davieG Posted 9 April 2010 Posted 9 April 2010 A couple of things are annoying me at the minute. First, I'll probably vote blue in the end but they're getting on my nerves with this "vote us because u don't want to vote labour" attitude. It's all about what we don't want and never why we should vote conservatives. I imagine it will put a lot of people off voting this may, I would sympathise with anyone that sticks to their principles and refuses to vote a party because they don't want the other major party. A flyer came through our door today and there was more about how Gordon Brown is bad than what Cameron can actually bring. Second, it's annoying how the public sector is being treated so differently to the private sector. It's about time the government became accountable for the public finances. The private sector has been flooded with redundancies, voluntary and compulsory, and office closures to cope with the recession. Yet the average person is now being asked to contribute more from their income to keep spending as high if not higher. Cuts need to be made, it's not nice, but no private business could ever just spend their way out like this. Just reading a couple of posts about JSA, there's no question a social security system is needed, but I think there should be some sort of conditional offer to them. For example, I'd raise the JSA amount by £10-15 a week but if a person is fit and able (IE not on disability allowance), they should be doing community work, however unqualified or ""degrading""". My job at the minute involves a hell of a lot of driving, the roads are absolutely covered in litter, if people are receiving a "survival income" in my opinion they should be doing something for it. If there was some sort of benefit to the community from JSA support, people might be more accepting. Let's face it, how many people on JSA honestly spend 40 hours a week full-time searching for a job? Aren't the two local councils City and County losing over 500 jobs between them?
Benji Posted 9 April 2010 Posted 9 April 2010 Aren't the two local councils City and County losing over 500 jobs between them? I want to say, penny in a pond, but we are talking about peoples jobs and lives so its not a fair comment. At the end of the day if Labour want more income for the public economy and are thinking about/implementing cuts (I remember reading our police force is to make spending cuts too at least office jobs) it makes you wonder how badly we have been spending outside of our means!
Webbo Posted 9 April 2010 Posted 9 April 2010 Aren't the two local councils City and County losing over 500 jobs between them? Which proves that unemployment is going to go up whoever wins the election. Add the inevitable tax rises and it makes you realise what a poison chalice it's going to be winning the election.
davieG Posted 9 April 2010 Posted 9 April 2010 I want to say, penny in a pond, but we are talking about peoples jobs and lives so its not a fair comment. At the end of the day if Labour want more income for the public economy and are thinking about/implementing cuts (I remember reading our police force is to make spending cuts too at least office jobs) it makes you wonder how badly we have been spending outside of our means! Which is a questioned I posed in the Merc when the Leics CC cuts were announced. The problem is it's not unique to one particular party considering Leics CC is and has been Tory controlled for decades. They're all profligate with our money but then I think private industry is with ever increasing prices and massive year on year increases in profits and wages for the top guys which they get even if they fail. Power is being abused by those at the top of both public and private enterprises.
FoxyPV Posted 9 April 2010 Posted 9 April 2010 Second, it's annoying how the public sector is being treated so differently to the private sector. It's about time the government became accountable for the public finances. The private sector has been flooded with redundancies, voluntary and compulsory, and office closures to cope with the recession. Yet the average person is now being asked to contribute more from their income to keep spending as high if not higher. Cuts need to be made, it's not nice, but no private business could ever just spend their way out like this. The public sector has seen massive cuts for the past several years, pay is far lower than in the private sector, redundancies have been coming thick and fast - forced and voluntary and will continue to be hit by the next government. Public sector has and will always be the first to be hit when cuts are made.
Daggers Posted 9 April 2010 Posted 9 April 2010 You say you got a real solution Well, you know We'd all love to see the plan You ask me for a contribution Well, you know We're doing what we can
hebangsthedrums Posted 10 April 2010 Posted 10 April 2010 Not honest Dave, that's for sure, but as for whether anyone else I'm still undecided. Can someone remind of that quote somewhere in the thread which refutes the concept of not being able to criticise if you have not voted?
Jon the Hat Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 The public sector has seen massive cuts for the past several years, pay is far lower than in the private sector, redundancies have been coming thick and fast - forced and voluntary and will continue to be hit by the next government. Public sector has and will always be the first to be hit when cuts are made. Sadly, pay in the public sector has caught up with the private sector under Labour, and in many cases surpassed it. Add to the the fact that it seems you have to carry an additional burden of pensions, and that the incompenetent are rarely ever removed from the payroll, and you have a culture of inefficiency. And before people take offence, I am not really talking about those who deliver at the front line, but the bureaucracy behind it all. If anything those on the front line are hardest pushed in the public sector. Do any of our teachers on here for example think that their LEA / the DoE are running a lean organsiation based on rewarding excellence and innovative thinking? My point is that there are vast amounts of unproductive spend in the public sector, and we are paying over the odds as a result. This has got immeasurably worse under Labour (partly becuase they threw money at problems they inherited from the Tories). Even Labour seem happy to admit there is waste, but they are determine to drive a debate focussed on a 6Bn difference in spending on a budgeet of over 700Bn. This is what we in finance like to call a rounding difference... The question really as I see it is whether we think tax should be increased next year, effectivley letting whichever government off the hook of saving money, or whether we as taxpayers should see the bloated public sector gets it own house in order without another dig into our pockets to try and sort out their mess.
