3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
This one is particularly bizarre. I was in Singapore a couple of months ago on business, I must say it didnt strike me as particularly destitute, the way they are spraying money around on public works doesn't immediately suggest a country on the edge of ruin.
Nope - but it is a country that does not have a health service that is free at the point of use, does have a very small welfare state and very strict forced saving schemes.
Plus I am not 100% sure the freedom-loving, taking-control British public are quite ready for a Confucian state opining on everything from chewing gum to haircuts.
The people of Singapore werent originally either. Lee Kuan Yew observed quite accurately that they would be more than prepared to follow his iron rule in exchange for the prosperity it brought them. You are probably right in your suggestion, which is why Asian countries are going to win
Theresa to Corbyn 'I have a plan you havent a clue'
May mishandled that reply. She should have said "the Minister for Brexit briefed this House and took questions as I was briefing EU Ambassadors. A similar briefing took place in the othe place". Instead she totally ducked it and, rather uncertainly, came out with platitudes. A fail.
I agree It feels, strangely, that Corbyn has been briefed better than May and May is struggling
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. Th money
2. Some people - a la Corbyn and those who have little knowledge of the EU - seem think that most EU regulation concerns workers rights. Not only has the Government not suggested trimming these, May explicitly said they would be protected yesterday. The point is that there are huge reams of regulation which the EU piles on, over and above what a functioning economy needs. In agriculture - there is the crazy 3 crop rule and much bureaucracy. In biotech there is a hostile environment to GM. In ports there is coming price controls. In tech there are about to be fines for platforms that carry too much American content. Data protection laws now mean costly requirements for companies to have data protection officers, as well as just following standards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. That it means becoming an offshore economy, this is often coupled with the term 'tax haven'. That is not what anyone has suggested. Having low corporation tax (perahaps at Ireland's level) does not make a country the Caymen Islands. Low tax rate is distinct from ultra low rates and secrecy, and sometimes being a home to laundered money
2. Some people - a lastandards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
And in Ireland there is no free at the point of use health service, even though the government has far lower defence spending obligations than the UK does.
He was talking about Leavers wanting to regain parliamentary sovereignty but May giving the speech outside of parliament and said 'Not so much the Iron Lady but the Irony Lady'
JP Morgan has warned investors that May's Brexit threats to the EU are 'very dangerous' + 'damaging' for UK jobs their profits.
Ha, ha - consultants, lawyers, banks and similar are going to make an absolute fortune from Brexit.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
What about the productive sectors of the economy though ?
There'll be opportunities for bookmakers too.
The rest of europe never really subscribed to a "single market" for bookmaking anyway, bit odd that.
Les grenouilles hate Betfair.
Epic sad face
I think it was one of the reasons remain lost, Britain has to follow every bloody rule to the letter whereas the continent tends to just ignore those they don't, or make up convenient fictions (French protectionist gambling for instance).
Wasn't protectionism. They thought exchanges lead to gambling addictions/problems.
Lol, did you buy that guff ? All about protecting the Paris-Mutuel.
I didn't. You mean the French can't be trusted, Perfidious French.
JP Morgan has warned investors that May's Brexit threats to the EU are 'very dangerous' + 'damaging' for UK jobs their profits.
Ha, ha - consultants, lawyers, banks and similar are going to make an absolute fortune from Brexit.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
What about the productive sectors of the economy though ?
There'll be opportunities for bookmakers too.
The rest of europe never really subscribed to a "single market" for bookmaking anyway, bit odd that.
Les grenouilles hate Betfair.
Epic sad face
I think it was one of the reasons remain lost, Britain has to follow every bloody rule to the letter whereas the continent tends to just ignore those they don't, or make up convenient fictions (French protectionist gambling for instance).
Wasn't protectionism. They thought exchanges lead to gambling addictions/problems.
Very tenuously related, but there'd have been an uproar if we'd banned Danish/Dutch pork products on account of their lower animal welfare standards.
A single market should mean just that, or its meaningless.
My dad's friend got a good going over at Calais after a trip to Bruges last week. They come out with the line "you can only bring so much tobacco/booze in to the country." Well, once we're out of the EU that will once again be true. But as long as we are/were in it, the goons at Calais/Dover have/had no right to say this.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. That it means becoming an offshore economy, this is often coupled with the term 'tax haven'. That is not what anyone has suggested. Having low corporation tax (perahaps at Ireland's level) does not make a country the Caymen Islands. Low tax rate is distinct from ultra low rates and secrecy, and sometimes being a home to laundered money
2. Some people - a la Corbyn and those who have little knowledge of the EU - seem think that most EU regulation concerns workers rights. Not only has the Government not suggested trimming these, May explicitly said they would be protected yesterday. The point is that there are huge reams of regulation which the EU piles on, over and above what a functioning economy needs. In agriculture - there is the crazy 3 crop rule and much bureaucracy. In biotech there is a hostile environment to GM. In ports there is coming price controls. In tech there are about to be fines for platforms that carry too much American content. Data protection laws now mean costly requirements for companies to have data protection officers, as well as just following standards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
Have you thought this through?
Government sets tax and regulation. Workers and employers bargain for wages. Government does not mandate low wages. It could lower the minimum wage but that's actually the reverse to the direction the government seems set on.
The original point stands - if the government succeeds in lowering business tax and regulation (one can debate if this is possible but for the sake of argument let's say it is) that has no downward impact on wages. If anything it pushes wages up because it increases demand.
Tagging 'low wage' onto low tax and low regulation is political rhetoric.
Workers bargain collectively for wages if there are strong trade unions, as there are in most high wage economies. The government creates the conditions in which low wage jobs proliferate. If you make it easier to hire and fire you remove incentives for employers to invest in training and other actions that make employees more marketable. Thus, you reduce their value and their ability to earn higher wages.
I think I'm softening my stance on Jezza - he 's like that elderly uncle (even though he's a fraction younger than me) who always get's things wrong. Much to the amusement of the rest of the family.
Dr Palmer might be right. He could be that kindly old geriatric confused by modern living. I sympathise.
One at random - £15-16/hr depending on experience.
Like many Leaver "facts" they don't hold up to a moment's analysis.
15-16/hr full time ? or just parttime ?
No I didnt look at Forklift Truck drivers in Stevenage specifically, it was illustrative, pick another semi-skilled or unskilled job and location to suit yourself, the fact remains semi-skilled and unskilled workers are five times more likely to be working part time now compared to a couple of decades ago.
Like many Remain answers you dont actually answer the question. You might be comfortable, those semi-skilled and unskilled workers that are having to sign on to benefits to support their family when they used to have a full time job, not so much.
JP Morgan has warned investors that May's Brexit threats to the EU are 'very dangerous' + 'damaging' for UK jobs their profits.
Ha, ha - consultants, lawyers, banks and similar are going to make an absolute fortune from Brexit.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
What about the productive sectors of the economy though ?
There'll be opportunities for bookmakers too.
The rest of europe never really subscribed to a "single market" for bookmaking anyway, bit odd that.
Les grenouilles hate Betfair.
Epic sad face
I think it was one of the reasons remain lost, Britain has to follow every bloody rule to the letter whereas the continent tends to just ignore those they don't, or make up convenient fictions (French protectionist gambling for instance).
Wasn't protectionism. They thought exchanges lead to gambling addictions/problems.
Very tenuously related, but there'd have been an uproar if we'd banned Danish/Dutch pork products on account of their lower animal welfare standards.
A single market should mean just that, or its meaningless.
My dad's friend got a good going over at Calais after a trip to Bruges last week. They come out with the line "you can only bring so much tobacco/booze in to the country." Well, once we're out of the EU that will once again be true. But as long as we are/were in it, the goons at Calais/Dover have/had no right to say this.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. That it means becoming an offshore economy, this is often coupled with the term 'tax haven'. That is not what anyone has suggested. Having low corporation tax (perahaps at Ireland's level) does not make a country the Caymen Islands. Low tax rate is distinct from ultra low rates and secrecy, and sometimes being a home to laundered money
2. Some people - a la Corbyn and those who have little knowledge of the EU - seem think that most EU regulation concerns workers rights. Not only has the Government not suggested trimming these, May explicitly said they would be protected yesterday. The point is that there are huge reams of regulation which the EU piles on, over and above what a functioning economy needs. In agriculture - there is the crazy 3 crop rule and much bureaucracy. In biotech there is a hostile environment to GM. In ports there is coming price controls. In tech there are about to be fines for platforms that carry too much American content. Data protection laws now mean costly requirements for companies to have data protection officers, as well as just following standards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
Have you thought this through?
