advertisement


why Corbyn may well win the next election.

All the above are public sector workers, and as such are totally funded by workers in the private sector. Workers who are generally opposed to tax increases of any kind, and as such are simply not willing to fund the public sector any more than they already do.
The public sector have born the brunt of the austerity measures.

Chris
You can't have it both ways. On the one hand, you characterise the public sector as leeches, draining money generated by the private sector. On the other hand, you also say that the private sector is smarter, more efficient and more productive than the public sector.

Do you not see a connection here? Action and consequence. If you want a smart, efficient public sector (and I think we all do) then you have to attract good people. The logic used by the private sector is that you don't get good people by paying carp salaries (at least, that's the logic used by the senior bods who set their own salaries...). So, by that logic, begrudging the public sector every excess penny is inevitably going to lead to the public sector being filled with those people incapable of holding their own with the smart, industrious types in the private sector. You get what you pay for. You, of all people, must see this.

Having said that, and working in the public sector as I do, I find myself surrounded by very bright, diligent people who just want to make a difference. They do a good job, because they know that their job matters. Almost without exception, all the people I work with in the public sector, both within and outside my organisation, are bright, educated, smart people who do a good job very well. They tend to be motivated by more than just money, though I don't expect you to understand that.
 
.

Having said that, and working in the public sector as I do, I find myself surrounded by very bright, diligent people who just want to make a difference. They do a good job, because they know that their job matters. Almost without exception, all the people I work with in the public sector, both within and outside my organisation, are bright, educated, smart people who do a good job very well. They tend to be motivated by more than just money, though I don't expect you to understand that.

Indeed. In fact many Public Sector posts require both Graduate Status and also very specific Post Graduate training in order to qualify candidates. Why would any sane voter want a second class public service run shambolically, under funded and with de-motivated poorly trained staff?

Of course few, if any, would. But that is exactly what a lot of Tories do want. Unqualified Teachers being just one example of many. Outsourcing contributes to this mess, with very lax rules regarding the training of those filling many outsourced posts, and the simple act of outsourcing, reducing the former Public Service to a set of simplistic 'tick boxes' to be filled in exchange for formulaic funding, rather than a comprehensive and joined up professional approach to, and analysis of the issue at hand.

Much Public Service, especially at local level, has its origins in the good intentions of local 'worthies', Guilds, etc., who saw that life FOR ALL depended upon the management of issues such as Public Health, Environment, Planning and Development, Housing, Social Care etc., etc.

These are mostly issues which if left to the 'I'm alright Jack' approach so beloved of Mescalito and his ilk, result in the seedy, dirty, poor and unhealthy society so well described by Dickens.

It's what we are being deliberately driven back to.

It has nothing to do with immigration, scroungers,fecklessness or any of the other streotypical scapegoats trotted out endlessly by the right wing propagandists.

It has everything to do with a mean minded penny pinching Govt which is determined to grasp back everything it can from the many, and give it to the few.

Just look around you. Crumbling roads, collapsing Social Care, endless closures of public services of all kinds, huge increases in rough sleeping and homelessness, privatised Rail services which can't cope and are owned by foreign Govts, very shakey energy supplies also dependednt on not just foreign, but hostile Govts... the list is endless.

And none of the above is accident. It is ALL deliberate Tory policy.

Of course.. with an election in the offing we are starting to hear how much they care.. and how much money they are putting into fixing society's ills. You'd think it was coming out of their own pockets to hear them.. but then in a very real sense it is, because every penny spent on the Plebs is a penny less for the grasping spivs in charge. But they won't of course mention that they are pretending to fix the damage that they themselves wrought, with less money than they claim, and even that mostly 'vired' from one pot to another for just long enough to buy a few votes.

I really despair. Not of the Govt. They are easy to understand. But of the population which continues to allow them to destroy our country.
 
Last edited:
So these public sector guys.

They are motivated by money and they aren't just motivated by money.

I'm glad that's been cleared up.
 
So these public sector guys.

They are motivated by money and they aren't just motivated by money.

I'm glad that's been cleared up.
No, the point is, that penny pinchers assume everybody is motivated by money, but fail to join the dots and see that, if so, the public sector will always be second rate and therefore inefficient. There’s a basic failure of logic in their position.

But the reality is that many work in the public sector from a sense of duty or vocation. Thank God, because if it were not so, we’d have been screwed years ago.
 
Meanwhile,

A report for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation says Scots living on less than £20,000 a year “will likely determine” whether Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn is the next prime minister.

And if the SNP can galavanise support in this group, it’s thought the nationalists could hold the balance of power at Westminster.

The findings underline how Scottish politics is on a knife-edge, with eight of the 20 most marginal seats situated north of the Border.
Or if Labour can galvanise support in this group....
 
How would one 'attract good people' to the public sector?

Of course it attracts those who feel a social and moral need to help so they are there, but are they any good at, say, teaching Maths? If you want 'good' Maths teachers what do you do. The suggestion that the private sector somehow attract good people is simply wrong. Maybe Eton pays the salaries that might attract some, ut is finance the right answer/motivation? Because if it is, how come that motivation is sneered at if you choose to work privately?

