Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

.

Raw,

Relating to :

Is it not the 'held' position that the private sector always shafts the public sector when it comes to business/money?

This may be the position held by some of society.

Personally, I think some of the Private sector, are prepared to shaft the public sector as some are prepared to shaft their own family, or friends, when it seems opportune to do so. Others have a more principled attitude in their relationship.

From previous ramblings, on other threads, I believe I have written that I worked for various companies in the 50-70s and admired the management of some companies and the industrial relationships within those private companies.

Also, have experience of public services and despaired at the qualities of management and sometimes the stupidity of the Unions, or at least their leaders.

Much of what the public services and wealth-fare services provide is good, and the private business benefit from the research facilitated by them.

Much efficiency, in some areas could be beneficially improved. However, there is something to be said for a level inefficiency as long as it is not to obvious. (Wont develop this.)

My father ran a successful business before it was nationalised in the 40s and continued to run it profitably afterwards in the public sector. Although, the nationalisation at the time was detrimental to him, he thought it was beneficial for those he employed and more than content by that. (Not advocating Nationalisation of Industry, but there is sometimes a virtue to size.)

Also, although I mainly worked in the public services area, I flirted with earnings from the private area and saw no real emotional conflict in doing so.

Again, many of my friends or associates were private businessmen and women either running, owning, or a few on the boards of large companies.

In general, I thought they were respectful of their own and their employees needs.

I dont think that I am biased against the private sector, but do see that there are more villains in that area than the public area.

What I have come to appreciate more and more, are the complexities of government and its reliance on appearing to be leading the public while actually being led by it.

Sometimes, I find that in order to implement a simple idea, a very devious and torturous route has to be followed.

Decision making is easy, implementation is the bugger.

--------------

Taxation.

You cant take it with you and mostly, it is nice to see how it is used.

=====

Just another thought.

Perhaps, half, or, at least a large percentage of what is produced by the private centre, is of little value to and of no benefit to society.

Are they deliberately production of waste and inefficiency and should they be thrown out on the scrap heap?

Is there a way of squelching the word / name 'fred?' Whilst I generally derive some enjoyment from reading the posts og Greek et al, I have no desire to note any mention of the most blinkered, stupid poster on AM (quite an achievement all things considered). I was rather hopeful that by squelching the muppet that would be that, but unfortunately it seems not - silly me. Guess I'll just have to give this 'fred' and a few others a wide berth in future.

mnamreh,

You say, 'I have encountered serving and retired Police Officers who were a disgrace to the uniform and all for which it stands'.
So have I. I have worked with some Officers who I would not pay in washers. The problem is that most bosses want the quiet life and don't have the bottle to chuck those Officers out on their ear.
I tried to get rid of 3 such excuses for police Officers, but each time I was over ruled by those higher up.
Some poor performers were given good assessments if they wanted a transfer, because if they were given bad ones, no other station would be prepared to accept them.
I often heard some who got to higher rank described in terms of, he/she was a unless PC, a useless Sergeant etc before they became a useless Officer of higher rank.
Discipline is one of the biggest failures in the Police Force.
When I joined, a Sergeant was almost god, and you stood up if anyone above the rank of Inspector entered the room, unless you were engaged in something you could not leave.
In the years toward the end of my service, many fairly senior Officers were addressed by their Christian name.
No wonder many Officers I see now days look scruffy and slovenly, when they know no action will be taken.
Like in all walks of life, the minority embarrass the majority.

Does anyone want a pie and pint with Fred ? Oh well Fred it was worth a try ....

i wouldnt mind.
personally i really dont see any problem with his posts, he is just expressing his own views and opinions. whats wrong with that? it just dont bother me. i may or may not agree with them but so what? anyway i dont read most of em just some.
Free speech and all that, i may or may not agree with him but i will defend the right for him to say it ,and all that etc. so just squelch him and thats ok with me also.chill out and be more open about it.
regards to all
jkd

Fred likes his own opinions - but not always others. Which is why he has (allegedly) squelched me, amongst others (again, allegedly).

FWIW, I never squelch people, even when I utterly disagree with them - unlike Fred, who appears to be unable to take that which he metes out.

