Non public sector workers

[I1L2T3]

I've worked in both sectors. Private sector now. Met plenty of hard workers and plenty of work shy folk in both. I honestly don't think it is any worse in the public sector. I currently share an office with a guy we haven't seen for 8 working days. We occasionally see him become 'available' on the system but we honestly don't know where he is or what he is working on. The managers don't seem to know either and don't seem too bothered. That said if the **** hit the fan he would turn in and work 18 hours a day for weeks on end. The managers know that and tend to let him do his own thing. I never seen anything like that in the public sector.

[L00b]

Well if you are happy to contribute unconvincing arguments, then so be it. I thought you were interested in the facts and an informed viewpoint.

Wildcat, all I'm saying is this: Winter's coming, the UK needs to buy a coat.

 

If you want a glimpse of what awaits the UK in the not-so-distant future, have a glimpse of where the US is at right now.

[Wildcat]

Wildcat, all I'm saying is this: Winter's coming, the UK needs to buy a coat.

 

If you want a glimpse of what awaits the UK in the not-so-distant future, have a glimpse of where the US is at right now.

 

Your link says the opposite, indeed the analogy would be better made to say he is advocating selling the coat.

 

The person that wrote the article also appears to believe the FBI were responsible for the Oklahoma bombing. I had a low opinion of the Telegraph before, but even I am surprised they have give this columnist any time.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambrose_Evans-Pritchard

 

A different analysis of the US economy here:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-07-06/krugman-says-u-s-economy-is-facing-a-long-siege-.html

 

and here:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/38018090

 

The republicans appear to be prolonging the recession by their blocking of legislation in the Senate.

[Glennis]

Are you aware that the daily mail is just a comic ? The things they write are not all true and actually is just written to drum up fear. Thats what sells news papers.

 

 

public sectors DO pay into pensions

>sometimes said nice employer will contribute

every job I've applied for has an employer contribution - if yours doesn't maybe you ought to look for a better job

 

>However its very rare to hear about strikes.

Remember the industrial action in the eighties - something to do with mines

then there was a small car plant in solihull

 

>Now please dont think I am suggesting that I think less bobbies, nurses, teachers would be a good idea, however I think public sector jobs should be brought more into line pay wise with non public sector.

 

Yes all the people in moorfoot are having a party - seriously they dont do any work - they dont ensure front end services are up and running, they dont ensure wages are paid, polices are implemented.

 

 

>There are far too many pen pushes in the public sector, people emplyed to wipe other peoples arses and drive their cars etc

 

really - how do you know this ? How many arse wipers are there ?

 

where are they ? In which government office.

 

you clearly have no clue about what you are talking about.

 

Well said, here is a brilliant example of an totally ignorant 'Daily Mail' reader, who has well and truely swallowed the coalition's (Tory) governments latest moral panic, now aimed at public sector workers, rather than single mothers, which was the case in the eighties ... same tactic, different victims.

[L00b]

Your link says the opposite, indeed the analogy would be better made to say he is advocating selling the coat.

It does? How so? The linked article simply paints a current picture of Recession US. Or were you referring to the article I linked in the other thread? (in which case, offloading stock amounts to the 'coat buying', not the other way around).

The person that wrote the article <...>

I don't pay much heed to character assassination, Wildcat.

 

At the end of the day, the figures reported in the linked article check out. You can certainly criticize the analysis/commentary (I'm not bothering), but the picture on which the analysis/commentary is based is still just as valid.

 

The Krugman and Stiglitz articles appear to concur: they advocate Gvt intervention, but still paint the same current picture (and risks of same if no Gvt intervention).