Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

1 Million Must Be Sacked!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

http://tpa.typepad.com/bettergovernment/2008/05/quangos-the-uns.html

* There are 1,162 quangos in the UK, running at a total cost to the taxpayer of £64 billion, equivalent to £2,550 per household.

* Even under the Cabinet Office’s restrictive definition of quangos, the cost of these bodies has risen 50% in the last ten years.

* UK quangos now employ an army of almost 700,000 bureaucrats.

* Even the Government itself does not know the full extent of the unaccountable quango industry, which range from the massive e.g. Job Centre Plus (Staff: 70,042, Cost: £3.5 billion) and the Courts Service (Staff: 19,986, Cost: £704.8 million); to the bizarre e.g. the British Potato Council (Staff: 49); or the West Northants Development Corporation (Staff: 34, Cost: £15.3 million)

* When the total number of quangos is added to the other government subsidiaries such as local authorities and NHS trusts, the total number of organisations controlled by the UK Government rises to 2,063, costing the taxpayer £257 billion and employing over 5.1 million people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep typical management. Eagar to save their own worthless ars£s. It always makes perfect sense to start trimming the tree from its base.

Managers are worth there weight in gold.

I would suggest a cull in pointless management, but as they see themselves as essential that won't happen. But if they cut the workforce what's the point of all the managers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

>The report said that because turnover rates are so high in the public sector, “relatively few” involuntary redundancies would be needed to reduce the overall headcount.

If people are moving being public sector jobs then this will not be true. You can't have high turnover when there are no more jobs to jump to.

I think a mass cull of the public sector is unavoidable, any alternative seems impossible. The next government will implement these cuts but no party can announce this as policy for obvious reasons.

VMR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they all take a 100% pay cut for 1 year, then we can pay back last years deficit. :unsure:

A nice way of explaining the scale of the problem.

I predict the slashing policy will be done by a new "emergency deficit reduction" organisation which can be used to deflect the flak from whichever policians are in power.

I am fascinated by how this is going to play out after the election. Get ready for many public services to go on strike for months when their pensions get slashed and wages reduced. Stock up on benefit claim forms while you still can :)

VMR.

Edited by VeryMeanReversion
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am fascinated by how this is going to play out after the election. Get ready for many public services to go on strike for months when their pensions get slashed and wages reduced.

Which is why they won't slash pensions and wages in the public sector.

They will put taxes up.

It will take 20 years of natural wastage to get the public sector cut down to size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Managers are worth there weight in gold.

I would suggest a cull in pointless management, but as they see themselves as essential that won't happen. But if they cut the workforce what's the point of all the managers?

Melt them down and use them to pay off the debt?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Laffer curve says no.

In the spirit of compromise, just put taxes up for public sector workers to pay for themselves.

VMR.

I can't see you can argue 'Laffer curve says no'. Laffer curve says 'if tax rates are 100% there is no incentive to earn money, so no tax is paid'.

We're nowhere near the point where people will give up work if tax rates go up - on the basis that it is no longer worth their while working. We are NOWHERE near that point.

At the moment net borrowing is falling - some dirty baarstaards are paying down debt - instead of doing the decent thing and spending it to create demand. That money is clearly available to be taxed.

Go to the High Street on a Saturday and look at the disposable income being spent. On a Friday evening around here the roads are awash with scooters with lads delivering Pizzas etc. There is still loads of money to tax.

All I'm saying is it is a lot easier to raise tax than cut public sector spending. If New Labour get elected again, taxes will go up in preference to public sector spending cuts.

In terms of trying to get out of the mess we're in, it strikes me as the lesser of two evils.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see you can argue 'Laffer curve says no'. Laffer curve says 'if tax rates are 100% there is no incentive to earn money, so no tax is paid'.

We're nowhere near the point where people will give up work if tax rates go up - on the basis that it is no longer worth their while working. We are NOWHERE near that point.

At the moment net borrowing is falling - some dirty baarstaards are paying down debt - instead of doing the decent thing and spending it to create demand. That money is clearly available to be taxed.

Go to the High Street on a Saturday and look at the disposable income being spent. On a Friday evening around here the roads are awash with scooters with lads delivering Pizzas etc. There is still loads of money to tax.

All I'm saying is it is a lot easier to raise tax than cut public sector spending. If New Labour get elected again, taxes will go up in preference to public sector spending cuts.

In terms of trying to get out of the mess we're in, it strikes me as the lesser of two evils.

If I worked in the public sector I would say that tax rises were the lesser evil. That way I would not be at risk of loosing my job although I would have to pay more tax. If I worked in the private sector I would say that tax rises wre the greater evil as I would have to pay them to keep someone in the public sector in a job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Potato Council

They exist! :blink:

I thought it had to be a joke.....

Read the "Death of Grass" and you'll discover how important potatoes are

Fourth most important food crop in the world behind rice, wheat and corn

There was a story about some health board in glasgow trying to get people to cut down on eating chips. It proved to be a disaster as potato, fried or not, was the only vegetable the lardarses were eating, and many developed scurvy due to an absolute lack of vitamin C from other sources.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see you can argue 'Laffer curve says no'. Laffer curve says 'if tax rates are 100% there is no incentive to earn money, so no tax is paid'.

In terms of trying to get out of the mess we're in, it strikes me as the lesser of two evils.

They are both evils indeed. You either take the money in tax, reducing spending power and go into recession or you cut down public spending, reduce jobs and go into recession. You can't bring down the deficit and not make the recession worse.

Personally, I think we are gonna get both regardless of who gets in. My preference is to cut the public sector as huge amounts of money is needed to create not many jobs. But them I work in the private sector like most of the working population so I would say that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest absolutezero

Laffer curve says no.

In the spirit of compromise, just put taxes up for public sector workers to pay for themselves.

VMR.

The theoretical Laffer curve can say what it wants.

They'll fiddle it somehow.

All the fundamentals said HPC should be WELL underway but they fiddled that too so now it's watered down (still there but not at the level we expected).

Link to post
Share on other sites

We're nowhere near the point where people will give up work if tax rates go up - on the basis that it is no longer worth their while working. We are NOWHERE near that point.

I'm already at the point where I don't work extra due to the tax. All my earnings at the 40% rate are dumped into a pension and I now turn down contract work unless they do cash in hand.

All I'm saying is it is a lot easier to raise tax than cut public sector spending.

I can agree that it's easier, I just dont think it would ever raise the sums required.

VMR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.