The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Personally, I'm in favour of it. These guys put their lives on the line day after day, and they deserve a decent salary for doing it. It must really grate that some footballers get more than double their annual salary in a week, all for kicking a ball around for a maximum of three hours a week.
40% may seem high, but considering they'll probably only get half that (if anything), then it's fair play. They always say you should ask for double what you actually want!
I appreciate that a strike may put lives at risk, but that's something held over them by government - and if they don't strike, they'll continue getting screwed.
40% may seem high, but considering they'll probably only get half that (if anything), then it's fair play. They always say you should ask for double what you actually want!
I appreciate that a strike may put lives at risk, but that's something held over them by government - and if they don't strike, they'll continue getting screwed.
Page:
Mendax Bartender wrote:
> In a few weeks I could be trained to do what firefighters
> do, and I could do it. There is little skill involved, no mental
> strain. When a firefighter can match me for job skills, then he can
> have 30k
That is a crock of etc.
> Hardly. a thousand educated people is more than enough to generate the
> kind of thinking power to avoid wars, to send help to starving people
> the world over, to control the ins and outs of the bank of england and
> keep the british economy stable.
..so is that...
> Firefighters may risk their lives once in a blue moon, but they have
> no honour.
...and that.
> In a few weeks I could be trained to do what firefighters
> do, and I could do it. There is little skill involved, no mental
> strain. When a firefighter can match me for job skills, then he can
> have 30k
That is a crock of etc.
> Hardly. a thousand educated people is more than enough to generate the
> kind of thinking power to avoid wars, to send help to starving people
> the world over, to control the ins and outs of the bank of england and
> keep the british economy stable.
..so is that...
> Firefighters may risk their lives once in a blue moon, but they have
> no honour.
...and that.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> And what of the MPs on £100,000+ p.a. for literally sitting
> around all day, and often falling asleep on the job? And with several
> months off a year and countless freebies, too?
They get paid what they do for the job because few others can do it as well. Any muppet can be a fireman.
> I did not say cut overseas aid - I said that it's odd that they
> continually find billions for that purpose, yet can find none when
> someone wants paying. The government would have refused the rise even
> if it had been 10%.
Overseas aid keeps millions of people alive. Giving firefighters a payrise won't necessarilly save anyone.
> For someone so concerned about people dying elsewhere, it's strange
> that you look down so much on people willing to give their lives for
> others. Giving ones own life for others is certainly more worthy than
> giving money?
This is the thing though, they're not WILLING to give their lives. More often than not, when a firefighter dies, it's because they fail to observe a rule of conduct. There is a line to be drawn between bravery and stupidity, and it's when this line is crossed that firefighters accrue most of their casualties.
> Their level of education is irrelevant. If they save just one life,
> they are worth more than you or I will ever earn. Tell me, what do
> you do, and how much do you earn? Are you really worth it?
Their level of skill is very relevant. Any idiot can turn around and become a firefighter. Drop out of school at 16 because you can't be bothered, and get picked up to ear 30k a year? Great incentive for further education that one.
What do I do? I'm an accountant. I earn £30k a year. Do I earn it? By God yes I do. I have skills that have taken years to develop, that most people who become firefighters don't even have the presence of mind to comprehend, much less master. My livelihood depends on my ability to think. crunch numbers, find problems to financial problems and issues. In a few weeks I could be trained to do what firefighters do, and I could do it. There is little skill involved, no mental strain. When a firefighter can match me for job skills, then he can have 30k
> A manager in McDonald's can earn £20-£25k a year. You
> don't think a firefighter deserves more than that?
Do you know anything about management? Human resource management? Cash flow analysis? Any of that?
I'm certain the average firefighter doesn't. Management is a fantastic skill, and too few people have it.
> Just one of these "college drop-outs" sitting doing nothing,
> but ready save my life, the life of someone I love, or even the life
> of a total stranger, is worth more than a thousand 'educated' people
> looking down their noses at ordinary working-class people who just
> want fair pay.
Hardly. a thousand educated people is more than enough to generate the kind of thinking power to avoid wars, to send help to starving people the world over, to control the ins and outs of the bank of england and keep the british economy stable.
I don't mind firefighters getting fair pay, but £30,000pa is NOT fair pay. Maybe £24-25k rising to 28 or so with experience.
