Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Welfare Budget
Topic Started: Nov 18 2015, 05:38 PM (526 Views)
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Posted Image

The above is excluding Pensions and again anyone listening outside of the window of the Red Nag would believe it has been paired to the bone.

LINK

Beginning to wonder where all these heavy cuts and trashing the welfare state have taken place? Maybe someone can enlighten me or wake me up when austerity kicks in.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
disgruntled porker
Nov 20 2015, 08:28 AM

I've never claimed any of that Steve. I do insist however that the world recession was massively due to a feckless and unfettered financial system. It would still have happened in this country, though not as deep and as prolonged as it has been.

It is prolonged because if it were not there would not be this excuse to usher in cuts and austerity. The recession is over, but the debts keep mounting, the imbalance stubbornly the same, the correction not forthcoming ....
Campaigning on a ticket to end it sooner, they have instead extended the period to over a decade before any hope of it ending ........ and I personally doubt it will end then.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jonksy
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 19 2015, 12:06 PM
Pro Veritas
Nov 19 2015, 11:29 AM
Jonksy
Nov 18 2015, 06:51 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepNew research reveals the scope of the ‘British Corporate Welfare State’

https://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2015/research/corporate-welfare-state/
I have long argued that Corporate Welfare is greater cost to the public than Social Welfare.

I have usually been ridiculed for saying so.

All The Best
It's worth at least scan reading the source report that article is based on

http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/SPERI-Paper-24-The-British-Corporate-Welfare-State.pdf

The man's a nutter

Seems according to him we should end the welfare state as that's corporate welfare in his book. See his Figure 1. Some of his supposed 'sources' are highly contentious too.

He started with an agenda and never self challenged it.

The only nutters here are those that think there is no corporate welfare...Far from him being a nutter he has hit the nail on the head..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Don't the right wing Usuals whinge on! Especially the cranky ones who write articles such as that.
Edited by Lewis, Nov 21 2015, 07:55 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Affa
Nov 20 2015, 05:38 PM
disgruntled porker
Nov 20 2015, 08:28 AM

I've never claimed any of that Steve. I do insist however that the world recession was massively due to a feckless and unfettered financial system. It would still have happened in this country, though not as deep and as prolonged as it has been.

It is prolonged because if it were not there would not be this excuse to usher in cuts and austerity. The recession is over, but the debts keep mounting, the imbalance stubbornly the same, the correction not forthcoming ....
Campaigning on a ticket to end it sooner, they have instead extended the period to over a decade before any hope of it ending ........ and I personally doubt it will end then.

The Usuals have objected to each and every cut therefore one must conclude they are very content to borrow and spend on current consumption and pass the bill down to future generations. Why they obfuscate and do not just admit that that is their position I do not know, but honest truth is not in the genes.

Truth is that dragging this out Osborne style will create greater accumulated discomfort overall and delay any rebalancing of the economy away from debt fuelled consumption towards greater exportable production. We are only half way and many other countries have already crossed the finish line. However strangely enough we still have many on the left in complete denial of the existence of a deficit problem and/or that their Party was culpable in creating it's magnitude. Corbyn clearly cannot see the difficulty.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
disgruntled porker
Member Avatar
Older than most people think I am.
[ *  *  * ]
RJD
Nov 20 2015, 11:38 AM
disgruntled porker
Nov 20 2015, 09:09 AM
RJD
Nov 20 2015, 08:52 AM

You deny that Brown and NL were culpable with the size of the deficit and you have never indicated that you support anty reduction in Public Spending. From your comments here one must assume you believe the likes of Corbyn have a Magic Money Tree.
The Usuals are in complete denial.
Once again you accuse me of things I have never said. Losing it old boy?
Maybe, but more likely that you have a convenient memory lapse. Just for the record tell us which Public Sector cuts you support if any? That is an open invitation for all Usuals and if they wish they can say "none prefer increases".

OK. I've always said that the collapse of the financial system was more to blame than anything else for the recession and I stand by that statement. Saying that, it does not entirely exonerate Brown. He should have been better prepared. He was driving the bus when it crashed. If it had faulty brakes, he should have checked them before setting off. Alternatively, had he done as a Tory would have him do, or would have done, had they been in the driving seat, and use less regulation in the financial sector, we would be in an even bigger pickle.

I would suggest many savings in the public sector could be made by not using agency staff to fill in where there is under manning and set your own, in house staff on, instead of doing the exact opposite. This is especially relevant within the NHS at the moment. It has to be more expensive to employ a middleman to supply your staff, or at least it should be. I am of course talking about providing the same level of service in these situations. We all know that private suppliers of such services tend to underquote and halfway through a contract back down and admit they cannot give the required service level at the price tendered. That would be a good start.
Edited by disgruntled porker, Nov 21 2015, 08:54 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Jonksy
Nov 21 2015, 04:45 AM
The only nutters here are those that think there is no corporate welfare...Far from him being a nutter he has hit the nail on the head..
So you haven't read it then

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
disgruntled porker
Nov 21 2015, 08:49 AM
RJD
Nov 20 2015, 11:38 AM
disgruntled porker
Nov 20 2015, 09:09 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Maybe, but more likely that you have a convenient memory lapse. Just for the record tell us which Public Sector cuts you support if any? That is an open invitation for all Usuals and if they wish they can say "none prefer increases".

OK. I've always said that the collapse of the financial system was more to blame than anything else for the recession and I stand by that statement. Saying that, it does not entirely exonerate Brown. He should have been better prepared. He was driving the bus when it crashed. If it had faulty brakes, he should have checked them before setting off. Alternatively, had he done as a Tory would have him do, or would have done, had they been in the driving seat, and use less regulation in the financial sector, we would be in an even bigger pickle.

I would suggest many savings in the public sector could be made by not using agency staff to fill in where there is under manning and set your own, in house staff on, instead of doing the exact opposite. This is especially relevant within the NHS at the moment. It has to be more expensive to employ a middleman to supply your staff, or at least it should be. I am of course talking about providing the same level of service in these situations. We all know that private suppliers of such services tend to underquote and halfway through a contract back down and admit they cannot give the required service level at the price tendered. That would be a good start.
Yes the NHS could save billions by not employing agency staff and recruiting their own. We know full well that won't happen with this shower in power. Many of the agency firms are big Tory donors and quite a number of Tory MPs are directors of them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jonksy
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Nov 21 2015, 11:37 AM
Jonksy
Nov 21 2015, 04:45 AM
The only nutters here are those that think there is no corporate welfare...Far from him being a nutter he has hit the nail on the head..
So you haven't read it then

Of course I have read it along with many other articles on the subject of corporate welfare.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lewis
Nov 21 2015, 11:51 AM
disgruntled porker
Nov 21 2015, 08:49 AM
RJD
Nov 20 2015, 11:38 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
OK. I've always said that the collapse of the financial system was more to blame than anything else for the recession and I stand by that statement. Saying that, it does not entirely exonerate Brown. He should have been better prepared. He was driving the bus when it crashed. If it had faulty brakes, he should have checked them before setting off. Alternatively, had he done as a Tory would have him do, or would have done, had they been in the driving seat, and use less regulation in the financial sector, we would be in an even bigger pickle.

I would suggest many savings in the public sector could be made by not using agency staff to fill in where there is under manning and set your own, in house staff on, instead of doing the exact opposite. This is especially relevant within the NHS at the moment. It has to be more expensive to employ a middleman to supply your staff, or at least it should be. I am of course talking about providing the same level of service in these situations. We all know that private suppliers of such services tend to underquote and halfway through a contract back down and admit they cannot give the required service level at the price tendered. That would be a good start.
Yes the NHS could save billions by not employing agency staff and recruiting their own. We know full well that won't happen with this shower in power. Many of the agency firms are big Tory donors and quite a number of Tory MPs are directors of them.
I have to ask....how do you know this?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Nov 22 2015, 08:09 PM
Lewis
Nov 21 2015, 11:51 AM
disgruntled porker
Nov 21 2015, 08:49 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Yes the NHS could save billions by not employing agency staff and recruiting their own. We know full well that won't happen with this shower in power. Many of the agency firms are big Tory donors and quite a number of Tory MPs are directors of them.
I have to ask....how do you know this?
First hand knowledge.

Also link:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/selling-nhs-profit-full-list-4646154
Edited by Lewis, Nov 22 2015, 08:36 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lewis
Nov 22 2015, 08:34 PM
Rich
Nov 22 2015, 08:09 PM
Lewis
Nov 21 2015, 11:51 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I have to ask....how do you know this?
First hand knowledge.

Also link:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/selling-nhs-profit-full-list-4646154
Well, I have been through that list and nowhere can I find any reference to agencies that supply nurses or doctors to the NHS, I read plenty of private healthcare companies that have some sort of relation with MP's of all parties and as long as any donation is recorded in the members register then all is above board, so what point are you trying to make?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Nov 22 2015, 08:46 PM
Lewis
Nov 22 2015, 08:34 PM
Rich
Nov 22 2015, 08:09 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
First hand knowledge.

Also link:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/selling-nhs-profit-full-list-4646154
Well, I have been through that list and nowhere can I find any reference to agencies that supply nurses or doctors to the NHS, I read plenty of private healthcare companies that have some sort of relation with MP's of all parties and as long as any donation is recorded in the members register then all is above board, so what point are you trying to make?
Well what point are you trying to make. You seem to be in denial of your Tory Parties underhand dealings?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Nov 22 2015, 08:46 PM
and as long as any donation is recorded in the members register then all is above board, so what point are you trying to make?
Talk about naive. :'(
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lewis
Nov 22 2015, 08:50 PM
Rich
Nov 22 2015, 08:46 PM
Lewis
Nov 22 2015, 08:34 PM
Well, I have been through that list and nowhere can I find any reference to agencies that supply nurses or doctors to the NHS, I read plenty of private healthcare companies that have some sort of relation with MP's of all parties and as long as any donation is recorded in the members register then all is above board, so what point are you trying to make?
Well what point are you trying to make. You seem to be in denial of your Tory Parties underhand dealings?
I am not making any point, please back up your above implied statement, YOU are the poster making the implication, therefore you must be able to back it up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Jonksy
Nov 22 2015, 07:56 PM
Steve K
Nov 21 2015, 11:37 AM
Jonksy
Nov 21 2015, 04:45 AM
The only nutters here are those that think there is no corporate welfare...Far from him being a nutter he has hit the nail on the head..
So you haven't read it then

Of course I have read it along with many other articles on the subject of corporate welfare.
So what did you think of this

Quote:
 
Education and training services have helped to ensure that workers have the skills and qualities demanded by employers. The National Health Service has helped to ensure that workers remain healthy and productive. In-work benefits have effectively subsidised employers’ wage costs. And on top of all this, governments are major consumers of private sector goods and services.

The net effect of such interventions is to socialise business risks and, ultimately, profits. Publicly-funded benefits and services that are aimed at meeting the needs and/or wants of private businesses is a key part of what governments do and have always done. Corporate welfare underpins capitalist economies and many of the most successful private companies owe their success to it, although not all companies need corporate welfare in the exact same quantity and form, nor do they depend on it to the same extent throughout their ‘life course’.


So he's in effect saying we have to end state funded education and the NHS then. He later goes on to say similar about welfare, state pensions and public highways etc etc. Do you still say he's hit the nail on the head?

That author is more nutter than messiah.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HIGHWAY
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Lewis
Nov 21 2015, 11:51 AM
disgruntled porker
Nov 21 2015, 08:49 AM
RJD
Nov 20 2015, 11:38 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
OK. I've always said that the collapse of the financial system was more to blame than anything else for the recession and I stand by that statement. Saying that, it does not entirely exonerate Brown. He should have been better prepared. He was driving the bus when it crashed. If it had faulty brakes, he should have checked them before setting off. Alternatively, had he done as a Tory would have him do, or would have done, had they been in the driving seat, and use less regulation in the financial sector, we would be in an even bigger pickle.

I would suggest many savings in the public sector could be made by not using agency staff to fill in where there is under manning and set your own, in house staff on, instead of doing the exact opposite. This is especially relevant within the NHS at the moment. It has to be more expensive to employ a middleman to supply your staff, or at least it should be. I am of course talking about providing the same level of service in these situations. We all know that private suppliers of such services tend to underquote and halfway through a contract back down and admit they cannot give the required service level at the price tendered. That would be a good start.
Yes the NHS could save billions by not employing agency staff and recruiting their own. We know full well that won't happen with this shower in power. Many of the agency firms are big Tory donors and quite a number of Tory MPs are directors of them.
Do you think hospitals employing agency staff is a thing that started since the last election
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gaffa
New Member
[ * ]
Steve K
Nov 22 2015, 09:42 PM

That author is more nutter than messiah.
Agreed having these things in place for the people of this country is way sets us apart from many of our neighbours and rivals around the world
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Nov 22 2015, 08:09 PM
I have to ask....how do you know this?
This is a start:-
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmregmem.htm

Plus:-

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lewis
Member Avatar
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Rich
Nov 22 2015, 08:53 PM
Lewis
Nov 22 2015, 08:50 PM
Rich
Nov 22 2015, 08:46 PM
Well what point are you trying to make. You seem to be in denial of your Tory Parties underhand dealings?
I am not making any point, please back up your above implied statement, YOU are the poster making the implication, therefore you must be able to back it up.
I have backed it up.

However if you want even more info:

Conservative MP Nadhim Zahawi is paid £2,917 a month for seven hours work as non-executive director of recruitment firm SThree - a firm staffing new Clinical Commissioning Groups. SThree has devoured £2.6million from the NHS in 10 months by filling vacancies caused by Tory health reforms. It’s “Real Staffing” agency, part of it international health business, has netted it at least £1.4 million across 8 London CCGs for just 40 staff.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/jos-bell/tory-links-of-health-agencies-exposed-as-hunt-lines-up-next-nhs-selloff-in-england
Edited by Lewis, Nov 22 2015, 10:18 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply