In the Public sector what's the difference between a tax cut and a pay rise? Tax cuts are a preferable way of putting more money in people's pockets surely especially the lowest paid surely?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
May 7th | UK General Election 2015 OT - Please go vote!
- Thread starter Volotaire
- Start date
- Status
In the Public sector what's the difference between a tax cut and a pay rise? Tax cuts are a preferable way of putting more money in people's pockets surely especially the lowest paid surely?
A lot take advantage of it and it's a legal brick wall.
travisbickle
Member
The bad thing about human rights is people use them!!
Who has the most human rights, the rapist who ruins a child's life or the rapists victim?
What about the burglar who assaults a pensioner in their home or the pensioner who is left petrified for life?
The system as is is badly worded and ends up protecting the wrong people.
Wrestlemania
Banned
Just because I know it'll piss you off - have a Guardian link:
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/aug/27/rape-cases-tories-human-rights-law
Find me scientific evidence that it disproportionately helps "the wrong people", rather than anecdotal evidence you have clearly pulled out of your arse and/or the pages of the Daily Mail.
I give it 2 years, the private sector is licking its lips right now
OmegaTreeFish
Banned
Would be political suicide. I don't believe any of this crap about the NHS being privatised. I doubt anyone but a tiny % of the country wants that. Just sounds like fear mongering.
Find me scientific evidence that it doesn't.
That argument goes both ways. The whole reason the debate came up in the first place is because anomalies got thrown up from extreme cases in the system.
Miles Quaritch
Member
I mean, I doubt many people wanted the rails privatised, but it still happened. The PPP for the underground? Still happened.
I imagine even fewer wanted Royal Mail privatised, but it still happened. It's all about making sure the thing you want to privatise is starved of enough money for long enough that when you bring up the idea of mass privatisation and all the supposed benefits it will bring, people jump on it without realising the long terms ramifications of such an action.
So far as anyone can tell, the Tories only think that you have Human Rights when they want you to have them--only the most 'serious cases' will be able to appeal to the HRA, and that will be decided by Parliament.
OmegaTreeFish
Banned
NHS is way more important to people to not be privatised. I don't believe you can compare them.
If the do it the outrage will be huge and I doubt anyone will vote for them again. There manifested said they were investing more money in it. I know its easy to just say "thats full of lies" but guess what. You can say that about all parties. People eventually learn that all you can really do is read the manifestoes and vote based on what one achieves what you want for your country. Avoid the media circus bullshit on TV as much as possible and see what happens.
The hate I'm this thread is quite out of hand at times. Many of us voted Tory because we believe they have a good economic plan for the long term. We arnt thinking short term. There are bullahit policies in there (right to buy, bedroom tax) but I'm not going to vote labour instead when I trust them even less.
But apparently we all hate poor and disabled people.
Its just an endless cycle and those younger voters here will eventually see this.
New part gets in power
Other side claim its an outrage
Party doesn't fulfill all its promises
Win next election as well
Papers point out parties lies
Repeat till new party get in
Go back to step one.
They all lie
Some one is always worse off
Its never black and white.
How naive. The Tories will make it popular through lies, obfuscation, and mistruths, just like they always do.
OmegaTreeFish
Banned
I mean ... Your very passionate and so overly convinced that no one is going to be able to have a conversation with you. Anyone who disagrees with you is naive, guilable , an idiot etc.
People who think calling slurs automatically win the debate amuse me.
I don't believe that all of the people who voted Tory are naive, gullible, stupid, etc. I do think that it's a little naive to believe that the Tories aren't master manipulators. I mean, they've managed to sell the most radical economic plan in a generation as being smart, obvious, and responsible.
OmegaTreeFish
Banned
Most people believe they all lie and take that into consideration.
StealthGoblin
Banned
My major concern about having a Tory majority is the potential infringements of our privacy, particularly digitally.
Well I mean if you think Labour lied about their manifesto then you'd think they have the most clear, brilliant, and exciting vision for Britain's future that's ever existed.
Wrestlemania
Banned
It's good that we have a human rights act which is intended to give us some protection against this.
Haha, not really - rather than providing some invisible protection that we should never have to think about, it's really just to protect foreign rapists. I read an article about it in the Daily Mail in 2011. Get rid!
They'll do it piece by piece, identifying things that the public don't think are worth money or don't understand properly.
The public bought into the "too many managers sat around doing nothing" line beautifully, for example, so that's the first place they'll go. Replace publicly paid management with private ones. They'll say the hospitals are failing because of A&E wait times and the public will lap it up. Once they are in place they can choose how to best spend all your tax money to make themselves a profit.
