What, if anything, would public sector mass walk-outs acheive?

[Chil1234]

That's it really. IMHO, very little bar a reduction in public sympathy and even worse public services for those who use and/or need them.

Well that's one aspect of it. But what about all the reports of people being unable to do their own job due to the number of other demands placed on them. Or people who have three times the work to do that they can reasonably manage even with overtime. People care not just for themselves, but also for the people they are letting down. After reading a lot of the stories I will certainly think twice before condemning something as a "poor service".

But there is another side to the coin. I speak to staff in other departments, less public facing roles shall we say, and they are struggling to find enough work to get them through the day. Yes really, although I bet some of that is macho bullsh*t. I reckon this is the case in many organisations, that the balance has got way out of kilter between where the resources are and where they're actually needed. Funny how it's the most essential services that always seem to lose out.

somewhere back along this thread there was some talk about how it is only being 'private sector taxes' that pays for the public sector? well, i just wanted to point out that public workers also pay tax! so i think you will find that we all pay for it!

yes, agreed that on threads like this that it always ends up comapring private and public. it's always the same in the UK, it's a general attitude of wanting to 'bring everyone' down, rather that bring bring people up.

hows about rather than taking more away from services we close all the tax loopholes that seem to be working very well for lots of companies right now and some individuals who get away without paying the correct amount of tax year after year? there are always other ways!

suprisingly, i take back what i said before about there being more public sympathy. there isn't. or at least not until something really serious affects those themselves and they go to find there is not help quick enough or not enough help when they need it. of course there are always those this wont effect because money talks in this country and it is money that buys you choice and other options.

lastly, the government know they are cutting hard and won't admit its a big risk. being crafty as they are, they are busy right now thinking of how to change the laws regarding UNIONS so that they will be unable to strike. so it is same old, same old, same old...

Hi Lego You probably were referring to what I said.

Yes of course public sector workers pay taxes but that money is coming ultimately from the private sector.

Let's say you give your son £100 a month. Then out of that you ask for £20 for board money. Have you really made anything? No.

Now lets say son goes out to work and he earns £100 a month. You know ask for £20. Have you made anything now? Yes.

I'm not here public sector bashing. Its a crucial part of any economy. But the size of it has to be in proportion to the rest of the economy. Its only logical that if the private sector contracts, then so does the public sector.

But what public services are you willing to give up?

There is an assumption that all of the unrest is about how much we are paid. Personally i think i earn a reasonable wage for the work i do. You could double my money but it still wouldnt mean i could cope with the stupid workload that is being created. It actually wouldnt even make me feel more valued for the work i do. Its not about money its about attitude and reasonableness about what people can acheive without the pressure becoming too much.

alibaba - my bad, it was Siasl who made the comment re pensions.

Nowanewme, it's not about what public services we are willing to give up. It's about what public services can we afford.

Clearly we cannot afford the status quo. Not with an annual overspend of £170billion a year.

I don't want to see any services cut. I'd actually like to see services improve. But we can't afford it so we have to have, what we can afford.

I'd like to fly business class when I go away. But I can't afford it so I accept I must go economy. Same principle here.

A public sector mass walkout would achieve nothing except media vilification of health sector workers, firemen, police etc.

If you really want to make the government stop and think our only real power is as economic units.

That is all 'they' want us to be - how much can we earn, how much will we spend -. Our humanity was surrendered thirty years ago when Thatcher came to power.

How about a policy of only buy what you need. Food, shelter, clothing. Think how often we buy something to cheer ourselves up, that little retail buzz and how fast it disappears . How much money we would save!

How about we choose a day and (spread the word) everybody takes an afternoon off from shopping together. It would be a mass action (like a flash mob) that would have a noticeable economic effect. Maybe we would also get some of our humanity back.

There are also parts of the public sector that can't walk out and strike and are being cut to the bone...a pay freeze and the redundancy boards start sitting very soon for the three tranches that are being made redundant. These are the people that will be expected to step in and do the fire fighting when the rest of the public sector strikes.

I accept that there isn't the money there and that things have to change. What we need is an adult discussion on what services we want and how we afford those. If Defence isn't a sacred cow and ring fenced, then I don't see why the NHS or Overseas Aid should be either. We also need to look long and hard at EU costs - maybe we want to stay in, but pay far less than we do now.

GReedychops. What di you mean 'back in power' They never been out of power. What's the news story here?

Niceguy2 but those are the decisions that need to be made. Like scaryteacher says, we need an adult discussion on. What services we can and cant afford. Real choices need to be made about what is important and what we have to accept can no longer be done. The situation, as is, is that we are still trying to do everything and that everything is getting done badly!

The difficulty is, any and every cut proposed is opposed.

No one ever says, ah yes, that probably is a luxury in these times.

Any debate is stiffled, as much by the left as the right.

NG2, we can well afford our public services,what we cant afford is Trident and tax avoiders (Like Gideon with his trust fund and Nokia)

Tax bankers bonuses to the hilt, bring in a Tobin tax.

We can afford it if but it would mean the Tories hitting their mates tax dodges so that wont happen

NG2, we can well afford our public services,what we cant afford is Trident and tax avoiders (Like Gideon with his trust fund and Nokia)

Tax bankers bonuses to the hilt, bring in a Tobin tax.

We can afford it if but it would mean the Tories hitting their mates tax dodges so that wont happen

I've always found it highly ironic (not to mention spittingly awful) that our dear Chancellor of the Exchequer is a tax avoider himself.

One rule for them......

Oh Newwave....how do you work that one out then?

Trident is expected to cost £15-£20billion to build. This is the total price and not the annual cost but lets suspend reality for one moment, just for you.

Last year, banking bonuses were I think about £7billion in total. Lets for a moment assume you introduce a 100% tax and noone emigrates to Switzerland as a result...

Well so far, neither of them really make a dent in the annual deficit of £160-£170billion.

So you'd be dependent upon your new taxes (upon the rich naturally in your world) to make up the other £150billion.

Now given the entire income tax take in 2010 was around £140billion, i think your figures don't really add up. There simply just are not enough rich people around.

NG2, I earn between £40K and £50k a year depending on commision levels, my partner earns £44k+.

I would happily pay an extra 5-8% in tax if it stopped the butchery of our social services. Most decent people would feel the same (provided they can afford it).

I would stress that i have no mortgage as it is paid off.

Dave and Gideon dosent realise that we are not all a lot of tax avoiding scum like them and their rich cronies.

So NiceGuy, are you saying that it's OK to exploit our public sector workers into an early gravem because we can't afford to treat them better? That doesn't really address the argument that nowanewme put very succinctly. At the moment the Govt and the public want to have their cake and eat it. We've seen on this thread that nobody cares that even the "economy class" services we have now are at the expense of the mental and physical health of those providing them. As long as the service is delivered, to hell with the wellbeing of the one dedicated member of staff who's spending each and every day running to stay still.

gaelicsheep, I think although I may be wrong that NG2 is a Tory which probably colours his views about the public sector and what the governments priorities should be.

My apologies if I am wrong.

I think the unions need to realise that the current situation where the Government is borrowing so much money to finance services is unsustainable and needs to addressed. This requires a contraction in the size and cost of the public sector.

I think the Unions need to protect their members terms and conditions and to fight the the Tory cuts.

Tax the rich not screw the poor

STop teh ridiculous practice of councils restricting themselves to certain companies when it comes to purchasing equipment.

That would save a fortune.

As it is, councils spend silly money on computers, furniture, stationery, books because they cannot look about for the cheapest price.

The justification we are given is that the opposite is true. That the organisation can, in theory, be more easily fleeced access preferential rates if we all order from the same companies.

I wonder how many of the "preferred suppliers" are Tory party donors or were NL party donors

The fact of the matter remains, I think we'd all be more accepting of this 'situation' but for the simple fact the less well off are paying for a debacle created by the wealthy- who have barely suffered at all.

I would be far more willing to accept some of these potentially disastrous cuts if:
a) the banks were forced to ditch the bonuses (another record year!)
b) tax avoiders were chased and caught, loopholes shut.
c) Nokia paid its tax bill.

Bugger 'all in this together'. We're not all idiots.

As for 'wanting to fly business class but having to fly economy'- yes, but what about 'dying of cancer on a waiting list versus getting timely and effective treatment'?

It does really annoy me, gaelic. The private sector loves a good public sector contract. Easy money.