Michael Dean :: Blog :: Archives

August 2009

August 04, 2009

Once upon a time, bonuses were paid as an addition to the salary if the performance of the individual, or perhaps the team, exceeded the job specification and targets that were part of the job.

Basically, if a worker actually does his/her job properly then they would not get a bonus. Why not? Because they did the job that they were paid for.

Nowdays, there are too many companies where the bosses get paid huge bonuses for achieving targets that are little more than their job specification. They get large salaries for doing their job, and then get large bonuses for doing their job.

This is not the same as those workers who get minimal salaries and whose earnings are based on their efforts and their performance. The commission structure generally means that these workers do get rewarded for the efforts that they put in.

Unfortunately we have seen a massive increase in this this greedy bonus culture amongst state sector organisations. Our taxes are being used to pay massive bonuses for those running these organisations.

We need to stop these greedy bosses from abusing the people of the UK who do not want their taxes being used to pay bonuses on top of the huge salaries these greedy people are getting!

Keywords: bonus, bonuses, government, greed, tax, taxes

Posted by Michael Dean | 0 comment(s)

August 12, 2009

Just watching a discussion on tv.

I hope that Labour MP, Angela Eagle carries on fronting the Labour attempts to justify it's actions and get back in power! In my view,   she  (and her leader Brown) are helping the Conservative cause and doing Labour harm. Which is good!

She was saying that the banks should be lending money to get the economy going. But (almost) everybody in the UK knows that the government (the one that she is a minister in) has told the banks to build up liquidity and they are doing this rather than financing the businesses and the mortgages  of the UK!

We all know that, the banks know that, the businesses know that.

So why does Eagle not seem to know that when she talks about the banks financing businesses and house loans.

I also like the way that Labour, particularly Brown and Eagle on tv tonight, blame the credit crunch for the financial problems.  They seem to forget that Brown was in charge of regulating the financial industry in the years before it went belly up with a severe case of bad loans!

The fact that the US and other countries had similar problems does not let New Labour off the hook in the UK. Their actions (or inactions!)  allowed the credit crunch to hit the UK severely.

So it is a severe case of hypocrisy to blame the credit crunch for the UK's problems!!!!!

Keywords: banks, brown, credit crunch, economy, finance, labour, mortgages

Posted by Michael Dean | 0 comment(s)

August 14, 2009

I have a fairly low opinion of the competency of New Labour and their leaders.

But the way that our leadership run the country affects so many people, in same cases the consequences are awful.

One of Gordon Brown's personal statements on what he was going to do to help families who were having problems paying their mortgage was to introduce the Mortgage Rescue Scheme. This was a key announcement by Brown and it was intended to show how he was able to respond to the needs of people who were likely to lose their homes because of the recession.

It took time for the scheme to come into effect, during which many people would have had their homes repossessed!

But we now find that the number of people that the scheme has helped in England is 15.  It is good that 15 families have been helped but what about all the other families who have had their homes repossessed? 

15 families helped! In Scotland it is around 1000 families, in Wales it is 70 families.

There were 11,400 repossessions between April and June. Yet this grandly announced scheme of Gordon Brown  has only helped 15 families!

Is this just incompetence by our government? Or are they only interested in saving the banking system?

Perhaps the officials involved in awarding certificates showing that school kids are able to catch a bus, should have been  spending their time on the Mortgage Rescue Scheme!

Posted by Michael Dean | 0 comment(s)

August 15, 2009

The move to force people to pay the legal costs even if they are found innocent of the charges  is an appalling move by Gordon Brown, even by New Labour's  own standards!!

What this legal change does is to remove justice from the middle classes.

Over the last 12 years, New Labour have given powers to many groups of people, powers that allow them to monitor and control the  UK population.

It won't actually matter any more if the police, traffic wardens and all these other officials make mistakes or even make up offences or simply tell lies.

There is no way that most people will now be able to challenge ANYaccusations made by these people.

Whatever people are accused of,  they are going to be forced to plead guilty, even if they risk going to jail simply because they don't have the money to defend themselves.

Another serious attack on our freedoms! If Brown carries on like this then we may not even have an election to throw him out of power!!

Why do Labour need to make these cuts? Because their policies in dealing with the recession (that they allowed to happen) have ruined the UK economy!

Posted by Michael Dean | 0 comment(s)

August 23, 2009

This did make me laugh.

New Labour have a problem with the outgoing Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Richard Dannat. He has been telling things as they are.

So just like nice, ordinary people would do when they don’t agree with someone, New Labour make a series of Freedeom of Information requests to find out what his expenses claims have been.

In their eyes, and presumably because they put this officer in the same category of person as they are, they expected to find loads of expense claims so they could make them public and embarress the General in public.

Unfortunately for them, the General is a totally different type of person to them. His expense claims were not in thsame ball park as the defense minister.

Between April 1 2005 and March 31st 2009, the General claimed £19K in expenses.

In the same time period, the defense secretary Bob Ainsworth claimed £394K of expenses!

An own goal indeed. I know whom I would prefer to be running the country!!!

Posted by Michael Dean | 0 comment(s)

August 29, 2009

Our revered prime minister has made a surprise visit to Afghanistan today.Smile

What he has had to say is not that surprising for him, but it really shows how good he is in catching the mood of the people!

Brown said that getting another 50,000 Afghan troops trained by the end of the year would enable them to “take more responsibility for their own affairs”. I don’t know how many they have trained or are in the process of training, but to get that many Afghan soldiers trained in four months would seem to need many more of our soldiers to train them!

I am glad that Brown has announced that new equipment, e.g. more armoured vehicles, will be made available. Two questions:

  • When will they be available?
  • How armoured are these vehicles?

If they are more heavily armoured than the vehicles currently in use by our soldiers then it will be an admission that the current vehicles do not have sufficient armour!

Keywords: afghanistan, armoured vehicles, more soldiers, war

Posted by Michael Dean | 0 comment(s)

August 30, 2009

More staff cuts are being threatened by the banking system.

Yet these are the people whose actions were the root cause of the global financial recession! Of course theirgreed  for profits was allowed by the Labour government who failed to regulate the financial industry properly.

New Labour encouraged the banking system to absorb the failing banks. Why? I don’t really understand their reasons, they don’t seem to be the right course of action!

The country has ploughed billions into the banks to stop them from failing – we will all have to pay extra taxes for many years to come.

But would the situation be better if the failing banks had been allowed to fail?

The assets of the failed banks could have been sold, this would have raised a lot of money.

Yes the staff would probably all lose their jobs, but they are going to lose them anyway! All the banks are eventually going to dump staff, just to cut costs. The way that Brown has organised things we have paid billions to the banks to take over the failed banks. They have taken the money and are still going to get rid of lots of people in the interests of efficiencies.

The UK is going to pay twice for the staff of these failed banks.

Keywords: bank, banks, branch closures, brown, labour, recession, staff cuts

Posted by Michael Dean | 0 comment(s)