14th March 2007, 07:14 PM
I too started full time in about 1983... and have the whole range from sleeping in doorways, to living behind peoples settees... I was on a whopping £60 a week (could have been £80 I can't remember now as the meths has addled my brain)
I think we have to come back to the point of this...
1. It was crap then .. and that was wrong - it is better now - but could be better.
2. VoR made some loverly sweeping statements about poverty being paid a dollar a day and diggers still seem to have enough to buy fags
this was returned (in the spirit of rough debate) with a sweeping statement back... and a full and complicated maths statement.
We can bandy these about till the cows come home..
What I am intrigued at is the need for
What was that statement meant to achieve
or the follow up about diggers have it easy etc... because they get all these lovely cash injections and freebies.....
it is hard.. at all ends.. tough to be a digger... crap to be a super.. piss poor as a PO.. and downright deppressing bing a director... OK so we arn't sitting in rags on the side of a street - but neither are we anywhere near a dignity wage - as kevin points out (splitter)
So do we argue about who had the harder time? Who deserves it more? or jsut get on and act. If VoR thinks that being a digger is so great.. what with the perks... go and become one again... if a digger thinks that directors swan about supping chardony while stuffing rolls of banknotes into swiss accounts... then go and try that stress inducing job for a week on the wages and hours already mentioned ... We have at last perhaps come to a realisation that its crap for everyone... the last thing we need is to lose the focus on what we are trying to do... TOGETHER
it is undignified.
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu
I think we have to come back to the point of this...
1. It was crap then .. and that was wrong - it is better now - but could be better.
2. VoR made some loverly sweeping statements about poverty being paid a dollar a day and diggers still seem to have enough to buy fags
this was returned (in the spirit of rough debate) with a sweeping statement back... and a full and complicated maths statement.
We can bandy these about till the cows come home..
What I am intrigued at is the need for
Quote:quote:poverty?
just hypothetically, does free accomm, tax-free subs of £40-50 a week plus a wage of £270 pw count as poverty?
a dollar a day, child labour and nowhere to live, that's what I call poverty
What was that statement meant to achieve
or the follow up about diggers have it easy etc... because they get all these lovely cash injections and freebies.....
it is hard.. at all ends.. tough to be a digger... crap to be a super.. piss poor as a PO.. and downright deppressing bing a director... OK so we arn't sitting in rags on the side of a street - but neither are we anywhere near a dignity wage - as kevin points out (splitter)
So do we argue about who had the harder time? Who deserves it more? or jsut get on and act. If VoR thinks that being a digger is so great.. what with the perks... go and become one again... if a digger thinks that directors swan about supping chardony while stuffing rolls of banknotes into swiss accounts... then go and try that stress inducing job for a week on the wages and hours already mentioned ... We have at last perhaps come to a realisation that its crap for everyone... the last thing we need is to lose the focus on what we are trying to do... TOGETHER
it is undignified.
"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu