Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
According to http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp99/r p99-111.pdf life expectancy for a UK male has gone from about 70 to about 75 in between 1981 2011 - say 7,5% increase, I can't find the exact figures at the moment but productivity per worker over the same period has increased by much much more. Well I'd say it was slightly more than that (78?) and anyway that is the LE at Birth, the figures so will only come into play in the middle of this century - the figures we'd want would be of people of working age and an average at that. But they probably did have the figures, I think they ignored the effect on future generations because no-one is going to turn down the chance of vast wealth so they all agreed on it, and now when the bills start to come in we realise what a momentously stupid and greedy idea it was. No one needs so much money when they retire. more tax and better state pension is the right way to go - just like in France (at least up until now) If we could afford final salary pensions in 1981 (and we could) why can't we today? (clue - the answer is in my preceeding mails ;)) My contention is that no only were people were blinded by greed and therefore igored the cyclical nature of the markets - which you agree - of but also ignoring the inexoarble increase in the life expectancy - which you don't - I guess we'll have to disagree. ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
What was the results of voting on Thursday? Dr Michael Benjamin, Community Psychiatrist They tried to make us vote for AV, we said No, No, No.Yes vote at 32.1% and the No vote at 67.9%. ... unless the FA disciplinary committee believes there has been malpractice and awards the referendum to Clegg but only in a year's time! ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Or, 26% of the electorate said no, 14% said yes and 60% couldn't be bothered either way. How's about a referendum on compulsory voting next time? On 7 May 2011, at 08:25, Dave Sowden davesow...@hotmail.com wrote: What was the results of voting on Thursday? Dr Michael Benjamin, Community Psychiatrist They tried to make us vote for AV, we said No, No, No.Yes vote at 32.1% and the No vote at 67.9%. ... unless the FA disciplinary committee believes there has been malpractice and awards the referendum to Clegg but only in a year's time! ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Were there Local Elections too? Michael Dr Michael Benjamin, Community Psychiatrist --- myRay: On-line Self-Help CBT http://www.myRay.com -- Mental Health: http//www.MyDoctorExplains.com Auditing || Quality Control http://www.MyDoctorExplains.com/alamo/ Blog: http://www.DrMichaelBenjamin.com 2011/5/7 Dave Sowden davesow...@hotmail.com What was the results of voting on Thursday? Dr Michael Benjamin, Community Psychiatrist They tried to make us vote for AV, we said No, No, No. Yes vote at 32.1% and the No vote at 67.9%. ... unless the FA disciplinary committee believes there has been malpractice and awards the referendum to Clegg but only in a year's time! ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
I find compulsory voting an affront to freedom of speech. Or the freedom to not speak. If people don't know or don't care about an issue, then it is better they don't vote and their influence on a vote something people ARE bothered about is zero. Still 69% for a NO vote, on a higher than expected turnout, is pretty resounding. Pretty resounding whether you measure it FPTP or as a proportion of voters in an AV way. Still, never mind chaps, as Labour are SO committed to AV, I am sure they will have it in their next manifesto so you can vote for it again that way. I am positive (in a FPTP way, 49%) they will ignore the fact 69% of people DON'T want it and stick with their principles. My AV on the matter however is no they wont because they are more bothered by getting elected regardless of which principle they have to eject. Only 4 years to wait for the answer - how exciting! -Original Message- From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On Behalf Of Jim Moran Sent: 07 May 2011 08:29 To: Dave Sowden Cc: LEEDS List Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Or, 26% of the electorate said no, 14% said yes and 60% couldn't be bothered either way. How's about a referendum on compulsory voting next time? On 7 May 2011, at 08:25, Dave Sowden davesow...@hotmail.com wrote: What was the results of voting on Thursday? Dr Michael Benjamin, Community Psychiatrist They tried to make us vote for AV, we said No, No, No.Yes vote at 32.1% and the No vote at 67.9%. ... unless the FA disciplinary committee believes there has been malpractice and awards the referendum to Clegg but only in a year's time! ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
