Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: mantahatch on 23 March 2011, 13:29:23
-
Don't fill your car up yet, wait till after 6pm. Duty dropping by 1p :y
Time to buy a V8
-
Don't fill your car up yet, wait till after 6pm. Duty dropping by 1p :y
Time to buy a V8
Fair enough. :y :y
-
I wonder how quick all the garages will run out and change there signs?
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
-
errr i thought it was not dropping, its just the 1p raise has been delayed until 2012.
Big bloody deal, like 1p is going to make a difference for or against!
-
errr i thought it was not dropping, its just the 1p raise has been delayed until 2012.
Big bloody deal, like 1p is going to make a difference for or against!
No------fuel duty escalator scrapped. Planned 4p duty rise in April stopped till next year. And 1p reduction in duty from 6pm this evening is what he just said.
-
i guarantee you it won't budge the price, of course increase it by a penny or two and the signs are changed before the chancellors sat down ;D ;D
-
And VED to rise by inflation only, not a million pounds as was mooted earlier.
-
Hurray, we are all saved.
Omega resale values will now rocket! :y
-
Hurray, we are all saved.
Omega resale values will now rocket! :y
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hurray, we are all saved.
Omega resale values will now rocket! :y
I thought David Icke was the saviour, not David Cameron? :-? ;D
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
should be 31p a litre >:(
-
guess what, my local put his petrol up by 1 pence a ltr this morning.
merchant bankers >:(
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
should be 31p a litre >:(
But better than a kick in the Testicles ::) ::)
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
should be 31p a litre >:(
But better than a kick in the Testicles ::) ::)
I'd rather they kept their 1p and let me kick Gordon Brown in the nuts!
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
should be 31p a litre >:(
But better than a kick in the Testicles ::) ::)
I'd rather they kept their 1p and let me kick Gordon Brown in the nuts!
They don't need the 1p for you to do that ;) :D
-
i think every garage has increased today by 1p, so that it makes no difference come 6pm
the people that make these decisions dont know what its like to work properly just to keep a roof over our heads
all i'm doing is working to pay the bills. Having evaluated my situation over the last few weeks, i cant physically afford to have a life, all i'm doing is living to work
thanks a f****** bunch government, you'll be the death of me
-
With the personal allowances going up we shall all be 90p better off a week, add that to the fuel decrease and ...BINGO....we are all rich :y
Where the hell do these politicians come from >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
Was there any increase in the tax? Believe the 3/3.2 post march '01 was in a temporary band until today?
-
Was there any increase in the tax? Believe the 3/3.2 post march '01 was in a temporary band until today?
just an inflation rise I believe,dunno how much though :-/
edit ,seems that a post 2001 mig 3.2 will go from £245 to £260 a year :'(
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
should be 31p a litre >:(
But better than a kick in the Testicles ::) ::)
I'd rather they kept their 1p and let me kick Gordon Brown in the nuts!
They don't need the 1p for you to do that ;) :D
Fully understand your burning desire to bruise the Browner's knackers, but not sure he had much to do with todays events.... :)
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
surely you didnt expect it to be more >:(
-
i guarantee you it won't budge the price, of course increase it by a penny or two and the signs are changed before the chancellors sat down ;D ;D
Correct.....i went past a couple of garages on the way home....after 6pm....still at same price they were this morning......just a 1p profit increase for the garage owners ;) ::)
I chucked in another £40 worth at 139.9 :(
That'll last me maybe until tomorrow evening, just :-/
-
Was there any increase in the tax? Believe the 3/3.2 post march '01 was in a temporary band until today?
just an inflation rise I believe,dunno how much though :-/
edit ,seems that a post 2001 mig 3.2 will go from £245 to £260 a year :'(
better than the original 400
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
surely you didnt expect it to be more >:(
It could have been more if the reduction in government income due to the fuel price reduction was offset by increasing the taxation on the oil companys that are doing very well at the moment due to the high price of crude oil
-
The Daily Mash has all the news and insight on the budget. :y :D
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/osborne-hands-average-family-%c2%a345-to-give-to-british-gas-201103233652/
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/osborne-to-close-gap-between-private-jet-owners-and-private-jet-renters-201103223648/
-
Id rather be saving a penny than be paying a penny more but as said just not enough. ;)
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
surely you didnt expect it to be more >:(
It could have been more if the reduction in government income due to the fuel price reduction was offset by increasing the taxation on the oil companys that are doing very well at the moment due to the high price of crude oil
Note though the levy on North Sea oil companies is going up from 20% to 30% 8-) 8-) Around £2 billion per year each apparently:y :y :y :y
-
The Daily Mash has all the news and insight on the budget. :y :D
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/osborne-hands-average-family-%c2%a345-to-give-to-british-gas-201103233652/
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/osborne-to-close-gap-between-private-jet-owners-and-private-jet-renters-201103223648/
I do like tha daily mash, makes me laff. ;D
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
surely you didnt expect it to be more >:(
It could have been more if the reduction in government income due to the fuel price reduction was offset by increasing the taxation on the oil companys that are doing very well at the moment due to the high price of crude oil
that wouldn't have worked.
knock 20p per litre off the tax, then tax the oil companies to make up the difference.
so the oil companies put petrol up by 25p/l to cover the extra cost.
oil company makes more money. we pay more. :(
-
I think everytime an under-fire tory resorts to the line "the mess the last government left" or some such a caption should automatically appear at the bottom of the screen "Tories agreed with Labour spending plans at the time and would have matched them pound for pound".
