There's nothing like making it up as you go along, eh?

Brian quotes £250m for bombing using old data - or just making it up?

Andrewr says "The fact is that the private sector has recognised that the final salary pension schemes of old are unaffordable..." but one might question the notion here of "fact" and "unaffordable". Pensions are not "unaffordable" per se. It is simply that firms have made decisions not to support them. Part of the problem has been the volatile stock market, but there are other ways to make pension provision. Usually there are lots of alternatives. "Unaffordable" is a sales pitch, a strategic construction, but not an essential truth.

Similarly, when, precisely, did I say I wanted inflation? Perhaps Andrewr is just making it up?

Which brings me back to Brian. The government (elected by considerably less than 50% of the electorate) decided, unilaterally, to cut the public sector: jobs, pay and pensions. Unsurprisingly many people thought that was rather unfair and objected. It is a bit specious to imply that people who didn't vote in a union ballot agreed that they should have their pay, pension or jobs cut.

Disagreements are played out in a number of different ways. Governments take unilateral action and declare TINA (there is no alternative). Trade unions threaten 'industrial action'. It is part of the theatre of negotiation - and of course Brian is simply being theatrical by using adjectives such as "shameful" and "bullying". This is just heckling rather than developing an argument, but as I have said before, it does come over as a tad misanthropic.

The idea that the "private sector" pays for the "public sector" is rather meaningless, but as this post started out, there's nothing like making it up.