Navy Net - Royal Navy Community

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Political humour, satire, memes etc. Not serious stuff


Says it all.....


What's wrong with that particular statement by the way? Ignoring who was purported to have said it, reading it solely in the context of it's text and separating it from the 25 points?

The Tory election motto can be found in Mein Kampf. You can associate anything to anything.


Last edited by a moderator:
This just came up on Facebook, no idea how accurate it might be.....

View attachment 23272

Whilst the figures for pay are correct in simple terms, It's quite a bit skewed and doesn't exactly tell the whole story. What it should say is "If you are 25+ years old on minimum wage and subject to some further details we're not going into, whilst ignoring a whole multitude of other factors; the numbers on your pay packet will appear higher than they would have 8 years ago."

The Tory minimum wage of £15,600 is calculated from the HIGHEST possible minimum wage for the bracket of 25 year olds+ which is £7.50 as of April this year. (The 25+ bracket was introduced in 2016.) This is a much smaller percentage of earners than the sum quoted for 2009. The majority still earn more than 2009/10 but it's the rates of £7.05 for 21 - 24 yr olds down to £4.05 for 16 year olds.

Assuming a 40 hour week = 40 x 7.50 = 300

Assuming no holidays, 300 x 52 = £15,600.

The figure for 2009/10 is the lower 2009 rate for earners 22+ which was made up of a far higher percentage of minimum earners. Which in 2009 was £5.80.

Assuming 40 hour week = 40 x 5.80 = 232. So same process gives an annual wage as quoted of £12,062.

Additionally, this 'rise' shows an increase of £1.70 at the max rate over 8 years. The total increase from 2002 to 2010 under labour? £1.73. For 17-21 year olds these supposed new found Conservative party increases are even lower. In fact, if we remove the skewed higher Tory bracket of 25+, lump it in with the 21-24 and just calculate the mean 21+ rate for 2017 to put this on a more level playing field, we're left with £7.26. This further lowers these apparently at first sight great Tory increases to just £1.48 over that quoted 8 year period.

This also doesn't take into account the 900,000 odd zero hour contract jobs that pay less than minimum wage, which stood at around 150,000 in 2009.

Let's also not underestimate the rising cost of living which is accelerating also. The cost of living is estimated to be around 25% higher than it was in 2009, with that take home pay quote from Facebook showing around the same as a percentage increase, before we've even dismantled the tax figure.

And apprenticeships, dear dear apprenticeships. Let's not go there but they too are ignored in this whole Facebook equation.

So, there is some truth to the statement, but it's certainly selective in the information it displays to try and prove a certain message. The real point here is that minimum wage has increased at pretty much the same rate year on year since it was introduced, this Facebook post is no revelation or strong move for the working man. It's situation normal, if not actually a little worse.

Data manipulation in it's presentation, oldest and easiest political trick in the book.

In fact, the total development rate has actually slightly slowed under a Conservative government, as you can see here:UK_National_Minimum_Wage_to_April_2016.svg_.png


I'll get back to doing my dhobying now. I am not even going to start on the tax! :)
Last edited by a moderator:
This also doesn't take into account the 900,000 odd zero hour contract jobs that pay less than minimum wage, which stood at around 150,000 in 2009.

"Up to a point, Lord Copper."

All of those on 'zero-hour' contracts are also covered by the legislation and must be paid at least minimum wage rates. Employees on such contracts are also protected by the full range of employment legislation including those applying to breaks, working hours, holiday entitlement, pensions, etc.. A large majority of those on such contracts work part-time and may have more than one employer.

Although much demonised by politicians and journalists, 'zero-hour' contracts are not as pernicious as they are frequently made-out to be. Having employed many people on such contracts, most of those would have been far worse off if they had been on fixed hour contracts. Quite simply we would have had to run the business with the leanest possible manning at all times and rely on the goodwill of the staff to cope when there were unexpected peaks in demand. To do otherwise would be uneconomic and likely lead to business failure.