Whats disappointing is I appear to be the only person pointing it out (for months) - seems the right-wing media are letting the tories off on this one and have done since the election :o
I'm sure eventually, when the Tories have once again decimated whats left of industry and strangled any glimmer of growth the truth will dawn that they know how to keep the rich rich and rely on them to fix it - aint gonna happen Gideon - the rich (as you should know) look after themselves and no one else, thats where governments come in - and yet again unemployment seems to be the price worth paying - i doubt Gideon or Dave (or Nick for that matter) have ever worried about money for a second in their privileged, work-shy lives hence the willingness to destroy jobs and decimate programmes designed to help the most needy (and least likely to vote) in the country :(
oh, thanks for the 1p off a litre tho, but you added 3p in tax at the start of the year...remember? so another 3p off would actually make it 1p cheaper - is this clear? I know you assume that anyone not rich enough to ignore fuel taxation is probably too stupid to work this one out ;D
-
What would you do ?
-
1p per litre, not enough I'm afraid :(
surely you didnt expect it to be more >:(
It could have been more if the reduction in government income due to the fuel price reduction was offset by increasing the taxation on the oil companys that are doing very well at the moment due to the high price of crude oil
Note though the levy on North Sea oil companies is going up from 20% to 30% 8-) 8-) Around £2 billion per year each apparently:y :y :y :y
[/highlight]
Wouldn't one be rather naive think that that wont be passed either directly or indirectly onto the consumer ?
-
All the garages in Ashford have put 2p on all fuel in the last week, so it's still a penny dearer, and another thing, is he still missing the fact that 90% of fuel is still above £1.30 a litre? What he should've done is take 30p of the 80p duty that's on fuel.
-
I think everytime an under-fire tory resorts to the line "the mess the last government left" or some such a caption should automatically appear at the bottom of the screen "Tories agreed with Labour spending plans at the time and would have matched them pound for pound".
Whats disappointing is I appear to be the only person pointing it out (for months) - seems the right-wing media are letting the tories off on this one and have done since the election :o
I'm sure eventually, when the Tories have once again decimated whats left of industry and strangled any glimmer of growth the truth will dawn that they know how to keep the rich rich and rely on them to fix it - aint gonna happen Gideon - the rich (as you should know) look after themselves and no one else, thats where governments come in - and yet again unemployment seems to be the price worth paying - i doubt Gideon or Dave (or Nick for that matter) have ever worried about money for a second in their privileged, work-shy lives hence the willingness to destroy jobs and decimate programmes designed to help the most needy (and least likely to vote) in the country :(
oh, thanks for the 1p off a litre tho, but you added 3p in tax at the start of the year...remember? so another 3p off would actually make it 1p cheaper - is this clear? I know you assume that anyone not rich enough to ignore fuel taxation is probably too stupid to work this one out ;D
Well said BJ, but it'll be the same old story any Conservative follower will just say all this needs to happen thanks to Labour, yes I'll admit Labour did a shit job, but the Conservative have come in and are set to make it a hell of a lot worse.
Apparently they've changed what they said though according to some folk because they didn't know the extent of the problem. Ok I'm sure that's true ::)
-
I think everytime an under-fire tory resorts to the line "the mess the last government left" or some such a caption should automatically appear at the bottom of the screen "Tories agreed with Labour spending plans at the time and would have matched them pound for pound".
Whats disappointing is I appear to be the only person pointing it out (for months) - seems the right-wing media are letting the tories off on this one and have done since the election :o
I'm sure eventually, when the Tories have once again decimated whats left of industry and strangled any glimmer of growth the truth will dawn that they know how to keep the rich rich and rely on them to fix it - aint gonna happen Gideon - the rich (as you should know) look after themselves and no one else, thats where governments come in - and yet again unemployment seems to be the price worth paying - i doubt Gideon or Dave (or Nick for that matter) have ever worried about money for a second in their privileged, work-shy lives hence the willingness to destroy jobs and decimate programmes designed to help the most needy (and least likely to vote) in the country :(
oh, thanks for the 1p off a litre tho, but you added 3p in tax at the start of the year...remember? so another 3p off would actually make it 1p cheaper - is this clear? I know you assume that anyone not rich enough to ignore fuel taxation is probably too stupid to work this one out ;D
That is not what the various business leaders have said, with them agreeing the budget should encourage business from abroad to come to the UK.
With fuel it is not only the 1p cut, but the 5p that is not going on next month that is the good news. The Government must raise income in some form or another, and I'm afraid if you drive a vehicle you are going to be hit, like smokers and drinkers.
What would you have done though BJ? Where would you raise taxes, or cut expenditure, to balance the UK books paying ten's of millions of pounds in interest payments per week on the debts created by the last Labour Government?
-
We need a civil war, there is no forces to fight us as they are too busy in libya and afganistan ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
All the garages in Ashford have put 2p on all fuel in the last week, so it's still a penny dearer, and another thing, is he still missing the fact that 90% of fuel is still above £1.30 a litre? What he should've done is take 30p of the 80p duty that's on fuel.
they did the same in se london del up 3p then down 1p
-
All the garages in Ashford have put 2p on all fuel in the last week, so it's still a penny dearer, and another thing, is he still missing the fact that 90% of fuel is still above £1.30 a litre? What he should've done is take 30p of the 80p duty that's on fuel.
they did the same in se london del up 3p then down 1p
They will do mate, they'll get it one way or another they'll just cover it up as best as possible >:(
-
All the garages in Ashford have put 2p on all fuel in the last week, so it's still a penny dearer, and another thing, is he still missing the fact that 90% of fuel is still above £1.30 a litre? What he should've done is take 30p of the 80p duty that's on fuel.
They've got to get the money to dig us out of Brown's hole somehow.. I suppose they could have put it on income tax instead, eh?
-
All the garages in Ashford have put 2p on all fuel in the last week, so it's still a penny dearer, and another thing, is he still missing the fact that 90% of fuel is still above £1.30 a litre? What he should've done is take 30p of the 80p duty that's on fuel.
They've got to get the money to dig us out of Brown's hole somehow.. I suppose they could have put it on income tax instead, eh?
All I can say is read BJ's post, it summed it up nicely.
-
No better or worse than expected.
A positive was the reduction in the required borrowing.
As long as the Labour scum dont get back in for a few more terms the mess might just about get sorted out.
-
No better or worse than expected.
A positive was the reduction in the required borrowing.
As long as the Labour scum dont get back in for a few more terms the mess might just about get sorted out.
Just in time for the next party to get us right back in the Brown stuff again ::) ::)
TBH, I think the Budget was very realistic for the current state of the economy. At least they haven't used the "Public Health" route for taxing Alcohol.
As with any budget, there have been increases in taxes (in some areas)... Isn't that what Budgets are about though :-/ ::)
-
What a pleasant surprise this morning to hear Osborne say that it wasn't a 1 p reduction but a SIX p reduction. That has put another £100 on each of my Omegas overnight.
I love the selective use of CPI and RPI. very clever as most folk don't spot that. Good use of smoke and mirrors.
Nice time bomb we are sitting on with fuel, energy, food costs all spiralling seemingly out of control. It only needs interest rates to go up and then up go mortgages cost of business borrowing (assuming you can find a bank prepared to lend).
There is a silver lining in the clouds as there will be plenty of arms sales to be made during and after the various conflicts we have our fingers in. A Spanish company had just upgraded the Libyan air traffic control! :y
-
All the garages in Ashford have put 2p on all fuel in the last week, so it's still a penny dearer, and another thing, is he still missing the fact that 90% of fuel is still above £1.30 a litre? What he should've done is take 30p of the 80p duty that's on fuel.
They've got to get the money to dig us out of Brown's hole somehow.. I suppose they could have put it on income tax instead, eh?
All I can say is read BJ's post, it summed it up nicely.
What it doesnt do is answer the question of where the money will come from. Bearing in mind that if this country was a company the recievers would have been called in a long time ago.The Socialists all seem to think there is a money tree in the treasury garden and if they want more money they can just go and pick some more from the tree. It was this mentality from socialist chancellors which has put the countries economy in the worst state it has ever been in. The amount of borrowing is nothing short of staggering, and it has to be stopped and then it has to be paid back.
The only way for the Govt to raise money is to tax peoples income and assets, and Brown cynically borrowed countless billions, knowing that in the future his successors would have to take the money back from the citizens of this country.
Personally, I think they should be cutting public spending much more than they are, and cutting taxes for those who create wealth. :y
-
We need a civil war, there is no forces to fight us as they are too busy in libya and afganistan ;D ;D ;D ;D
They swear allegiance to the Queen not the government
-
All the garages in Ashford have put 2p on all fuel in the last week, so it's still a penny dearer, and another thing, is he still missing the fact that 90% of fuel is still above £1.30 a litre? What he should've done is take 30p of the 80p duty that's on fuel.
They've got to get the money to dig us out of Brown's hole somehow.. I suppose they could have put it on income tax instead, eh?
All I can say is read BJ's post, it summed it up nicely.
What it doesnt do is answer the question of where the money will come from. Bearing in mind that if this country was a company the recievers would have been called in a long time ago.The Socialists all seem to think there is a money tree in the treasury garden and if they want more money they can just go and pick some more from the tree. It was this mentality from socialist chancellors which has put the countries economy in the worst state it has ever been in. The amount of borrowing is nothing short of staggering, and it has to be stopped and then it has to be paid back.
The only way for the Govt to raise money is to tax peoples income and assets, and Brown cynically borrowed countless billions, knowing that in the future his successors would have to take the money back from the citizens of this country.
Personally, I think they should be cutting public spending much more than they are, and cutting taxes for those who create wealth. :y
Good idea however if it is services or jobs that creates issues. We have a number of elderly relatives who live independently by care in the community. Much cheaper than the state paying for a care home place. I also have an uncle who has spent most of his wealth on cost of his care home. The place is grim and he is treated just like the less compus mentis folk . A locked front door is the same for everyone.
Jobs? Less tax coming in and more unemployment benefit to be paid. Having said that, I have a friend working in government "healthy eating for schools". There dept has to cut costs by only 15%. How many years are they going to have the campaign before they realise you cannot educate pork?
Now waste in public sector. That is what they should concentrate on. No new computers for ten years, use existing furniture and make do. No travel to meetings use something called the Internet and so on. :y
-
All the garages in Ashford have put 2p on all fuel in the last week, so it's still a penny dearer, and another thing, is he still missing the fact that 90% of fuel is still above £1.30 a litre? What he should've done is take 30p of the 80p duty that's on fuel.
They've got to get the money to dig us out of Brown's hole somehow.. I suppose they could have put it on income tax instead, eh?
All I can say is read BJ's post, it summed it up nicely.
What it doesnt do is answer the question of where the money will come from. Bearing in mind that if this country was a company the recievers would have been called in a long time ago.The Socialists all seem to think there is a money tree in the treasury garden and if they want more money they can just go and pick some more from the tree. It was this mentality from socialist chancellors which has put the countries economy in the worst state it has ever been in. The amount of borrowing is nothing short of staggering, and it has to be stopped and then it has to be paid back.
The only way for the Govt to raise money is to tax peoples income and assets, and Brown cynically borrowed countless billions, knowing that in the future his successors would have to take the money back from the citizens of this country.
Personally, I think they should be cutting public spending much more than they are, and cutting taxes for those who create wealth. :y
Albs you've hit the nail right on the head there if the UK was a company......tories keep comparing the budget of the 4th largest economy on the planet with someone maxing out their credit card or its similar to a household budget or a corner shop - the tories have done that since Thatcher and before - its very easy to speak in those terms as people can understand it, sounds good, makes sense but a country isn't like a house or a company or a credit card - its insulting and spurious to suggest it is, now cutting cutting public expenditure in "toryworld" is tightening the belt a bit, going for one less haircut, buying cheaper coffee, sacking one of the staff...........fine for the household but what about the hairdresser losing a few quid, the gardener losing a job or the shop losing revenue? "toryworld" works if you own the house, not if you supply it or work for it - and cutting public expenditure drastically is exactly the opposite of what we should be doing - its far cheaper to gain taxpayers than gain unemployed - the tories have never understood that and still spoonfeed us the "household budget" baloney, Labour didn't do us many favours but they did create jobs and grew the economy :o
-
From an economic point of view, the same principles apply in any situation. You cannot simply spend money you dont have forever more. There will be a day of reckoning.Brown wasnt stupid, he knew this, but he planned on using every trick in the book to delay the day of reckoning until after he had retired. He built a career on lying through his teeth in any given situaton, but thankfully he got his come uppance. The first time the British electorate had the opportunity to pass judgement on him he was history. Avery cynical dishonest character, with a hell of a lot to answer for.
Labours job creation policy is one of the major factors in the current problems. It has long been known that this countries civil service was overmanned, but they actually created approx. 750,000 extra jobs in the public sector in just over a decade.
These werent genuine jobs of course, they were jobs cynically created for political reasons which every taxpayer and business has to pay for. Brown also stole many billions from private pension funds to finance the pensions for these new jobs, and in one cynical stroke, destroyed what was probably the best private pension system in the world.
Im no fan of the Tories, but these things have to be undone and put right and there is no pain free way to do it. No economy can be healthy in the long term, if the govt. employs much of the population for no good reason, other than to keep them from being unemployed. If you dont believe that, go and ask anyone who lived in the USSR.Thats how they tried to run their economy for decades, but even they had to admit in the end it simply doesnt work, as has Cuba.
Small government and incentive to work hard to better yourself should be the cornerstones of running a countries economy imo. Nothing else has ever worked, and I dont think it ever will.
-
From an economic point of view, the same principles apply in any situation. You cannot simply spend money you dont have forever more. There will be a day of reckoning.Brown wasnt stupid, he knew this, but he planned on using every trick in the book to delay the day of reckoning until after he had retired. He built a career on lying through his teeth in any given situaton, but thankfully he got his come uppance. The first time the British electorate had the opportunity to pass judgement on him he was history. Avery cynical dishonest character, with a hell of a lot to answer for.
Labours job creation policy is one of the major factors in the current problems. It has long been known that this countries civil service was overmanned, but they actually created approx. 750,000 extra jobs in the public sector in just over a decade.
These werent genuine jobs of course, they were jobs cynically created for political reasons which every taxpayer and business has to pay for. Brown also stole many billions from private pension funds to finance the pensions for these new jobs, and in one cynical stroke, destroyed what was probably the best private pension system in the world.
Im no fan of the Tories, but these things have to be undone and put right and there is no pain free way to do it. No economy can be healthy in the long term, if the govt. employs much of the population for no good reason, other than to keep them from being unemployed. If you dont believe that, go and ask anyone who lived in the USSR.Thats how they tried to run their economy for decades, but even they had to admit in the end it simply doesnt work, as has Cuba.
Small government and incentive to work hard to better yourself should be the cornerstones of running a countries economy imo. Nothing else has ever worked, and I dont think it ever will.
For me that is a great assessment and analysis Albs 8-) 8-) :y :y :y :y
-
Varche. I agree with your sentiments regarding the elderly.We have a duty to find ways to look after them properly. I seem to remember we looked after then better decades ago when the country as a whole was considerably poorer,or maybe its just my rose tinted specs.
Waste in the public sector - as I said above, we can start by abolishing the extra 750,000 "jobs" created since 97.
Where would these people find work ? I think we are all ignoring the elephant in the room. :-X.......but Gordon Brown actually used the answer as a soundbite.Pity he was lying when he said it. ;)
-
From an economic point of view, the same principles apply in any situation. You cannot simply spend money you dont have forever more. There will be a day of reckoning.Brown wasnt stupid, he knew this, but he planned on using every trick in the book to delay the day of reckoning until after he had retired. He built a career on lying through his teeth in any given situaton, but thankfully he got his come uppance. The first time the British electorate had the opportunity to pass judgement on him he was history. Avery cynical dishonest character, with a hell of a lot to answer for.
