blandy Posted January 2, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted January 2, 2019 1 hour ago, Risso said: Er no, that makes no sense whatsoever I'm afraid. My point was that MPs earn less than a lot of other people in the private and public sector. So their pay wouldn't be considered a 'pittance' compared to somebody who earns less than them, that would just be a completely illogical argument. But compared to a lot of private sector chief executives and public sector workers like council bosses, their pay is much lower. I saw in a local rag recently that the chief execs of councils such as Daventry earn about £170,000 pa. I think I also read that the recently departed boss of Sunderland council was on about £600,000. (I'm making no judgement on the justification or otherwise of those salaries) Whether they earn a multiple of the average national salary or not wasn't the point I was making. You could make the same point about a Premier League footballer on £10K a week being on a relative pittance compared to somebody like Raheem Sterling on £300,000. It isn't a pittance by any normal measure, but relatively it's a lot less than people in the same industry. Exactly what I was (trying to) say in terms of the comparisons. It’s a ton of money compared to normal folk, it’s a very well paid job. It’s way less than a footballer or CEO, though he has not got the talent to be either. A politician talking to his voters is insensitive to call 70 grand a year a pittance. He’s no genius, nothing above “us”. He’s got a very well paid job and I assume works hard for his money. Well done him. Pittance, no. Never in a million years. It was dumb. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 53 minutes ago, blandy said: Exactly what I was (trying to) say in terms of the comparisons. It’s a ton of money compared to normal folk, it’s a very well paid job. It’s way less than a footballer or CEO, though he has not got the talent to be either. A politician talking to his voters is insensitive to call 70 grand a year a pittance. He’s no genius, nothing above “us”. He’s got a very well paid job and I assume works hard for his money. Well done him. Pittance, no. Never in a million years. It was dumb. He didn't say he earned a pittance, did he? That was me trying to explain why an MP 'only' had life savings of £130K. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 9 hours ago, StefanAVFC said: He's such a dogwhistling cock This is essentially the Australian immigration policy for people who arrive by boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 3, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted January 3, 2019 6 hours ago, Risso said: He didn't say he earned a pittance, did he? That was me trying to explain why an MP 'only' had life savings of £130K. Oh, right. Wrong end of the stick. Sorry. I should have scrolled back more posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 20 hours ago, Risso said: I think I also read that the recently departed boss of Sunderland council was on about £600,000. Somehow that doesn't sound like the complete picture. Quote Former chief executive Dave Smith, who has now left the authority after resigning in August 2015, recieved £625,570 in 2015/16, although that included £331,414 in pension contributions. His salary was £108,686. Sonia Tognarelli, director of finance and interim head of paid service who left the council in 2016 after 35 years service, received £605,958 in the same year. An unnamed executive director of People’s Services at the council received £444,495, making them the fifth highest earner in the country. A spokesman for Sunderland City Council said that eight of the 13 members of staff no longer work for the authority. The council spokesman said: “These figures reflect the terms and conditions for eight senior employees no longer employed by the council, including former chief executive Dr Dave Smith. “They include payments to the Pension Fund to reflect payments in the future.” Durham County Council had the most employees who received remuneration in excess of £100,000, in the North East, with 20. John O’Connell, chief executive of the TPA, hit out at the figures.: “The average council tax bill has gone up by more than £900 over the last 20 years and spending has gone through the roof. He said: “Disappointingly, many local authorities are now responding to financial reality through further tax rises and reducing services rather than scaling back top pay. Sunderland Echo Hmmm... There must have been a hefty golden handshake in there too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrisp65 Posted January 12, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 12, 2019 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 Let's see who's in the wings? Quote Next Conservative Leader Oddschecker Think we're well past showers, and even tornadoes of shit? It's an apocalypse of shit in there. Record defeat for sitting Government, yet May's still amongst their least repulsive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 11 minutes ago, Xann said: Let's see who's in the wings? Oddschecker Think we're well past showers, and even tornadoes of shit? It's an apocalypse of shit in there. Record defeat for sitting Government, yet May's still amongst their least repulsive I reckon a quid on John Bercow at 949/1 is money well spent. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 15, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted January 15, 2019 47 minutes ago, Xann said: Let's see who's in the wings? Oddschecker Think we're well past showers, and even tornadoes of shit? It's an apocalypse of shit in there. Record defeat for sitting Government, yet May's still amongst their least repulsive She's less repulsive in same way Harold Shipman is less repulsive than Dennis Nilsen. A more acceptable dinner guest but under the surface they both like making corpses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Looks like it's not just Labour who need to be worried about keeping their fragile coalition of voters together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 23, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted January 23, 2019 14 minutes ago, ml1dch said: Looks like it's not just Labour who need to be worried about keeping their fragile coalition of voters together. That's basically Corbyn's plan. Do nothing, say nothing about Brexit, hope that enough remain Tories get the hump with May and Co. and hope to win a general election on the back of it. It kind of assumes that tory voters in those remain areas will be fine with Labour's plans and Labour's support for and enabling of Brexit and not vote for LDs or whoever, and end up with anohter hung parliament as a consequence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 4 minutes ago, blandy said: That's basically Corbyn's plan. Do nothing, say nothing about Brexit, hope that enough remain Tories get the hump with May and Co. and hope to win a general election on the back of it. It kind of assumes that tory voters in those remain areas will be fine with Labour's plans and Labour's support for and enabling of Brexit and not vote for LDs or whoever, and end up with anohter hung parliament as a consequence. But then a former Tory voter voting Lib Dem doesn't necessarily mean it's a returned Lib Dem MP. In those constituencies with small majorities, a thousand switching to Lib Dem and another thousand just staying at home could be thing that pushes Labour from second to first. I guess the gamble both are taking is which party wins the race to piss off as few of it's remain voters as they can. I thought it was interesting, as pretty much everything on the subject we've heard is all about Labour's fractured support all wanting different things - but the other side have a similar issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 23, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted January 23, 2019 52 minutes ago, ml1dch said: But then a former Tory voter voting Lib Dem doesn't necessarily mean it's a returned Lib Dem MP. In those constituencies with small majorities, a thousand switching to Lib Dem and another thousand just staying at home could be thing that pushes Labour from second to first. I guess the gamble both are taking is which party wins the race to piss off as few of it's remain voters as they can. I thought it was interesting, as pretty much everything on the subject we've heard is all about Labour's fractured support all wanting different things - but the other side have a similar issue. You're right, it doesn't, though in "middle class Remain areas" the tweet is talking about, I wonder if it's realistically going to mean Labour takes them. I suspect not, and that's obviously excluding the same voters being pissed off with Labour, too, for either helping facilitate Brexit, or for having a tube as a leader and policies that they (tories) would hate. But yeah, it is an interesting angle and subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, blandy said: You're right, it doesn't, though in "middle class Remain areas" the tweet is talking about, I wonder if it's realistically going to mean Labour takes them. I suspect not, and that's obviously excluding the same voters being pissed off with Labour, too, for either helping facilitate Brexit, or for having a tube as a leader and policies that they (tories) would hate. But yeah, it is an interesting angle and subject. You're also right - it often won't be Labour that takes those seats. From a purely tactical point of view, though, Labour and Lib Dems are likely to have to enter some form of arrangement for Corbyn to take office, presumably with the price of admission being significant giveaways in terms of Brexit policy. So Lib Dems winning is better for Labour than Tories winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 23, 2019 Moderator Share Posted January 23, 2019 3 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: So Lib Dems winning is better for Labour than Tories winning. Better for remain too... except it's the LibDems who will cave on main planks of their policy for power Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 23, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said: You're also right - it often won't be Labour that takes those seats. From a purely tactical point of view, though, Labour and Lib Dems are likely to have to enter some form of arrangement for Corbyn to take office, presumably with the price of admission being significant giveaways in terms of Brexit policy. So Lib Dems winning is better for Labour than Tories winning. Do you think LDs would do a coalition again HV? (I suspect not). Maybe some sort of arrangement, but I have my doubts. I suppose if they did they might be able to stop some of Corbyn's more brainless ideas being implemented. ANd that might be less bad than the effing tories getting in again, which seems, in these bonkers times, the least unlikely outcome of a GE if held soonish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted January 23, 2019 Moderator Share Posted January 23, 2019 11 minutes ago, blandy said: Do you think LDs would do a coalition again HV? (I suspect not). Maybe some sort of arrangement, but I have my doubts. I suppose if they did they might be able to stop some of Corbyn's more brainless ideas being implemented. ANd that might be less bad than the effing tories getting in again, which seems, in these bonkers times, the least unlikely outcome of a GE if held soonish. Lock your granny up, they'd sell her for power Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 23, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, bickster said: Lock your granny up, they'd sell her for power Last time, I think they did it because the Mps wanted power etc. like you say, and the members (niaively) voted to approve the power share. They couldn't have done it with the approval vote. So while the MPs might want to do the same again, I bet the members wouldn't approve that by vote again, seeing as it trashed them completely. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Can anybody look at these figures and genuinely see them as anything other than a bung? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts