The New Labour Leader

CardyTheClaret · Post by **CardyTheClaret** » Sun Sep 29, 2019 11:55 pm

fidelcastro wrote:You've obviously not read through this thread.

Cardy stated, quite clearly, further up the thread, that he had employees earning £100,000+

Yet despite this, he claims the minimum wage is too high in East Lancashire!

Do me a favour!

The point I was trying to make is how can you set a minimum wage that is fair in this country when there are such massive differences in standards of living costs across the UK.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:00 am

CardyTheClaret wrote:The point I was trying to make is how can you set a minimum wage that is fair in this country when there are such massive differences in standards of living costs across the UK.

There are foodbanks all across the UK too, or haven't you noticed? You won't care, I expect.

Taio is correct in one sense, I don't know what line of business you are in, but whatever it is, with draconian and selfish attitudes like yours, I wouldn't work for you!

CardyTheClaret · Post by **CardyTheClaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:15 am

fidelcastro wrote:There are foodbanks all across the UK too, or haven't you noticed? You won't care, I expect.

Taio is correct in one sense, I don't know what line of business you are in, but whatever it is, with draconian and selfish attitudes like yours, I wouldn't work for you!

None of my staff need to use food banks. I do think I would consider giving you work. You see, I’m fair minded and don’t make assumptions based on the tiniest amount of information of a Football messageboard.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:19 am

fidelcastro wrote:There are foodbanks all across the UK too, or haven't you noticed? You won't care, I expect.

Taio is correct in one sense, I don't know what line of business you are in, but whatever it is, with draconian and selfish attitudes like yours, I wouldn't work for you!

You're completely ignoring his question about minimum wage and differences in cost of living across the country....
Why is that?

Cost of living is vastly different in places like London and the home counties compared to somewhere like Burnley yet the minimum wage is exactly the same.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:22 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:You're completely ignoring his question about minimum wage and differences in cost of living across the country....
Why is that?

Cost of living is vastly different in places like London and the home counties compared to somewhere like Burnley yet the minimum wage is exactly the same.

No I'm not.

The minimum wage is too low, whether it's in Leeds, London or Lancaster.

Is that clear enough?

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:24 am

fidelcastro wrote:No I'm not.

The minimum wage is too low, whether it's in Leeds, London or Lancaster.

Is that clear enough?

What would you make it then?

Would you have it level across the country?

For example, a number of years ago an AA patrolman would earn more if they were based within the M25 compared to being outside of it, I think it was about 5k difference, I remember seeing the job advert.
Do we need the same with the minimum wage?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:24 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:... yet the minimum wage is exactly the same.

One google search. That's all i expect of you people. Just one Google search to check your facts but you still disappoint.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:25 am

CardyTheClaret wrote:None of my staff need to use food banks. I do think I would consider giving you work. You see, I’m fair minded and don’t make assumptions based on the tiniest amount of information of a Football messageboard.

Thank you for your kind words!

I shall get back to you, the next time I'm between jobs... which may be sooner than you think, if what I've heard today is true!

Anyway, I'm off to bed.

Good night.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:26 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:One google search. That's all i expect of you people. Just one Google search to check your facts but you still disappoint.

Sorry, I don't live online like you do

So it's slightly higher but not noticeably so.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:28 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:One google search. That's all i expect of you people. Just one Google search to check your facts but you still disappoint.

Just before I go...

Yes, I've heard there's a 'living wage' for Londoners, and I believe this is a question that our esteemed PM fell short of answering during his leadership campaign.

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:28 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:One google search. That's all i expect of you people. Just one Google search to check your facts but you still disappoint.

What's he got wrong?

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:30 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:Sorry, I don't live online like you do

So it's slightly higher but not noticeably so.

The funny thing is that I do more than one google search (ie. when i think i'm right i still try to disprove myself), and now think that i'm wrong because of how deliberately confusing the Tories have made it by renaming the minimum wage to the "Living Wage".

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:31 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:The funny thing is that I do more than one google search, and now think that i'm wrong because of how deliberately confusing the Tories have made it by renaming the minimum wage to the "Living Wage".

Yes you are wrong. Just one Google search that's all I ask.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:33 am

taio wrote:Yes you are wrong. Just one Google search that's all I ask.

I did multiple.

But this has disproved one regular accusation i face - that i look for evidence that supports my opinion and look no further. So my mistake still proves you lot wrong.

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:34 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:I did multiple.

But this has disproved one regular accusation i face - that i look for evidence that supports my opinion and look no further. So my mistake still proves you lot wrong.

Nah, your mistake makes you look foolish especially with how you worded your post. Funny.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:35 am

All it shows is you spend way more time then a lot of us searching for answers to any and all discussions/arguments

There are definitely much better ways to spend ones time.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:36 am

taio wrote:Nah, your mistake makes you look foolish especially with how you worded your post. Funny.