People should have to take an intelligence/common sense test to be allowed to vote. That way we would get better quality voters and wouldn't get R/tards voting for BNP and EDL Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device -Original Message- From: Mark Humphries mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk Sender: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 09:09:29 To: 'Jim Moran'j...@jimmoran.co.uk; 'Dave Sowden'davesow...@hotmail.com Cc: 'LEEDS List'leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? I find compulsory voting an affront to freedom of speech. Or the freedom to not speak. If people don't know or don't care about an issue, then it is better they don't vote and their influence on a vote something people ARE bothered about is zero. Still 69% for a NO vote, on a higher than expected turnout, is pretty resounding. Pretty resounding whether you measure it FPTP or as a proportion of voters in an AV way. Still, never mind chaps, as Labour are SO committed to AV, I am sure they will have it in their next manifesto so you can vote for it again that way. I am positive (in a FPTP way, 49%) they will ignore the fact 69% of people DON'T want it and stick with their principles. My AV on the matter however is no they wont because they are more bothered by getting elected regardless of which principle they have to eject. Only 4 years to wait for the answer - how exciting! -Original Message- From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On Behalf Of Jim Moran Sent: 07 May 2011 08:29 To: Dave Sowden Cc: LEEDS List Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Or, 26% of the electorate said no, 14% said yes and 60% couldn't be bothered either way. How's about a referendum on compulsory voting next time? On 7 May 2011, at 08:25, Dave Sowden davesow...@hotmail.com wrote: What was the results of voting on Thursday? Dr Michael Benjamin, Community Psychiatrist They tried to make us vote for AV, we said No, No, No.Yes vote at 32.1% and the No vote at 67.9%. ... unless the FA disciplinary committee believes there has been malpractice and awards the referendum to Clegg but only in a year's time! ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
I was only joking. However could be defined by what newspaper you read. Starting with banning of Daily Mail readers. However have been genuinely enlightened today by Mark. Never thought of compulsory voting as restriction of liberty and probably against what it is supposed to uphold. Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device -Original Message- From: Dr. Michael Benjamin. beden...@gmail.com Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 11:58:36 To: m...@leeds-united.netm...@leeds-united.net Cc: Mark Humphriesmark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk; Leeds listleedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org; Jim Moranj...@jimmoran.co.uk; DaveSowdendavesow...@hotmail.com; LEEDS Listleedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? There can never ever be a bar to voting no matter what the erstwhile 'good ' reason. The minute you permit anyone to ' define' eligibility then along come someone else with his criteria. And his right to define. Fascism and communism was all seemingly good people at the outset. They defined. They committed atrocities. There is no way that one should decide that another is inferior or inhibited when it comes to basic rights. The most basic of which is man's equal right to express himself, receive justice and to realize his true potential and desire. Sorry to pontificate but I didnt bring up the subject and I have difficulty with any form of intolerance. Sent from my iPhone Dr Michael Benjamin Community Psychiatry On 7 May 2011, at 12:25, m...@leeds-united.net wrote: People should have to take an intelligence/common sense test to be allowed to vote. That way we would get better quality voters and wouldn't get R/tards voting for BNP and EDL Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device -Original Message- From: Mark Humphries mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk Sender: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 09:09:29 To: 'Jim Moran'j...@jimmoran.co.uk; 'Dave Sowden'davesow...@hotmail.com Cc: 'LEEDS List'leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? I find compulsory voting an affront to freedom of speech. Or the freedom to not speak. If people don't know or don't care about an issue, then it is better they don't vote and their influence on a vote something people ARE bothered about is zero. Still 69% for a NO vote, on a higher than expected turnout, is pretty resounding. Pretty resounding whether you measure it FPTP or as a proportion of voters in an AV way. Still, never mind chaps, as Labour are SO committed to AV, I am sure they will have it in their next manifesto so you can vote for it again that way. I am positive (in a FPTP way, 49%) they will ignore the fact 69% of people DON'T want it and stick with their principles. My AV on the matter however is no they wont because they are more bothered by getting elected regardless of which principle they have to eject. Only 4 years to wait for the answer - how exciting! -Original Message- From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On Behalf Of Jim Moran Sent: 07 May 2011 08:29 To: Dave Sowden Cc: LEEDS List Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Or, 26% of the electorate said no, 14% said yes and 60% couldn't be bothered either way. How's about a referendum on compulsory voting next time? On 7 May 2011, at 08:25, Dave Sowden davesow...@hotmail.com wrote: What was the results of voting on Thursday? Dr Michael Benjamin, Community Psychiatrist They tried to make us vote for AV, we said No, No, No.Yes vote at 32.1% and the No vote at 67.9%. ... unless the FA disciplinary committee believes there has been malpractice and awards the referendum to Clegg but only in a year's time! ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
