What do you people do for a living?

CraigXXL

blister pus wrote:

CraigXXL wrote:

and how do you explain this

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/public-sector-employment-rises-to-eightyear-high-588298.html

that's a July 2003 article - don't make me laugh

and what happened following that expansion is exactly what i stated above

try this instead

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1088147/Labours-decade-high-employment-propped-public-sector-jobs-boom-claims-study.html

or just search for yourself.

Anonymous

Well, both sides have put their point across, and neither is ever going to concede to the other.
And in the process the thread has been derailed completely.
Good effort.

360

CraigXXL wrote:

blister pus wrote:

CraigXXL wrote:

and how do you explain this

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/public-sector-employment-rises-to-eightyear-high-588298.html

that's a July 2003 article - don't make me laugh

and what happened following that expansion is exactly what i stated above

try this instead

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1088147/Labours-decade-high-employment-propped-public-sector-jobs-boom-claims-study.html

or just search for yourself.

I don't think anyone who quotes the dailymail (for anything other than comedy effect) can ever argue a point successfully.

bails87

CraigXXL wrote:

Bails I'm banging my head against a brick wall with you. Could you please tell me how much PROFIT is included in the US figures then deduct that from the figures given.

No, I can't, because I don't know. But there shouldn't be any abnormal profit. Given the cost per head is $3100 in the UK and $5000 in the US, maybe the hospitals providing medicare health services are making a 60% profit on each patient, but that seems pretty high. Even if they were making 60% then the costs would be equal, which suggests neither is better than the other.

You are not comparing like for like figures.

I know! That's the whole point, I'm comparing public with private. Because you said that the private sector is always more efficient than the public sector. If it costs more to deliver the same outcomes in a private setting, then the private sector is less efficient than the public (in this instance, if the figures are to be believed).

bails87

360 wrote:

CraigXXL wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1088147/Labours-decade-high-employment-propped-public-sector-jobs-boom-claims-study.html

or just search for yourself.

I don't think anyone who quotes the dailymail (for anything other than comedy effect) can ever argue a point successfully.

What's that, the Daily Mail don't like labour? Who'd have guessed!

Again though, what's your point?

CraigXXL

My job

I make businesses look at their costs in order to make profits and survive against their competition. This often involves sitting with different departments to make them more effective at a lower cost so they contribute more to the companies profits. I have done the same within local council to ensure that services provide value for money. Hence my views.

blister pus

CraigXXL wrote:

blister pus wrote:

CraigXXL wrote:

and how do you explain this

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/public-sector-employment-rises-to-eightyear-high-588298.html

that's a July 2003 article - don't make me laugh

and what happened following that expansion is exactly what i stated above

try this instead

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1088147/Labours-decade-high-employment-propped-public-sector-jobs-boom-claims-study.html

or just search for yourself.

so now you've resorted to the mail, why am i not surprised. but the expansion of the state sector under NuLab was always going to happen after the Thatcher years, it's just not news, what is news worthy is what happened during and after that expansion

blister pus

CraigXXL wrote:

My job

I make businesses look at their costs in order to make profits and survive against their competition. This often involves sitting with different departments to make them more effective at a lower cost so they contribute more to the companies profits. I have done the same within local council to ensure that services provide value for money. Hence my views.

well there you go. you are the problem.

Anonymous

blister pus wrote:

well there you go. you are the problem.

What an arrogant tw*t.
Sounds like he's more part of the solution.

CraigXXL

360 wrote:

I don't think anyone who quotes the dailymail (for anything other than comedy effect) can ever argue a point successfully.

You're right there it could have been worse with the Express but the IFS should put the point across better, try the conclusion.

blister pus

yeehaamcgee wrote:

blister pus wrote:

well there you go. you are the problem.

What an arrogant tw*t.
Sounds like he's more part of the solution.

back in your box and watch out for those smillies numbskull.

Happy Harry

Well. Glad that's all cleared up, then :shock:

bunyip

I make things in a factory (manufacturing) anything from parasol bases to speed boats. we are one of the leading companies in our field and are british owned. I know very little about UK v's US health care £/head neither it seems does anybody else

SPIRO

I am a Stickmonkey in Her Majesty's Armed Forces.....

MTB-NCL

LOL! Nearly 200 replies what?

ste_t

I spend most of my time ordering minions around whilst eating bacon & mushroom toasties and drinking coffee, sat in the office, shopping for bike related things on t'interweb.

Though technically speaking, I run a bar.

TheNorthernTrain

I sit on my arse all day playing xbox, eating pizza, occasionally going for a ride and rarely doing any sort of work.

In the 2 years i have been at uni I have only been into the library a maximum of 4 times, who said degrees were pointless

I'm self employed as a student bum, and occasionally I'll leave the house and go and stand behind the bar in the union and serve people now and then. So really I have a piss easy life, I don't want this bubble to burst....