| Modern day London 06:32 - Jun 10 with 7598 views | peenemunde |
Yet a another murder last night.
It’s like a war zone. What has happened to a once fine city.
|  | | |  |
| Modern day London on 20:30 - Jun 11 with 1340 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Modern day London on 20:28 - Jun 11 by trampie |
Their wages are paid by the public. |
Including by police officers, teachers, civil servants, nurses et al. |  |
| |
| Modern day London on 20:42 - Jun 11 with 1306 views | Witneyjack |
| Modern day London on 20:28 - Jun 11 by trampie |
Their wages are paid by the public. |
Which they all are. |  | | |
| Modern day London on 21:36 - Jun 11 with 1240 views | londonlisa2001 |
Could leave it to market forces Trampie. Put it all in the private sector.
I’d warn you though, that while I would have phenomenal healthcare, schools, policing, fire service, postal service etc, you’d have absolutely nothing in your rural west Wales community. Zero provision of any kind.
Suits me. It’s be a tonne cheaper for me to stop subsidising you.
Would you be happy though?
Nope.
And how would Leanne manage up there in Tonypandy?
So shut up and stop being such a troll, |  | | |
| Modern day London on 21:51 - Jun 11 with 1222 views | dickythorpe |
This thread has more twists and turns than a snake riding a roller coaster in a David Lynch designed theme park.
Just to throw it off tangent yet again, I believe it's great news the sun will destroy our planet in 5 billion years .....the shame is humanity has to wait that long.
We haven't the intelligence to get on Earth, so why the feck are we exploring other planets in the solar system?
There is life on other planets and they probably are hiding from us.
I mean what self respecting Martian wants a spice taking, alcohol addicted, job shy benefit cheat living next to him ? |  | | |
| Modern day London on 22:12 - Jun 11 with 1199 views | LeonWasGod |
| Modern day London on 21:36 - Jun 11 by londonlisa2001 |
Could leave it to market forces Trampie. Put it all in the private sector.
I’d warn you though, that while I would have phenomenal healthcare, schools, policing, fire service, postal service etc, you’d have absolutely nothing in your rural west Wales community. Zero provision of any kind.
Suits me. It’s be a tonne cheaper for me to stop subsidising you.
Would you be happy though?
Nope.
And how would Leanne manage up there in Tonypandy?
So shut up and stop being such a troll, |
Understand your point about the difficulties of getting companies to provide services in poorly populated areas. But I don’t think it’s a given anyone would have phenomenal public services through the private sector. They’re more than capable of screwing things up as plenty of high profile cases have shown in recent years. |  | | |
| Modern day London on 22:17 - Jun 11 with 1196 views | trampie |
| Modern day London on 21:36 - Jun 11 by londonlisa2001 |
Could leave it to market forces Trampie. Put it all in the private sector.
I’d warn you though, that while I would have phenomenal healthcare, schools, policing, fire service, postal service etc, you’d have absolutely nothing in your rural west Wales community. Zero provision of any kind.
Suits me. It’s be a tonne cheaper for me to stop subsidising you.
Would you be happy though?
Nope.
And how would Leanne manage up there in Tonypandy?
So shut up and stop being such a troll, |
I'm a troll for putting up links about what the Chancellor of Exchequer was quoted as saying is it ? and for putting up a business insider link looking at the data and that says the Chancellor was right.
You let yourself down badly sometimes, you try and come across as all knowledgeable but just like your internet friend Lohengrin you have an agenda.
I'm a troll for putting up data suggesting public sector workers have a good deal, I mention both you and Lohengrin because the minute something go's up you don't like [and I only deal in facts] and you have no comebacks you both try and belittle, its a very poor show I must say.
Lower rung public sector workers should get more money, middle and upper rung public sector workers should possibly get less, definitely upper run public sector workers.
The big issue is their pensions, they are too generous, the country cant afford it, future generations will not be able to afford it, the BI article majors on the generous pensions.
I'm all for equality and the inequality is startling regarding the difference between private and public sector pensions. |  |
| |
| Modern day London on 23:01 - Jun 11 with 1154 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Modern day London on 22:12 - Jun 11 by LeonWasGod |
Understand your point about the difficulties of getting companies to provide services in poorly populated areas. But I don’t think it’s a given anyone would have phenomenal public services through the private sector. They’re more than capable of screwing things up as plenty of high profile cases have shown in recent years. |
I don’t think the private sector should provide essential services.