As I said, invest[ment] into productive enterprise - if you are a baker, you probably won't be able to manually make bread anymore (in economically significant quantities) once your in your 70s - if though you invest in a bread making machine with some of your surplus during your productive years then the bread continues to be made after you are in your dotage, so you can continue to eat even though you are no longer directly productive. British and American business preferred to spend the surplus that should have been set aside for pension investment on excess profits (mostly dividends to their shareholders) rather than on productive investment. Like I said I have a great deal of respect for actuarial science, and I don't think there are any surprises in life expectancy today that weren't forseen (and factored into pension calculations) 25/ 30 years ago. The big surprise for companies and therir pensioners is that we don't live in a perpetual bull-market - but then again when you look at the share of profits in our GDP I think that the companies knew that from the beginning! Damian PS - Class traitor! Wages slaves do what the're told. On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Richard Naef rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk wrote: Final Salary pensions are perfectly sustainable if they are properly funded, and if the funding is invested into productive enterprise (for want of a better word). I have to say I couldn't agree less. Contributions make up a small part of the final pot., it is the predictions of growth, the poor investment polices, enormous profits and income of the people who manage them and increase in life expectancy that have caused the major part of the problem. Work for say 20 years at a company, retire at 65 (or earlier) and live for 20 years or more on the salary you finish on, do the mathematics old chap. I have been a private consumer of financial products for over 30 years now and have seen enough projections and graphs to fill the devils punch bowl, yet still need to work. Its bad enough in the public sector - which I pay for, but also private companies have had to top them up, taking money out of profits, again which I pay for. ttfn Richard ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
According to http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp99/rp99-111.pdf life expectancy for a UK male has gone from about 70 to about 75 in between 1981 2011 - say 7,5% increase, I can't find the exact figures at the moment but productivity per worker over the same period has increased by much much more. If we could afford final salary pensions in 1981 (and we could) why can't we today? (clue - the answer is in my preceeding mails ;)) Damian PS I know there are other factors such as migration and often a shorter working life in white collar jobs, but the point is the same On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Damian Walsh pussaydam...@gmail.com wrote: As I said, invest[ment] into productive enterprise - if you are a baker, you probably won't be able to manually make bread anymore (in economically significant quantities) once your in your 70s - if though you invest in a bread making machine with some of your surplus during your productive years then the bread continues to be made after you are in your dotage, so you can continue to eat even though you are no longer directly productive. British and American business preferred to spend the surplus that should have been set aside for pension investment on excess profits (mostly dividends to their shareholders) rather than on productive investment. Like I said I have a great deal of respect for actuarial science, and I don't think there are any surprises in life expectancy today that weren't forseen (and factored into pension calculations) 25/ 30 years ago. The big surprise for companies and therir pensioners is that we don't live in a perpetual bull-market - but then again when you look at the share of profits in our GDP I think that the companies knew that from the beginning! Damian PS - Class traitor! Wages slaves do what the're told. On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Richard Naef rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk wrote: Final Salary pensions are perfectly sustainable if they are properly funded, and if the funding is invested into productive enterprise (for want of a better word). I have to say I couldn't agree less. Contributions make up a small part of the final pot., it is the predictions of growth, the poor investment polices, enormous profits and income of the people who manage them and increase in life expectancy that have caused the major part of the problem. Work for say 20 years at a company, retire at 65 (or earlier) and live for 20 years or more on the salary you finish on, do the mathematics old chap. I have been a private consumer of financial products for over 30 years now and have seen enough projections and graphs to fill the devils punch bowl, yet still need to work. Its bad enough in the public sector - which I pay for, but also private companies have had to top them up, taking money out of profits, again which I pay for. ttfn Richard ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Final Salary pensions are perfectly sustainable if they are properly funded, and if the funding is invested into productive enterprise (for want of a better word). I have to say I couldn't agree less. Contributions make up a small part of the final pot., it is the predictions of growth, the poor investment polices, enormous profits and income of the people who manage them and increase in life expectancy that have caused the major part of the problem. Work for say 20 years at a company, retire at 65 (or earlier) and live for 20 years or more on the salary you finish on, do the mathematics old chap. I have been a private consumer of financial products for over 30 years now and have seen enough projections and graphs to fill the devils punch bowl, yet still need to work. Its bad enough in the public sector - which I pay for, but also private companies have had to top them up, taking money out of profits, again which I pay for. ttfn Richard ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
HEAR HEAR ! Damian Walsh wrote: PS my first IS job in 1985 was reprogramming pension schemes to allow premium holes and premium holidays so that the employers contributions did not have to be paid. Class Traitor.. :-) ___ ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
No because I don't think that the coalitions's plans are economically sound, like. They are ideologically driven, like, and have stifled the recovery to the extent that net growth in our economy over the last 6 months has been 0.0%. Deficit reduction is one thing, slash and burn quite another. In my view. I Sent from my iPhone On 4 May 2011, at 07:48, Mark Humphries mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: Cool, so you are all for the coalition in their attempts to reduce the structural deficit asap I take it? Just curious like -Original Message- From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On Behalf Of Ian Murray Sent: 03 May 2011 22:52 To: Joe Skinner Cc: LEEDSLIST Subject: Re: [LU] Good omen? It hurts when you lance a boil, and a boil doesn't kill you, but we all know that in the long term you're better off having lanced it. ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
And Labour's plan to reduce the deficit wouldn't be called slash and burn? How different was their plan? But anyway, your analogy about lancing the boil fits very well with the structural deficit plans over 4, not 5 years. One could argue that Labours idea to delay the slash and burn by 1 year before the general election was politically driven, but the fact remains all 3 major parties were committed to major spending cuts before the election, the only difference was the timing of and depth of the initial cuts. I don't blame you for your selective memory on this, Milliband suffers the same :-) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
But anyway, your analogy about lancing the boil fits very well with the structural deficit plans over 4, not 5 years. SNIP only difference was the timing of and depth of the initial cuts. trouble is the major cuts aren't really major - despite the real pain that will be caused to many particularly the poorest, the actual decrease in spending will end up in single percentage points as much of spending is guaranteed or ring fenced. Real problem is we all are living longer, working less, expect bigger pensions and don't want to pay realistic tax. communism, capitalism, fascism all nasty things but as idea's pale into insignificance with the concept of the Final Salary Pension Jesus what drugs were we taking when we thought that was a sustainable idea! I am afraid euthanasia is the only answer to our problems.. ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Since this long political thread has come round to the subject of The Cuts, perhaps I could link it back to the original issue. I understood that the good old generous Royals footed the bill for the so-called wedding, and all the rest of us had to do was stump up the paltry 20 million quid for security. But my question is: in a time when the defence chiefs are screaming about how cuts are decimating our defence capability, when we are decomissioning aircraft carriers and cancelling fighter jet programmes (all things I agree with, BTW, but that is not relevant), what are we doing paying for all these squaddies to be prancing about on horsesand paying for RAF jets to do flypasts? ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Well the 'prancing around on horses' bit is pretty self explanatory as they are called the Household Cavalry. As for the RAF Jets, most of the planes were decommisioned ones. If we are still being defended by Spitfires, Lancaster Bombers and Typhoons then we are in the sh*t if someone attacks us ala 1941 I understood that the good old generous Royals footed the bill for the so-called wedding, and all the rest of us had to do was stump up the paltry 20 million quid for security. But my question is: in a time when the defence chiefs are screaming about how cuts are decimating our defence capability, when we are decomissioning aircraft carriers and cancelling fighter jet programmes (all things I agree with, BTW, but that is not relevant), what are we doing paying for all these squaddies to be prancing about on horsesand paying for RAF jets to do flypasts? ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Because we're British Because we've been doing it for the last 4 or 500 years (RAF flyovers notwithstanding) Because we can Because nobody does it better I enjoyed it - Original Message - From: Robert Heath rhe...@mis-munich.de To: Richard Naef rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk; leedslist@gn.apc.org Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 7:53 PM Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Since this long political thread has come round to the subject of The Cuts, perhaps I could link it back to the original issue. I understood that the good old generous Royals footed the bill for the so-called wedding, and all the rest of us had to do was stump up the paltry 20 million quid for security. But my question is: in a time when the defence chiefs are screaming about how cuts are decimating our defence capability, when we are decomissioning aircraft carriers and cancelling fighter jet programmes (all things I agree with, BTW, but that is not relevant), what are we doing paying for all these squaddies to be prancing about on horsesand paying for RAF jets to do flypasts? ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 6092 (20110503) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
As for the RAF Jets, most of the planes were decommisioned ones. If we are still being defended by Spitfires, Lancaster Bombers and Typhoons then we are in the sh*t if someone attacks us ala 1941 We are still very much being defended by Typhoons! It's what the RAF calls a Eurofighter. Not to be confused with the WW2 tank-buster Typhoon. Two Eurofighter Typhoons were involved in the flypast. the only surviving WW2 Typhoon is in the RAF museum at Hendon. M ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. ;-) I only saw the flypast on the news, having spent the day building a bin store and clearing out loads of rubbish. As for the RAF Jets, most of the planes were decommisioned ones. If we are still being defended by Spitfires, Lancaster Bombers and Typhoons then we are in the sh*t if someone attacks us ala 1941 We are still very much being defended by Typhoons! It's what the RAF calls a Eurofighter. Not to be confused with the WW2 tank-buster Typhoon. Two Eurofighter Typhoons were involved in the flypast. the only surviving WW2 Typhoon is in the RAF museum at Hendon. M ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
On 04/05/2011 11:50, Tim Leslie wrote: PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. ;-) I only saw the flypast on the news, having spent the day building a bin store Didn't work though did it? They still found him. ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Reduce the deficit, not fill it. And as I'm sure you know, the structural deficit is not the same thing as the national debt, which is fast approaching a TRILLION pounds. In that context 1 extra bank holiday every 30 years is pissing in the wind. If only Labour had read all of John Keynes theory and not just stopped at the it is ok to spend when times are bad bit and got our cheque books out, conveniently ignoring the as long as you save when times are good bit eh :-). Then, depending what colour you are, we might not be having to make such drastic cuts in public spending, or have the excuse of the deficit/debt to make ideological cuts. Either way you look at it, it is Blair/Brown/Darling to blame, not Cameron, not Clegg, not FPTP, not the Queen and not Ken Bates. What a shitter. -Original Message- From: Ian Murray [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com] Sent: 04 May 2011 14:00 To: Mark Humphries Cc: Robert Heath; Richard Naef; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Maybe we can use the cake and pop tax revenue to fill this deficit you seem so concerned about? Or no, we have to offset that against the net loss to the economy of billions caused by the extra BH. (not that I complained too much, but the points there) Sent from my iPhone ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Would have been an interesting dogfight to watch from the fens though, a typhoon vs a bf109 -Original Message- From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On Behalf Of markbu...@aol.com Sent: 04 May 2011 13:55 To: t...@3leafieldvillas.co.uk; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. PLANE SPOTTER ALERT. ;-) Ah, you need to get in touch with your inner anorak ;-) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Hmm what evidence have you got that they spent any money ever or came for the wedding. Don't all tourists go to france instead because paris is warmer? Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device -Original Message- From: Mark Humphries mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk Sender: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 11:57:34 To: 'Robert Heath'rhe...@mis-munich.de; 'Richard Naef'rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Collecting the extra tax revenue from those idiot tourists (from UK and overseas) who came into town to watch the poncey horses and raf jet? And broadcasting rights? And extra sale of champers? And union flags? And cakes and pop for all the street parties? -Original Message- From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On Behalf Of Robert Heath Sent: 04 May 2011 10:54 To: Richard Naef; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Since this long political thread has come round to the subject of The Cuts, perhaps I could link it back to the original issue. I understood that the good old generous Royals footed the bill for the so-called wedding, and all the rest of us had to do was stump up the paltry 20 million quid for security. But my question is: in a time when the defence chiefs are screaming about how cuts are decimating our defence capability, when we are decomissioning aircraft carriers and cancelling fighter jet programmes (all things I agree with, BTW, but that is not relevant), what are we doing paying for all these squaddies to be prancing about on horsesand paying for RAF jets to do flypasts? ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it) ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Sent from my iPhone On 4 May 2011, at 14:23, Mark Humphries mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote: Reduce the deficit, not fill it. Semantics, pedantics. And as I'm sure you know, the structural deficit is not the same thing as the national debt, which is fast approaching a TRILLION pounds. Yeah I know. What's your point? I like the way you capitalise the word TRILLION though, to emphasise it's hugeoscity. Are you some sort of Tory recruitment officer? This is getting to be a bit on the boring side pal. In that context 1 extra bank holiday every 30 years is pissing in the wind. Nope. I raised it in a light hearted way. I think you were serious about your pop and cake tax though. If only Labour had read all of John Keynes theory and not just stopped at the it is ok to spend when times are bad bit and got our cheque books out, conveniently ignoring the as long as you save when times are good bit eh :-). OK mate. I'll defer to your supreme knowledge of macroeconomic affairs. All I'll say is you conveniently ignore that THE ENTIRE DEVELOPED WORLD (I can learn at least one thing from you) was in recession. I don't remember the Tories jumping up and down about our underegulation of the banks 1997-2008, which ultimately caused this mess. Perhaps you can send me a link to the appropriate Hansard entries? Then, depending what colour you are, we might not be having to make such drastic cuts in public spending, or have the excuse of the deficit/debt to make ideological cuts. Either way you look at it, it is Blair/Brown/Darling to blame not Cameron, not Clegg, not FPTP, not the Queen and not Ken Bates. Nah - the lack of growth (our only hope for a sustained recovery) is Oik and Dave's fault. Ably assisted by Cleggster What a shitter. Indeed. -Original Message- From: Ian Murray. [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com] VSent: 04 May 2011 14:00 To: Mark Humphries Cc: Robert Heath; Richard Naef; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Maybe we can use the cake and pop tax revenue to fill this deficit you seem so concerned about? Or no, we have to offset that against the net loss to the economy of billions caused by the extra BH. (not that I complained too much, but the points there) Sent from my iPhone ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
I can see this is all upsetting you, so I will just say it doesn't matter what the tories (or libdems) thought about the deregulation of the financial services sector, Labour did the deed, no one else. I also don't remember reading any other chancellor in the developed world claiming they had banished boom and bust? eh? don't you think financial ministers in EVERY country make totally unfounded and unrealsitic claims - how else would they get voted in? the public voted labour in* because they were sick of thatchers slash and burn and tory corruption and wanted increased public spending, trouble is they also wanted low taxes, so the stupid nitwits borrowed money as did most countries and pretty much every citizen in them. Only the libdems pre Clegg were brave enough to suggest real increasses in tax for the middle class and weathly and a fat lot of good it did them. I was around in the 70's and things are still a lot better now and people better off, but we now have to spend a few years working hard to pay for it. * I say voted in because of course they and pretty much every govt post 1970 got a minority of the votes cast but still had enormous majorities due to the stupid electoral system. ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Of course we would. Pity you couldn’t lend Tony and Gordon your crystal ball though, would have prevented the tories getting in again wouldn’t it. -Original Message- From: Ian Murray [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com] Sent: 04 May 2011 15:55 To: Mark Humphries Cc: Robert Heath; Richard Naef; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? We would have been in a much worse position under the Tories 1997-2008 since they would have made vast improvements to healthcare, the schooling system, ema, minimum wage etc etc etc. ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Whereas obviously you're seeing all this through the retrospectoscope. Hindsight makes prophets of us all. The investment in all public services was needed after 18 years of Tory rule. Many mistakes were made but a vast improvement was seen, most obviously in the NHS. And, forgive me for adopting your pedantry, the Tories did not get in. They had to form a coalition to form a government. From: mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk To: ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com CC: rhe...@mis-munich.de; rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: RE: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 17:35:35 +0100 Of course we would. Pity you couldn’t lend Tony and Gordon your crystal ball though, would have prevented the tories getting in again wouldn’t it. -Original Message- From: Ian Murray [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com] Sent: 04 May 2011 15:55 To: Mark Humphries Cc: Robert Heath; Richard Naef; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? We would have been in a much worse position under the Tories 1997-2008 since they would have made vast improvements to healthcare, the schooling system, ema, minimum wage etc etc etc. ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
They may do, but has one ever blown up in someones face so dramatically? I mean, Gordy was the self styled economic genius of his generation, so he told us. But the thing that I really don't get is how so soon after this happened, Milliband is trying to now pretend we don't need slash and burn cuts and to trust their economic nouse, and some people believe him. -Original Message- From: leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org [mailto:leedslist-boun...@gn.apc.org] On Behalf Of Richard Naef Sent: 04 May 2011 17:25 To: leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? eh? don't you think financial ministers in EVERY country make totally unfounded and unrealsitic claims - how else would they get voted in? ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
On 04/05/2011 14:23, Mark Humphries wrote: Either way you look at it, it is Blair/Brown/Darling to blame, not Cameron, not Clegg, not FPTP, not the Queen and not Ken Bates. And just how do you know it's not Ken Bates, Mark? Whio knows what shit the old beardy bastard is dreaming up with his new base in St Kitts or wherever it is he's hidden his bulging wallet? ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
The benefit of the retrospectoscope is that it's based on cold hard facts, not mystical powers. Like the assumption Major wouldn't have invested in public services with the economic boom just round the corner, no, he would have abolished the top rate tax band, or set up nurse/teacher/policeman shooting parties or something cos he was a cold hearted evil fucker was Major. Mind you the retrospectoscope does tell me he shagged Edwina Currie, so your crystal ball might be confusing that abomination with nurse/police/teacher culls I guess. But as a minority of people didn't believe that, they voted for Blairs new world of centre politics, but unfortunately he also got carried away with himself and took us to war and let Brown get on with ending boom and bust (not realising Brown had only read the first chapter of Keynes). Bottom line, Blair/Brown made mahusive assumptions about our economy, hocked us to the hilt, sold all our gold and left us exposed to the unthinkable - the bust round the corner. The tories did get in, along with libdems, or are they no longer tories if they are in a coalition government now? From: Ian Murray [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com] Sent: 04 May 2011 17:40 To: mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk Cc: rhe...@mis-munich.de; rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: RE: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Whereas obviously you're seeing all this through the retrospectoscope. Hindsight makes prophets of us all. The investment in all public services was needed after 18 years of Tory rule. Many mistakes were made but a vast improvement was seen, most obviously in the NHS. And, forgive me for adopting your pedantry, the Tories did not get in. They had to form a coalition to form a government. ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