Government sets tax and regulation. Workers and employers bargain for wages. Government does not mandate low wages. It could lower the minimum wage but that's actually the reverse to the direction the government seems set on.
The original point stands - if the government succeeds in lowering business tax and regulation (one can debate if this is possible but for the sake of argument let's say it is) that has no downward impact on wages. If anything it pushes wages up because it increases demand.
Tagging 'low wage' onto low tax and low regulation is political rhetoric.
Workers bargain collectively for wages if there are strong trade unions, as there are in most high wage economies. The government creates the conditions in which low wage jobs proliferate. If you make it easier to hire and fire you remove incentives for employers to invest in training and other actions that make employees more marketable. Thus, you reduce their value and their ability to earn higher wages.
You've missed the point that there is a bunch of ways to have looser regulation beyond labour rights.
I think I'm softening my stance on Jezza - he 's like that elderly uncle (even though he's a fraction younger than me) who always get's things wrong. Much to the amusement of the rest of the family.
Dr Palmer might be right. He could be that kindly old geriatric confused by modern living. I sympathise.
Let's put a confused old man whose ideas haven't changed since about 1976 into the PM's job. What a good idea.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. Th money
2. Some people - a la Corbyn and those who have little knowledge of the EU - seem think that most EU regulation concerns workers rights. Not only has the Government not suggested trimming these, May explicitly said they would be protected yesterday. The point is that there are huge reams of regulation which the EU piles on, over and above what a functioning economy needs. In agriculture - there is the crazy 3 crop rule and much bureaucracy. In biotech there is a hostile environment to GM. In ports there is coming price controls. In tech there are about to be fines for platforms that carry too much American content. Data protection laws now mean costly requirements for companies to have data protection officers, as well as just following standards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. That it means becoming an offshore economy, this is often coupled with the term 'tax haven'. That is not what anyone has suggested. Having low corporation tax (perahaps at Ireland's level) does not make a country the Caymen Islands. Low tax rate is distinct from ultra low rates and secrecy, and sometimes being a home to laundered money
2. Some people - a lastandards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
And in Ireland there is no free at the point of use health service, even though the government has far lower defence spending obligations than the UK does.
JP Morgan has warned investors that May's Brexit threats to the EU are 'very dangerous' + 'damaging' for UK jobs their profits.
Ha, ha - consultants, lawyers, banks and similar are going to make an absolute fortune from Brexit.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
What about the productive sectors of the economy though ?
There'll be opportunities for bookmakers too.
The rest of europe never really subscribed to a "single market" for bookmaking anyway, bit odd that.
Les grenouilles hate Betfair.
Epic sad face
I think it was one of the reasons remain lost, Britain has to follow every bloody rule to the letter whereas the continent tends to just ignore those they don't, or make up convenient fictions (French protectionist gambling for instance).
Wasn't protectionism. They thought exchanges lead to gambling addictions/problems.
Very tenuously related, but there'd have been an uproar if we'd banned Danish/Dutch pork products on account of their lower animal welfare standards.
A single market should mean just that, or its meaningless.
My dad's friend got a good going over at Calais after a trip to Bruges last week. They come out with the line "you can only bring so much tobacco/booze in to the country." Well, once we're out of the EU that will once again be true. But as long as we are/were in it, the goons at Calais/Dover have/had no right to say this.
It's supposed to be for personal use only, isn't it?
JP Morgan has warned investors that May's Brexit threats to the EU are 'very dangerous' + 'damaging' for UK jobs their profits.
Ha, ha - consultants, lawyers, banks and similar are going to make an absolute fortune from Brexit.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
What about the productive sectors of the economy though ?
There'll be opportunities for bookmakers too.
The rest of europe never really subscribed to a "single market" for bookmaking anyway, bit odd that.
Les grenouilles hate Betfair.
Epic sad face
I think it was one of the reasons remain lost, Britain has to follow every bloody rule to the letter whereas the continent tends to just ignore those they don't, or make up convenient fictions (French protectionist gambling for instance).
Wasn't protectionism. They thought exchanges lead to gambling addictions/problems.
Very tenuously related, but there'd have been an uproar if we'd banned Danish/Dutch pork products on account of their lower animal welfare standards.
A single market should mean just that, or its meaningless.
My dad's friend got a good going over at Calais after a trip to Bruges last week. They come out with the line "you can only bring so much tobacco/booze in to the country." Well, once we're out of the EU that will once again be true. But as long as we are/were in it, the goons at Calais/Dover have/had no right to say this.
The issue is the amount. If they think you have got so much that you are likely to be selling rather than drinking yourself.
From the guidance
Although there are no limits to the alcohol and tobacco you can bring in from EU countries, you’re more likely to be asked questions if you have more than the amounts below.
No limits, you just have to say it's for personal consumption. If you travel once a year you could fill your car up
How you'd prove or disprove that is left as an exercise for the reader.
There is clearly a shortage of labour. Otherwise there would not be excessive vacancies for any particular job, in this case forklift truck drivers, and hence the market is not in equilibrium. If there is an demand for labour exceeds the supply of labour, then the market clearing wage should if anything move up.
Hence the number of foreigners is not affecting the wages or availability of jobs in this instance.
JP Morgan has warned investors that May's Brexit threats to the EU are 'very dangerous' + 'damaging' for UK jobs their profits.
Ha, ha - consultants, lawyers, banks and similar are going to make an absolute fortune from Brexit.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
What about the productive sectors of the economy though ?
There'll be opportunities for bookmakers too.
The rest of europe never really subscribed to a "single market" for bookmaking anyway, bit odd that.
Les grenouilles hate Betfair.
Epic sad face
I think it was one of the reasons remain lost, Britain has to follow every bloody rule to the letter whereas the continent tends to just ignore those they don't, or make up convenient fictions (French protectionist gambling for instance).
Wasn't protectionism. They thought exchanges lead to gambling addictions/problems.
Very tenuously related, but there'd have been an uproar if we'd banned Danish/Dutch pork products on account of their lower animal welfare standards.
A single market should mean just that, or its meaningless.
My dad's friend got a good going over at Calais after a trip to Bruges last week. They come out with the line "you can only bring so much tobacco/booze in to the country." Well, once we're out of the EU that will once again be true. But as long as we are/were in it, the goons at Calais/Dover have/had no right to say this.
Remain might have won if they'd said no more booze cruises if we leave
One at random - £15-16/hr depending on experience.
Like many Leaver "facts" they don't hold up to a moment's analysis.
15-16/hr full time ? or just parttime ?
No I didnt look at Forklift Truck drivers in Stevenage specifically, it was illustrative, pick another semi-skilled or unskilled job and location to suit yourself, the fact remains semi-skilled and unskilled workers are five times more likely to be working part time now compared to a couple of decades ago.
Like many Remain answers you dont actually answer the question. You might be comfortable, those semi-skilled and unskilled workers that are having to sign on to benefits to support their family when they used to have a full time job, not so much.
Don't want to answer your question???!!! You brought up forklift truck drivers in Stevenage, not me. For which there are 169 full time jobs available if anyone wants them, whether from Lech or Letchworth.
I have specifically answered your question and provided supporting evidence for my answer. What on earth else do you want?
If you want to choose another occupation, go for it; we shall have a look at that also.
Edit: because it needs saying again: 169 full time forklift truck driver jobs in Stevenage (perhaps not as many as 169 but there or thereabouts, I haven't gone through each advert).
Edit: 169 job vacancies for forklift truck drivers. In Stevenage.
A moments inspection of which will show you that many of the jobs are the same job being advertised by different agencies.
A further moments inspection will show you most of those jobs are not in Stevenage, unless Harlow, Watford and Bishop Stortford suddenly moved when I wasnt looking
JP Morgan has warned investors that May's Brexit threats to the EU are 'very dangerous' + 'damaging' for UK jobs their profits.
Ha, ha - consultants, lawyers, banks and similar are going to make an absolute fortune from Brexit.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
What about the productive sectors of the economy though ?
There'll be opportunities for bookmakers too.
The rest of europe never really subscribed to a "single market" for bookmaking anyway, bit odd that.
Les grenouilles hate Betfair.
Epic sad face
I think it was one of the reasons remain lost, Britain has to follow every bloody rule to the letter whereas the continent tends to just ignore those they don't, or make up convenient fictions (French protectionist gambling for instance).
Wasn't protectionism. They thought exchanges lead to gambling addictions/problems.
Very tenuously related, but there'd have been an uproar if we'd banned Danish/Dutch pork products on account of their lower animal welfare standards.
A single market should mean just that, or its meaningless.
My dad's friend got a good going over at Calais after a trip to Bruges last week. They come out with the line "you can only bring so much tobacco/booze in to the country." Well, once we're out of the EU that will once again be true. But as long as we are/were in it, the goons at Calais/Dover have/had no right to say this.
Remain might have won if they'd said no more booze cruises if we leave
@PaulBrandITV: .@Anna_Soubry asks PM to put her negotiating objectives in a white paper so they can be debated properly in House on behalf of constituents
Edit: 169 job vacancies for forklift truck drivers. In Stevenage.
A moments inspection of which will show you that many of the jobs are the same job being advertised by different agencies.
A further moments inspection will show you most of those jobs are not in Stevenage, unless Harlow, Watford and Bishop Stortford suddenly moved when I wasnt looking
Thank you, so you agree that there are plenty of jobs for forklift truck drivers in Stevenage and its environs.
@PaulBrandITV: .@Anna_Soubry asks PM to put her negotiating objectives in a white paper so they can be debated properly in House on behalf of constituents
Good to see Anna being more sensible but a white paper is not going to happen
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
This one is particularly bizarre. I was in Singapore a couple of months ago on business, I must say it didnt strike me as particularly destitute, the way they are spraying money around on public works doesn't immediately suggest a country on the edge of ruin.
Nope - but it is a country that does not have a health service that is free at the point of use, does have a very small welfare state and very strict forced saving schemes.
Plus I am not 100% sure the freedom-loving, taking-control British public are quite ready for a Confucian state opining on everything from chewing gum to haircuts.
The people of Singapore werent originally either. Lee Kuan Yew observed quite accurately that they would be more than prepared to follow his iron rule in exchange for the prosperity it brought them. You are probably right in your suggestion, which is why Asian countries are going to win
Lee Kwan Yew's dictatorship in Singapore and Augusto Pinochet's in Chile have long been the ideal dream regimes in Tory minds, just as certain ones on the European continent were in the 1930s. Are you aware that about 40% of people living in Singapore are foreigners who aren't citizens of that country?
Singapore is the place that I believe will be first in requiring compulsory mass microchip implantation. Whether in the first instance that will only be for "workers" or whether it will extend to those whom the regime and its media designate as "talents" is an open question.
Lee Hsien Loong, who took over from pater Lee Kwan Yew, was Senior Wrangler at Cambridge (top in the undergraduate maths finals - for more than 200 years a highly respected achievement) one year in the early 1970s. He was allowed to sit the exams in a room on his own. Why? Because when he was doing them he shouted a lot.
JP Morgan has warned investors that May's Brexit threats to the EU are 'very dangerous' + 'damaging' for UK jobs their profits.
Ha, ha - consultants, lawyers, banks and similar are going to make an absolute fortune from Brexit.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
What about the productive sectors of the economy though ?
There'll be opportunities for bookmakers too.
The rest of europe never really subscribed to a "single market" for bookmaking anyway, bit odd that.
Les grenouilles hate Betfair.
Epic sad face
I think it was one of the reasons remain lost, Britain has to follow every bloody rule to the letter whereas the continent tends to just ignore those they don't, or make up convenient fictions (French protectionist gambling for instance).
Wasn't protectionism. They thought exchanges lead to gambling addictions/problems.