PJV3
Member
Ovek
7Member7
"Snoopers' charter" was the first thing that came out of Theresa Mays mouth when she was given the Home Secretary job again. With no Libdem to block it this time it will easily get through parlement.
We'll need the Lords to slap it down before their inevitable reformation / replacement
Thornton Reed
Member
Great post and this is exactly going to happen. It was only yesterday the telegraph was championing a private health care system
They've already pulled the strings to get 'maybe we should pay for GP appointments' into the national conversation, something that was simply unthinkable and would have been laughed at by anyone outside of the most fanatical rightwing circles less than a decade ago. They'll have it implemented by 2020.
Bingo.
More arm flapping.
As soon as the nhs starts being privatised then people will start protesting and rightfully vote against whoever is doing it. It is political suicide and whoever starts it, the opposition can capitalise by simply saying "vote for us. We won't do it"
Re paying for gp appointments, I think a nominal fee for time wasting visits is fair. "I've got a cough and a cold", yes, so do a lot of people around winter.
I also think certain a&e visits should accrue a nominal charge. Do something stupid while drunk? That's a tenner.
Re paying for gp appointments, I think a nominal fee for time wasting visits is fair. "I've got a cough and a cold", yes, so do a lot of people around winter.
I also think certain a&e visits should accrue a nominal charge. Do something stupid while drunk? That's a tenner.
jimbobsmells
Member
This post seems to contradict itself.
You realise this is exactly how it will play out in public, piece by piece and you won't mind until it's too late.
not really because paying a fee to subsidise your stupiditu for a drunken accident does not equate to privatisation.
Plus I wasnt saying the latter should happen, it's just my take on it.
I wish I believed that this was true, but I don't. The NHS has already 'started being privatised'. It's a project that has been underway for years under various different names (Labour did it too).
Do you really think they'll sit there and just announce that they're going to privatise the NHS? They'll lie about it, spin it, and obfuscate about it. They'll disguise it as 'efficiency savings' and insist that there's no choice but to bring in more private provisions. I know that they'll do this because it's what they already do.
They will gut the NHS and people will cheer them on.
Again, these are views that were literally laughable in the past, and now you're saying they're sensible and reasonable. This is what the Tories do now. They recast radical views as sensible, wait until enough people have started agreeing, and then they push them into law. This is how they will dismantle the NHS, and people will commend them for their smart, sensible approach.
PJV3
Member
There's 5 years til the next election. People will be distracted by the EU etc. And you don't want to go down that "stupid" charge route, the money spent on the internal market is huge enough as it is.
Wrestlemania
Banned
Privatisation in and of itself is not the problem - the problem is the resulting effects of that privitisatio on the service itself, one of which is the potential for many parts of it no longer being free at the point of use.
JesseEwiak
Member
As an American, yup. Conservatives are very good at getting lots of middle class people to believe that lower class people are lesser human beings, who deserve no comforts or entitlements unless they "deserve" it.
Now, it'll be a little tougher for your Conservative's, since there's not a racial component, but I don't doubt many of the stories coming form the Murdoch press about the "wasteful" NHS will focus on immigrant families and non-white Britons. Ya' know, those'll just be the ones they run across.
jimbobsmells
Member
Dude I totally agree I don't want to pay for someone's drunken behaviour but that's why we have the NHS it's meant to be free at the point of service.
You already paid through your taxes. If it's between me paying twice to visit a GP or the status quo I'll pick the status quo every time.
You want to fine people for wasting GPs time, then ok but I can see some challenges around that.
Not everything should be free imo. Health problems caused by obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption. ...It's basically your own fault
Wrestlemania
Banned
Not the least of which is the completely disproportionate effect it would have on the poor. "Oh, I'm not going to get this checked out because I don't want to risk the £10 it'll cost if it turns out to be nothing" as opposed to "Fuck it, it's only a tenner, might as well just get seen".
And the what happens if it turns out to be something more serious which results in thousands of pounds of hospital treatment?
Wait, I've got it! "Because you could have caught this earlier, you are liable for all the extra costs incurred in treating you at a more advanced stage". Perfect!
is there actually a majority in the commons for this or is it just a oh please shut up about this backbenchers bill?
JesseEwiak
Member
Right, only the "good" people should receive the benefits of society, right?
Clearly that's what I'm saying.
PJV3
Member
The taxes on those products should pay for it.
It's not free, it's free at the point of care. You pay for them through your taxes.
Wrestlemania
Banned
Additional charges (the vast majority will have already paid once through taxes) for treatment of things deemed to be self inflicted is not even remotely a workable solution. Tackling the cause of those problems should be the priority, not dismantling the service which provides treatment for their effects.
In a perfect world taxes would cover everything and there'd be no cuts or defecit
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked