'Things Can Only Get Better'

[Chil1234]

I know its easy to be wise with hindsight but here goes. The CB issue this week has highlighted how overcommitted a lot of families on relatively good incomes are struggling to make ends meet - and often personal debt in the form of loans, cards and hefty mortgages are cited as the reason. If they're struggling, what must be happening elsewhere?

My with-hindsight feeling is that, totally aside from failing to regulate the activities of the banks... the last government actively encouraged the explosion of personal debt that is now crippling so many by whipping up an atmosphere of 'things can only get better'. It's been 15 years since the last recession but they do come around eventually. Lenders behaved abominably, but it was also irresponsible of the last government to put it around that recession was a thing of the past.

Saisl yes some jobs in the public sector are better paid, people have studied and gained qualifications and exp to do these so called (your words not mine) middle class jobs.

However next time you order a coffee in starbucks, ask the lovely people how much they are paid. The basic wage, because they are the people producing the surplus value for the rich capitalist and shareholders. These people on minimum wages are the working poor that the free economy is based on.

You do need to look at different wages for different jobs.

A social worker for example, educated to MA level very often, does not get that much for a postgrad role; a care assistant gets minimum wage.

OTOH there are clearly roles )often adminsitrative) that are paid above average whack: I almost married a council programmer who absolutely earned more than the public sector equivalent for a trainee. Mind, it satyed the same on qualifying as was regarded as an 'investment.... so they all apcked up and went to the Private Sector where wqages for qualified programmers were far higher.

There's no point looking at overall averages in such a diverse spread: it's far more varied than that. And a lot of non state jobs- I ahve held a few_-esp. in the third sector are paid on LA pay scales anyhow.

Cinnamon

Just put this on another thread, repeating in case any here know the answer:

"I don't even understand the theory TBH.

public sector = people's money is taken in, in the form of tax, and then redistributed amongst a load of (usually low to middle earning) people, in order to provide a service that benefits the community. The working conditions etc are usually pretty good compared to the private sector. They pay taxes and the money circulates around and around.

private sector = people's money is taken in, in the form of tax, then spent in the private sector where some of it is siphoned off in profits and large salaries for the owners etc. the rest is spent on providing a service for the community. the people employed in the middle and lower ends have less preferable terms and conditions etc. They pay taxes and the money circulates around and around, with a bit less each circuit due to the siphoning off.

What am I missing?"

ISNT, you don't miss a trick. Its the siphoning off in the private sector that IS the problem. It is this that is breaking economies and creating poverty. IMO

I guess that's what freaks wealthy tory types out about a large state? It's lots of lovely money sloshing around in front of their noses that they can't get their hands on, it's out of the "game" of the markets?

Is that why they get their knickers in such a twist about it? I think it might be, and all the stuff about efficiency is a smokescreen.

I'm just picturing this money sloshing about under their noses.
The state might be too big or not big enough, I don't honestly know. I just think that the cuts will impact upon the people who will most need frontline services. The very same people that gained nothing much in the boom years. Cutting benefits to famillies will not offset the huge welfare bill they are busy creating with their cuts. The private sector is not growing at the rate that Georgy Peorgy hoped it would and can not accomodate his soon to be made redundent public service workers.

I thought it was interesting what Belle-Broomstick said about areas of deprivation in the north. (do you mind if a shorten your name?) It was Thatcher who caused mass unemployment isn't it. The last government tried to invest in these areas, rightly so. I live in the south east with DH on an average wage, but I have never had a problem that money has been spent in areas in the north.

Selling public companies, steel, coal, shipbuilding, it has ruined the lives of thousands and is a lost area of revenue for our economy. That is the private sector though, the rich off to make a quick killing and sod the rest!

CAn I just add it's not just teh North; industrial towns anywhere- as someone who lives in S E Wales, and used to live in another similarly hit town in teh west.

The public sectory pay being better than private sector pay statistic is a great example of lies, damned lies and statistics ( or something similar) The lowest paid public sector work has bee contracted out to the private sector, therefore making it look as if we are all living it up at your expense.

I am a senior teacher , have been working for eight years. I still do not earn what i did in my previous job in the private sector. I don't mind, I chose the career change but I would have earned more in the private sector

Good point Burg.

Also, since the minimum wage low wages = a set amount; prior to that however (oooh under the previous Government I beleive) I did work in the Public Sector, VAT office to be precise, and the wage was so appallingly low that teh unions took the case on- IIRC it was £55 P?A full time, with overtime expected. Bus fayre, keep to mum and it was gone; indeed if any other bill came in Mum was ending up subbing me, despite being fully employed.

Let's not go back there; becuase that is genuinely the days of could not afford to work. Had I not had Mum, I could not have afforded to even get to work some weeks.

Sorry, £5.5k PA

Yes all the low paid work appears to have been contracted out. When I worked in social services years ago they were busy contracting out all home care services. The contracts went out and as I understand things now, there is so little money left in the coffers that the elderly are left to organise their own care what will more cuts do to the most vulnerable in society.

I don;t imagine there will be anything soon for them; i'm on a diet and my sole motivation is to lose weight so I can live as long as possible to ensure ds3 is cared for.

Sad huh?

Understandable, SanctiMoanyArse. I'm sure services to children will be for the chop as well as services for adults with ASDs.

I'm thin and on a diet, just so I can afford to feed DCs. Great isn't it.

I agree with the negative comments about the previous government. They were a fucking disgrace. Encouraging the explosion of personal debt, paying benefits (tax credits) to families with above average incomes to make them vote Labour, allowing housing costs to spiral out of control, all of it disgraceful.

...And breathe...

The loss of services is a consequence of the previous Governments reckless overspending causing us to have the highest deficit we've ever had in peace time.
The coalition is having to drastically reduce spending to tackle the deficit and prevent national bankrupcy as you can't carry on having a deficit that is 12% of GDP and spending more £40 billion a year on debt interest.