[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
work

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 11406)
Message
File  []
close
C4TPLkTWYAA0Kxe[2].jpg
114061140611406
>> No. 11406 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 5:51 pm
11406 Workplace annoyances
Old thread isn't showing my text, so I made a new one.

I got into a political argument with a colleague.

I tend to avoid political talk due to that old adage. I mentioned how the health service was underfunded due to Tory cuts.

She countered by saving it's because of staff doing agency work. So a nurse at one hospital doing agency work at a different hospital, instead of overtime at her own. Apparently, they get triple pay via the agency. Her argument was essentially the NHS is adequately funded but the funds are mismanaged and poorly spent.

I also mentioned that if there were enough nurses to start with they'd probably wouldn't have to use agencies to begin with but she did not agree. Whilst agency fees may be a factor in the NHS funding crisis, it is probably a drop in the ocean compared with chronic Tory underfunding.

She moved on to how schools are struggling because there's too many immigrant children in schools like in Boston and teachers are struggling to cope with this and increased class sizes. I thought of rebutting her by saying increased class sizes are due to chronic Tory underfunding but what's the point, eh?

To complete the trinity of bigotry, she said there's too many immigrants coming over here claiming bennies and having too many children. I tried to point out that it's mostly younger healthy migrants who come here to work and don't use the NHS as much as the elderly do. Also the fact that birth rate is declining, who do you think will support the elderly population?

She religiously gets the Daily Heil™ everyday, so I don't know what I was expecting.

Whinge ticked due to blowing off steam and mindless rambling.
Expand all images.
>> No. 11408 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 6:08 pm
11408 spacer

pfi-1.png
114081140811408
>>11406
>Her argument was essentially the NHS is adequately funded but the funds are mismanaged and poorly spent.
I'm quite drawn to this argument even though I'm also drawn to higher spending. I kind of wish the left would make both argument instead of focusing purely on investment. There has been a lot of waste in the NHS. Nearly all of it is down to fetishising the private sector, though, not the "inherent inefficiency of government" or some bollocks like that.
>> No. 11410 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 6:12 pm
11410 spacer
>>11406
Mail reader puts feelings before facts shocker.

In before anyone makes the mistake of thinking she somehow has a point, because she clearly doesn't.
>> No. 11411 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 6:19 pm
11411 spacer
I just don't like immigrants.
>> No. 11413 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 6:55 pm
11413 spacer
>>11411
Even hard working Poles who are better than thieving Brits?
>> No. 11414 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 7:11 pm
11414 spacer
NHS funding probably is being mismanaged though. My concerns about this are preventing me from looking into directly finding the NHS.
>> No. 11415 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 7:22 pm
11415 spacer
>>11414
Er, yeah, it's being pissed away on private providers who milk the contracts in the knowledge that the government is at an inherent disadvantage.
>> No. 11417 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 7:33 pm
11417 spacer
>I tend to avoid political talk due to that old adage. I mentioned how the health service was underfunded due to Tory cuts.

How dare you. She was completely correct to wind you up.

>>11413
>Even hard working Poles who are better than thieving Brits?

Okay Pawel, have another Tyskie.
>> No. 11418 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 7:54 pm
11418 spacer
>>11406
She countered by saving it's because of staff doing agency work. So a nurse at one hospital doing agency work at a different hospital, instead of overtime at her own. Apparently, they get triple pay via the agency. Her argument was essentially the NHS is adequately funded but the funds are mismanaged and poorly spent.

She has a point though.
>> No. 11419 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 7:59 pm
11419 spacer

absolutely_right.png
114191141911419
>>11406
Ask her about her views on the DUP.
>> No. 11420 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 8:26 pm
11420 spacer
>>11418
She really doesn't.
>> No. 11423 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 10:03 pm
11423 spacer

gggh.png
114231142311423
>>11419
Say what you will about Sammy Wilson, he's been consistent in his approach to "ethnics" for his entire career (including the ethnicities that were here before his ancestors).
>> No. 11424 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 10:09 pm
11424 spacer
>>11420

She does actually.

But even then, it's only a few percent of the massive shortfall the NHS faces, alongside the clusterfuck of PFI, outsourcing, drug costs, increased demand, and vampire executives.

The NHS has been forced to adopt wasteful spending practices in order to plug short-term solutions into long-term problems. The money it gets should be plenty, if it was allowed to manage itself without political interference.
>> No. 11426 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 10:54 pm
11426 spacer
>>11424
>She does actually
No, she doesn't. This army of nurses doing double shifts for NHS and agency are like the army of foreigners coming here to claim all the bennies.
>> No. 11428 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 11:37 pm
11428 spacer

International-breakdown-of-health-spending-600x337.png
114281142811428
We spend slightly more than the EU average on healthcare overall (as a proportion of GDP), but vastly more than the EU average on hospital services and vastly less on outpatient services.

IMO the problem isn't PFI, it isn't agency nurses or mismanagement. It's a simple philosophical divide - Our Beloved NHS spends far too much on treating people in hospital and not enough on keeping people out of hospital. We massively over-use hospital care, which is far more expensive than outpatient care. We should be spending more on district nurses, nurse practitioners in general practice, community mental health teams and other kinds of outpatient services.

A&E departments should have the right to refuse admission to people who would be more appropriately treated in general practice or at a walk-in centre. People with chronic diseases should be more proactively monitored in the community. Care homes should have far stricter statutory obligations regarding the monitoring and treatment of their residents and face fines if they dump difficult residents in A&E. We should be developing specialist halfway-house projects for frail but well patients, to reduce the burden of bed-blocking. People with lifestyle-related diseases should be aggressively targeted, with punitive measures if necessary. Diversion away from hospital should become a primary benchmark for NHS trusts. We should seriously consider means-tested charges for access to certain services, just as we currently apply means-tested charges for prescriptions; this could substantially reduce waste due to missed and unnecessary appointments.
>> No. 11429 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 11:50 pm
11429 spacer
>>11428
Have you considered that there may be more than one single problem?
>> No. 11430 Anonymous
27th June 2017
Tuesday 11:58 pm
11430 spacer
>>11428
>Our Beloved NHS spends far too much on treating people in hospital and not enough on keeping people out of hospital.
Not really. You may have noticed the very well-documented problem with discharges. The problem isn't that we're putting too many people in hospital, it's that we're keeping them there too long, primarily because it's not safe to discharge them. Older people are sometimes waiting months to be discharged because the required social care provision isn't there, more often than not because the council can't afford to set it up (gee, I wonder what could be causing the shortage of funds there).

>Diversion away from hospital should become a primary benchmark for NHS trusts.
No. We optimise for what we measure. If diversion away from hospital becomes a benchmark, then there is an incentive to divert people away from hospital with no regard for whether it's appropriate to do so.

>We should seriously consider means-tested charges for access to certain services, just as we currently apply means-tested charges for prescriptions; this could substantially reduce waste due to missed and unnecessary appointments.
We have seriously considered it, and found it to be a really fucking bad idea because people won't use those services.
>> No. 11431 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 12:04 am
11431 spacer
>>11408
This is at the heart of it really. The argument that the public sector is commercially unaware or poor at drafting contracts doesn't really hold. The simple fact of the matter is that the public sector cannot win. They don't have the same leverage that their private sector partners do. If a private sector company doesn't like the look of a contract, they can just walk away. If the local NHS trust doesn't like the terms on offer, it can hardly decide to just stop providing services full stop.
>> No. 11432 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 12:08 am
11432 spacer
>>11429

Look at the numbers. We're spending twice the EU average on hospital care and a quarter of the EU average on outpatient care. That's an extraordinary disparity. I'm not saying it's the only issue, but it's the elephant in the room.

>>11430

I mentioned the issue of bed-blocking in my third paragraph. Liverpool are doing fantastic work in managing the discharge of frail patients and reducing bed-blocking, without any significant increase in spending. Bed-blocking is only a small part of the problem - according to the Carter Report, it accounts for less than 1% of the NHS budget. If we totally eliminated bed-blocking, the savings would quickly be gobbled up by inflation and increasing demand.
>> No. 11433 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 12:18 am
11433 spacer

Judge-Dredd-Fat-Protest.jpg
114331143311433
>People with lifestyle-related diseases should be aggressively targeted

If we could stop mad feminists fetishizing obesity, and start treating it like having the dire health consequences that it does, it would do an enormous benefit to the NHS.
>> No. 11434 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 12:19 am
11434 spacer
>>11408
>>11431

The cost to the NHS of PFI is about £2bn a year, or about 1.6% of the total NHS budget. In the best-case scenario, avoiding PFI would have reduced NHS expenditure by slightly less than 1%.

Our total expenditure on private services is about 7.6% of the NHS budget, much of which is very good value for money. That includes things like optical care, pharmacy services and the vast majority of GPs. There are probably some savings to be made here, but they pale in comparison to the increase in demand.

Privatisation is a sideshow.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/department-of-health-annual-report-and-accounts-2015-to-2016
>> No. 11435 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 12:59 am
11435 spacer
>>11433
Find me a feminist who propagates the idea obesity isn't harmful to health? I think you're the mad one?
>> No. 11436 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 1:04 am
11436 spacer
>>11435
Don't feed him lad.
>> No. 11437 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 1:04 am
11437 spacer
>>11434
>Our total expenditure on private services is ... very good value for money

Hahahahahaha. Yeah I'd like to see Virgin or Circle run one of our bloated wasteful A&E departments!
>> No. 11440 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 1:24 am
11440 spacer
>>11435

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_feminism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_acceptance_movement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_at_Every_Size
>> No. 11441 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 1:35 am
11441 spacer
>>11437

Your chemist is a private contractor. Your optician is a private contractor. Your GP is almost certainly a private contractor. The majority of private spending in the NHS has existed since the beginning of the service.

The lion's share of spending on privately-provided services goes to pharmacists and GPs. Major private services contracts are practically a rounding error in the NHS budget.
>> No. 11442 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 1:53 am
11442 spacer
>>11440
Alright, I'll take Health at Every Size as bollocks. But given I've never heard of it before - your article discusses works exclusively by Americans - I'm not sure it has anything to do with the obesity crisis or the NHS though. Fat acceptance is about not shaming people for weight problems that are socially and economically driven and thus exacerbating them through stress. It certainly didn't cause any fuckers to get fat in the first place.
>> No. 11443 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 2:03 am
11443 spacer

cchq-fake-25p.png
114431144311443
>>11441
>The majority of private spending in the NHS has existed since the beginning of the service.
>> No. 11445 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 8:22 am
11445 spacer
>>11442
You not hearing of it before is quite irrelevant. These movements also have an international quality now thanks to the interblog.

I agree it didn't cause it. But what it does is say it is okay, and normalises a medical issue. It is essentially denial as a political movement, and as the obseity rate increases it is only going to get stronger, as more people go into denial and be counter productive to what is best for the individual and for society as a whole.

You are quite mistaken about it just being about not being shamed by society, that's a front, like pro smoking groups being about 'freedom of choice'. Shamed means their doctor told them that if they don't reduce their size, they will have another heart attack, or that he will have to cut off their foot for diabetes. Or their own guilt, lthat they won't fit in a normal sized chair. I've read the blogs. Healthy at every size is also built upon a deliberate closing of the mind to the risk. It actively promotes ignorance about the dangers or the most dangerous lifestyle disease in the world today.
>> No. 11446 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 8:24 am
11446 spacer
>>11445
Apologies for typos, on my mobile.
>> No. 11447 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 3:47 pm
11447 spacer
>>11445
>You not hearing of it before is quite irrelevant. These movements also have an international quality now thanks to the interblog.

i.e. they are completely irrelevant outside of small internet communities. You can find blogs about all sorts but that doesn't mean they have any impact on real life beyond a few mentally ill people.

>You are quite mistaken about it just being about not being shamed by society, that's a front, like pro smoking groups being about 'freedom of choice'.

Fuck off and let me have my fags you little cunt.
>> No. 11448 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 9:19 pm
11448 spacer
>>11447

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susie_Orbach
>> No. 11449 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 9:28 pm
11449 spacer
>>11448

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Churchill
>> No. 11450 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 9:30 pm
11450 spacer
>>11449
That's impressive.
>> No. 11451 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 10:48 pm
11451 spacer
>>11449

We all love Mad Jack, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make (if any).
>> No. 11452 Anonymous
28th June 2017
Wednesday 10:50 pm
11452 spacer
>>11451

Likewise.
>> No. 11453 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 3:43 am
11453 spacer
>>11447


>i.e. they are completely irrelevant outside of small internet communities.

