Someone please explain to me why you would vote Tory.

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by tommygoldy, May 8, 2015.

  1. sANDYbAY

    sANDYbAY On benefits-won't sponsor!

    I live fairly near the middle of England (a bit to the left but quite near) and I'm not mad. I've been checked by doctors and I've got a certificate now so I can prove I'm not mad.





    And if you say I am I'll come round and kill all your family and neighbours and everyone in your street.
     
    Jono1249 likes this.
  2. Nah Lillian's my bitch.
     
    Jono1249 likes this.
  3. Merlin Cat

    Merlin Cat Moderator

    I thought you were being all clever- however, now I've googled it...... :)
     
  4. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    So just to clarify - are you asserting that a Labour government would not have needed to place any austerity measures in place?

    Or are you still a believer in Alistair Darlings "spend our way out of recession" economic strategy. Or when they dropped VAT to 15% on a whim, costing thousands to pretty much all businesses with pretty much not effect?

    I would imagine most of us would be happy with a manifesto along the lines of:

    • Sort the taxation out*
    • Ensure any corporations pay their due in tax and close loopholes.
    • Increase minimum wage to living wage - and reduce the burden of benefits to people trying to earn a living whilst the public purse shores up their employers and often foreign share holders.
    • Build a more efficient public sector spending mechanism - and reward the talent in it for their hard work.
    • Personally I still HUGELY believe that the NHS, Police etc should be privatised and run as NOT for profit organisations, a form of co-operative where we can harness the talent and knowledge of the private sector too and help build an efficient service not mired with the circling vultures. Most of it has already gone - why people don't see this is beyond me.

    All Labour came up with was Mansion Tax.

    To be fair to the Lib Dems - they were the only ones bold enough to actually show their strategy in any detail and the maths behind it.



    *the thing is - were this fair people would be surprised. Take me for example - no kids, never claimed benefit and have to pay for prescriptions, dentist etc etc. I get very little for free. I believe I already shore up the tax system disproportionately already. So why would I be happy being hit for more? On the other hand I believe in contributing to society - but maybe some form of statement about what you get out compared to what you put in would be fairer? It's hard to sell a system that pretty much everyone thinks is unfair - though I don't understand why they people that knowingly never contribute and never will contribute have a voice in the debate.
     
    vanorak, SweeneyTodd, Dicky and 3 others like this.
  5. I would prefer old labour values but we can't have everything. Lib dems are an embarrasment to their faithful who are faithful no more! The trouble now is that the tories with a majority hold will pass laws making their passage into office easier for themselves & will not have the welfare of the people at heart- that saddens me!
     
    Duble agent V.W.Ford likes this.
  6. I like what you put but police should be privatised? The current ongoing joke within the police is that G4S will be taking over and they certainly aren't a non-profit organisation. They currently staff custody suites, many on zero hours contracts and actually shown to be more expensive. Any company is there purely to make money and is not charitable. Unfortunately the political and police head shed always fall for the 'loss leader' of a cheap deal for the first couple of years then are stung thereafter.
     
  7. sANDYbAY

    sANDYbAY On benefits-won't sponsor!

    G4s are looking good to take over the police ing of Britain. They only claimed for tagging a few thousand dead people, they hardly ever placed a tag on a criminals false leg.
    They were almost perfectly set up to do security for the Olympics apart from not actually having enough trained people, Oh and not robustly vetting the few people they had hired.
    On the positive side they've almost paid the penalty imposed on them for claiming to tag people who were already in prison.
    They hardly kill anyone in the South African prisons they run.
    They almost never cause the death of people they are tasked to deport, and the pregnant ladies unborn baby didn't actually die when they manhandled her out of her wheelchair.

    So, yup, in a couple of years a completely different company (called possibly G4SUK) will be handed a contract to print money.
     
    vanorak, chrisgooner and Jono1249 like this.
  8. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    What should sadden you and disgusts me is a welfare state system that has been set up not to furnish the end needs of the people, but to build numerous little empires across its breadth.

    I want a management grade, I can't do that without a team to manage. I don't have one, so I'll invent one - better still, if we spend our time monitoring our performance and maybe those of others, or hopefully duplicating something national and massively over building it locally.

    e.g. - over 3.2 MILLION people are registered disabled - how many of them because their lifestyle is wilfully negligent - there are over 77,000 people entitled registered as disabled because of their alcohol or they are drug addicts ffs.

    People aren't asked for their needs, they are told what they are entitled to - again, no one needs a certain allowance, my team disappears and maybe so do I. So no way am I rocking the boat.

    Tell me the unions don't fight this tooth and nail.


    My point about privatisation is this simple - when you make money from a product or a service, it governs what you can spend in the first place - no sales, no company.

    If we designed our welfare state to fit the NEEDS of society, not present them with a smorgsboard so that many can simply offload their responsibility and blame someone else, then it would fix those that waste this system - and we could concentrate on those genuinely in need.
     
    SweeneyTodd likes this.
  9. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    I don't mean that we should have privatised Policing - I mean that the organisation behind it shouldn't be the monumentally closed shop that it currently is and should be organised around the structures that work in private enterprise - the people that do this should run it as a profit/loss just as private enterprise is.

    E.g. why are most of Forces procurement arms independent of each other, and why are many of them based in Westminster, some of the most expensive real estate on earth? Why are these then closed shops for preferred suppliers, who make unbelievable amounts of money by doubling or trebling the prices of kit over what you or I could buy in the high street?

