quote:

Originally posted by disley21:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
They have caused the damage and are very busy explaining to you how they are stemming the damage.

Part of the damage is caused by too many State-paid jobs. Not all of these jobs are necessary and they cause the country to spend a lot of money it doesn't need to spend.

However, if the Tories reduce the numbers of these jobs (to save the country money) it looks like they are deliberately putting people on the dole.

If Labour keeps these jobs (to save putting people on the dole) it looks like they are supporting the working man. This sounds more emotionally positive.

But, think about it. Which is cheaper for the nation and would help us out of the recession quicker? To pay for uncessessary jobs at £60k a year (or whatever) or save that money, and pay less for those people to join the dole queue, or pay a visit to their local Jobcentre?

It's easy when you say it like that.

Maybe we should put you in charge of going telling people they're out of a job and they've got to go on the dole, possibly for the first time in their lives, where they then have to deal with the stigma associated with it, seeing as you clearly don't have a problem with it at all.

Better yet, try it yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by who is she:
have you ever in your life been asked the questions that they ask you? how you can say it is an easier option I despair, the humiliation of having to go in a place like that, when you have worked for everything you ever had in your life I am truly astounded some can be so glib about it, I hope you never in your life have to experience it.

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
It is useful to be pragmatic in politics, or even take a Utilitarian view.

If the public park in your neighbourhood is full of flowers to make it look pretty, should people be allowed to pick those flowers, or dig them up, and put them in their own homes to look pretty?

After all, we all want our homes to look pretty?

The Utilitarian view is to leave the flowers in the park, because they are for everybody to enjoy, not just a self-selected few.

So it is with government. The Utilitarian view is to try to do good for the greatest number of people.

If a few people's feelings are hurt by losing their expensive government-sponsored jobs, should this be at the expense of the majority, who want to save the country money?

The problem with the Labour party, is they appeal to people's emotions. They spend a lot of money trying not to hurt people's feelings (dumbing down education, creating jobs, creating egalitarian issues which divide more than ever).

Their methods are to assume that people can't make their own decisions, so they must be told what to eat and how often, where and when to smoke, what to put in which dustbin, or whether or not they can have NHS treatment depending on how fat they are. They use emotive words to persuade the electorate of their intentions, and these emotive words fill some of the electorate with such guilt if they disagree with them, that they are persuaded the Labour Party is the only part which cares for The People. This indeed is today's mantra, famously spoken by Mrs Harmon last night. You are a Bad Person if you do not agree with Labour's policies. You are a Bad Person if you agree with Conservative policies.

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:

quote:

Originally posted by disley21:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
They have caused the damage and are very busy explaining to you how they are stemming the damage.

Part of the damage is caused by too many State-paid jobs. Not all of these jobs are necessary and they cause the country to spend a lot of money it doesn't need to spend.

However, if the Tories reduce the numbers of these jobs (to save the country money) it looks like they are deliberately putting people on the dole.

If Labour keeps these jobs (to save putting people on the dole) it looks like they are supporting the working man. This sounds more emotionally positive.

But, think about it. Which is cheaper for the nation and would help us out of the recession quicker? To pay for uncessessary jobs at £60k a year (or whatever) or save that money, and pay less for those people to join the dole queue, or pay a visit to their local Jobcentre?

It's easy when you say it like that.

Maybe we should put you in charge of going telling people they're out of a job and they've got to go on the dole, possibly for the first time in their lives, where they then have to deal with the stigma associated with it, seeing as you clearly don't have a problem with it at all.

Better yet, try it yourself.

Then cut the pay of some of these jobs....if the state are paying, cut the pay to the average wage and save £1000's a year AND keep people in work....

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:
They are gaining seats all over the country...I dont understand it, as I feel they were the worst offenders


Are people REALLY that forgiving or just plain stupid

Maybe it's because they are sick of watching the UNELECTED Gordon Brown killing this country. I'm sure that most people base who they vote for or more than the expenses....I would say POLICY had a big part to play in it. I'd say you'd be pretty daft to cast a vote purely on the expenses scandal....

*sorry if this has already been said...haven't read the thread yet!!!!*

Not only the unelected Gordon Brown, but the 7 unelected members of his cabinet.

oh the great unelected debate.......the last time I voted it was for a party and its policies not for a person who I happened to like the look of

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:
In my view its not so much about Gordon Brown being unelected but having proved himself to be totally unable to do the job. The fact that we are in the financial mess we are now when he was Chancellor for so many years, stating over and over again how prudent he was, proves that beyond the shadow of a doubt.

quote:

Originally posted by bozzimacoo:
don't forget high interest rates

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:
They are gaining seats all over the country...I dont understand it, as I feel they were the worst offenders


Are people REALLY that forgiving or just plain stupid

Maybe it's because they are sick of watching the UNELECTED Gordon Brown killing this country. I'm sure that most people base who they vote for or more than the expenses....I would say POLICY had a big part to play in it. I'd say you'd be pretty daft to cast a vote purely on the expenses scandal....

*sorry if this has already been said...haven't read the thread yet!!!!*

Not only the unelected Gordon Brown, but the 7 unelected members of his cabinet.

oh the great unelected debate.......the last time I voted it was for a party and its policies not for a person who I happened to like the look of

But you have to be able to TRUST the leader of that party to push the policy through and believe they will stick to their word....I wouldn't trust Brown with my hamster, never mind the country.

and how can you possible make an assumption on whether you trust them by listening to a few speeches.........unless you have a sixth sense.

quote:

Originally posted by disley21:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
They have caused the damage and are very busy explaining to you how they are stemming the damage.

Part of the damage is caused by too many State-paid jobs. Not all of these jobs are necessary and they cause the country to spend a lot of money it doesn't need to spend.

However, if the Tories reduce the numbers of these jobs (to save the country money) it looks like they are deliberately putting people on the dole.

If Labour keeps these jobs (to save putting people on the dole) it looks like they are supporting the working man. This sounds more emotionally positive.

But, think about it. Which is cheaper for the nation and would help us out of the recession quicker? To pay for uncessessary jobs at £60k a year (or whatever) or save that money, and pay less for those people to join the dole queue, or pay a visit to their local Jobcentre?

It's easy when you say it like that.

Maybe we should put you in charge of going telling people they're out of a job and they've got to go on the dole, possibly for the first time in their lives, where they then have to deal with the stigma associated with it, seeing as you clearly don't have a problem with it at all.

Better yet, try it yourself.

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:

quote:

Originally posted by bozzimacoo:
don't forget high interest rates

mmmm was that 15% or 16%

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:

But you have to be able to TRUST the leader of that party to push the policy through and believe they will stick to their word....I wouldn't trust Brown with my hamster, never mind the country.

and how can you possible make an assumption on whether you trust them by listening to a few speeches.........unless you have a sixth sense.

Because if their own party feels confident in electing them for leadership, it at least indicates to the rest of the country that the man or woman has some ability, regardless of whether you agree with their policies. Gordon Brown has not been through that process.

quote:

Originally posted by disley21:

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:

quote:

Originally posted by disley21:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
They have caused the damage and are very busy explaining to you how they are stemming the damage.

Part of the damage is caused by too many State-paid jobs. Not all of these jobs are necessary and they cause the country to spend a lot of money it doesn't need to spend.

However, if the Tories reduce the numbers of these jobs (to save the country money) it looks like they are deliberately putting people on the dole.

If Labour keeps these jobs (to save putting people on the dole) it looks like they are supporting the working man. This sounds more emotionally positive.

But, think about it. Which is cheaper for the nation and would help us out of the recession quicker? To pay for uncessessary jobs at £60k a year (or whatever) or save that money, and pay less for those people to join the dole queue, or pay a visit to their local Jobcentre?

It's easy when you say it like that.

Maybe we should put you in charge of going telling people they're out of a job and they've got to go on the dole, possibly for the first time in their lives, where they then have to deal with the stigma associated with it, seeing as you clearly don't have a problem with it at all.

Better yet, try it yourself.

Then cut the pay of some of these jobs....if the state are paying, cut the pay to the average wage and save £1000's a year AND keep people in work....

