Poll: The Budget

[No1newts]

http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16190693

To be honest I have been pretty solidly behind the con/lib coalition and the difficult decisions they have had to make to keep this country away from becoming another Greece.

However I cannot help but be completely incensed with the current proposals. On one hand they will try and save money by paying public sector workers in the regions less because it costs less to live, so essentially you will do the same job in Liverpool as someone in London and get paid less for your troubles. Complete disgrace they should instead be looking at offering extra incentives for public sector workers to live and work in busier areas rather than knocking down the salary of those away from more expensive areas.

With some serious arguing I could possibly be convinced this isn't a complete disgrace but then in the same budget that they propose to take money away from those who will be working for lower salaries... they propose to scrap the 50p tax rate and give more money back to the rich any savings they make from ripping off the poor will just be given back to the rich!

I am not a drama llama and if you look at my post history I am generally against union sabre rattling and public sector workers claiming they have a hard life but I really cannot understand how they can begin to justify such a hypocritical decision.

Anyone else miffed by this decision?



And yes it is a slow saturday night for me to be posting about this at 10pm

 

[No1newts]

If someone works in London and ends up with £0, after paying for all the bare essentials of life... whilst someone else does exactly the same job, in the north, but ends up with £5k, after paying for all the bare essentials of life... is that fair on the person in London?

You get London weightings for all sorts of jobs, because the living costs are that much higher.

In my OP I said they should look at weightings not reducing the salary of those in the regions. If you can have the same standard of living somewhere not so nice or in London for the same financial benefits why would you live somehwere ****? I am not saying living away from a big city is inherently bad, but why should you be financially penalised for not living in the big city?

As Fox says

Under the new scheme if the pay is reduced for the less than great areas... why would people bother working there? Might as well move somewhere nice and enjoy the same sort of disposable income as a result of higher wages offsetting the increased living costs?

They will shift workers away from less desirable areas if they can operate to the same standard of living, be it better or worse, in a nicer area.

 

[No1newts]

When you put it like that I can see where are you coming from but... a teacher teaching kids should be able to look forward to a particular salary regardless of whether she takes on the challenges of a comprehensive in Stafford or a comprehensive in Basingstoke...

This.

Ultimately people will move to areas where there is a better standard of living especially if salary becomes an issue. I can have the same standard of living in London or Scunthorpe... hmm...

Will just make it a struggle to get teachers in less urban/less well thought of areas.

 

[No1newts]

I'll have a little giggle in two years when applicants dry up for nursing and teaching posts.

I mean, who in their right mind would want to work for an employer such as the government nowadays?

At least in a few years I will be able to enjoy my Westfield on traffic free roads as everyone buggers off down south.

Does make you wonder

Why should I get a job with the government in the north now? **** pension, **** pay... sign me up!

 

[No1newts]

Welcome to the private sector in the north.

Thats what I work in, the thread was not out of self interest it was mere disbelief.