Jump to content

Cost of government


Banker

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Do you actually realize how ridiculous that statement is?

Well Dan Davies role was to reduce headcount, it’s gone up by c400 in 5 years & he’s been promoted to CEO home affairs.

Nick Black & most of senior management in DOI would have been managed out or on disciplinary action in private sector 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Do you actually realize how ridiculous that statement is?

sadly it does seem to be that the shitter you are the higher you rise so perhaps not so ridiculous if you drop the encouraged bit, but that could be left in so that the correct people end up with taxpayers cash by 'mistake'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I didn’t say everyone in the finance sector is earning over £50 k a year. I said it was not an uncommon salary ( which it isn’t)

I don’t know of anyone personally earning a 50k+ salary , perhaps we just mix in different circles, 50k each year would be like a small lottery win to most people I know.

I know of a few who have invested in property but are asset rich rather than cash rich, I know of a few business owners that make 50k+ in profit but it’s mostly reinvested back into the business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The costs are indeed ridiculous. 

However is the expanding size of Govt not the real concern?  It's supposed to be streamlined but infact has increased by more than 350 from 7,520 in 2017.   

I understand the Bell administration did actually reduce the size of Govt by approximately 10%. 

 

Edited by The Phantom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ramseyboi said:

And I assume ending fairly early in this one.  Your “insight” all seems very dated.  I would put money on it that the last time you were paid by someone one who isn’t iomg I was still wearing green double breasted suits from Burtons.

Your assumption is incorrect.

And you would lose your money 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Phantom said:

The costs are indeed ridiculous. 

However is the expanding size of Govt not the real concern?  It's supposed to be streamlined but infact has increased by more than 350 from 7,520 in 2017.   

I understand the Bell administration did actually reduce the size of Govt by approximately 10%. 

 

It is the overall cost that should be concentrated on.  I would much prefer to employ 100 at £60k or 200 at £30k than 160 at £45k. It is pretty easy to massage figures such as payroll numbers or basic salaries and has been done over many years. Why were bankers, even at lower levels, given guaranteed bonuses? It was simply because it enabled them to make salaries look small in reports as they did not include bonuses. Just as many manual workers are given X hours of guaranteed over time at pay and a half or higher. The employee has a guaranteed higher salary but the employer can report that basic payer is much lower. Governments love that one   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lost Login said:

It is the overall cost that should be concentrated on.  I would much prefer to employ 100 at £60k or 200 at £30k than 160 at £45k. It is pretty easy to massage figures such as payroll numbers or basic salaries and has been done over many years. Why were bankers, even at lower levels, given guaranteed bonuses? It was simply because it enabled them to make salaries look small in reports as they did not include bonuses. Just as many manual workers are given X hours of guaranteed over time at pay and a half or higher. The employee has a guaranteed higher salary but the employer can report that basic payer is much lower. Governments love that one   

And bonuses, overtime etc are not generally pensionable.  Just imagine the pension bill if they were!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, offshoremanxman said:

 You’re earning more now being a good sparky or plumber than you’ll ever earn in the finance sector here yet there’s people like you talking complete rubbish to try to justify what are basically government £50K + admin salaries. 

Not trying to justify any salaries or talking rubbish. I will leave that to you

 It’s supply and demand. Yes a good tradesman earns very good money, they deserve it, frustrating though it is to get one to turn up. I and I lot of people wouldn’t have a clue how to do the stuff that electricians and plumbers do. That’s why we pay them for their expertise and the training they have done.

Although there are some in the finance sector earning way more than that despite what you say.

T’was  ever thus
 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Not trying to justify any salaries or talking rubbish. I will leave that to you

 It’s supply and demand. Yes a good tradesman earns very good money, they deserve it, frustrating though it is to get one to turn up. I and I lot of people wouldn’t have a clue how to do the stuff that electricians and plumbers do. That’s why we pay them for their expertise and the training they have done.

Although there are some in the finance sector earning way more than that despite what you say.

T’was  ever thus
 

It isn't that hard to get a tradesperson to turn up and work for a reasonable rate, unless in your initial interaction with them they conclude you are a dick who is not worth working for.

They can pick and chose who they work for.  They/we turn up first time for nice people

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, HNWI said:

I look in on this (and other) forums periodically and being quite honest, one or two of your posts have to be the largest pieces of sanctimonious claptrap put into writing that I have ever have the misfortune to read.

I note from another of your posts in another thread that your idea of an leisure is to spend afternoons "mooching" in a local hardware store? . It will be the remnants of just the sort of culture ingrained during your public sector career.

 

Sorry to disappoint but my career has been exclusively in the private sector.

Whilst I respect and admire the contributions that those in the public sector have made, regrettably I cannot claim to have been party to them.

Sometime, somewhere in these pages someone has come to the conclusion that I am a public sector employee and the myth has gained currency as your post proves.

I have never once said that I worked for the Government .

Whilst I’m at it can I also debunk the theories that I am Howard Quayle or David Ashford.

Thank you

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

 

Whilst I’m at it can I also debunk the theories that I am Howard Quayle or David Ashford.

 

No one thinks you're HQ, you've shown an ability to compose sentences.

We are all concerned about your deep desire to be Ashford though, that's some of the weirdest shit anyone ever wrote on this forum.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
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...