You see, that's a far more logical solution than simply turfing people out and forcing them to live on scraps.

quote:

Originally posted by love greek sunsets:
I have read throgh this thread with interest, but would have to say some do get quite personal when debating, both as bad as one another, a bit like the politicians

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by Garage Joe:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
This is the worst situation the country has ever been in, bar the 1930s crisis.

My Mum and Dad would disagree and would draw your attention to 1940. Luckily Churchill kept his nerve even though the scratters kept banging on about him being unelected.

World War II was caused by the global economic crisis of the 1930s and could be seen as an extension of it. The war itself wasn't an economic crisis and can't be compared with today's peacetime crisis.

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by who is she:
have you ever in your life been asked the questions that they ask you? how you can say it is an easier option I despair, the humiliation of having to go in a place like that, when you have worked for everything you ever had in your life I am truly astounded some can be so glib about it, I hope you never in your life have to experience it.

And you really belive Labour is the cause of all this and the Conservatives the answer?

I don't know if you are talking to me, but people are employed in order to help the finances of the company they work for. Now, whether that company is a government department, or county council department, or Woolworth's, or Curry's doesn't make any real difference.

If the company is earning less money than it pays out, it cannot act as if it is a charity and keep people on because they will not be "glib" about letting them go. If they don't have enough money to pay all the people, then some people will have to go, in order for the company to stay in the black, and not collapse.

Now, the hundred-year-old Woolworth's was not in this position. It had to let EVERYBODY go because it just did not have the money to recover. Other companies are letting SOME people go, in order to try and recover.

If companies keep people on just because they feel sorry for them and detest the stigma their employees will feel if they go on the dole, the companies will collapse completely, like Woolworth's.

This country is heading for bankruptcy, like Woolworth's. If it does not save money, it will become bankrupt. And if it becomes bankrupt, it will not have the money to fund the dole queues, or the NHS, or education. Everything will have to be paid for privately, like it was before the development of our magnificent welfare state in the 1940s.

It will become like some of those former Eastern Bloc countries, like Bulgaria or Romania. No pavements, bad roads, a shoddy health service, low wages, bad housing, because there will just not be the money to pay for it all which we take for granted today.

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:

quote:

Originally posted by bozzimacoo:
don't forget high interest rates

mmmm was that 15% or 16%

quote:

Originally posted by love greek sunsets:

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:

quote:

Originally posted by bozzimacoo:
don't forget high interest rates

mmmm was that 15% or 16%

god could you imagine it

quote:

Originally posted by forgetmenot:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by who is she:
have you ever in your life been asked the questions that they ask you? how you can say it is an easier option I despair, the humiliation of having to go in a place like that, when you have worked for everything you ever had in your life I am truly astounded some can be so glib about it, I hope you never in your life have to experience it.

And you really belive Labour is the cause of all this and the Conservatives the answer?

I don't know if you are talking to me, but people are employed in order to help the finances of the company they work for. Now, whether that company is a government department, or county council department, or Woolworth's, or Curry's doesn't make any real difference.

If the company is earning less money than it pays out, it cannot act as if it is a charity and keep people on because they will not be "glib" about letting them go. If they don't have enough money to pay all the people, then some people will have to go, in order for the company to stay in the black, and not collapse.

Now, the hundred-year-old Woolworth's was not in this position. It had to let EVERYBODY go because it just did not have the money to recover. Other companies are letting SOME people go, in order to try and recover.

If companies keep people on just because they feel sorry for them and detest the stigma their employees will feel if they go on the dole, the companies will collapse completely, like Woolworth's.

This country is heading for bankruptcy, like Woolworth's. If it does not save money, it will become bankrupt. And if it becomes bankrupt, it will not have the money to fund the dole queues, or the NHS, or education. Everything will have to be paid for privately, like it was before the development of our magnificent welfare state in the 1940s.

It will become like some of those former Eastern Bloc countries, like Bulgaria or Romania. No pavements, bad roads, a shoddy health service, low wages, bad housing, because there will just not be the money to pay for it all which we take for granted today.

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:
Some of the jobs I think Jennywren may have had in mind....

