I would have thought that the more people who lose their jobs because of these cuts then the increases in the taxes that working people pay will become even bigger .
So is the answer to employ lots more people in the public sector so that taxes paid by working people will become lower?
Cutting public spending has to involve reviewing public sector jobs, and sadly Brown increased the public sector by a huge amount, many due to the amount of red tape and box ticking.
Of course it is horrible for those who may loose their jobs, and we have to hope they find others, but with such a massive amount of people many of the cuts will be the result of not replacing staff who leave.
Ultimately we will a suffer one way or another, many in the private sector have been made redundant, or not had pay increases, and the NI increase would have resulted in redundances in both private and public sector.
Something has to be done to mend the appalling legacy left by Brown and Co. and it is at their feet that the blame lies.
Went into the national income along with all other tax revenues.
I'm sure oil revenues were well spent under the Conservatives. The idea that they were frittered away on mass unemployment and later on tax breaks for the well off is surely no more than silly ill informed myth. For example, how many new shools and hospitals were built in the 80s and 90s? Excluding Portakabins...
I would doubt that very much - all governments waste money hand over fist, the experience of the last 13 years should tell you that.
I would go furher. It more than waste. We are talking about criminality on a vast scale here. Taxation is evil in that public services are largely unnecessary and an unwarrented hindrance to economic prosperity. Civil servants do little more than order massive quantities of stationery, hand out £50 pound notes to consultants every couple of seconds and defraud us... while laughing in our faces from the back of Jaguars. It is time this all stopped and for the show trials to begin. The whole nation agrees with me after 5 pints.
Cutting the defecit is a necessity as there is too big a disparity between expenditure and income. However to me, the decision to do this by cutting jobs and rolling back the role of the state is an idelogical one not an economic one. Pay cuts. pay freezes and natural wastage should be used as ways to reduce spending.
But the Tories are using the present financial crisis to drive thru the dismantling of the state in a way Thatcher and Blair never even concieved.
Cutting the defecit is a necessity as there is too big a disparity between expenditure and income. However to me, the decision to do this by cutting jobs and rolling back the role of the state is an idelogical one not an economic one. Pay cuts. pay freezes and natural wastage should be used as ways to reduce spending.
But the Tories are using the present financial crisis to drive thru the dismantling of the state in a way Thatcher and Blair never even concieved.
It is both ideology and economics. While pay cuts, pay freezes and natural wastage will all help they will not by themselves sort out the budget deficit. The public sector is too big and too costly and shrinking it is the only way to resolve that.
It is both ideology and economics. While pay cuts, pay freezes and natural wastage will all help they will not by themselves sort out the budget deficit. The public sector is too big and too costly and shrinking it is the only way to resolve that.
That's an ideological not financial argument though - we can either reduce the function of the state, pay more taxes or do both. By deciding to cut rather than tax, Cameron is not really different from Thatcher era Tories.
Though they do seem to feel students should pay more tax.
That's an ideological not financial argument though - we can either reduce the function of the state, pay more taxes or do both. By deciding to cut rather than tax, Cameron is not really different from Thatcher era Tories.
Not really ideology can and in this instance does go hand in hand with finance. My view is the state is too big so I have no desire to pay more taxes to sustain or increase its size. I do believe some tax rises will be needed to sort out the mess the public finances are in.
How do you work that out then? Benefits cost the taxpayer far less than public sector salaries.
I'm not sure I was right to say what I did actually. Going off the figures in this story unemployment benefits cost the tax payer 61 billion pound a year.
I hadn't realised until you pointed it out that public sector salaries were also paid by the tax payer or that public sector workers didn't pay taxes.:o
I would go furher. It more than waste. We are talking about criminality on a vast scale here. Taxation is evil in that public services are largely unnecessary and an unwarrented hindrance to economic prosperity. Civil servants do little more than order massive quantities of stationery, hand out £50 pound notes to consultants every couple of seconds and defraud us... while laughing in our faces from the back of Jaguars. It is time this all stopped and for the show trials to begin. The whole nation agrees with me after 5 pints.
I'm, sorry, but that's just sensationalist Daily Mail-esque nonsense.
You have to consider there's a vast difference between 6-figure salaried Whitehall top brass and the other 99.9+% who are inline to be dumped onto the scrapheap. They’re just doing their job as dictated by government legislation. No ordinary civil servant is in any position to laugh at anyone.
A little factoid I picked up is civil service staff were recently asked to fill out a questionnaire about working in their particular department. In HMRC – one of the bigger civil service departments – when asked if they’re proud to work there, only 18% said yes. And when asked if they’d recommend others work there, only 14% said yes.
Cutting public spending has to involve reviewing public sector jobs, and sadly Brown increased the public sector by a huge amount, many due to the amount of red tape and box ticking.
Have you ever wondered why there's so much "red tape and box ticking"? Do you think its all there for shits'n'giggles? Do you think stopping doing it would have no consequences?
I'm, sorry, but that's just sensationalist Daily Mail-esque nonsense.
