egg

The point is that it suits the present government to pay less and use the pension contributions of those currently contributing towards the pensions in payment. It's always been that way. You advocate spending cuts, so I'm not sure where you're going here. The only realistic change is for government to increase public sector pay, to bank people's pension contributions for the future, and pay existing pensions entirely from tax and borrowing. What are you actually saying should happen?

No. Public sector roles by nature are only available in the public sector.

Yep. All the traitors were superb though. I think Alan's popularity clouded peoples judgement a bit though.

Absolutely not. It's locked in and I know what I'm getting and when. A stocks and shares based scheme doesn't give that certainty. Also, as said, the cost to me of buying the equivalent pension would require a massive hike in the salary. Also bear in mind that if public sector pay increases now, the money has to be paid now. Most public sector pensions are unfunded schemes (local government schemes being the main exception) so the current government merely provide a guaranteed future benefit. It's the problem of future governments to actually pay them. The teachers contribute a lot to theirs (well a lot to paying the pensions currently in payment), but, they'd be paying much more to buy the equivalent pension benefits in the public sector.

I do some work in the public sector and have a pension. It'd cost a fortune to buy an equivalent scheme privately. The role doesn't pay brilliantly though, and the pension is the sweetener. If they dilute it I'm out, and that'll happen across the public sector.

That's a different issue entirely to people suddenly not feeling English, and believing that every brown person is a rapist.

Done what, made people become angry/feral lunatics? That's down to people and their perception of the world.

Very interesting, and I share your view. I had a run in with one of his fans yesterday. Complete stranger who I happened to be sat next to. Pertinent part of the conversation began with comment from him that it's a strange world. He said it'll get worse. I asked why, he says immigrants. It went downhill from there. Apparently people who don't agree with flags on lampposts aren't English enough. It's good that the flags are divisive. All the boat people should be shot on the beaches. Apparently I "wanted" his kids to be raped because I disagreed. He's convinced himself that every woman and child is at risk of being raped by an illegal. Wouldn't have it that white natives rape people too. He got angrier when I asked how he feels about his kids growing up with division. It's ok apparently though, cos they won't be safe otherwise. We're breeding a load of MAGA type loons who are properly convinced that Nigel is the saviour of good old England. It'll take some real effort to keep Reform out, and yep, lots of tactical voting will be needed.

Absolutely shocking, but it's a win, and will hopefully breed some much needed confidence. Has that performance pushed SR towards RM?

I wouldn't. I've said for ages that we need a proper manager, not a pushover coach. Ducks post the other day nailed it.

Why would we spend £60m or whatever on players that can't be used effectively. It makes no sense...unless it's the players who are putting their foot down over the team shape.

Not sure I agree. It'll be 3 up top I reckon. We need more communication in the team, and we'll have that in that back 3. Fellows will be further up the pitch for sure. Midfield worries me though. Bazunu aside, I don't have an issue with that side, although I still don't know why we aren't playing 4231 or 433.

Yep. Feels very much like player power has won. Not good.

The new fella has been playing it with the kids team. Personally, I cannot as see us signing the players we did if the coach (these people aren't managers) can't play them in a system he fancies. I just think they don't think Azaz has shown enough to build a team around.

He replied to your post about Trump!

If his ideas are great in principle, they should be put into practice. That takes money. Where does that come from without tax revenue?

Yep. Also worth noting that Trump had threatened to pull NYC federal funding if Mamdani won. There's nothing more democratic than some good old fashioned electorate blackmail.

I wouldn't necessarily tar them with the same brush. There's a difference between pledges that can't be honoured and blatant dishonesty.

In what way has this season (thus far) not been wasted? It's been a complete waste of a golden opportunity to get points on the board.

Spot on. We've got to stop hiring trendy coaches, and bring in a manager who can impose standards, and bin off anyone not toeing the line. It feels like the tail has been wagging the dog. That's got to stop. Now.

It's you that is calling for cuts. It's you that can't say what you want to see cut. It's not for me to answer for you, it doesn't work like that. Although you haven't actually asked me anything, but I'm out of here so don't bother asking me anything now.

I'll tap out too. Utterly pointless discussion. You: make cuts Us: what ones? You: I don't know. Just cut something. Brilliant. Fucking brilliant.

You're just repeating the same headlines mate. Give some details. Welfare. What? Pip? Fuck the unemployed and don't pay their rent? Maybe sack off child benefit? Be specific. Civil service. What? Maybe lay off some judges? Close a few courts? Reduce our military spend and forget our NATO pledge? Be specific. Honestly mate, either be more specific, or be quiet.

Chat GPT is limited to what it can write. I too want to know where he wants to save. Are we slashing social care? Road maintenance? Getting rid of pricey nurses and their pensions? Perhaps cram a few more kids into classrooms? Reduce further the SEND budgets? Or is it just "spend less"?

No you're not. You're not talking about any specific savings. You've just said LA, also NHS. It's just a vague way of saying efficiencies. You've not identified one single specific spending cut you'd like to see. Not one.