You seem to have ignored the multiple Wikipedia entries all with several dozen citations.
>> No. 11454 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 9:02 am
11454 spacer
>>11453
Wikipedia also has multiple entries with many citations on individual species of Pokémon. What exactly is your point?
>> No. 11455 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 12:27 pm
11455 spacer
>>11448
What exactly does a feminist author of works including "the anti-diet guide to permanent weight loss", "a program to conquer compulsive eating", and "how fast food ... [is] creating new forms of child abuse" have to do with your fictional pro-obesity movement?
>> No. 11457 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 12:53 pm
11457 spacer
>>11455

Mate you can live in denial all you want but this fat shaming etc nonsense is very much real. Fringe Internet lunacy perhaps, but in the year of our Lord 2017 that doesn't mean as much as it once did.
>> No. 11459 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 5:35 pm
11459 spacer
>>11455

In 1978, Orbach's Fat is a Feminist Issue achieved exactly what it set out to, putting fat and body image at the centre of contemporary feminism. Quotes:

"A feminist perspective to the problem of women's compulsive eating is essential if we are to move on from the ineffective blame-the-victim approach and the unsatisfactory adjustment model of treatment."

"Feminism argues that being fat represents an attempt to break free of society's sex stereotypes. Getting fat can thus be understood as a definite and purposeful act; it is a directed, conscious or unconscious, challenge to sex-role stereotyping and culturally defined experience of womanhood."

"My fat says 'screw you' to all who want me to be the perfect mom, sweetheart, maid and whore... In this way, fat expresses a rebellion against the powerlessness of the woman, against the pressure to look and act in a certain way and against being evaluated on her ability to create an image of herself."

This is not some fringe rant on a Tumblr blog. It's a book that was an international bestseller at the time and is now a set text on many university courses. From a blurb by Naomi Wolf: "Virtually all feminist debate on body image owes its existence to Susie Orbach's enduring formulation".

Orbach doesn't frame being fat as simply an inconvenient fact. She doesn't merely gloss over the obvious health issues. She frames fatness as a positive act of rebellion. She isn't some weird extremist relic of the 70s; she regularly writes for the Guardian and has presented documentary series for Radio 4. She is firmly within the mainstream of liberal feminist thought.

If you take a cursory glance over the references in the previously-linked Wikipedia articles, you'll find abundant evidence for the existence of the fat acceptance movement. There are multiple organisations advancing the idea that obesity is essentially irrelevant to physical health and that long-term sustained weight loss is essentially impossible (the Health at Every Size movement). There are numerous academics advocating this view - Linda Bacon, Jon Robison, Barbara Altman Bruno.
>> No. 11461 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 5:56 pm
11461 spacer
A couple of years ago I posted on .gs about how I can miraculously eat whole tubs of ice cream every other day and remain apparently lean and fit. Other posters suggested I was invisibly fucking up my insides and my cholesterol will be throught the roof.

So perhaps I will experience health complications down the line and contribute to the crisis. But I won't be shamed for it like a fat person would, because I don't look the type.

Oh, if I only I was fat, then I could have pejorative remarks made about my body that would definitely change my dieting habits, no really they would!
>> No. 11463 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 6:01 pm
11463 spacer
>>11459
Have you considered not being a judgmental cunt? A radical idea, I know.
>> No. 11464 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 6:08 pm
11464 spacer
>>11461
What are you even trying to say?
>> No. 11466 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 6:51 pm
11466 spacer
>>11464
I think he's trying to say that it's double standards because thin people can also act like slobs.

Which apparently makes it okay to be a fat fucking cunt.
>> No. 11467 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 7:34 pm
11467 spacer
>>11461
Have you never had someone criticise you when they see you eating that much ice cream?
>> No. 11469 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 7:44 pm
11469 spacer
>>11467
I'm assuming he's not in the habit of eating his whole tubs of ice cream in public.
>> No. 11470 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 7:57 pm
11470 spacer
>>11469
Fat people, on the other hand, are always fat in public.

If it's a question of body image is presented in media, you may as well get upset about toothpaste adverts showing people using more toothpaste than is needed.
>> No. 11471 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 8:00 pm
11471 spacer
Let's be honest; fat people are really disgusting. Their apparent greed and lack of control is really filthy. If I were to wipe out a group of people, it would be fat people. They aren't that far removed from animals.
>> No. 11472 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 8:08 pm
11472 spacer
>>11470
>Fat people, on the other hand, are always fat in public.
Good, you're starting to get his point.
>> No. 11473 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 8:17 pm
11473 spacer
>>11472
If you see someone doing something dangerous, it's natural to warn them. Say if you see someone about to put their hand in boiling water, you'd tell them to stop. If someone puts their hand in boiling water in the privacy of their own home, you wouldn't know to warn them. If someone is fat, you see it.
>> No. 11475 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 9:13 pm
11475 spacer
>>11473
Er, yes. Proper chubbies wear it on the outside, whereas visceral fatties (like our lad with his ice cream) have the privilege of giving themselves a heart attack without anyone judging them for it.
>> No. 11478 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 9:21 pm
11478 spacer
>>11475
I'm not really sure what you're arguing for here. One lot gets the privilege of dying early because they didn't get as much warning but not experiencing harassment either directly or through the media, the other gets the privilege of knowing they need to make a change in order not to die, but also experiences harassment either directly or through the media.
>> No. 11479 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 9:45 pm
11479 spacer
>>11478
>I'm not really sure what you're arguing for here.
That's fine. I'm not going to judge you for your lack of mental capacity.
>> No. 11481 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 10:23 pm
11481 spacer
>>11478
>the privilege of dying early

How much does eating a tub of ice cream take off your life?

Christ, what an absolute abortion of a thread this is from start to finish.
>> No. 11482 Anonymous
29th June 2017
Thursday 11:24 pm
11482 spacer
>>11481
Depends how full it is when it hits you.
>> No. 11483 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 12:24 am
11483 spacer
>>11481

One? Not a lot. Getting in the habit of it because nobody sees it in order to criticise it? Probably a lot.

>>11479
The thread has got to the point where I'm not bothering to view the last few posts so it's hard to tell which side you're taking. Who has the privilege, the ones who are warned they'll die early if they don't make a change or the ones who aren't?
>> No. 11484 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 12:39 am
11484 spacer
>>11483
>Who really has the privilege here, the ones who have lots of melanin or the ones who burn easily?
This is how stupid you sound.
>> No. 11485 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 12:42 am
11485 spacer
>>11484
Yes, in a place where that's a factor the people with melanin have a privilege. Sorry man I'm drunk and like I said lost the thread of this conversation a while ago, I'm not really sure what either of us are arguing for.
>> No. 11487 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 12:49 am
11487 spacer
>>11485
>Yes, in a place where that's a factor the people with melanin have a privilege.
I'm not sure that word means what you think it means.
>> No. 11489 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 1:01 am
11489 spacer
>>11481

That isn't directly measurable, it would be like asking how much more water an opaque container of unknown volume could hold that is constantly having random unknown amounts of water poured in and out of it for the last 50 years.
>> No. 11490 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 1:02 am
11490 spacer
>>11487
Melanin? Or privilege? Because if it's privilege then disabled white people must be equally privileged to able-bodied white people, but that's clearly not the way it's meant.
>> No. 11491 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 1:38 am
11491 spacer

4_albino_african_clawed_frog.jpg
114911149111491
>>11490
>>11489

Gay frog bumlords
>> No. 11492 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 1:52 am
11492 spacer
Can we just agree that Vanilla and Chocolate are better than Strawberry and that Mint is pretty ace too?
>> No. 11493 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 2:04 am
11493 spacer

stalincorbyn.jpg
114931149311493
Socialism doesn't work.

No pun intended.
>> No. 11494 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 2:44 am
11494 spacer
Can I say I know a paediatric A&E nurse who is single, has a mortgage on a 3 bedroom house aad is doing quite well for herself?
>> No. 11495 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 8:58 am
11495 spacer
>>11494
Yes, but we'd all know you probably aren't telling the truth.
>> No. 11496 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 11:16 am
11496 spacer
>>11494
Paediatric A&E? She's only allowed to deal with the children who burn themselves or suffer concussion? That seems oddly specialised.
>> No. 11499 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 1:09 pm
11499 spacer
>>11493 Free market capitalism doesn't seem to be working very well either.
>> No. 11500 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 1:45 pm
11500 spacer
I find it a bit hard to take all these messages of public sector strife seriously. I'm on a lower wage than any nurse and doing fine.
>> No. 11501 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 2:00 pm
11501 spacer
>>11500
Living in your mum's back bedroom rent free is not "doing fine" m7.
>> No. 11502 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 2:31 pm
11502 spacer
>>11501
I haven't lived with me mum for six years.
>> No. 11503 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 3:06 pm
11503 spacer
>>11502
That's not what she told me.
>> No. 11504 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 3:21 pm
11504 spacer
>>11500
So instead of fighting for yours and supporting others who are doing the same, you turn around and want everyone to have a shite time because you are a meek twat taking 9 inches from some greedy boss? Let me guess, minimum wage should be abolished, right?

