Gordon really has reformed the benefit system

[OwlHoot]

.. It's strange that, at the height of the British Empire, the total civil service staff numbered just over 4000, handling India, Canada, Australia and part of Africa. These days, with an island off Argentina and a rock in the Med, we seem to need 12.5 million government employees.

Same with the services.

In 1850, say, I think all the admin for the army and navy was done by no more than a few dozen officers and clerks. But today the MoD has 100,000 mouse clickers, nearly as many bureaucrats and clerks as soldiers in the army!

And in 1850 they didn't have computers, only quill pens. But we've come a long way since then.

[TriggerHippy]

Yup, agreed. I could rant as well. To return to the original question, I think we all lose because the current system has outgrown the capability of it's creators to control it.

[Zippy]

I agree with you in part, but the NHS??? Do we really need something that's almost the largest organization in the world (except for the Chinese Army) to look after a population that's smaller than that of Germany or France. How do they manage?

Based on recent personal experience, they don't manage but attempt to achieve a consensus. I've seen posts created, deputies to (said) posts created and I'll stop now before this turns into a full on rant.

[TriggerHippy]

You can't really compare the 19th century civil service, with all 21st century public sector including the NHS, which did not exist in Victorian times.

I agree with you in part, but the NHS??? Do we really need something that's almost the largest organization in the world (except for the Chinese Army) to look after a population that's smaller than that of Germany or France. How do they manage?

[Bagpuss]

Pretty misleading stats
You can't really compare the 19th century civil service, with all 21st century public sector including the NHS and free schooling, which did not exist in Victorian times.

[Platypus]

It's strange that, at the height of the British Empire, the total civil service staff numbered just over 4000, handling India, Canada, Australia and part of Africa. These days, with an island off Argentina and a rock in the Med, we seem to need 12.5 million government employees.

Pretty startling stats

[TriggerHippy]

So...

1. Was it all necessary or are we back somewhere near where we started?
2. Who are the winners and losers overall?

It wasn't needed at all, although the UK tax system is far more complicated then it needs to be. IMHO, we've fallen further behind then we were when we started as a result of a phenomenal growth in stealth taxes. The basic problem with the whole Tax Credit approach is that you pay a higher tax up front and are then means tested every 6 or so months when trying to claim it back. It lends itself to mistakes and omissions, most of which result in the money remaining in the coffers on HM Treasury, rather than the people who are entitled to it.

The winners of sorts are the legions of Government employees who have a job processing Tax Credit claim forms ... the losers would be the taxpayers and people who lack the means to claim back what they could.

It's strange that, at the height of the British Empire, the total civil service staff numbered just over 4000, handling India, Canada, Australia and part of Africa. These days, with an island off Argentina and a rock in the Med, we seem to need 12.5 million government employees.

[Doggy Styles]

I read today that, since 1999, Gordon Brown has:

1. abolished family credit
2. introduced working families' tax credit
3. introduced the disabled person's tax credit
4. introduced a childcare tax credit
5. introduced an employment credit
6. abolished the married couple's tax allowance
7. introduced the children's tax credit
8. introduced a baby tax credit
9. abolished the working families' tax credit
10. abolished the disabled person's tax credit
11. abolished the children's tax credit
12. abolished the baby tax credit
13. introduced a child tax credit
14. abolished the employment credit
15. introduced a working tax credit

and none of them are/were called 'benefits'.

So...

1. Was it all necessary or are we back somewhere near where we started?
2. Who are the winners and losers overall?