the general strike of 1926. Not exacly a "pervading feeling" I would argue." It's interesting to note that the General Strike of 1926 achieved absolutely nothing. It's also noteworthy that the General Strike was also campaigning to keep unsustainable job numbers and perks (in that case in the mining industry). All it demonstrates is the capacity of the average public sector worker to deny the crisis and refuse to restructure to meet changing conditions.

:))Ha ha - the 3 million on strike are in the public sector!! That's not a reflection of private sector concerns. That survey likewise - they didn't give any indication about whether they filtered out public sector workers. It's meaningless.

"God knows why you can't by a TV that has no reciever, just can be plugged into DVD/digital players for films etc which you own already. Maybe it does exist, if so let me know, would help avoid paying for tv licence." Just get a monitor with an hdmi input

You've never met a retired teacher?

A deal with the last government? That'll be before the meltdown and collapse of government revenue then? The strikes aren't just about a 'little bit of money' - they're also about the fact that public sector workers are retiring at 60 when everyone else has to work to 66. This is a system created for the life expectancy of the 1940s - not the 21st century. To try and justify the clearly unsustainable expenditure on forecasts for 2061?!??!? I'vew never heard anything so ludicrous. We can't get our forecasts right for the next 3 months, and between now and 2061 you've got Peak Oil and catastrophic climate change to deal with. I see david_carnell's pushing the old 'blame it on the government' line as predicted. ;-) The government doesn't have any money - it's the taxpayers money. Selectively quoting the Office of Budget Responsibility is also disingenuous. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has actually suggested that the gap between contributions and pensions in payment would double over the next four years to ?9bn. That's an extra ?4.5bn we don't have - so it means cutting other public services or increasing taxation. Increasing taxation so that public sector workers can get off work 6 years early. Saying the government should offer better terms on private sector pensions is typical of these kind of arguments - the money doesn't exist, it's just taking more in tax from the taxpayer adding an administration fee and handing back again. Suggesting that we solve the expenditure crisis by increasing payments to private sector workers is nonsensical. The appropriate solution is to stop public sector pensions altogether, and offer public sector the same opportunity as everyone else - stakeholder equivalent pensions that they can top up if they want more.

Since that's manifestly a claim of considerable (and insulting) fiction, I assume you don't get a fook for some other reason: UK - 8.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide per head per year. US - 17.5 China - 5.3 India - 1.4 Vietnam - 1.3 Somalia - 0.1

Unfortunately your experience, whilst great for you, doesn't reflect reality. Lord Hutton's independent report in March demonstrated that the argument that public sector workers receive less is a myth. It's a persistent myth that reflects public sector workers sense of entitlement.