Benji Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 Sadly, pay in the public sector has caught up with the private sector under Labour, and in many cases surpassed it. Add to the the fact that it seems you have to carry an additional burden of pensions, and that the incompenetent are rarely ever removed from the payroll, and you have a culture of inefficiency. And before people take offence, I am not really talking about those who deliver at the front line, but the bureaucracy behind it all. If anything those on the front line are hardest pushed in the public sector. Do any of our teachers on here for example think that their LEA / the DoE are running a lean organsiation based on rewarding excellence and innovative thinking? My point is that there are vast amounts of unproductive spend in the public sector, and we are paying over the odds as a result. This has got immeasurably worse under Labour (partly becuase they threw money at problems they inherited from the Tories). Even Labour seem happy to admit there is waste, but they are determine to drive a debate focussed on a 6Bn difference in spending on a budgeet of over 700Bn. This is what we in finance like to call a rounding difference... The question really as I see it is whether we think tax should be increased next year, effectivley letting whichever government off the hook of saving money, or whether we as taxpayers should see the bloated public sector gets it own house in order without another dig into our pockets to try and sort out their mess.
Bellend Sebastian Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 Chew on this, me hearties: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/10/beware-radical-tories-reality-terrifying
Guest Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 Chew on this, me hearties: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/10/beware-radical-tories-reality-terrifying The comments at the bottom are much more telling than the article
Webbo Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 If Polly Toynbee doesn't like you , you can't be that bad.
Shrenchel Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 She chats sense sometimes but she really is a twat. Id love to watch her and Melanie Phillips fvck each other to death.
Daggers Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 Do any of our teachers on here for example think that their LEA / the DoE are running a lean organsiation based on rewarding excellence and innovative thinking? No. But they were just as shit under the last lot. Again, arguing party politics doesn't solve the problems - which is the management of the entire system from top down...all the way from the Department of Education. You want to know what the biggest waste in education is? It is that every time there's a new person put in charge of it they change everything, causing yet more pointless paperwork and measurable systems (so they can prove what a good job they did). The Tory solution was to disband the LEAs altogether - an wonderful idea created by a thinktank-load of twats. Consequently costs to schools spiralled as there was no longer anyone able to negotiate bulk discounts. If you look at education suppliers now they all charge a good 20-30% over the going market rates for products, a direct result of that policy. The Labour investment in schools has had a massive impact on the quality of provision. For everything they've cocked up, that can not be knocked.
davieG Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 No. But they were just as shit under the last lot. Again, arguing party politics doesn't solve the problems - which is the management of the entire system from top down...all the way from the Department of Education. You want to know what the biggest waste in education is? It is that every time there's a new person put in charge of it they change everything, causing yet more pointless paperwork and measurable systems (so they can prove what a good job they did). The Tory solution was to disband the LEAs altogether - an wonderful idea created by a thinktank-load of twats. Consequently costs to schools spiralled as there was no longer anyone able to negotiate bulk discounts. If you look at education suppliers now they all charge a good 20-30% over the going market rates for products, a direct result of that policy. The Labour investment in schools has had a massive impact on the quality of provision. For everything they've cocked up, that can not be knocked. Unfortunately change is seen as the panacea to all problems not just in the public services but in private industry and has become so endemic it's now just done for the sake of it or as you say as a badge of achievement to the people who instigate it whether it's proved successful or not. In many cases those proposing the changes are often long gone by the time anyone realises that the change hasn't delivered what was promised and the merry go round starts all over again. During my last years in private industry my job changed and the reporting structure once a year on average for the last ten years and when I worked at County Hall my desk was located in 9 different places in 5 years, there where several changes in the management structure including who I reported to and yet I was still doing fundamentally the same job. All it did in most of the case was to deflect me from my main task whilst the changes where implemented and of course every new manager tweaked the system at a micro level creating even more work.
Guest Bilo Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 She chats sense sometimes but she really is a twat. Id love to watch her and Melanie Phillips fvck each other to death. She does on occasion but is far too self-righteous for my liking. Anybody reading that article would think Labour were a paragon of competence and excellent government and not the tired old bunch that's allowed the Tories a foothold we all recognise. The comments at the bottom are far more sensible.