But like the firefighters have stated, they don't want a payscheme. they don't want to start on one wage and work their way up a salary ladder. They want £30k no nonsense. And it's no surprise the government has said no. Some people are in education for 8 years beyond high school to earn less than that. But you don't see junior doctors saying if I don't get a 40% payrise, I'm going to stand by and watch people die.
Firefighters may risk their lives once in a blue moon, but they have no honour.
> And what of the MPs on £100,000+ p.a. for literally sitting
> around all day, and often falling asleep on the job? And with several
> months off a year and countless freebies, too?
They get paid what they do for the job because few others can do it as well. Any muppet can be a fireman.
> I did not say cut overseas aid - I said that it's odd that they
> continually find billions for that purpose, yet can find none when
> someone wants paying. The government would have refused the rise even
> if it had been 10%.
Overseas aid keeps millions of people alive. Giving firefighters a payrise won't necessarilly save anyone.
> For someone so concerned about people dying elsewhere, it's strange
> that you look down so much on people willing to give their lives for
> others. Giving ones own life for others is certainly more worthy than
> giving money?
This is the thing though, they're not WILLING to give their lives. More often than not, when a firefighter dies, it's because they fail to observe a rule of conduct. There is a line to be drawn between bravery and stupidity, and it's when this line is crossed that firefighters accrue most of their casualties.
> Their level of education is irrelevant. If they save just one life,
> they are worth more than you or I will ever earn. Tell me, what do
> you do, and how much do you earn? Are you really worth it?
Their level of skill is very relevant. Any idiot can turn around and become a firefighter. Drop out of school at 16 because you can't be bothered, and get picked up to ear 30k a year? Great incentive for further education that one.
What do I do? I'm an accountant. I earn £30k a year. Do I earn it? By God yes I do. I have skills that have taken years to develop, that most people who become firefighters don't even have the presence of mind to comprehend, much less master. My livelihood depends on my ability to think. crunch numbers, find problems to financial problems and issues. In a few weeks I could be trained to do what firefighters do, and I could do it. There is little skill involved, no mental strain. When a firefighter can match me for job skills, then he can have 30k
> A manager in McDonald's can earn £20-£25k a year. You
> don't think a firefighter deserves more than that?
Do you know anything about management? Human resource management? Cash flow analysis? Any of that?
I'm certain the average firefighter doesn't. Management is a fantastic skill, and too few people have it.
> Just one of these "college drop-outs" sitting doing nothing,
> but ready save my life, the life of someone I love, or even the life
> of a total stranger, is worth more than a thousand 'educated' people
> looking down their noses at ordinary working-class people who just
> want fair pay.
Hardly. a thousand educated people is more than enough to generate the kind of thinking power to avoid wars, to send help to starving people the world over, to control the ins and outs of the bank of england and keep the british economy stable.
I don't mind firefighters getting fair pay, but £30,000pa is NOT fair pay. Maybe £24-25k rising to 28 or so with experience.
But like the firefighters have stated, they don't want a payscheme. they don't want to start on one wage and work their way up a salary ladder. They want £30k no nonsense. And it's no surprise the government has said no. Some people are in education for 8 years beyond high school to earn less than that. But you don't see junior doctors saying if I don't get a 40% payrise, I'm going to stand by and watch people die.
Firefighters may risk their lives once in a blue moon, but they have no honour.
If you can't put a price on saving someone's life, how do you ever put an upper limit on what firefighters should earn?
Also, I suggest a protest outside your local swimming pool, insisting the lifeguards wages be doubled. You know they can earn as little as £4 an hour?
Also, I suggest a protest outside your local swimming pool, insisting the lifeguards wages be doubled. You know they can earn as little as £4 an hour?
Mendax Bartender wrote:
> and have somehow come to the conclusion that £8 an hour = £30,000pa.
> This is utter crap, in order to achieve that, they're in violation of
> any number of EU laws.
And what of the MPs on £100,000+ p.a. for literally sitting around all day, and often falling asleep on the job? And with several months off a year and countless freebies, too?
> There are those on the planet about to die, for
> not reason other than that they can't afford to live. Sure, we should
> let thousands or even millions of people die so that our firefighters
> can have "fair" pay.
I did not say cut overseas aid - I said that it's odd that they continually find billions for that purpose, yet can find none when someone wants paying. The government would have refused the rise even if it had been 10%.