But there would absolutely be a phenomenal service in London and absolutely nothing in rural areas. And we’d pay less as the expensive bit is providing services in rural areas.
Which is why it shouldn’t happen.
Trampie is just a troll. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Modern day London on 00:04 - Jun 12 with 1114 views | trampie |
| Modern day London on 23:01 - Jun 11 by londonlisa2001 |
I don’t think the private sector should provide essential services.
But there would absolutely be a phenomenal service in London and absolutely nothing in rural areas. And we’d pay less as the expensive bit is providing services in rural areas.
Which is why it shouldn’t happen.
Trampie is just a troll. |
I also don’t think the private sector should provide essential services just like you, I think a sovereign nation should direct funds and resources to the area of the state that need it most which will often be rural areas away from the main hubs, which you also seem to be saying.
But having a large state sector does not mean paying lots of those people wages and pensions that the country cant afford to the detriment of other workers and other citizens. | |
| |
| Modern day London on 23:09 - Jun 12 with 987 views | jackrabbit |
| Modern day London on 10:07 - Jun 10 by oh_tommy_tommy |
And you said my post was a load of bolloxs  |
Yeah, total bollocks.
"The Met has enough cash to stop criminals … but it is wasting it’
Mayor’s call for more money may be undermined by inspectorate saying the force is a bad housekeeper, writes Kate McCann
SADIQ KHAN’S demand for more cash to fight rising crime has been undermined by a warning that Scotland Yard is failing to spend taxpayers’ money efficiently.
A report by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary warned that the Metropolitan Police “requires improvement” and has a “limited understanding of the level and quality of service it can provide”, casting doubt on the Mayor of London’s hopes for more funding.
It follows a spate of violent moped and knife attacks in the capital in recent weeks, leading to claims that London gangs are out of control and police are failing to get a grip on the situation. Critics have called on Mr Khan to do more to tackle the issue, but he has demanded the Government hand over more money and linked the rise in violence to funding cuts.
However, the efficiency report appears to contradict the link between cuts and crime and adds weight to claims that the force has enough funding but does not spend it well.
Campaigners said the Met, overseen by Mr Khan, is wasting taxpayers’ money on first-class travel and training courses at the same time as demanding more funds. They also called for better procurement practices and for spending on office space to be cut. The force also holds millions in reserve funds, although this has fallen since 2014.
Stephen Greenhalgh, the former deputy mayor of policing, said Mr Khan had failed to come up with a plan for the police and accused him of spending millions on office space instead of selling it off to fund the police as Boris Johnson did as mayor.
Mr Greenhalgh, who worked for Mr Johnson at City Hall, told The Daily Telegraph: “The mayor has no plan apart from letting the number of officers fall, despite his pledge that they would be kept above 32,000.
“He is using crime as an excuse to demand more money from the Government despite getting a good budget settlement.
“The whole idea that he is cash-strapped is absurd, especially when they can afford to spend £10 million on a leadership course.”
Earlier this year, the mayor’s office announced it was spending £250  million to buy the Empress State building, which houses specialist officers, despite claims by campaigners that extending the lease would have been far cheaper.
A recent report also highlighted the amount the force spends on flights, around £8 million between April 2015 and December 2017. Mr Khan was elected in May 2016. Of that amount, over half was spent in non-economy cabins.
The recent rise in crime has prompted fears that the Met does not have enough officers to handle its demands. But the force’s accounts show it has underspent on recruitment and does not need extra cash from the Government to boost officer numbers.
In addition, the report from the Inspector of Constabulary into efficiency found that the Met did not have a thorough understanding of how much policing cost.
It rated the force as “requires improvement” for efficiency, making it one of the worst in the country despite receiving more funding per person than any other city or region.
The report, which looks at how police spend their money and plan for the future, concluded: “The force should ensure that it understands the level of service that can be provided at different levels of costs, so it can identify the optimum level of service provision.”
‘It’s easy for the mayor to demand more cash, but hard-pressed families deserve better for their taxes’
The findings contradict the mayor’s claim that a fall in officer numbers due to funding cuts has had an impact on violence in the capital.
Last week, Mr Khan said police were “under-resourced and overstretched”, adding: “Everyone, except from the Government, accepts now there is a link between cutting police resources and an increase in serious violent crime.”
But John O’Connell, the chief executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “It’s clear that there are still savings to be made by being more efficient and getting better value for taxpayers’ money. It’s easy for the mayor to demand more cash, but hard-pressed families deserve better for their taxes. By getting better value on procurement, more money could be spent on fighting crime.” |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
