Teachers on strike

amigafan2003 said:
Nonsense - you have many choices as far as public services go.

You don't have to send your children to a public school. You don't have you use the NHS. You don't have to have your bins collected by the council. You don't have to claim Job Seekers Allowance if you're out of a job.
Click to expand...

But you WILL still pay for the bin collection and you WILL still contribute to the NHS and also money to schools etc etc.
So what you are saying means nothing.
 
If you were choosing to pay a Union money, then I don't see why you would not return your vote. Be a part of the union or don't imo.
 
Morba said:
As i said before, if only 3 people turn out and 2 vote yes, is it right for 80,000 people to strike because the majority of voters voted yet?

No.

Stupid unions tbh :)
Click to expand...

But this is the principle on which our democracy is based on. :confused:

As I said, if it's good enough for the government then it should be good enough for the unions.

Two wrongs don't make a right but the world isn't perfect. If you accept the vote that got the current government into power then you have to accept the vote for public sector workers to strike.
 
Panzerbjorn said:
But this is the principle on which our democracy is based on. :confused:

As I said, if it's good enough for the government then it should be good enough for the unions.

Two wrongs don't make a right but the world isn't perfect. If you accept the vote that got the current government into power then you have to accept the vote for public sector workers to strike.
Click to expand...

There will always be someone running the country making decisions, if the vote is not valid due to a big enough turnout then the current party stays in.

In this teacher scenario, that would mean that there should be no strike.
See the difference?
 
amigafan2003 said:
Nonsense - you have many choices as far as public services go.

You don't have to send your children to a public school. You don't have you use the NHS. You don't have to have your bins collected by the council. You don't have to claim Job Seekers Allowance if you're out of a job.

I know what the retort is going to be - "then I shouldn't have to.............".
Click to expand...

But you do have to pay taxes to fund them or be done for tax evasion. With private companies you can choose not to pay for a goods or services and use another company instead.

If I paid for private healthcare that wouldn't excuse me from paying the same taxes as someone who doesn't want private healthcare. It's a simple difference between public and private sectors.
 
Morba said:
But you WILL still pay for the bin collection and you WILL still contribute to the NHS and also money to schools etc etc.
So what you are saying means nothing.
Click to expand...

I knew that would be the retort.

How about this then? You/everyone has a social responsibility to provide for those that don't have the means to provide for themselves. I.e., even if you don't want to avail yourself of free public healthcare, free public schooling, free social programs for unemployment mitigation, free public policing, then you should still contribute to ensure those services are available for those that cannot afford private alternatives.

Let me guess the next retort "I'm a filthy, right wing, I'm all right Jack capitalist and it's survival of the fittest". Close?
 
amigafan2003 said:
I knew that would be the retort.

How about this then? You/everyone has a social responsibility to provide for those that don't have the means to provide for themselves. I.e., even if you don't want to avail yourself of free public healthcare, free public schooling, free social programs for unemployment mitigation, free public policing, then you should still contribute to ensure those services are available for those that cannot afford private alternatives.

Let me guess the next retort "I'm a filthy, right wing, I'm all right Jack capitalist and it's survival of the fittest". Close?
Click to expand...

What rubbish. That is not a reply to what I said and is not a backup argument to what I was answering of you.
Nice way to change the game :p
 
wildman said:
seriously read all my posts. Thats why i said it should be mandated and large fines for not turning up should be in place. If you don't want to vote for any party then you simply turn up and deface your voting papers.

In all seriousness if the government can threaten to fine us for mot completing a census form then they sure as hell can threaten to fine us for not turning up at the polling station.

I am not saying you have to vote, I am saying you have to show up even if you write crap on your paper. In the last local election we had I didn't want to vote for any of the candidates so I simply turned up at the polling station and wrote you are a shower of w****rs on the ballot slip, popped it in the box, job done.
Click to expand...

I approve of you voting even if you spoil your paper. I usually vote for an independant or minor party.

As a theory it might be OK to fine voters who do not turn up but in practise a large 'no turn out' and refuse to pay would swamp the courts making normal operations impossible.

What I am against is lazy gits sitting at home moaning their ass off about the government / unions etc and not actually taking part in the process.
Click to expand...

They are to be found on OCUK forums moaning..................
 
do_ron_ron said:
The majority of teachers in England and Wales who voted caused a strike. The stats speak for themselves.
Click to expand...

Means nothing if for example, 3 turned up to vote like morba said!


How did the union guys come up with the figure of £100bn+ of tax being dodged in 'the city'?
 
Last edited:
do_ron_ron said:
The majority of teachers in England and Wales who voted caused a strike. The stats speak for themselves.
Click to expand...

But that majority is an even smaller part of the percentage that voted. Of the whole union members, the minority caused a strike. Simple really.
 
amigafan2003 said:
Nonsense - you have many choices as far as public services go.

You don't have to send your children to a public school. You don't have you use the NHS. You don't have to have your bins collected by the council. You don't have to claim Job Seekers Allowance if you're out of a job.

I know what the retort is going to be - "then I shouldn't have to.............".
Click to expand...

yes of course that is what the retort is, why should you pay for something you don't use. I don't see non drivers paying car tax for example or fuel tax as they don't use it

Can I opt out of part of my council tax please as I take all my garbage to the landfill myself on a Saturday morning ? Additionally I pay for my own personal security guards so what ever taxation % I pay to cover police costs I'll take a refund on that too please ?
 
Morba said:
But that majority is an even smaller part of the percentage that voted. Of the whole union members, the minority caused a strike. Simple really.
Click to expand...

It was a majority. If there was anything adverse in this dont you think the Govt would have went to the courts to get the result overturned as others have done in the past?

The reason they did not is because it was valid so arguements against the result are dumb.
 
Morba said:
There will always be someone running the country making decisions, if the vote is not valid due to a big enough turnout then the current party stays in.

In this teacher scenario, that would mean that there should be no strike.
See the difference?
Click to expand...

But the vote was valid because there was a big enough turnout so it's a moot point.

As I said before, similar turnout percentages have been enough to decide elections so why should it be any different for unions?

I actually agree that, like Australia, everyone should be required to vote, even if they ruin their ballet. However, that's not the case in this country so at the moment it looks like double standards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom