But what happens if one of you or both lose your jobs?

I think its a shame you are fed up with thread you have made some very strong statements and not really answered many of the questions asked of you.

I understand you feel everyone should have medical, loss of earnings insurance but didnt really say how this would be economically viable for those on lower incomes. As I said I wouldnt presume to ask you how you manage to pay for yours.

Everyone's opinion is just that an opinion and I, as a someone interested in economics would like to hear more of yours and what you feel the answers to the problems are.

oooooooooooooooooo now your making me reply again

lol

sorry if I have not answered all the questions but the thread was moving very fast.....ha ha.

i do not have all the answers I just feel by cutting out the people not needed or doubling up on jobs in the public services it is a start.

If people do not like their job get another one......if their job is too hard or too stressful get another one.

Now please dont ask anything else ha ha..................pretty please


oh and if one of us lost our job...we would get on with it has happened before......we didnt moan and groan we got on with it.......nobody died.

I thought it was interesting on the news last night when they interviewed one of the councillors, and the reporter kept saying to her "yes, but what about all those jobs lost", to which she replied "well, we have had to go through our finances, which companies have to do every year, but it's just something that we've never had to do before"!!!!??? Just as I said then, a lot of wastage in the past, the money comes in, and lots of it, from the Government and from our council taxes, parking fines, etc. so much so in some instances, that they have to stuff it all away into Icelandic Banks (that subsequently lost it for them ) because they've got too much of it, and they just hand it out to whoever needs paying. It's about time they were held accountable for every single penny that they have coming in, they might be a lot more thoughtful in paying it out, just like the private sector.

Hi Spot, just wanted to get that off my chest before moving on to yours!

As of last night, the stock market is still up, so I don't know what happened there, when you say this morning it dropped like a stone, I'll be checking that one out.

The growth will come from wherever it has always come from, there will always be people with good jobs, mediocre jobs, mundane jobs, and plenty of dosh to splash about. Apparently, people who are on benefits are living close to the breadline so they say, so in effect, they are not the people who are contributing towards the growth are they. If you put all these latest redundancies into context with the amount of the population who ARE still working, it's probably quite a low percentage I would have thought, so again,growth will still happen (hopefully!).

I agree, there will of course be further cuts, the fiscal studies people said that last night, there HAS to be more cuts for this to work. As I said in my first ever post in here, it's the pm's I want sorting out, I didn't mention the poor unfortunates who have already been targeted, and I strongly feel they will be streamlining parliament soon, you just see if I'm right. Whether they can or not is another matter, I don't know enough about politics to know whether they can reduce the number of mp's by 1/3 or not, perhaps you do? There are some of these who as I mentioned again in my first or 2nd post, who do not warrant their existence, these were my initial target, not the council workers losing their jobs, nor the police, nor the firefighters, for God's sake, they're the ones we actually NEED. The Quangoes too, most of those can go in my book, total waste of money and recourses, we managed without them before, and can do so again.

Depends which jobs are going IMO. Will it be pen pushers (as you have put it ) or will it be Police etc of whom we do not have enough of as it is

it's no different to a private company having a re-shuffle and getting rid of dead wood, just that it's in the public eye.
If the job you do is relevant and important then you won't lose it.

If only the world really did work like that!!! If they are cutting the numbers of essential workers then it certainly isn't a case of getting rid of 'old wood' !!!!!

Well if they do as they claim they will which is just not replace people when they leave etc and offer voluntary redundancy not too many should be made redundant against their wishes.
We had all this years ago with British Gas and BT when they were privatised and tbh more people volunteered to go than they could possibly allow to go and still operate effectively. There is no point speculating who will and who will not be affected until the time comes.

You are right Trouble but I am suspecting that Police numbers will be cut. I know people on a the waiting list (passed initial assessments etc) and speaking with one of them , there seemed little hope of recruitment. I really hope their numbers are not cut but I am not optimistic. But as you say time will tell.

I've only dipped in & out of this thread but I'm a civil servant & have been for years. And for years our rate of pay was well below the equivalent jobs in the private sector. At one stage there were huge problems because people were getting very expensive & highly desirable training for skills & qualifications that were needed in the private sector to the extent that they were leaving in droves to get more highly paid jobs in the private sector ~ despite the costs of their training being met by the public sector.

The reasion they gave the unions in our pay negotitations not to increase our pay in line with the private sector, was because our pensions were an extremely good benefit that the private sector workers didn't always have.

Now we're in a recession & belts must be tightened & what do they want to do but erode the pension benefits that have always been the excuse for paying us less than the private sector!!!! IMO they seem to want to target the public setor workers whatever way they can & just because they can!!

I'm not saying there isn't some waste & uneconomical rubbish like quangoes, jobs for the boys etc that shoudn't be culled, but the vitriol in the press about the so-called "gold-plated" pensions of public sector workers, has been taken way too far.

it hasnt, it just down a fraction.
nothing untoward.

the IFS has stated the group hit hardest are the poor, followed by the rich, and the middle class get hit the least.

ways to ease that burden on the poorest:
cancel trident
remove and means test all the over 75 free benefits...winter fuel, free travel, and tv licence.
scrap BBC licence fee, introduce ads.
pull out of afghanistan
increase tax rate for super rich
decrease foreign aid, cancel it altogether for countries like india, which is the 11th richest economy in the world.
decrease subsidy to the EU.
cancel all road building