Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
R K

Unions Are Forces Of Stagnation Says Gideon

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12312417

"We have got to be as bold in promoting growth and removing barriers to business expansion, and fighting the forces of stagnation, as we have been in dealing with the deficit," he said.

'Stagnation'But he said governments were being held back by people who oppose efforts to "create more competitive markets".

In the UK, the trade unions and opposition had opposed "controversial" changes to employment tribunals, he said, and were opposed to other "difficult" decisions aimed at promoting growth.

"I regard these people as the forces of stagnation, when we are trying to get the British economy competitive again, moving forward again."

Know your place serfs.

The Bullingdon Boys know theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the unions are forces of stagnation, I think they are preferable to the forces of social destruction that the Torylition government is unleashing.

Is George Osborne more unpopular than Alistair Darling was, I wonder?

He could end up being the most unpopular chancellor of the exchequer ever. It would be some feat if he surpassed the likes of Denis Healey, Geoffrey Howe or Norman Lamont, but he's well on his way. Gordon Brown wasn't particularly unpopular as a chancellor, his undoing all came about while he was prime minister, in which office he displayed monumental incompetence in his reverse Robin Hood act of robbing the taxpayer to bail out the bankers. And now George Osborne is just continuing punishing the people for what Brown did, aided by the Liberal Democrats, who might as well cross the floor and become Tories, as they've deserted their own voters and probably destroyed their party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the unions are forces of stagnation, I think they are preferable to the forces of social destruction that the Torylition government is unleashing.

Is George Osborne more unpopular than Alistair Darling was, I wonder?

He could end up being the most unpopular chancellor of the exchequer ever. It would be some feat if he surpassed the likes of Denis Healey, Geoffrey Howe or Norman Lamont, but he's well on his way. Gordon Brown wasn't particularly unpopular as a chancellor, his undoing all came about while he was prime minister, in which office he displayed monumental incompetence in his reverse Robin Hood act of robbing the taxpayer to bail out the bankers. And now George Osborne is just continuing punishing the people for what Brown did, aided by the Liberal Democrats, who might as well cross the floor and become Tories, as they've deserted their own voters and probably destroyed their party.

whoever is at the helm when this all collapses will be the most unpopular chancellor ever, you alluded to it yourself highlighting Brown was well regarded as chancellor but got all the sh!t as PM, because thats when the first cracks appeared despite them being created years before.

Personally i dont think Osbourne will be chancellor when the uk ultimately defaults because i think its a few years away but clearly being regarded as a good chancellor/pm is no more or less than coming in at the start of an economic upcycle, being a sh!t one is coming in at the end, so a good politician is no different to a good investor, meanwhile 90% of the popn will @rse about blaming the poor schlepp in power when it goes t!its up without understanding the bigger picture

Edited by Tamara De Lempicka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The unions bent over and got shafted by Labour, it started with the pension raid and continued throughout the past Labour govt. The Union leaders betrayed the workers, so they too drink champagne with the elites. If unions where truly concerned over the workers all of them would be arguing for balanced budgets and ensuring the currency retained it's purchasing power. Unfortunately the Union movement is full of imbeciles who keep promising a free lunch when the only think they deliver is a free lunch for themselves.

Still at least the free market will deliver salvation to us all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bizarrely, the Unions look after the interests of the individual, whilst its the Corporates who look at things from the position of the wider group.

arguably its the unions who have the more individualistic, selfish point of view, i.e get as much as you can for yourself and your friends. whilst the capitalists advocate the individuals toughing things out but the overall effect of this is better for everybody as a whole.

strange, but true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You must not remember coming home from school, mum cooking the tea and then the power going off night after night and the cursing about strikers from said mum.

It was said that Maggie won because the women voted for her after she said "A woman knows how to run the household budget" (or something similiar. This is wrong they voted for her in droves because of millions of ruined dinners and caused by men that would most likely give their wife a gentle right hook reminder to have the tea ready next time they walked in 2 hours late from the pub.

The unions were there worse enemy in past and it looks like they will do the same again and guarantee 3 terms for Cameron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The unions were there worse enemy in past and it looks like they will do the same again and guarantee 3 terms for Cameron.
I think the people still have too much anger directed at bankers to get too worked up about the unions. I don't think the Torylition goverment will last it's full first term, let alone 3, since I can't see the Lib Dems supporting policies which are, for the most part, the exact opposite of what their voters voted for.
....men that would most likely give their wife a gentle right hook reminder to have the tea ready next time they walked in 2 hours late from the pub.
If they were 2 hours late the dinner would probably be ruined and it would be the men being confronted by an angry missus holding the frying pan in a combative pose. Edited by Hyperduck Quack Quack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But he said the UK economy had to be rebuilt with less emphasis on financial services and more on business investment and exports.

Yeah yeah yeah. The UK people have heard it all before in the 80s and after those sacrifices TPTB just threw it away again for general debt impoverishment to be even worse off As a consequence the words are meaningless now (even if the policy would be good for the UK).

He did manage to avoid saying "we're all in it together" for a "change".

For sure many UK people will now be thinking what George Bush once said

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the people still have too much anger directed at bankers to get too worked up about the unions. I don't think the Torylition goverment will last it's full first term, let alone 3, since I can't see the Lib Dems supporting policies which are, for the most part, the exact opposite of what their voters voted for.

If they were 2 hours late the dinner would probably be ruined and it would be the men being confronted by an angry missus holding the frying pan in a combative pose.

you forget that those women are now pensioners in there 70's and 80's now and more likely to vote than the youngsters and they see unions flexing their muscles again, they remember and they will vote.

My grandfather was a Yorkshire miner down the pit at 13 and huge. Unless you have seen someone that has done tough manual labour 10 hours a day for 6 days a week starting work with a pick axe at 13 in 1917 (miners were exempt being soldiers) you would be surprised. My mother, her sister and her mother lived in fear of him, but right was on his side because he was in the Union fighting for a better life for the working man, just not the women.

The unions have always been thugs and they are still thugs, all they know is intimidation and looking out fro themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bizarrely, the Unions look after the interests of the individual, whilst its the Corporates who look at things from the position of the wider group.

arguably its the unions who have the more individualistic, selfish point of view, i.e get as much as you can for yourself and your friends. whilst the capitalists advocate the individuals toughing things out but the overall effect of this is better for everybody as a whole.

strange, but true.

If by 'wider group' you mean themselves and their shareholders you are correct. If you mean that the corporations are champions of competitive markets and free trade, I'll have some of what you're smoking. :D

If the interests of the individual are to be sacrificed for the good of the wider group this seems more akin to socialism than any libertarian position I am aware of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the interests of the individual are to be sacrificed for the good of the wider group this seems more akin to socialism than any libertarian position I am aware of.

thats precisely the point. the unions look after only the interestes of its members, how it affects other people outside their group, they really dont care, as long as their groups gets what it wants and is protected.

today britain produces as much steel as it did in the 1970's but with only 15% of the workforce.

protecting steel workers jobs is good for them. but not for the wider country.

cutting jobs in the public sector is bad for individuals, but good for the wider country in the long term.

if you look at it in the point of the individual - you cant argue its not bad for someone whos been made redundant and has to suffer, which is essentially what unions fight for and it is understandable.

but as i say, its the unions who support the individual and its the individualists, who in effect look at things in terms of the wider group.

the reason why they play it out as though the unions are morally correct is because there is a emotional story to tell behind their actions - a person with a family to support loses his job.

whereas with the individualist, you cant really identify a specific group with the overall economy, or a company as a whole, which is invisible and faceless.

Edited by mfp123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12312417

Know your place serfs.

The Bullingdon Boys know theirs.

God this government has only been in power 9 months and its rhetoric is already sounding tired and jaded.

This sort of stuff was dated in the Major era, it positively prehistoric now.

The unions have not been a major force in shaping the British economy since the 1970s

Still there is nothing like a bunch of old Etonian toffs rubbing the workers faces in the dirt to remind them why they formed Unions in the first place.

People like Cameron and Osbourne pontificating about the failings of ordinary people are more likely to succeed in sparking a revolution than all the Marxist and Trotskyist agitators of the last 50 years. Unlike Thatcher and Major they are not plugged into the thought patterns or aspirations of the skilled working class and the tower middle classes.As someone whose attended quite a few Conservative party functions over the years one of the things I have always noticed is the underlying class tension beween many of the party members and the grandees at the top. Most local Conservative party activists and councillors are not ex public schoolboys who have had a gilded upbringing but are small businessmen, self employed tradesmen, cab drivers and ordinary employees. Some surprisingly are even Union members.

As these people make up a sizable proportion of Tory voters I can see the government in danger of burning through the good will of its own supporters in record time.If the economy is still flat on its back in 12 months time or there is another banking crisis then things may unravel for Cameron and company very fast.

Edited by stormymonday_2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God this government has only been in power 9 months and its rhetoric is already sounding tired and jaded.

This sort of stuff was dated in the Major era, it positively prehistoric now.

The unions have not been a major force in shaping the British economy since the 1970s

Still there is nothing like a bunch of old Etonian toffs rubbing the workers faces in the dirt to remind them why they formed Unions in the first place.

People like Cameron and Osbourne pontificating about the failings of ordinary people are more likely to succeed in sparking a revolution than all the Marxist and Trotskyist agitators of the last 50 years. Unlike Thatcher and Major they are not plugged into the thought patterns or aspirations of the skilled working class and the tower middle classes.As someone whose attended quite a few Conservative party functions over the years one of the things I have always notced is the underlying class tension beween many of the party members and the grandees at the top. Most local Conservative party activists and councillors are not ex public schoolboys who have had a gilded upbringing but are small businessmen, self employed tradesmen, cab drivers and ordinary employees. Some surprisingly are even Union members.

As these people make up a sizable proportion of Tory voters I can see the government in danger of burning through the good will of its own supporters in record time.If the economy is still flat on its back in 12 months time or there is another banking crisis then things may unravel for Cameron and company very fast.

Rubbish, the NUT have ensured that the last 10 years of students from out schools have not had a decent education. They have consigned that generation to a life off call centre work or un employment. All in the name of lefty ideals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For thirty years the Tories have been banging this drum and its a lie and its not working any more.

