O/T:- Election

[The Dug Out]

With regard to taxation i think it is a neccessary evil, society would not, or indeed, could not function without it.
Trouble is that taxation is being abused by the people we elect to manage it, take Nottingham City Council, they are/were a bunch of elected people that were so incompetent it beggars belief, they increased local taxation to their limit,mismanage the cash by letting it be ditributed by people that just have not got a clue, they in turn blame central government which is a political trope that has worn thin.
Lambeth is another case in question, probably worse than NCC, just been reading about it and it is criminal how they spend public money (taxation).

[jackal2]

With regard to taxation i think it is a neccessary evil, society would not, or indeed, could not function without it. Trouble is that taxation is being abused by the people we elect to manage it, take Nottingham City Council, they are/were a bunch of elected people that were so incompetent it beggars belief, they increased local taxation to their limit,mismanage the cash by letting it be ditributed by people that just have not got a clue, they in turn blame central government which is a political trope that has worn thin.

True. Taxation isn't the problem, it's how the money is used to deliver services that matters.

The risk inherent within publicly-funded services is that the providers can - and sometimes do - fall into the mindset that the taxpayer will get what they're given and like it or lump it. If a service can effectively demand money with menaces, the people delivering it (or not delivering it) get paid regardless of whether that service is good quality or poor quality.

The NHS is a classic example.

Make no mistake, there are many examples within the NHS of outstanding people and outstanding areas of work, where the people delivering the service are motivated by the genuine desire to work their hardest and do their very best for people with the public funds they receive.

There are also, however, people and areas within the NHS who demonstrably don't care enough about service users and will do the bare minimum they can get away with each day, because they know they will get paid anyway.

If you don't recognise both 'types' from the NHS and several other public sector organisations, then you've either never used or worked in them, or you probably are one the lazy or incompetent sods wasting everyone's money.

What the public sector needs is the ability/power to root out the malevolent types and sack them, quickly. And at the opposite end of the scale - because the carrot is just as important as the stick - what it also needs is the ability to reward those public servants who represent all that is best about the public sector. There are many good, honest, hard-working people in the public sector whose efforts don't deserve to be undermined by the freeloaders.

Unfortunately, as we've seen in several high profile cases of public sector incompetence, negligence in the public sector is often "punished" by issuing a large fine to the organisation instead of rooting out and sacking the incompetent or lazy individuals who caused the problem. The public are encouraged to think that this is somehow "justice", when actually taxpayers are fining themselves, while the perpetrators who should be identified and dismissed often end up continuing to work in the same organisation for many more years.

A Government of any political persuasion with the bravery to introduce real individual accountability into the public sector, with deserved rewards for outstanding service and swift financial consequences or dismissal for those employees not performing, would be onto a winner, because the public would actually begin to get true and consistent value for the tax they pay.

[Elite_Pie]

Would any Tory government be considered by you as the best government that you have lived under in the last 50 years?

I honestly couldn't pick a best government. Right back to the Heath v Wilson era most of them merge into the 'meh' category so only the bad ones stand out. The worst two do happen to be Tory governments however, starting with Thatcher. She governed solely for her supporters, and they undoubtedly did very well under her. But if you didn't support her you didn't count, you were left to rot. I didn't ever think I'd see worse, but this bunch have proved me wrong. The level of lies, cronyism and corruption has gone off the scale. I blame Johnson for that more than Sunak, but Sunak was happy to be part of it. I can't wait to see them binned.

[Lullapie]

What would society look like if we abandoned all other forms of taxation though? What public services would you cut funding to or privatise? How would you ensure that those in society who genuinely need support get it? Would you abolish the welfare state altogether?

I agree that there are just too many ways to get taxed. You get taxed when you earn, taxed when you spend, taxed when you sell. If you decide to do nothing, you get "taxed" thought inflation as a result of more government incompetence. There has to be a better way, but it cannot be at the expense of those who cannot support themselves.

It would be a monumental shift to move to that and of course, it's probably more theory than practice.

The introduction of the Welfare State starting in 1945 was revolutionary (not in the Lenin sense) and has been mimicked by many countries throughout the world ever since. The trouble is, it has been abused. Similar to the union movement. Unions were ***** in the early days to help those that didn't have a voice and the mass mobilisation they organised benefit everybody below the super rich.

However absolute power brings greed and corruption. Over the years, the Welfare State has been seen by many as a gravy train. I don't just mean those that receive it, but just as much, those that administer it. It has got to the stage where people become experts in what they can claim. What they are 'entitled' to. All this to the detriment of those that really need it.

There would need to be a reset and I believe Britain is far too gone to be able to do that without a massive overthrow of the establishment. It was heading towards that with Brexit, but the establishment managed to rein everything back in again.

I'm not fully anti-taxation, but what I believe is fair taxation - like I mentioned before VAT (or GST as they call it where I live). You only pay, as you spend.

[Lullapie]

I honestly couldn't pick a best government. Right back to the Heath v Wilson era most of them merge into the 'meh' category so only the bad ones stand out. The worst two do happen to be Tory governments however, starting with Thatcher. She governed solely for her supporters, and they undoubtedly did very well under her. But if you didn't support her you didn't count, you were left to rot. I didn't ever think I'd see worse, but this bunch have proved me wrong. The level of lies, cronyism and corruption has gone off the scale. I blame Johnson for that more than Sunak, but Sunak was happy to be part of it. I can't wait to see them binned.

Yes Johnson made a complete dick of himself - even before he became PM. He missed his chance when Cameron resigned and left the vacuum that the Tories never really filled.

Funny thing is that I am a Thatcher-ite. My family certainly wasn't anything like what you imagine Thatcher supporters to look like. We certainly weren't wealthy and had to work very hard to get by. The only two things that really helped was we were able to buy our council house and we adopted the Tebbitt mantra of get on your bike if it's not working for you - rather than waiting for something to happen and the government to act for you.

I remember not being able to talk about who we supported in fear of retribution. That also has stuck in my mind as I've grown up, how violent the left can be if you don't agree with them. We have friends in the US who own businesses, employ hundreds of people, but daren't outwardly show who they support because the left would close them down. That is echoed across many businesses, which is a very sorry state of affairs.

[Lullapie]

Despite having studied political science at university and being very interested in political ideas and how societies function, I've come to not care so much about what colour tie (or blouse!) politicians wear, but how corrupt or not they are.

If Labour or Conservatives were both impeccably honest in how they went about their business, who they gave government contracts to (hello Conservatives), promoted people to important positions using one criterion which is competence, not gender or skin colour (hello Labour) or blind, ignorant loyalty to the PM (hello Boris), then I would take more of an interest in their policies.

As it is I'll be voting Labour, actually for the first time in my life, purely on the basis that I don't like the majority of people in the Conservative party or their (lack of) ethics. There are some good ones, just as there are some ones I don't like and don't trust in the Labour Party, but I think Starmer has done a decent job of making them electable, and things need freshening up.

Having said that, I see some huge problems that we are going to need to get a grip on as a nation very soon. I don't expect we will, as they are hard problems to solve.

1) Population decline. Not necessarily a bad thing in itself, but definitely a bad thing when you have a huge demographic chunk of older people that needs medical procedures / care assistants / pensions, while the number of people of working age or soon to be working age is declining. Immigration has been the solution so far, but that is not a vote winner in 2024 and looks like becoming less so, due to concerns about social cohesion. Making rich old people pay for more stuff is also not a vote winner, cause rich old people vote and young people don't.

2) Pensions. As per no.1, pensioners get a good deal rom political parties because they actually vote (good for them, seriously). However, pensions were originally introduced not as a way to enjoy your autumn years, but to make sure you didn't die when you could no longer work. The 'boomer' generation got lucky with advances happening in medical care but pension age staying the same, but it is not sustainable. Everyone knows the pension age is going to have to go up dramatically as people live longer. Not a vote winner but we need to start talking about that.

3) NHS. Similar to no.2. It started out as penicillin or a plaster cast and lying down for a few days, and is now something completely different. We all like it, and I personally don't want to see US style private insurance, but it is tremendously expensive and maybe some kind of payment for use of the NHS for those who can afford it and don't have chronic complaints would help. Also not a vote winner.

4) Housing. Part of the reason for population decline (apart from the fact that social norms have changed and people don't feel obliged to have kids if they don't want them) is that raising a family is absurdly expensive compared to a few decades ago. Housing is a big part of this. I may be mistaken but I think there is a consistent net increase in UK population, but not in (affordable) housing stock. We need to build more houses so that housing becomes cheaper. We also cannot make houses cheaper because most people's only investment is their house, and this would lead to them in the best case being extremely pissed off, and in the worst case behind on their mortgage with negative equity.

5) Immigration. Some people love it, some people hate it. Personally I think we could benefit from it, but not like this. Leaving aside ethical concerns about persecuted people, taking generally unskilled labour off boats to become a burden on the taxpayer in the short term, then compete for jobs, public services and housing with local low earners in the long term, is not a recipe for healthy finances and social cohesion. It is also enriching organised crime groups beyond their widest dreams. Again, we need to have an honest conversation about the situation, our options, and the consequences either way. Isn't India churning out tech entrepreneurs hand over fist? Let's get them in. East Asian culture prioritises work ethic and academic achievement? Get them in.

Basically we need to have a sensible, mature, public conversation about the nuts and bolts of what makes a country successful and nice to live in, whom we want to look after, to what extent, and what we're willing to sacrifice to do that, without the hyperbole and 'no-go' topics that constrain us now. But we'll probably just get slogans. Having said that, do vote for someone because you'll miss it when it's gone.

Great post.

[SmiffyPie]

VAT should be levied on non-essentials only. Food (I know it isn't now), water, electricity, gas etc should be VAT free.

[BigFatPie]

True. Taxation isn't the problem, it's how the money is used to deliver services that matters.

The risk inherent within publicly-funded services is that the providers can - and sometimes do - fall into the mindset that the taxpayer will get what they're given and like it or lump it. If a service can effectively demand money with menaces, the people delivering it (or not delivering it) get paid regardless of whether that service is good quality or poor quality.

The NHS is a classic example.

Make no mistake, there are many examples within the NHS of outstanding people and outstanding areas of work, where the people delivering the service are motivated by the genuine desire to work their hardest and do their very best for people with the public funds they receive.

There are also, however, people and areas within the NHS who demonstrably don't care enough about service users and will do the bare minimum they can get away with each day, because they know they will get paid anyway.

If you don't recognise both 'types' from the NHS and several other public sector organisations, then you've either never used or worked in them, or you probably are one the lazy or incompetent sods wasting everyone's money.

What the public sector needs is the ability/power to root out the malevolent types and sack them, quickly. And at the opposite end of the scale - because the carrot is just as important as the stick - what it also needs is the ability to reward those public servants who represent all that is best about the public sector. There are many good, honest, hard-working people in the public sector whose efforts don't deserve to be undermined by the freeloaders.

Unfortunately, as we've seen in several high profile cases of public sector incompetence, negligence in the public sector is often "punished" by issuing a large fine to the organisation instead of rooting out and sacking the incompetent or lazy individuals who caused the problem. The public are encouraged to think that this is somehow "justice", when actually taxpayers are fining themselves, while the perpetrators who should be identified and dismissed often end up continuing to work in the same organisation for many more years.

A Government of any political persuasion with the bravery to introduce real individual accountability into the public sector, with deserved rewards for outstanding service and swift financial consequences or dismissal for those employees not performing, would be onto a winner, because the public would actually begin to get true and consistent value for the tax they pay.

At last, I now know why I can’t get a GP appointment for 3 weeks and my NHS dentist has just turned private only…because of all the public sector slackers taking the piss out of the Hard Working Taxpayer!

3 questions present themselves. What evidence do you have to support your assertions, does the private sector suffer similar HR difficulties(are professional leadswingers the reason we get such terrible service from the water companies for example) and have the issues you describe got much worse since 2010, when by almost every measure public services were in much better shape than now?

[Elite_Pie]

Funny thing is that I am a Thatcher-ite. My family certainly wasn't anything like what you imagine Thatcher supporters to look like. We certainly weren't wealthy and had to work very hard to get by. The only two things that really helped was we were able to buy our council house and we adopted the Tebbitt mantra of get on your bike if it's not working for you - rather than waiting for something to happen and the government to act for you.

A lot to like and respect about that. But it ignores the fact that Thatcher left some communities in similar situations to rot. I know some unions were getting above themselves back then due to some extreme left leadership, but she was so determined to topple them that she gave no consideration at all to the real victims. Those victims were working class families who just wanted a job. Most had family ties which stopped them "getting on their bike", so they were left without hope. She saw them as collateral damage rather than real people.

I remember not being able to talk about who we supported in fear of retribution. That also has stuck in my mind as I've grown up, how violent the left can be if you don't agree with them.

And I remember Thatcher using the police force as her private army. At the height of the miners strike I cycled past Cinderhill colliery on my way to work, so I witnessed some of the scenes first hand. The violence I saw didn't come from the left, it came from the police.

[jackal2]

3 questions present themselves.

The tone of your reply perhaps answers a few questions too. Regardless of whether we're talking about the public sector or the private sector, I don't think the notion that employees should be rewarded for good performance and penalised for bad performance would touch such a nerve with the majority of people.

What evidence do you have to support your assertions?

My own experience and the anecdotes of many other people I've spoken with over the years, relaying examples of good and bad practice/service. I suspect the vast majority of people on here would also have their own experiences, if they are being open and honest...

Does the private sector suffer similar HR difficulties(are professional leadswingers the reason we get such terrible service from the water companies for example)?

Yes, private sector companies can in theory be as poor at appointing or disposing of bad staff as public sector ones, but if they have competitors in the market then there's at least an opportunity for customers to switch to a better provider, so there's more likely to be a 'reckoning' for providers who suffer poor/incompetent employees gladly.

Regarding purchasing running water (as opposed to bottled), where you live will often restrict you to one provider, so although water companies are private and technically 'charge' you rather than 'tax' you, perhaps the knowledge that they have a captive audience does indeed breed a similar arrogance to those elements in the public sector who think the customer just has to like it or lump it.

Have the issues you describe got much worse since 2010, when by almost every measure public services were in much better shape than now?

If your argument is that more people were employed in the public sector pre-2010, you will find that the more employees an organisation of any type has, the more it can hide its weaknesses, because you'll have more 'good' employees around to pick up the slack of the 'bad' ones, but that doesn't equate to providing better value for the taxpayer or customer. Value for money lies not in the number of people you employ, but in the quality, and that's why the public sector (and yes, private sector too) needs to be effective in separating the wheat from the chaff. One effective employee will provide more value than multiple bad ones.