If we constrain the supply of low skill labour in the UK, we boost the income of low skilled UK workers, at the expense of multinational companies and potential immigrants. It is entirely right that the UK government looks out for low wage British workers over a wealthy elite and foreigners.
Multinational companies are the people who least need low-skilled immigration. They can hire the same people wherever they like. If restrictions have the effect you're hoping, the people you shaft will be consumers of services in Britain, and people in non-low-skilled jobs in industries that also need low-skilled labour. Some of these will indeed be rich people hiring cleaners or whatever, but a lot of them will be ordinary consumers. You also screw workers who would otherwise have been getting a step up from a low-skilled job, but won't get the promotion because you've locked out the people they'd have been in charge of, or lose their jobs because you've made their whole business uncompetitive so the jobs end up getting moved overseas.
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Remember back in the day they had another free food source for the working class ?
They were called allotments. Don't seem so popular now.
They are quite popular where I live. My Dad has one and we often eat the food he grows there.
Big waiting lists though
We have an allotment where Herself does a spiffing job growing staple vegetables (haven't had to buy spuds, onions, shallots, garlic, etc for years) and soft fruits (jams and cordials). The two allotment patches in our village our also much oversubscribed with long waiting lists for both.
That said, as point pointed out up-thread allotment holding does seem to be a mainly middle-class hobby with very few holders coming from our council estate. That estate was built in the early fifties with houses of a high standard and large gardens (well large compared to any modern development). Gardens that are amply big enough for a vegetable patch yet very few residents have one.
We also have in the High Street a Co-Op, which as you would expect is quite expensive and which sells processed foods at what I would consider exorbitant prices. Almost bang opposite is a green-grocer that sells fruit and vegetables of good quality at reasonable prices and round the corner is a family butcher and a fishmonger both can be expensive but also cheap cuts.
Almost everyday I see young single mums (most of whom are seriously overweight) from the Estate buying expensive, crap, food in the Co-Op but never yet have I seen one of them in the green-grocers, the butchers or the fishmongers.
The problem would seem to be not of money but of education including basic skills. If the ladies shopped more wisely not only they would they and their children be better fed (last week one of them gave a tube of Pringles to her child for his breakfast - he was going to learn nothing useful at school that morning) but they would also have more money for the other vital staple of their lives - fags and vodka (both of which are available at cheaper prices within 50 yards of the Co_Op.
My village is exactly the same minus the fishmonger, problem with young people these days is that they cannot be bothered to make a meal from scratch, hence the Co-op crap and suchlike.
The LibDems are so obviously manufacturing their differences with the Tories when they are ready to go into coalition with them again and do their bidding again.LibDems and Tories go in the same column.They are both state shrinkers.
Do you actually , really believe the drivel you have just posted ?
Mark
There is a liberal principle of individual freedom that people should take responsibility for their own affairs - and not expect the government to control their lives. The consequence of this is less government and state interference.
This does not mean leaving those who can not fend for themselves to suffer since there is a long standing liberal principle to help those who can not look after themselves.
Lib Dems and Conservatives are both suporters of free markets and less state intervention in business (eg in favour of privatising the Post Office). Conservatives are less keen than Lib Dems on individual freedoms (eg 90 day prison without charge) and also less keen to help those who can not help themselves. However, Lib Dem principles are probably closer to Conservative than to a socialist Labour Party. The social democrat labout supporters ahould have already moved from Labour to the Lib Dems , leaving Labour more socialist, as it has become under Ed Miliband.
Just last week I mentioned how a perfectly balanced and reasonable comment by Farage would be twisted round the left-wing echo chamber to the point where oh-so-witty PB posters would be making jokes about how Farage actually opposes breast-feeding, but that they'd combine it with other distortions so they couldn't all be fact checked at once.
And today we have JackW doing exactly that. It's pretty pathetic.
Some might consider that having a little fun at Ukip's expense is entirely within the British tradition of poking fun at politicians.
Is Ukip-land to be a laughter free zone - now that would be "pretty pathetic".
Except further down the thread I pointed out that Dan Hodges' tweet was funny. I'm not criticising poking fun at UKIP or any other party. I'm criticising poor attempts at jokes based on things that aren't true. You, and a bunch of other posters, make the same terrible joke every week. You just add the latest manufactured outrage to the list of things that UKIP are supposedly guilty of. It's just a transparent attempt to add such smears into the popular consciousness.
JackW , along with many other posters on here, is just using the same thought process that racists and bigots use. They want to crack a joke at someones expense to relieve their own frustrations at the world, and so they choose a victim after constructing justifications in their own mind. But really its no different to a bigot telling a joke about a minority.
The other parties don't really dislike UKIP for ideological reasons, or they wouldn't have made the commitments on immigration and benefits that they have. Its just about anger over newcomers threat to their existing position of authority and power, which is the root cause behind racist and sexist jokes/smears as well
The unpalatable evidence for Kippers is that Farage and his pomposity are a drag on the Kipper ticket. There is a large section of society which find his musings on women and traffic toxic. A leader with more modern views - Carswell/Flynn ? - would have better chance of attracting these voters.
Its just possible that unlike say, Cameron chasing the Guardian readers, at this point is his parties evolution, Farage isn't interesting in chasing people that are never going to vote for him. An old friend of mine from high school, who now writes for the Guardian and the Independant, almost every day posts the latest clipping of whatever Farage has said to all his (metropolitan elite) friends, who all shake their heads in dismay, missing the fairly basic point that none of them was ever going to vote for a party like UKIP regardless of who was in charge.
Any minute now Mr Smithson will be telling us that Salmond may not win Gordon at GE2015 and that the Lib Dems have a fighting chance there.because of the "No" vote.
Oh, wait a minute, ludicrously he has already made that laughable case which will be proved completely wrong :-)
LOL, we had the incumbent LD duffer on this morning saying Salmond had done nothing in last 7 years , must have forgot to lift his head from the trough over the last 32 years he has been sitting on his duff. You could not embarrass these half witted useless Lib Dems.
Any minute now Mr Smithson will be telling us that Salmond may not win Gordon at GE2015 and that the Lib Dems have a fighting chance there.because of the "No" vote.
Oh, wait a minute, ludicrously he has already made that laughable case which will be proved completely wrong :-)
LOL, we had the incumbent LD duffer on this morning saying Salmond had done nothing in last 7 years , must have forgot to lift his head from the trough over the last 32 years he has been sitting on his duff. You could not embarrass these half witted useless Lib Dems.
Talking of troughers, has anyone told Alex Salmond he can no longer claim the £400 a month food allowance.
Alex Salmond claimed £800 for food on MPs' expenses during recess
Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister, claimed £400 per month for food when the Commons was not even sitting.
"The mayor of London was holding his regular monthly phone-in on LBC radio, when he was asked for his opinion on the matter.
He said: "Of all the excuses I've heard for being late that is one of the poorest - I mean, for a politician to turn up late for an event and blame the immigrants.""
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Remember back in the day they had another free food source for the working class ?
They were called allotments. Don't seem so popular now.
Allotments are like hens teeth, you wait years to get one and are very very popular
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Here's a little conundrum to chew over.
We have an explosion of foodbanks and yet the greatest rate of obesity is within the lowest decile of society.
Discuss.
Only a rich arse would ask such a question , it is of course that having little money they have to buy cheap stodge which of course is full of garbage and makes them fat.
Just last week I mentioned how a perfectly balanced and reasonable comment by Farage would be twisted round the left-wing echo chamber to the point where oh-so-witty PB posters would be making jokes about how Farage actually opposes breast-feeding, but that they'd combine it with other distortions so they couldn't all be fact checked at once.
And today we have JackW doing exactly that. It's pretty pathetic.
Some might consider that having a little fun at Ukip's expense is entirely within the British tradition of poking fun at politicians.
Is Ukip-land to be a laughter free zone - now that would be "pretty pathetic".
Except further down the thread I pointed out that Dan Hodges' tweet was funny. I'm not criticising poking fun at UKIP or any other party. I'm criticising poor attempts at jokes based on things that aren't true. You, and a bunch of other posters, make the same terrible joke every week. You just add the latest manufactured outrage to the list of things that UKIP are supposedly guilty of. It's just a transparent attempt to add such smears into the popular consciousness.
JackW , along with many other posters on here, is just using the same thought process that racists and bigots use. They want to crack a joke at someones expense to relieve their own frustrations at the world, and so they choose a victim after constructing justifications in their own mind. But really its no different to a bigot telling a joke about a minority.
The other parties don't really dislike UKIP for ideological reasons, or they wouldn't have made the commitments on immigration and benefits that they have. Its just about anger over newcomers threat to their existing position of authority and power, which is the root cause behind racist and sexist jokes/smears as well
The unpalatable evidence for Kippers is that Farage and his pomposity are a drag on the Kipper ticket.
The Sunday Times asked a "pomposity" type question.
"thinking specifically about the current party leaders, do you think they look down on ordinary people?"
The Ghost of Will Self thinks Len McCluskey is the one telling Ed not to have an EU referendum, thinks Nigel Farage is a drag on UKIP, and thinks anyone not comfortable with ethnic slurs needs to man up
A desperate fool
Gawd - even tim's insults were wittier than yours.
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Remember back in the day they had another free food source for the working class ?
They were called allotments. Don't seem so popular now.
Allotments are like hens teeth, you wait years to get one and are very very popular
Why don't council's build more then ? Nobody could complain about the green belt being used for allotments.
I'm shocked that UKIP haven't thought through the policy implications of immigration for transport more fully. If we had lanes on motorways reserved for the British-born, Nigel Farage's conference crisis would no doubt have been averted.
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Here's a little conundrum to chew over.
We have an explosion of foodbanks and yet the greatest rate of obesity is within the lowest decile of society.
Discuss.
Only a rich arse would ask such a question , it is of course that having little money they have to buy cheap stodge which of course is full of garbage and makes them fat.
Crisps, fizzy drinks, biscuits, cakes, ready meals are not cheap and are mostly not necessary but are in many people's shopping trolleys.
Any minute now Mr Smithson will be telling us that Salmond may not win Gordon at GE2015 and that the Lib Dems have a fighting chance there.because of the "No" vote.
Oh, wait a minute, ludicrously he has already made that laughable case which will be proved completely wrong :-)
LOL, we had the incumbent LD duffer on this morning saying Salmond had done nothing in last 7 years , must have forgot to lift his head from the trough over the last 32 years he has been sitting on his duff. You could not embarrass these half witted useless Lib Dems.
Talking of troughers, has anyone told Alex Salmond he can no longer claim the £400 a month food allowance.
Alex Salmond claimed £800 for food on MPs' expenses during recess
Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister, claimed £400 per month for food when the Commons was not even sitting.
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Here's a little conundrum to chew over.
We have an explosion of foodbanks and yet the greatest rate of obesity is within the lowest decile of society.
Discuss.
Only a rich arse would ask such a question , it is of course that having little money they have to buy cheap stodge which of course is full of garbage and makes them fat.
Not so, Mr. G., cheap food is essentially free of garbage. Its the expensive processed stuff that contain lots of fats, salt and other unhealthy stuff, as I am sure you know.
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Remember back in the day they had another free food source for the working class ?
They were called allotments. Don't seem so popular now.
Allotments are like hens teeth, you wait years to get one and are very very popular
Why don't council's build more then ? Nobody could complain about the green belt being used for allotments.
Do councils need to be involved in this? My neighbours rent the allotments behind my house directly from the landowner. (I'm not sure but I suspect they pay him in root vegetables.)
I know that smart phones have come down in cost recently, but only in the UK could there be an App for foodbanks. They even illustrate the page with an iPhone.
If we constrain the supply of low skill labour in the UK, we boost the income of low skilled UK workers, at the expense of multinational companies and potential immigrants. It is entirely right that the UK government looks out for low wage British workers over a wealthy elite and foreigners.
Multinational companies are the people who least need low-skilled immigration. They can hire the same people wherever they like. If restrictions have the effect you're hoping, the people you shaft will be consumers of services in Britain, and people in non-low-skilled jobs in industries that also need low-skilled labour. Some of these will indeed be rich people hiring cleaners or whatever, but a lot of them will be ordinary consumers. You also screw workers who would otherwise have been getting a step up from a low-skilled job, but won't get the promotion because you've locked out the people they'd have been in charge of, or lose their jobs because you've made their whole business uncompetitive so the jobs end up getting moved overseas.
What matters is the size of effects. If mass immigration reduces unskilled wages by 10%, then that's a direct 10% reduction of income for these people.
The other side of the coin is that it reduces costs for businesses as you say. But let's think about that a little more. The labour costs for businesses based mainly on UK unskilled labour are, what, 40% of costs at a push? Maybe three quarters of that will be unskilled labour, and you're down to 30% of costs. So the net effect is a 3% reduction in prices. Then, of course, UK consumers buy lots of things, including imported goods, services that are not labour-intense etc. Perhaps local labour-intense goods and services are as much as a third of the spending of low income people. So that's a 1% reduction in living costs.
So a 10% reduction in wages versus a 1% reduction in living costs. My numbers may of course be poor estimation, but it's very clear the living cost effect is far, far smaller than the wage effect.
As for your second effect of moving up to a managerial position, that also doesn't hold. The jobs which are just a step-up from a low skilled job and come with experience from being in a low skilled job are going to have just as much competition as the entry ones, because of all the immigrants you're competing with, so the same negative situation applies.
Any minute now Mr Smithson will be telling us that Salmond may not win Gordon at GE2015 and that the Lib Dems have a fighting chance there.because of the "No" vote.
Oh, wait a minute, ludicrously he has already made that laughable case which will be proved completely wrong :-)
LOL, we had the incumbent LD duffer on this morning saying Salmond had done nothing in last 7 years , must have forgot to lift his head from the trough over the last 32 years he has been sitting on his duff. You could not embarrass these half witted useless Lib Dems.
Talking of troughers, has anyone told Alex Salmond he can no longer claim the £400 a month food allowance.
Alex Salmond claimed £800 for food on MPs' expenses during recess
Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister, claimed £400 per month for food when the Commons was not even sitting.
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Remember back in the day they had another free food source for the working class ?
They were called allotments. Don't seem so popular now.
Allotments are like hens teeth, you wait years to get one and are very very popular
Why don't council's build more then ? Nobody could complain about the green belt being used for allotments.
Totally agree, been a few new ones up our way , but for sure the council's would rather waste their money on bollox stuff. You read the crap on their websites , same on NHS , and they wax on with lots of bullshit words on how great they are , etc etc and then you phone up and the service is crap they fob you off , pass you from person to person and then give you a fax number so that you have to start at square one again.
Just last week I mentioned how a perfectly balanced and reasonable comment by Farage would be twisted round the left-wing echo chamber to the point where oh-so-witty PB posters would be making jokes about how Farage actually opposes breast-feeding, but that they'd combine it with other distortions so they couldn't all be fact checked at once.
And today we have JackW doing exactly that. It's pretty pathetic.
outrage to the list of things that UKIP are supposedly guilty of. It's just a transparent attempt to add such smears into the popular consciousness.
