bWize
Well-known member
- Nov 6, 2007
- 1,688
This... If everything was top notch and efficient then I would.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Would you pay more tax if it meant protecting public services?
- Thread starter Herr Tubthumper
- Start date
This... If everything was top notch and efficient then I would.
seagullsovergrimsby
#cpfctinpotclub
VAT was 15% in 1984 , The Tories scrapped the 8% and 12½% rates and introduced a single 15% rate in 1979.
Just making the point that money is not always the answer.Throwing money at the NHS without ongoing reform will not solve long term problems.
Competent communication should be a relatively cheap and cost effective improvement to implement.
spring hall convert
Well-known member
It's an amazing slight of hand that succesive Governments of all colours have managed to convince us that they can't be trusted to organise the services that we own in a disciplined and efficient manner to the extent that we welcome the theft of them from us as if it is some profoundly superb bit of management.
The OP's question is a hypothetical one. The Conservatives won a majority based around the willful and ideological abandonment of essential services.
Last edited:
Yes, but only on condition that it went only on front-line staff, not on yet more management.
Too much public sector money over the last 30 years has been wasted on middle-managers, strategic co-ordinators, 'quality assurance officers' (in universities), external consultants, business managers, Assistant Deputy Directors of Photopcopier Toner Procurement (OK,I made the last one up), etc, etc, etc.
Mrs Peteinblack and I both work in the public sector (my wife in the NHS, and me in a university), and we can't do our jobs properly because the layers of bureaucrats force us to spend more and more time on 'strategic reviews', ticking boxes, repeated restructurings, endless audits (not financial, but administrative or procedural), 'away-days' for training purposes, appraisals, peer reviews, business plans, and countless meetings about meetings.
That said, a lot of this bureaucratic bullshit has been generated by all governments over the last 30 years in the name of 'modernisation' and improving performance/efficiency - but it's actually counter-productive, because we now serve our bureaucrat masters rather than the public, and do paperwork instead of the job itself.
One example: a House of Commons inquiry a few years ago found that Probation Officers spend 75% of their time at their desks dealing with paperwork or sat in front of a computer screen rather than actually dealing directly with young offenders, - but they then get blamed when youth re-offending increases, and told that this shows how incompetent they are, and so they need to be more closely managed or privatised.
In fact, cut 50% of these over-paid, hyper-active but mostly incompetent managers and bureaucrats, and that itself would free up huge sums which could then be spent on police officers, nurses and teachers - without the need actually to increase spending overall or raise taxes.
Too much public sector money over the last 30 years has been wasted on middle-managers, strategic co-ordinators, 'quality assurance officers' (in universities), external consultants, business managers, Assistant Deputy Directors of Photopcopier Toner Procurement (OK,I made the last one up), etc, etc, etc.
Mrs Peteinblack and I both work in the public sector (my wife in the NHS, and me in a university), and we can't do our jobs properly because the layers of bureaucrats force us to spend more and more time on 'strategic reviews', ticking boxes, repeated restructurings, endless audits (not financial, but administrative or procedural), 'away-days' for training purposes, appraisals, peer reviews, business plans, and countless meetings about meetings.
That said, a lot of this bureaucratic bullshit has been generated by all governments over the last 30 years in the name of 'modernisation' and improving performance/efficiency - but it's actually counter-productive, because we now serve our bureaucrat masters rather than the public, and do paperwork instead of the job itself.
One example: a House of Commons inquiry a few years ago found that Probation Officers spend 75% of their time at their desks dealing with paperwork or sat in front of a computer screen rather than actually dealing directly with young offenders, - but they then get blamed when youth re-offending increases, and told that this shows how incompetent they are, and so they need to be more closely managed or privatised.
In fact, cut 50% of these over-paid, hyper-active but mostly incompetent managers and bureaucrats, and that itself would free up huge sums which could then be spent on police officers, nurses and teachers - without the need actually to increase spending overall or raise taxes.
Rubbish, how can you say 'wilful and ideological abandonment of essential services'. What a load of shite. The Conservatives won a majority based around sound management of the economy and the fact that the Labour Party led by Ed Miliband were unfit for Government.
Lower West Stander
Well-known member
No - I pay enough tax thanks
spring hall convert
Well-known member
You're entitled to your opinion, as am I. No need to get your knickers in a twist.
alfredmizen
Banned
- Mar 11, 2015
- 6,342
He didnt, he simply took the opposite view to you, whats the matter , would you have liked him to put some kisses at the end?
spring hall convert
Well-known member
"What a load of shite."
Chatlotte Church is famously crap at looking after her own money, her financial opinions are worth absolutely jack.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
Perhaps I am missing your point here, but are you saying that you are quite happy to hand over shed loads of more cash to any government as you trust them implicitly to spend it wisely and in the most efficient manner? I'm shocked if you are. Any organisation can save money by doing things more efficiently. Try living in a country where the government 100% CANNOT be trusted to provide anything, then perhaps you would have a more questioning nature of any government.
- Thread starter
- #53
spring hall convert
Well-known member
I'm making the point that they have deliberately sold us the lie that funding public services is bad and selling stuff that we own at knockdown rates to their mates is good. Therefore, I find the premise of the question completely hypothetical becuase without major changes to how the country is run, it's never going to happen.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,089
An HMRC study done in 2010/11 calculated that the total of all forms of tax paid by people earning were as follows:
£25K - 36%
£40K - 38%
£80K - 43%
£150K - 48%.
I think that in addition to tax it would also make sense to factor in pension contributions because people - if they aren't already - will soon be obliged via Auto-Enrolment to save for their retirement. Therefore, those figures are effectively 40-50% already.
£25K - 36%
£40K - 38%
£80K - 43%
£150K - 48%.
I think that in addition to tax it would also make sense to factor in pension contributions because people - if they aren't already - will soon be obliged via Auto-Enrolment to save for their retirement. Therefore, those figures are effectively 40-50% already.
- Thread starter
- #56
Brighton Mod
Its All Too Beautiful
Protect Public services from what?
sir albion
New member
With the amount of foreign aid we pay and the hideous billions that are wasted elsewhere it's clear to see where the money should come from and it's not the British tax payer that's for sure.
The nhs is crippled by the middle man and agency workers...Time someone took some responsibility for the tax payers money.
The nhs is crippled by the middle man and agency workers...Time someone took some responsibility for the tax payers money.
banjo
GOSBTS
If she comes round and shows me here pubic service I'm in.