- Street Football Coordinator: Moray Council, Salary: £19,887
- European Programme Policy Officer: Advantage West Midlands, Salary: £29,687 - £37,109
- Community Space Challenger Co-ordinator: Southwark Council, Salary: £28,494 - £33,777
- Head of Communities and Partnership: Charnwood Borough Council, Salary: £34,991 - £37,543
- Enviro-Crime Enforcement Officer: Lambeth Council, Salary: £29,241 – £30,774
- Equality and Diversity Manager: East Kent Hospitals University NHS Trust, Salary: £29,091 - £38,352
- Communications and Strategy Manager: Allerdale Borough Council, Salary: £34,991 - £37,543
- Public Affairs Manager: East of England Development Agency, Salary: £40,304 - £45,189
- Head of Participation and Inclusion: Hertfordshire County Council, Salary: £38,729 - £42,197

quote:

Originally posted by Lockes no 1 fan:
which was a question not an insult.......and to be fair anyone who thinks that the tories would do a better job than labour must be stupid because if you look at their policies they are just the same as Labours. The only thing that sets them apart is their colours

quote:

Originally posted by Soozy woo:

quote:

Originally posted by disley21:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
They have caused the damage and are very busy explaining to you how they are stemming the damage.

Part of the damage is caused by too many State-paid jobs. Not all of these jobs are necessary and they cause the country to spend a lot of money it doesn't need to spend.

However, if the Tories reduce the numbers of these jobs (to save the country money) it looks like they are deliberately putting people on the dole.

If Labour keeps these jobs (to save putting people on the dole) it looks like they are supporting the working man. This sounds more emotionally positive.

But, think about it. Which is cheaper for the nation and would help us out of the recession quicker? To pay for uncessessary jobs at £60k a year (or whatever) or save that money, and pay less for those people to join the dole queue, or pay a visit to their local Jobcentre?

It's easy when you say it like that.

Maybe we should put you in charge of going telling people they're out of a job and they've got to go on the dole, possibly for the first time in their lives, where they then have to deal with the stigma associated with it, seeing as you clearly don't have a problem with it at all.

Better yet, try it yourself.

And lets face it ........when there is mass unemployment people no longer go out to restaurants or buy things other than complete necessity ..........shops and businesses lose trade and lay off even more staff. It has a knock on effect you know.

we need people working in order to spend money to help recovery ....there is a bigger picture it's not all black and white.

When the mining/shipping and steel industries were shut down en masse - whole communities suffered - all the local shops and businneses went bust too. Sometime it's cheaper in the long run to subsidise jobs to keep the economy running.

quote:

Originally posted by forgetmenot:
sorry put my bit in the wrong place.. say it again. Sop, you really think labour is the cause of all this and the CONS are the answer? god help us then..

quote:

Originally posted by love greek sunsets:

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:
- Head of Participation and Inclusion: Hertfordshire County Council, Salary: £38,729 - £42,197

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by disley21:

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:

quote:

Originally posted by disley21:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
They have caused the damage and are very busy explaining to you how they are stemming the damage.

Part of the damage is caused by too many State-paid jobs. Not all of these jobs are necessary and they cause the country to spend a lot of money it doesn't need to spend.

However, if the Tories reduce the numbers of these jobs (to save the country money) it looks like they are deliberately putting people on the dole.

If Labour keeps these jobs (to save putting people on the dole) it looks like they are supporting the working man. This sounds more emotionally positive.

But, think about it. Which is cheaper for the nation and would help us out of the recession quicker? To pay for uncessessary jobs at £60k a year (or whatever) or save that money, and pay less for those people to join the dole queue, or pay a visit to their local Jobcentre?

It's easy when you say it like that.

Maybe we should put you in charge of going telling people they're out of a job and they've got to go on the dole, possibly for the first time in their lives, where they then have to deal with the stigma associated with it, seeing as you clearly don't have a problem with it at all.

Better yet, try it yourself.

Then cut the pay of some of these jobs....if the state are paying, cut the pay to the average wage and save £1000's a year AND keep people in work....

You see, that's a far more logical solution than simply turfing people out and forcing them to live on scraps.

