2017 UK General Election RESULTS Thread

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: crazyewok

And you dont like the low pay of hard labour? Get a another job then!

What you have to realise is that not everyone has the mental capacity to seek or carry out higher paid work.

How about people with learning disabilities or low I Q's. ?

Why we need to bring back some manfacturing work.

Also better disability support. What the torys did to disability makes me sick

a reply to: TrueBrit

Heres as far as I will agree with you on this.

There needs to be a living wage for above 21's.

We need to stimulate some medium skilled manufacturing jobs as well.

a reply to: UKTruth

Good question.

I would basically have the system set up so that:

a) Nearly all work offered by employers is full time.

b) All full time work must pay a wage which pays double the monthly cost of all bills pertaining to living, including food, light, heat, water rates, council tax, and all other associated costs. That wage may be different depending on geographic area, to make sure that regardless of local cost of housing, if one is employed, one can afford it with ease no matter what. That is the companies problem. Any company executive or board member who tries to move their business out of UK territory to save their bottom lines, will be arrested on the basis that their actions amount to economic terrorism, and their share in the company will fall either to other shareholders, or better yet, be placed in trust to pay a yearly dividend to the staff.

c) I would make it illegal to offer zero hours contracts, and pass a law forcing all businesses to have greater than 95% of their frontline work force on full time pay, preventing them trying to save money by making their work forces part time in bulk.

d) I would ban unpaid internships.

e) I would, in the case of the public sector, make it illegal for the government to hire any agency, or staff therefrom, to perform public works, instead insisting that government departments hire the people they need to get work done, directly. This would most certainly include the MoD, the NHS, the Highways Agency, the Police Force, Her Majesties Prison Service, and so on.

f) I would also place limitations on how far a government agency OR an employer, may require one to travel to work, with the only party able to ignore those rules, being the prospective employee. That way the companies and the government may not prevent a person accessing benefits if there simply is not appropriate work in their area, as is currently the case.

There are other bits and bobs you could throw in their to make the corporate world understand its place (that is beneath the heels of those who work for it, not over them with a whip), and always more that could be done to remind government that it is there to serve the people, not to be served by them, but those are a good start I think.

a reply to: TrueBrit

In otherwords you want communism as thats what you ideas amount too.

And as for Zero Hours contracts. What about people (like me who relied on them when at uni) who need flexible working hours? Not everyone wants fixed term contracts.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: UKTruth

Good question.

I would basically have the system set up so that:

a) Nearly all work offered by employers is full time.

About 70% of work is already full time... what is nearly all? 80%?, 99%?
What about jobs that don't require a full time position?

b) All full time work must pay a wage which pays double the monthly cost of all bills pertaining to living, including food, light, heat, water rates, council tax, and all other associated costs. That wage may be different depending on geographic area, to make sure that regardless of local cost of housing, if one is employed, one can afford it with ease no matter what. That is the companies problem. Any company executive or board member who tries to move their business out of UK territory to save their bottom lines, will be arrested on the basis that their actions amount to economic terrorism, and their share in the company will fall either to other shareholders, or better yet, be placed in trust to pay a yearly dividend to the staff.

Where is the money coming from? Your idea would kill jobs and productivity stone dead.
Arrest company directors who want to move their businesses out of the country??? Steal their assets???
Your nirvana sounds like Stalinist Russia.

c) I would make it illegal to offer zero hours contracts, and pass a law forcing all businesses to have greater than 95% of their frontline work force on full time pay, preventing them trying to save money by making their work forces part time in bulk.

Agree.

d) I would ban unpaid internships.

What if someone wanted to do an unpaid internship to get experience?
Not allowed their free will?

e) I would, in the case of the public sector, make it illegal for the government to hire any agency, or staff therefrom, to perform public works, instead insisting that government departments hire the people they need to get work done, directly. This would most certainly include the MoD, the NHS, the Highways Agency, the Police Force, Her Majesties Prison Service, and so on.

What about work that only needed to be done for a short period - projects that had a start and finish date? Hiring would be problematic, projects hopelessly delayed, those that were hired would contribute to govt bloat and overspend once projects were completed.... you haven't given this enough thought.

f) I would also place limitations on how far a government agency OR an employer, may require one to travel to work, with the only party able to ignore those rules, being the prospective employee. That way the companies and the government may not prevent a person accessing benefits if there simply is not appropriate work in their area, as is currently the case.

Terrible idea. You would create a mess in trying to administer such a hair brained idea. How far is too far. Is it travel time or distance?
Laborious regulation for little gain.

There are other bits and bobs you could throw in their to make the corporate world understand its place (that is beneath the heels of those who work for it, not over them with a whip), and always more that could be done to remind government that it is there to serve the people, not to be served by them, but those are a good start I think.

Govt working for the people - sure, totally with you on that.
Corporations knowing their place? Poppycock. people work for corporations, not the other way around. Without corporations and private enterprise, you'd still be sploshing around in a mud pit whilst your Lords rode by on their horses and kicked more mud in your face.

