We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Council Pay Freeze
Comments
-
CluelessJock wrote: »At the risk of being repetitive: the difference is it's not public money that runs the private sector..........it's not hard to understand the difference!
Nepotism in the private sector is fine? Who you know, not what you know? & as it is in the private sector it is ok?
Please!
Business' have responsibilities too you know.It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0 -
lemonjelly wrote: »
Employment is not about production. What do bankers "produce"? (except for calamities!)
Profits. Corporate deals. Investment returns. Wealth.0 -
Lemonjelly, Business owners are entitled to run their businesses as they see fit (within the law), if they want to promote their son's Godfathers half sister that's fine, as long as they don't use public money.
Should it not be this way?0 -
lemonjelly wrote: »Nepotism in the private sector is fine? Who you know, not what you know? & as it is in the private sector it is ok?
Please!
Business' have responsibilities too you know.
The point you are deliberately failing to ignore is that private businesses are run with private money. In that regard, they are essentially free to operate as they wish, within the law of course.
The public sector is run with OUR money, and have different governance obligations.
If the private sector is inefficient, it fails. If the public sector is inefficient, it gets given more taxpayer's money.
It's not rocket science.0 -
If the private sector is inefficient, it fails. If the public sector is inefficient, it gets given more taxpayer's money.
It's not rocket science.
No it's not rocket science.
So I'm surprised to see you saying such things when so many private sector organisations and business's are currently being bailed out with our money.0 -
-
CluelessJock wrote: »Lemonjelly, Business owners are entitled to run their businesses as they see fit (within the law), if they want to promote their son's Godfathers half sister that's fine, as long as they don't use public money.
Should it not be this way?
If they care about their business, no. Best qualified person should get the job.
Sir Jack Hayward put his son in charge of WWFC not so long ago. The club was mismanaged, and in the end the son was sacked, & I believe Sir Jack was suing him over allegations of impropriety.
Your arguement is preservation of the status quo, and implies that by engaging in hard work & acheiving qualifications is a waste of time as business owners will only look after their own.It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0 -
The point you are deliberately failing to ignore is that private businesses are run with private money. In that regard, they are essentially free to operate as they wish, within the law of course.
The public sector is run with OUR money, and have different governance obligations.
If the private sector is inefficient, it fails. If the public sector is inefficient, it gets given more taxpayer's money.
It's not rocket science.
Tosh!
Failing departments get restructured and retrained to allow them to fulfil the purpose they are there for. Negligent or incompetant staff are removed.
I agree that areas of the public sector could & should be made more efficient. However the majority of this thread deals with stereotypes only, not meaningful debate.It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »No it's not rocket science.
So I'm surprised to see you saying such things when so many private sector organisations and business's are currently being bailed out with our money.
Two points.
1) I am completely against govenment bail-outs of private organisations. They should have been allowed to fail, irrespective of the wider economic implications. To do anything else is fundamentally at odds with capitalism.
2) Having said that, there is a difference between the Daily Mail use of the word bailout, and the government taking an investment in such organisations, which is EXACTLY what happened with the banks here in the UK. Bailout implies throwing public money at a problem, whereas even you will hardly have failed to notice that the government actually injected (rightly or wrongly) capital into these companies in exchange for equity. In most cases, they have made a huge profit in the process.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »No it's not rocket science.
So I'm surprised to see you saying such things when so many private sector organisations and business's are currently being bailed out with our money.
Quality point!:D
Of course, the private banking sector has been such a success story for the private sector hasn't it?
Oh, hang on, it takes the public sector to sort its mess out!
Private sector is only concerned about profit. All else is secondary. Problem with having profit as your sole focus leads to loss of rational thinking...It's getting harder & harder to keep the government in the manner to which they have become accustomed.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards