On Thursday, 24 September 2015 14:12:23 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 18:32:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Then you have the Underground train drivers. £50k my arse.

So what, in your opinion, would be a fair salary for a tube driver?

Oooh, about the same as a nurse.

Why that high ?
How long does it take to train a train driver,
how long does it take to train a nurse.
How many hours do each work, night/day work etc...

Which job do you think the more rewarding? Sitting in a cab on your own in
the dark all day? Sounds like hell to me...

--
*How's my driving? Call 999*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

People of lesser intellect may find it exciting.

On Friday, 25 September 2015 07:08:31 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

In article ,
Richard wrote:
Err, all you're saying is nurses are underpaid. Just what that has to
do with tube driver's pay, I dunno. Except in the views of Mail
readers, who want to keep everyone but themselves on the poverty line.

Indeed, nurses are underpaid. So instead of siding with grossly overpaid
and pampered train drivers, focus on getting a better deal for the
nurses. Oh, forgot. Nurses tend not to be striking ****heads, so don't
count.

But the likes of you don't want nurses to be better paid. As it would
increase the taxes you pay. What you actually mean is you want tube
drivers to be paid less.

Why not just be honest for once?

I do want nurses to be paid more and at times I feel guilty that I earn more
than the average nurse. However, I am not a public sector worker. I do not
want train drivers to be paid more than nurses. The problem is that everyone
wants nurses that care. If the pay is increased to a realistic level, the
caring types will be displaced by the "I'm all right, Jack" (read Dave
Plowman) types - there only for the money and ready to strike at the drop of
a hat.
If most people were paid a decent wage, nothing would be affordable. How
much would your cup of tea cost if the tea pickers earned the same as your
beloved train driver?

There are consequences for being idle.

In article ,
Richard wrote:
But the likes of you don't want nurses to be better paid. As it would
increase the taxes you pay. What you actually mean is you want tube
drivers to be paid less.

Why not just be honest for once?

I do want nurses to be paid more and at times I feel guilty that I earn
more than the average nurse. However, I am not a public sector worker.

Right. So it matters not what wages are in the private sector. Typical
right wing thinking - by those who love a knee jerk response.

I do not want train drivers to be paid more than nurses.

If you want to control the wages of everyone - which is what this suggests
- you'd be better off in the Soviet Union of years ago. And it has escaped
you that the differential between the highest and lowest paid has
increased dramatically over the past few years. But ******s like you want
it to widen further.


The problem is that everyone wants nurses that care. If the pay is
increased to a realistic level, the caring types will be displaced by
the "I'm all right, Jack" (read Dave Plowman) types - there only for the
money and ready to strike at the drop of a hat.

You've certainly shown your true colours there. You want minimum wages for
everyone (except you, of course) so only those with a vocation take a job.


If most people were paid
a decent wage, nothing would be affordable. How much would your cup of
tea cost if the tea pickers earned the same as your beloved train
driver?

What were you saying about 'I'm alright Jack'?

I'll revise the Soviet Union reference. You'd have done better when there
were slaves.

--
*OK, who stopped payment on my reality check?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
harry wrote:
Which job do you think the more rewarding? Sitting in a cab on your
own in the dark all day? Sounds like hell to me...

People of lesser intellect may find it exciting.

How long have you been a tube driver, harry?

--
*Dance like nobody's watching.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thursday, 24 September 2015 17:32:55 UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Which job do you think the more rewarding? Sitting in a cab on your
own in the dark all day? Sounds like hell to me...

is not in the dark, it's not all day, and you get free travel in London
for yourself and a partner.

Great. Most firms give a discount etc on their product.

it's not a discount it's free and for a partner too.
I work in a uni, do I get free education for my kids or partner NO.
I work for the govenment, do I get any specail tax discounts NO.
Even the so called subersidised shop is more expensive than sainsbury or the co-op that have oppened in the last few years because they know college superdised food is MORE expensive than the commercial options.
Two subways stores have open too.


if we run an event where food is requred we go to M&S for sandwich platters because it's cheaper to do that than hiring our own cateres.


What about a night watchman that has to patrol along a dark alley and
may get attacked and killed just for being there,

And a tube driver can be injured in an accident. Just as likely.

far less likely.



or the doorman of a
night club that could be attacked at any moment.

Then if they feel underpaid, they should join a union and get better
conditions. Just like the tube drivers. If you really feel bouncers do an
essential job.

more essential than tube train drivers I'd say.



How many train drivers
run the risk of getting elbola or other diseases/infections from their
patients.

Err, all you're saying is nurses are underpaid.

No I didn't say anyhting of the sort. Why have you accussed me of saying that ?

On Thursday, 24 September 2015 23:40:21 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 18:32:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Then you have the Underground train drivers. £50k my arse.

So what, in your opinion, would be a fair salary for a tube driver?

Oooh, about the same as a nurse.

Why that high ?
How long does it take to train a train driver,
how long does it take to train a nurse.
How many hours do each work, night/day work etc...

Which job do you think the more rewarding?

Irrelevant to what they should be paid.

Yep, but WFT I'm agreeing with rod :-0


Sitting in a cab on your own in the
dark all day? Sounds like hell to me...

Still scared of the dark even now eh ? Figures.

Oh and agian.

Maybe they should employ blind people, preferabley in a wheel chair.
that way they won;lt even have to stand and wopn't worry about the dark.
They could use voice recognitiojn for start/stoping trains.
Afterall the DLR hasn't a driver at all.

but of course we "NEED" train drivers to drive in the dark.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Certainly the fact that the Tube drivers get ridiculous wages is an
example of unbridled capitalism.

How much do you get paid, Tim?

I'd far rather that others doing essential services had their pay brought
up to that of a tube driver - if working in London. Of course they might
well need a decent union for that, so no bad thing.

That tends to be the difference between you and me.

I'd like to see everyone in work earning a reasonable wage. Not reducing
the wages of some - especially given most on here will have no idea of the
job itself.

--
*I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Great. Most firms give a discount etc on their product.

it's not a discount it's free and for a partner too.

The driver is hardly going to make much use of it while working? Or
perhaps you expect him to buy a ticket before driving the damn thing?

I work in a uni, do I get free education for my kids or partner NO.

And you think the cost of that would be in the same ballpark as free
travel?

I work for the govenment, do I get any specail tax discounts NO.

Likewise.

Even the so called subersidised shop is more expensive than sainsbury or
the co-op that have oppened in the last few years because they know
college superdised food is MORE expensive than the commercial options.
Two subways stores have open too.

What you obviously need is a decent union then.

But supermarket staff (at least in some) do get a discount on their own
shopping. QED.

BTW, if you really feel perks should be banned in any job, it's a
reasonable point of view. So let's start off with MPs. All those who have
a company car that they can also use privately. And so on. Think you'll
find lots of people would start bleating then. Mainly those who object to
tube drivers pay and conditions.

--
*Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Afterall the DLR hasn't a driver at all.

It still has a member of staff on every train.

--
*Isn't it a bit unnerving that doctors call what they do "practice?"

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Of course with an ever increasing number of
commuters it is difficult to keep up with demand.

Pigs arse it is. Its completely trivial to measure the
increasing demand and build enough new trains
and infrastructure to handle that.

And in the same post you said:-

Clearly wasn’t enough with those where fools like you
want to see suitable investment quickly after privatisation.

Even the most stupid can usually follow their own argument.

--
*'ome is where you 'ang your @ *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Certainly the fact that the Tube drivers get ridiculous wages is an
example of unbridled capitalism.

How much do you get paid, Tim?

Zero, I'm unemployed. Hmm, perhaps I should sign on. Can I do that
while receiving a state pension?

Right. I'd say get yourself a job as a tube driver then since according to
most here it's money for old rope. Decent pension too, if you last the
course.

--
*Frustration is trying to find your glasses without your glasses.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In t,
Tim wrote:

In , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:


In t,
Tim wrote:

Certainly the fact that the Tube drivers get ridiculous wages is an
example of unbridled capitalism.

How much do you get paid, Tim?


Zero, I'm unemployed. Hmm, perhaps I should sign on. Can I do that
while receiving a state pension?

Right. I'd say get yourself a job as a tube driver then since according to
most here it's money for old rope. Decent pension too, if you last the
course.


Just remember it's a temporary position until driverless trains
come in by 2020!

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

In article ,
Richard wrote:
But the likes of you don't want nurses to be better paid. As it would
increase the taxes you pay. What you actually mean is you want tube
drivers to be paid less.

Why not just be honest for once?

I do want nurses to be paid more and at times I feel guilty that I earn
more than the average nurse. However, I am not a public sector worker.

