Squadron Disbandment
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squadron Disbandment
207 (Reserve) Squadron Disbands
Another squadron disbands. It's all very sad, and I wonder when it will all end.
Another squadron disbands. It's all very sad, and I wonder when it will all end.
Why is it sad?
Gnd,
We spend an absolute fortune on defence, one of the highest spenders on the planet, what on earth has benefit payments got to do with it? Unemployment goes up, benefit payments go up, no getting away from that, or would you rather see families starve?
The RAF is hardly training any pilots right now so surely the fact that there is to be one badged BFJ training squadron rather than two is simple common sense expediency?
Gnd,
We spend an absolute fortune on defence, one of the highest spenders on the planet, what on earth has benefit payments got to do with it? Unemployment goes up, benefit payments go up, no getting away from that, or would you rather see families starve?
The RAF is hardly training any pilots right now so surely the fact that there is to be one badged BFJ training squadron rather than two is simple common sense expediency?
Proone,
I agree with you up to a point. I think the issue some have with "benefit" is it when it seems to entitle people to a life of carefree indolence secure in the knowledge that rent, beer, sky TV and the latest trainers are all provided by the state; a family receiving the proposed cap of £26K pa is hardly going to starve...and why, oh why, should they have a right to live in an area which decent hardworking folk cannot afford to live in?
The rationale for reducing the training committment is sound; the simple fact is that we may well have the largest defence spend in Europe, but when it has been used by successive governments as a "benefits system" for ailing UK companies to protect jobs and R&D in this country (both worthwhile), pays our pensions and, more recently, been allowed to spiral out of control whilst tough decisions were ducked for political expediency (thanks to Blair, Browne and Brown) it does appear at prima facie that we don't get much bang for our buck.
Coupled with the horrendous cost of the latest toys it's hardly surprising. Me? I'd send everyone back through Linton and stream in the old manner - the capacity is there now.
I agree with you up to a point. I think the issue some have with "benefit" is it when it seems to entitle people to a life of carefree indolence secure in the knowledge that rent, beer, sky TV and the latest trainers are all provided by the state; a family receiving the proposed cap of £26K pa is hardly going to starve...and why, oh why, should they have a right to live in an area which decent hardworking folk cannot afford to live in?
The rationale for reducing the training committment is sound; the simple fact is that we may well have the largest defence spend in Europe, but when it has been used by successive governments as a "benefits system" for ailing UK companies to protect jobs and R&D in this country (both worthwhile), pays our pensions and, more recently, been allowed to spiral out of control whilst tough decisions were ducked for political expediency (thanks to Blair, Browne and Brown) it does appear at prima facie that we don't get much bang for our buck.
Coupled with the horrendous cost of the latest toys it's hardly surprising. Me? I'd send everyone back through Linton and stream in the old manner - the capacity is there now.
Gentleman Aviator
Pr00ne
.. how about:
Service pay up by 1% - if you are lucky
benefits up by 5.8%.
discuss.
what on earth has benefit payments got to do with it?
Service pay up by 1% - if you are lucky
benefits up by 5.8%.
discuss.
teeteringhead,
"benefits up by 5.8%"
Have you ever tried living on a means tested £65 per week with a constant need to demonstrate your activities to find work to protect that amount? The increase is miserly and many other benefits have been cut, reduced or done away with all together.
"service pay up by 1%"
Compared to the millions in the private sector who have had no increase for years, or have had actual pay cuts, or been made redundant with 30 days notice on minimum terms of a weeks pay for every year served. You are lucky.
Evalu8ter,
I think the key word in your well argued case is "seems." The £26k is extremely rare and very few people would describe their meager existence on means tested benefits as carefree indolence.
Totally agree with your final point about BFTS.
"benefits up by 5.8%"
Have you ever tried living on a means tested £65 per week with a constant need to demonstrate your activities to find work to protect that amount? The increase is miserly and many other benefits have been cut, reduced or done away with all together.
"service pay up by 1%"
Compared to the millions in the private sector who have had no increase for years, or have had actual pay cuts, or been made redundant with 30 days notice on minimum terms of a weeks pay for every year served. You are lucky.
Evalu8ter,
I think the key word in your well argued case is "seems." The £26k is extremely rare and very few people would describe their meager existence on means tested benefits as carefree indolence.
Totally agree with your final point about BFTS.
Gentleman Aviator
Pr00ne .... you were the one who asked what benefit payments had to do with it.
I attempted to illustrate the different and competing pressures on the Public Purse, without comment.
For completeness:
... no I haven't, (but I know many) have you?
I attempted to illustrate the different and competing pressures on the Public Purse, without comment.
For completeness:
Have you ever tried living on a means tested £65 per week with a constant need to demonstrate your activities to find work to protect that amount?
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Mos Eisley
Age: 48
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
very few people would describe their meager existence on means tested benefits as carefree indolence
The increase is miserly and many other benefits have been cut, reduced or done away with all together.
king hoo.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would feel happier about military spending if it was better targetted and we had more to show for it. Random examples are 8 Chinooks sitting somewhere unflyable, millions spent on projects that fail to deliver or are cancelled while our people are living in shoddy, ancient accommodation that isn't maintained to any acceptable standard..
Nimrod MR4 cost £3.8 billion with nothing to show for it
Chinooks cost £422 million and aren't in service
Further examples in incredible incompetence and waste here
MOD procurement £6billion waste/yr « Bristol Against Arms Trade
Nimrod MR4 cost £3.8 billion with nothing to show for it
Chinooks cost £422 million and aren't in service
Further examples in incredible incompetence and waste here
MOD procurement £6billion waste/yr « Bristol Against Arms Trade
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: LONDON
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A2
If you want to maintain that glorified A2 status you are boing to have to start reading up old boy. The 8 Mk3 Chinooks you refer to are in service and have been used by crews for at least the least 2 years.
Still, the truth and a good story/general whine remain at odds on this web site!!
If you want to maintain that glorified A2 status you are boing to have to start reading up old boy. The 8 Mk3 Chinooks you refer to are in service and have been used by crews for at least the least 2 years.
Still, the truth and a good story/general whine remain at odds on this web site!!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The link I quoted, states on a a full reading, that the helicopters are now entering service 15 years late. By MOD procurement standards that is a top result!
