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

GeorgeHowell

Would the government not have to go out and borrow an extra £700 billion or so to make this happen, or am I missing something ?

StevieJ

grizzly1911 wrote: »

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.

Yes, they have to be careful about claiming how much they were going to save

simongregson

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.

This is not what happens in the private sector. Either the company would borrow to cover wages, making up the difference from future income, or the company would be making an illegal deduction from wages and quite rightly be wound up/taken to an ET by its creditors the employees.

In the event that a company could not pay its outstanding wage bill on going bust then the workers would be paid their outstanding wages from the national insurance fund i.e. the taxpayer.

Meanwhile the company directors will be swanning off thinking of their next get rich quick scheme thanks to the benefits of limited liability provided by the state (private sector scum and all that (joke honestly, but I've seen enough of the reverse phrase!). Gin and tonics all round!

J_i_m

The_White_Horse wrote: »

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.

I think I am largely convinced now that this thread is meant as a troll, yet I'll cling onto the hook a little.

Much of the public sector is already run like a business. The NHS trust I work for is mostly run by people from the finances sector who are convinced they're still running a private business, they've even made a silly brand which confuses and irritates people in equal measure.

But the thing is.. Private sector jobs are no more important than Public sector jobs. Actually the staple public sector jobs such as policing, fire-fighting, soldiery, teaching, nursing etc carry large amounts of personal accountability throughout the hierarchy, especially the frontline staff whose salaries are not as impressive as many people would like to think. And the majority of these jobs are not as you so eloquently put it "rubbish".

I have a colleague who used to work in business management in the private sector, he got made redundant and later trained as a mental health nurse because that's where the jobs were. He tells me that he got far more money in his old job for what was essentially being a salesman and shuffling money and paper around (yes, I know it still requires a skill-set) but now as a nurse his personal accountability has soared yet his earnings have plummeted for doing a job that is often more stressful, more challenging and more responsible.

So yes, public sector workers are funded by the tax payer. Yet the majority of it's workforce are not on gold plated salaries and proportionally more of it's workforce are directly responsible for people's safety than much of the private sector and the jobs they do are actually very important indeed if ultimately under appreciated.

But that's okay, I don't seek appreciation, I seek to earn a living.

grizzly1911

StevieJ wrote: »

Yes, they have to be careful about claiming how much they were going to save

117 unelected peers appointed under the current government (don't know if they were replacements or new) cost £18m pa according to Sadiq Khan on BBC News tonight.

BobQ

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.

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.

You have become a troll.....

grizzly1911

BobQ wrote: »

You have become a troll.....

He was born under the bridge I don't know about becoming one.:D

dori2o

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

Because not everyone, especially those who deals with these matters, is a complete moron like you.