Tory cuts could be mighty unpleasant

edgex

The_White_Horse wrote: »

Yeah but private companies can do what they like, because they pay for it - not the taxpayer. That is the point public sector workers continually fail to grasp.

er no

whether public or private

YOU pay for it

The_White_Horse

edgex wrote: »

you completely FAIL at understanding economics/business/finance/money dont you :rotfl:

if no one is spending money, how do these people suddenly start businesses?
to run a business, you need paying customers
no paying customers = no business


if there are large cuts in the public sector, there will be follow on cuts in the private sector

Not at all, all these recently sacked people will get new jobs - using their brilliant meeting arranging skills. They set up a business and they get customers.

alternatively, we could cut tax by the amount spent on these useless workers and those in the private sector could spend their own money, rather than having it spent for them on 5 a day nappy co-ordinators.

LeeSouthEast

ILW wrote: »

Bit I don't get is why public sector workers seem to get offered redundancy terms way above the statutary level. Is this a fair use of taxpayers money or just another stitch up?

Certainly not where I work we don't. They'd try and give less if the union would permit it.

ninky_2

The_White_Horse wrote: »

Again lefty, private firms can do whatever they like with their own money. Public workers are paid by taxpayer money and therefore, they should get the absolute minimum. I don't pay tax to employ all these incompetent middle managers.

how about all the taxpayers money that goes into subsidising private banks and firms? it's not just the public sector that relies on tax money.

Pete111

The_White_Horse wrote: »

its also about time these hateful lefts learned that being sacked from one job doesn't mean getting a shoe in for another one a couple of months later after the "moron public" forget ala Mandy and Blunkett.

What is that hateful sharon shoosmith up to? I bet she will make it in the corporate world. hhahahahahahaah laughable. another useless incompetent left elevated well above her station in life.

Okkkay....

Listen I'm more than happy the Torys will get a chance to sort this out (or make it worse - we shall no doubt see which!) but WH, I'm afraid you are coming across as pretty unhinged mate...

Sir_Humphrey

whitehorse wrote:

Again lefty, private firms can do whatever they like with their own money. Public workers are paid by taxpayer money and therefore, they should get the absolute minimum. I don't pay tax to employ all these incompetent middle managers.

Employers do not pay what they want, they pay what the market will allow them to pay.

The public sector jobs market is part of the wider jobs market. You have to pay enough to recruit people. This is called market forces.

The only way to significantly cut public sector wages and conditions and make it stick is to have an equal cut in the private sector.

Think about it. This is divide and rule here.

The_White_Horse

edgex wrote: »

er no

whether public or private

YOU pay for it

A company that makes profits can spend those profits as they see fit. If they want to spend it on additional redundancy costs then that is their choice.

All public workers are costs to the nation. You make nothing, you create nothing - you are just a drain and a cost and should be kept to the absolute minimum.

All money is created by the private sector. You create nothing. You survive like a leech sucking the blood out of the economy.

ILW

edgex wrote: »

er no

whether public or private

YOU pay for it

Err No.
You can choose whther you want to pay anything to a private company in most cases.

carolt

ninky wrote: »

how about all the taxpayers money that goes into subsidising private banks and firms? it's not just the public sector that relies on tax money.

But that's nonsense, ninky - Britain's wealth is based on our thriving financial sector. That is the future!

(Quote, all parties, circa 1998.)

Rochdale_Pioneers

edgex wrote: »

wonder how many times Rochdale council has changed control over those 25 years, & how many Tory councillors theyve had in that period

Rochdale is a classic in local government incompetence. Its had councils of every political make-up you can think of - repeatedly with Tories in the ruling group during the frequent NOC periods:

Labour 1973 - 1975
No overall control 1975 - 1976
Conservative 1976 - 1979
No overall control 1979 - 1980
Labour 1980 - 1982
No overall control 1982 - 1986
Labour 1986 - 1992
No overall control 1992 - 1996
Labour 1996 - 2003
No overall control 2003 - 2007
Liberal Democrat 2007 - present

The problem is that with all the changes policies tended to cross from one group to another. I can think of various policies opposed by the Tories/Labour/Libs which after power changed to the Tories/Labour/Libs ended up being advocated by the very same councillors who had been opposing it a short period earlier.

Ultimately local government is entirely dependent on the caliber of the people on the council. Its not party political.