Right. So it matters not what wages are in the private sector. Typical
right wing thinking - by those who love a knee jerk response.

Well,

I do not want train drivers to be paid more than nurses.

If you want to control the wages of everyone - which is what this suggests
- you'd be better off in the Soviet Union of years ago.


Not everyone, just the ****ing train drivers.
It is you that hankers for the soviet system.

And it has escaped
you that the differential between the highest and lowest paid has
increased dramatically over the past few years. But ******s like you want
it to widen further.

****, no. I do not earn enough yet to benefit from any widening. Did you not
comprehend " at times I feel guilty that I earn more than the average nurse"
? I am guessing, but I would expect that your income (if you still work)
will have exceeded that of even the highest paid nurse.



The problem is that everyone wants nurses that care. If the pay is
increased to a realistic level, the caring types will be displaced by
the "I'm all right, Jack" (read Dave Plowman) types - there only for the
money and ready to strike at the drop of a hat.

You've certainly shown your true colours there. You want minimum wages for
everyone (except you, of course) so only those with a vocation take a job.

Where did I say that? My original response to your question of what a train
driver should earn was the same as a nurse. ****, you are stupid.



If most people were paid
a decent wage, nothing would be affordable. How much would your cup of
tea cost if the tea pickers earned the same as your beloved train
driver?

What were you saying about 'I'm alright Jack'?

I can adopt that attitude, because I'm sure as **** right wing.

I'll revise the Soviet Union reference. You'd have done better when there
were slaves.

There are still slaves, but I couldn't be arsed to live in an Islamic
country.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 24 September 2015 23:40:21 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 18:32:18 UTC+1, Richard wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
Then you have the Underground train drivers. £50k my arse.

So what, in your opinion, would be a fair salary for a tube driver?

Oooh, about the same as a nurse.

Why that high ?
How long does it take to train a train driver,
how long does it take to train a nurse.
How many hours do each work, night/day work etc...

Which job do you think the more rewarding?

Irrelevant to what they should be paid.

Yep, but WFT I'm agreeing with rod :-0


Sitting in a cab on your own in the
dark all day? Sounds like hell to me...

Still scared of the dark even now eh ? Figures.

Oh and agian.

Maybe they should employ blind people, preferabley in a wheel chair.
that way they won;lt even have to stand and wopn't worry about the dark.
They could use voice recognitiojn for start/stoping trains.
Afterall the DLR hasn't a driver at all.

Yeah, they should sack the lot and have no drivers at all.

but of course we "NEED" train drivers to drive in the dark.

Only you stupid british do and only you lot are
actually stupid enough to pay them that much.

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
Great. Most firms give a discount etc on their product.

it's not a discount it's free and for a partner too.

The driver is hardly going to make much use of it while working? Or
perhaps you expect him to buy a ticket before driving the damn thing?

I work in a uni, do I get free education for my kids or partner NO.

And you think the cost of that would be in the same ballpark as free
travel?

I work for the govenment, do I get any specail tax discounts NO.

Likewise.

Even the so called subersidised shop is more expensive than sainsbury or
the co-op that have oppened in the last few years because they know
college superdised food is MORE expensive than the commercial options.
Two subways stores have open too.

What you obviously need is a decent union then.

But supermarket staff (at least in some) do get a discount on their own
shopping. QED.

BTW, if you really feel perks should be banned in any job, it's a
reasonable point of view. So let's start off with MPs. All those who have
a company car that they can also use privately. And so on. Think you'll
find lots of people would start bleating then. Mainly those who object to
tube drivers pay and conditions.

Company cars are a taxable benefit in kind. Fuel for private use is also
taxable. Free travel for railway workers is not. Discuss.
--
bert

Company cars are a taxable benefit in kind. Fuel for private use is
also taxable. Free travel for railway workers is not. Discuss.

Please add no tax on solar electricity income to the
discussion!

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
whisky-dave wrote

Great. Most firms give a discount etc on their product.

it's not a discount it's free and for a partner too.

The driver is hardly going to make much use of it while working?

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that
the hours they work is only a subset of the hours in a day
for train drivers and that they do have to travel to get to
work and home again, just like everyone else.

Even the so called subersidised shop is more expensive than
sainsbury or the co-op that have oppened in the last few years
because they know college superdised food is MORE expensive
than the commercial options. Two subways stores have open too.

What you obviously need is a decent union then.

You mean an obscene one.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Tim Streater wrote

Certainly the fact that the Tube drivers get ridiculous
wages is an example of unbridled capitalism.

How much do you get paid, Tim?

Irrelevant to what a train driver 'driving'
a train that can drive itself should be paid.

I'd far rather that others doing essential services had their pay
brought up to that of a tube driver - if working in London.

More fool you.

Of course they might well need a decent union for that,

Train drivers aren't paid that much because they have
a decent union, they are paid that much because they
can hold the system to ransom. And its only an utterly
obscene union that exploits that situation to produce
such an utterly obscene result.

That tends to be the difference between you and me.

Wrong, as always.

I'd like to see everyone in work earning a reasonable wage.

What train drivers get paid is nothing even remotely
like a reasonable wage for doing nothing useful at all.

Not reducing the wages of some

Those whose pay level makes no sense whatever.

- especially given most on here will have no idea of the job itself.

Even sillier than you usually manage. Its obvious what the
job involves, particularly with trains that can drive themselves.

Sweet **** all, that's what.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
whisky-dave wrote

Afterall the DLR hasn't a driver at all.

It still has a member of staff on every train.

But it makes no sense to be paying that individual
anything like what train drivers get paid.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Of course with an ever increasing number of
commuters it is difficult to keep up with demand.

Pigs arse it is. Its completely trivial to measure the
increasing demand and build enough new trains
and infrastructure to handle that.

And in the same post you said:-

Clearly wasn't enough with those where fools like you
want to see suitable investment quickly after privatisation.

Says he flagrantly dishonestly deleting
from the quoting why that happened.

The return on the massive investment
required weren't there, ****wit.

In article , Capitol
writes

Company cars are a taxable benefit in kind. Fuel for private use is
also taxable. Free travel for railway workers is not. Discuss.

Please add no tax on solar electricity income to the
discussion!
Income from solar electricity should not exist.
--
bert

In article ,
Capitol wrote:
Right. I'd say get yourself a job as a tube driver then since
according to most here it's money for old rope. Decent pension too, if
you last the course.


Just remember it's a temporary position until driverless trains
come in by 2020!

The vast majority of tube users ain't in favour of driverless trains. So
even if they do go automatic, there will still likely be a staff member on
them - as with the DLR. Or indeed the Victoria Line.

--
*IF A TURTLE DOESN'T HAVE A SHELL, IS HE HOMELESS OR NAKED?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Richard wrote:
If you want to control the wages of everyone - which is what this
suggests - you'd be better off in the Soviet Union of years ago.


Not everyone, just the ****ing train drivers.

Ah, right. So for some reason you've singled them out to be jealous of?

Are you an LT user? Do you even live in London?

Anything else you have 'righteous indignation' about? Other than non
whites, of course.

--
*If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Maybe they should employ blind people, preferabley in a wheel chair.
that way they won;lt even have to stand and wopn't worry about the dark.
They could use voice recognitiojn for start/stoping trains.
Afterall the DLR hasn't a driver at all.

Yeah, they should sack the lot and have no drivers at all.

Pray tell about any other city worldwide which has a tube system anything
like the size of that in London which runs with no staff on the trains?

Sure as f**k isn't one in OZ...

--
*War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
bert wrote:
BTW, if you really feel perks should be banned in any job, it's a
reasonable point of view. So let's start off with MPs. All those who have
a company car that they can also use privately. And so on. Think you'll
find lots of people would start bleating then. Mainly those who object to
tube drivers pay and conditions.

Company cars are a taxable benefit in kind. Fuel for private use is also
taxable.

And it were based on a true cost, no-one would use a company car
privately. It is still a very good deal.


Free travel for railway workers is not. Discuss.

Very difficult to work out any true extra costs to the rail companies. But
I doubt you'd understand this.

--
*Oh, what a tangled website we weave when first we practice *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Huge wrote:
On 2015-09-25, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes

[27 lines snipped]

BTW, if you really feel perks should be banned in any job, it's a
reasonable point of view. So let's start off with MPs.

[4 lines snipped]

Excellent idea. My expenses were only allowed on the grounds that they
were "wholly, exclusively and necessarily" incurred as a result of
performing my duties. MPs should be the same.

Mine, when working as a freelance, were not. The accountant merely claimed
for what he knew the ILR would accept without question.