The unpalatable evidence for Kippers is that Farage and his pomposity are a drag on the Kipper ticket.
The Sunday Times asked a "pomposity" type question.
"thinking specifically about the current party leaders, do you think they look down on ordinary people?"
The Ghost of Will Self thinks Len McCluskey is the one telling Ed not to have an EU referendum, thinks Nigel Farage is a drag on UKIP, and thinks anyone not comfortable with ethnic slurs needs to man up
A desperate fool
Gawd - even tim's insults were wittier than yours.
Oh I'm hurt..
But apart from your posting name, everything I have said there is what you have said
Ed Miliband wont have an EU referendum because Len told him he couldn't - WRONG
Victims of ethnic slurs should man up... well, anyone with any decency would know that was wrong
So can we bet on UKIP getting more than a 10th of the number of LD seats at the next GE? Or was that another ill considered post that you want to run away from?
Just last week I mentioned how a perfectly balanced and reasonable comment by Farage would be twisted round the left-wing echo chamber to the point where oh-so-witty PB posters would be making jokes about how Farage actually opposes breast-feeding, but that they'd combine it with other distortions so they couldn't all be fact checked at once.
And today we have JackW doing exactly that. It's pretty pathetic.
Some might consider that having a little fun at Ukip's expense is entirely within the British tradition of poking fun at politicians.
Is Ukip-land to be a laughter free zone - now that would be "pretty pathetic".
Except further down the thread I pointed out that Dan Hodges' tweet was funny. I'm not criticising poking fun at UKIP or any other party. I'm criticising poor attempts at jokes based on things that aren't true. You, and a bunch of other posters, make the same terrible joke every week. You just add the latest manufactured outrage to the list of things that UKIP are supposedly guilty of. It's just a transparent attempt to add such smears into the popular consciousness.
The unpalatable evidence for Kippers is that Farage and his pomposity are a drag on the Kipper ticket.
The Sunday Times asked a "pomposity" type question.
"thinking specifically about the current party leaders, do you think they look down on ordinary people?"
The Ghost of Will Self thinks Len McCluskey is the one telling Ed not to have an EU referendum, thinks Nigel Farage is a drag on UKIP, and thinks anyone not comfortable with ethnic slurs needs to man up
A desperate fool
Gawd - even tim's insults were wittier than yours.
Oh I'm hurt..
But apart from your posting name, everything I have said there is what you have said on here
But yet you are the one with the personal insults. I mocked your leader's approach - you used personal insults. Ditto to Jack. Have a word with yourself.
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Here's a little conundrum to chew over.
We have an explosion of foodbanks and yet the greatest rate of obesity is within the lowest decile of society.
Discuss.
Only a rich arse would ask such a question , it is of course that having little money they have to buy cheap stodge which of course is full of garbage and makes them fat.
Not so, Mr. G., cheap food is essentially free of garbage. Its the expensive processed stuff that contain lots of fats, salt and other unhealthy stuff, as I am sure you know.
Hurst , not much cheap about fresh meat , chicken , etc unless you are buying the low end crap. Fruit and veg is also far from cheap nowadays. What you see in the trolleys is six pies / pasties etc at £1 , thousands of bags of crisps and drinks full of sugar and dodgy ingredients. As someone said up thread , lots of them would not know what the vegetables were never mind how to cook them. I most certainly agree they should be able to make soups, stews etc but are too lazy to learn how to or to cook.
Any minute now Mr Smithson will be telling us that Salmond may not win Gordon at GE2015 and that the Lib Dems have a fighting chance there.because of the "No" vote.
Oh, wait a minute, ludicrously he has already made that laughable case which will be proved completely wrong :-)
LOL, we had the incumbent LD duffer on this morning saying Salmond had done nothing in last 7 years , must have forgot to lift his head from the trough over the last 32 years he has been sitting on his duff. You could not embarrass these half witted useless Lib Dems.
Talking of troughers, has anyone told Alex Salmond he can no longer claim the £400 a month food allowance.
Alex Salmond claimed £800 for food on MPs' expenses during recess
Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister, claimed £400 per month for food when the Commons was not even sitting.
Any of the Westminster troughers give their pensions to charity
Most of them don't have five tax payer funded pensions like the trougher Alex Salmond.
Making a real tit of yourself again I see. So being a politician he gets many more and bigger pensions than other similar MP's / MSP's. What a stupid stupid little twerp you are. Pathetic nasty Tory.
Any minute now Mr Smithson will be telling us that Salmond may not win Gordon at GE2015 and that the Lib Dems have a fighting chance there.because of the "No" vote.
Oh, wait a minute, ludicrously he has already made that laughable case which will be proved completely wrong :-)
LOL, we had the incumbent LD duffer on this morning saying Salmond had done nothing in last 7 years , must have forgot to lift his head from the trough over the last 32 years he has been sitting on his duff. You could not embarrass these half witted useless Lib Dems.
Talking of troughers, has anyone told Alex Salmond he can no longer claim the £400 a month food allowance.
Alex Salmond claimed £800 for food on MPs' expenses during recess
Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister, claimed £400 per month for food when the Commons was not even sitting.
Any of the Westminster troughers give their pensions to charity
Most of them don't have five tax payer funded pensions like the trougher Alex Salmond.
Making a real tit of yourself again I see. So being a politician he gets many more and bigger pensions than other similar MP's / MSP's. What a stupid stupid little twerp you are. Pathetic nasty Tory.
He has five tax payer funded pensions.
I know your brain can't process facts, so posting the facts is making a tit of oneself.
Malcolm, a bit of advice.
Stick with insults, it confirms what we all know about, you're poor little brain when confronted with the facts it spews insults.
Turns out your insults are nearly as funny as your predictions on Scotland.
Just last week I mentioned how a perfectly balanced and reasonable comment by Farage would be twisted round the left-wing echo chamber to the point where oh-so-witty PB posters would be making jokes about how Farage actually opposes breast-feeding, but that they'd combine it with other distortions so they couldn't all be fact checked at once.
And today we have JackW doing exactly that. It's pretty pathetic.
Some might consider that having a little fun at Ukip's expense is entirely within the British tradition of poking fun at politicians.
Is Ukip-land to be a laughter free zone - now that would be "pretty pathetic".
Except further down the thread I pointed out that Dan Hodges' tweet was funny. I'm not criticising poking fun at UKIP or any other party. I'm criticising poor attempts at jokes based on things that aren't true. You, and a bunch of other posters, make the same terrible joke every week. You just add the latest manufactured outrage to the list of things that UKIP are supposedly guilty of. It's just a transparent attempt to add such smears into the popular consciousness.
The unpalatable evidence for Kippers is that Farage and his pomposity are a drag on the Kipper ticket.
The Sunday Times asked a "pomposity" type question.
Gawd - even tim's insults were wittier than yours.
Oh I'm hurt..
But apart from your posting name, everything I have said there is what you have said on here
But yet you are the one with the personal insults. I mocked your leader's approach - you used personal insults. Ditto to Jack. Have a word with yourself.
I'm perfectly fine with myself. I never lie or smear, I just say it as it is.
You lie and smear constantly, and cant back your pathetic arguments with evidence.. because they are terrible childish arguments. You make statements that are almost immediately rebuffed
You have double standards, and use them to dictate whether you are outraged or offended depending on who made the remark, not what was said
So as far as I can tell from your posts on here, you are a desperate fool.
In real life, when you have to use your real name, maybe you aren't so brave and maybe not as foolish either
I know that smart phones have come down in cost recently, but only in the UK could there be an App for foodbanks. They even illustrate the page with an iPhone.
The problem would seem to be not of money but of education including basic skills.
It's certainly a factor, and by no means restricted to people on rough estates.If I was offered a garden or an allotment, I wouldn't have the first idea how to start growing vegetables- no doubt I could learn, but if you're a single parent juggling part-time work with childcare, the idea of toddling off to a hypothetical Vegetable Cultivation Class is difficult to imagine. And wouldn't I need implements of various kinds (rakes, trowels, hoses...) that cost money? The whole project feels like taking up an entirely new hobby - nothing wrong with it, but not a general solution.
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
If we constrain the supply of low skill labour in the UK, we boost the income of low skilled UK workers, at the expense of multinational companies and potential immigrants. It is entirely right that the UK government looks out for low wage British workers over a wealthy elite and foreigners.
Multinational companies are the people who least need low-skilled immigration. They can hire the same people wherever they like. If restrictions have the effect you're hoping, the people you shaft will be consumers of services in Britain, and people in non-low-skilled jobs in industries that also need low-skilled labour. Some of these will indeed be rich people hiring cleaners or whatever, but a lot of them will be ordinary consumers. You also screw workers who would otherwise have been getting a step up from a low-skilled job, but won't get the promotion because you've locked out the people they'd have been in charge of, or lose their jobs because you've made their whole business uncompetitive so the jobs end up getting moved overseas.
What matters is the size of effects. If mass immigration reduces unskilled wages by 10%, then that's a direct 10% reduction of income for these people.
The other side of the coin is that it reduces costs for businesses as you say. But let's think about that a little more. The labour costs for businesses based mainly on UK unskilled labour are, what, 40% of costs at a push? Maybe three quarters of that will be unskilled labour, and you're down to 30% of costs. So the net effect is a 3% reduction in prices. Then, of course, UK consumers buy lots of things, including imported goods, services that are not labour-intense etc. Perhaps local labour-intense goods and services are as much as a third of the spending of low income people. So that's a 1% reduction in living costs.
So a 10% reduction in wages versus a 1% reduction in living costs. My numbers may of course be poor estimation, but it's very clear the living cost effect is far, far smaller than the wage effect.
Right, this is the same as the argument for the minimum wage. But it's wrong to claim that it's only, or mainly, hurting multinationals. If you successfully push up labour costs, you push up the cost of buying stuff for everybody
As for your second effect of moving up to a managerial position, that also doesn't hold. The jobs which are just a step-up from a low skilled job and come with experience from being in a low skilled job are going to have just as much competition as the entry ones, because of all the immigrants you're competing with, so the same negative situation applies.
When you locked people out, pushed up prices and reduced quality you also destroyed a bunch of jobs, including these ones.
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
I don't suppose we can get some kind of cross-party consensus on letting people build shops where people want to buy things? So many of Britain's problems seem to come down to its nutty, over-prescriptive planning system; what would it take to actually do something about it?
The problem would seem to be not of money but of education including basic skills.
It's certainly a factor, and by no means restricted to people on rough estates.If I was offered a garden or an allotment, I wouldn't have the first idea how to start growing vegetables- no doubt I could learn, but if you're a single parent juggling part-time work with childcare, the idea of toddling off to a hypothetical Vegetable Cultivation Class is difficult to imagine. And wouldn't I need implements of various kinds (rakes, trowels, hoses...) that cost money? The whole project feels like taking up an entirely new hobby - nothing wrong with it, but not a general solution.
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
Your second point is a very good one. Not sure how best to deal with though.
On your first, may I say this:-
1. Growing anything is not hard. Even a few herbs or tomatoes on a window sill would help. Stick some seed in earth. All it needs is water and light. Did you not do basic biology at school? 2. Don't overestimate the amount of equipment needed. 3. A garden charity (is there such a thing? If not I may set one up) would be ideal to help those who wanted to grow food, even collectively, to be shared with stuff like this / know how etc. 4. People - even those who worked - did grow stuff during the war on every patch of land that could be found so it should be possible now.
Agreed that it is not a general solution for wider issues - I certainly found it much harder when my children were young to devote time to gardening - but as an addition to other measures to helping people learn about growing food and how to cook it is not a bad thing.
The problem would seem to be not of money but of education including basic skills.
It's certainly a factor, and by no means restricted to people on rough estates.If I was offered a garden or an allotment, I wouldn't have the first idea how to start growing vegetables- no doubt I could learn, but if you're a single parent juggling part-time work with childcare, the idea of toddling off to a hypothetical Vegetable Cultivation Class is difficult to imagine. And wouldn't I need implements of various kinds (rakes, trowels, hoses...) that cost money? The whole project feels like taking up an entirely new hobby - nothing wrong with it, but not a general solution.
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
Your second point is a very good one. Not sure how best to deal with though.
On your first, may I say this:-
1. Growing anything is not hard. Even a few herbs or tomatoes on a window sill would help. Stick some seed in earth. All it needs is water and light. Did you not do basic biology at school? 2. Don't overestimate the amount of equipment needed. 3. A garden charity (is there such a thing? If not I may set one up) would be ideal to help those who wanted to grow food, even collectively, to be shared with suff like this / know how etc. 4. People - even those who worked - did grow stuff during the war on every patch of land that could be found so it should be possible now.
Agreed that it is not a general solution for wider issues - I certainly found it much harder when my children were young to devote time to gardening - but as an addition to other measures to helping peopl learn about growing food and how to cook it is not a bad thing.
You can hire/borrow tools from other allotment users or the person who runs it. Its not really an excuse that buying gardening equipment is expensive
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
I don't suppose we can get some kind of cross-party consensus on letting people build shops where people want to buy things? So many of Britain's problems seem to come down to its nutty, over-prescriptive planning system; what would it take to actually do something about it?
Living as I do in a country with no planning permission at all, when we first looked at buying some property, I asked my wife how we went about getting permission to build on the land, she looked confused and replied that it was our land we could do with it what we wanted. I asked my wife how one went about ensuring that your neighbour doesn't decide to build an food processing plant next door since he could do what he wanted with it, aha, she said that was simple, we buy the land next door, and then we can do with it what we want.
The problem would seem to be not of money but of education including basic skills.
It's certainly a factor, and by no means restricted to people on rough estates.If I was offered a garden or an allotment, I wouldn't have the first idea how to start growing vegetables- no doubt I could learn, but if you're a single parent juggling part-time work with childcare, the idea of toddling off to a hypothetical Vegetable Cultivation Class is difficult to imagine. And wouldn't I need implements of various kinds (rakes, trowels, hoses...) that cost money? The whole project feels like taking up an entirely new hobby - nothing wrong with it, but not a general solution.
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
Nick, I certainly don't advocate mass vegetable growing, though no doubt it would make sense, aside from the factors you mention it isn't everyone's cup of tea (there is a reason why Herself runs our allotment). However, arranging ones life to buy and cook cheap decent food is not beyond the vast majority of people. If there is no shop on the estate that sells fresh food then perhaps a walk to one that does would be a good idea.
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Interestingly, near my student daughter's digs there is a Co-op and now a Sainsburys. The latter is cheaper than the former and so the Co-op has taken to giving free samples to students to persuade them to shop at the Co-op. The samples were tea bags and cake, which is why the Cyclefree household this weekend enjoyed Co-op's finest chocolate cake.
Must confess that I'm a little surprised that the Co-op (given its history and general air of self-righteousness) is more expensive than others.
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
I don't suppose we can get some kind of cross-party consensus on letting people build shops where people want to buy things? So many of Britain's problems seem to come down to its nutty, over-prescriptive planning system; what would it take to actually do something about it?
