Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
TUC says 'manage economy like the Olympics' 
Author Message
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm
Posts: 12251
Reply with quote
Quote:
Trade union movement leader Brendan Barber is urging the government to "learn from the Olympics" in creating policies to boost the economy.

The TUC chief will say the success of British athletes funded by public money show "private isn't always best and the market doesn't always deliver".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19539090

The Olympics also relied heavily on unpaid volunteers who were fed chocolate and McDonalds. I rather fear that the Tories will take that as the guiding principle.

_________________
All the best,
Paul
brataccas wrote:
your posts are just combo chains of funny win

I’m on Twitter, tweeting away... My Photos Random Avatar Explanation


Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:33 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
Reply with quote
So the TUC is suggesting we run the economy by spending much more money than we have in the budget?
Sounds about right for a left wing union to suggest.

_________________
pcernie wrote:
'I'm going to snort this off your arse - for the benefit of government statistics, of course.'


Mon Sep 10, 2012 10:40 am
Profile WWW
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
l3v1ck wrote:
So the TUC is suggesting we run the economy by spending much more money than we have in the budget?
Sounds about right for a left wing union to suggest.

Actually, from the interviews on the radio this morning, that's not what they are suggesting at all no. What they seemed to be suggesting is that we look what made our olympic teams successful and how they managed to optimise performance for a given budget.

So pretty much the opposite of what you were suggesting, really.


Mon Sep 10, 2012 10:58 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 3:16 am
Posts: 6146
Location: Middle Earth
Reply with quote
I have no ideas of the true figures, but wouldn't a host nation for the Olympics throw as much money as possible in preparation for a good medal performance?

_________________
Dive like a fish, drink like a fish!

><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>
•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><(((º>

If one is diving so close to the limits that +/- 1% will make a difference then the error has already been made.


Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:05 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 7173
Reply with quote
l3v1ck wrote:
So the TUC is suggesting we run the economy by spending much more money than we have in the budget?
Sounds about right for a left wing union to suggest.

Since both money and the "economy" are human inventions and are completely arbitrary, there is literally no reason why the world couldn't enjoy a decent standard of living beyond lack of political will and the vested interests of the rich.

_________________
timark_uk wrote:
That's your problem. You need Linux. That'll fix all your problems.
Mark


Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:13 am
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
belchingmatt wrote:
I have no ideas of the true figures, but wouldn't a host nation for the Olympics throw as much money as possible in preparation for a good medal performance?

You can throw as much money at a sport as you like, it doesn't mean you'll definitely win. England's football team and the LTA prove that on a pretty much daily basis. It improves your chances obviously but its still not a given. So when we've produced lots of teams that have won things, including some who have had very limited budgets and some who were up against other teams that had at least as big a budget - for example, our cyclists are very well funded, but so are those of France, Australia, the USA and China - it makes sense to look at them and see what the differentiators were that made them winners and the others not, yes? Aside from the sheer chance factor which you can never entirely remove from the equation.


Mon Sep 10, 2012 12:29 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:06 pm
Posts: 6355
Location: IoW
Reply with quote
I read that as though the TUC were referencing the PM's 'cut public spending and the private sector will pick up the slack' scheme that has failed so spectacularly.

_________________
Before you judge a man, walk a mile in his shoes; after that, who cares?! He's a mile away and you've got his shoes!


Mon Sep 10, 2012 1:00 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
Spreadie wrote:
I read that as though the TUC were referencing the PM's 'cut public spending and the private sector will pick up the slack' scheme that has failed so spectacularly.

Requiring the public's money to be spent efficiently is one of those things that all governments say that nobody can ever really disagree with, like 'reducing child poverty'. Thing is, the current mob have set themselves various targets, told everyone that the austerity measures were worth it to achieve those targets and then pretty much failed to hit any of the targets they set in the first place.

Basically, the government is the anti-olympics.


Mon Sep 10, 2012 1:38 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:10 pm
Posts: 5490
Location: just behind you!
Reply with quote
Quote:


Quote:
He added: "Tell that that to Bradley [Wiggins], Jessica [Ennis] or Mo [Farah], all supported by targeted funding.

And if they failed to deliver their funding gets cut, is that what he wants?
Quote:
"Markets always trump planning, they say. Well look at the Olympic Park, the result of years of careful planning and public investment.

Hideously over the original budget, the only target they hit was getting it completed on time.

Quote:
We won't build up industrial strength unless we work out what we do best as a country, whether it's cars, pharmaceuticals, aerospace, or the creative industries, and help them do even better."
now that is a bit of common sense that all can agree on

Quote:
"And it won't be the West London rich who suffer. No, it will be the rest of us.
is he including himself in that "us" or is it the usual Union figure whereby everything they advocate doesnt actually affect them adversly, only their members.

_________________
johnwbfc wrote:
I care not which way round it is as long as at some point some sort of semi-naked wrestling is involved.

Amnesia10 wrote:
Yes but the opportunity to legally kill someone with a giant dildo does not happen every day.

Finally joined Flickr


Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:24 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
bobbdobbs wrote:
And if they failed to deliver their funding gets cut, is that what he wants?

The HE sector (the one I'm in) already worked on the basis of performance related funding, even before it was basically turned into a private sector business (which it now pretty much is). I suspect pretty much all the public sector would accept that deal if they could hold the government to it, given it's better than hitting your target and getting your funding cut anyway because the government has given hundreds of billions of pounds to private sector businesses who miserably failed to hit theirs, which is what has happened this time round.

Quote:
Quote:
"Markets always trump planning, they say. Well look at the Olympic Park, the result of years of careful planning and public investment.

Hideously over the original budget, the only target they hit was getting it completed on time.

Going massively over budget is hardly the exclusive preserve of the public sector though now is it?

Quote:
Quote:
We won't build up industrial strength unless we work out what we do best as a country, whether it's cars, pharmaceuticals, aerospace, or the creative industries, and help them do even better."
now that is a bit of common sense that all can agree on

Again, its the kind of things politicians say comfortable in the knowledge that nobody could sensibly object to it but it doesn't pin them down to actually promising to do anything.

Quote:
is he including himself in that "us" or is it the usual Union figure whereby everything they advocate doesnt actually affect them adversly, only their members.

Trade Union leaders are at the end of the day politicians, with all the faults that breed contains.

Jon


Mon Sep 10, 2012 3:01 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 10 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.