Company cars are a taxable benefit in kind. Fuel for private use is
also taxable. Free travel for railway workers is not. Discuss.

Free travel for railway workers should be taxable. No discussion
required.

Going to be difficult to implement. You'd need to log every journey made
and tax the individual accordingly. And the amount would be smaller than
the costs of implementing it in many cases.

--
*Letting a cat out of the bag is easier than putting it back in *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Capitol wrote

Right. I'd say get yourself a job as a tube driver then
since according to most here it's money for old rope.
Decent pension too, if you last the course.

Just remember it's a temporary position
until driverless trains come in by 2020!

The vast majority of tube users ain't in favour of driverless trains.

BULL****.

Have fun explaining why they are happy to use the DLR.

So even if they do go automatic, there will still likely
be a staff member on them - as with the DLR.

Who ain't the DRIVER, ****wit.

And who doesn’t get paid anything like what a train driver gets paid.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Of course they might well need a decent union for that,

Train drivers aren't paid that much because they have
a decent union, they are paid that much because they
can hold the system to ransom. And its only an utterly
obscene union that exploits that situation to produce
such an utterly obscene result.

You think what they get paid an 'obscene' amount for one who by nature has
to live in London?

As usual, you have no idea of the costs involved with that. Not surprising
given you live in a hovel worth pennies.

--
*I started out with nothing, and I still have most of it*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
whisky-dave wrote

Afterall the DLR hasn't a driver at all.

It still has a member of staff on every train.

But it makes no sense to be paying that individual
anything like what train drivers get paid.

What do they get paid. Wodney? Lets have the actual amount, since you know
so much about it.

--
*America is so advanced that even the chairs are electric.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Richard wrote

If you want to control the wages of everyone - which is what this
suggests - you'd be better off in the Soviet Union of years ago.

Not everyone, just the ****ing train drivers.

Ah, right. So for some reason you've singled them out

Yep, because they are obscenely overpaid given how easy their job is.

Are you an LT user? Do you even live in London?

Irrelevant to whether they are obscenely overpaid.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Maybe they should employ blind people, preferabley in a wheel chair.
that way they won;lt even have to stand and wopn't worry about the dark.

They could use voice recognitiojn for start/stoping trains.
Afterall the DLR hasn't a driver at all.

Yeah, they should sack the lot and have no drivers at all.

Pray tell about any other city worldwide which has
a tube system anything like the size of that in London

The size is completely irrelevant to what works fine with no driver.

which runs with no staff on the trains?

Completely and utterly irrelevant to what works fine with no DRIVER.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...subway_systems

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Richard wrote

If you want to control the wages of everyone - which is what this
suggests - you'd be better off in the Soviet Union of years ago.

Not everyone, just the ****ing train drivers.

Ah, right. So for some reason you've singled them out

Yep, because they are obscenely overpaid given how easy their job is.

Wasn't asking you Wodney. No need to for anything, given your answers are
always the same.

Are you an LT user? Do you even live in London?

Irrelevant to whether they are obscenely overpaid.

Of course Wodney. What someone is paid need have no relevance to the cost
of living in that area. So let's pay them a dollar a day like some workers
in India.

You really are an idiot of the first order.

--
*The e-mail of the species is more deadly than the mail *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Pray tell about any other city worldwide which has
a tube system anything like the size of that in London

The size is completely irrelevant to what works fine with no driver.

Yes, pet. Would work just fine for one train a week in the outback.

--
*I'm really easy to get along with once people learn to worship me

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...


I do not want train drivers to be paid more than nurses.

If you want to control the wages of everyone - which is what this suggests
- you'd be better off in the Soviet Union of years ago.


Not everyone, just the ****ing train drivers.
It is you that hankers for the soviet system.

And it has escaped
you that the differential between the highest and lowest paid has
increased dramatically over the past few years. But ******s like you want
it to widen further.

****, no. I do not earn enough yet to benefit from any widening. Did you not
comprehend " at times I feel guilty that I earn more than the average nurse"
? I am guessing, but I would expect that your income (if you still work)
will have exceeded that of even the highest paid nurse.



The problem is that everyone wants nurses that care. If the pay is
increased to a realistic level, the caring types will be displaced by
the "I'm all right, Jack" (read Dave Plowman) types - there only for the
money and ready to strike at the drop of a hat.