You have to consider there's a vast difference between 6-figure salaried Whitehall top brass and the other 99.9+% who are inline to be dumped onto the scrapheap. They’re just doing their job as dictated by government legislation. No ordinary civil servant is in any position to laugh at anyone.
A little factoid I picked up is civil service staff were recently asked to fill out a questionnaire about working in their particular department. In HMRC – one of the bigger civil service departments – when asked if they’re proud to work there, only 18% said yes. And when asked if they’d recommend others work there, only 14% said yes.
As said, no-one’s laughing.
Yep, our department got one of the surveys as well (only took around 20 minutes, and was online before anybody asks). Our department didn't get much better than those marks.
If they focus public sector cuts on middle-management and mandarins, then they might just get away with it, as this will put fewer people on the dole, but save more money.
However, true to form, it's middle-management and mandarins who are usually asked by the politicians, "Who shall we make redundant?" to which the answer is, "Ohh well.. unprecedented times.. front line services will take a hit.." thus saving similar amounts, but putting ten times as many people on the dole queue.
Think about it - up for redundancy are:
1 Sir Mandarin on £200,000 p/a/ - Under-secretary to the adminstrative side-officer secretary to the whatever.
OR
10 Care workers on £20,000 p/a
Who's loss damages society the most and creates more strain on the welfare system?
Yes - but the public sector (i.e. the taxpayer) will have to pick up their dole money, their housing costs and other benefits. So in practice you put someone on the dole, demoralise them and the country is no better off financially. Better to keep them in a wage - even if it means cutting that.
Your making the assumption all public sector workers will be entitled to full benefits when made unemployed this is not and will not be the case..
My missus works in the public sector nhs ,and welcomes the cuts ,there is far too many people collecting a wage for nothing ,lifes not over when you loose your job ,you just need to adjust and start again.
Your making the assumption all public sector workers will be entitled to full benefits when made unemployed this is not and will not be the case..
My missus works in the public sector nhs ,and welcomes the cuts ,there is far too many people collecting a wage for nothing ,lifes not over when you loose your job ,you just need to adjust and start again.
I'd agree with this.
In our department, there are far too many consultants and contractors. I know of some contractors, there to do a short term job and knowledge transfer remember, who have been there for at least six years. Consultants on big money, who had three months left on their contracts,are still there two or three years later. It's shocking mismanagement of money and I, as a public sector worker myself, am as angry at this as anybody.
There are many ways in which our department could cut back, and we have already started. We had a meeting yesterday where we were told that our budget for the rest of this financial year would need to be cut back by 100k (this is just our division, not the whole department). This will involve reduction of posts, so people will be moved to other divisions as any vacancies arise.
Our department has an immediate recruitment freeze, as does the whole of the civil service, and we know there will be further cuts down the line. As said, our department can make various cuts which are obvious, but somewhere some people will have to be made redundant, hopefully voluntary.
I'm lucky enough to have worked in the department for over 20 years, and have qualifications, so am in a good position for the department to keep me, even in the worst scenario, as I'm an expensive resource which they have 'on the cheap'. I have a good pension and good terms if, by some chance, I do have to be made redundant.
However, there are a lot of people, not in such a good position, worried in our department as well, so people on this forum would do damn well to remember that instead of posting some of the idiotic posts I've seen on here who see the public sector as whole as a lot of uncaring, lazy spongers. As I said, people in the sector as as angry at some of the mismanagement as anybody, we're all having to try and fight through this together. I just wish people would think a little bit more instead of spouting the crap they sometimes do.
Your making the assumption all public sector workers will be entitled to full benefits when made unemployed this is not and will not be the case..
My missus works in the public sector nhs ,and welcomes the cuts ,there is far too many people collecting a wage for nothing ,lifes not over when you loose your job ,you just need to adjust and start again.
From something another FM has said I now get the impression that the salaries of public sector workers are paid from taxes which obviously must mean public sector workers don't pay taxes, so could you possibly confirm this ?
From something another FM has said I now get the impression that the salaries of public sector workers are paid from taxes which obviously must mean public sector workers don't pay taxes, so could you possibly confirm this ?
Public sector salaries are paid for via budgets from the government. As regards us not paying taxes, can you tell me what those tax entries are on my pay slip then?
Comments
Exactly what public spending would you have cut or taxes put up to make up for the loss of revenue from North sea Oil?
Went into the national income along with all other tax revenues.
So is the answer to employ lots more people in the public sector so that taxes paid by working people will become lower?
So if everyone works in the public sector we pay no tax -yippee!!:D
Of course it is horrible for those who may loose their jobs, and we have to hope they find others, but with such a massive amount of people many of the cuts will be the result of not replacing staff who leave.
Ultimately we will a suffer one way or another, many in the private sector have been made redundant, or not had pay increases, and the NI increase would have resulted in redundances in both private and public sector.
Something has to be done to mend the appalling legacy left by Brown and Co. and it is at their feet that the blame lies.
I'm sure oil revenues were well spent under the Conservatives. The idea that they were frittered away on mass unemployment and later on tax breaks for the well off is surely no more than silly ill informed myth. For example, how many new shools and hospitals were built in the 80s and 90s? Excluding Portakabins...
I would doubt that very much - all governments waste money hand over fist, the experience of the last 13 years should tell you that.
I would go furher. It more than waste. We are talking about criminality on a vast scale here. Taxation is evil in that public services are largely unnecessary and an unwarrented hindrance to economic prosperity. Civil servants do little more than order massive quantities of stationery, hand out £50 pound notes to consultants every couple of seconds and defraud us... while laughing in our faces from the back of Jaguars. It is time this all stopped and for the show trials to begin. The whole nation agrees with me after 5 pints.
Its not going to be pretty, but needs to happen.
If Labour hadnt overspent and borrowed so much in the first place, such large cuts and job losses wouldnt have to occur.
Indeed - had they only spent what could have been afforded much pain would have been avoided.
But the Tories are using the present financial crisis to drive thru the dismantling of the state in a way Thatcher and Blair never even concieved.
It is both ideology and economics. While pay cuts, pay freezes and natural wastage will all help they will not by themselves sort out the budget deficit. The public sector is too big and too costly and shrinking it is the only way to resolve that.
That's an ideological not financial argument though - we can either reduce the function of the state, pay more taxes or do both. By deciding to cut rather than tax, Cameron is not really different from Thatcher era Tories.
Though they do seem to feel students should pay more tax.
Not really ideology can and in this instance does go hand in hand with finance. My view is the state is too big so I have no desire to pay more taxes to sustain or increase its size. I do believe some tax rises will be needed to sort out the mess the public finances are in.
I'm not sure I was right to say what I did actually. Going off the figures in this story unemployment benefits cost the tax payer 61 billion pound a year.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23380239-the-real-cost-of-unemployment-is-61-billion-per-year.do
I hadn't realised until you pointed it out that public sector salaries were also paid by the tax payer or that public sector workers didn't pay taxes.:o
I'm, sorry, but that's just sensationalist Daily Mail-esque nonsense.
You have to consider there's a vast difference between 6-figure salaried Whitehall top brass and the other 99.9+% who are inline to be dumped onto the scrapheap. They’re just doing their job as dictated by government legislation. No ordinary civil servant is in any position to laugh at anyone.
A little factoid I picked up is civil service staff were recently asked to fill out a questionnaire about working in their particular department. In HMRC – one of the bigger civil service departments – when asked if they’re proud to work there, only 18% said yes. And when asked if they’d recommend others work there, only 14% said yes.
As said, no-one’s laughing.
Have you ever wondered why there's so much "red tape and box ticking"? Do you think its all there for shits'n'giggles? Do you think stopping doing it would have no consequences?
Yep, our department got one of the surveys as well (only took around 20 minutes, and was online before anybody asks). Our department didn't get much better than those marks.
Bifffo, your posts rock :cool:
Your making the assumption all public sector workers will be entitled to full benefits when made unemployed this is not and will not be the case..
My missus works in the public sector nhs ,and welcomes the cuts ,there is far too many people collecting a wage for nothing ,lifes not over when you loose your job ,you just need to adjust and start again.
I'd agree with this.
In our department, there are far too many consultants and contractors. I know of some contractors, there to do a short term job and knowledge transfer remember, who have been there for at least six years. Consultants on big money, who had three months left on their contracts,are still there two or three years later. It's shocking mismanagement of money and I, as a public sector worker myself, am as angry at this as anybody.
There are many ways in which our department could cut back, and we have already started. We had a meeting yesterday where we were told that our budget for the rest of this financial year would need to be cut back by 100k (this is just our division, not the whole department). This will involve reduction of posts, so people will be moved to other divisions as any vacancies arise.
Our department has an immediate recruitment freeze, as does the whole of the civil service, and we know there will be further cuts down the line. As said, our department can make various cuts which are obvious, but somewhere some people will have to be made redundant, hopefully voluntary.
I'm lucky enough to have worked in the department for over 20 years, and have qualifications, so am in a good position for the department to keep me, even in the worst scenario, as I'm an expensive resource which they have 'on the cheap'. I have a good pension and good terms if, by some chance, I do have to be made redundant.
However, there are a lot of people, not in such a good position, worried in our department as well, so people on this forum would do damn well to remember that instead of posting some of the idiotic posts I've seen on here who see the public sector as whole as a lot of uncaring, lazy spongers. As I said, people in the sector as as angry at some of the mismanagement as anybody, we're all having to try and fight through this together. I just wish people would think a little bit more instead of spouting the crap they sometimes do.
From something another FM has said I now get the impression that the salaries of public sector workers are paid from taxes which obviously must mean public sector workers don't pay taxes, so could you possibly confirm this ?
Public sector salaries are paid for via budgets from the government. As regards us not paying taxes, can you tell me what those tax entries are on my pay slip then?