Public Sector wages rising despite pay "freeze"

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

How would YOU get to work to pay your taxes, if:

A) There were no roads built, maintained, or repaired to allow any transportation to actually get you to work?

Private sector toll roads

There was no government, or employees to collect the taxes you, as a private sector employee, pays?

I should imagine they would be :j

Refer to my comments above.

ILW

StevieJ wrote: »

What I don't understand is why people don't appear to believe that a similar thing happens in the private sector, or is it really just public sector bashing again?

The difference is that in most cases, if I do not agree with how a private sector spends [EMAIL="it@s"]it's[/EMAIL] money, I am not forced to contribute to it.

Mallotum_X

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Might be zero - though there are many arguments which would prove that it's actually not zero.

But if you are going down that...may I say, extremely simplistic and childish route....I'd ask you to answer the following question.

How would YOU get to work to pay your taxes, if:

A) There were no roads built, maintained, or repaired to allow any transportation to actually get you to work?
There was no government, or employees to collect the taxes you, as a private sector employee, pays?

Think about it. You may be able to be all high and mighty and suggest public sector workers put zero into the pot. But so would you without the public sector workers to collect and put your contribution into the pot.

Want to argue this one any further?

Sorry i think you have misunderstood my point.

Im not saying there should not be a public sector, or that their contibution to society for the work undertaken is zero.

My point was that the net tax contibution of a public sector worker is zero (on their public sector salary - other forms of income may well exist).

MacMickster

ILW wrote: »

The difference is that in most cases, if I do not agree with how a private sector spends it's money, I am not forced to contribute to it.

And if you don't agree with how the public sector is run then vote for whoever will run it the way that you want.

This means that you will probably have to form your own party.

This thread seems indicative of a slow news day. Nothing substantive to debate so mention public sector pay, poke with a sharp stick then sit back and watch.

heathcote123

Graham_Devon wrote: »

However, they want the public sector to save money and reduce wastage. I read in one of the journal thing that each new recruit costs an NHS organisation approximately £7,000. That includes advertising, interviews, training and legal framework costs (H&S etc) and misc administrative costs (such as setting up payroll, pensions etc).
".

well surely the answer is to cut the massive inneficiences that lead to you spending 7k per person recruiting? thats just ridiculous.

Percy1983

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Still missing the point then. The tax they pay is notional, as the worker gets paid net, so no tax is raised. The net tax benefit is zero...

But, to answer your question in simple terms, yes such a scheme would be entirely possible, cost less to administer and save all the fuss with cycling cash payments about.

I still don't understand, I have earnt my money (partially paid for by the government) and then from what I have earn (SEE DEFINITION OF MY MONEY) I then pay some back in tax etc.

adouglasmhor

StevieJ wrote: »

I don't think they want them scrapped but more of an emphasis on servant in the phrase, Public servant

I am a former public sector worker, you want a servant get a butler.

ILW

heathcote123 wrote: »

well surely the answer is to cut the massive inneficiences that lead to you spending 7k per person recruiting? thats just ridiculous.

7k to recruit an admin assistant just proves how badly run things are.

adouglasmhor

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Still missing the point then. The tax they pay is notional, as the worker gets paid net, so no tax is raised. The net tax benefit is zero...

But, to answer your question in simple terms, yes such a scheme would be entirely possible, cost less to administer and save all the fuss with cycling cash payments about.

It would be even simper to have a flat tax or even a flat tax but we don't.
Also you still don't get that not all the public sector is paid from the Governments tax system, It's you who is oversimplifying vastly.

adouglasmhor

Mallotum_X wrote: »

Sorry i think you have misunderstood my point.

Im not saying there should not be a public sector, or that their contibution to society for the work undertaken is zero.

My point was that the net tax contibution of a public sector worker is zero (on their public sector salary - other forms of income may well exist).

I work in a private company on contract to governmental bodies, so my tax contribution is also zero by your flawed logic.