Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Non-Believer last won the day on November 16

Non-Believer had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,917 Excellent

About Non-Believer

  • Rank
    MF Veteran
  • Birthday 07/12/1961

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    T' internet
  • Interests
    Observing Incompetents.............Washing off Bullshit...........Looking at Big Pictures
  1. What's going on at nobles

    You missed out, "stand for election"....
  2. UK Budget - any impact on the IOM?

    Was that the incident that "involved the language of the lower decks", as reported....?
  3. Public Sector Pension Liability

    I'd suggest that the allowances for the lower paid, public and private, are about the only thing that makes life on such lower wages viable on the IoM with its cost of living. If you consider manual new starters on the new Govt terms are now on about £15k gross pa - reduce or take away the allowance, what sort of existence are they left with, given living costs, energy, Govt charges and taxes? Or anybody else earning up to £20k a year? They need to brutally address the middle and top PS salaries and pensions, that's where the problems lie and long have done. And the lack of balls to do it.

    Bargain for Mr Charters' rels visit. Shame nothing was apparently gleaned from the "Canterbury Model" in respect of being yet implementable in respect of IoM Health Services.
  5. Public Sector Pension Liability

    Indeed. Because you can guarantee that those supping on the gravy ain't going to give up one drop beforehand.
  6. Malewdicrous

    Where do we get these idiots from? Is there a local factory somewhere churning them out for elections? Tell him Mugabe's looking for a new job now - he'll fit right in over here if some of our own are anything to go by.
  7. MHK suggests media should be gagged

    When the pressures of running the IoM are increasing in intensity - time to shut down free speech?
  8. Public Sector Pension Liability

    Philip, what I'm getting at is, even if we discount the headline £3.8BN, we still need to know by how fast the liability is growing if we're going to attempt to address it by cash flows, taxation, whatever. If we've got a runaway train on our hands we need to know how fast it's going in order to work out what we need to slow it with...if it doesn't crash itself of its own accord?
  9. Public Sector Pension Liability

    The original article states that the liability has risen by £832M. Over what time? When was the last assessment? Hopefully not only a year ago?!!
  10. Public Sector Pension Liability

    Probably the same as Bell (and Teare) did. Ignore it or at best, kick it a bit further down the road. Alf's already shown form in that in the last budget, IIRC? ETA iomtoday now quoting CT as saying progress has been slow and there's still no plan to deal with it. Hoping to bring it before Tynpotwald in the New Year for debate....zzzzz
  11. WOW expensive flu jabs !!

    Be interesting to see who the recipients were. Must have been Very Important People that we couldn't possibly do without if they were bed-ridden with lurgy....
  12. Public Sector Pension Liability

    2020 isn't it, that fund is projected to be completely depleted? Bearing in mind that problems with the PSP fund were first warned about in 2006/7. Well over ten years ago. Worth thinking about. Because that's pretty much all anybody's done with it in that time.
  13. Public Sector Pension Liability

    Didn't Allan Bell identify and state that that was actually the case during his tenure? But couldn't/wouldn't do anything about it?
  14. We are not as deep in it as we thought.

    Bump. It might appear to be getting deeper fiscally at the moment. PS Pension liability up a further £832M to £3.8BN (iomtoday). I'm sure it'll all be offset by the increased VAT payment though......not.
  15. Incapacity benefits - Tynwald debate tomorrow

    Yes, why not? What I'm getting at is, do they use the Govt-produced "average wage" (say) as the benchmark for how much benefits should be? Because the "average wage" figure as produced by Govt every year is generally recognised to be a complete fantasy for all but 15% of the population. But - if they base the bennies payments on those figures then it would be no wonder that "lots" of people would be better off on benefits than working, because "most" working people don't earn anything near the "average wage".