In all my time on ATS I have not seen a worse collection of ideas. You are advocating mass unemployment, a depression the likes of which we have never seen, and a return to the middle ages.
In addition, NONE of what you wrote even remotely removes luck from the equation. On the contrary it makes luck even more important. The significant minority WITH a job would feel very lucky as their friends and neighbours starved on the streets.

a reply to: UKTruth

Thats the point of communism......destroy the economy and make everyone equal by bringing everyone done to a equal level of poverty......well except the leaders....

a reply to: UKTruth

Not at all. In Stalinist Russia, the state would have taken the money. That would not be the case here.

Furthermore, I mean upward of 90% of all available work, and ideally absolutely all work offered must be full time.

Also, with regard to the cost to business, they can negotiate with the energy companies, telecoms people and the landlords locally, to ensure rents are dirt cheap but accommodation high quality, and to ensure that all services provided to an employee are provided at the most preferential rate, not the highest. If they value the ability to operate, they can either make a good effort on their workers behalf, or risk collapsing their companies. Most sensible people would just work hard to make things wonderful for the workers, rather than bitch about the imposition it places upon them. And hey, maybe some of those fat bastards in suits would actually have to do some damned work! That would be a turn up for the books wouldn't it! Highly irregular!

As for the bans on agency staff, with respect, you are wrong. Highways, for example, need CONSTANT refurbishment, and the only reason this is not done, is because no one wants to fund the highways properly. There should be someone working on EVERY stretch of bollarded road, ALL the time, with NO gaps. Shifts should be working round the clock, to ensure that works are completed perfectly and quickly, minimising inconvenience to the road user, and meaning that the taxes drawn for the purpose actually go to providing a quality maintenance service which NEVER stops and works QUICKLY, not at the unnecessarily glacial pace we are used to at the moment.

Furthermore, in terms of things like the NHS, with respect, that institution needs many more times the number of nurses it currently has, more doctors, more beds and less expenses being paid to private companies. We need to be getting rid of all private sector involvement with the NHS and run the entire thing from the national budget without even the merest hint of business being done by or on its behalf. Those are not temporary hires. We need to be making our own drugs, manufacturing our own medical equipment, employing people to keep churning it out who will never need or want another job as long as they live. Banish all businesses from the NHS.

Also, on the point of regulating distance travelled or time spent getting there, if you cannot walk it in 45 minutes, you should not take the job unless you sign a waiver saying you forgo that particular element of the rules, for the duration of your employment there.

And you said that you agree with government working for the people.

But I want government for the working people, not those who merely get paid. There is a difference. And no, I am not advocating for mass unemployment or a depression. I am advocating for a circumstance in which those things are made impossible, by the government making adjustments which render that totally impossible, by ensuring that no one can possibly go hungry, because everyone has work and no company or boss would dare to wind up to save their pocket book, because they would be too damned scared to piss on the workers by doing so. That would be a lovely situation. After all, who is going to cause a depression, or losses of jobs? No one would dare close their businesses! It would be a redundancy free situation. If closing a plant to save yourself money is illegal and comes with a life sentence, that would rather end that problem, would it not?

originally posted by: UKTruth

Good question.

by Truebrit
b) All full time work must pay a wage which pays double the monthly cost of all bills pertaining to living, including food, light, heat, water rates, council tax, and all other associated costs. That wage may be different depending on geographic area, to make sure that regardless of local cost of housing, if one is employed, one can afford it with ease no matter what. That is the companies problem. Any company executive or board member who tries to move their business out of UK territory to save their bottom lines, will be arrested on the basis that their actions amount to economic terrorism, and their share in the company will fall either to other shareholders, or better yet, be placed in trust to pay a yearly dividend to the staff.

Where is the money coming from? Your idea would kill jobs and productivity stone dead.
Arrest company directors who want to move their businesses out of the country??? Steal their assets???
Your nirvana sounds like Stalinist Russia.

Sadly, these companies that do not pay realistic wages rely on the taxpayer to top-up the employee's income. If a company cannot function without this indirect recourse to the State, they are not really viable and should not be in business.

As to companies that pay dividends to staff; would they be the sort of company that refer to staff as partners? John Lewis partnership seem to be doing ok, demonstrating this an idea that works.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I resent the implication that everyone on good money does not work hard.

I'm a Late Entry Officer in the British Army. Being an LE means that I worked my way through the ranks and accepted a commission after reaching the rank of Colour Sergeant. I was an infantry soldier and have fought at the sharp end in a spearhead battalion for 2 decades. I have smashed my mind and body in #holes you couldn't imagine and have watched friends and colleagues be maimed and killed doing the same work. My body has pains in places I didn't know I had places. If I wasn't in action I was in traction. Yes I spend more time behind a desk now than a weapon, but that is because my current role requires it.