The great advantage of such contracts is flexibility. Where the demand for workers is variable depending on unpredictable circumstances such as the weather they enable an employer to call on the staff required as and when they are needed. The only viable alternatives are 'Uber-style' sub-contracting relationships or greatly increased prices

Consider, for example, a tree surgery business. It is dangerous for employees to work when it is raining but the work must be covered so extra hours (or extra workers) will be required when the weather is fine to make up for time lost to rainy days. It would be hopelessly uneconomic for the business to pay its employees on a fixed hours basis since they would then need to quote for each job including an element of risk for poor weather. Also, employees are generally willing to work extra hours when required but generally expect to be paid extra for hours beyond a normal working day, unsocial hours, working over weekends/holidays, etc..

Similar but different factors apply in other businesses as diverse as roofing, removals, hospitality and in much of agriculture/horticulture. In the town where I live there is a proliferation of agencies dealing with temporary staff for office, hospital, factory, construction and agricultural work. Every morning there is a queue of people who turn up uncertain whether or not they will be employed that day. There is no general outcry about that (perhaps because many of those in the queue are recent migrants!).

I agree with much of the rest of your post but please don't fall into the trap of believing that politicians know much about the realities of the workplace.
Last edited:
"Up to a point, Lord Copper."

All of those on 'zero-hour' contracts are also covered by the legislation and must be paid at least minimum wage rates. Employees on such contracts are also protected by the.

There are certainly places where zero hour contracts can work. They are massively abused by large chain businesses though. But that's not the purpose of this thread.

For this particular discussion, a lot of those 900,000 do not earn £15,600 a year, which is the point, apologies if that was not clear, not that zero hour contracts are the root of all evil.
Look at the prize you could win?

They don't even have enough money to get into parliament how the hell would they run it?

Dear Sumo
This is urgent. Yesterday we launched our manifesto. We laid out an inspiring vision that could change the lives of millions of people in this country. But, Sumo, we only have 22 days to make this manifesto a reality — and the stakes are high.
If you believe in properly funding schools, in giving the NHS the cash it needs to treat the sick, in publicly owned and on-time railways — then donate today to help us create a Britain for the many, not the few.
Please urgently chip in to our election fund right now.
I'll chip in £5

I'll chip in £10

I'll chip in £20

I'll chip in another amount = to zero

We announced a series of bold pledges: for a real Living Wage of £10 per hour. For decent homes for all, with a million new homes to rent or buy. For free education and an end to tuition fees.
Yet if we don't work together right now, it could slip through our fingers. We all need to step up and create the biggest people-powered election campaign this country has ever seen.
Sumo, we will create a Britain in which no one is held back.
Please can you chip in right now to create a fairer Britain on 8 June? We've 22 days - this is urgent.
Thanks for everything that you do.
Sarah Champion
Shadow Minister for Women and Equalities
P.S. We've got 25 manifestos signed by Jeremy Corbyn and we're entering anyone who donates by Friday into a draw to win one!
The draw is open to individuals aged 16 or over who are resident in the UK, and who make any donation to the Labour Party between 16 May and 19 May inclusive. Every donation will count as one entry into the draw.
There are no tickets but each participant will be allocated a unique number that will be entered into the draw. Automated or third party entries will be disqualified. Labour Party employees are not permitted to enter.
The competition will run from 16 May 2017 until 19 May 2017 at 11.59pm with the selected number picked at random on 20 May. If you are selected you will be contacted to provide details for posting your copy of the manifesto. This prize draw is not open to residents outside the UK.
The personal details supplied will not be passed to any third party, in compliance with our privacy policy

The Labour Party reserves the right to withdraw a reward and to modify, suspend, cancel or terminate the draw or extend or resume the entry period or disqualify any participant at any time without giving advance notice and will do so if it cannot be guaranteed that the draw can be carried out fairly or correctly for technical, legal or other reasons or if the Labour Party suspects that any person has been manipulating entries or the results or has acted unethically in any other way.
To manage your email preferences or unsubscribe from Labour Party emails please click here. We won't pass on your email address to anyone else: see our privacy policy. Reproduced from an email sent by the Labour Party, promoted by Iain McNicol on behalf of the Labour Party both at Southside, 105 Victoria Street, London SW1E 6QT.

Latest Threads

New Posts