For those of the 'left' persuasion, you may want cease reading. Strictly speaking this isn't about the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Nor is it entirely about those people who work for a living being better of than those on welfare. I will leave such class war clap-trap to the Labour Party, or Welfare Party as it is more properly called. This is the party, who this week revealed their real leader. Many suspected that the unions controlled the party and this was confirmed when the shenanigans carried out by the odious Tom Watson MP and Labour's paymasters, (and these are the same ones that elected Red Ed Miliband over his brother, David, as party 'leader') in Scotland were revealed. The real leader of the Labour/Welfare party is Len McCluskey, the leader of the mostly public sector Unite union.
But I digress.
The inequality of which I speak is that between the public and private sector. Average hourly wages in the public sector are more than 24% higher than those in the private sector. Simply put, this is scandalous! Even its apologists admit that the best that they can reduce the discrepancy to, is just over 8%, when they eliminate factors such as public sector workers having more education and experience than their private sector counterparts.
Those reading this who live outside of London really need to think about those numbers. Average wages in London are around 50% higher in the private sector and around 25% higher in the public sector, than the UK average.
So what this means is that in those other regions of England and Wales, the public sector crowds out the private sector. That is, the public sector pays better than the private sector. The data (all from 2011) shows that outside of London the average hourly wages for the public sector is around £17/hour. In London it climbs to over £22/hour, presumably due to the so called 'London Weighting' allowance. In all regions outside of London, all, these averages far exceed the local private sector average wage. In Wales and the North East, the average private sector hourly wage is around £13/hour. So the public sector is offering wages that are 30% higher than the private sector. Think about that and ask yourself why would anyone want to work in the private sector and much more importantly, why should a servant - because that is what the public sector are supposed to be - servants of the people - earn more than the person that pays his/her wage??
And of course we then move to the subject of pensions. You will recall all of those demonstrations shown on TV, particularly by the biased BBC - the same BBC that uses license/TV Tax money to such great effect for it's own and recently ex-employees - where people were complaining about their public sector pensions being decimated and how unfair it all was, etc.. A great study by the independent Institute of Fiscal Studies, found that even after these reforms come into play
Which brings us back to the 'cuts' that the Labour/Welfare Party and it's union masters, (I was going to say paymasters but we now see that the union grip on Labour/Welfare is more than just money-centred), always rant on about - though recently in a confused and conflicted way - we will oppose 'cuts' but we will keep them if we regain power (or the latter gets changed depending on who is speaking!)
In all the talk about cuts and how the public sector is being 'killed off' and how these workers are suffering etc., consider this. These public sector workers have achieved pay increases above the so-called 'freeze' that was imposed by the incoming Conservative 'led' coalition government. Employment in the public sector fell by 6.4% between April 2010 and April 2012 and yet the public pay bill rose by 2%, which translates to a 9% increase, per head, over two years.
I must be lying, I can (almost) hear you cry. What about all those statements from the government saying we 'are all in this together' and the 'public sector must share in the pain'? Surely they can't have been lies? Especially when you hear confirmation from Labour/Welfare and the unions on how 'ordinary public servants are suffering at the hands of a heartless, typically Tory regime', etc..
Well it seems that yes, they are all lying - kind of. There was a freeze but as fans of Yes, Minister will know, the Sir Humphrey's can always get around such trivialities. It seems that a lot of public servants in Whitehall and the NHS, etc., continued to receive 'annual increments' simply because, by staying employed they are 'building up experience'. So they didn't get a salary increase but their pay went up!
Unequal Britain isn't about the so called rich and the so called poor. It is about the continuing differences between those that work in the public sector and those that they supposedly work for. Between a protected and cosseted minority and those that pay for them. And the tragedy? There doesn't seem to be any political party that actually represents the poor schmuck who pays for this. Taxation, in all its various and iniquitous forms, continues to be far too high in the UK and no political party is advocating slashing taxes and getting big government off of the backs of the working people. Not one! None are saying that the 'master' should be paid more than the servant.
Democracy 21st Century style!
Still, I suppose it could be worse. I am not a fan of the Muslim Brotherhood but in Egypt, Morsi was democratically elected. Wonder what his greater crime was? The one that tipped the army? Maybe threatening some of their perks?
Enjoy the weekend and thanks for reading!
But I digress.
The inequality of which I speak is that between the public and private sector. Average hourly wages in the public sector are more than 24% higher than those in the private sector. Simply put, this is scandalous! Even its apologists admit that the best that they can reduce the discrepancy to, is just over 8%, when they eliminate factors such as public sector workers having more education and experience than their private sector counterparts.
Those reading this who live outside of London really need to think about those numbers. Average wages in London are around 50% higher in the private sector and around 25% higher in the public sector, than the UK average.
So what this means is that in those other regions of England and Wales, the public sector crowds out the private sector. That is, the public sector pays better than the private sector. The data (all from 2011) shows that outside of London the average hourly wages for the public sector is around £17/hour. In London it climbs to over £22/hour, presumably due to the so called 'London Weighting' allowance. In all regions outside of London, all, these averages far exceed the local private sector average wage. In Wales and the North East, the average private sector hourly wage is around £13/hour. So the public sector is offering wages that are 30% higher than the private sector. Think about that and ask yourself why would anyone want to work in the private sector and much more importantly, why should a servant - because that is what the public sector are supposed to be - servants of the people - earn more than the person that pays his/her wage??
And of course we then move to the subject of pensions. You will recall all of those demonstrations shown on TV, particularly by the biased BBC - the same BBC that uses license/TV Tax money to such great effect for it's own and recently ex-employees - where people were complaining about their public sector pensions being decimated and how unfair it all was, etc.. A great study by the independent Institute of Fiscal Studies, found that even after these reforms come into play
"Public sector workers will continue to accrue pensions that are dramatically more generous than those accrued, on average, by private sector employees, few of whom have access to a defined benefit pension."
Which brings us back to the 'cuts' that the Labour/Welfare Party and it's union masters, (I was going to say paymasters but we now see that the union grip on Labour/Welfare is more than just money-centred), always rant on about - though recently in a confused and conflicted way - we will oppose 'cuts' but we will keep them if we regain power (or the latter gets changed depending on who is speaking!)
In all the talk about cuts and how the public sector is being 'killed off' and how these workers are suffering etc., consider this. These public sector workers have achieved pay increases above the so-called 'freeze' that was imposed by the incoming Conservative 'led' coalition government. Employment in the public sector fell by 6.4% between April 2010 and April 2012 and yet the public pay bill rose by 2%, which translates to a 9% increase, per head, over two years.
I must be lying, I can (almost) hear you cry. What about all those statements from the government saying we 'are all in this together' and the 'public sector must share in the pain'? Surely they can't have been lies? Especially when you hear confirmation from Labour/Welfare and the unions on how 'ordinary public servants are suffering at the hands of a heartless, typically Tory regime', etc..
Well it seems that yes, they are all lying - kind of. There was a freeze but as fans of Yes, Minister will know, the Sir Humphrey's can always get around such trivialities. It seems that a lot of public servants in Whitehall and the NHS, etc., continued to receive 'annual increments' simply because, by staying employed they are 'building up experience'. So they didn't get a salary increase but their pay went up!
Unequal Britain isn't about the so called rich and the so called poor. It is about the continuing differences between those that work in the public sector and those that they supposedly work for. Between a protected and cosseted minority and those that pay for them. And the tragedy? There doesn't seem to be any political party that actually represents the poor schmuck who pays for this. Taxation, in all its various and iniquitous forms, continues to be far too high in the UK and no political party is advocating slashing taxes and getting big government off of the backs of the working people. Not one! None are saying that the 'master' should be paid more than the servant.
Democracy 21st Century style!
Still, I suppose it could be worse. I am not a fan of the Muslim Brotherhood but in Egypt, Morsi was democratically elected. Wonder what his greater crime was? The one that tipped the army? Maybe threatening some of their perks?
Enjoy the weekend and thanks for reading!
No comments:
Post a Comment