Quizzes & Puzzles37 mins ago
Nasty Business.
Nasty taxes from the Nasty Party.
Tory Party to increase Council tax to pay for social care.
National insurance to increase for workers and employers,
Planning to raid inheritence tax,
Not forgetting the Nasty party are also targeting the triple lock system for pensioners.
When did Boris tear up his election manifesto of lies?
Tory Party to increase Council tax to pay for social care.
National insurance to increase for workers and employers,
Planning to raid inheritence tax,
Not forgetting the Nasty party are also targeting the triple lock system for pensioners.
When did Boris tear up his election manifesto of lies?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by gulliver1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Therese Coffey chose her words badly and has been pulled up for not knowing how the system works.
https:/
https:/
Of course it’s necessary to restore some sanity to public finances following the ludicrous orgy of borrowing (serviced by taxpayers). Much of this was used to fund a “Track and Trace” system which neither tracked nor traced very well. A lot more was used to pay people to sit at home in their nightwear watching repeats of Midsomer Murders, whilst munching Hobnobs, until they heard from their employers that the business would not reopen. It’s all got to be paid for.
However, there is another way. Instead of thinking up ways to get more money in, they could apply a little intelligence to work on ways to prevent so much from flooding out. Since around 40% of all they spend will soon be going on the NHS, that is a good place to start. That organisation is hopelessly over-managed and badly organised. Throwing more money at it will simply perpetuate that shortcoming and the money will just get lost in the noise of expanded bureaucracy and increased executive salaries and bonuses. Never once in the last week or two has there been any mention of how the £12bn a year they expect to raise will be spent. No mention of expected outcomes; no mention of how services will be improved; no mention what this is expected to mean to patients. Just a headline that more money will be spent. Raising taxes even further as suggested by some on here is a ludicrous idea. You could raise taxes to 100% and spend it all on the NHS and still the outcomes would be the same – chaos and disorganisation. Already plans are afoot to recruit 42 executives at a cost of £10m pa to administer the new funds. That’s the way the NHS works. It is a job creation scheme for non-medical staff. These administrators failed to come up to snuff when the pandemic hit. They were hopelessly prepared and completely incapable of handling a situation which, we are told, they had been warned of for years of its likelihood and for which they had “war-gamed”. It is a scandal to suggest more taxes are needed to fund such a shambles.
The UK does not need to burden its taxpayers even further. It needs to demonstrate it can spend what it already raises more efficiently.
However, there is another way. Instead of thinking up ways to get more money in, they could apply a little intelligence to work on ways to prevent so much from flooding out. Since around 40% of all they spend will soon be going on the NHS, that is a good place to start. That organisation is hopelessly over-managed and badly organised. Throwing more money at it will simply perpetuate that shortcoming and the money will just get lost in the noise of expanded bureaucracy and increased executive salaries and bonuses. Never once in the last week or two has there been any mention of how the £12bn a year they expect to raise will be spent. No mention of expected outcomes; no mention of how services will be improved; no mention what this is expected to mean to patients. Just a headline that more money will be spent. Raising taxes even further as suggested by some on here is a ludicrous idea. You could raise taxes to 100% and spend it all on the NHS and still the outcomes would be the same – chaos and disorganisation. Already plans are afoot to recruit 42 executives at a cost of £10m pa to administer the new funds. That’s the way the NHS works. It is a job creation scheme for non-medical staff. These administrators failed to come up to snuff when the pandemic hit. They were hopelessly prepared and completely incapable of handling a situation which, we are told, they had been warned of for years of its likelihood and for which they had “war-gamed”. It is a scandal to suggest more taxes are needed to fund such a shambles.
The UK does not need to burden its taxpayers even further. It needs to demonstrate it can spend what it already raises more efficiently.
Another nhs review and reorganisation eh? Another few billions to be wasted on management consultants, chaos as things are changed, more managers employed to implement it... until someone suggests another.outcomes was mentioned but only in general terms like reduce backlogs waiting for ops. They haven't been clear either about where they'll get doctors and nurses from in the next 3 years
I'm torn over this!
On the one hand my head tells me we have to pay the money back, but on the other hand I'm a political prostitute and will vote for whichever party allows me to keep more of my money, which historically has been the Tory party...and as I'm naturally right of center anyway, the Tory party has always been a natural fit for me.
We now have a Tory leader who is only notionally a Tory, and we'll be living in an era with the highest taxes for 70 years - the Tory party can no longer be described as the low tax party.
Merely as a 'by the way', isn't there an argument that people like me who have private pensions, private medical insurance, long term disability insurance and critical illness insurance, should pay a reduced level of NI?
As for the NHS, as soon as the tax rise was announced they started whining it was not enough...but let's face it, even if the NHS was promised 100% of the entire tax-take and a free Unicorn for every staff member, they'd still be whining that it wasn't enough.
On the one hand my head tells me we have to pay the money back, but on the other hand I'm a political prostitute and will vote for whichever party allows me to keep more of my money, which historically has been the Tory party...and as I'm naturally right of center anyway, the Tory party has always been a natural fit for me.
We now have a Tory leader who is only notionally a Tory, and we'll be living in an era with the highest taxes for 70 years - the Tory party can no longer be described as the low tax party.
Merely as a 'by the way', isn't there an argument that people like me who have private pensions, private medical insurance, long term disability insurance and critical illness insurance, should pay a reduced level of NI?
As for the NHS, as soon as the tax rise was announced they started whining it was not enough...but let's face it, even if the NHS was promised 100% of the entire tax-take and a free Unicorn for every staff member, they'd still be whining that it wasn't enough.
//Another nhs review and reorganisation eh? Another few billions to be wasted on management consultants,...........//
So what do you suggest then Bobb, carry on pouring money into the bottomless pit and getting less and less?
I've written on here a few times over the years what I would like to see and that is a proper businessman come in and sort it out, someone along the lines of Terry Leah, Mike Rose or Alan Sugar, someone who knows how to run a business on tight budgets and get the best from them
Alongside this I would like a permanent body (yes a quango I guess) of labour, tory and a represented from each of the other sub-main parties (Not the Raving loony party clearly). The purpose of this body would be to stop the main two parties using the NHS as a political football.
And no, I dont mean privatise the NHS before the usual hammer in, although there is no good reason why decently written contracts shouldn't be given out to third parties.
And while we are at it, no the Americans do not want the NHS, they laugh at it, nor would we want their system but there are many other systems around the World that run better than ours does atthe minute.
So what do you suggest then Bobb, carry on pouring money into the bottomless pit and getting less and less?
I've written on here a few times over the years what I would like to see and that is a proper businessman come in and sort it out, someone along the lines of Terry Leah, Mike Rose or Alan Sugar, someone who knows how to run a business on tight budgets and get the best from them
Alongside this I would like a permanent body (yes a quango I guess) of labour, tory and a represented from each of the other sub-main parties (Not the Raving loony party clearly). The purpose of this body would be to stop the main two parties using the NHS as a political football.
And no, I dont mean privatise the NHS before the usual hammer in, although there is no good reason why decently written contracts shouldn't be given out to third parties.
And while we are at it, no the Americans do not want the NHS, they laugh at it, nor would we want their system but there are many other systems around the World that run better than ours does atthe minute.
YMB: "'ve written on here a few times over the years what I would like to see and that is a proper businessman come in and sort it out, someone along the lines of Terry Leah, Mike Rose or Alan Sugar, someone who knows how to run a business on tight budgets and get the best from them " - bang on give the thing to a proper businessman and tell him to run it efficiently. ....and before all the lefties wet their Alans, no I'm not suggesting privatisation. It is possible to run a public sector operation like a proper business. Personally I think the problem is too much money, all that does is give the management aspirations to hire more management and more admin staff and more buildings etc.
canary: "Since all the items mentioned in the OP are well represented in News channels, it's patently obvious you don't follow any of these - no surprise there. " - ohh I do but as the OP is a very confused individual I'd like him to tell me what he'd like to discuss rather than what others think he wants to discuss.
