david_carnell

The problem is that the Harrier is a 40 year old airframe that against a state with a decent air force would be crucified. It's ok in Iraq and Afghanistan but against Russia, China, even modern day Argentina, it would be found lacking. We need the F35C and quickly. I wonder if the RAF will get the F35C too now or will still try and ask for the STOVL variant? Santerme? Mamora Man? Any thoughts?

Explains a lot.

What field of work was this MM? Emergency services? I'd rather not have firefighters working 14 days solid if it's ok by you. That would seem to produce rather tired fire fighters. But no one has answered me why we all have to be dragged down to have equally poor pay and conditions in the workplace? Instead of looking at a group of workers and saying "I wish my work offered that - how can I get that too?" instead we hear "I'm jealous - disgraceful - ensure we are all equally screwed by our employers". It seems absurd.

Except Unite/Unison/FBU don't blame private sector workers at all. As a union member myself I have nothing but sympathy for my "brothers and sisters" who suffer the indignity of lack of pension cover or poor employment conditions. But if you think that somehow that means I'm not going to fight for mine you're sorely mistaken. The constant battering against the left is of "dumbing down" - try and lift a section of society up and look what happens. Don't like your lot? Join a union and make a difference again. Fed up with the cushy deal public sector workers get due to union membership? Join a union. But don't criticise those that have.

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > All public sector services are going to have to > make cuts...and they all are going to fight tooth > and nail over them. Whilst I symapthise with > anyone facing a job loss, like Pearson says, > public sector workers are afforded benefits and > employment protections that the vast majoirity of > private sector workers don't have. Ask any private > sector worker when they last got a pay rise for > example..year on year rises just don't exist for > them. It would appear that the LFB have taken a pay cut and had their pay frozen according to the OP. So they're no better off than the private sector. And I've never understood this argument - whenever the public sector workers complain everyone says, "moan moan moan we don't get the perks you do yadda yadda pay rises etc etc" Firstly, pay in the public sector is below it's private sector equivalent. And secondly, and most importantly, why is that the fault of the public sector? Why not start questioning the type of contracts you're getting in the private sector and demanding better. Collective negotiation often works wonders. Ask a trade unionist.

Made me smile Bob. Good work.

randombloke Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Old saying I heard in the Army whilst at Sandhurst > in 1980: > > When Jerry was shooting the Tommies ducked; > > When the Tommies were shooting the Jerries > ducked; > > When the Yanks were shooting everybody ducked. > > One wonders if it still holds true? > > Suffice to say that all the American Forces I saw > were too gung ho for words. > They may well be professional now, but having met > a recently retired US Army Colonel a couple of > years ago who insisted the Gherkin was a Torpedo, > ("Well if you ask a taxi driver to take you to the > Torpedo, he'll look at you like you are an idiot, > it's called the Gherkin", "It looks like a Torpedo > I'll call it that")(whispered aside to partner > "Jesus I'd have had to salute you when I was in, > you total @#$%&, you may be a higher rank but you > would never be my superior officer"), I doubt much > has changed. She told another friend her new job > with the US Govt was highly classified, so much so > that she didn't have an address just a grid > reference for her new office. "Oh" said friend, > "what do you put that under in your Sat Nav then? > "Highly secret base?" She failed to see the irony. Whilst it is easy to blame the Americans for being, well, American.... it is both unfair and innaccurate to describe the US Special Forces as anything other than highly professional and exceptional at their jobs. The behaviour and training of the US regular forces may leave something to be desired by the US Navy SEAL team (as in this rescue) or DELTA Force are very much the equal of anything Britain can offer. The constant fawning over the SAS/SBS by the tabloid press ignores their historical mishaps and failings. It may well be the case that in this particular instance, one soldier has made an error of judgement and an innocent woman has died but to tar large numbers of professional soldiers with the brush of ineptitude because of it is innappropriate.

Weegee - you'll be referring to the building currently housing Casa Smerelda approaching Nunhead. It's also been known as: Page 2 The Village Inn but on the night we went, and I agree the food was amazing for a short period, it was known as The Duke. I think it was once something else too but before my time in the area. Beautiful old building - shit location. Aaaaaanyway.....yep, I'm up for one last hurrah. I've been to a few forum drinks over the years but not for a while so this sounds a top idea.

I won't be happy until ED coffee houses are serving caffe corretto with gusto. Perfect hangover cure. Or cause.

