h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

>but hey ho bring on the social workers. < VIM 139

VIM do you have any figures as to how many social workers have psycholgy and law degrees?

I have little time for this over simplification of matching degree subject to subsequent employment, because a degree teaches you ways of thinking, assessing information and evidence intelligently, being able to precis that information rationally, for the purposes of essays etc. leading to clear rational decision making, by weighing up costs/benefits of any particular course of action. A skill very important in business very often, as well as the public sector.

When I did my biology degree, the majority of my fellow students when into industry, industries that no connection with biology. It was their skills in thinking that were thought useful.

Yes of course we need properly qualified engineers etc for hands on jobs. Probably more of them. But it is simplistic to just assess this data in a 1:1 way in terms of job done subsequently.

Personally I prefer to live in a rich mixed society..which values the education of all its people.

@Otto - "In terms of avoiding confrontation, the answer is (as it always is) to have serious and meaningful consultations, setting out the problem, and asking for solutions. In pretty much every major industrial dispute that's made the headlines (and absolutely every one in my sector), unions have always been ready to make compromises and make suggestions. They're prepared to accept change, and will negotiate the terms of it. It needs management who are prepared to listen and engage, and unions and staff representatives who are prepared to engage in return, and be constructive with their ideas."

However -

"Mr Serwotka, head of the fifth biggest union, called for other unions to unite to oppose major cuts.

"Our message to the politicians should be simple," he said. "If you’re coming for our jobs, our pensions, our services and our education, we are going to stand together and we are going to defend them. And we are going to take united industrial action as a last resort if we have to." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7556451/Labour-is-worst-government-ever-says-Mark-Serwotka.html

Doesn't sound like they're prepared to accept change to me.

What you have there is a piece of political theatre at an abstract level. They're against cuts to pay, to jobs, to pensions, and most of all to service levels. It's a warning shot, and it's a challenge to the prevailing rhetoric about deep cuts. When it comes to details and specifics, you'll find that public sector staff and their unions are ready for appropriate discussions and negotiations. But you don't start by saying that. Over the next few months you'll see the main political parties hyping up the rhetoric, playing the hard man, and you'll see the unions responding with this kind of stuff. It's pure theatre, as anyone familiar with the politics of negotiations will know. What do you expect the unions to say?

I really don't understand why people aren't more angry. A very small number of people have become super, super rich through monumental avarice and incompetence. Now the rest of us, and in particular the poor and vulnerable, will be picking up the tab while those who benefited most continue avoiding and evading tax.

< What you have there is a piece of political theatre at an abstract level. >
Will that satisfy the world financial institutions that are telling us that we must reduce the national debt. The services and goods that we create for ourselves and offer/give away to the world no longer meet international demands.
The last time we were down at this level, the mining unions and whole mining communities were swept aside along with slices of other industries and thousands of jobs. The social upheaval and debt created at that time is still being paid off.
There may well be a few people with a hand in the till but our problems go much deeper than that.

Ancient Brit - there is more than enough money kicking about to adequately fund the public sector but, as previously mentioned, it's in the hands of very few people.

The unions have to make a stand else things will just keep on getting worse. They probably will anyway but we have to try at least. This isn't just about spending, this is basically a class issue. Hopefully the current financial climate and injustice will inspire more people to get off their bums and help fight.

Hmm. You seem to be overlooking the fact that quite a few people see it as a three-cornered fight.

So when it comes to competiting for crumbs from the Rich Man's Table, you should remember that those same people might think that you never put anything on it.

@Roymondo "this is basically just a class issue"

What's the class difference between bankers and teachers and doctors? Aren't they all the "professional classes"? What class is a GP on £100K a year- what side of the barricade do GPs stand on?

This "class" nonsense is the fight the Labour party want to have, carefully neglecting to mention that Prescott walks away with a £1.5 million pension next month and possibly being made a Lord. It ignores the fact that Blair is now reckined to betherichest ex-PM ever with a personal wealth estimated at over £30m (£10m of which camefrom banks incidentally) or that the Kinnock clan have about 3 multi-million pound pensions each.

Don't give us the classwar propaganda that the Labour Party and your mates at the Socialist Worker have been feeding you. While Union bosses send their members out to man the barricades (and possibly to lose their jobs), they'll still be pocketing six figure salaries and/or be parachuted into safeLabour seats.

Class war my

Fine. Let the rich get richer and the poor get poorer while our public services are sold off to exacerbate the problem.

That ain't the world I want to be in but, if you're happy with it, fill ya' boots.

@Roymondo

Instead of inanities like "Class War" you posted stuff earlier about where taxes are being lost possibly through under-manning. That's great stuff - it doesn't just moan about a problemm it offers a solution. Whilst I'm sure the figures have been massaged for effect it offers something positive and inspires hope that there are other answers.

But never forget that the Labour Party who want to fight a class war and who fund UAF thugs and exacerbate EDL thuggery were the ones to create this problem It was Brown who deregulated the banks. It was Mandleson who said he was "intensely relaxed about people becoming filthy rich". Labour are good at slogans for the gullible - nomore boom and bust, British Jobs for British Workers, Education Education Education, Tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime" but it has all been shown to be absolute nonsense. And now they're desperately trying to point the blame at the bankers - the same bankers they feted and flirted with for a dozen years and who theLabour Party allowed and encouraged to get filthy rich.

Is this really the future you and the Labour party offer? Class war? Encouraging hatred and envy promoting industrial unrest strikes and riots?

