No its not - nobody is dragged screaming to Aldi to work. What is the ultimatum here, it is not a prison where they have to do as they are told.

All these people have options - this is a free country the way you talk Aldi is salt mine in Siberia, get a grip on the true reality here.

Mintball is incorrect, it was care workers who you thought had expense accounts.

And while you may not have said others should not have a pay rise, you have never been slow in condemning any other workers (especially but not exclusively those in the public sector) who may have taken industrial action in order to preserve and/or improve their working conditions and/or pay.

I never said tat you said that cleaners had expense accounts: you claimed that homecare workers had expense accounts.

You also 'think' that Blair led a 'socialist government'.

That tells intelligent people everything they need to know.

Oh, he did. Spectacularly. In recent years the only main political party to sort of stay in the same place is the Tories, the other 2 have shifted to the right and are now occupying the same ground as the "nasty" party.

You just need to read the manifestos, it's all in there, benefit cuts (neatly called welfare reform or some other such slogan that passed a focus group), NHS privatisation, no mention of any form of renationalisation. A vote for Labour/Lib Dem is a vote for Thatcher and everything she stood for, no matter how much people try and pretend it isn't.

If you don't quit with ad hominem attacks people will be taking a rest, understand?

At last somebody who can read. If some member of the chattering classes on here can show me where I said home care workers had expense accounts I will readily admit my mistake.

I don't agree with striking because it is counter-productive as we saw in Grangemouth and we saw with the miner dispute of 84/85. How is it that most non union labour seem to be able to sort out their issues without the need for industrial action yet union dominated trades industries seem to see striking as a viable tool to get what they think they are entitled to.

Maybe I am wrong but it appears to me the union is driving the strike rather than the members - the union guys will be OK they will not lose money during a strike unlike their members, its bonkers. The idea that automatic pay increases should be given out without the need for any performance improvement is a concept set in the dark ages. My wife used to work at Morrisons they give out annual pay rises based on the profitability of the company as a whole i.e. performance related pay that is individually done for each employee all 140k of them. Having a union would not get the employees anymore pay in fact it would actually hinder and most likely cost them.

I trust that means everyone?

So how does huge spending on public services follow what Thatcher was doing which was the opposite i.e. reducing the size of the state?

It was financed privately. Wander round Darwen or Blackburn and see how many NHS buildings are labelled with "Capita". What did Labour donor, Mr Aldridge have to do to get his company name linked to the NHS? Build an "academy".
That's the Labour legacy, let me profit from the NHS and I'll build you a school.

Are you really saying the massive amount of extra money spent on health and education by Blair/Brown's Labour was all really a myth it didn't actually happen?

The institute for fiscal studies suggest they did - spending on health and education went from 10.1% of national income to 14.8% by 2010.

No, I'm saying look where it came from, how it was financed. What was it spent on. It's quite interesting, that for all this extra money the spent on health, the life expectancy gap between the richest and poorest grew for the first time in decades.

It was financed from taxation and/or government borrowing - that much is proven.

Well, yes, but every single thing the government buys is financed from taxation and/or borrowing.