725,000 public sector jobs face axe, economist warns

tomterm8

marklv wrote: »

Irrespective of what higher taxes can harm, if they need to be raised and have to be raised, they will be raised. Moreover, businesses are generally a lot more resilient than you think.

The tory party is the party of business. If they have to chose between cutting public services and harming businesses, the Tory party has always cut public spending.

mbga9pgf

marklv wrote: »

All this about pensions and redundancy payouts was agreed decades ago in contracts. The government can't change them now to suit its own ends - the unions recently won a court case on this. As for SRP, most private sector employers offer a lot more than that and you know it.

Thats funny, because they changed my redundancy terms and conditions 4 months ago and got away with it. :mad:

StevieJ

The funniest thing on here is people arguing with Mr Ed it is like one flew out of the cuckoo's nest.

Wookster

lemonjelly wrote: »

So, can anyone tell me why there is such a blood lust amongst the private sector workers on here against the public sector?

I don't hate the public sector, but I do think that there is more of a disconnect from reality than in the private sector. This is embodied in comments from people like Mark Serwotka (General Secretary of the PCS Union who has already threatened strikes if there are any public service cuts). Bob Crow is another example. These people just live in a different world to the rest of us. They do not understand the concept of balancing a budget, the value of money or why excessive debt is a bad thing.

What irks me is the impunity with which organisations in the public sector behave - the Stafford NHS is an example, similarly the Quango responsible for the Foot & Mouth outbreak is another. As far as I know, no one lost their jobs over these two c0ck ups.

One example of how this has affected me has been in my dealings with HMRC some years ago when the company I was working for failed. We were neck deep in enquiries, started to avoid payment of an R & D tax refund - a refund that would have possibly kept us going long enough to get us out of the woods. Internally we were balls to the wall in getting queries sorted as soon as possible but HMRC just dragged their feet and indeed the inspector we were dealing with, left every Friday to play golf, similarly he was out of the office at 5pm every day when we were in until 8-9pm trying to sort matters out.

Ditto previously mentioned comments on pain thus far having been seen in the private sector but not in the public sector.

ILW

marklv wrote: »

You (not you personally but the general public) do have to pay for them by acquiring the products and services they offer. Your argument is bogus because it's not possible to cherry pick what you want from public services and only pay tax on what you want. Nonsense.

This is not strictly true, if for example I do not like the way CocoCola is being run, I can refuse to buy their product, if I do not like the way my council is being run and refuse to pay them I can be sent to prison. If nothing else that gives me a right to complain and comment on the wages being paid and the efficiency of how the money is being spent.
I do believe we need a well funded public sector, but like any organisation it needs to operate withing the funding availbable and cannot be seen as a way of just keeping people off the dole.

wintersunshine

Wookster wrote: »

What irks me is the impunity with which organisations in the public sector behave - the Stafford NHS is an example, similarly the Quango responsible for the Foot & Mouth outbreak is another. As far as I know, no one lost their jobs over these two c0ck ups.

The Stafford NHS ????? !!!!!!? have they got to do with the price of fish?

marklv

ILW wrote: »

This is not strictly true, if for example I do not like the way CocoCola is being run, I can refuse to buy their product, if I do not like the way my council is being run and refuse to pay them I can be sent to prison. If nothing else that gives me a right to complain and comment on the wages being paid and the efficiency of how the money is being spent.

Your argument is weak. You are talking about yourself as an individual, and this is wrong in this context as you cannot purchase public services individually - it is simply not possible and I don't know of any country in the world which operates this way. Cans of Coke and tins of spaghetti are packaged products, so you are comparing apples with oranges here.

ILW wrote: »

I do believe we need a well funded public sector, but like any organisation it needs to operate withing the funding availbable and cannot be seen as a way of just keeping people off the dole.

You seem to be changing your tune here. You cannot have a well funded public sector and then strip it to the bone with mass redundancies.

Wookster

wintersunshine wrote: »

The Stafford NHS ????? !!!!!!? have they got to do with the price of fish?

This:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/5010722/Heads-should-roll-over-the-Staffordshire-hospital-scandal.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stafford_Hospital_scandal

It should be noted that the CEO seems to have got rather a large payoff:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7309123/Row-over-pay-off-for-NHS-scandal-hospital-boss.html

(if that isn't gross misconduct then god knows what is)

marklv

Wookster wrote: »

I don't hate the public sector, but I do think that there is more of a disconnect from reality than in the private sector. This is embodied in comments from people like Mark Serwotka (General Secretary of the PCS Union who has already threatened strikes if there are any public service cuts). Bob Crow is another example. These people just live in a different world to the rest of us. They do not understand the concept of balancing a budget, the value of money or why excessive debt is a bad thing.

What on earth are you on about? All the unions want is to protect their members - and why not? Otherwise, what is the point of the trade unions?

Wookster wrote: »

What irks me is the impunity with which organisations in the public sector behave - the Stafford NHS is an example, similarly the Quango responsible for the Foot & Mouth outbreak is another. As far as I know, no one lost their jobs over these two c0ck ups.

What is the relevance of this?

Wookster wrote: »

One example of how this has affected me has been in my dealings with HMRC some years ago when the company I was working for failed. We were neck deep in enquiries, started to avoid payment of an R & D tax refund - a refund that would have possibly kept us going long enough to get us out of the woods. Internally we were balls to the wall in getting queries sorted as soon as possible but HMRC just dragged their feet and indeed the inspector we were dealing with, left every Friday to play golf, similarly he was out of the office at 5pm every day when we were in until 8-9pm trying to sort matters out.

Ditto previously mentioned comments on pain thus far having been seen in the private sector but not in the public sector.

HMRC is only open during standard office hours - and I wouldn't expect people there to work until late in the evening, what would be the point? It would be a waste of funds to do this. Whether the inspector likes to play golf is totally irrelevant!! :rotfl:

chucky

Wookster wrote: »

This:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/5010722/Heads-should-roll-over-the-Staffordshire-hospital-scandal.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stafford_Hospital_scandal

It should be noted that the CEO seems to have got rather a large payoff:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7309123/Row-over-pay-off-for-NHS-scandal-hospital-boss.html

(if that isn't gross misconduct then god knows what is)

and what's your point???

don't you think that the same thing happens on a much bigger scale in the private sector?