The point of the above is not to big myself up. It is an example of how many of the people you presume to accuse of not knowing what graft is have worked hard to get where they are.

As a person progresses up a hierarchy they will typically spend less time at the coal face and more pushing paper. It's a simple fact.

People who think that the only kind of hard work involves lifting and shifting really haven't got a clue. The work I do now puts me under huge amounts of mental pressure. I won't go into the nature of my current role, but the work I do affects hundreds if not thousands of people every day. Are you saying that a guy shifting bricks has a more difficult job? I spent weeks during the invasion of Iraq filling and moving sandbags in 35C temperatures for 10 hours a day. This is the kind of crap job a soldier gets. One of my jobs when a student was hand loading 16 ton of steel bar onto lorries in a yard for £30 per day. I did that for 3 years. I would happily do that again for a week away from the pressure of my current job.

I don't know what you did between the ages of 18-19, but if it's harder than fighting for your life while surrounded in a mud building, being told to burn any personal correspondence and pictures and to swallow wedding rings because the Taliban are about to smash through the walls and skin you on Al Jazera, then fair one. But I work in an office now, so that stuff must never have happened...

The top 15% is not all bankers and stock brokers. Many of us earned our pay packet. Our wages often represent the level of skill, training, experience we bring to the role, and the responsibility that we take on.

Do you think that the heart surgeon, up to his elbows in some poor sods chest isn't grafting just because he makes good money? What about the air traffic controller trying to play 3D chess with thousands of people's lives in their hands? Do they have an easier job than a bricky? Of the 30 top paid jobs in the UK there are senior police, health care providers, education staff, railway repair, prison and fire service posts. These are jobs where you start low and work up.

But you won't acknowledge that because earning a decent living means we're elitist scum, right?

a reply to: PaddyInf

Its pointless. You talking to a hateful, resentful communist.

Our comrade here or at least his freinds would round us up and shot us if given the chance.

Look at every communist "revolution" and see who got purged first.....

Reading his posts remind me of Pol Pots.

He had the idea that only hard labour counted as "true" work. Everyone was sent to the feilds for hard labour, all the teachers, doctors and sceintists where either forced to work in the fields or in most cases executed.....

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: PaddyInf

Its pointless. You talking to a hateful, resentful communist.

Our comrade here or at least his freinds would round us up and shot us if given the chance.

Look at every communist "revolution" and see who got purged first.....

Agreed. At some point there is no further conversation to be had. When a person advocates arresting business owners if they want to move their business out of the country, the line has been crossed to dictatorship and there is no point taking that person seriously anymore.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: UKTruth

Not at all. In Stalinist Russia, the state would have taken the money. That would not be the case here.

No your 100% right, your nothing like stalinist communism.....your more in line with Pol Pots.

He had the same idea as you. Only hard back breaking labour counts as real work. And he emptied all the citys by force to work in the fields.

All the lawyers, doctors, teachers, sceinists and other intellectuals where forced in to hard labour or in most cases executed.

The elephant in this particular room isn't communism and it isn't capitalism.
It's corporatism.

We have reached a stage where every publicly limited company is run on the single principle of maximising shareholder value.

Every year dividends and share value HAS to increase or the CEO gets the boot.

This means, no matter how much productivity improves, no matter how hard every single person works, there is a pressure to reduce the wage bill. .

That is why we have agencies, zero hours and fake self employment.

Instead of legislating every little thing, the government needs to make it more tax efficient to hire people on proper contracts abd wages than to rip off their workers.

a reply to: SprocketUK

That would do as well.

But there is only one party who has anything even approaching that in their manifesto, and it is not the party in government.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: SprocketUK

That would do as well.

But there is only one party who has anything even approaching that in their manifesto, and it is not the party in government.

None of them are tackling this issue.
The Tories are too wrapped up in their city salary promises from their mates in the big banks, while Labour are veering between Blairite "lite Thatcherism" of the same ilk and seeking to try and address it through tax and benefits which is always clunky and ultimately of very little real benefit to the people who really need the help.


Hell, there is a whole lot of stuff wrong with our country and, frankly I can't see any party getting anywhere near sorting out a 1/4 of it.

We have a political generation of visionless drones who manage to get through selection by don't of never having done anything remarkable (bad or good).

Says a lot when one of the most radical is JC (Who I have previously said I don't much like on balance, and that hasn't changed).

Much as I despise his party and his disdain for the referendum result, I was impressed with Tim Farron's honesty on Women's hour the other week. I have never heard him talk so well and sound so sincere on tv. Maybe the quality of questioners on R4 were to blame? Anyway, he's gone now.

Of the current (newer) crop of political figures the two that have impressed me most of late are Ruth Davidson, and Leanne Wood, neither of which sit in Westminster.

a reply to: UKTruth

How to Download Apps from Appstore without apple id and password/ cydia/ Jailbreak for iOS
iosdownloadjailbreak.com...