I would imagine because these may be, academically, very good schools achieving good results. Yet due to ones beliefs, or lack of them, parents and their children are actively discriminated against. As Dawkins says, there is no such thing as a Christian or a Muslim child. Merely a child with Christian or Muslim parents who hasn't been allowed to think for themselves.

Can't we all just pop over once the kids are asleep, Quids? I'll even bring some manky stella for you as well as some proper beer. We can get drunk, set the world to rights and predict the price of your house this time next year!

With that sort of knowledge Damian, you'll be on their target list.

Apologies. I've edited that. But the rest of the SpeakYourBrains nonsense you're spouting is still just that....nonsense.

Agreed. But it's Friday and I'm past caring.

Ridgley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > All I am saying if you are a terrorists, you > should be deported as well as any illegal > immigrants but that is not how the system works it > seem to favour terrorist to stay in the country > but an illegal immigrant does no have the same > treatment why? Ridgley, I say this whilst trying not to offend....but WTF are you on about? Do you even know what you're talking about or just open your mouth and let stuff spew out? We jail terrorists. We try and deport those who shouldn't be here. The system isn't perfect and sometimes, I imagine, mistakes are made. But unless you have evidence of mass waves of suicide bombers wandering the streets of Peckham, browsing the large selection of yams for sale, then try and post something that makes sense.

Quick, Sean, post the opening intro to Idiocracy.....the poor.....they're breeding....AND FAST!

Will Young is a deep-cover Al-Qaida operative. FACT.

What do you want to discuss.....terrorist deportations or X-Factor rejects? Decide.

Devlin, in the seminal work, "The Heritability of IQ" reckons it's about .50 in the general population. Most modern day textbooks and reference works tend to agree with that. But that implies absolute equality thereafter. That is almost impossible to achieve. Therefore whilst nurture may also only be .50 it is more weighted.....if that makes sense. Do we have any geneticists on here? I know that counter intuitively, genetics plays a bigger part the older you are i.e. it suggests that the underlying genes actually express themselves by affecting a person's predisposition to build, learn, and develop mental abilities throughout the lifespan. Whereas at birth and early years it's all about nurture.

And the idea that those societies that are fairer, or more equal, can only do so by becoming uncompetitive and unwelcoming to business is also nonsense. In the European countries "Ease of Doing Business Index" of 2008, Denmark came top. A country reknowned for it's Nordic model of social democracy and wealth distribution.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So while we're currently not in great shape by > Western European standards, it hasn't always been > the case. In fact, pre-Thatcher, the UK was > something of a leading light in terms of wealth > distribution. QED, Jeremy. That's Keynsian economics for you, a post-war consensus that covered all government, Conservative or Labour, for 35 years. I don't want this to turn into a Thatcher-bashing or Thatcher-loving argument because they've been done to death but I think it's irrefutable that her period as PM and the legislation passed during that period led not only to wealth creation but a massive widening of the income gap and the associated issues I've highlighted elsewhere that unequal societies are susceptible too.

Huguenot IS Carol McGiffen and I claim my ?5.

If we believe that the premise that a fairer society, one with a smaller income gap, is a desirable outcome then there are seemingly only two methods available: smaller differences in pay before tax (like in Japan) redistribution through taxes and benefits (like in Sweden and other Nordic countries) Little has mean remarked of the "small-goverment" method employed by the Japanese yet theirs is as fair a society as the Scandanavians. As well as more progressive income and property taxes and more generous benefits, we also need policies to reduce differences in incomes before taxes and benefits. That means higher minimum wages, more generous pensions, running the national economy with low levels of unemployment, better education and retraining policies, increasing the bargaining power of trade unions. Good labour law, protection of union rights and high minimum wages are amongst the factors contributing to greater equality of incomes in New Hampshire, another model of small-state governance with low income inequality. One of the factors which makes a difference in Japan is how companies are owned and run. Differences in incomes of directors and employees in Japanese companies are smaller partly because almost all directors were people who had been promoted from among those who had worked their way up the firm. Other differences in corporate governance makes unions influential stakeholders and union leaders are sometimes given seats on the board. Patterns such as these lead to different ethical standards: it is not uncommon for directors of Japanese companies to take pay cuts themselves to avoid laying off junior employees. Perhaps this would be a better direction for Britain to head in if we reject a high-taxation route.

I would suggest targeting the far larger issues of VAT carousel fraud and avoidance of corporation tax before settling on applying the thumbscrews to those in receipt of benefits. But then they aren't "soft" targets.