> And a lot of people actually become firefighters because they either
> a) have no skills or b) chicks dig the uniform. Again, I'm insulted by
> the idea of paying £30,000 to college dropouts.
For someone so concerned about people dying elsewhere, it's strange that you look down so much on people willing to give their lives for others. Giving ones own life for others is certainly more worthy than giving money?
Their level of education is irrelevant. If they save just one life, they are worth more than you or I will ever earn. Tell me, what do you do, and how much do you earn? Are you really worth it?
A manager in McDonald's can earn £20-£25k a year. You don't think a firefighter deserves more than that?
> Sure, there are some intelligent people in there, and some who even
> care. But largely, their job still consists of doing next to nothing -
> a fact that is pretty much beyond dispute.
Just one of these "college drop-outs" sitting doing nothing, but ready save my life, the life of someone I love, or even the life of a total stranger, is worth more than a thousand 'educated' people looking down their noses at ordinary working-class people who just want fair pay.
> and have somehow come to the conclusion that £8 an hour = £30,000pa.
> This is utter crap, in order to achieve that, they're in violation of
> any number of EU laws.
And what of the MPs on £100,000+ p.a. for literally sitting around all day, and often falling asleep on the job? And with several months off a year and countless freebies, too?
> There are those on the planet about to die, for
> not reason other than that they can't afford to live. Sure, we should
> let thousands or even millions of people die so that our firefighters
> can have "fair" pay.
I did not say cut overseas aid - I said that it's odd that they continually find billions for that purpose, yet can find none when someone wants paying. The government would have refused the rise even if it had been 10%.
> And a lot of people actually become firefighters because they either
> a) have no skills or b) chicks dig the uniform. Again, I'm insulted by
> the idea of paying £30,000 to college dropouts.
For someone so concerned about people dying elsewhere, it's strange that you look down so much on people willing to give their lives for others. Giving ones own life for others is certainly more worthy than giving money?
Their level of education is irrelevant. If they save just one life, they are worth more than you or I will ever earn. Tell me, what do you do, and how much do you earn? Are you really worth it?
A manager in McDonald's can earn £20-£25k a year. You don't think a firefighter deserves more than that?
> Sure, there are some intelligent people in there, and some who even
> care. But largely, their job still consists of doing next to nothing -
> a fact that is pretty much beyond dispute.
Just one of these "college drop-outs" sitting doing nothing, but ready save my life, the life of someone I love, or even the life of a total stranger, is worth more than a thousand 'educated' people looking down their noses at ordinary working-class people who just want fair pay.
VenomByte wrote:
> We spend 0.36% of GNP on overseas aid. This is well short of the UN
> target of 0.7%, but far ahead of the European average of 0.2%.
So we pay out a higher percentage than most.
Most of those EU countries have far better funding for public services than we do, and don't get crucified for their low aid contributions.
They also have larger populations in many cases, and so can afford to pay more than us. So maybe we could cut overseas aid to a comparable level, and get our public services up to a respectable level? No-one could complain about it, because they're all doing it.
> Then again, we have a national debt of around £400 billion. The
> interest on this is 25-30 billion a year. We currently give less than
> 4 billion a year on overseas aid.
I'm not saying cut the aid, but we are paying out money we don't have. We're borrowing money, and giving it away. Maybe we should get ourselves in order before giving it away? After all, with debts like this, we're heading towards becoming a third-world country ourselves, and who will be there to bail us out? Will the EU be as keen to wipe out our national debt? When they refuse to loan us any more, what will we give to other countries then?
I'm not into all this stuff either, so I'm no doubt talking out of my butt (it wouldn't be the first time) - but it all seems illogical to me ... borrowing money, giving it away, and landing ourselves in more debt. Maybe someone who does know the ins-and-outs of this would care to explain it in plain English for the benefit of myself and other morons. But maybe this particular aspect is a topic for another thread?
> We spend 0.36% of GNP on overseas aid. This is well short of the UN
> target of 0.7%, but far ahead of the European average of 0.2%.
So we pay out a higher percentage than most.
Most of those EU countries have far better funding for public services than we do, and don't get crucified for their low aid contributions.