It's a solution if it saves ENOUGH money to help save the country from bankruptcy. The other thing to look at, is how useful some of these jobs actually are? Do they actually contribute anything to the nation other than save one more person person from going on the dole queue?

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by love greek sunsets:

I saw a Greek sunset only last night!

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by Soozy woo:

quote:

Originally posted by disley21:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
They have caused the damage and are very busy explaining to you how they are stemming the damage.

Part of the damage is caused by too many State-paid jobs. Not all of these jobs are necessary and they cause the country to spend a lot of money it doesn't need to spend.

However, if the Tories reduce the numbers of these jobs (to save the country money) it looks like they are deliberately putting people on the dole.

If Labour keeps these jobs (to save putting people on the dole) it looks like they are supporting the working man. This sounds more emotionally positive.

But, think about it. Which is cheaper for the nation and would help us out of the recession quicker? To pay for uncessessary jobs at £60k a year (or whatever) or save that money, and pay less for those people to join the dole queue, or pay a visit to their local Jobcentre?

It's easy when you say it like that.

Maybe we should put you in charge of going telling people they're out of a job and they've got to go on the dole, possibly for the first time in their lives, where they then have to deal with the stigma associated with it, seeing as you clearly don't have a problem with it at all.

Better yet, try it yourself.

And lets face it ........when there is mass unemployment people no longer go out to restaurants or buy things other than complete necessity ..........shops and businesses lose trade and lay off even more staff. It has a knock on effect you know.

we need people working in order to spend money to help recovery ....there is a bigger picture it's not all black and white.

When the mining/shipping and steel industries were shut down en masse - whole communities suffered - all the local shops and businneses went bust too. Sometime it's cheaper in the long run to subsidise jobs to keep the economy running.

One of the major causes of this recession was the great numbers of people spending money which didn't exist). The Labour policy of spending our way out of recession is just an extension of this.

Simples.

If the money isn't there, you can't spend it.

Cheaper mortgages might mean people can still afford to go out to restaurants and the cinema, but they go for pleasure, not specifically to keep people in jobs.

However, for example, there is a great swathe of the British Nation which wants its 30-something children to leave home and set up their own nest. When property prices drop low enough for these 30-somethings to be able to afford to buy their own property, and when the mortgage companies start releasing more money (at more inflated interest rates), Mrs and Mrs Britain will be remortgaging their properties to let Miss and Master Britain have the deposits in order to leave home.

The 30-somethings, who are now busily munching their way through restaurants and popcorn at the cinema will find they will have to stay home more in order to pay their mortgage. Meantime, so will their parents.

And that is one of the reasons this recession has not even begun to bite yet.

quote:

Originally posted by Garage Joe:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by Garage Joe:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
This is the worst situation the country has ever been in, bar the 1930s crisis.

My Mum and Dad would disagree and would draw your attention to 1940. Luckily Churchill kept his nerve even though the scratters kept banging on about him being unelected.

World War II was caused by the global economic crisis of the 1930s and could be seen as an extension of it. The war itself wasn't an economic crisis and can't be compared with today's peacetime crisis.

No it wasn't.
Apart from that I am replying to someone who said worst crisis.
If you want a worst economic crisis since 1930 then think North East 1979 onwards. Thatcher etc etc. We haven't recovered from it yet.

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
And that is one of the reasons this recession has not even begun to bite yet.

quote:

Originally posted by forgetmenot:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by who is she:
have you ever in your life been asked the questions that they ask you? how you can say it is an easier option I despair, the humiliation of having to go in a place like that, when you have worked for everything you ever had in your life I am truly astounded some can be so glib about it, I hope you never in your life have to experience it.

And you really belive Labour is the cause of all this and the Conservatives the answer?

I don't know if you are talking to me, but people are employed in order to help the finances of the company they work for. Now, whether that company is a government department, or county council department, or Woolworth's, or Curry's doesn't make any real difference.

If the company is earning less money than it pays out, it cannot act as if it is a charity and keep people on because they will not be "glib" about letting them go. If they don't have enough money to pay all the people, then some people will have to go, in order for the company to stay in the black, and not collapse.