But then, what do I care?

.

Did anyone see " The Apprentice " last nite ? the Doctor who was the team leader that was fired said to Sir Alan I started like you with just 200 and built up a successful company. How much do Doctor's get paid. ?

Yes, we watched it.

:-(

We both agreed that we both have such very negative and irritating feelings about the show, and it just doesn't seem to portray 'business' as we know it.

We used to be big fans but one more week might just be the last for us.

ALD,

I think our next meeting is at the Wig and Gown. You are welcome as long as your pockets aren't sown up.

Doctors payments, depends on what they are doctoring.

I have a couple of daughters with PHDs, and payments vary, also, many PHD are being laid off. (The latter is going to happen to the Medics as well.)

Had a friend back in the 80s, who had PHD in Engineering and PHD in Chemistry, but when applying for posts was frequently told he was over qualified. Ended up continuing in his hobby of "computers".

Last time I had sex, it did not work out too well. Could I be over qualified?

Greek,

You challenged me with the following:
Some further figures.

The process of applying for BSF investment was so fiendishly complex that, collectively, Englands local authorities spent an estimated 250 million on preparing their bids, with 60 million being spent on consultancy or advisory costs. Thats 250 million just to fill in the forms, so plentiful was the red tape.

Some councils which entered the process six years ago have only just started building new schools.
Another project starting this year is three years behind schedule.

I have no problem continuing this debate, but only if you can show my figures are wrong. If you can't it is an open and shut case of Labour Government waste.

===========================

I see the BSF as similar to the PFI schemes.

The private finance initiative (PFI) was invented in Australia in the late 1980s, and was originally applied to toll road and railway projects.[1] In 1992 PFI was implemented for the first time in the UK by the Conservative government of John Major. It immediately proved controversial, and was attacked by the Labour Party while in opposition. Labour critics such as the future Secretary of State for Health, Patricia Hewitt considered that PFI was really a back-door form of privatisation (House of Commons, December 7, 1993), and the future

=======================


Again reading back on some threads you will see that I thought the schemes were follies. But they were a way of conning the public into getting something of nothing. Also, perhaps a way of paying friend off. Basically I saw it in this way. (Buying a house for X+nothing, and selling it for 2X+nothing - T.) (T=Time) (Easy money.) Buy to-day and pay to-morrow or do a moonlight flit.

The gate was opened by the Tories and applied with alacrity by Labour. Didnt the private sector like it.

====================


The difference was that, the infrastructure of the country was left to decay by the previous administrations, and needed restitution. The longest period of decay was under Maggie.

Yes, there are always slovenly processing within the Public Sector and the numbers are colossal, but the same slovenliness occurs in the Private sector. However, numbers involved are smaller and dont hit the headlines, but it is the public in general which has to pick up the debris.)

Again some of the costs in this area are due to crazy the NIMBY actions of vociferous groups.

================

I havent number crunched, and I am not inclined to do so. but I hope this is an answer, but somehow doubt it.

Regards.


Ps. regarding SEX. try a different position! 8-)

Fred - 'Perhaps, half, or, at least a large percentage of what is produced by the private centre, is of little value to and of no benefit to society.Are they deliberately production of waste and inefficiency and should they be thrown out on the scrap heap?'

The BIG difference here is that I have the freedom of choice to buy or not to buy private sector output, useless or not. I don't have a choice on where my hard earned money/tax is wasted.

I can imagine you stood in that bucket now trying to lift yourself up by the handle.

Raw,

The problem with waste is that it the disposal of it is paid for the public as a whole.

Also, if it is waste it is produced at a cost to the public in many other ways.

Again, what you define of waste of you pay your taxes for?

If there is waste, but you have a "harmonious" society it may be better to tolerate that wast until you have a better idea.

The motor car engine, although producing "driving or haulage power" produces waste heat on hot day and other pretty useless waste products of degradation of fuel. I wouldn't throw the engines away, but I would hope for some further improvements. (Research done by your partially publicly funded Universities etc, )

Also, the private car user produces "waste" at a cost to his environment and the damages to society in general.


Should general taxation be used to rid society of the products of the individual. (If so, where are your boundaries? If not, how do you charge and obtain payment from the responsible individual.)

The difficulty with cutting down on waste, is what is defined by "waste".

The waste of my neighbour is often compost to me. 8-)

Again, Trident, Aircraft Carriers, Harriers may be a waste to me. Others have different opinions.

I object to paying for their cost, but can't withdraw from "General" taxation.

Fred,

I agree that PFI was equally as bad as the BSF program, but that does not excuse either, so I don't get your point.

Fred, I wasn't refering to 'rubbish' waste, that would be a whole new can of worms, as would the environmental issues and I have no interest in debating either with you. Come to think of it, you are doing what you always do and broadening the scope of the discussion so I don't have the time to continue.

As a shining example of the waste I mean, I refer you to the mothballed on launch, expensive, new aircraft carrier that someone, somewhere, agreed to buy. It wasn't the private sector that signed the contract. I would prefer to have seen that sort of wasted money not collected as tax in the first place. Hopefully the price of steel will increase and we can weigh it in for a profit before it gets wet.

The country is paying 120million a day in interest payments to service its loans, that to me is waste and is doing exactly what, i assume, you would detest. Instead of the tax and spend redistribution of wealth mentatility it is the millions of ordinary folk pouring money into the coffers of the few.

Rawdm999,

Well said. Like you I feel it is almost impossible to continue debating with Fred when he twists things so much. I will though still sometimes quote figures and fact as answers, but will not comment any further on his posts, until/unless he changes tack.

Greek - frustrating isn't it. He frequently states as fact something, which when challenged, he loses in the blur of is twisting & turning.

His response, if any, will determine my next post, if any, as i've remembered how much time can be lost in these futile debates with him.

Raw,

The BIG difference here is that I have the freedom of choice to buy or not to buy private sector output, useless or not. I don't have a choice on where my hard earned money/tax is wasted.

=========

The country is paying 120million a day in interest payments to service its loans, that to me is waste and is doing exactly what, i assume, you would detest. Instead of the tax and spend redistribution of wealth mentatility it is the millions of ordinary folk pouring money into the coffers of the few.

==========

As a consequence of living in a developed society, it is necessary for the reasonable structures and complexities of that state to have financial support i.e. taxation in one form, or another.

In a reasonably caring and organised society, taxation does not have to be only in cash, but probably includes the work, which members of that society provide within it, whether it appears initially directly towards themselves or society in general. Low paid workers in low paid public services are an example. They receive a low wage, but they service others.

Initially, a parent having a child seems for personal benefit, but when you consider that that child may be a future health carer, researcher, trader or businessman and contribute to society at a later date the value to society may change.

The problem which I see with having lower taxes and being able to opt out when the taxation doesnt suit oneself, is defining what is of value yourself and to that society as a whole, I.E. the total environment we live in.

Are the Police an expensive waste of time and who produce little of value.

Unfortunately, they are necessary for the keeping of law and order. But a perfect society may not need them.

(But living out of town, rarely travelling away from my castle and employing a few minders, I dont need, or want them.)

I think, in order to have harmony within a society, a tolerance of mistakes (not criminality) and what can be defined has to be accepted. That does not exclude improving by progress.

The problem is, that when a butterfly flaps its wings it effects everybody.

In order to affect the use your tax, it seems you have to become politically involve and hope you have enough of others to concur with your values.

===============================

I think the squealing about 120million a day, is similar to those complaining about their fix rate prime mortgage which they took out in good times.

Sad, but it looked good, at the time. (Was it turning a blind eye, or have we God's gift of hindsight.)

I hope those who are taking out mortgages at this point in time will feel as good about it in 2years time.

=================================

Greek,

What are you grumbling about?

Havent checked, or disagreed, with your figures, and will accept them for the time-being.

But, I dont think the only sinners were the Labour government when enabling contracts and believed they adopted joyfully the procedures, developed by their predecessors and filled the private sectors teeth with gold to get what they wanted.

Borrowing, from the public to finance the private sectors profit margin and then being asked to bail out by the private sector when things go wrong, is crazy.

(I dont apologise for baiting you earlier (once again). Of course, I dont think the police a complete waste of time!) 8-) or (