This one news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8045414.stm does have a point.
£92,000 to read a fucking autocue ? It's an outrage !
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:33, archived)
I can't help it, it's hard wired into my middle class mainframe.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:35, archived)
it's not their fault, she could probably get £120,000 off Sky.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:37, archived)
I suspect you consider advertising on television morally wrong.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:37, archived)
yes I do.
Also, on a point of clarification my family read the Guardian because we like Charlie Brooker swearing in the G2 and are bored of hearing about gorillas dying in the no-news Independent.
Posh food and the Guardian go together like balsamic vinegar and extra virgin olive oil.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:40, archived)
Is this the same moral objectivity that means you think private healthcare and education is evil.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:41, archived)
My family are also relativists so it works for us.
And yes, yes I do think those things you grammar schooled twat.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:43, archived)
choosing nicer, more expensive things over rubbish ones and paying more for them
but when the same model is applied to things like Healthcare or Education is is suddenly wrong
Are first class tickets on trains and planes also evil?
Is having a private pension rather than a state pension the poisonous work of Thatcher?
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:52, archived)
Normal commuters are sardined into carriages with standing room only while theres 30 or 40 seats sitting empty because no one will buy a first class ticket.
Cunts.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:54, archived)
And have 30 or 40 seats to yourself...
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:54, archived)
I'm not paying an extra grand or whatever it is for the privelege of a slightly more available seat.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:55, archived)
and then wee on 39 of the seats.
But in reality I'll just drive.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:56, archived)
it's not feasible to drive anything other than a bus, bike, van or taxi in central London.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:59, archived)
I live in London. I get the tube if I'm ever in the centre of town.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 14:01, archived)
Is the food your mum cooks not ritzy enough for you and the massive fuck off period house you live in big enough for your small family?
I think living and learning are too essential components of humanity for the market to put a price on them.
Private schools distort the meaning of social mobility letting it rest on not how good and talented you are but on how much money your parents could afford to pay out.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 14:04, archived)
I'm a pragmatic liberal socialist.
I'm also a Lib Dem.
I also crave the food hall in John Lewis on Oxford Street. (they have a special room for posh cheese!)
I also read the Guardian.
Private Eye is my bible.
I can do these things because I'm pragmatic about the fact that sometimes I'm shit at being liberal and sometimes I'm shit at being a socialist.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:54, archived)
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:39, archived)
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:41, archived)
That's started to flake and crack a little bit where a child's grubby fingers have been over excitedly shelling it.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:41, archived)
I'll forgive all news readers if they let me kill Natasha Kaplinsky using the mediums of rapists and ice picks.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:36, archived)
the NHS and prisons are not losing out becuase of MPs, but her salary is irrelevant. They both just lost their tempers.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:37, archived)
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:39, archived)
because no one really thinks they earn one.
When you earn £20k a year you're looking at people on £40k wondering why you're not earning that but when you've got £40k it doesnt seem to go anywhere and you wonder why so many people seem to earn £70k a year.
I'm sure that Newsreader sits there thinking about Anne Robinson and her £3m a year for being a ginger harridan cunt.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:43, archived)
I need to leave, I earn about half as much as others do for the same job in other firms, it's just a case of having been here for 4 years and having security.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:45, archived)
who has English as their first language.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:46, archived)
you get people born in England working in McDonalds.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:49, archived)
you like to go and masticate reconstituted vomit with the serfs.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:54, archived)
except me because I don't eat McDonalds.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:58, archived)
What ?
So if I read lots of works of great fiction, then one day read a Nick Hornby novel because I was bored, I'd instantly become a philistine ?
Rubbish.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 14:01, archived)
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 14:05, archived)
how your mental powers have lead you to be earning less than 20k a year : (
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 14:07, archived)
That's a ridiculously long amount of time, I'm sure I'll manage.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 14:07, archived)
Two years later, I was on 11k. Before tax.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:47, archived)
I started on £6k a year when I was 18 and that was 1988.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:48, archived)
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:50, archived)
which isn't that bad for that line of work. I've just applied for a council job that pays about the same, but full time.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:51, archived)
*didn't, but would like to leap on the clever bandwagon*
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:41, archived)
Hassle them contantly. Never let them finish a point. Hopefully get them so riled up they'll say, "ALRIGHT FINE! WE STARTED THE IRAQ WAR TO STEAL THEIR FUCKING OIL! HAPPY NOW?".
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:42, archived)
I can see how, as a politician, it would be very annoying.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:44, archived)
Also, she's earning a fixed salary as set out in a contract, the fact that it's a lot of money is irrelevant, she isn't skimming money through expenses claims or avoiding paying tax on the sale of second homes.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:36, archived)
MPs should stand up and ask for a decent wage for what they do and drop all the expenses bollocks. They ought to be paid about £180k a year instead of £65k plus £100k expenses
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:40, archived)
£64,000 is a huge salary. They should have a rented place in london paid for directly, then they don't need to furnish it. They should get transport to and from their constituency paid for. But they should enter public service because they want to serve the public, not because they want the money.
He isn't making a valid point at all, her salary, a fixed amount set from the beginning, has nothing to do with dishonest expense claims.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:43, archived)
Maybe in Malawi, not in London.
You've got to compare it against the marketplace and you'd get more than £64k a year being an area sales manager for a Bank. Which job would you rather see attract the best candidates ?
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:45, archived)
and I'm doing fine in London. I have money left over. But then I'm cheap and miserable and Northern. Frugal's a dirty word now, you see.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:46, archived)
but then it's a pretty important job by most people's standards as well. You can make a damn sight more than that as an accountant, if you're that way inclined.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:48, archived)
If you're supposed to be running the country, you ought to be paid a salary that will attract people capable of running the country.
Anyone with any brains and ambition is going to think fuck politics, no money in it unless you can get right to the top and start bending the rules and taking backhanders.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:50, archived)
Maybe I should go into politics.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:52, archived)
and again, I bet you he has other sources of income. Plus when they leave office they get more money thrown at them.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:53, archived)
after dinner speaking, directorships etc.
If you get into the cabinet, you're laughing, but, not all of them do.
There's what 650 MP's ? So probably only 10% get to be in the cabinet and about 1% or less ever get one of the top jobs like PM or party leader. We still need those 600 odd other people to be motivated and fucking good at what they do, so they need to be well paid, it needs to be an attractive job.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:58, archived)
the sort of people who become MPs are either self serving power mongers who think they will get the top jobs and earn all the dough, or people who genuinely want to make things better, in which case a £64K salary is pretty good, providing you can get a place in london paid for.
I'm not against having a system for allowing MPs to live near their place of work, but the house of commons has done it's best to prevent the current system being changed or scrutinised. And what is currently happening is dishonest, if not in some cases illegal.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 14:04, archived)
But maybe if the job was better paid it'd attract a better class of person.
or at least make it less tempting for them to be dishonest to make a bit more cash.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 14:08, archived)
But expenses were introduced for exactly the reason that they hoped it would allow people to be MPs that were truly local to their constituency and genuinely interested in serving the people.
Expenses allowed poorer MPs who did not and could not afford to have 2nd homes in London to actually stand and do their jobs without what amounted to financially based discrimination.
Means test the fuckers that's what I say.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:50, archived)
which, regardless of what you think, is a large salary (it's more than me and my mrs earn combined and we have a very nice lifestlye living in london and could get by on less if we had to), but virtually all MPs have other sources of income too as advisors to businesses etc.
Plus there are many other perks, you aren't comparing like with like when you bring in bank sales managers.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:51, archived)
Are we going to begrudge people luckier than us the chance to make a few quid doing a job that you perceive to be easier than yours for ever? Bitter?
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:37, archived)
there isn't a single one of us that would turn down an easy 92 grand a year. Not even me.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:39, archived)
he could do with brushing up on his arithmetic though, 92 isn't nearly twice 64.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:37, archived)
wanking off cameramen though.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:41, archived)
As for politicians, when they're in, that's it, they're in for several years.
And looking at how much some MPs are claiming for, they make well over 100k per year with the additions. I wouldn't be surprised if they claimed car allowance, too.
On top of that (ooo 'eck, I'm off), the Labour Politicians used the Royal Flight for getting home - Margaret Beckett used it to get to East Mids airport, when it's only 2 hours ish on the train.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:40, archived)
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:44, archived)
Give them all a free flat in London and let those who have to commute more than 80 miles to Westminster claim travel and overnight expenses.
Stick them all on £100k a year, cabinet a bit more, PM probably £250k then tell them all to fuck off and get on with it.
Regardless of anything else, making them claim expenses for all sorts of shit just wastes their time.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:47, archived)
I like that idea.
In failing that, keep the current system they have now, but let it be claimed for the general public, like you and me. See how quickly they bat that one into touch :-)
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:49, archived)
People are paid to do a job. It doesn't matter how much it is. They've been dishonest with the claiming. She hasn't. He's acting like they deserve it.
I think it's the whole schemes fault not the MPs though, as I would probably put the expenses down for the copious amount of hookers I've had spank me with my leather briefcase.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:42, archived)
thing is politicians aren't any less likely than anyone else to turn down free money if they're offered it, but for some reason we expect them to be saints.
(, Tue 12 May 2009, 13:46, archived)