apart from WASTE £10 billion on the Kings Cross redevelopment - so that
the Kinnocks (un-electable in this country remember) can get to their
offices in Sprouts by the cheapest route, while being allowed to claim
the cost of going the whole way by taxi and first class scheduled air
Here's an example, hot off the press. Today we have had Oliver Letwin
explaining some of the Tories' proposals for spending should they be
elected. It looks like the public services are going to be pared back
However, tonight the Trevor McDonald programme on ITV had a piece
about the dreadful lack of midwives in the UK and the effect this is
having on births all over the country. Apparently we are 10,000 (ten
thousand!) midwives short. The midwives that there are are having to
work long hours to cope with the pressure.
So, if anything, both Labour and the Tories should be ploughing in
*more* taxpayers' money into the NHS, not less. Another item on the
news today was the industrial action by job centre staff and others in
that category. A public servant's starting salary mentioned earlier in
the day was just over £9,000, so it's no wonder they're out on strike.
How can the fourth richest country (so called) allow this to continue?
And then wonder why we can't get the staff and increasingly have to
rely on people from countries far worse than ours but who are willing
to work for a pittance.
Adam Crozier, Royal Mail boss on the other hand gets a basic (basic!)
salary of half a million quid! The top people in many other industries
receive similar huge sums of dosh. I'd say, a couple of hundred grand
should be enough for anybody.
So while managers everywhere are getting paid what I believe to be
excessive remunerations, plus perks, share options, and golden
goodbyes, we do not have enough staff to run a vital part of the NHS!
Neither Gordon's nor Olive's sums add up at all.
For which they get more money than other people in similar professions.
Why not just introduce better tax breaks for people wishing to take
private medical care...?
Life has winners and losers. Sounds terribly harsh but should they
strike simply because they are low paid? Whilst I believe in freedom I
also believe that those people went into those low paid jobs on low pay.
If they had all gone in at £30k then had their money cut to £9k I could
This has always been the way since slavery...
Why though? Typical left view (not that I am saying that that is wrong
in itself if you can back it up). Adam's salary should be set at a
level which he would earn in the next best employment (opportunity cost)
for this is the way of the free market.
Are you the communist who would cap earnings at a couple of hundred
A third of my family are employed by the NHS and I can only agree.
However, nothing will be done on the back of strikes.
But do people care?
If that many people were bothered about our friend Brown he would be out
Register for the mailing list to win
Show me one good doctor who just does private work and I'll show you ten
who are able to afford to do both private and public work because of
Of course, what would I know, I clearly lack logic or reasoning.
Register for the mailing list to win
You clearly have no objectivity, being brainwashed by right wing views that
all private is brill, when that clearly is not the case.
Look at the big picture. Find out who own and runs the Uk, and for whose
benefit, which is not you and me. Read Who Runs Britain by Paxman and Who
Own Britain by Cahill. Understand them and then you will see a ruling class
of people who think they have the almighty right to rule, or heavily
influence matters and live the life of Riley to boot, while excluding others
(you and me). Voting Tory is shafting yourself, your family and friends.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.