With the closure of more police and fire stations announced, what I don't understand is how 30/40/50 years ago we paid our rates and taxes and supported post offices, police stations, fire stations, more hospitals and all their staff plus bus conductors and probably a larger army. Now it's all cutbacks (even when Labour were in - okay maybe except civil servants).
I can understand in the private sector that competition and the greedy directors and shareholders lead to job losses but I can't understand how we can no longer support our essential services how we once did?
Were we borrowing too much back then? Have we never been able to afford our services? Do we pay too little tax now to support them? Did the privatisation of our large industries affect the countries income? Ageing population?
0
Comments
Ageing population reduces those that pay.
This is not new and things were not all wonderful in the old days.
Back then scroungers (rich, poor, foriegn) were blamed as now. I could go back further.
Three significant changes are, imho, the ageing population and hugely increased costs of keeping everyone alive and well (not just the old) and far higher expectations (a fridge, a freezer, central heating, colour TV are expectations not aspirarations for many).
And housing costs are much bigger either as rent or a mortgage as a % of income so as with the desired consumables pushing up wages
Just within the "Community and Living" section, there must be a Director and Senior Managers running a large team of staff to deal and work with:
Asylum and immigration
Community advice
Domestic violence
Legal advice
Support groups
Voluntary organisations
Exhibitions
Town centre management
Carers
Children and family care
Crime prevention
Infectious diseases
Recycling, rubbish and waste
Street care and cleaning
Walking
Records and archives
Births
Deaths, funerals and cremations
Grants
Marriages
Tourism and travel
Youth support
Pollution
Animal welfare
Childcare
Community centres and facilities
Equality and diversity
Libraries
Safety
Taxis and minicabs
Youth offending
Cycling
I wonder how many of these roles were about 30 years ago?
Asylum and immigration
Grants
Parental support
Carers
Children and family care
Youth offending
Adapting homes
Disabilities
Food
Help for adults
Mental health
Services for older people
Domestic violence
Health and medical advice
Youth support
Childcare
Infectious diseases
Accessibility
Community transport services
Doctors, GPs and hospitals
Fostering, adopting and looked after children
Home care
Substance misuse
Some of the change is in new techonologies, for sure. When I started work there were very few IT systems and lots of things were done on paper. There were even typists for if you needed a letter or memo written up. Jobs like that, and filing clerks etc have gone from offices. In manufacturing, loads of jobs have gone from production lines because so much more can be automated. On one level, this is a good thing as it means boring jobs can be eliminated, but it does mean there are fewer jobs. As a society, we should probably have looked to deal with this by working less and emphasising other things in life. The only concession to this approach was the expansion of education, but even that has now been offset by extending the retirement age and the cost of education meaning students will likely have to work.
The only areas of public services that seem to have grown in the last few decades are those relating to enforcement - parking now costs almost everywhere and there are people paid to enforce it, for example. To be fair I think transport is better now than when I was younger. I used to spend ages at bus stops in my teens.
Housing has also played a role - public housing is more or less gone for most people now, meaning the choices, particularly for thos who are younger and don't have anything behind them, are either exorbitant rents and moving every 6 months or unaffordable housing with a ridiculous mortgage. I'm lucky in that I started buying my house years ago, anyone I know with family and an ambition to live somewhere they can fit in a piece of furniture are having to move to somewhere with a one to two hour A road commute. This isn't sustainable, and I think the government's idea of stirring up hatred against those on benefits who don't (yet) have to do this will be a short term fix. Longer term, it will impact on the lives of those having to do these commutes and their families, as well as likely chaging the voting patterns of the poorer parts of the South East.
The international aspect is also important - as Asia and other regions of the world catch up with the west and demand to consume more, prices will rise. For years, Western Europe and the US could pretty much dictate prices for commodities like oil and minerals. This is no longer the case and means a lot of the invisible income that came from getting things cheaper or having them pass through the UK is no longer there.
Double knock (confimration from a third party that there is a fire) before they turn out.