Yes. We all make mistakes, and they make us look foolish.

I expect less of you, that's why i only ask for one Google search. I would love it if you were all as critical as I am and actually went about trying to disprove your own points of view, but i know that's too much to expect.

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:37 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:One google search. That's all i expect of you people. Just one Google search to check your facts but you still disappoint.

Imagine posting this only to be wrong and that you have done or not done what you were accusing someone else of. Priceless.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:38 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:All it shows is you spend way more time then a lot of us searching for answers to any and all discussions/arguments

There are definitely much better ways to spend ones time.

You're trying to mock me for working at being more informed than you. Think about that.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:39 am

taio wrote:Imagine posting this only to be wrong and that you have done or not done what you were accusing someone else of. Priceless.

But i did do what i was accusing others of not doing. How else would I have known that i was wrong? Deductive reasoning isn't a skill of yours, is it?

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:40 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:You're trying to mock me for working at being more informed than you. Think about that.

It gets better. Stop digging. You already made a **** of yourself. You only checked again after I asked what was wrong with what Sidney said.

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:41 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:But i did do what i was accusing others of not doing. How else would I have known that i was wrong? Deductive reasoning isn't a skill of yours, is it?

See my post of 12.28 (again)

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:43 am

taio wrote:It gets better. Stop digging. You already made a **** of yourself. You only checked again after I asked what was wrong with what Sidney said.

Lol. Not even close to true.

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:47 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:Lol. Not even close to true.

I dont use "Lol" but it is fitting to your original post to Sidney. Only to be made better by you poorly trying to justify it rather than just holding your hands up like any normal person would.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:51 am

taio wrote:It gets better. Stop digging. You already made a **** of yourself. You only checked again after I asked what was wrong with what Sidney said.

Wait a minute. You think that i saw your post, spent time researching to double check myself enough to satisfy myself that i got something wrong, and then compiled a post replying to sidney telling him that i found it funny that in fact i thought he was correct in the first place, along with an explanation as to why i think i was initially wrong?

How ******* fast do you think I work?

Let's pretend that when you posted at 12:28 and i posted at 12:30 is the full 120 seconds. And let's pretend that i sit here spamming refresh so that I saw your post a split second after you posted it. That gives me 119 seconds to look it up and then write my post. Don't be so ******* moronic.

Anyway, this proves you wrong.

You can see i posted my reply to sidney at 00:24 and then immediately started fact checking myself before you posted

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:53 am

taio wrote:I dont use "Lol" but it is fitting to your original post to Sidney. Only to be made better by you poorly trying to justify it rather than just holding your hands up like any normal person would.

I literally ******* replied to him to tell him i thought he was originally correct. How is that not "holding my hand up" you dense ****.

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:54 am

Imploding Turtle wrote: Wait a minute. You think that i saw your post, spent time researching to double check myself enough to satisfy myself that i got something wrong, and then compiled a post replying to sidney telling him that i found it funny that in fact i thought he was correct in the first place, along with an explanation as to why i think i was initially wrong?

How ******* fast do you think I work?

Let's pretend that when you posted at 12:28 and i posted at 12:30 is the full 120 seconds. And let's pretend that i sit here spamming refresh so that I saw your post a split second after you posted it. That gives me 119 seconds to look it up and then write my post. Don't be so ******* moronic.

Anyway, this proves you wrong.

You can see i posted my reply to sidney at 00:24 and then immediately started fact checking myself before you posted

Too much detail. Which shows you just can't cope with being wrong. Haha. Goodnight, sleep well and I hope this trivial matter doesn't eat away at you too much.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:56 am

CardyTheClaret wrote:Yes. In East Lancashire, it is. That’s if you’re the one paying it, of course.

I wonder how many people in East Lancashire companies are earning more than 'minimum wage'.

Is their pay ok but for many in the same company not ok?

The many taking a cut for the few to prosper?

Are any earning less on here?

Is it sufficient to live properly?

Is it ok that others are valued and paid more than you - so they can live well and you not?

What would you like to do about it?

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:56 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:I literally ******* replied to him to tell him i thought he was originally correct. How is that not "holding my hand up" you dense ****.

Nothing on this thread more dense than what you posted. You dense ****.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:57 am

taio wrote:Too much detail. Which shows you just can't cope with being wrong. Haha. Goodnight, sleep well and I hope this trivial matter doesn't eat away at you too much.

Looks like you're refusing to admit you were wrong.

"too much detail"

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:58 am

taio wrote:Nothing on this post more dense than what you posted. You dense ****.

You gonna admit you were wrong, twice? Or are you just going to accuse others of doing what you yourself are guilty of?

taio · Post by **taio** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:06 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:One google search. That's all i expect of you people. Just one Google search to check your facts but you still disappoint.

When you mock somebody like this you really ought to make sure you've got your facts right. You didn't and to make things even funnier tried to pathetically cover your tracks. That really is dense as ****.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:18 am

taio wrote:

When you mock somebody like this you really ought to make sure you've got your facts right. You didn't and to make things even funnier tried to pathetically cover your tracks. That really is dense as ****.

By "cover my tracks" you mean immediately own up to my mistake.

Did you miss that post? Did you read it and then immediately forget it? Do i need to quote it for you? Surely not since you've accused me of something you've been proven wrong bout (and not owned up to) based on that post's existence.

I thought you'd gone to bed, anyway? Or was this convo niggling at you?

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:40 am

Quickenthetempo wrote:Corbyn has been around for a long time in politics, voting against nearly every proposal brought to the house, even from Labour. He has shown great ability to say what is wrong with everything and put a spanner in the works.

But to be a PM you need to be someone who puts the ideas forward, to show people the way.

I can't think of anything he has done in all his years which would suggest he is suitable for the job.

You might be able to?

They say a week is a long time in politics, so cast your mind back to the Labour leadership race of 2015. The Labour Party has just abstained on the Tory welfare bill, except for Corbyn and a few others who voted against it. This is brought up by one of his leadership rivals as a reason he's unfit to become leader. If Corbyn died today he will have achieved the realignment of the Labour Party with the majority of members, and their core beliefs. For a 1000/1 candidate, that's quite a remarkable, and regardless what you might think of his opinions there's no denying he inspired a lot of people during his campaign, the point of which was to allow ideas to come forth from below and be considered by the party. This is what has happened, so that the nature of state ownership being advocated now is very different to that of the 1970s.

boatshed bill · Post by **boatshed bill** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:28 am

fidelcastro wrote:Either.

£8.21 per hour for someone over 25 is not acceptable in 21st century Britain.

And many on this sort of wage are on some form of state benefit, basically we the taxpayers are subsidising companies who pay low wages.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:48 pm

Imploding Turtle wrote:You're trying to mock me for working at being more informed than you. Think about that.

There's no point mocking you though, that's how you choose to spend your time, that's your choice, I just prefer to do other things with mine.

Goobs · Post by **Goobs** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:11 pm

boatshed bill wrote:And many on this sort of wage are on some form of state benefit, basically we the taxpayers are subsidising companies who pay low wages.

So we raise the minimum wage, I assume we also raise the wage of those in more qualified / higher paid roles proportionally too?

Then when companies are struggling to cover the new costs they put up the prices of their goods / services (as you suggested further up).

Doesn't this then just put the lowest paid back in the same position as they are now only dealing with larger numbers?

If someone is on minimum wage there is usually a reason for this, most likely being either they are happy in what they are doing and it provides them with enough to live or they aren't qualified / able to do better paid jobs.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:33 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:There's no point mocking you though, that's how you choose to spend your time, that's your choice, I just prefer to do other things with mine.

Pretending to be someone else on twitter?

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 1:56 pm

Goobs wrote:So we raise the minimum wage, I assume we also raise the wage of those in more qualified / higher paid roles proportionally too?

Then when companies are struggling to cover the new costs they put up the prices of their goods / services (as you suggested further up).

Doesn't this then just put the lowest paid back in the same position as they are now only dealing with larger numbers?

If someone is on minimum wage there is usually a reason for this, most likely being either they are happy in what they are doing and it provides them with enough to live or they aren't qualified / able to do better paid jobs.

Not really. The disparity between rich and poor is greater now than when Charles Dickens wrote oliver twist!

It is this disparity that breeds contempt, whether that being jealousy of rich people, many of whom are rich enough to exploit tax loopholes, or a sense of snobbery by the better off, exemplified by CardyTheClaret on this thread, who despite employing people earning in excess of 100 grand (persumably annually!), still believes the minimum wage to be too high in East Lancashire!

With attitudes like this, it is no wonder that the Labour Party membership elected a socialist as leader, with the hope he can narrow that unfair gap.

CardyTheClaret · Post by **CardyTheClaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:08 pm

fidelcastro wrote:Not really. The disparity between rich and poor is greater now than when Charles Dickens wrote oliver twist!

It is this disparity that breeds contempt, whether that being jealousy of rich people, many of whom are rich enough to exploit tax loopholes, or a sense of snobbery by the better off, exemplified by CardyTheClaret on this thread, who despite employing people earning in excess of 100 grand (persumably annually!), still believes the minimum wage to be too high in East Lancashire!

With attitudes like this, it is no wonder that the Labour Party membership elected a socialist as leader, with the hope he can narrow that unfair gap.

Firstly, there are people out there who can't read or write, can't string three words together, if you think they're worth 17k a year, perhaps you should start your own company and employ them.

So go Fidel (i'll file you under jealous, seeing as it's gone petty) My cleaner is on minimum wage, my top salesman earned over 100k based on the value of business he won for the company. How would you pay them?

They're best of friends, I bet you can't get your head around that, can you?

CardyTheClaret · Post by **CardyTheClaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:11 pm

Goobs wrote:So we raise the minimum wage, I assume we also raise the wage of those in more qualified / higher paid roles proportionally too?

Spot on, Goobs. It's not just as simple as upping minimum wage, it's the knock-on effect up the ladder that is the problem.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:11 pm

CardyTheClaret wrote:Firstly, there are people out there who can't read or write, can't string three words together, if you think they're worth 17k a year, perhaps you should start your own company and employ them.

So go Fidel (i'll file you under jealous, seeing as it's gone petty) My cleaner is on minimum wage, my top salesman earned over 100k based on the value of business he won for the company. How would you pay them?

They're best of friends, I bet you can't get your head around that, can you?

The problem is that people are working flat out in jobs that absolutely need doing but are struggling to make ends meet.

I'm not sure how easy that is to solve, but people are having less and less time and money to spend on anything other than what is needed to live.

Thats not ideal.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:23 pm

CardyTheClaret wrote:Firstly, there are people out there who can't read or write, can't string three words together, if you think they're worth 17k a year, perhaps you should start your own company and employ them.

So go Fidel (i'll file you under jealous, seeing as it's gone petty) My cleaner is on minimum wage, my top salesman earned over 100k based on the value of business he won for the company. How would you pay them?

They're best of friends, I bet you can't get your head around that, can you?

When this top salesman earned all.this money for your company, I wonder if it even occurred to you to share the profits with his/her fellow employees?

No, I'll bet it didn't, because that's what greedy plutocrats like you don't do! You don't believe in sharing, you don't believe in redistribution.

I guess that's nothing illegal, but some of us want a fairer society.

CardyTheClaret · Post by **CardyTheClaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:25 pm

fidelcastro wrote:When this top salesman earned all.this money for your company, I wonder if it even occurred to you to share the profits with his/her fellow employees?

No, I'll bet it didn't, because that's what greedy plutocrats like you don't do! You don't believe in sharing, you don't believe in redistribution.

I guess that's nothing illegal, but some of us want a fairer society.

I could always just toss it off, sell up and retire. Go on, what would you pay them?

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:31 pm

CardyTheClaret wrote:I could always just toss it off, sell up and retire. Go on, what would you pay them?

Well, for a start, a minimum wage of ten pounds an hour seems a good place to begin.

I understand that people are concerned that a 16 year old might be paid that too, but if he/she was doing exactly the same job as someone aged 25+ then why shouldn't they be paid the same?

CardyTheClaret · Post by **CardyTheClaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:36 pm

fidelcastro wrote:Well, for a start, a minimum wage of ten pounds an hour seems a good place to begin.

I understand that people are concerned that a 16 year old might be paid that too, but if he/she was doing exactly the same job as someone aged 25+ then why shouldn't they be paid the same?

Can I get YOU to come in and explain to the 25 year old? So, now under your new regime I’m paying 16 year olds 21k, yes?

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:41 pm

CardyTheClaret wrote:Can I get YOU to come in and explain to the 25 year old? So, now under your new regime I’m paying 16 year olds 21k, yes?

Not sure where you get that figure from... It can only be dependent on the number of hours they work, but it sounds like you can afford it, given the number of skilled, efficient and highly motivated salesmen you employ!

CardyTheClaret · Post by **CardyTheClaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:46 pm

fidelcastro wrote:Not sure where you get that figure from... It can only be dependent on the number of hours they work, but it sounds like you can afford it, given the number of skilled, efficient and highly motivated salesmen you employ!

40 hours @£10. My sales team are up and down the country all hours, commission based.

Ok, so the kids are earning 21k. What about the people on the phones earning 20k now. What do we pay them now they see the warehouse kid earning more than them?

HarryPottsDesk · Post by **HarryPottsDesk** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:47 pm

Could CardyTheClaret do his pitiable strutting at the golf club, where people might be impressed by it, and leave some small corner of this forum for people who are interested in Burnley FC?

CardyTheClaret · Post by **CardyTheClaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 2:50 pm

HarryPottsDesk wrote:Could CardyTheClaret do his pitiable strutting at the golf club, where people might be impressed by it, and leave some small corner of this forum for people who are interested in Burnley FC?

Why are you reading this thread when it’s clearly nothing to do with football? There’s no strutting here, stop being a dick.