If only, if only the "british working man" was more flexible, took less pay rises, worked harder" it could all be so different.

Despite massive relaxation of workers rights, union reforms etc.. the jobs still went to China.

Yet not a word from Osborne on managements and CEO's giving themselves 100% + pay rises.

Same old failed policies, oh and we have to be nice to bankers, with not one reform in place.

I've already decided. Don't vote for any of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sack all union members, that nasty relic of Victorian subculture. 2011 employment laws are more than sufficient to give employees a fair working environment. When Are they replacing those striking £40k/yr tube driver with cheaper, reliable, Apple iPads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rubbish, the NUT have ensured that the last 10 years of students from out schools have not had a decent education. They have consigned that generation to a life off call centre work or un employment. All in the name of lefty ideals.

Congratulations on your choice of idiotiic non sequitors.

You have singulartly failed to address a single point that I have raised.

When it comes to tired slogans you make Osbourne seem like Shakespeare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations on your choice of idiotiic non sequitors.

You have singulartly failed to address a single point that I have raised.

When it comes to tired slogans you make Osbourne seem like Shakespeare.

Facts always beat fancy words.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Facking dirty self serving union scum. I want lower taxes, the deficit sorted out, smaller efficient public sector and to hell with these union idiots. How the hell do we protest against these union scoundrels putting our children's futures at risk when they have a tv corporation and a liebour party on their side?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no leftie but these bastards are starting to piss me off, the elite are getting richer and the working man poorer, and still they want to step on the little guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the unions are forces of stagnation, I think they are preferable to the forces of social destruction that the Torylition government is unleashing.

Is George Osborne more unpopular than Alistair Darling was, I wonder?

He could end up being the most unpopular chancellor of the exchequer ever. It would be some feat if he surpassed the likes of Denis Healey, Geoffrey Howe or Norman Lamont, but he's well on his way. Gordon Brown wasn't particularly unpopular as a chancellor, his undoing all came about while he was prime minister, in which office he displayed monumental incompetence in his reverse Robin Hood act of robbing the taxpayer to bail out the bankers. And now George Osborne is just continuing punishing the people for what Brown did, aided by the Liberal Democrats, who might as well cross the floor and become Tories, as they've deserted their own voters and probably destroyed their party.

How many 'predictions' have you had about the coalition?

Have you even ever commented about house prices?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Facts always beat fancy words.

This is the stuff he might be on about - it's how the Establishment Elites "Play"

A "Pyrrhic" Victory Unstressed + Unstressed Two Syllables

Note/eton the 'ikkle' lamb - "STRessed & Unstressed" 2 Syllables

gedit?

In verse and poetry, meter is a recurring pattern of stressed (accented, or long) and unstressed (unaccented, or short) syllables in lines of a set length. For example, suppose a line contains ten syllables (set length) in which the first syllable is unstressed, the second is stressed, the third is unstressed, the fourth is stressed, and so on until the line reaches the tenth syllable. The line would look like the following one (the opening line of Shakespeare's "Sonnet 18") containing a pattern of unstressed and stressed syllables. The unstressed syllables are in blue and the stressed syllables in red.

  • Shall I com PARE thee TO a SUM mer's DAY?

Each pair of unstressed and stressed syllables makes up a unit called a foot. The line contains five feet in all, as shown next:

  • ....1.............. 2.................3..............4................ 5

    Shall.I..|..com.PARE..|..thee.TO..|..a.SUM..|..mer's DAY?

.A foot containing an unstressed syllable followed by a stressed syllable (as above) is called an iamb. Because there are five feet in the line, all iambic, the meter of the line is iambic pentameter. The prefix pent in pentameter means five (Greek: penta, five). Pent is joined to words or word roots to form new words indicating five. For example, the Pentagon in Washington has five sides, the Pentateuch of the Bible consists of five books, and a pentathlon in a sports event has five events. Thus, poetry lines with five feet are in pentameter.

.......Some feet in verse and poetry have different stress patterns. For example, one type of foot consists of two unstressed syllables followed by a stressed one. Another type consists of a stressed one followed by an unstressed one. In all, there are six types of feet:

. Iamb (Iambic) Unstressed + Stressed Two Syllables

Trochee (Trochaic) Stressed + Unstressed Two Syllables

Spondee (Spondaic) Stressed + Stressed Two Syllables

Anapest (Anapestic) Unstressed + Unstressed + Stressed Three Syllables

Dactyl (Dactylic Stressed + Unstressed + Unstressed Three Syllables

Pyrrhic Unstressed + Unstressed Two Syllables .

The length of lines—and thus the meter—can also vary. Following are the types of meter and the line length:

.

Monometer One Foot

Dimeter Two Feet

Trimeter Three Feet

Tetrameter Four Feet

Pentameter Five Feet

Hexameter Six Feet

Heptameter Seven Feet

Octameter Eight Feet

.

.......Meter is determined by the type of foot and the number of feet in a line.

Thus, a line with three iambic feet is known as iambic trimeter.

A line with six dactylic feet is known as dactylic hexameter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.