Now, the hundred-year-old Woolworth's was not in this position. It had to let EVERYBODY go because it just did not have the money to recover. Other companies are letting SOME people go, in order to try and recover.

If companies keep people on just because they feel sorry for them and detest the stigma their employees will feel if they go on the dole, the companies will collapse completely, like Woolworth's.

This country is heading for bankruptcy, like Woolworth's. If it does not save money, it will become bankrupt. And if it becomes bankrupt, it will not have the money to fund the dole queues, or the NHS, or education. Everything will have to be paid for privately, like it was before the development of our magnificent welfare state in the 1940s.

It will become like some of those former Eastern Bloc countries, like Bulgaria or Romania. No pavements, bad roads, a shoddy health service, low wages, bad housing, because there will just not be the money to pay for it all which we take for granted today.

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
And that is one of the reasons this recession has not even begun to bite yet.

I reckon we've still got a fair few fixed rate mortgages due to switch to SVR in the next year or two. That could rack up a lot of mortgage defaults for people mortgaged to the hilt or whose jobs are a bit risky. That could create a bit of a domino effect as those defaults will go onto the bank balance sheets and enough of those could endanger the banks again.

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:
And that is one of the reasons this recession has not even begun to bite yet.

I reckon we've still got a fair few fixed rate mortgages due to switch to SVR in the next year or two. That could rack up a lot of mortgage defaults for people mortgaged to the hilt or whose jobs are a bit risky. That could create a bit of a domino effect as those defaults will go onto the bank balance sheets and enough of those could endanger the banks again.

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:
Some of the jobs I think Jennywren may have had in mind....

- Street Football Coordinator: Moray Council, Salary: £19,887
- European Programme Policy Officer: Advantage West Midlands, Salary: £29,687 - £37,109
- Community Space Challenger Co-ordinator: Southwark Council, Salary: £28,494 - £33,777
- Head of Communities and Partnership: Charnwood Borough Council, Salary: £34,991 - £37,543
- Enviro-Crime Enforcement Officer: Lambeth Council, Salary: £29,241 – £30,774
- Equality and Diversity Manager: East Kent Hospitals University NHS Trust, Salary: £29,091 - £38,352
- Communications and Strategy Manager: Allerdale Borough Council, Salary: £34,991 - £37,543
- Public Affairs Manager: East of England Development Agency, Salary: £40,304 - £45,189
- Head of Participation and Inclusion: Hertfordshire County Council, Salary: £38,729 - £42,197

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by MrsB:
Some of the jobs I think Jennywren may have had in mind....

- Street Football Coordinator: Moray Council, Salary: £19,887
- European Programme Policy Officer: Advantage West Midlands, Salary: £29,687 - £37,109
- Community Space Challenger Co-ordinator: Southwark Council, Salary: £28,494 - £33,777
- Head of Communities and Partnership: Charnwood Borough Council, Salary: £34,991 - £37,543
- Enviro-Crime Enforcement Officer: Lambeth Council, Salary: £29,241 – £30,774
- Equality and Diversity Manager: East Kent Hospitals University NHS Trust, Salary: £29,091 - £38,352
- Communications and Strategy Manager: Allerdale Borough Council, Salary: £34,991 - £37,543
- Public Affairs Manager: East of England Development Agency, Salary: £40,304 - £45,189
- Head of Participation and Inclusion: Hertfordshire County Council, Salary: £38,729 - £42,197

Indeed, Mrs B, but the schools and NHS are also full of non-jobs which are nothing more than several layers of managers managing the managers. Too much NHS money goes to all these managers, and not enough into the health of the nation.

quote:

Originally posted by forgetmenot:
spot on, raise your voice and keep repeating it, people have forgotten to easilly about thta evil thatcherism, or are to young to remember.

quote:

Originally posted by forgetmenot:

spot on, raise your voice and keep repeating it, people have forgotten to easilly about thta evil thatcherism, or are to young to remember.

quote:

Originally posted by love greek sunsets:

quote:

Originally posted by jennywren:

quote:

Originally posted by love greek sunsets:

I saw a Greek sunset only last night!

you lucky thing