They also have larger populations in many cases, and so can afford to pay more than us. So maybe we could cut overseas aid to a comparable level, and get our public services up to a respectable level? No-one could complain about it, because they're all doing it.
> Then again, we have a national debt of around £400 billion. The
> interest on this is 25-30 billion a year. We currently give less than
> 4 billion a year on overseas aid.
I'm not saying cut the aid, but we are paying out money we don't have. We're borrowing money, and giving it away. Maybe we should get ourselves in order before giving it away? After all, with debts like this, we're heading towards becoming a third-world country ourselves, and who will be there to bail us out? Will the EU be as keen to wipe out our national debt? When they refuse to loan us any more, what will we give to other countries then?
I'm not into all this stuff either, so I'm no doubt talking out of my butt (it wouldn't be the first time) - but it all seems illogical to me ... borrowing money, giving it away, and landing ourselves in more debt. Maybe someone who does know the ins-and-outs of this would care to explain it in plain English for the benefit of myself and other morons. But maybe this particular aspect is a topic for another thread?
I've said twice already that they should have a pay rise, but it seems to me that they're actually after £8 an hour, and have somehow come to the conclusion that £8 an hour = £30,000pa. This is utter crap, in order to achieve that, they're in violation of any number of EU laws.
So yes, payrise, 30k, no.
And while it's lovely to think we should shut up shop and ignore the world so we can serve our own internal self-interest, being one of the most wealthy countries in the world comes with obligations. At least people who save our lives by reducing crime, surgery, warfare or firfighting GET paid. There are those on the planet about to die, for not reason other than that they can't afford to live. Sure, we should let thousands or even millions of people die so that our firefighters can have "fair" pay.
Now that IS a nauseating thought.
Imagine being told that you can't have any food this week because someone in another country wanted a pay rise, despite being able to live perfectly well on the wage they had. Nice. Suddenly you want to pick up a few sticks of dynamite and go running into the nearest english restaurant screaming some nonsense about jihad before blowing up the patrons.
And a lot of people actually become firefighters because they either a) have no skills or b) chicks dig the uniform. Again, I'm insulted by the idea of paying £30,000 to college dropouts.
Sure, there are some intelligent people in there, and some who even care. But largely, their job still consists of doing next to nothing - a fact that is pretty much beyond dispute.
But yeah, if you want everyone to get paid more, trigger wage inflation, which will soon enough set inflation out of control and ruin the economy, and at the same time watch millions of people starve so that you can feel better about your firemen, then give them 30k.
So yes, payrise, 30k, no.
And while it's lovely to think we should shut up shop and ignore the world so we can serve our own internal self-interest, being one of the most wealthy countries in the world comes with obligations. At least people who save our lives by reducing crime, surgery, warfare or firfighting GET paid. There are those on the planet about to die, for not reason other than that they can't afford to live. Sure, we should let thousands or even millions of people die so that our firefighters can have "fair" pay.
Now that IS a nauseating thought.
Imagine being told that you can't have any food this week because someone in another country wanted a pay rise, despite being able to live perfectly well on the wage they had. Nice. Suddenly you want to pick up a few sticks of dynamite and go running into the nearest english restaurant screaming some nonsense about jihad before blowing up the patrons.
And a lot of people actually become firefighters because they either a) have no skills or b) chicks dig the uniform. Again, I'm insulted by the idea of paying £30,000 to college dropouts.
Sure, there are some intelligent people in there, and some who even care. But largely, their job still consists of doing next to nothing - a fact that is pretty much beyond dispute.
But yeah, if you want everyone to get paid more, trigger wage inflation, which will soon enough set inflation out of control and ruin the economy, and at the same time watch millions of people starve so that you can feel better about your firemen, then give them 30k.
We spend 0.36% of GNP on overseas aid. This is well short of the UN target of 0.7%, but far ahead of the European average of 0.2%.
Then again, we have a national debt of around £400 billion. The interest on this is 25-30 billion a year. We currently give less than 4 billion a year on overseas aid.
Pales in comparison, doesn't it?
Maybe if we paid off more of the nationl debt, then in a few years time we could acutally afford to give firefighters, policemen etc, higher wages. Or maybe not. I'm not that clued up.
Either way, if you're going to argue about money, really need to mention the national debt somewhere...
Then again, we have a national debt of around £400 billion. The interest on this is 25-30 billion a year. We currently give less than 4 billion a year on overseas aid.
Pales in comparison, doesn't it?
Maybe if we paid off more of the nationl debt, then in a few years time we could acutally afford to give firefighters, policemen etc, higher wages. Or maybe not. I'm not that clued up.
Either way, if you're going to argue about money, really need to mention the national debt somewhere...
Mendax Bartender wrote:
> Belldandy, by the same argument, shouldn't the police get paid more
> than the firemen then? Their job is notoriously far more hazardous,
> and becoming more so by the day.
Yes, they should. As should doctors, nurses and ambulance crews, and those in the armed forces. No-one as far as I know has said that they shouldn't. But you also seem to forget that those in the emergency services have the same deductions from their pay every month that you do, so they wouldn't exactly be getting something for nothing.
> Everyone deserves a little more than they get, but they don't get it
> simply because the money has to come from somewhere. Pump up the pay
> for the police, the firefighters and the entire army, and all of a
> sudden, you have a massive dent in your wage packet that you're
> getting nothing extra for.
Strange, though, that the government can find billions for overseas aid, yet pay for these services is always so limited.
> Suddenly, perhaps the firefighters don't do
> THAT much. Maybe they should take a pay cut...
>
> And I'll say again, 95% of the time, firefighters know pretty much
> what the day entails.
That is, quite frankly, insulting.
They also know that, any given day, they may not be going home to their wife and children because of some other idiot's antics.
Not to mention the sights, sounds and smells that they could have to face when removing burned bodies from those not so minor incidents.
But I'm sure they don't mind the stress of that kind of thing at all when they spend 364 days of the year 'sitting on their butts doing nothing'.
Personally, I think the £30k they are asking for is perfectly reasonable.
> Teach basic fire safety. Answer false alarms by
> students setting off fire alarms in drunken stupors. Rescue a cat from
> a tree. Every now and then stamp out a fire that has strted in
> someone's paper bin. I don't need to see my taxes go on £30,000
> a year firemen when I can do all of the above myself.
If only the rest of the nation was so foolproof and capable - then we wouldn't need a fire brigade at all. Could you also rescue a pensioner from a burning tower block? Clear up a chemical spill? Or maybe cut a family free from there car after a motorway pile-up, with the possibility of the car behind exploding at any moment?
On the other hand, give them a pay cut. Then see how many are interested in saving your house when your neighbour's chip pan goes up.
Any one of those actions is potentially life-threatening - not just to the firemen involved, but to countless others as well. And any individual willing to put themselves at risk to do what is required is easily worth £30k a year in my eyes, if not more - even if they are only required to do it once a year.
Sure, it's a job they choose to do - but I for one am grateful that some people in this world still care enough to want to do jobs like that. It won't last forever, though - low pay and ungrateful 'customers' is exactly why we don't have enough teachers.
Besides, just because someone chooses to do a high-risk job, doesn't mean the rest of us should expect them to do it for nothing.
> Belldandy, by the same argument, shouldn't the police get paid more
> than the firemen then? Their job is notoriously far more hazardous,
> and becoming more so by the day.
Yes, they should. As should doctors, nurses and ambulance crews, and those in the armed forces. No-one as far as I know has said that they shouldn't. But you also seem to forget that those in the emergency services have the same deductions from their pay every month that you do, so they wouldn't exactly be getting something for nothing.
> Everyone deserves a little more than they get, but they don't get it
> simply because the money has to come from somewhere. Pump up the pay
> for the police, the firefighters and the entire army, and all of a
> sudden, you have a massive dent in your wage packet that you're
> getting nothing extra for.
Strange, though, that the government can find billions for overseas aid, yet pay for these services is always so limited.
> Suddenly, perhaps the firefighters don't do
> THAT much. Maybe they should take a pay cut...
>
> And I'll say again, 95% of the time, firefighters know pretty much
> what the day entails.
That is, quite frankly, insulting.
They also know that, any given day, they may not be going home to their wife and children because of some other idiot's antics.
Not to mention the sights, sounds and smells that they could have to face when removing burned bodies from those not so minor incidents.
But I'm sure they don't mind the stress of that kind of thing at all when they spend 364 days of the year 'sitting on their butts doing nothing'.
Personally, I think the £30k they are asking for is perfectly reasonable.
> Teach basic fire safety. Answer false alarms by
> students setting off fire alarms in drunken stupors. Rescue a cat from
> a tree. Every now and then stamp out a fire that has strted in
> someone's paper bin. I don't need to see my taxes go on £30,000
> a year firemen when I can do all of the above myself.
If only the rest of the nation was so foolproof and capable - then we wouldn't need a fire brigade at all. Could you also rescue a pensioner from a burning tower block? Clear up a chemical spill? Or maybe cut a family free from there car after a motorway pile-up, with the possibility of the car behind exploding at any moment?
On the other hand, give them a pay cut. Then see how many are interested in saving your house when your neighbour's chip pan goes up.
Any one of those actions is potentially life-threatening - not just to the firemen involved, but to countless others as well. And any individual willing to put themselves at risk to do what is required is easily worth £30k a year in my eyes, if not more - even if they are only required to do it once a year.
Sure, it's a job they choose to do - but I for one am grateful that some people in this world still care enough to want to do jobs like that. It won't last forever, though - low pay and ungrateful 'customers' is exactly why we don't have enough teachers.
Besides, just because someone chooses to do a high-risk job, doesn't mean the rest of us should expect them to do it for nothing.
Belldandy, by the same argument, shouldn't the police get paid more than the firemen then? Their job is notoriously far more hazardous, and becoming more so by the day.
What about the armed forces? Those quite obviously willing to die not because someone fell asleep with a fag in their hand, but instead to die so that the country can be kept free, so that other countries can be kept free.
Everyone deserves a little more than they get, but they don't get it simply because the money has to come from somewhere. Pump up the pay for the police, the firefighters and the entire army, and all of a sudden, you have a massive dent in your wage packet that you're getting nothing extra for. Suddenly, perhaps the firefighters don't do THAT much. Maybe they should take a pay cut...
And I'll say again, 95% of the time, firefighters know pretty much what the day entails. Teach basic fire safety. Answer false alarms by students setting off fire alarms in drunken stupors. Rescue a cat from a tree. Every now and then stamp out a fire that has strted in someone's paper bin. I don't need to see my taxes go on £30,000 a year firemen when I can do all of the above myself.
Sure, a large number of firefighters died in the 9/11 tragedy. And I don't take anything away from that. But they weren't the only one's to die. And if people are to be paid money for in-job hazards, all office workers should be awarded extra pay if working in a world-famous city, more so if in a high rise building. I should get a pay-rise for the risk of repetitive strain from some of the monkey work I have to do, or the risk of falling doewn the stairs, or tripping over on my way home, or getting run over by a bus.
I agree that what they get paid isn't enough, but I'm also convinced that they don't deserve what they're asking for. And if by some miracle they get it, then I'm quitting my job to go and play cards and teach basic fire safety, because I'll get the same money for less effort.
What about the armed forces? Those quite obviously willing to die not because someone fell asleep with a fag in their hand, but instead to die so that the country can be kept free, so that other countries can be kept free.
Everyone deserves a little more than they get, but they don't get it simply because the money has to come from somewhere. Pump up the pay for the police, the firefighters and the entire army, and all of a sudden, you have a massive dent in your wage packet that you're getting nothing extra for. Suddenly, perhaps the firefighters don't do THAT much. Maybe they should take a pay cut...
And I'll say again, 95% of the time, firefighters know pretty much what the day entails. Teach basic fire safety. Answer false alarms by students setting off fire alarms in drunken stupors. Rescue a cat from a tree. Every now and then stamp out a fire that has strted in someone's paper bin. I don't need to see my taxes go on £30,000 a year firemen when I can do all of the above myself.
Sure, a large number of firefighters died in the 9/11 tragedy. And I don't take anything away from that. But they weren't the only one's to die. And if people are to be paid money for in-job hazards, all office workers should be awarded extra pay if working in a world-famous city, more so if in a high rise building. I should get a pay-rise for the risk of repetitive strain from some of the monkey work I have to do, or the risk of falling doewn the stairs, or tripping over on my way home, or getting run over by a bus.
I agree that what they get paid isn't enough, but I'm also convinced that they don't deserve what they're asking for. And if by some miracle they get it, then I'm quitting my job to go and play cards and teach basic fire safety, because I'll get the same money for less effort.
I agree.
Page: