Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Introduction of a Public service 'scrappage'scheme and creating jobs for our young .
Options
Comments
-
donegalfella wrote: »This post has been deleted.
I have no ideas how you are comparing airlines with health care. Air travel for many is a luxury and not essential. Almost all health care is needed and in many cases essential.0 -
... Do some of you people actually believe what you post?
That's a real problem: people who defend the public service and people who attack the public service seem capable of holding the most preposterous beliefs. And as long as people hold firmly to beliefs that have no foundation in fact, constructive dialogue is impossible.They are a lot of very hard working dedicated people within both the Public and Private sectors. There are also wasters within both sectors, and there are roles that provide zero benefit to either organisation...
True. But there should be no need for you to point that out. It's in the category called "the bleedin' obvious".0 -
They are a lot of very hard working dedicated people within both the Public and Private sectors. There are also wasters within both sectors, and there are roles that provide zero benefit to either organisation.
True to some extent, but I do not care about any "wasters" in the private sector. I can choose to support them or not, as the case may be. Market forces ensure not many wasters stay wasters for ever. In contrast, I do care about wasters in the public sector, the vast majority of whom work less hard and less hours than I have to, as it is my taxes - which I have no choice in paying - which go towards paying their wages and pensions.0 -
Absolutely.. we must never attempt to streamline any service within the PS because nurses work hard... The numerous layers of unnecessary management within the HSE must not be dealt with because nurses work hard.. /boggle
Do some of you people actually believe what you post?
you should read posts before replying like that.
do i believe what i post? what, that a lot of public sector workers are not absolute lazy scroungers, absofuckinglutely.
the majority in this forum attack public workers as a whole when in reality there are quite a large proportion of the 300,000 workers that are quite good at their job. of course there is scope for reform, and in the current economy thats essential, but public service 'scrappage scheme' is hugely insulting to those who do a good job, if you cant see that then... /boggle.0 -
True to some extent, but I do not care about any "wasters" in the private sector. I can choose to support them or not, as the case may be. Market forces ensure not many wasters stay wasters for ever. In contrast, I do care about wasters in the public sector, the vast majority of whom work less hard and less hours than I have to, as it is my taxes - which I have no choice in paying - which go towards paying their wages and pensions.
you know for a fact i suppose having conducted a vigourous study of the work ethic in the public service. or did you just read in some newspaper.0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 13665
P. Breathnach wrote: »That's bollocks. Some of our highest paid private sector workers are lawyers, bankers, medics, bookies, accountants, drug dealers (both legal and illegal), and entertainers. Many of them don't even compete with one another in Ireland, let alone with the planet.
With all of the above, people can chose to abstain from their services (e.g. do their own conveyancing (no law against it), stay at home and eat chicken soup (medics), don't gamble (obviously), do their own taxes (the reveneue are very friendly and helpful), drink instead of take illegal drugs, use herbal and natural remedies instead of pharmecuticals and entertain themselves.
You don't have to pay bono €1 when you buy his CD, you can simply not buy his CD ("I know a place called vertigo" what does that even mean?). Fundamentally, no matter what the good or service is, you can buy it, not buy it, or buy something as a substitute. This creates competition in the public sector. Competition can be between two similar products (in the examples above, 2 different accountants) or between buying and abstaining ("it's too expensive to get a solicitor, sure I'll represent myself").
This is not true of the public sector. I am legally required to pay taxes with the threat of a penal sanction if I fail to do so. These taxes are taken and used as payment for the public sector. If I am healthy, can I refuse to pay for the HSE? If I want to home school my children, can I refuse to pay for the Dept of Education's budget? If I am not charitable, can I refuse to contribute the ~30% of the taxes I pay which goes to social welfare?
This means that the ultimate consumers of public services (i.e. citizens) have no control over price. Therefore, this should be set by the government. The government has a duty to ensure that the citizens get good value from the public sector. This means efficiency in productivity and in pay.
The government have no duty to protect public sector pay and conditions. If anything, the government should be working against public sector pay and conditions and always trying to keep them low (in much the same way as a private company will do).
So the idea that the public sector should be overpaid because some sectors of the private sector are overpaid is a nonsense argument. The government should try to employ people at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer for the maximum amount of efficiency. Because if a private sector worker is not offering an efficient service at the right price, they will price themselves out of the market.0 -
True to some extent, but I do not care about any "wasters" in the private sector. I can choose to support them or not, as the case may be. Market forces ensure not many wasters stay wasters for ever. In contrast, I do care about wasters in the public sector, the vast majority of whom work less hard and less hours than I have to, as it is my taxes - which I have no choice in paying - which go towards paying their wages and pensions.
Essentially, you are trying to give yourself a permit to join in the attacks on the public sector.
There are wasters in the private sector, and you can not always make a real choice between supporting them or not, because you might not know about their deficiencies until it is too late. In addition, there are other issues about the private sector way of doing things that many people here are not acknowledging - restrictive practices, unfair contracts, failure to meet legal requirements, sharp practice, and much else.
I have no intention of vilifying the private sector collectively, because that would be wrong. But giving them a free pass in order to set up a private-sector-good-public-sector-bad model is just as wrong.0 -
johnnyskeleton wrote: »With all of the above, people can chose to abstain from their services (e.g. do their own conveyancing (no law against it), stay at home and eat chicken soup (medics), don't gamble (obviously), do their own taxes (the reveneue are very friendly and helpful), drink instead of take illegal drugs, use herbal and natural remedies instead of pharmecuticals and entertain themselves...
I could also try to find an uninhabited island and live there alone and unnoticed.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 13665
P. Breathnach wrote: »I could also try to find an uninhabited island and live there alone and unnoticed.
Exactly, the only way to avoid the overpaid and bloated public service would be to live in your own island state as a hermit. But even still you can sail to the mainland every so often and avail of competitively priced private sector goods and services.0 -
P. Breathnach wrote: »Essentially, you are trying to give yourself a permit to join in the attacks on the public sector.
There are wasters in the private sector, and you can not always make a real choice between supporting them or not, because you might not know about their deficiencies until it is too late. In addition, there are other issues about the private sector way of doing things that many people here are not acknowledging - restrictive practices, unfair contracts, failure to meet legal requirements, sharp practice, and much else.
I have no intention of vilifying the private sector collectively, because that would be wrong. But giving them a free pass in order to set up a private-sector-good-public-sector-bad model is just as wrong.
wasters in private sector usually lead to company going out of business (or they get fired)
the government is already bankrupt (and no one is getting fired or held responsible)
the sooner people realize that the government is bankrupt the better we all be0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Just some replies.
The original post is not an attack on the public service but a suggestion that some vigour be put back into it by very strongly encouraging staff with poor moral and work motivation to leave. It is an attempt (among other things) to deal with the alleged low moral in the public service that so many public servants themselves are claiming.
No one wants their children in school with a teacher who has no motivation or see their parents being treated by un-motivated health staff or Garda with low moral etc. So if any public servant states that they no longer have any motivation to do their duties, they should be allowed do the decent thing and leave. There are plenty of un-employed and qualified people out there to do their job,in most cases, if this is necessary.
Enthusiastic and hard working public servants should have nothing to fear.
There may also be benefits for workers who are 'burnt out' or unmotivated. I agree that what I propose may not suit everyone. Some critics of the public service would probably see the public service as 'rotten to the core' so to speak and beyond redemption and hence what I am saying is utterly futile. Some defenders, on the other hand see nothing at fault with moral in the public service that could not be cured by removing the pay cut (and perhaps a pay increase for their grade or department). Such are two ends of the arguments. There are probably more.
Anyhow the potential is there (if you examine the pay scales) to get the job done cheaper and possibly better by hiring people (who are actually interested in working) at the lower pay scales.0 -
Wasters in the banks (including the Central Bank) who caused the current financial situation get rewarded for their efforts. It reminds me of that ad "what is a financial regulator"?
once again the banks should not have been given a cent
lets remember who gave the money to the banks? yep the government, last i checked they are a subset of the PS
oh and last i checked the Central Bank are also a subset of the PS too,
and as primetime has shown the CB, Regulator and the Government all put a blind eye on the out of control lending (hell some of the money was lend to fellow cronies), they were the ones who could have stopped the madness in its tracks and didnt
put the blame squarely where it lies
:mad:0 -
once again the banks should not have been given a cent
lets remember who gave the money to the banks? yep the government, last i checked they are a subset of the PS
oh and last i checked the Central Bank are also a subset of the PS too,
and as primetime has shown the CB, Regulator and the Government all put a blind eye on the out of control lending (hell some of the money was lend to fellow cronies), they were the ones who could have stopped the madness in its tracks and didnt
put the blame squarely where it lies
:mad:
are you for real.
