Council Tax - whats yours and do you think it a good system?

molley

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

a) Private employers are paying about £30bn pa to employees pension schemes and this figure is reducing. Public sector needs to accrue (£180bn paybill at say 20%) £38bn pa and this is rising - tho' probably won't be for much longer. Given that there are 4x the numbers working in private sector then clearly the per capita contribution is significantly lower.
b) He will also pay VAT on his purchases - so he will also be contributing to public pensions even with discretionary purchases.

Andy, we've debated these issues before. The justification for generous public pensions was to offset ostensibly lower public pay. Given the pay rises over the last decade and perks now enjoyed compared to the vast majority in the private sector (note : we are not all bankers, we do not all receive bonuses, company cars, pensions etc. Many in SMEs get minimum holidays, sick pay etc) that justification no longer seems valid.

Ostensibly lower public pay?? If you mean that public sector pay was not lower then you are completely wrong .As someone who worked in the Civil Service I know what pay rises we got ...then of course there is the huge Pensions we got for free ..another fallacy .
And what are these "pay rises over the last decade" and " perks" you mention?

molley

hullight wrote: »

I just think the single person discount should be more than 25%...considering students get a 100% discount for some arbitrary reason.

It should be 50%

Andy_L

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Andy, we've debated these issues before. The justification for generous public pensions was to offset ostensibly lower public pay. Given the pay rises over the last decade and perks now enjoyed compared to the vast majority in the private sector (note : we are not all bankers, we do not all receive bonuses, company cars, pensions etc. Many in SMEs get minimum holidays, sick pay etc) that justification no longer seems valid.

We have, & you consistantly fail to address the point that comparing average salary is pointless as they are skewed by, eg, the lack of minimum wage burger flippers/shelf stackers in the public sector (as a result of contractorisation) and the higer numbers of, eg, highly paid doctors in the private sector.

Andy_L

molley wrote: »

Ostensibly lower public pay?? If you mean that public sector pay was not lower then you are completely wrong .As someone who worked in the Civil Service I know what pay rises we got ...then of course there is the huge Pensions we got for free ..another fallacy .
And what are these "pay rises over the last decade" and " perks" you mention?

The civil service, as a specific sub-set of the Public Sector, does have lower average salary than the Private. But see my previous post for why comparing averages is an apples & oranges comparisson

Old_Slaphead

molley wrote: »

Ostensibly lower public pay?? If you mean that public sector pay was not lower then you are completely wrong .As someone who worked in the Civil Service I know what pay rises we got ...then of course there is the huge Pensions we got for free ..another fallacy .
And what are these "pay rises over the last decade" and " perks" you mention?

The public sector is more than just the CS. Job by job comparisons are impossible - but across the board the public sector has done very well.
The CS are not badly paid (maybe comparisons are poor in London but why oh why doesn't the Govt relocate those jobs? CS pay in my area is well up to average)
CS pensions are worth massively more than what staff contribute.
CS get lots of benefits that the average private sector worker doesn't (ie unbelievable redundancy package, extra holidays, job security, early retirement at 60, sick pay).

Old_Slaphead

Andy_L wrote: »

We have, & you consistantly fail to address the point that comparing average salary is pointless as they are skewed by, eg, the lack of minimum wage burger flippers/shelf stackers in the public sector (as a result of contractorisation) and the higer numbers of, eg, highly paid doctors in the private sector.

So, as comparisons are pointless, the premise of 10+ years ago that public sector workers were deserving of a 'gold plated' pension because wages were lower was equally invalid ???

Talk specifics - maybe 10 years ago PCs, nurses. teachers etc were paid an average/below average wage. Now in general they are paid average/above average. The justification for hugely subsidised pension is, at least in their cases, no longer valid.

Andy_L

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

Talk specifics - maybe 10 years ago PCs, nurses. teachers etc were paid an average/below average wage. Now in general they are paid average/above average. The justification for hugely subsidised pension is, at least in their cases, no longer valid.

Teaching is a graduate profession - I would expect them to be paid above the average

Nursing is a skilled profession - I would expect them to be paid above the average

The comparison is state school teacher vs public (sic ) school teacher. NHS nurse/Dr/Dentist vs private practice.
Those are comparisons that can & should be done (and I would love them to be done to settle the argument once & for all) and which, in the old days (till mid-80s?) were done until the wages councils that did them were abolished.

Undeniably difficult for Coppers/Millitary etc that don't have a private sector comparator, harder for generic occupations where its tricky to tell job weight just from a job description/title and relatively easy for the professions (Chartered Accountants/Surveyors/Engineers etc).

Strangly ONS produce salary breakdown by both Private vs Public and by Job type but don't then combine both. Whether thats to hide the truth (whoever it favours) or becasue they number of participants mean it wouldn't be statistically valid "I couldn't possibly comment" on

Old_Slaphead

You seem to miss the point. The justification for 'gold-plated' pensions was to compensate for lower salaries generally associated with 'public service'.

That is manifestly not the case now for a large number of public sector jobs and consequently they should be discontinued in the current format.

Pensions should now be moved to DC schemes (with all existing accrued benefits preserved). In that way, everone would have an interest in ensuring that the economy was run efficiently and private sector 'fat cats' and government policy-makers were be accountable to the country at large .

nb superficial wage comparisons between state vs public school teachers are totally inappropriate unless you factor in the differing job requirements, standards expected and job availability. Re. NHS vs private - private income is paid for by taxpayer and controlled by gov't - hence it's pseudo public sector anyway!

geewhiz

I am in Band F paying £2,182 including water and waste water charges,neighbour has built an extension so has an extra room but they are still in E !

treliac

geewhiz wrote: »

I am in Band F paying £2,182 including water and waste water charges,neighbour has built an extension so has an extra room but they are still in E !

Why don't you challenge your banding? There's information on this on the site.