    Why do the Police invest stupid amounts of money in branding and Investors for People? Who are they competing with? Why would an organisation based on a named rank hierarchy need Investors in People?

    I have not proposed that Policing, or the NHS etc should be sold off to private enterprise - I have proposed that they should have their organisational structures based on spend to your needs, re invest any profit, pool resources where you can and stop being awarded a budget that if you don't spend you don't get it the next year. The people best placed to enable this come from Private Enterprise - and if we could actually identify who is good at this in public enterprise then they should be there too.
     
    vanorak, Jono1249 and chad like this.
  10. I agree - My 11yo son is registered disabled as a profoundly deaf boy, however this does not affect his day to day life atm. It will only become apparent what damage has been done to our welfare system when he is fending for himself in the 'big world'! I just fear for the future under this govt! We shall see! :D
     
    Moons likes this.
  11. Funny you should mention Investors in People as I thought about it this morning. My former force paid £10k for the privilege of displaying their badge. None of us minions truly bought into it but the gaffers were happy.
    There has been and still is ongoing force restructures but again there is no logic or reason. Forces are joining up for some things and not for others. Notts HR department is now based at Chester yet there is nothing else in common.
    P!ss up and brewery come to mind.
     
    Moons likes this.
  12. I think you could be right.

    But I think there's more to it than that. I don't think most Londoners actually believe that the recession is real. There's no sign of it here. Where I live they are knocking down huge council estates to build multi million pound developments of luxury waterfront flats. Google "Woodberry Down" if you're interested.

    In the meantime the brilliant local childrens centres are all under threat of closure due to council cuts.

    There's plenty of money about, and every indication that business is booming, but unfortunately very little of it is "trickling down" to the vulnerable and communities are suffering as a consequence.

    What's the picture elsewhere?
     
    vanorak and SweeneyTodd like this.
  13. Actually, only 37% of people who voted wanted a Tory government. That means 63% didn't :thinking:
     
  14. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    Its because the HR departments have very little to do that they balls about with Investor's In People - I can't go into detail here - but I do know that one HR dept wanted to put all people working with that force through IiP - even those working for 3rd party suppliers - we worked out that we would need to take over a year and a half of the senior's team in total across 5 people - so loose one of them for a year and a half, to put people who didn't want it through for an organisation that has no competitors.

    Even better when you realise its voluntary, has not basis on law (I'm not saying it's utter pants - just a waste of time for organisations that have no competitors and because they have a ranking hierarchy can't map most of the IiP policies anyway).

    For me - it adds ZERO value to that faced of public service.
     
    Jono1249 likes this.
  15. sANDYbAY

    sANDYbAY On benefits-won't sponsor!

    @Moons I agree with what you're saying but I'm not sure how a privatised non profit NHS/Police/Railway is any different from a nationalised NHS/Police/ etc.

    Also your comment about a privatised company needing to sell so it can exist is true for companies like Ford or BMW. We can decide to buy them or not as we see fit but Law Enforcement and Health we have no choice about whether we use them. For them we are a completely captive market and it doesn't make any difference if they give a good service or one that's been pared to the bone, we will still have to use it regardless. So, if you want to generate the biggest return for you private investors you maximise income and minimise expenditure. Zero hours contracts and poverty wages knowing that;
    A) the state will step in with working tax credits so your employees don't actually starve.
    B) the state will educate your workers free for you
    C) the state will weaken employment laws so it's easier and cheaper for you to get rid of staff
    D) if you have good enough lawyers you can negotiate contracts heavily in your favour
    E) if it all goes wrong you can walk away and the state will pick up the bill

    On the downside;
    A) you may have to employ an ex MP or two as consultants, (they won't really be in the way though as they'll only be required to work four or five days a year.
    B) there is no 'B'.
     
    vanorak, Dicky, Moons and 1 other person like this.
  16. Only 66.1% voted and actually wanted a government.
     
    vanorak, ermintrude1978 and the2ems like this.
  17. I see no evidence of it here either (lancashire - typically poor) which brings me back to my original question - where is all the money. Govt making massive & drastic cuts but borrowing MORE than the previous govt ever did in their tenure- I reckon we are being lied to! Where oh where is the money! Not only that but there is a planned 5% VAT increase so they will be stealing more of our hard earned money - they are crooks!
     
    tommygoldy and Moons like this.
  18. Totally agree.
     
    Moons likes this.
  19. Moons

    Moons Supporter

    I think it's this simple - as public sector makes no wealth, they are not aligned or trained in the fundamental of budgeting where your income is governed by what you deliver.

    Sadly, even the really talented managers are told that you have to spend X or you won't get it next year.


    This is not a way to build efficient systems - the amount of times I've been told in public sector jobs that X or Y is in the budget so spend it, despite my saying we have a spare over there than no one uses, amazes me.

    I don't get that in private sector, we keep it lean as best we can all the time.

    My view remains - large swathes of the NHS is already privatised - that horse has already bolted - but running it along the same lines as described above would mean you don't tolerate the likes of Serco, Atos Origin, Interserve, Capita and that mob under delivering - you would have people that know and play their game (and can be sacked if they don't perform, rather than given the hidey holes they currently have).
     
  20. Our son's special school displays it's Autism Inclusion certificate in the reception area. Who decided to spend time and money to get a certificate that states the bleedin' obvious.
     
    vanorak likes this.

Share This Page