You've certainly shown your true colours there. You want minimum wages for
everyone (except you, of course) so only those with a vocation take a job.

Where did I say that? My original response to your question of what a train
driver should earn was the same as a nurse. ****, you are stupid.



If most people were paid
a decent wage, nothing would be affordable. How much would your cup of
tea cost if the tea pickers earned the same as your beloved train
driver?

What were you saying about 'I'm alright Jack'?

I can adopt that attitude, because I'm sure as **** right wing.

I'll revise the Soviet Union reference. You'd have done better when there
were slaves.

There are still slaves, but I couldn't be arsed to live in an Islamic
country.

In article ,
Richard wrote:
And it has escaped you that the differential between the highest and
lowest paid has increased dramatically over the past few years. But
******s like you want it to widen further.

****, no. I do not earn enough yet to benefit from any widening. Did you
not comprehend " at times I feel guilty that I earn more than the
average nurse" ? I am guessing, but I would expect that your income (if
you still work) will have exceeded that of even the highest paid nurse.

You seem fixated about nurses pay. And your answer appears to be to lower
the pay of those you think shouldn't be better paid than them.

And in some twisted way you seem to think this would be good for nurses.

--
*Money isn't everything, but it sure keeps the kids in touch.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
wrote:

And it has escaped you that the differential between the highest and
lowest paid has increased dramatically over the past few years. But
******s like you want it to widen further.


****, no. I do not earn enough yet to benefit from any widening. Did you
not comprehend " at times I feel guilty that I earn more than the
average nurse" ? I am guessing, but I would expect that your income (if
you still work) will have exceeded that of even the highest paid nurse.

You seem fixated about nurses pay. And your answer appears to be to lower
the pay of those you think shouldn't be better paid than them.

And in some twisted way you seem to think this would be good for nurses.


Of course it would. Their transport costs would reduce. In your
socialist heaven, pay is not related to productivity and the result
shows in the economic failure of every Labour government of the last 50
years.

In article ,
Capitol wrote:
You seem fixated about nurses pay. And your answer appears to be to
lower the pay of those you think shouldn't be better paid than them.

And in some twisted way you seem to think this would be good for nurses.


Of course it would. Their transport costs would reduce.

And by exactly how much? Put a figure on it - so we can all have a laugh.
At how it would sort out the low pay of nurses.

In your
socialist heaven, pay is not related to productivity and the result
shows in the economic failure of every Labour government of the last 50
years.

And in your free market paradise we have the situation where the likes of
nurses can't afford decent accommodation in the London area.

But then it's exactly what the likes of you want.

--
*The fact that no one understands you doesn't mean you're an artist

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Pray tell about any other city worldwide which has
a tube system anything like the size of that in London

The size is completely irrelevant to what works fine with no driver.

Yes, pet. Would work just fine for one train a week in the outback.

Works fine with all of these too
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_urban_metro_subway_systems
--

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Richard wrote

If you want to control the wages of everyone - which is what this
suggests - you'd be better off in the Soviet Union of years ago.

Not everyone, just the ****ing train drivers.

Ah, right. So for some reason you've singled them out

Yep, because they are obscenely overpaid given how easy their job is.

Wasn't asking you Wodney.

Even a terminal ****wit such as yourself should have
noticed what public groups are about, if someone
was actually stupid enough to lend you a seeing
eye dog and a white can because you have
wanked yourself completely blind, as always.

Are you an LT user? Do you even live in London?

Irrelevant to whether they are obscenely overpaid.

Of course Wodney. What someone is paid need
have no relevance to the cost of living in that area.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed
that the bus drivers, nurses, white van drivers, cops
etc etc etc 'live' in that area fine.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Capitol wrote:
You seem fixated about nurses pay. And your answer appears to be to
lower the pay of those you think shouldn't be better paid than them.

And in some twisted way you seem to think this would be good for
nurses.


Of course it would. Their transport costs would reduce.

And by exactly how much? Put a figure on it - so we can all have a laugh.
At how it would sort out the low pay of nurses.

In your
socialist heaven, pay is not related to productivity and the result
shows in the economic failure of every Labour government of the last 50
years.

And in your free market paradise we have the situation where the likes of
nurses can't afford decent accommodation in the London area.

Even sillier than you usually manage.

Must be why they are all camping in squats and in cardboard boxes on the
street.