And the other side of the coin, if you reduce incentives for money makers to work in the UK, how is that missing wealth regenerated?

I had this chat with a friend quite high up in banking. He said, if the incentives go, I'll just go to the USA and get rich there. The base rate there is 37% and the threshold roughly 200,000 pound higher. I've not done the maths, but that's a lot. Some may accuse him of moral banckruptcy (do you KNOW a moral banker?) but regardless he contributes 45% of his filthy money to our coffers. He has a point, and there are alot like him. You might as wll just open the plug and watch the coffers empty.

My view is that good teachers / nurses / policemen etc need some natural leaning toward those attributes of the job we all find admirable (fairness, a willingness to go the extra mile (or ten), the ability to inspire, the ability to control etc) but also superb training, and a fair pay scale. That's about where w are now overall. Yes we have charts to say we lost ground, but overall, the structure is about right and STILL (not you Still) the 'good' people don't come?
Why. Maybe because the good people are already there? Maybe there aren't that many 'good' people around anymore. Maybe they are all in the private sector getting rich and so, by the defenitions of some above, not actually, good at all....greedy buggers. You know.
Mankind.
 
I think beatification and demonisation of public sector workers are equally misguided. They're people. Some are good (morally and/or at their jobs) some are bad (morally and/or at their jobs). I'm sure we've all experienced good and bad teachers, for example. What's more, plenty of people, including my wife and both of our daughters, will switch between sectors throughout their careers; do they suddenly become money-obsessed greedheads as they transfer from the public to the private sector, or leeches if they make the opposite move?

The 'bargain' used to be that employment in the public sector was slightly lower paid than private sector comparators, but that this was offset by more secure employment and a favourable pension scheme. Some, but by no means all, would also have been attracted to the public sector for 'public good' motivations. Over the past decade or so, public sector pay has been allowed to fall further and further behind private sector comparators, job security has weakened, and pension provision has worsened. Not surprisingly, the result has been demotivation.
 
The data shows chinless wonders who claim they'll run away if taxes go up are mainly full of shit, and in fact stay put and just work less.

Plus. many of those who say they'll quit the UK if taxes are raised would be no great loss and, yes, Phil Collins, I'm looking at you.
 
The data shows chinless wonders who claim they'll run away if taxes go up are mainly full of shit, and in fact stay put and just work less.

I heard a few professionals (Architects/interior designers) in the 80's saying if labour got in they would emigrate, alas, none went to my knowledge.

Bloss
 
The data shows people don't like to pay tax, but chinless wonders who claim they'll run away are mainly full of it.
In fact they stay put and just work less.


Erm apart from the personal stuff about my pal, the point is, that he was answering a question regarding this subject, not making a threat. He would go. He has a house there already.
Maybe lot's wouldn't tho but this doesn't address my question. The proposal was, in general terms, to remove money from the filthy rich scum tory fat boys (etc etc) so I was asking, IF we did that, how would their contribution be replaced.
'And the other side of the coin, if you reduce incentives for money makers to work in the UK, how is that missing wealth regenerated?' Was what I asked.

Labour's proposal is quite moderate in fact, but the financial difference between 50% starting at £123000, and 37% starting at £370000 ish is quite a lot of cash. Ask your accountant :)
 
Erm apart from the personal stuff about my pal

Experience of one = no evidence.

He would go. He has a house there already.

Except in recent years taxes have gone up, and tax benefits for bankers (e.g. bonuses) curtailed. Yet your friend has stayed put.

Maybe lot's wouldn't tho but this doesn't address my question.

The data suggests most stay.

The proposal was, in general terms, to remove money from the filthy rich scum tory fat boys (etc etc) so I was asking, IF we did that, how would their contribution be replaced.
'And the other side of the coin, if you reduce incentives for money makers to work in the UK, how is that missing wealth regenerated?' Was what I asked.

Taxes have gone up, there hasn't been an exodus, and the country has coped.
It appears your concerns are ill founded.
 
Experience of one = no evidence.

It was an anecdote, not evidence.



Except in recent years taxes have gone up, and tax benefits for bankers (e.g. bonuses) curtailed. Yet your friend has stayed put.

He flits about a bit. His accountant knows what to.



The data suggests most stay.

Lucky so far...will this be true after Labour sweep to power? I assume your data has the gift of foresight?



Taxes have gone up, there hasn't been an exodus, and the country has coped.
It appears your concerns are ill founded.

How, exactly, has the country 'coped'? I thought your point was that it was hideous here? And that data. Please publish the figures you have that record exact details of the movements of anyone here earning over the tax threshold for the past 10 years or so, or just provide a link.

badly constructed post...some of my replies are above. Apologies.
 
This reminds me of the Rolling Stones back in the sixties.

Ditching their lovely houses in Sussex (where I lived at the time ) for the South of France.

Drastic measures!
 
How, exactly, has the country 'coped'?


For a start your expectation of the highly paid running away hasn't happened despite increases in taxes + loss of tax breaks.

I thought your point was that it was hideous here?

You thought wrong.

And that data. Please publish the figures you have that record exact details of the movements of anyone here earning over the tax threshold for the past 10 years or so, or just provide a link.

You appear to have confused me with the ONS.
 


advertisement


Back
Top