Cameron Tax Dodger

Mistermeaner

To be clear I begrudge noone their salary or pension (public or private sector) I was using the juxtaposition to expose the hypocracy of many labour supporters who claim to support labour because of their concern for wider society when in fact their only concern is lining their own pockets. Not all are like this but many are.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Mistermeaner wrote: »

To be clear I begrudge noone their salary or pension (public or private sector) I was using the juxtaposition to expose the hypocracy of many labour supporters who claim to support labour because of their concern for wider society when in fact their only concern is lining their own pockets. Not all are like this but many are.

I have no problem with people seeking to reduce their tax burden. But you've stated you don't want to pay any tax leaving the most vulnerable in society to suffer.

Maybe you should find another country to live in with these rules and see how you prosper. Best of luck.

Mistermeaner

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

I have no problem with people seeking to reduce their tax burden. But you've stated you don't want to pay any tax leaving the most vulnerable in society to suffer.

Maybe you should find another country to live in with these rules and see how you prosper. Best of luck.

Can you point me towards where I said this? I don't recall

Mistermeaner

Tromking wrote: »

Wage restraint in the public sector is coming at a cost though. Risable staff retention rates and cuts are beginning to bite and effect service. I watched the national and local news the other evening and both were dominated by NHS stories based around the lack of staff. When you seek to reduce the deficit predominantly through cuts in public services it comes at a cost. The economically literate on these boards who currently enjoy good health may not see it, but others do.

The simple answer from the left - throw money at the problem. We have had fireman striking over pay and pensions despite the fact that there are hundreds of applicants for each single job. Nurses are queueing up from other countries to work here for less than our domestic ones are paid but of course we don't want those pesky migrants providing cheap labour.

The issue with worker satisfaction in the public sector is mostly down the frustration of working in the massive bureaucracy of things like the NHS and education where because of no need for efficiency and competition people are all paid the same regardless of performance so the good get dragged down and frustrated and the crap can just cruise.

The answer is not just to throw money at people. Private sector recognised this a long time ago .

Paying high rates for agency staff is nothing to do with funding or who is in Westminster that is down to poor management (arguably as not paying the ludicrous unfunded public sector pensions is probably a net saving)

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Can you point me towards where I said this? I don't recall

It was recent. You stated those who need to use public services should be the ones paying for them. Of course the most vulnerable use public services most often.

You believe yourself to be the model citizen because you begrudgingly pay tax. Anyway just keep paying my gold plated pension.

Mistermeaner

So you believe that public money should be spent on services for the vulnerable who need them most but are happy to draw a "gold plated pension" from the public pot thus directly reducing the amount of money available for those vulnerable people.

And you are a more moral person than me?

Hypocrite

Mistermeaner

Its so telling in this thread that all the labour supporting individuals who start out claiming to be on a moral high ground and concerned with the most vulnerable in society revert to gloating about their publically provided pensions and early retirement when they get called out.

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Its so telling in this thread that all the labour supporting individuals who start out claiming to be on a moral high ground and concerned with the most vulnerable in society revert to gloating about their publically provided pensions and early retirement when they get called out.

Or simply responding in kind.

isplumm

kabayiri wrote: »

I think I'm right in saying that some UK contractors took part in a very similar scheme, where loans replaced salary, on seemingly open ended repayment options.

The companies offering the scheme were based in the IOM, and the government took a dim view, claiming that £400m+ was being lost.

yes & a lot of these IT contractors are now getting hit with massive tax bills!!

Mark

Tromking

Moby wrote: »

We have loads of sessional workers in various roles to fill the gaps in service provision due to the cuts. They get paid more generous rates by the agencies who recruit them.....who in turn charge the govmt/taxpayer...so methinks how are we actually benefitting overall from cutting......but I'm just a simple economically illiterate guy....there's obviously something I've missed;)

Yep, you have.
In fact, it's Hunt's attempts at trying to cut down on the massive cost of agency staff to the NHS that is causing the problem. Insisting on capping the amount Trusts can pay out for temporary staff isn't working as some trusts are ignoring the cap or are opting to close stuff.