Labours job creation policy is one of the major factors in the current problems. It has long been known that this countries civil service was overmanned, but they actually created approx. 750,000 extra jobs in the public sector in just over a decade.
These werent genuine jobs of course, they were jobs cynically created for political reasons which every taxpayer and business has to pay for. Brown also stole many billions from private pension funds to finance the pensions for these new jobs, and in one cynical stroke, destroyed what was probably the best private pension system in the world.
Im no fan of the Tories, but these things have to be undone and put right and there is no pain free way to do it. No economy can be healthy in the long term, if the govt. employs much of the population for no good reason, other than to keep them from being unemployed. If you dont believe that, go and ask anyone who lived in the USSR.Thats how they tried to run their economy for decades, but even they had to admit in the end it simply doesnt work, as has Cuba.
Small government and incentive to work hard to better yourself should be the cornerstones of running a countries economy imo. Nothing else has ever worked, and I dont think it ever will.
For me that is a great assessment and analysis Albs 8-) 8-) :y :y :y :y
However, what of the greedy bankers?
No mention of them in your post........? :-/
-
Dont get me started. ;D ;D ;D............too late you already have.
The subject has been raked over many tines on herebut - some of the banks got things badly wrong undoubtedly (and there was a lot of collusion and interference by politicians both here and in the U.S. which helped create that situation) but most of them didnt. Most investment houses in the square mile you probably wont have heard off. They quitely went about their business of making a profit, and they still are making profits, without taking a handout from the govt.
They are private companies and what they pay their employees is no one elses business. Once the govt decides on how much a company can pay its employees we are as a society in very deep trouble indeed.
Dont believe everything you read or see in the headlines about the banking industry. ;)
And dont believe the Liebore lies that our current troubles are all as a result of the toxic debt crisis - that is a very long way from the truth. The economy of this country was criminally mismanaged for years, and that is why things are as bad as they are. We could have been in a much much healthier position now if the economy had been run on a sound footing since 97. ;)
-
Dont get me started. ;D ;D ;D............too late you already have.
The subject has been raked over many tines on herebut - some of the banks got things badly wrong undoubtedly (and there was a lot of collusion and interference by politicians both here and in the U.S. which helped create that situation) but most of them didnt. Most investment houses in the square mile you probably wont have heard off. They quitely went about their business of making a profit, and they still are making profits, without taking a handout from the govt.
They are private companies and what they pay their employees is no one elses business. Once the govt decides on how much a company can pay its employees we are as a society in very deep trouble indeed.
Dont believe everything you read or see in the headlines about the banking industry. ;)
I agree. Bankers and public servants should be left alone now. They both earn their money and it's not their fault that that we fell into recession.
-
Banks create approx 22% of the countries wealth.The public sector(or more accurately, parts of it) wastes ???% of the countries wealth. ;)
-
Banks create approx 22% of the countries wealth.The public sector(or more accurately, parts of it) wastes ???% of the countries wealth. ;)
The public sector do what it says on the tin, serve the public. Any fool would know that they don't create wealth, but are part of any civilised society. My public sector worker left the house at 6:40 this morning and is still not home. In fact, she is never home before 7.
The public sector does not waste money, the people who manage it do.
They are an easy target for people when the cash is tight and, no doubt, the private sector could do it cheaper. But it is plain wrong to tar them all with the same brush, just as it is wrong to call all bankers greedy, grasping, self-centered, uncaring pondlife. ;D
-
I dont disagree Steve. But as a whole it is far bigger than it needs to be, and as you say, the people running it seem to have a very strong sense of entitlement to take our money off us and spend it how they see fit.
I have read several reports recently which state that Whitehall is recruiting as many people as it ever has. They arent cutting back at all. I have also been told by more than one person (but dont know for a fact) that the NHS is the third biggest employer in the world, after the Chinese Army and the Indian railways - if true, its outrageous.
Im not daft enought to think we dont need a public sector. I just believe strongly that parts of it have become something entirely different which doesnt serve the public in any way shape or form. These are probably the very people who have made your wifes job so much more difficult and frustrating in recent years ? ;)
-
I dont disagree Steve. But as a whole it is far bigger than it needs to be, and as you say, the people running it seem to have a very strong sense of entitlement to take our money off us and spend it how they see fit.
I have read several reports recently which state that Whitehall is recruiting as many people as it ever has. They arent cutting back at all. I have also been told by more than one person (but dont know for a fact) that the NHS is the third biggest employer in the world, after the Chinese Army and the Indian railways - if true, its outrageous.
Im not daft enought to think we dont need a public sector. I jsut believe strongly that parts of it have become som ething entirely different which doesnt serve the public in any way shape or form. These are probably ther very people who have made your wifes job so much more difficult and frustrating in recent years ? ;)
You don't know the half of it. The first 'public servants' to lose their jobs are the ones who enforce all the stupid rules, (ie. H&S), and make it twice as difficult and, thus, take twice the time and, therefore, cost twice as much to reach exactly the same conclusion as would have originally been reached.
Daft regulation is what is making the public sector so expensive to run, and the ranks of the enforcers have swelled dramatically.
-
I dont disagree Steve. But as a whole it is far bigger than it needs to be, and as you say, the people running it seem to have a very strong sense of entitlement to take our money off us and spend it how they see fit.
I have read several reports recently which state that Whitehall is recruiting as many people as it ever has. They arent cutting back at all. I have also been told by more than one person (but dont know for a fact) that the NHS is the third biggest employer in the world, after the Chinese Army and the Indian railways - if true, its outrageous.
Im not daft enought to think we dont need a public sector. I jsut believe strongly that parts of it have become som ething entirely different which doesnt serve the public in any way shape or form. These are probably ther very people who have made your wifes job so much more difficult and frustrating in recent years ? ;)
You don't know the half of it. The first 'public servants' to lose their jobs are the ones who enforce all the stupid rules, (ie. H&S), and make it twice as difficult and, thus, take twice the time and, therefore, cost twice as much to reach exactly the same conclusion as would have originally been reached.
Daft regulation is what is making the public sector so expensive to run, and the ranks of the enforcers have swelled dramatically.
As far as education is concerned (as I know what your wife does, Steve!), a part of the public sector - the civil service - is the very thing that has made life miserable for another part of the civil service - education. Take away the excessive regulation, constant tinkering and target-setting and the lives of teachers would be much easier and they could then concentrate on delivering edication in the classroom! ;)
-
I dont disagree Steve. But as a whole it is far bigger than it needs to be, and as you say, the people running it seem to have a very strong sense of entitlement to take our money off us and spend it how they see fit.
I have read several reports recently which state that Whitehall is recruiting as many people as it ever has. They arent cutting back at all. I have also been told by more than one person (but dont know for a fact) that the NHS is the third biggest employer in the world, after the Chinese Army and the Indian railways - if true, its outrageous.
Im not daft enought to think we dont need a public sector. I jsut believe strongly that parts of it have become som ething entirely different which doesnt serve the public in any way shape or form. These are probably ther very people who have made your wifes job so much more difficult and frustrating in recent years ? ;)
You don't know the half of it. The first 'public servants' to lose their jobs are the ones who enforce all the stupid rules, (ie. H&S), and make it twice as difficult and, thus, take twice the time and, therefore, cost twice as much to reach exactly the same conclusion as would have originally been reached.
Daft regulation is what is making the public sector so expensive to run, and the ranks of the enforcers have swelled dramatically.
As far as education is concerned (as I know what your wife does, Steve!), a part of the public sector - the civil service - is the very thing that has made life miserable for another part of the civil service - education. Take away the excessive regulation, constant tinkering and target-setting and the lives of teachers would be much easier and they could then concentrate on delivering edication in the classroom! ;)
Oh the irony, Nick, the irony. ;D
-
I dont disagree Steve. But as a whole it is far bigger than it needs to be, and as you say, the people running it seem to have a very strong sense of entitlement to take our money off us and spend it how they see fit.
I have read several reports recently which state that Whitehall is recruiting as many people as it ever has. They arent cutting back at all. I have also been told by more than one person (but dont know for a fact) that the NHS is the third biggest employer in the world, after the Chinese Army and the Indian railways - if true, its outrageous.
Im not daft enought to think we dont need a public sector. I just believe strongly that parts of it have become something entirely different which doesnt serve the public in any way shape or form. These are probably the very people who have made your wifes job so much more difficult and frustrating in recent years ? ;)
er, I think someones been winding you up on that point.. ;D
-
I dont disagree Steve. But as a whole it is far bigger than it needs to be, and as you say, the people running it seem to have a very strong sense of entitlement to take our money off us and spend it how they see fit.
I have read several reports recently which state that Whitehall is recruiting as many people as it ever has. They arent cutting back at all. I have also been told by more than one person (but dont know for a fact) that the NHS is the third biggest employer in the world, after the Chinese Army and the Indian railways - if true, its outrageous.
Im not daft enought to think we dont need a public sector. I jsut believe strongly that parts of it have become som ething entirely different which doesnt serve the public in any way shape or form. These are probably ther very people who have made your wifes job so much more difficult and frustrating in recent years ? ;)
You don't know the half of it. The first 'public servants' to lose their jobs are the ones who enforce all the stupid rules, (ie. H&S), and make it twice as difficult and, thus, take twice the time and, therefore, cost twice as much to reach exactly the same conclusion as would have originally been reached.
Daft regulation is what is making the public sector so expensive to run, and the ranks of the enforcers have swelled dramatically.
As far as education is concerned (as I know what your wife does, Steve!), a part of the public sector - the civil service - is the very thing that has made life miserable for another part of the civil service - education. Take away the excessive regulation, constant tinkering and target-setting and the lives of teachers would be much easier and they could then concentrate on delivering edication in the classroom! ;)
Oh the irony, Nick, the irony. ;D
Oh bu**er! :-[ :-[ :P ;)
-
I dont disagree Steve. But as a whole it is far bigger than it needs to be, and as you say, the people running it seem to have a very strong sense of entitlement to take our money off us and spend it how they see fit.
I have read several reports recently which state that Whitehall is recruiting as many people as it ever has. They arent cutting back at all. I have also been told by more than one person (but dont know for a fact) that the NHS is the third biggest employer in the world, after the Chinese Army and the Indian railways - if true, its outrageous.