Fucking twat.
>> No. 11506 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 4:44 pm
11506 spacer
>>11500
No dependants, am I right?
>> No. 11509 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 5:43 pm
11509 spacer
>>11500

Nurses = the public sector. Firemen = the public sector. This reductionism is absurd, there are all sorts of jobs in the public sector.

Nurses get shit pay for how hard they work, but it's OK pay in the grander scheme of things. Thing is there, are a lot of other people who do very valuable work in the public sector, and earning barely over minium wage for it. Which in turn leads to a drain of talent- Why would you work for peanuts in jobs that otherwise rightly command 20k+ in the private sector? Why do you think the management tends to be so shocking in public sector services, if not for the fact anyone who's actually competent will land a much better job elsewhere?

The whole austerity narrative was fair enough, but we're past that now and it's plain to see that it's basically just an ideological starvation of the public sector regardless of whether or not that's going to have positive or negative consequences. They just enjoy tightening the vice on those bloody unionised, Labour voting scum.
>> No. 11510 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 6:31 pm
11510 spacer
>>11504
> you turn around and want everyone to have a shite time

Well, as I'm working in the private sector, I'm paying for them.

>>11506
Yes. Having kids and being on a low wage is not a new thing though regardless.
>> No. 11513 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 6:50 pm
11513 spacer
>>11510
I take it you can't earn more because you are a moron, right?
>> No. 11518 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 7:07 pm
11518 spacer
>>11513
Careful, lad. You'll only make people angry if you insinuate poor people are stupid.
>> No. 11527 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 7:59 pm
11527 spacer
>>11500
Speaking of public sector strife, I'm keeping on this because it annoys me: Remember the wank about how the post-office strike, southern strike and airline strike and whatever were going to ruin Christmas in a a politically motivated strike attempting to bring down the government, so the government should step in and biff the trade unions on the nose again? Remember that second Winter of Discontent? No?

Yeah, exactly. Because it was nothing. Because the press lied. They want to see trade unions fucked some more even though they're already below George Galloway in terms of power held. They'll lie again, they'll do it for more mild labour disputes in the hope of getting our already stringently regulated trade unions to piss off entirely. I'm incredibly unhappy about it, from a press-honesty standpoint as much as anything else.

>>11509
>if not for the fact anyone who's actually competent will land a much better job elsewhere?
I think there's a legitimate case to be made that a secondary reason is political ideology, vaguely encompassed in the Blair era obsession with statistics. Rather than develop on this, I'll just stick with the strike angle: I've always been drawn to the idea of service deliverers going on a sort of "paper strike". i.e. they won't fill in stupid self-assessment forms or other data-generating exercises secondary to their real job, but they'll continue to show up to work and provide the frontline services they're actually paid to perform.

Not work to rule, where they tediously follow the exact write-up of the job they're paid to perform (often disrupting services): Doing their actual day job and skipping the rules about target-sheets that get in their way. Obviously I don't mean fill in zero paperwork, but there's a pretty clear difference between marking your students' essays and going through a mini struggle session on form 25A about what you think your own failings are and how you'll improve them for review by the staff department. (Don't worry, it's not actionable, you just have to do it!)

Either we'd see the crucial importance of many apparent middle-class-job-creation exercises, or a lot of managers would start looking very flustered indeed as they're all forced to sit at their desks playing solitare while occasionally grabbing the phone and feigning conversation. Now wouldn't that release quite a burden from the public purse: Free Doctors, Teachers and Nurses...
>> No. 11528 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 8:39 pm
11528 spacer
>>11518
Oh no, nobody's doing that. He's insinuating stupid people are usually poor.
>> No. 11529 Anonymous
30th June 2017
Friday 9:38 pm
11529 spacer
>>11527
It's okay lad. Soon the press will be regulated, and so will the internet. I'm happy as long as everyone else gets fucked with - especially poor people who vote for these sort of things.

Return ] Entire Thread ] Last 50 posts ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password