Phone Line Wiring Diagram

hidden truths ..... or if you know little by little discomfort ...

must first start from a premise ... .... Of all the material I searched on the internet, I found only

• The 2005 state budget
• The budget of the Chamber of Deputies 2006
• The budget of the Chamber of Deputies 2005
• Senate Budget 2006 The budget
• Senate 2005

Naturalmente niente suddiviso e esplicitato in maniera sufficientemente analitica.

Nulla ho trovato relativo ai vari ministeri…………

Questo mi porta ad una considerazione iniziale: Nulla si può criticare con cognizione di causa per mancanza di elementi certi.

Ed è proprio da qui che nasce la mia principale considerazione: se poco sai poco fastidio dai…

Il bilancio di un ministero, devo presumere, sia stilato in forma analitica, quasi a somiglianza con un normale bilancio.
Il controllo di gestione, impone infatti che, se non si conosce il centro di costo e la voce di spesa, il controllo è quasi impossibile.

Facciamo un esempio:
In un impresa esistono i costi diretti ed i costi di struttura.
I costi diretti sono quelli che si affrontano per costruire il “prodotto”
I costi di struttura sono tutti gli altri costi che servono per tenete in piedi la macchina

Se un impresa ha problemi di prodotto, la cosa si tenta di risolverla con :

• Nuove tecnologie produttive
• Nuovi prodotti intermedi
• Nuovi semilavorati
• Nuovi fornitori
• Materie prime alternative

Se un impresa ha problemi non legati al prodotto, ma alla macchina “azienda” allora la strada è diversa :
Contenimento delle spese generali
Eliminazione of wasteful expenditure

If we compare this to a ministry, we should say that:
Direct costs are those aimed at the "product" intended as a direct service to that ministry accused
Structural costs are identical to a private company.

But the ministry does not have a turnover, and the only entrance is the contribution of the state.
This contribution must be divided into direct costs and overheads.
But if you do not know the subdivision, if s'ingenera a misunderstanding here.

an example: If

the contribution of the State Ministry for the FOO is € 3 billion for 2006, first you should know: these 3
billion as they are divided?
As for the direct costs to the service of the citizen
As for the cost structure
As for the long-term investment.

If you do not know this division, are missing important data, and the worst thing s'ingenera THEATRE OF POLICY.

If the state provides for 2007 to € 2.5 billion, missing the 0.5 billion compared to 2006 by which entry is removed??

If we do not know, everyone will say, according to his own political expediency, what is more "spectacular". ... ... ... .... But the truth??

The city, though willing, he wants to compare "Truth" spoken by everyone, no weapons, so to be trusted ..

is why it is important that:

• budgets of various ministries are Public policy and public (everyone has a website, but try to find the cost of a ministry in their sites ....)
• the state budget is, cost center and cost item, which is identical to all financial statements from government (central government, parliament, ministries, regions, provinces, municipalities, etc.. etc)
• Highways contributions are expressed in the three categories mentioned above (not otherwise We will never know, when cutting or greater contribution, the difference in who is charged ... ..)

And here begins the Teatrino equivocation !!!!!!!!!!
If there is a right-wing government, a cut in that ministry, the Right will say it cut structural costs, while the left will say that they cut the direct costs of public services ... ... ... ... ... ... if there 'is a left-wing government, it is perfectly equal but opposite ... ...
and we, in the middle, do not know who is right, if not for the political vocation ...