Very tenuously related, but there'd have been an uproar if we'd banned Danish/Dutch pork products on account of their lower animal welfare standards.
A single market should mean just that, or its meaningless.
My dad's friend got a good going over at Calais after a trip to Bruges last week. They come out with the line "you can only bring so much tobacco/booze in to the country." Well, once we're out of the EU that will once again be true. But as long as we are/were in it, the goons at Calais/Dover have/had no right to say this.
The issue is the amount. If they think you have got so much that you are likely to be selling rather than drinking yourself.
But that's what is wrong. They should make the effort to prove you're selling it. It's incredibly lazy to set a limit. People can store a lot for a long time.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
This one is particularly bizarre. I was in Singapore a couple of months ago on business, I must say it didnt strike me as particularly destitute, the way they are spraying money around on public works doesn't immediately suggest a country on the edge of ruin.
Nope - but it is a country that does not have a health service that is free at the point of use, does have a very small welfare state and very strict forced saving schemes.
Plus I am not 100% sure the freedom-loving, taking-control British public are quite ready for a Confucian state opining on everything from chewing gum to haircuts.
The people of Singapore werent originally either. Lee Kuan Yew observed quite accurately that they would be more than prepared to follow his iron rule in exchange for the prosperity it brought them. You are probably right in your suggestion, which is why Asian countries are going to win
Lee Kwan Yew's dictatorship in Singapore and Augusto Pinochet's in Chile have long been the ideal dream regimes in Tory minds, just as certain ones on the European continent were in the 1930s. Are you aware that about 40% of people living in Singapore are foreigners who aren't citizens of that country?
Singapore is the place that I believe will be first in requiring compulsory mass microchip implantation. Whether in the first instance that will only be for "workers" or whether it will extend to those whom the regime and its media designate as "talents" is an open question.
Lee Hsien Loong, who took over from pater Lee Kwan Yew, was Senior Wrangler at Cambridge, one year in the early 1970s. He was allowed to sit the exams in a room on his own? Why? Because when he was doing them he shouted a lot.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. That it means becoming an offshore economy, this is often coupled with the term 'tax haven'. That is not what anyone has suggested. Having low corporation tax (perahaps at Ireland's level) does not make a country the Caymen Islands. Low tax rate is distinct from ultra low rates and secrecy, and sometimes being a home to laundered money
2. Some standards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
Have you thought this through?
Government sets tax and regulation. Workers and employers bargain for wages. Government does not mandate low wages. It could lower the minimum wage but that's actually the reverse to the direction the government seems set on.
The original point stands - if the government succeeds in lowering business tax and regulation (one can debate if this is possible but for the sake of argument let's say it is) that has no downward impact on wages. If anything it pushes wages up because it increases demand.
Tagging 'low wage' onto low tax and low regulation is political rhetoric.
Workers bargain collectively for wages if there are strong trade unions, as there are in most high wage economies. The government creates the conditions in which low wage jobs proliferate. If you make it easier to hire and fire you remove incentives for employers to invest in training and other actions that make employees more marketable. Thus, you reduce their value and their ability to earn higher wages.
You've missed the point that there is a bunch of ways to have looser regulation beyond labour rights.
No, I haven't. Clearly, environmental protections are also vulnerable, as are health and safety rules and advertising regulations. In our ongoing competition with EU member states we will not have membership of the single market to offer to possible investors; thus, we will need to offer other incentives. Less regulation across a range of areas, as well as even lower corporation tax, are what we will be able to offer.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. That it means becoming an offshore economy, this is often coupled with the term 'tax haven'. That is not what anyone has suggested. Having low corporation tax (perahaps at Ireland's level) does not make a country the Caymen Islands. Low tax rate is distinct from ultra low rates and secrecy, and sometimes being a home to laundered money
2. Some people - a la Corbyn and those who have little knowledge of the EU - seem think that most EU regulation concerns workers rights. Not only has the Government not suggested trimming these, May explicitly said they would be protected yesterday. The point is that there are huge reams of regulation which the EU piles on, over and above what a functioning economy needs. In agriculture - there is the crazy 3 crop rule and much bureaucracy. In biotech there is a hostile environment to GM. In ports there is coming price controls. In tech there are about to be fines for platforms that carry too much American content. Data protection laws now mean costly requirements for companies to have data protection officers, as well as just following standards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
To be competitive you can be low cost through high productivity and/or low wages.
