why can't public sector finances be done a year in arrears?

The_White_Horse

this way, they know the tax take and make payments accordingly.

it would sort of be like running a business. what fun. instead of promising loads of people massive salaries for doing rubbish jobs, they can pay them in accordance with what the country makes.

of course, the public sector is so efficient and helps us as a country to be efficient, they will love this opportunity to show us just how efficient they are.

benefits, public sector salaries, investments etc can all be paid in a proportion the ACTUAL AMOUNT OF MONEY WE HAVE. Genius.

And if we don't have the money, they don't get paid. Sort of like a real company that can't pay more in salaries than it makes.

Radical thoughts.

Mallotum_X

So if we all agree with you what then?

The_White_Horse

Mallotum_X wrote: »

So if we all agree with you what then?

the lefties will still f*ck everything on every level.

J_i_m

I would agree that there is a lot of baggage, red tape and beauracy within the public sectors and I'd often use words like !!!!-up, brewery, organise and couldn't when talking about it

However... Speaking as a public sector employee if I stop getting paid then I'll also stop working.

The_White_Horse

you wouldn't stop being paid - you would be paid in accordance with what the country has earned.

say you worked in a real company and were on £30k a year. If the company only turned over £20k in the year, you can't be paid £30k can you. You have to take a salary in accordance with what the company has. or leave.

that should apply in the public sector. you can't promise the public sector and benefit bvrigade payments of say £6bn if you only raise £3bn. Clearly you are £3bn short. Does this not make any sense???

grizzly1911

The_White_Horse wrote: »

you wouldn't stop being paid - you would be paid in accordance with what the country has earned.

say you worked in a real company and were on £30k a year. If the company only turned over £20k in the year, you can't be paid £30k can you. You have to take a salary in accordance with what the company has. or leave.

that should apply in the public sector. you can't promise the public sector and benefit bvrigade payments of say £6bn if you only raise £3bn. Clearly you are £3bn short. Does this not make any sense???

No .

If you only have 50% of the revenue then you can also stop providing 50% of the services.

We then provide those reduced services to those who are most in need.

We withdraw services from those that are most able to pay, Everyting - waste disposal, schooling, health care, welfare, pensions etc. the lot.

What level should we put the cut off in place - someone who doesn't fall within the child benefit group, perhaps, we could set the cut off there or there about.

So look we have kept your tax liability down. You can provide for yourselves. I am sure the private sector will fill the void and sell you the necessary plans to look after yourselves. Don't complain about the cost or the profit they need to make, just think of the inefficiency you are escaping.

The_White_Horse

i would be more than happy to pay zero tax and look after my own. the way it should be.

the people who contribute least should get least. if any cuts are to be made it should be from the workers first, as they are clearly overpaid and there are too many of them. then from the people who contribute least.

the whole point of society is we all chip in for things we all need ie defence, roads, courts, police etc - not, we all pay for layabouts and non-jobs and gold plated pensions.

the reason this govt are still borrowing record amounts is because they are gutless. they take from those who contribute most because they know they will get away with it - they know if they take from the scum there will be more riots- because the rioters know the worst that will happen is a year or two in a holiday camp and the best thing is nothing at all.

i saw some programme about scroungers not being able to work. sickening depressed people blabbing on about "being empty" and "wishing the were dead" - they can still work whilst feeling this way. unreal. Yes, some are clearly disabled and mentally unfit to work, but these depressed people are taking the p1ss.

I have a few friends who have been diagnosed with clinical depression - they still work.

CLAPTON

given the freeze in many public sector jobs over the last two years plus many paying increased pension contributions (equivalent to a pay cut) then you are arguing for an increase in public sector pay?

Radiantsoul

The_White_Horse wrote: »

this way, they know the tax take and make payments accordingly.

it would sort of be like running a business. what fun. instead of promising loads of people massive salaries for doing rubbish jobs, they can pay them in accordance with what the country makes.

---

And if we don't have the money, they don't get paid. Sort of like a real company that can't pay more in salaries than it makes.

Radical thoughts.

This is not really how real companies work though. Companies have debt, retained profits, creditors and capital to fund themselves.

Moreover governments are more closely related to charities(or perhaps even churches). They do not exist to make a profit, and in fact have no way of measuring their performance or even agreeing what that performance is.

grizzly1911

Just heard commentary on the BBC News re the lost vote on boundary changes. The coalition were looking to reduce MPs by 50 to save £13m, or £260K a head.

grizzly1911

The_White_Horse wrote: »

i would be more than happy to pay zero tax and look after my own. the way it should be.
.

I doubt you could afford to do it on your own - if you were to purchase a plan to cover all eventualities in advance, or whether you would be able to raise the funds when you most needed them if you chose not to insure.

The_White_Horse wrote: »

the people who contribute least should get least. if any cuts are to be made it should be from the workers first, as they are clearly overpaid and there are too many of them. then from the people who contribute least.

the whole point of society is we all chip in for things we all need ie defence, roads, courts, police etc - not, we all pay for layabouts and non-jobs and gold plated pensions.

.

What proof do you have to substantiate that they are overpaid? many jobs paid for out of the public purse are actually supplied by the private sector at market rate. Little more than NMW in a lot of cases. They do not get gold plated pensions.

To say they contribute the least is fanciful. How do you know what they do? How do you know what their job description entails?

There are no doubt areas where things could be done more efficiently and certain jobs are not required but to label all the same is presumptuous.

The_White_Horse wrote: »

I have a few friends who have been diagnosed with clinical depression - they still work.

Why am I not surprised at that?