blame the public service for the banking collapse. blame the public service (not just the civil service i presume, why stop there) for the actions of the private banking industry.
do the public service cause cancer too?0 -
jumpin_macflash wrote: »are you for real.
blame the public service for the banking collapse. blame the public service (not just the civil service i presume, why stop there) for the actions of the private banking industry.
do the public service cause cancer too?
im not blaming the public service
im reminding you that a subset of the employees employed by the state have failed to do their jobs and then have handed money to bankers despite protests from the people
i dont agree with a cent being given to banks0 -
It is quite clear a certain section of the population, especially on this forum, will never accept that there are exceptionally talented, hard working dedicated people in the Public Service. To these people all public servants are wasters and all are overpaid and they are not interested in facts and figures.
They have listened to and devoured the spin from IBEC and Govenment which has created a PS V Private sector battle leaving the ruling classes smiling and pocketing the wealth of the state.
The public sector were note responsible for our current difficulties thats all down to the Private Sector and the greed of developers and bankers.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 13665
It is quite clear a certain section of the population, especially on this forum, will never accept that there are exceptionally talented, hard working dedicated people in the Public Service. To these people all public servants are wasters and all are overpaid and they are not interested in facts and figures.
Do we have talented hard working dedicated peopel working in the public sector? Yes
Can we afford to keep paying them at current levels? No
If their pay has been cut to well below their private sector equivalent, and they can't make any further paycuts, should we just accept that? No.
If needs be, should there be job losses in the public sector? Yes, if needs be.
This is the general attitude. No one is insulting the public sector. It's just that we can't afford them anymore. It's sad that people in Waterford Crystal had paycuts and ultimately lost their jobs, but people could no longer afford the crystal they made at the cost of production in Waterford.
It's a strawman argument to suggest that people are bashing the public sector - no one is trying to insult them. But we, the consumers of public services, can no longer afford to pay as much as we have been paying, and the service provider is being paid less by us to provide those services. The service provider can decide, just like a private company, to:
1) see if they can cut wages and increase production;
2) cut staff numbers and lower the level of service provided; or
3) borrow money to keep the ship afloat and hope business picks up.
It's a question of how this corporation is going to survive. It can't keep borrowing forever, so there must be either reductions in pay for the same level of staff or reductions in staff with consequent reduction in the level of service provided to the people.
It is an unfortunate by-product that public sector workers are affected by this, but considering their relatively high wage levels (compared to other EU countries) they should be able to bear these necessary changes.0 -
It is an unfortunate by-product that public sector workers are affected by this, but considering their relatively high wage levels (compared to other EU countries) they should be able to bear these necessary changes.[/QUOTE]
What EU country do you propose we use as a benchmark for the PS
France, Germany or perhaps Bulgaia, Estonia or should be just pick the place with the lowest wage and impose those wages on the PS.
Perhaps all jobs both Private & Public in Ireland should be paid the same as the lowest in the EU.0 -
What EU country do you propose we use as a benchmark for the PS
France, Germany or perhaps Bulgaia, Estonia or should be just pick the place with the lowest wage and impose those wages on the PS.
Perhaps all jobs both Private & Public in Ireland should be paid the same as the lowest in the EU.
A good level to start is one that the country can afford by the tax take.
I have no idea how far above or below we are on that figure.. But if we are having to borrow to meet the commitments then it's far to say it needs to be lowered (until the tax take can be increased).
And to be honest a lot of the potential solutions can be done by folks in the PS before wages need be cut. We have seen the wastage in HSE over buying branded drugs, wastage on travel/entertainment in FAS etc.. that all adds to the bottom line.. If those were cut sufficiently, then any shortfall (if it exists) could be drastically minimized.0 -
What EU country do you propose we use as a benchmark for the PS
France, Germany or perhaps Bulgaia, Estonia or should be just pick the place with the lowest wage and impose those wages on the PS.
Perhaps all jobs both Private & Public in Ireland should be paid the same as the lowest in the EU.
how about competing with our neighbors in UK?
the private sector workers are learning the hard way about competition with UK
for that matter how about just balancing the damn books, what would you call a company that operates with 25billion+ a year and increasing losses? bankrupt?0 -
Advertisement
-
We need public services and unfortunately public services are not profit making services. Yes things can be done differently but when the employer is acting as a dictator then change wont happen easily.
All change in every 0rganisation, either private or public, have come about because of proper engagement between employer and employees.
If the government seriously want change in the PS they need to engage properly and not in a half hearted manner as happened before Christmas.
Secondly the sweet heart deal done with the Top Paid Civil Servants makes an chance of low paid employers engaging with the government.0 -
how about competing with our neighbors in UK?
the private sector workers are learning the hard way about competition with UK
for that matter how about just balancing the damn books, what would you call a company that operates with 25billion+ a year and increasing losses? bankrupt?
Will you as a private sector employee accept UK pay rates, UK tax rates, UK council taxes.
Are you prepared to allow our Bankers earn similar seven figure salaries like their counterparts in the UK.?0 -
We need public services and unfortunately public services are not profit making services. Yes things can be done differently but when the employer is acting as a dictator then change wont happen easily.
All change in every 0rganisation, either private or public, have come about because of proper engagement between employer and employees.
If the government seriously want change in the PS they need to engage properly and not in a half hearted manner as happened before Christmas.
Secondly the sweet heart deal done with the Top Paid Civil Servants makes an chance of low paid employers engaging with the government.
Sorry but have you worked in the private sector? I have worked both here and abroad for over 25 years in the private sector and the vast majority of changes are dictated to the employee's by management, not through numerous levels of "engagement" and bargaining. Thats how decisions get implemented quickly and efficiently, and everyone can benefit.
The PS has the power to either balance the books or to continue to fritter away funds in this country.. In many cases it has chosen to do the latter, thus forcing the government to implement draconian cost savings (like hitting the lower paid with serious reductions which were absolutely not fair!).
If the PS doesn't want to continue to be hit by draconian cost savings then it needs to wake the f**k up and start to balance it's books.. Continual need to "engagement" has not solved a single problem in the last 10 years. The debt continues to mount... and until it starts becoming the solution then more changes (and probably worse changes) will be forced on it..
This is not a attack on anyone working with, for or in the PS.. It's a mere comment on how the government will be forced into making further cuts as it simply does not have the funds available to continue to fund the PS in its current form. The PS could head off a lot of those cuts to pay by bringing in efficiencies directly...0 -
Will you as a private sector employee accept UK pay rates, UK tax rates, UK council taxes.
Are you prepared to allow our Bankers earn similar seven figure salaries like their counterparts in the UK.?
hmm NHS style medical system sounds great too me
yes please bring it on
btw where do you think the money to pay the public sector comes from? and the money to repay the debts were taking on to continue paying existing ps wages?? yes taxes and the way things are going are gonna have to increase quite a bit just to pay the interest on debt being taken on
increased taxes and same level of public services, thats the future we face0 -
Join Date:Posts: 13665
What EU country do you propose we use as a benchmark for the PS
France, Germany or perhaps Bulgaia, Estonia or should be just pick the place with the lowest wage and impose those wages on the PS.
France or Germany would be fine.
We have very high public spending and very low tax take.
I know that there's a lot of talk about the lower paid public servants being hit the most, but looked at from another point of view, a bottom end clerical officer, caterer or cleaner in the public sector will be paid more than minimum wage. There is no reason for this as there are plenty of people who would do the same or better job for minimum wage. Why pay more? We are urged to pay more because it is "fair", but fairness has nothing to do with it.
Do we really need an army of nearly 10k, or even 5k?
But the two main problem areas are quangoes and the HSE administration. As regards quangoes and other small state organisations, they tend to fall into three categories - necessary, nice and novelty.
There are some necessary public offices such as the DPP, CSO, An Bord Pleanala etc which perform necessary public functions. Then there is a big layer of organisations which are nice to have - the road safety authority, various ombudsmen, data protection commissioner, FAS etc which add benefit to the country but if scrapped life would still carry on.
Then there are the novelty organisations such as the Youth Council, various commissions and reports, sea fisheries board, the "digital hub development agency" (there's some really efficient PS workers right there) etc. These latter group exist to deflect blame away from the government, so if there are angry fishermen they take it up with the sea fisheries board, if there is a lack of broadband, well the government has set up a think tank to look into it. Youth Crime? Don't worry, we're in the process of reaching out to those kids.
There is a list of quangos on this thread and to be honest, I'd be in favour of presuming that they are of little or no use, and putting the onus on them to justify their existence. It is estimated that the cost of all these organisations is €13bn, and if that could be cut down to €5bn it would be a terrific saving, without affecting the garda on the street at all.0 -
johnnyskeleton wrote: »Do we have talented hard working dedicated peopel working in the public sector? Yes
Can we afford to keep paying them at current levels? No
If their pay has been cut to well below their private sector equivalent, and they can't make any further paycuts, should we just accept that? No.
If needs be, should there be job losses in the public sector? Yes, if needs be.
This is the general attitude. No one is insulting the public sector. It's just that we can't afford them anymore. It's sad that people in Waterford Crystal had paycuts and ultimately lost their jobs, but people could no longer afford the crystal they made at the cost of production in Waterford.
It's a strawman argument to suggest that people are bashing the public sector - no one is trying to insult them. But we, the consumers of public services, can no longer afford to pay as much as we have been paying, and the service provider is being paid less by us to provide those services. The service provider can decide, just like a private company, to:
1) see if they can cut wages and increase production;
2) cut staff numbers and lower the level of service provided; or
3) borrow money to keep the ship afloat and hope business picks up.
It's a question of how this corporation is going to survive. It can't keep borrowing forever, so there must be either reductions in pay for the same level of staff or reductions in staff with consequent reduction in the level of service provided to the people.
It is an unfortunate by-product that public sector workers are affected by this, but considering their relatively high wage levels (compared to other EU countries) they should be able to bear these necessary changes.
I have to disagree with you. There have been many threads over the past year regarding the PS and their wages. Almost all of these threads have included personal attacks. The PS have been insulted constantly and for you to suggest otherwise is disengenous.
The Govt laid out a plan ( such as it is) to reduce the deficit over a number of years. We are only in year one and the PS have effectively taken 2 paycuts( levy or no levy ,it reduced take home pay). Why then is there a constant need for this PS bashing. I see private sector workers moaning constantly about taking pay cuts, yet no one seems bothered about that.
Many PS workers have taken their cuts( unless your at the top level) and just got on with it. Others are taking limited action and there appears to be some discontent, but on the whole the country is getting on with it. In other words, most PS workers have gotten over it and I think its about time most of you did too.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 13665
Taxipete29 wrote: »I have to disagree with you. There have been many threads over the past year regarding the PS and their wages. Almost all of these threads have included personal attacks. The PS have been insulted constantly and for you to suggest otherwise is disengenous.
Sorry, perhaps I should have said that the general attitude of most reasonable people who understand and have analysed the issues. I can't speak for the AH crowd.
Certainly when it comes to media analysis, I don't think I've ever seen undue attacks on the public sector. I say undue because there is an attitude in the public sector that for me to even comment on it is an attack, and saying that there have to be cuts in pay/numbers; that public sector workers earn more than public sector workers in other countries; or that there are many parts of the public sector that are not particularly useful is seen almost as a personal attack on every public sector worker.Taxipete29 wrote: »The Govt laid out a plan ( such as it is) to reduce the deficit over a number of years. We are only in year one and the PS have effectively taken 2 paycuts( levy or no levy ,it reduced take home pay). Why then is there a constant need for this PS bashing. I see private sector workers moaning constantly about taking pay cuts, yet no one seems bothered about that.
Again, I am simply stating the fairly basic and undeniable fact that the government is spending too much money for the tax it is taking in. The amount that was cut in the last budget is paltry - in fact the increased interest from the deficits of the last 2 years almost cancels out the cuts made in the last budget. So the reality is that further cuts are necessary. These should more properly be made by reducing staff in the areas I mentioned above as they are not as necessary as other roles and we can't afford them anymore.
The fact that you interpret this as public sector bashing proves the point I made above - any comment on the public sector is seen as an insult and is treated as though we had insulted you personally. Because of that attitude (shared with the top levels of the unions) it is very difficult to debate the cuts that have to be made.Taxipete29 wrote: »Many PS workers have taken their cuts( unless your at the top level) and just got on with it. Others are taking limited action and there appears to be some discontent, but on the whole the country is getting on with it. In other words, most PS workers have gotten over it and I think its about time most of you did too.
I don't know what this is supposed to mean, but it sounds like you have assumed that I have some axe to grind with public sector workers. I don't. I am pointing out that the government needs to cut back its spending dramatically, much the same as some private companies have to cut back their spending dramatically. If people lose their jobs well it's sad for them on a personal level, but I'm not analysising it on a personal level, I'm looking at what is good for the country as a whole.
Do you accept that the government is spending almost twice as much as it is taking in?
Do you accept that we are a signatory to Maastricht and have to keep our deficit within 3% of GDP?
Do you accept that because of this we need to close the budget gap?
If yes, then you must accept as part of that that the government needs to cut back dramatically on spending. They may also have to increase taxes but that could be worse for the economy than cuts in spending.0 -
Taxipete29 wrote: »I have to disagree with you. There have been many threads over the past year regarding the PS and their wages. Almost all of these threads have included personal attacks. The PS have been insulted constantly and for you to suggest otherwise is disengenous.
The Govt laid out a plan ( such as it is) to reduce the deficit over a number of years. We are only in year one and the PS have effectively taken 2 paycuts( levy or no levy ,it reduced take home pay). Why then is there a constant need for this PS bashing. I see private sector workers moaning constantly about taking pay cuts, yet no one seems bothered about that.
Many PS workers have taken their cuts( unless your at the top level) and just got on with it. Others are taking limited action and there appears to be some discontent, but on the whole the country is getting on with it. In other words, most PS workers have gotten over it and I think its about time most of you did too.
Did you really believe that to be true? All I hear from the unions is that action will be escalated this year.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
johnnyskeleton wrote: »Sorry, perhaps I should have said that the general attitude of most reasonable people who understand and have analysed the issues. I can't speak for the AH crowd.
Certainly when it comes to media analysis, I don't think I've ever seen undue attacks on the public sector. I say undue because there is an attitude in the public sector that for me to even comment on it is an attack, and saying that there have to be cuts in pay/numbers; that public sector workers earn more than public sector workers in other countries; or that there are many parts of the public sector that are not particularly useful is seen almost as a personal attack on every public sector worker.
Again, I am simply stating the fairly basic and undeniable fact that the government is spending too much money for the tax it is taking in. The amount that was cut in the last budget is paltry - in fact the increased interest from the deficits of the last 2 years almost cancels out the cuts made in the last budget. So the reality is that further cuts are necessary. These should more properly be made by reducing staff in the areas I mentioned above as they are not as necessary as other roles and we can't afford them anymore.
The fact that you interpret this as public sector bashing proves the point I made above - any comment on the public sector is seen as an insult and is treated as though we had insulted you personally. Because of that attitude (shared with the top levels of the unions) it is very difficult to debate the cuts that have to be made.
I don't know what this is supposed to mean, but it sounds like you have assumed that I have some axe to grind with public sector workers. I don't. I am pointing out that the government needs to cut back its spending dramatically, much the same as some private companies have to cut back their spending dramatically. If people lose their jobs well it's sad for them on a personal level, but I'm not analysising it on a personal level, I'm looking at what is good for the country as a whole.
Do you accept that the government is spending almost twice as much as it is taking in?
Do you accept that we are a signatory to Maastricht and have to keep our deficit within 3% of GDP?
Do you accept that because of this we need to close the budget gap?
If yes, then you must accept as part of that that the government needs to cut back dramatically on spending. They may also have to increase taxes but that could be worse for the economy than cuts in spending.
Look at it this way. You let x number of PS workers go. There are no jobs for them at present. They sign on the dole. Now the money that will be spent on Social Welfare payments coupled with the payoffs your going to have to make when making these people redundant will reduce any percieved saving.
We are still a relatively low direct tax economy. This has to change. Not to keep the gravy train running, but to insure that everyone pays for the services they are getting. You cant tax your way out of a recession but you cant cut your way out of one either.
I love the way though people are not so quick to suggest solutions that would directly impact on their earnings0
Advertisement