he is clearly speaking the truth

news.sky.com/story/1353507/lord-freud-ac...er-disabled-comments

In the corporate world many public companies insist they need to pay millions to get the best MD's/CEO's and also top local authority leaders stating if you pay peanuts you get monkeys. But in reality these excessively paid people are often the best con people that is they can sell themselves. And may have some of what is needed but they are really the monkeys when it comes to real key knowledge and needed skills.

Strange world. That this argument even arises about ever even thinking of paying anyone below minimum wage and at the some time shareholders and the country get ripped off by highly paid individuals. You may find even some of these disbled people with a keen mind etc far superior to these same CEO's.
Many senior people in all sectors are far from worth what they are paid. Many also will remind all readers that within the world of work and the rich there are many who are as lazy as the ("falsely accused") unemployed. I know as I spend much of my working life clearing up after the mess they left. That's the so called workers.

It's so easy and superficial and stupid to misinterpret, simplify and say "how ghastly to say disabled people deserve less money". A good story. It's less popular to say "is it possible that some employers might be prepared to hire disabled people who produce less if they are allowed to pay less?". Not even to say it WOULD increase employment opportunities but just to look at it?

Oh no, that's FAR too complicated for human beings 2014.

Re-phrase good JK, "Oh no, that's FAR too complicated for inhuman beings 2014."

And, would such inhuman beings block severely disabled BIG brains like Stephen Hawking?

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-26892...ease-discovered.html

I knew Lord Freud would have a supporter and one in particular

yes set up a several tier system of paying people.

It worked for Rome when they began importing slaves.

The lower classes soon found themselves unemployed and consequently the middle class began to depreciate & could no longer afford flat screen teles (yes they had them then, they just didn't work)

Hence the beginning of the collapse of the Roman Empire.

I argued in the Senate against slavery at the time.
As usual no-one listened to Senator Heddius.

hedda wrote:
I knew Lord Freud would have a supporter and one in particular

yes set up a several tier system of paying people.

It worked for Rome when they began importing slaves.

The lower classes soon found themselves unemployed and consequently the middle class began to depreciate & could no longer afford flat screen teles (yes they had them then, they just didn't work)

Hence the beginning of the collapse of the Roman Empire.

I argued in the Senate against slavery at the time.
As usual no-one listened to Senator Heddius.

More proof the Tories are deluded and out of touch.

Sadly the Tories are more viscous than the BNP.

JK2006 wrote:
It's so easy and superficial and stupid to misinterpret, simplify and say "how ghastly to say disabled people deserve less money". A good story. It's less popular to say "is it possible that some employers might be prepared to hire disabled people who produce less if they are allowed to pay less?". Not even to say it WOULD increase employment opportunities but just to look at it?

Oh no, that's FAR too complicated for human beings 2014.

Quite right, JK

Just seen a woman on the news who is willing TO PAY an employer - merely to take on her disabled son.
She is clearly a realist - and recognises that he has virtually no chance of employment, and understands that actually working (even for no pay) would give him a better life balance that simply sitting at home looking at the wallpaper.

Thats clearly too complicated for some to understand.

No jokes about a 'Freudian Slip'?

Pattaya wrote:
No jokes about a 'Freudian Slip'?

No - but when andrew is prepared to pay TWICE as much for his tee shirts, because they take TWICE as long and cost TWICE as much to make by a disabled person - Then and only then, will he be in a position to criticise.

In The Know (as always) wrote:
Pattaya wrote:
No jokes about a 'Freudian Slip'?

No - but when andrew is prepared to pay TWICE as much for his tee shirts, because they take TWICE as long and cost TWICE as much to make by a disabled person - Then and only then, will he be in a position to criticise.

ITK this is one of those cases where the press turn it into a 'good story'....as of course they do with anybody they want to,like UKIP, Milliband et al....Ched Evans,Grisham and that old bag Madley...sensible meaning comments,just not PC friendly....but you've jumped on perceived faults in others,you must of course expect them to be returned...especially if it makes us have a chuckle.

In The Know (as always) wrote:
Pattaya wrote:
No jokes about a 'Freudian Slip'?

No - but when andrew is prepared to pay TWICE as much for his tee shirts, because they take TWICE as long and cost TWICE as much to make by a disabled person - Then and only then, will he be in a position to criticise.

I get my clothes online, also why not put disabled people in parliament ?

andrew wrote:
In The Know (as always) wrote:
Pattaya wrote:
No jokes about a 'Freudian Slip'?

No - but when andrew is prepared to pay TWICE as much for his tee shirts, because they take TWICE as long and cost TWICE as much to make by a disabled person - Then and only then, will he be in a position to criticise.

I get my clothes online, also why not put disabled people in parliament ?


Blunkett? Milliband?

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Milliband?

LOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
andrew wrote:
In The Know (as always) wrote:
Pattaya wrote:
No jokes about a 'Freudian Slip'?

No - but when andrew is prepared to pay TWICE as much for his tee shirts, because they take TWICE as long and cost TWICE as much to make by a disabled person - Then and only then, will he be in a position to criticise.

I get my clothes online, also why not put disabled people in parliament ?


Blunkett? Milliband?

I don't think blind lefties make clothes.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
andrew wrote:
In The Know (as always) wrote:
Pattaya wrote:
No jokes about a 'Freudian Slip'?

No - but when andrew is prepared to pay TWICE as much for his tee shirts, because they take TWICE as long and cost TWICE as much to make by a disabled person - Then and only then, will he be in a position to criticise.

I get my clothes online, also why not put disabled people in parliament ?


Milliband?

Is being a twat a disability?

Pattaya wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
andrew wrote:
In The Know (as always) wrote:
Pattaya wrote:
No jokes about a 'Freudian Slip'?

No - but when andrew is prepared to pay TWICE as much for his tee shirts, because they take TWICE as long and cost TWICE as much to make by a disabled person - Then and only then, will he be in a position to criticise.

I get my clothes online, also why not put disabled people in parliament ?


Milliband?

Is being a twat a disability?

Ask IDS.

Pattaya wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
andrew wrote:
In The Know (as always) wrote:
Pattaya wrote:
No jokes about a 'Freudian Slip'?

No - but when andrew is prepared to pay TWICE as much for his tee shirts, because they take TWICE as long and cost TWICE as much to make by a disabled person - Then and only then, will he be in a position to criticise.

I get my clothes online, also why not put disabled people in parliament ?


Milliband?

Is being a twat a disability?

Yes. It is a lifelong affliction that is exacerbated by public speaking.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
It is a lifelong affliction that is exacerbated by public speaking.

.... through your nose !

I hear that Silliband is now HALF as popular as Gordon Brown was !

Now - that IS an achievement LOL !

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
It is a lifelong affliction that is exacerbated by public speaking.

“Our best hope would be to keep Ed off the TV,” said one senior Labour MP.

But Miliband knows that Labour also has an Achilles heel - a lack of economic competence in the public’s eyes. His answer is to make the election a question about living standards and “which party will be best for me and my family?” It worked for Barack Obama when he trailed Mitt Romney on economic trust in the 2012 presidential race.

...will not allay the jitters and pessimism among Labour MPs. They extend to the Shadow Cabinet, some of whom appear to have their eyes not on the May general election but the Labour leadership election that would follow if the party lost.

“Unity is necessary but it is not enough,” groaned one Labour frontbencher. “If we are not careful, it will be the unity of the graveyard.”

all of above from - www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/lab...mething-9802551.html