Sir Fynwy Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 Geoff Peters (of Talk Sport infamy) has just put a Conservative flyer through my letterbox, thats any chance of them getting my vote gone up in smoke, the bloke comes across as a total weapon. PS. Geoff a crappy Rover 75 doesn't look anything like a Jag
Sparky Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 Geoff Peters (of Talk Sport infamy) has just put a Conservative flyer through my letterbox, thats any chance of them getting my vote gone up in smoke, the bloke comes across as a total weapon. PS. Geoff a crappy Rover 75 doesn't look anything like a Jag Im sure i read somewhere that he is also a DJ in Tamworth and goes by the name DJ willy puller. Seriously
FoxyPV Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 Sadly, pay in the public sector has caught up with the private sector under Labour, and in many cases surpassed it. Add to the the fact that it seems you have to carry an additional burden of pensions, and that the incompenetent are rarely ever removed from the payroll, and you have a culture of inefficiency. And before people take offence, I am not really talking about those who deliver at the front line, but the bureaucracy behind it all. If anything those on the front line are hardest pushed in the public sector. Do any of our teachers on here for example think that their LEA / the DoE are running a lean organsiation based on rewarding excellence and innovative thinking? My point is that there are vast amounts of unproductive spend in the public sector, and we are paying over the odds as a result. This has got immeasurably worse under Labour (partly becuase they threw money at problems they inherited from the Tories). Even Labour seem happy to admit there is waste, but they are determine to drive a debate focussed on a 6Bn difference in spending on a budgeet of over 700Bn. This is what we in finance like to call a rounding difference... The question really as I see it is whether we think tax should be increased next year, effectivley letting whichever government off the hook of saving money, or whether we as taxpayers should see the bloated public sector gets it own house in order without another dig into our pockets to try and sort out their mess. Pay only matches the private sector at the top - ie boardroom level, the rest of us wankers get fooking stiffed. Heartily agree about inefficiencies and not being able to sack the lazy wankers that give us all a bad name - fook I'd like to shoot most of the ****s myself. Pensions are a bit of a bugbear and should be based on mean salary rather than final salary as there are some ****s at directorate level who work for a year and then retire on a massive amount. The biggest effeciency saving would be telling Deloitte and all those other consultant wankers to fook off - £1000 a day to tell you what you already know (if you had half a brain which management clearly don't). The problem is that too many people talk a good story and do fook all or have no idea of how that particular department runs. We are restructuring at the moment and they have seconded some twat from HR to try and sort out the industrial side of things, who is making a complete balls up. We are stuck with computer systems that don't work and have been forced upon us because management has decided that they have spent too much money designing these to let them go rather than hold the private companies to account over their failings. :@ Sorry rant over. My bugbear is that the public sector always takes the blame when the private sector fails - the only reason the deficit is so big is because the fooking banks played god and lost and the govt had to step in to stop us all getting fooked. (I'm not saying Labour didn't have a rather large hand in allowing this to happen) The cuts that will be made will be in things like Surestep - a small but invaluble maternity provision that allows women to go and get help (financial and counselling etc) and other small semi community based projects that make a real difference. Taxes should be increased anyway to accomodate spending on essential items such as Health, Education etc and they should cut Trident and all the rest of the military bollox, get everyone out of Iraq and Afghanistan and save a fortune.
BoneDog Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 I've just heard that UKIP are going to pull Britain out of the EU if they get power! Very big if, but they might get a vote from me just for that reason. Are they a bit racist though cos I know nothing about them?
lou Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 I've just heard that UKIP are going to pull Britain out of the EU if they get power! Very big if, but they might get a vote from me just for that reason. Are they a bit racist though cos I know nothing about them? slightly more left wing than Hitler I would no more vote for UKIP than the BNP to be honest. <_<
Guest Bilo Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 I've just heard that UKIP are going to pull Britain out of the EU if they get power! Very big if, but they might get a vote from me just for that reason. Are they a bit racist though cos I know nothing about them? Racist might be a bit strong but they are definitely to the right of the Tories. They want to be tough on immigration, certainly tougher than any of the mainstream parties. I do seem to remember them getting all menstrual when Honest Dave called them a bunch of closet racists though. Personally I wouldn't vote for them because as frustrating as some EU policy can be, I believe membership of it is a good thing.
Benji Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 Racist might be a bit strong but they are definitely to the right of the Tories. They want to be tough on immigration, certainly tougher than any of the mainstream parties. I do seem to remember them getting all menstrual when Honest Dave called them a bunch of closet racists though. Personally I wouldn't vote for them because as frustrating as some EU policy can be, I believe membership of it is a good thing. Did you see Nigel Farage's attack on the new EU President though? That was priceless and almost a vote winner for me.
Guest Bilo Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 Did you see Nigel Farage's attack on the new EU President though? That was priceless and almost a vote winner for me. I seem to remember him tearing Tony Blair apart at the EU Parliament as well. He's a good debater, that much I'll grant him.
lou Posted 11 April 2010 Posted 11 April 2010 I seem to remember him tearing Tony Blair apart at the EU Parliament as well. He's a good debater, that much I'll grant him. If thats what wins votes Im voting for Finnegan and Lisa then!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.