Im not daft enought to think we dont need a public sector. I just believe strongly that parts of it have become something entirely different which doesnt serve the public in any way shape or form. These are probably the very people who have made your wifes job so much more difficult and frustrating in recent years ? ;)
er, I think someones been winding you up on that point.. ;D
Not that much of a wind-up! It's actually the fourth biggest employer in the world. Here's the top ten:
The Chinese Army (2,225,000)
Walmart (2,100,000)
China National Petroleum (1,649,992)
NHS (1,626,000)
China's State Grid Corp. (1,533,800)
United States Army (1,477,896)
Indian National Railways (1,410,659)
Indian Army (1,325,000)
North Korean Army (1,106,000)
Russian Army (1,037,000)
http://www.vancouversun.com/life/environment/world+largest+employers/3758010/story.html
:o
-
Over 1.6 million employees. :o :o :o...........WHY?????
-
So, we employ more people than any other country on the planet to look after our health......is that not something to be grateful for;the fact that you are living in a country that puts its the cost of the populations health above everything else :question
The flaw in your arguement is that if YOU as an individual were denied medical treatment on the basis of cost, you would probably start a thread on lack of investment in the NHS. :-[
-
Over 1.6 million employees. :o :o :o...........WHY?????[/quote]
GOOD GOD!! :-[ :-[ :-[WHY NOT??
-
Im quite confident that a large number of those 1.6 million are not involved in looking after our health.Its another gravy train for pen pushers and they probably frustrate the hell out of people who want to look after our health. ;)
-
Waken up mate.
Capitalism IS a gravy train, all over.
why stop at the NHS.?
-
Over 1.6 million employees. :o :o :o...........WHY?????[/quote]
GOOD GOD!! :-[ :-[ :-[WHY NOT??
Many countries with much larger populations employ a lot less people in their health services, and have much better health statistics than this country.So - WHY ? ;)
Remember, we have to pay for this.It should be an efficient organisation, and anyone who doesnt need to be there, shouldnt be.
-
Waken up mate.
Capitalism IS a gravy train, all over.
why stop at the NHS.?
Capitalism isnt a gravy train. Things are free on gravy trains. Theres no free lunches with capitalism. :)
-
Over 1.6 million employees. :o :o :o...........WHY?????[/quote]
GOOD GOD!! :-[ :-[ :-[WHY NOT??
Many countries with much larger populations employ a lot less people in their health services, and have much better health statistics than this country.So - WHY ? ;)
Remember, we have to pay for this.It should be an efficient organisation, and anyone who doesnt need to be there, shouldnt be.[/quote]
you mean people like the ROYAL FAMILY?
-
Waken up mate.
Capitalism IS a gravy train, all over.
why stop at the NHS.?
China and North Korea have pretty big gravy trains, too. Are they capitalist? ;) ;D
-
Dont think the royal family are employed by the NHS. :D ;D
Im not the worlds biggest royalist, but they do serve an important constitutional role imo. They are probably the one thing that prevents slippery tinkers like Tony Bliar installing himself as president.
-
Im quite confident that a large number of those 1.6 million are not involved in looking after our health.Its another gravy train for pen pushers and they probably frustrate the hell out of people who want to look after our health. ;)
A GRAVY TRAIN; definition
A job where no work is involved. To get paid for doing nothing. Sitting at a keyboard and posting nonsense all day.
As in, "Look over there, Albs is riding the gravy train again"
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
This is a gravy train:
...the number of managers in hospitals has soared by 12 per cent in just one year, outstripping the recruitment of nurses by six to one.
There were 44,600 new managers employed in 2009 compared with only 7,080 more nurses, 2,040 consultants and only 650 new midwives.
(from article dated 2010)
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/168648/Scandal-of-NHS-bosses-s-pay-riseScandal-of-NHS-bosses-s-pay-rise
>:( ::) ::)
-
I do my job as least as effectively as my employer requires me too. They provide me with a TV,DVD player and a computer with internet access and have no problem with me making use of it. That is their right as a PLC, they are responsible only to their shareholders (of which I am one). There couldnt ever be such a justifiable scenario when the person is being paid from the public purse. :)
-
Ok Albs, but to be honest, I am more worried about the price of petrol!
And so should you be, driving an Omega!
Ranting on about the NHS, and your paying over £6 a gallon! :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[
-
Nothing of any substance appears to have been said about benefits. They should be slashed. I for one am sick of paying for lazy bums. They get bloddy plenty aswell, and their free time. Genuine people not included.
-
Nothing of any substance appears to have been said about benefits. They should be slashed. I for one am sick of paying for lazy bums. They get bloddy plenty aswell, and their free time. Genuine people not included.
period.... :y
-
Nothing of any substance appears to have been said about benefits. They should be slashed. I for one am sick of paying for lazy bums. They get bloddy plenty aswell, and their free time. Genuine people not included.
Agreed - the giant money eating, self serving machine that the unwelfare state has become needs to be disassembled and rebuilt into a smaller more effective service which prevents the genuinely needy from falling into real poverty, rather than a career choice for the workshy which it has been in recent years. :y
-
Ok Albs, but to be honest, I am more worried about the price of petrol!
And so should you be, driving an Omega!
Ranting on about the NHS, and your paying over £6 a gallon! :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[
My fuel is £3.63 per gallon - although I do think thats outrageous as it was £2.73 this time last year. ;)
-
Nothing of any substance appears to have been said about benefits. They should be slashed. I for one am sick of paying for lazy bums. They get bloddy plenty aswell, and their free time. Genuine people not included.
period.... :y
Well we live in a capitalist society. There is a cost to everything, accept it. Watching the news tonight, the journalist said: "What's in the pot for you?" Err, bloody nothing, and so it should be, it seems that people now expect the budget to be some sort of bloody give away. We've had it too good for too long, living on borrowed wealth, thanks to bloody labour and Mr "no more boom and bust".
I for one am not bothered about the cost of petrol. I'll still fill my machines up, I'm still going to LPG them though, better in my pocket than a welfarer.
The socialists mentality is intrinsically wrong. Strikes, improved pay and conditions, welfare, sick pay, holiday pay, flexi time, 35 hour weeks, benefits, money for bloody everyone yet no productivity to pay for it!
We can whinge about the cost of fuel as much as we want, but I fill my auto elite up and get 280 miles around town or 500 down the motorway, and for 80-90 quid to shift a big lard a**e isn't that bad really. Better than going on filthy, late, expensive, unreliably, inconvenient, impractical public transport.
-
Not up on the legal type of thing, but could not the government say that petrol cannot be sold over a certain price, say £1.25 ltr, keeping the same duty, so everybody pays the same. The garages/oil companies would have to settle for lower profits or streamline their orgs with lower bonuses etc. :y
Probably talking out the top of my head, but its an idea. ;)
-
No better or worse than expected.
A positive was the reduction in the required borrowing.
As long as the Labour scum dont get back in for a few more terms the mess might just about get sorted out.
Not sure I agree with that:
"Total borrowing will be £165.5 billion in 2010-11, and £167.4 billion in 2011-12. £261.6 billion of this is additional borrowing for extra spending. Much of the rest is refinancing of maturing debt. There will be no shortage of government bonds around for several years. The Chancellor’s budget adds £44 billion more to the national debt by 2014-15, taking the total increase in debt over the five years of the strategy to £485 billion."
"The main change in the budget is the increase in public spending which was not flagged in the speech. The figures for extra spending are:
2011-12 increase of £10.6 billion
2012-13 increase of £9.2 billion
2013-14 increase of £8.1 billion
2014-15 increase of £6.1 billion"
http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2011/03/24/office-of-budget-predicts-fall-in-capital-gains-tax-receipts-with-higher-rate/
Smoke and mirrors. ::) ::) ;)
-
Over 1.6 million employees. :o :o :o...........WHY?????
GOOD GOD!! :-[ :-[ :-[WHY NOT??
Many countries with much larger populations employ a lot less people in their health services, and have much better health statistics than this country.So - WHY ? ;)
Remember, we have to pay for this.It should be an efficient organisation, and anyone who doesnt need to be there, shouldnt be.[/quote]
you mean people like the ROYAL FAMILY?
They bring in more in tourism than they cost, and as a friend pointed out the other day, no matter who is in government, the Queen has the last word on things- i.e. as long as she's in, she can veto sharia law if it ever gets that far. Very useful!
oh, and it makes the yanks envious ;D ;D
-
I thought we'd given up on capitalism when we bailed out the banks? :o
-
I thought we'd given up on capitalism when we bailed out the banks? :o
In favour of what? Socialism? Haha you make me laugh!
Can a mod put BJs last post in the joke section!
-
I thought we'd given up on capitalism when we bailed out the banks? :o
In favour of what? Socialism? Haha you make me laugh!
Can a mod put BJs last post in the joke section!
err.....kinda....yep ;D
-
I thought we'd given up on capitalism when we bailed out the banks? :o
I dont know how many banks there are in this country, but its a lot. I dont remember how many were bailed out, but Im pretty sure it was either three or four.
-
I thought we'd given up on capitalism when we bailed out the banks? :o
I dont know how many banks there are in this country, but its a lot. I dont remember how many were bailed out, but Im pretty sure it was either three or four.
But every single one benefitted from those bailouts. Without them every bank would have gone under.
-
Interesting bit on BBC news this a.m. re the penny reduduction. The chap was head of petrol retailers or such like. On 10th March they wrote to Osborne asking if any cuts in duty were forthcoming that they be involved in the process. Why? It has never been done before, on the same day and the garages pay the government duty on the fuel they buy. So no machinery to get the 1 p overpaid back. Sounds simple but the Chancellor bodged even that! No wonder garages were reported to put upthe price a penny before later reducing it.
-
No better or worse than expected.
A positive was the reduction in the required borrowing.
As long as the Labour scum dont get back in for a few more terms the mess might just about get sorted out.
Not sure I agree with that:
"Total borrowing will be £165.5 billion in 2010-11, and £167.4 billion in 2011-12. £261.6 billion of this is additional borrowing for extra spending. Much of the rest is refinancing of maturing debt. There will be no shortage of government bonds around for several years. The Chancellor’s budget adds £44 billion more to the national debt by 2014-15, taking the total increase in debt over the five years of the strategy to £485 billion."
"The main change in the budget is the increase in public spending which was not flagged in the speech. The figures for extra spending are:
2011-12 increase of £10.6 billion
2012-13 increase of £9.2 billion
2013-14 increase of £8.1 billion
2014-15 increase of £6.1 billion"
http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2011/03/24/office-of-budget-predicts-fall-in-capital-gains-tax-receipts-with-higher-rate/
Smoke and mirrors. ::) ::) ;)
The key is in my wording i.e. a reduction in the required borrowing....i.e. its less than was originaly thought......yes, its still huge but what do you expect after so many years of typical incompitent labour fiscal management ;D ;D