Supermarkets don't seem to find it that difficult, by and large, to build shops wherever they want to.
In areas like those that Nick Palmer was describing, the supermarkets don't seem to want to build shops.
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
I don't suppose we can get some kind of cross-party consensus on letting people build shops where people want to buy things? So many of Britain's problems seem to come down to its nutty, over-prescriptive planning system; what would it take to actually do something about it?
The shops were planned for and did exist, people just didn't use them so they closed. The problem is not the planning system it is the education system. Take whatever problem you care to from the large number facing society in the UK and you will find our piss-poor education system at the root of it.
I know that smart phones have come down in cost recently, but only in the UK could there be an App for foodbanks. They even illustrate the page with an iPhone.
Take whatever problem you care to from the large number facing society in the UK and you will find our piss-poor education system at the root of it.
Right next to a sense of entitlement, and an allergy to making an effort. The reason there are all those jobs for immigrants to fill is because the British unemployed can't be bothered to get of their arses and do them. It a gentleman from Gdansk can be bothered to come over here and dig in our fields to feed his family, then frankly I have no sympathy for a gentleman from Bristol that wants to sit in front of his xbox and be paid for it.
Right, this is the same as the argument for the minimum wage. But it's wrong to claim that it's only, or mainly, hurting multinationals. If you successfully push up labour costs, you push up the cost of buying stuff for everybody.
It is predominantly affecting corporate profits. The impact on cost of living is minimal.
When you locked people out, pushed up prices and reduced quality you also destroyed a bunch of jobs, including these ones.
The overwhelming majority of jobs that gets squeezed out are those that only get squeezed out because the labour force is better paid. It's an insane argument to say that's a bad thing. It's like arguing we shouldn't train up our labour force because otherwise we're pushing up labour costs for shoe-shining and strawberry picking.
Take whatever problem you care to from the large number facing society in the UK and you will find our piss-poor education system at the root of it.
Right next to a sense of entitlement, and an allergy to making an effort. The reason there are all those jobs for immigrants to fill is because the British unemployed can't be bothered to get of their arses and do them. It a gentleman from Gdansk can be bothered to come over here and dig in our fields to feed his family, then frankly I have no sympathy for a gentleman from Bristol that wants to sit in front of his xbox and be paid for it.
But, but, but, what if the bloke from Bristol was an ethnically pure Englishman, with a penchant for real ale and steak and kidney pudding? Surely he is heir to the earth!
The problem would seem to be not of money but of education including basic skills.
It's certainly a factor, and by no means restricted to people on rough estates.If I was offered a garden or an allotment, I wouldn't have the first idea how to start growing vegetables- no doubt I could learn, but if you're a single parent juggling part-time work with childcare, the idea of toddling off to a hypothetical Vegetable Cultivation Class is difficult to imagine. And wouldn't I need implements of various kinds (rakes, trowels, hoses...) that cost money? The whole project feels like taking up an entirely new hobby - nothing wrong with it, but not a general solution.
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
Is it time though really? Most supermarkets run delivery services for prices that are lower than corner shop prices, where you can get fresh fruit and vegetables delivered to your door. The reason people eat poorly is just cultural: it's seen as normal to eat that sort of stuff so people do it without thinking about it. If you transported the same people into an environment where people were focused on eating healthily and exercising, the cultural habits would rub off.
The Co-op can be a bit pricier than other larger supermarkets, but they do some great deals on a variety of foods and their own brand cakes etc are far better than other larger supermarkets IMHO.
Interestingly, near my student daughter's digs there is a Co-op and now a Sainsburys. The latter is cheaper than the former and so the Co-op has taken to giving free samples to students to persuade them to shop at the Co-op. The samples were tea bags and cake, which is why the Cyclefree household this weekend enjoyed Co-op's finest chocolate cake.
Must confess that I'm a little surprised that the Co-op (given its history and general air of self-righteousness) is more expensive than others.
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Remember back in the day they had another free food source for the working class ?
They were called allotments. Don't seem so popular now.
Allotments are like hens teeth, you wait years to get one and are very very popular
When I was a kid we used to give our neighbours our potato peelings for their chickens. In return we got free eggs. That's what I call recycling!
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Most young kids, especially boys, are not going to get excited over cookery lessons, whatever you call them. The way to get kids interested in this is to focus on the sports and fitness side of things. PE is terribly taught in school - it's focused on getting a few good kids for the sports team rather than on tracking every child's performance and their improvement.
Lower the minimum wage to a handfull of rice a day, and stop all benefits!
No, much better to pay people not to contribute until the country goes bust. As Mr Laffer said, if you take money from people that work to pay people that don't, pretty soon you will have a lot of people that don't work. Idleness isn't a lifestyle choice, its being a parasite on people that can be bothered to make an effort.
NickP, that is simple not true, most folk living in housing estates in cities tend to be able to source a large supermarket within walking distance these days.
The problem would seem to be not of money but of education including basic skills.
It's certainly a factor, and by no means restricted to people on rough estates.If I was offered a garden or an allotment, I wouldn't have the first idea how to start growing vegetables- no doubt I could learn, but if you're a single parent juggling part-time work with childcare, the idea of toddling off to a hypothetical Vegetable Cultivation Class is difficult to imagine. And wouldn't I need implements of various kinds (rakes, trowels, hoses...) that cost money? The whole project feels like taking up an entirely new hobby - nothing wrong with it, but not a general solution.
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
Remember back in the day they had another free food source for the working class ?
They were called allotments. Don't seem so popular now.
They are quite popular where I live. My Dad has one and we often eat the food he grows there.
Big waiting lists though
The ones near Colchester station seem popular too, and very, very well tended.
When I was younger we routinely ate all sorts of food that seems to have disappeared - offal, tongue, cheaper cuts of meat, black pudding etc. Some of that was because having one side of the family come from Irish farming stock, this was normal fare. And some was because ready meals, crisps etc were seen as a huge extravagance and, certainly as my mother was concerned, a cop-out.
But the idea of wasting food was viewed with horror. That attitude was formed by wartime experience, certainly, and - interestingly - some Sri Lankan friends of mine (having recent experience of living in a war zone) share that attitude.
I think that if you are poor, even if you try your best, the odds are often stacked against you - poor housing, no shops nearby, little time, exhaustion etc. We need to try and even the odds in their favour not just criticise.
Interestingly, near my student daughter's digs there is a Co-op and now a Sainsburys. The latter is cheaper than the former and so the Co-op has taken to giving free samples to students to persuade them to shop at the Co-op. The samples were tea bags and cake, which is why the Cyclefree household this weekend enjoyed Co-op's finest chocolate cake.
Must confess that I'm a little surprised that the Co-op (given its history and general air of self-righteousness) is more expensive than others.
The Co-op has always been more expensive and worse than the bigger supermarkets in my experience. If it's the only store near you, as it is in some God forsaken places, you are snookered.
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Most young kids, especially boys, are not going to get excited over cookery lessons, whatever you call them. The way to get kids interested in this is to focus on the sports and fitness side of things. PE is terribly taught in school - it's focused on getting a few good kids for the sports team rather than on tracking every child's performance and their improvement.
You want to try and get an out of shape kid to do PE if they don't want to.. the parent(s) will be up the school before you can say "couch potato"
Interestingly, near my student daughter's digs there is a Co-op and now a Sainsburys. The latter is cheaper than the former and so the Co-op has taken to giving free samples to students to persuade them to shop at the Co-op. The samples were tea bags and cake, which is why the Cyclefree household this weekend enjoyed Co-op's finest chocolate cake.
Must confess that I'm a little surprised that the Co-op (given its history and general air of self-righteousness) is more expensive than others.
