Mal Volio Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 The problem is that those managing have increased their take beyond both their value That's a subjective judgment though. From where I'm sitting, it's a fairly good deal. We get OK (not brilliant) public services and in return pay less tax than most other developed countries with similar levels of infrastructure/ and what the country can affort to pay. That's politics. We can decide that we want to cut back public services, fine, but we don't need to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonboy Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Cut this for a start:Youth Services And before people start bleating on about kids needing a community centre most of the funding for services such as this doesn't go on community centers it goes on 'empowering young people' to become NuLabour thinkers. Coffee... down.... w-r-o-n-g w--a---y. Actually maybe the prioritisation is better in the hands of the politicians. Things you never thought you'd hear yourself say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Volio Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 You didn't deal with my point. Did you make one ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonboy Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Anyone with 'diversity' in their job title to start with.Basically anyone who got their job through the Indy job section's a good start. This is giong to be fun That's me down the job centre plus then! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 .Why oh why oh why don't people READ THE DAMN THREAD before wading in ? Hmm ? Seriously - these (choice, constraints on spending) are the stock responses of the anti-public sector crowd and we've covered each of them 3 or 4 times already. While completely ignoring the morla arguments against having a public sector. Is theft and extortion immoral? Yes. Then the public sector is immoral. Argument over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OurDayWillCome Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I'm not sure any decent business would ever touch Business Link with a bargepole. Only when there's free money on offer. It's the taxpayer money tree, unfortunately the government have plucked all the leaves of and now it's dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNACR Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 That's me down the job centre plus then! Nah, I'd axe Job Centre Plus as well - sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abharrisson Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 This is off-topic really but, what really winds me up is the 'we've got nothing to do'. This has been a standard refrain for decades. I guarantee you could carpet the entire country with youth clubs and it'd make no difference. True you need to have some form of ambition or desire in order to structure your day.... not having any isn't going to be helped by providing a youth club you have no desire to get involved with..... however while it might not encourage the feckless and the violent to suddenly come in off the streets and hand in their knives lets not forget though in every community there are a proportion of parents doing their level best for kids who just want to get along... these guys don't appear in the crime stats as anything other than victims but the money provided for youth clubs while probably needing better application is meant to help those folk and I am all for that... save the ones we can save. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faithman Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Maybe you do, I think you need to read my post again. Let me enlighten you - we don't. Currently you are spending money that we don't have and putting it on credit. You appear to understand the suffering caused by a reduction in pay, but are nevertheless storing this up for us, in future tax rises. Hence, many dislike the irresponsible public 'servant' attitude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OurDayWillCome Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Coffee... down.... w-r-o-n-g w--a---y.Actually maybe the prioritisation is better in the hands of the politicians. Things you never thought you'd hear yourself say. Could you work out what they actually do for young people? I left the site dazed and confused Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Volio Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Did you make one ? Oh, OK, was it this: It doesn't come out of our pockets if we are not forced to pay for it! Where do you think it comes from ? The money that oils every business comes from the people who buy its services, or from the people who buy the services of the people who buy its services. What we all do is exchange our labour for cash, and then spend it If a company cocks up and has to increase its prices, we pay. If it has to dig into reserves, then it's essentially using money we already paid it. Taking the example I gave of fGW - it's even clearer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OurDayWillCome Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 but the money provided for youth clubs while probably needing better application is meant to help those folk and I am all for that... save the ones we can save. But Youth Services money doesn't filter down that far, maybe a small proportion does but the rest is squandered on weekend workshops for mainly middle-class children whose parents want them to get involved in the Youth Parliament or other similar schemes as it looks good on their CV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stars Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Did you make one ? Actually, yes You wrote - The money comes out of all of our pockets, either way. If FirstGreatwestern **** up, they either increase the fares or demand a bung from the public purse. To which i replied - It doesn't come out of our pockets if we are not forced to pay for it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepLurker Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Indeed. But the value to the people of the community of the nurse/medicine woman/whatever is such that they're happy to support her. In the same way, the guys who are good fighters are supported because they stop the nextdoor village from nicking the crops and reaping the women. In your model, the farmer is the only person with control over food and resource, and if he lives in the community he has to trade. Now that could be a model for private or public sector depending how you twist it. In my (very) contrived example a nurse might well have a very high value, but she is utterly dependent on the farmer. So her value to the community is less than that of the farmer (I'll point out once again for the hard-of-thinking that this is a practical viewpoint, not necessarily a moral one). Your step sideways into "protection" is very interesting. The "good fighters" are essential to any community because, as you point out, they protect the rest of the community. However history is full of examples of the "good fighters" taking power and becoming effectively rulers - in fact, pretty much every society in history has gone down this path with the farmers living in abject misery whilst those who are utterly dependent on them live a life of luxury. Effectively, the tail is wagging the dog. Some on