Private vs public

Which is best?

There arnt many examples of directly comparable private vs public.

Private rented vs council, I have just moved into a council house and its much better than my previous private rented terraced house.

Private vs council, sports centres; I have just signed up to pay monthly at my local council gym.. I believe the council run sports centres are cheaper than comparable private gyms.

So it seems council run facilities win hands down, so why do the Conservatives want to privatise things?

Cause it ultimately costs the Government money to run council services, but it ultimately profits the Government to have private companies doing it right, making a profit, paying tax.

/thread.

Which is best?

There arnt many examples of directly comparable private vs public.

Private rented vs council, I have just moved into a council house and its much better than my previous private rented terraced house.

It's subsidised by the taxpayer, a private dwelling is not. So there might be a bit of artifice to the value-for-money perception. Maybe, maybe not, but just saying.

Private vs council, sports centres; I have just signed up to pay monthly at my local council gym.. I believe the council run sports centres are cheaper than comparable private gyms.

It's subsidised by the taxpayer, a private gym is not. So there might be a bit of artifice to the value-for-money perception. Maybe, maybe not, but just saying.

So it seems council run facilities win hands down, so why do the Conservatives want to privatise things?

Which things does you Conservative council want to privatise?

From what little I know of public sector services being delivered privately the bottom line is the service gets better only when the amount paid for that service goes up, either as a direct bill to the end user or as the amount paid from the public purse. The difference appears to be that in private hands an amount goes to profit while in public hands any profit is put back into the public purse.

Schools. No comparison.

Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android

Which is best?

 

There arnt many examples of directly comparable private vs public.

 

Private rented vs council, I have just moved into a council house and its much better than my previous private rented terraced house.

 

Private vs council, sports centres; I have just signed up to pay monthly at my local council gym.. I believe the council run sports centres are cheaper than comparable private gyms.

 

So it seems council run facilities win hands down, so why do the Conservatives want to privatise things?

Usually because they are propped up by Government money. If a leisure centre drops in demand it takes 20 years to close it amidst public consultations and public money. If its private it folds and no one cares a jot.

As for gyms etc wait until bank holidays etc,they tend to close for longer and more frequently than private venues in my experience.

Cause it ultimately costs the Government money to run council services, but it ultimately profits the Government to have private companies doing it right, making a profit, paying tax.

 

/thread.

We lived in a council house for 12 years we paid more each year than it cost to build, in the time we lived there it was painted just once with nothing else done to it.

From what little I know of public sector services being delivered privately the bottom line is the service gets better only when the amount paid for that service goes up, either as a direct bill to the end user or as the amount paid from the public purse. The difference appears to be that in private hands an amount goes to profit while in public hands any profit is put back into the public purse.

Except of course there is little profit in public services. The wastage of public money by overmanning, poor management and lack of incentive to bother in the public sector is atrocious, and costs taxpayers billions.

Except of course there is little profit in public services. The wastage of public money by overmanning, poor management and lack of incentive to bother in the public sector is atrocious, and costs taxpayers billions.

No what costs the money is that the services are underinvested and usually have their hands tied by politicians looking to score points with the public by pointing to how little money they're letting the public sector spend. The result is a service trying to deliver services under conditions not conducive to delivering such a service and manned by people constantly being told they are stealing from the public.

Once a service goes private the costs go up as the private sector grows the business by investing and claws money back by raising prices. Of course most public services are ones we can't really do without so one way or another we have to pay for it.

We lived in a council house for 12 years we paid more each year than it cost to build, in the time we lived there it was painted just once with nothing else done to it.

So how can they be subsidized by the tax payer?

---------- Post added 17-02-2014 at 19:51 ----------

The wastage of public money by overmanning, poor management and lack of incentive to bother in the public sector is atrocious, and costs taxpayers billions.

Is this what you have read in the media?

My rent for my old private house is roughly the same as my larger council house. So, of the £300 per month, I would guess around £100 would be profit or the private landlord, that gives a lot of scope for wastage and overmanning, before it runs into needing a subsidy.

I would assume the Government funded schools are much cheaper.

So how can they be subsidized by the tax payer?

 

---------- Post added 17-02-2014 at 19:51 ----------

 

My own sediments entirely.

 

I would assume the Government funded schools are much cheaper.

Sheffield Girls High costs about £11 000 per year to attend.

Average secondary funding in Sheffield schools will be roughly £6000 per pupil per year.