I'm starting to lose the will to live here. The Tory 1997 manifesto talks largely about tax cuts and, euphemistically, benefit reform. It does not mention failing public services and a plan to increase investment therein. I suppose the manifesto is the best we have to go on as far as 'cold hard facts' go but there it is. The only investment it talks about is in transport. The Tories did not 'get in' - they were not elected to form a majority government. From: mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk To: ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com CC: rhe...@mis-munich.de; rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: RE: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 17:55:47 +0100 The benefit of the retrospectoscope is that it’s based on cold hard facts, not mystical powers. Like the assumption Major wouldn’t have invested in public services with the economic boom just round the corner, no, he would have abolished the top rate tax band, or set up nurse/teacher/policeman shooting parties or something cos he was a cold hearted evil fucker was Major. Mind you the retrospectoscope does tell me he shagged Edwina Currie, so your crystal ball might be confusing that abomination with nurse/police/teacher culls I guess. But as a minority of people didn’t believe that, they voted for Blairs new world of centre politics, but unfortunately he also got carried away with himself and took us to war and let Brown get on with ending boom and bust (not realising Brown had only read the first chapter of Keynes). Bottom line, Blair/Brown made mahusive assumptions about our economy, hocked us to the hilt, sold all our gold and left us exposed to the unthinkable – the bust round the corner. The tories did get in, along with libdems, or are they no longer “tories” if they are in a coalition government now? From: Ian Murray [mailto:ianjamesmur...@hotmail.com] Sent: 04 May 2011 17:40 To: mark.humphr...@blueyonder.co.uk Cc: rhe...@mis-munich.de; rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk; leedslist@gn.apc.org Subject: RE: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen? Whereas obviously you're seeing all this through the retrospectoscope. Hindsight makes prophets of us all. The investment in all public services was needed after 18 years of Tory rule. Many mistakes were made but a vast improvement was seen, most obviously in the NHS. And, forgive me for adopting your pedantry, the Tories did not get in. They had to form a coalition to form a government. ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
Re: [LU] [Non LU] Good omen?
Final Salary pensions are perfectly sustainable if they are properly funded, and if the funding is invested into productive enterprise (for want of a better word). Today's problem with Final Salary Pensions is the funding. Public Service pensions are unfunded with the govt making guarantees out of taxation. This is a more a philosophical issue than an economic one. However most private companies pensions are under-funded because the private companies DID NOT PAY THE PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS THEY WERE CONTRACTED TO PAY between the mis-80s to around 2005. Basically stock market returns were above average for twenty years so that companies could argue that they did not need to make their full contributions to cover their pension commitments. Now that the trend is under average they are squealing and cancelling this type of pension. There is no mention of them actually repaying the contributions they missed just as at the time there was no mention of offering their employees contribution holidays either. Because I have a great deal of respect for actuarial science, I think that there is a good chance that if a company paid its full contributions over the working life of its employees, there would be no under-funding of a final pension salary scheme. I really do feel that the problems with these schemes is truly (for once) an example of the bosses robbing the workers. Damian PS my first IS job in 1985 was reprogramming pension schemes to allow premium holes and premium holidays so that the employers contributions did not have to be paid. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Richard Naef rich...@triumph-computers.co.uk wrote: ..s idea's pale into insignificance with the concept of the Final Salary Pension Jesus what drugs were we taking when we thought that was a sustainable idea! I am afraid euthanasia is the only answer to our problems.. _ ___ Leedslist mailing list Info and options: http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist To unsubscribe, email leedslist-unsubscr...@gn.apc.org MARCHING ON TOGETHER (There's it)