Fire up the Quattro mate

Where is this idea coming from that the Labour Party is waging class war, anyway?

King Bomba,

Yeah Roymondo posted,

> this is basically a class issue.< 145

No mention of class war.

Then,

>Class war my < woopert 147

then,

>Is this really the future you and the Labour party offer? Class war?< woopert 149

I think you'll have to ask woopert where he is getting it from.

@Effers

You're 'aving a laugh ain't you darling? 'Oo is it that's always giving it the rabbit abaht Posh Twit Tories and the like eh? An' wot party keeps on abaht policies formed on the "playing fields of Eton" Eh? Eh? 'Oo is it that's tryin' to frame yer acktchual debate arahnd the greedy few versus the put upon many? An' 'oo is it that's always givin' it large abaht "them" and "us"? It's not the Tories, Gawd Bless 'Em.

I am losing track here with all the names...

Who is Fred kite a sock puppet of?

FB

I really hate hootoo name changing things well annoying trying to work out who is saying what when....

Damn Tonys, Haikus, Acronyms (cept people whos hootoo names are normally acronyms of course.)

Sock puppets are a royal pain in the arse as you cannot even look at home pages to work out who people are...

FB

For the record:

1) I am not a member of, nor do I support, the Labour Party. I will vote for my local MP though. He happens to be Labour but is also a fantastic MP.

2) Some of my best friends are SWP. I'm not SWP. The SWP gets on my nerves. I admire their commitment and agree with the general principles though. The same can be said of The Socialist Party, The Workers' Party and many more. The folk you see selling papers at demos do actually give a toss. That's why they do it.

3) I occasionally march with UAF. The government and mainstream media seem unwilling to dispel the far right's immigration paranoia, which has allowed the rise of the BNP and, latterly, the creation of the EDL. Somebody's got to stand up to the far right and I'm proud to be one of the many who are so doing, albeit in a small way in my case.

This latter point could be more relevant than it initially appears. By allowing the lower classes (for want of a better term) to fight among ourselves on the basis of race, religion and country of birth, we are being distracted from the real issues. For example, the lack of social housing is not the fault of immigration, it is the fault of under investment. This point gets lost in the constant barrage of 'Immigrants jump housing lists' nonsense that certain elements of the media are happy to propagate, and which the governments responsible are happy to see diverting the argument away from the real issue.

Well, that's my take on it anyway. No doubt others will disagree.

Roy it's a pity there's no fist held high smiley here. Yep we need to start making those molotov cocktails

I think after the next election it will be a whole new political landscape..and all the old arguments about New Labour during the period of boom will quickly become a distant and fairly irrelevant issue.

The Election has just been called BTW.

Seriously I'm really scared about the future of health services especially. I hope the Left can put their differences aside given what lies ahead.

"Will that satisfy the world financial institutions that are telling us that we must reduce the national debt."

The national debt can be reduced either by cutting spending, raising taxes, or a combination. What we should do is say to the rich, and to the corporations, that enough is enough and that we will no longer tolerate their tax evasion and avoidance. This has nothing to do with class war or soaking the rich, and everything to do with enforcing the laws as they stand.

A lot of the calls for massive cuts in public spending (in the media, anyway) are from people who would be making the same arguments whether or not the credit crunch had happened. What they're doing is jumping on the bandwagon and using it as a pretext for what they want to do anyway. And I'm exactly the same - if there had been no credit crunch, I would *still* be arguing for the rich and the companies to pay their fair share so that those on the lowest incomes can be taken out of the tax system entirely, which as we've already seen is very administratively efficient.

"The services and goods that we create for ourselves and offer/give away to the world no longer meet international demands"

Not sure that's true at all. Although we do need to go back to manufacturing in high-tech precision areas where we can compete, there are also a number of other areas where the UK is very competitive. Education, for example. We have fantastic universities in this country, which bizarrely appear to be the first target for cuts. And culture - TV, film, music, design, art. I would go as far as to say that our most precious resource is the English language and its place in the world.

"You seem to be overlooking the fact that quite a few people see it as a three-cornered fight. So when it comes to competiting for crumbs from the Rich Man's Table, you should remember that those same people might think that you never put anything on it. "

But they would be wrong. Along with anyone else who thinks that the public sector does not generate wealth. I thought we'd already established this.

I'm scared about the future generally. The prospect of a Conservative government, and what it would mean for the country, gives me the shivers.

As the election's been called I reckon that could well be my last post on the subject 'round these parts.

You're quite right Otto, I would have been calling for a shrinking of the Public Sector in any case. The current situation merely takes what is sensible (imo) and makes it an imperative.

What isn't being mentioned is the huge amount of debt that's been hidden through the use of PFIs. None of this debt (and I'm told it runs into many tens of billions) is included in the numbers bandied about. Darling has forecast a mini-boom next year in order to keep projections low, but even so we're looking at a debt of £1.4 trillion by 2015.

I've also been told by people who claim to know about these things that the magic figure is 20%. Either taxes collected increase by 20% or spending is cut by 20%. It would seem that all of the major parties are agreeing that spending will be cut by around 12-14% (achieved through cuts AND efficiencies) but they're being coy about taxes. They're also refusing to say exactly where the cuts will fall, leading to the nimbyism and sabre rattling from unions.

Interesting times ahead.

> The prospect of a Conservative government, and what it would mean for the country, gives me the shivers. < Roy

Yea same here, but they are only 4 points ahead in the polls as of now..I reckon it's all still to play for.

They really ought to be romping away with it if people really wanted a Tory government.

I'm optimistic.