this thread are arguing that this is what is happening to the State at the moment - something that was created to help the community is effectively taking it over. My contrived example was all about pointing out where's the dog and where's the tail - and the public sector is the tail. It cannot live without the dog, but too many people seem to have forgotten that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Volio Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 In my (very) contrived example a nurse might well have a very high value, but she is utterly dependent on the farmer. As the farmer is utterly dependent on the Big Lads when the next village come, and as the farmer is utterly dependent on the medicine woman when he or his only son tread on a rusty nail and are at death's door. That's more than a moral dependency. In both cases the farmer's life and his farm are at risk. There have been medicine people and official fighters in communities since recorded history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 As the farmer is utterly dependent on the Big Lads when the next village come, and as the farmer is utterly dependent on the medicine woman when he or his only son tread on a rusty nail and are at death's door. That's more than a moral dependency. In both cases the farmer's life and his farm are at risk. There have been medicine people and official fighters in communities since recorded history. No clue what this has to do with the state. The state is the big lads from the next village. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seenoevil Posted August 20, 2009 Author Share Posted August 20, 2009 I am the original topic starter.And to bring the topic 'back' if you will, I quote below from 'INJIN's post. ..... "While completely ignoring the moral arguments against having a public sector. Is theft and extortion immoral? Yes. Then the public sector is immoral. Argument over". These are exactly the comments I wished to highlight. To simply state the public sector are immoral theives with no supported evidence to give credence? The public sector extends to Nurses and Health Workers. I do not advocate they are beyond reproach, but highlight how 'weak' any arguement around immoraility and theiving quickly becomes, and how easily it is exposed. The comments DO however expose peoples TRUE feelings, and reinforce Public Sector bashing is alive and well. We are here to discuss 'why' however, and such comments I feel translate very well for all to draw their own conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNACR Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 But Youth Services money doesn't filter down that far, maybe a small proportion does but the rest is squandered on weekend workshops for mainly middle-class children whose parents want them to get involved in the Youth Parliament or other similar schemes as it looks good on their CV. I sponsored a scheme to help kids get professional sports coaching. All the people who ran it used to moan that the only kids that turned up were middle class with good parents - and they almost seemed to resent helping those kids. However, all the schemes were in pretty rough areas and I wouldn't have said the parents were 'middles class', they just cared about their kids. They should help the willing kids who want to get on instead of dicking around trying to turn themselves into the real-life version of Michelle Pfeiffer in that film where she's in some rough school or any other version of the same largely fictional cliche. It was for that reason that I stopped sponsoring it. I felt in deliberately trying to find the poorest kid to make the largest transformation to their life it was actually more about the egos/self esteem of the people running the scheme than the kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepLurker Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 As the farmer is utterly dependent on the Big Lads when the next village come, and as the farmer is utterly dependent on the medicine woman when he or his only son tread on a rusty nail and are at death's door. That's more than a moral dependency. In both cases the farmer's life and his farm are at risk. There have been medicine people and official fighters in communities since recorded history. Sorry, but you're wrong. If you're stuck all alone on a desert island with no hope of rescue, what do you do? Become a nurse? Become a warrior? Or become a farmer, and hope that you'll never be sick or get raided by cannibals? When the size of the community grows then it becomes more efficient for certain members to specialise - to become nurses or fighters. But it all starts with a farmer. He's the only member of a community who is essential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I am the original topic starter.And to bring the topic 'back' if you will, I quote below from 'INJIN's post. ....."While completely ignoring the moral arguments against having a public sector. Is theft and extortion immoral? Yes. Then the public sector is immoral. Argument over". These are exactly the comments I wished to highlight. To simply state the public sector are immoral theives with no supported evidence to give credence? The public sector extends to Nurses and Health Workers. I do not advocate they are beyond reproach, but highlight how 'weak' any arguement around immoraility and theiving quickly becomes, and how easily it is exposed. The comments DO however expose peoples TRUE feelings, and reinforce Public Sector bashing is alive and well. We are here to discuss 'why' however, and such comments I feel translate very well for all to draw their own conclusions. Taxes - extorted payments from the unwilling. Fact. Extortion is immoral. Another fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 (edited) l Edited August 20, 2009 by Injin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mal Volio Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 But it all starts with a farmer. He's the only member of a community who is essential. If you set up a situation woth only one person in it, then that person is obviously the only essential one. As soon as there are more people, there are interdependencies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePiltdownMan Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 If you set up a situation woth only one person in it, then that person is obviously the only essential one.As soon as there are more people, there are interdependencies. These dependencies don't have to exist though do they? Some people could choose not to associate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weebag Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Taxes - extorted payments from the unwilling. Fact. Extortion is immoral. Another fact. Extortion is immoral I agree. Ref taxes, people would generally prefer to have the public services than not. I know - I have asked. Thefore taxes are not extorted. You ought to do your own survey like I just have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePiltdownMan Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Extortion is immoral I agree.Ref taxes, people would generally prefer to have the public services than not. I know - I have asked. Thefore taxes are not extorted. You ought to do your own survey like I just have. In that case why not make taxes voluntary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.