The thing is, if they just got rid of the 100s of 1000s of people who seem to have jobs just for the sake of having jobs (and everyone in the NHS I've spoken to knows at least one person like that, but it's never _them_ )
I mean, the kind of people who's job seems to be things like "I know, we could have a poster campaign to tell people not to abuse the staff... on account of people who abuse staff generally noticing posters". Ok, bad example, but you get what I mean.
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:00, 2 replies, latest was 15 years ago)

I was reading in the paper today, for everything that is negative in it, there is an oppersistion MP putting the boot in.
For example, one labour MP, some finance dude, was bitching'n'moaning that the barclays dude got £1.6m in bonuses..... yet under his rule, they were getting like £30m in bonuses.

I've come up with an idea, no MP should take home, after bonuses, more than the PM (and the PM's wages should not rise on account of this). I don't see how they can do that, imagine if you took home more than your boss, it's just madness.
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:08, Reply)

Bob Diamond of Barclays
Was awarded a £6.5m bonus yesterday. I think it was a cash bonus and didn't include his share options. He is a non-dom taxpayer and pays only £25,000 a year in tax.

My idea would be forced suicide booths for bankers and when they're dead we have a draw for their cash. It could go around the country, a glorious banker murdering roadshow. It'd be standing room only.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:14, Reply)

I was watching a clip from the Daily Show yesterday
showing certain people insisting that bankers had contracts and these were inviolate and therefore they must get their bonuses, and then these same people saying that teachers must be prepared to compromise and renegotiate their contracts.
( The Light in Chains don't touch the Pope's boner, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:25, Reply)

That's right.
The bonus' are contractual, not discretionary.

If you are the employee then you are going to want to get what you are contractually entitled to. I know I would.

Fucking teachers and nurses, sponging off the honest English (not British) taxpayers.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:45, Reply)

Ahh, I couldn't remember if it was 1.6 or 6.5, it was 50/50 there. It's still a hell of a lot less than 33m that the last bloke got.
It's hardly his fault that the country has such loop holes, however, if I was him I'd have to give a fuckload to charties 'cus Karma would really fuck me up big time.
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:27, Reply)

If Karma existed

( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:28, Reply)

Which it doesn't

( Naked Ape call me Caitlyn, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:33, Reply)

Yes it does.

( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:36, Reply)

You might like to call it "Coincidence" or "Consequence", but it's still the same thing.

( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:37, Reply)

No it's not
If we're talking about karma in the strict sense that it applies to how your next life plays out, then there's no provable answer as to it's existence.
If we're talking about it being 'something that catches up with you if you do something bad or greedy', then no it is not the same as 'coincidence' or 'consequence'. Plus, the very act of saying you'll do something selfless so that karma rewards you later is a selfish act, thus arguably would get you punished later.
Everything is a consequence of things that happened before, but there is no logical reason to associate any type of mysticism or supernatural element to it.
( Labia Majora You keep on talking but it makes no sense at all, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:42, Reply)

I live in a bubble world with my own faiths and beliefs, please don't try and pop them.
I believe that by the very act of "being a decent/charitable/good/whatever person", the rewards that come from that would be any of a number of things (such as people seeing you're a good person and wanting to hang around you, or help you in the future), but absolutly mostly, is that it makes _you_ be able to feel good about _your_self. That is the reward from doing good deeds.

I was once told that you undo any good you do if you mention charity, I think that's bullshit, because let's say someone was a billionare and gave a few million to restore an old person's home; if he mentions it does the house burn down or something? There is a huge following of the richest people in the western world who are dedicating the _majority_ of their fortunes to helping out others... I bet they feel fucking awesome about that, and why shouldn't they?

If everyone believed essenchally 'what goes around, comes around', which is my very simplistic interpritation of Karma, the world would be a much better place.

I don't believe the karama thing in regards to 'the next life', but that's the good thing about faith and beliefs, like with cooking, you can make it fit your own bill.
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:56, Reply)

The only thing that goes around/comes around is the Circle line
and that's not very often
( sporters I’m sincerely gratitude to you, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:37, Reply)

I think he got £20m in share options
That he has to wait 3 years to cash. Tough at the top.
(Set your faces to Stunned Bigly, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:33, Reply)

The reality is that for every front line role there is an awful lot of backroom stuff that needs to be done.
Hospitals have to have pay role and finance, IT, complaints monitoring, facilities managers, training people, cleaners, biomedical scientists, porters, mortitians, grounds keepers, security, on top of them you need team leaders, clinical leads, department heads and a board. I've missed a bunch probably

Now there is fat to trim out of that system, there always is, but the idea that the majority are unnecessary is just wrong.
(PsychoChomp, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:11, Reply)

Nonononononono, not at all, they're all really important, I'm thinking of individuals rather than roles.

( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 8 Mar 2011, 12:35, Reply)