Crunch time for council workers’ golden pensions

SuzieSue

The_White_Horse wrote: »

This is what they cannot understand. It is beyond their comprehension that some people MAKE money rather than WASTE money.

As I said previously, we are bankrupt, but no-one realises this.

lemonjelly

The_White_Horse wrote: »

This is what they cannot understand. It is beyond their comprehension that some people MAKE money rather than WASTE money.

Interesting, especially when Lord Turner said yesterday that the city contributes nothing to society http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/Tax-On-Banks-Lord-Turner-Chair-Of-The-FSA-Backs-A-New-Levy-On-Banks-To-Curb-City-Bonuses/Article/200908415369326?lpos=Business_First_Home_Article_Teaser_Region_3&lid=ARTICLE_15369326_Tax_On_Banks%3A_Lord_Turner%2C_Chair_Of_The_FSA%2C_Backs_A_New_Levy_On_Banks_To_Curb_City_Bonuses

The_White_Horse

SuzieSue wrote: »

As I said previously, we are bankrupt, but no-one realises this.

McClown realises, but thinks he can borrow his way out.

Frankly, he doesn't really care. He knows he will never be elected in his own right and is currently on a scorch and burn run, to make things harder for the tories.

Spiteful.

Old_Slaphead

The_White_Horse wrote: »

McClown realises, but thinks he can borrow his way out.
Spiteful.

Surely not - he's investing for the future in people and jobs.

The_White_Horse

lemonjelly wrote: »

Interesting, especially when Lord Turner said yesterday that the city contributes nothing to society http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/Tax-On-Banks-Lord-Turner-Chair-Of-The-FSA-Backs-A-New-Levy-On-Banks-To-Curb-City-Bonuses/Article/200908415369326?lpos=Business_First_Home_Article_Teaser_Region_3&lid=ARTICLE_15369326_Tax_On_Banks%3A_Lord_Turner%2C_Chair_Of_The_FSA%2C_Backs_A_New_Levy_On_Banks_To_Curb_City_Bonuses

The man is clearly an idiot

Old_Slaphead

The_White_Horse wrote: »

The man is clearly an idiot

Seconded..

carolt

donaldtramp wrote: »

Ah..... the standard defence put forward for the whole public sector.:rolleyes:

The poor teachers(massive, ludicrous, paid holiday entitlement plus pensions)
The poor doctors (GPs are now on over a hundred grand a year, plus pensions, a pay settlement even their BMA couldn't believe at the time)
Who will police us? (The police retirement age is max 55. You can retire at 49 if you started at 19 after thirty years service) You then get a lump sum, ability to start another job and a bullet proof tax-payer funded pension for life)

And you don't get why people are annoyed and politicians have finally woken up to it?
I notice you mention all the "worthwhile" services. What about the far greater proportion of the public sector who brings none of these "worthwhile" services?

I believe in good government but that does not mean it has to expand to the level it has under the current government to generate nonsensical jobs which only add bureaucracy, expense and future liabilities to the taxpayer.

The state has expanded too far. Did you know that recently 30-40% of all advertising in the media was from the state? We don't NEED to be told what to do all the time. That is ridiculous.

The only reason we are able to function carrying this size of state is Browns overdraft. When this runs out (handily after his term of office:rolleyes:) there is going to be real pain. If you can't see it coming, you need to get real.

If you "don't get it," you're going to have to learn learn fast as the state is rolled back massively (pensions, jobs and all) by whoever has the misfortune of winning the next election.:rolleyes:

Unfortunately, you don't really answer my question. You moan a lot (again) about how unjustifiably overpaid and cushy you believe jobs in the public sector to be, but avoid mentioning your preferred solution.

Is it - by implication - that you think these jobs should all be privatised?

Or is it - again I'm having to try to read between the lines here - that you think that these jobs (or at least the "worthwhile" ones, to use your phrase) should remain in the public sector, but be paid less, and decent pensions removed?

If it's the former, I'd like to hear how you perceive this working and where accountability would come from.

If it's the latter, who exactly do you think will do these jobs on vastly less pay, with rubbish pensions, when they can earn far more in the private sector. Why would a graduate with a good degree spend a further year training to be a teacher, for example, when they can earn vastly more in the private sector? How many doctors would bother working for the NHS? etc etc.

You get what you pay for.

The_White_Horse

carolt wrote: »

If it's the latter, who exactly do you think will do these jobs on vastly less pay, with rubbish pensions, when they can earn far more in the private sector. Why would a graduate with a good degree spend a further year training to be a teacher, for example, when they can earn vastly more in the private sector? How many doctors would bother working for the NHS? etc etc.

You get what you pay for.

the point is, where are all these overpaid pen pushers going to work?? they won't leave the public sector because their useless non jobs don't exist in the real world and they couldn't cope.

if all teacher's pay was cut 40% where would they all go??? private schools wouldn't even look at half of them, and there wouldn't be enough jobs for them. they would have tio lump it or resign.

Old_Slaphead

carolt wrote: »

If it's the latter, who exactly do you think will do these jobs on vastly less pay, with rubbish pensions, when they can earn far more in the private sector. Why would a graduate with a good degree spend a further year training to be a teacher, for example, when they can earn vastly more in the private sector? How many doctors would bother working for the NHS? etc etc.

Where are all these fantastic, well paid jobs in the private sector ? It only really happens in the City of London and that's only a very small part of the UK.

What do teachers get paid ? About £35-40,000? Add in another 20% pension and decent holidays etc. Can they really do vastly better in the private sector?

Maybe a few could but the great majority would find it difficult.

If private sector pay is so high (which it's not) the how come there's such a furore when any public sector job is threatened with outsourcing ?

carolt

The_White_Horse wrote: »

the point is, where are all these overpaid pen pushers going to work?? they won't leave the public sector because their useless non jobs don't exist in the real world and they couldn't cope.

if all teacher's pay was cut 40% where would they all go??? private schools wouldn't even look at half of them, and there wouldn't be enough jobs for them. they would have tio lump it or resign.

Where they would go isn't really the question - that's their problem. Let's imagine a situation in which all these 'useless' individuals enjoyed a 'cushy' life on the dole instead.

What matters is who on earth would take their place, on far lower salaries with no pensions? - if, according to you, even higher salaries and fantastic (apparently) pensions only attract the dross?

Or would you prefer a world with no teachers? Or unqualified teachers? Or what, exactly?