The Co-op has always been more expensive and worse than the bigger supermarkets in my experience. If it's the only store near you, as it is in some God forsaken places, you are snookered.
The ethical supermarket then!
Fitalass: I don't eat much cake. I can't say that the Co-op cake impressed that much - a bit too sweet for my taste.
The only cake I make a bee-line for is panettone. So this time of the year is wonderful, though dreadful for the waistline!
"Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use."
I couldn't agree with you more. It has the same toxic value for the Tories as the homeless did for them in the 80's when London became the begging capital of Europe and it became known as cardboard box city.
My issue though is with Ed Milliband. At last he is faced with an open goal. He has the opportunity to lead lead a campaign and show what Labour values really are but instead he chooses to join Farage in kicking immigrants.
I'm beginning to think he has the political instincts of a bluebottle
What is Labour's policy on this? Does it have a policy?
We can all agree that food banks are grotesque in a country as rich as ours. So why do they arise and what practical policies are needed?
I am puzzled as to how it is possible to go hungry when the benefits cap is £26,000 (net). I know people who live on far far less than that in a year and yet manage to feed themselves and their family.
I would genuinely like to understand how people find themselves in this position and what the best way of helping them to get out of it is/
As always very fair points.
I for one am puzzled how people who claim to be on the poverty line can afford sky subscriptions and smoke 20 fags a day plus each.
Jack also makes the interesting point about obesity.
Of course Ben isn't interested in facts or improving matters, just hitting the tories.
But that argument is easily killed off by pointing out that foodbank use is rationed - you to be referred to them.
Exactly,
So the demand was always there, but supply was rationed (or non-existent). As supply has been increased, more people are able to use them.
Glad you got there in the end.
So, assuming Cyclefree is correct (and she usually is) - Ben's argument appears to boil down to that it's the tories fault that Labour tried to restrict people using them?
Right, this is the same as the argument for the minimum wage. But it's wrong to claim that it's only, or mainly, hurting multinationals. If you successfully push up labour costs, you push up the cost of buying stuff for everybody.
It is predominantly affecting corporate profits. The impact on cost of living is minimal.
When you locked people out, pushed up prices and reduced quality you also destroyed a bunch of jobs, including these ones.
The overwhelming majority of jobs that gets squeezed out are those that only get squeezed out because the labour force is better paid. It's an insane argument to say that's a bad thing. It's like arguing we shouldn't train up our labour force because otherwise we're pushing up labour costs for shoe-shining and strawberry picking.
It's not predominantly affecting corporate profits, you made that up.
And no, the labour force isn't just better paid if you restrict it, it's smaller and less productive and produces less wealth. Training people makes them more productive and produces more wealth.
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Most young kids, especially boys, are not going to get excited over cookery lessons, whatever you call them. The way to get kids interested in this is to focus on the sports and fitness side of things. PE is terribly taught in school - it's focused on getting a few good kids for the sports team rather than on tracking every child's performance and their improvement.
You want to try and get an out of shape kid to do PE if they don't want to.. the parent(s) will be up the school before you can say "couch potato"
It needs to be started in schools before the kids get to a stage where they're out of shape. And schools need to just start saying to parents that the kid is failing in the subject if they're failing. I agree more parental education would help.
One of the problems for people on very low incomes is unexpected bills; car breakdown for example.Or a three item prescription for someone who hasn't a pre-payment certificate, because they don't often have one. £25 at the wrong time of the week can be a disaster.
And our main local store is the Co-op and we're quite happy with it. Quality and service is better than the small-chain opposition.
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Most young kids, especially boys, are not going to get excited over cookery lessons, whatever you call them. The way to get kids interested in this is to focus on the sports and fitness side of things. PE is terribly taught in school - it's focused on getting a few good kids for the sports team rather than on tracking every child's performance and their improvement.
You want to try and get an out of shape kid to do PE if they don't want to.. the parent(s) will be up the school before you can say "couch potato"
It needs to be started in schools before the kids get to a stage where they're out of shape. And schools need to just start saying to parents that the kid is failing in the subject if they're failing. I agree more parental education would help.
You are kidding! Trying to get a kid to do something they don't want to, such as what they are at school to do, is tantamount to asking to be suspended/put on police bail!
My Dad works at an East London school, and perfectly good teachers are being frequently suspended. My Dad himself was court marshalled because, as a supply teacher, he made a "shhhh" gesture to the class when a girl had fallen asleep with her headphones on, (after being asked 3 times to take them off)
The result was a charge of racism because an African girl said he was taking the mickey out of her lips
Being smaller doesn't make it less productive. You just made that up. The reverse is true, due to diminishing marginal returns. Especially when other factors, such as land, are highly constrained.
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Most young kids, especially boys, are not going to get excited over cookery lessons, whatever you call them. The way to get kids interested in this is to focus on the sports and fitness side of things. PE is terribly taught in school - it's focused on getting a few good kids for the sports team rather than on tracking every child's performance and their improvement.
You want to try and get an out of shape kid to do PE if they don't want to.. the parent(s) will be up the school before you can say "couch potato"
It needs to be started in schools before the kids get to a stage where they're out of shape. And schools need to just start saying to parents that the kid is failing in the subject if they're failing. I agree more parental education would help.
You are kidding! Trying to get a kid to do something they don't want to, such as what they are at school to do, is tantamount to asking to be suspended/put on police bail!
My Dad works at an East London school, and perfectly good teachers are being frequently suspended. My Dad himself was court marshalled because, as a supply teacher, he made a "shhhh" gesture to the class when a girl had fallen asleep with her headphones on, (after being asked 3 times to take them off)
The result was a charge of racism because an African girl said he was taking the mickey out of her lips
Yeah, well obviously you need to get rid of the stupid politically correct crap first and give more power to teachers to stand up to parents. We need a step change in allowing teachers to tell kids they need to do better and enforcing standards.
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Most young kids, especially boys, are not going to get excited over cookery lessons, whatever you call them. The way to get kids interested in this is to focus on the sports and fitness side of things. PE is terribly taught in school - it's focused on getting a few good kids for the sports team rather than on tracking every child's performance and their improvement.
Evidence? In my Comp cooking was just about the most popular class with the lads, that and PE. The boys also tended to be better at it than the girls IIRC
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Most young kids, especially boys, are not going to get excited over cookery lessons, whatever you call them. The way to get kids interested in this is to focus on the sports and fitness side of things. PE is terribly taught in school - it's focused on getting a few good kids for the sports team rather than on tracking every child's performance and their improvement.
You want to try and get an out of shape kid to do PE if they don't want to.. the parent(s) will be up the school before you can say "couch potato"
It needs to be started in schools before the kids get to a stage where they're out of shape. And schools need to just start saying to parents that the kid is failing in the subject if they're failing. I agree more parental education would help.
You are kidding! Trying to get a kid to do something they don't want to, such as what they are at school to do is tantamount to asking to be suspended/put on police bail!
My Dad works at an East London school, and perfectly good teachers are being frequently suspended. My dad himself was court marshalled because, as a supply teacher, he made a "shhhh" gesture to the class because a girl had fallen asleep with her headphones on, (after being asked 3 times to take them off)
The result was a charge of racism because an African girl said he was taking the mickey out of her lips
My fairly newly qualified teacher granddaughter is firmly of the opinion, based on her experience, that if at a parents evening she tells the parents of a (sixth form) student that they are not making any progress in her subject, she will be asked what she, the teacher, is doing about it. Not why the student doesn't appear to be making any effort.
One of the problems for people on very low incomes is unexpected bills; car breakdown for example.Or a three item prescription for someone who hasn't a pre-payment certificate, because they don't often have one. £25 at the wrong time of the week can be a disaster.
And our main local store is the Co-op and we're quite happy with it. Quality and service is better than the small-chain opposition.
Afternoon all
I also suspect the return to a more "normal" monetary policy will come as a shock to millions of people. We've had years of artificially-low interest rates which have meant that many homeowners have been insulated against the worst aspects of the recession (compare with the recession of the early 90s).
A return to interest rates of say 2.5% (which wouldn't be unreasonable for an economy supposedly growing at 3% per annum) would leave a lot of mortgage payers facing much higher bills and thus undoing a lot of the "good" achieved by changes to taxation under the Coalition.
NickP, that is simple not true, most folk living in housing estates in cities tend to be able to source a large supermarket within walking distance these days.
Not in my experience, sorry. Perhaps Scotland is different?
Cyclefree's idea of a charity to train people in food growing seems worth a try, and I don't think there is one. I admit to cultural bias - I don't like any kind of gardening after trying it for a few years (too messy) and I don't much like vegetables. But that's not a basis for policy...
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Most young kids, especially boys, are not going to get excited over cookery lessons, whatever you call them. The way to get kids interested in this is to focus on the sports and fitness side of things. PE is terribly taught in school - it's focused on getting a few good kids for the sports team rather than on tracking every child's performance and their improvement.
Evidence? In my Comp cooking was just about the most popular class with the lads, that and PE. The boys also tended to be better at it than the girls IIRC
Making alcohol in VIth form Chemistry was very popular in my time!
If you look at the education systems in places like Poland and Finland, which are high on PISA rankings, one of the things they do is to have very tough minimum expectations for kids. There's none of this "oh well these kids are from a council estate/immigrant family/troubled family, therefore they can't do maths". One of the ways they do this is that teachers can make it clear to the students early that they get Fs when they deserve Fs. Kids need to understand they can't sail through school.
One of the problems for people on very low incomes is unexpected bills; car breakdown for example.Or a three item prescription for someone who hasn't a pre-payment certificate, because they don't often have one. £25 at the wrong time of the week can be a disaster.
And our main local store is the Co-op and we're quite happy with it. Quality and service is better than the small-chain opposition.
Yes - a fair point. That's when people can get driven into using the Wongas of this world.
If there is little spare cash, any sort of a problem can become an issue. Some things are essential - and it is very very difficult for families in these cases. I don't know what the answer is.
But there is a sense - and I don't apply this only - or even principally - to the poor - in which we have forgotten the art of doing without if we can't afford something. It is not essential to have a TV let alone these 60 inch monsters that people were rioting over recently.
At the risk of getting into 4 Yorkshiremen territory, we did not have a TV when we grew up and I was a teenager before we acquired a washing machine. And we did not have central heating. Of course, the person who endured the burden of this - the lack of a washing machine anyway - was my mother. And matters were tough - much tougher than they are now - for women of her generation.
I am glad that matters have improved but what it did leave me with was an abiding sense that stuff could only be acquired when you had earnt it however much you might have wanted it. A hard lesson maybe but a useful one.
Interestingly, near my student daughter's digs there is a Co-op and now a Sainsburys. The latter is cheaper than the former and so the Co-op has taken to giving free samples to students to persuade them to shop at the Co-op. The samples were tea bags and cake, which is why the Cyclefree household this weekend enjoyed Co-op's finest chocolate cake.
Must confess that I'm a little surprised that the Co-op (given its history and general air of self-righteousness) is more expensive than others.
The Co-op has always been more expensive and worse than the bigger supermarkets in my experience. If it's the only store near you, as it is in some God forsaken places, you are snookered.
The co-op gives its profits back to the customers (its members with a card) or it did when it was making money. Its nothing to do with ethics if it is more expensive, its giving the profits it earns back and if it is inefficient it will make less profits at whatever are its prices. A lot of co-ops are smaller convenience stores, this may affect prices.
All getting a bit Dig for Victory on here today. Reckon we're being led up the garden path (sorry!)
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Most young kids, especially boys, are not going to get excited over cookery lessons, whatever you call them. The way to get kids interested in this is to focus on the sports and fitness side of things. PE is terribly taught in school - it's focused on getting a few good kids for the sports team rather than on tracking every child's performance and their improvement.
Evidence? In my Comp cooking was just about the most popular class with the lads, that and PE. The boys also tended to be better at it than the girls IIRC
My experience helping in schools over several years and knowing lots of teachers. I'm happy to expand my anecdotal evidence though. May I ask when this was?
NickP, that is simple not true, most folk living in housing estates in cities tend to be able to source a large supermarket within walking distance these days.
Not in my experience, sorry. Perhaps Scotland is different?
Cyclefree's idea of a charity to train people in food growing seems worth a try, and I don't think there is one. I admit to cultural bias - I don't like any kind of gardening after trying it for a few years (too messy) and I don't much like vegetables. But that's not a basis for policy...
One day I hope to persuade you differently Nick!
But I will look into the gardening / charity side. Gardeners are usually keen to share their skills / hobby......
Comments
There is a liberal principle of individual freedom that people should take responsibility for their own affairs - and not expect the government to control their lives. The consequence of this is less government and state interference.
This does not mean leaving those who can not fend for themselves to suffer since there is a long standing liberal principle to help those who can not look after themselves.
Lib Dems and Conservatives are both suporters of free markets and less state intervention in business (eg in favour of privatising the Post Office). Conservatives are less keen than Lib Dems on individual freedoms (eg 90 day prison without charge) and also less keen to help those who can not help themselves. However, Lib Dem principles are probably closer to Conservative than to a socialist Labour Party. The social democrat labout supporters ahould have already moved from Labour to the Lib Dems , leaving Labour more socialist, as it has become under Ed Miliband.
"It is Hoi Polloi, two L's, not one."
I stand castigated but those bloody Greeks never could write proper.
Leave us Plebs alone (and yes, I understand it should be' we plebs').
You could not embarrass these half witted useless Lib Dems.
Alex Salmond claimed £800 for food on MPs' expenses during recess
Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister, claimed £400 per month for food when the Commons was not even sitting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5299733/Alex-Salmond-claimed-800-for-food-on-MPs-expenses-during-recess.html
'John McTernan tipped for Alistair Darling seat bid'
http://tinyurl.com/oayhjvw
I'm sure his endeavours will by attended by the same success that is evident in so much of his career.
He's standing in for Dave, personally, the Tories should do a Clegg and give it a miss
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/12/will-cleggs-pmqs-session-highlight-the-tensions-in-the-coalition/
"The mayor of London was holding his regular monthly phone-in on LBC radio, when he was asked for his opinion on the matter.
He said: "Of all the excuses I've heard for being late that is one of the poorest - I mean, for a politician to turn up late for an event and blame the immigrants.""
http://www.foodbankapp.co.uk/
If you cannot afford to buy food, why have an expensive mobile and contract?
The other side of the coin is that it reduces costs for businesses as you say. But let's think about that a little more. The labour costs for businesses based mainly on UK unskilled labour are, what, 40% of costs at a push? Maybe three quarters of that will be unskilled labour, and you're down to 30% of costs. So the net effect is a 3% reduction in prices. Then, of course, UK consumers buy lots of things, including imported goods, services that are not labour-intense etc. Perhaps local labour-intense goods and services are as much as a third of the spending of low income people. So that's a 1% reduction in living costs.
So a 10% reduction in wages versus a 1% reduction in living costs. My numbers may of course be poor estimation, but it's very clear the living cost effect is far, far smaller than the wage effect.
As for your second effect of moving up to a managerial position, that also doesn't hold. The jobs which are just a step-up from a low skilled job and come with experience from being in a low skilled job are going to have just as much competition as the entry ones, because of all the immigrants you're competing with, so the same negative situation applies.
We have some of the world's hungriest obese people.
But apart from your posting name, everything I have said there is what you have said
Ed Miliband wont have an EU referendum because Len told him he couldn't - WRONG
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28125622
Nigel Farage's leadership is a drag on UKIP - WRONG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#mediaviewer/File:UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
Victims of ethnic slurs should man up... well, anyone with any decency would know that was wrong
So can we bet on UKIP getting more than a 10th of the number of LD seats at the next GE? Or was that another ill considered post that you want to run away from?
The big problem with junk food is that it generally tastes nice.
Sorry, politics seems to be shutting down for Christmas .
dit: I checked. Wrong. It's a singular collective noun. Plebeii would be a number of plebeians ... one learns something every day.
What you see in the trolleys is six pies / pasties etc at £1 , thousands of bags of crisps and drinks full of sugar and dodgy ingredients. As someone said up thread , lots of them would not know what the vegetables were never mind how to cook them.
I most certainly agree they should be able to make soups, stews etc but are too lazy to learn how to or to cook.
I know your brain can't process facts, so posting the facts is making a tit of oneself.
Malcolm, a bit of advice.
Stick with insults, it confirms what we all know about, you're poor little brain when confronted with the facts it spews insults.
Turns out your insults are nearly as funny as your predictions on Scotland.
No UKIP MEPs in Scotland and Yes will win.
You lie and smear constantly, and cant back your pathetic arguments with evidence.. because they are terrible childish arguments. You make statements that are almost immediately rebuffed
You have double standards, and use them to dictate whether you are outraged or offended depending on who made the remark, not what was said
So as far as I can tell from your posts on here, you are a desperate fool.
In real life, when you have to use your real name, maybe you aren't so brave and maybe not as foolish either
http://www.homelesshub.ca/blog/how-can-homeless-people-afford-cell-phones
There's lots of app development for homeless people going on, certainly not only in the UK. For example, see:
http://www.homelesshub.ca/blog/how-can-homeless-people-afford-cell-phones
Time is another factor, and availability kicks in, in some areas. The planning approach that separates major shopping areas from housing areas can result in the main food source in a rough estate being an expensive corner shop stocking no fresh food. So people get into the habit of thinking of crisps and burgers as a reasonable diet.
Er, it was the last Labour government which proposed 90-day detention without charge.
The blame game: two losers, one victor
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/12/08/blame-game-two-losers-one-victor/
It's only a 5 min walk, shall I leave now to avoid being late because of all the immigrants in Manchester clogging up Market Street?
On your first, may I say this:-
1. Growing anything is not hard. Even a few herbs or tomatoes on a window sill would help. Stick some seed in earth. All it needs is water and light. Did you not do basic biology at school?
2. Don't overestimate the amount of equipment needed.
3. A garden charity (is there such a thing? If not I may set one up) would be ideal to help those who wanted to grow food, even collectively, to be shared with stuff like this / know how etc.
4. People - even those who worked - did grow stuff during the war on every patch of land that could be found so it should be possible now.
Agreed that it is not a general solution for wider issues - I certainly found it much harder when my children were young to devote time to gardening - but as an addition to other measures to helping people learn about growing food and how to cook it is not a bad thing.
The key is to get kitchens and proper cooking lessons back into schools and call it cookery and do only cookery rather than faffing around with "home economics" or - as they insisted on calling it in my school - "food studies".
Must confess that I'm a little surprised that the Co-op (given its history and general air of self-righteousness) is more expensive than others.
In areas like those that Nick Palmer was describing, the supermarkets don't seem to want to build shops.
But the idea of wasting food was viewed with horror. That attitude was formed by wartime experience, certainly, and - interestingly - some Sri Lankan friends of mine (having recent experience of living in a war zone) share that attitude.
I think that if you are poor, even if you try your best, the odds are often stacked against you - poor housing, no shops nearby, little time, exhaustion etc. We need to try and even the odds in their favour not just criticise.
Fitalass: I don't eat much cake. I can't say that the Co-op cake impressed that much - a bit too sweet for my taste.
The only cake I make a bee-line for is panettone. So this time of the year is wonderful, though dreadful for the waistline!
I for one am puzzled how people who claim to be on the poverty line can afford sky subscriptions and smoke 20 fags a day plus each.
Jack also makes the interesting point about obesity.
Of course Ben isn't interested in facts or improving matters, just hitting the tories.
What a broad sense of humour he has!!
Well, its an interesting approach.
And no, the labour force isn't just better paid if you restrict it, it's smaller and less productive and produces less wealth. Training people makes them more productive and produces more wealth.
And our main local store is the Co-op and we're quite happy with it. Quality and service is better than the small-chain opposition.
My Dad works at an East London school, and perfectly good teachers are being frequently suspended. My Dad himself was court marshalled because, as a supply teacher, he made a "shhhh" gesture to the class when a girl had fallen asleep with her headphones on, (after being asked 3 times to take them off)
The result was a charge of racism because an African girl said he was taking the mickey out of her lips
@LordAshcroft: What would the Ashcroft National Poll show if AV had been the law. Result also at 4pm with tables at http://t.co/e0ckDUu5JJ and @ConHome
I also suspect the return to a more "normal" monetary policy will come as a shock to millions of people. We've had years of artificially-low interest rates which have meant that many homeowners have been insulated against the worst aspects of the recession (compare with the recession of the early 90s).
A return to interest rates of say 2.5% (which wouldn't be unreasonable for an economy supposedly growing at 3% per annum) would leave a lot of mortgage payers facing much higher bills and thus undoing a lot of the "good" achieved by changes to taxation under the Coalition.
Cyclefree's idea of a charity to train people in food growing seems worth a try, and I don't think there is one. I admit to cultural bias - I don't like any kind of gardening after trying it for a few years (too messy) and I don't much like vegetables. But that's not a basis for policy...
If you look at the education systems in places like Poland and Finland, which are high on PISA rankings, one of the things they do is to have very tough minimum expectations for kids. There's none of this "oh well these kids are from a council estate/immigrant family/troubled family, therefore they can't do maths". One of the ways they do this is that teachers can make it clear to the students early that they get Fs when they deserve Fs. Kids need to understand they can't sail through school.
Mr. Eagles, counter-factuals like that are misleading. If you change the system, you change behaviour.
If there is little spare cash, any sort of a problem can become an issue. Some things are essential - and it is very very difficult for families in these cases. I don't know what the answer is.
But there is a sense - and I don't apply this only - or even principally - to the poor - in which we have forgotten the art of doing without if we can't afford something. It is not essential to have a TV let alone these 60 inch monsters that people were rioting over recently.
At the risk of getting into 4 Yorkshiremen territory, we did not have a TV when we grew up and I was a teenager before we acquired a washing machine. And we did not have central heating. Of course, the person who endured the burden of this - the lack of a washing machine anyway - was my mother. And matters were tough - much tougher than they are now - for women of her generation.
I am glad that matters have improved but what it did leave me with was an abiding sense that stuff could only be acquired when you had earnt it however much you might have wanted it. A hard lesson maybe but a useful one.
Its nothing to do with ethics if it is more expensive, its giving the profits it earns back and if it is inefficient it will make less profits at whatever are its prices.
A lot of co-ops are smaller convenience stores, this may affect prices.
But I will look into the gardening / charity side. Gardeners are usually keen to share their skills / hobby......
A mortgage is a loan. Do you oppose mortgages?