Corrupt tory scum

[xenia]

Surely profit is what an employer gets after paying the workers. Worker produces £300 of goods per day, gets paid £100, other costs covered, remainder = profit.

 

Profit is only generated by paying people less than the value of goods they create. No?

 

It is more likely that the contractor will look at what is wasteful in the enterprise. Invariably services provided by the public sector are disgracefully overmanned, over managed with poor purchasing policies.

 

By bringing in efficiencies employees tend to maintain and occasionally improve terms and conditions whilst making a profit. Profit is essential for investment in the business as well as for the financial benefit of shareholders.

[TeaFan]

It is more likely that the contractor will look at what is wasteful in the enterprise. Invariably services provided by the public sector are disgracefully overmanned, over managed with poor purchasing policies.

 

By bringing in efficiencies employees tend to maintain and occasionally improve terms and conditions whilst making a profit. Profit is essential for investment in the business as well as for the financial benefit of shareholders.

 

You were talking about profit in general. Aren't you getting your threads confused?

[Icanc4miles]

You can argue forever about which is better, public or private, but at the end of the day it is a mixed economy that Britain has; its a matter of getting the balance right.

[xenia]

You were talking about profit in general. Aren't you getting your threads confused?

 

You have misunderstood me I think, I am talking about how service contractors make profit.

[TeaFan]

You have misunderstood me I think, I am talking about how service contractors make profit.

 

No, and sorry to be picky, but you said profit is the thing that pays you and your bruvvers. That can't be true.

[Anna B]

And people call me right wing!

 

Cromwell, Franco, Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Pick your dictator.

 

No parliament necessary then? Just appoint some generalissimo and all will be well?

 

Study histrory. Recall what your predecessors have fought and died for.

 

The way to put this right is for us, the people to refuse to further tolerate the shenanigans of the westminster elite.

 

Publicly fund politica lparties, make them finacially accountable. Ban or seriously limit the money that can be donated from vested interests.

 

Never abandon your right to vote.

 

Well I've been called many things, but never right wing. I invoked Cromwell merely as an example of how one man with an idea can change things. I certainly wasn't recommending a Dictatorship, far from it.

 

You say the people should 'refuse to further tolerate the shenanigans of the Westminster elite.' I agree. But how? Financial accountability won't do it when the system is rotton at the core.

 

I treasure the hard won right to vote, and know what it cost to get it, which is why it angers me to see it so reduced in effectiveness. It seems to me to be simply a sop to the ordinary man so that the politicians can invoke the word 'democracy' and then continue to do whatever they please, unhindered by the threat of the ballot box.

 

With the internet, we now have the possibility of a new way of voting, which would make a real difference and do away with the need for expensive politicians and their 'shenanigans.'

We might need a few politicos as facilitators and advisors, but Democracy would be in the hands of the people again.

[mypalseger]

Which is fine, when you're ******* your money up the wall on a Mr Bean lookalike in opposition. When God forbid that lot get back in your combined millions are just as pernicious as individual wealthy donors.

 

Mr Bean lookalike ? I think Osborne takes that title. The Tories have been found out. No amount of bluster will change the facts.

[xenia]

Well I've been called many things, but never right wing. I invoked Cromwell merely as an example of how one man with an idea can change things. I certainly wasn't recommending a Dictatorship, far from it.

 

You say the people should 'refuse to further tolerate the shenanigans of the Westminster elite.' I agree. But how? Financial accountability won't do it when the system is rotton at the core.

 

I treasure the hard won right to vote, and know what it cost to get it, which is why it angers me to see it so reduced in effectiveness. It seems to me to be simply a sop to the ordinary man so that the politicians can invoke the word 'democracy' and then continue to do whatever they please, unhindered by the threat of the ballot box.

 

With the internet, we now have the possibility of a new way of voting, which would make a real difference and do away with the need for expensive politicians and their 'shenanigans.'

We might need a few politicos as facilitators and advisors, but Democracy would be in the hands of the people again.

 

We probably agree on more than we disagree on , what I dont understand is how it would work, I fear that if everything was voted on in an X factor style vote it could lead to chaos, I think we should do more to improve the quality of our elected representatives. I totally agree there are too many of them and we should slim parliament down to about half.

 

However, there is a sting in the tail if you make parlaiment smaller. A government needs, say, 75 MPs to become ministers, junior ministers PPS etc. Over a 5 year period sackings, resignations , normal churn, will lead to, say a 50% turnover. If the parliament was reduced to 400 the quality of the ministers towards the end of the parliment is going to be pretty low.

[xenia]

No, and sorry to be picky, but you said profit is the thing that pays you and your bruvvers. That can't be true.

 

Of course it is true, Profits generated by business through trading, through the jobs they generate and the consequent taxes paid provide the cash that pay for public services and the people employed by public services.

 

To extend the point, when public services are provided by public bodies, because those bodies are not profit/cost oriented they become profligate, when they adopt the principles of the free market they become more efficient.

 

Do not misunderstand me, the free market is not perfect, (A4E) for example shows what can happen when contracts are awarded without proper supervision and accountability. But if you get supervision and accountability right the private/contracted out model if more cost and operationally efficient.

[Anna B]

We probably agree on more than we disagree on , what I dont understand is how it would work, I fear that if everything was voted on in an X factor style vote it could lead to chaos, I think we should do more to improve the quality of our elected representatives. I totally agree there are too many of them and we should slim parliament down to about half.

 

However, there is a sting in the tail if you make parlaiment smaller. A government needs, say, 75 MPs to become ministers, junior ministers PPS etc. Over a 5 year period sackings, resignations , normal churn, will lead to, say a 50% turnover. If the parliament was reduced to 400 the quality of the ministers towards the end of the parliment is going to be pretty low.

Where as now it's simply bursting with talent?

 

Well we agree that some sort of reform is needed. Now all we have to do is persuade those grasping little MPs to vote for it...