We are all in this together, well not if you are in a union.

ninky_2

PrivatisetheNHSnow wrote: »

teacher=private schools produce better results that the public sector

is that because the pupils have parents who are more wealthy and therefore they have more support and less to deal with outside of the school gates?

doctors=GPs are self-employed. most countries do not have an nhs, you don't need public sector healthcare

no you can just let people die i suppose. or push them outside on the street when they haven't got insurance like in the states.

police=spend most of their time filling in forms, the ultimate public sector task

wrong, wrong and wrong.
yes far better to have no police force or one paid for by the wealthy to protect them and theirs

public sector=benefits system



Whatever. If you get a 2:1 in Maths, you become an accountant. If get a 2:2, you become a Maths teacher. Everyone knows this that's been to university.

i've been to university and i know plenty of teachers with firsts or 2:1s. and i'm sure there are accountants with 2:2s.

Spartacus_Mills

marklv wrote: »

Compensation packages in the public sector are already set at minimum market rates - and should stay at these rates. I've been saying this all along. That doesn't mean cutting pay just because the private sector is doing so in some - only some areas of industry, many of which have no direct public sector equivalent.

No it does not mean cutting pay just because the private sector is doing it but the private sector cutting pay does have an economic consequence for the raising of tax for the government.

If there is less money coming in to the government in terms of taxes then that has to translate to reductions in the public sector pay bill just as less money coming in to a private company means that cuts in pay and overheads have to be made.

I think, irrespective of what the swivel eyed Alan Cross and you (who are generally far more reasonable and measured in your points) think it is inevitably going to happen. Your wages will be effected as will your pensions. It is not reasonable to expect the private sector taxpayer to pay extra to fund the public sectors ballooning wage and pensions bill. It is fine when time is booming and jobs are being created in the private sector, it is unsustainable going forward as the money is not going to be there and deferring the pain simply prolongs the pain when we do get onto it.

Pennywise

misskool wrote: »

but if you want the chartered accountants to think about becoming teachers you have to have the salary there to tempt them.

you only get the barrel scraping because you pay barrel scrapings.

I would much rather have someone who could be a chartered accountant choosing to become a teacher because the pay was the same rather than a teacher who only did it because it was the best paid job for their academic ability.

Median salary for a chartered accountant in a company is remarkably similar to that in public sector and in fact more than a chartered accountant in practice -

http://www.payscale.com/research/UK/Job=Chartered_Accountant/Salary/by_Employer_Type

As I've said before, it's only the tiny minority of the top people who get the top salaries. Most chartered accountants won't even be paying higher rate tax whether private or public sector. It suddenly makes teaching with the pension, shorter working hours, etc comparable if not attractive!

The_White_Horse

if I paid ZERO tax, i would be quite happy to pay for medical, education, street cleaning, street lights, rubbish collection etc.

lostinrates

The_White_Horse wrote: »

if I paid ZERO tax, i would be quite happy to pay for medical, education, street cleaning, street lights, rubbish collection etc.

I'd be happy to pay some of those with a reduced tax, not eliminated. Street cleaning...yes, we do that round here, no one does it for you in the country side, and rightly so Lighting , rofl, thank god, no. Rubbish our fortnightly collection is ample. We struggles the five week gap in the snow/festive season.

The_White_Horse

fortnightly bin collections are not ample - in a civilised society it is disgusting. it should be weekly as a minimum.

The_White_Horse

the only thing tax should pay for is defence, roads, police, the court system and prisons. everything else can be paid for by the individual.

that said, I am in favour of the nhs to an extent. although it is badly managed and inefficient. things like sex changes etc should NOT be available.

misskool

The_White_Horse wrote: »

fortnightly bin collections are not ample - in a civilised society it is disgusting. it should be weekly as a minimum.

Sometimes when I forget the bins it's a whole month between collections and it's not a problem. I don't see why people should generate so much rubbish anyways.

lostinrates

Fortnightly bin collections are fine for us.

The gripe I have is more the limited range of recycle-ables they take.

in fact, I'd say fortnightly bin collections are a sensible part of reducing public sector costs which we all want so badly. Now we've made a tangible loss to reduce public sector costs, this effort should be matched within the sector.

lostinrates

misskool wrote: »

Sometimes when I forget the bins it's a whole month between collections and it's not a problem. I don't see why people should generate so much rubbish anyways.

Next month I fully expect to use only one wheelie collection. But the recyclables will be to much, and I will make a delivery myself of our ''agri waste'' of haylage wraps...a waste and cost needlessly created by the difficulty of getting planning for a hay barn.