Where Your Tax Money Goes

@Jennifer1984 Said

The question of where to make the cuts is a complete and utter no-brainer.... Slash the armed forces.

Pull out of the Afghan war, scrap Trident, cancel the aircraft carriers and reduce manpower by around 25%. We could still meet commitments to our overseas dependencies, such as the Falkland Islands and still have some left over to provide for UN peacekeeping duties if required.

That'll take a bloody great big slice out of the budget deficit at a stroke.

@Jennifer1984 Said

The question of where to make the cuts is a complete and utter no-brainer.... Slash the armed forces.

Pull out of the Afghan war, scrap Trident, cancel the aircraft carriers and reduce manpower by around 25%. We could still meet commitments to our overseas dependencies, such as the Falkland Islands and still have some left over to provide for UN peacekeeping duties if required.

That'll take a bloody great big slice out of the budget deficit at a stroke.

@Kimmler Said

What you going to do with all the men & women that were previously employed by the armed forces or were employed by companies making Trident, aircraft carriers etc?

@Jennifer1984 Said

They'll have to get other jobs. They can either retrain or use the skills they already have for the benefit of the civilian population. Many civilian professions are in desperate need of the skills that get diverted away to military / industrial complex.

Example: Our country has to bring in thousands of immigrant doctors every year to fill the gaps in the NHS. There are around nine thousand skilled doctors, surgeons, nurses and other medical practitioners in the three services. If only a third of those were taken out of the military, then that would be three thousand "British jobs for British workers".

The same would apply across the board. Simple, innit..?

@raditz Said

Of course you're not actually creating any jobs, just transferring them around.

@Kimmler Said

Yes, more a case of not so simple innit? Plus, what would be the point of making them redundant in one part of the public sector just to employ them in another? No savings and no new jobs.

@Jennifer1984 Said

Well, actually, yes... it really is that simple. By cutting the armed forces as I suggested, there would be a massive saving to the public purse (?400 million pounds a week from simply withdrawing from the war, just for starters) and no loss of employment..!!

Those doctors currently employed in the 'Stan, could be employed in civilian hospitals, possibly increasing the ratio of staff to head of population for a start, and they'd be paying tax all year round, too, rather than drawing pay tax free as they do when they are out of the country, in the Afghan theatre (something they keep very quiet about when complaining about poor pay)

Also, the cost of armed forces medical provision is - even in peacetime - about three times per head of patient in comparison to the civilian population.

We also have to be aware of the different promotion structures in the armed forces. In the armed forces, the promotion structure enables those who keep their nose clean and wait their turn to rise up the ranks, with the higher pay that goes with it. Their medical skills may never improve, but by virtue of "dead man's shoes" and "Buggins' Turn" (something Gordon Brown fans will recognise)an officer can rise up from Sub Lieutenant to Lieutenant to Lieutenant Commander to Commander to Captain to Admiral...... In the armed forces you are a serviceman first, and a doctor second.

The NHS structure is more selective and promotions are based on talent, experience and qualification. In the NHS, a former military medic would have to work harder to climb the greasy pole. I don't have a problem with that..!!


So, the benefits are tangible and beneficial to the civilian population:

Better value for money via more efficient use of skilled personnel, at cheaper cost to the public purse.

More British medical professionals in the NHS means less reliance on foreign incomers.

Those professionals would not be taking advantage of military tax breaks which would mean more revenue to the Exchequer

Possibly, an increased doctor / patient ratio which would mean shorter waiting lists and better patient care.


And it really..... really.... is that simple.

Innit.

.

@Kimmler Said

I'm sorry but it isn't as simple as you suggest. As most hospitals are trusts now and are limited in the amount of staff they can employ, so there would be no new jobs created for these Dr and nurses you make redundant from the armed forces. So bang goes the rest of your arguement.

@Jennifer1984 Said

Who said anything about creating new jobs...?? You miss a very relevant point here, Kimmler...

Many health trusts are actually understaffed, this is why they are bringing in doctors from all over the EU and Commonwealth. Yes, they have an upper limit of people they can affordably employ, but many of them don't have those numbers. OK, some simple mathematics for you.

If a trust can employ (for arguments sake, to keep it simple)100 people, and they only have 90 people, then they can employ 10 more people before they reach their limit..!!

Amazing, isn't it..!!

Now, if we fill those 10 places with British medical staff, brought out of the armed forces, then we won't have to bring foreign medical staff into the country from other places.

Ahhhhhh, so that's how it works..!!!

Refer back to my post yesterday where I said: Example: Our country has to bring in thousands of immigrant doctors every year to fill the gaps in the NHS . That's both points encapsulated in one simple sentence.

I do hope I don't have to make the same point a third time.


.

@Jennifer1984 Said

Who said anything about creating new jobs...?? You miss a very relevant point here, Kimmler...

Many health trusts are actually understaffed, this is why they are bringing in doctors from all over the EU and Commonwealth. Yes, they have an upper limit of people they can affordably employ, but many of them don't have those numbers. OK, some simple mathematics for you.

If a trust can employ (for arguments sake, to keep it simple)100 people, and they only have 90 people, then they can employ 10 more people before they reach their limit..!!

Amazing, isn't it..!!

Now, if we fill those 10 places with British medical staff, brought out of the armed forces, then we won't have to bring foreign medical staff into the country from other places.

Ahhhhhh, so that's how it works..!!!

Refer back to my post yesterday where I said: Example: Our country has to bring in thousands of immigrant doctors every year to fill the gaps in the NHS . That's both points encapsulated in one simple sentence.

I do hope I don't have to make the same point a third time.


.