. May seemed more confident than at previous PMQs, and her mockery of Corbyn’s response to her speech yesterday was effective. She will be satisfied that that she saw Corbyn off.
. May seemed more confident than at previous PMQs, and her mockery of Corbyn’s response to her speech yesterday was effective. She will be satisfied that that she saw Corbyn off.
She has shown leadership. It is a trait sorely lacking of late so she should be happy with herself. Whether she is leading us in the right direction is of course up for debate but she is leading and at this point that is important.
President Barack Obama will leave office Friday with his highest approval rating since 2009, his presidency largely viewed as a success, and a majority saying they will miss him when he is gone.
A new CNN/ORC poll finds Obama's approval rating stands at 60%, his best mark since June of his first year in office. Compared with other outgoing presidents, Obama lands near the top of the list, outranked only by Bill Clinton's 66% in January 2001 and Ronald Reagan's 64% in January 1989. About two-thirds (65%) say Obama's presidency was a success, including about half (49%) who say that was due to Obama's personal strengths rather than circumstances outside his control.
And in Ireland there is no free at the point of use health service
There is, but it is only for those who are allowed to have medical cards, some 31% of the population, which doesn't even include all elderly people. No prizes for guessing which way a large majority in Northern Ireland would vote in a reunification referendum.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. Th money
2. Some people - a la Corbyn and those who have little knowledge of the EU - seem think that most EU regulation concerns workers rights. Not only has the Government not suggested trimming these, May explicitly said they would be protected yesterday. The point is that there are huge reams of regulation which the EU piles on, over and above what a functioning economy needs. In agriculture - there is the crazy 3 crop rule and much bureaucracy. In biotech there is a hostile environment to GM. In ports there is coming price controls. In tech there are about to be fines for platforms that carry too much American content. Data protection laws now mean costly requirements for companies to have data protection officers, as well as just following standards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. That it means becoming an offshore economy, this is often coupled with the term 'tax haven'. That is not what anyone has suggested. Having low corporation tax (perahaps at Ireland's level) does not make a country the Caymen Islands. Low tax rate is distinct from ultra low rates and secrecy, and sometimes being a home to laundered money
2. Some people - a lastandards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
And in Ireland there is no free at the point of use health service, even though the government has far lower defence spending obligations than the UK does.
and yet nobody dies on the streets
Great.
yes it is, you seem to struggle with things that are a bit different to here, dont you do diversity or innovation ? :-)
That kind of violent talk by Britain's Foreign Secretary helps how, exactly?
Ask how it helps Boris.
Well quite. The sort of people who will lap that up are the sort of people whose votes he will need in any future leadership bid. It won't help the national interest - where a huge degree of sensitivity and restraint is required - but that's all rather a secondary consideration these days. Brexit is becoming a glorified Tory leadership contest.
"Britain's Brexit deal must be inferior to EU membership" says Malta's pm. Wishful thinking. For the 27 it will surely be inferior. For the UK anything, including WTO fallback, is superior.
There's actually room for a good outcome here.
The EU thinks being outside the single market is inferior. The UK does not. So both sides can get what they want.
If we have to have slightly higher transaction costs through not being full CU members, so be it. Not huge deal to to the economy overall and outweighed by benefits of being able to pursue global trade and outside of growth restricting single market.
Except, according to sane, rationale people (ie Remainers) being inside the single market is superior for the UK's economy with necessary oversight by the ECJ resulting in negligible impingement upon sovereignty, while, according to swivel-eyed loons (ie Leavers), being inside the single market is inferior for the UK on account of the huge diminution of sovereignty and the concomitant oppressive yoke of the EU bureaucracy.
The government realised (or was told) that there was no option to stay in the single market without the four freedoms. The trading benefits of the single market were expounded at length in the campaign, and the dangers of leaving it were also expounded at length by Osborne and Cameron amongst others. The voters decided to leave, and recent polling in the last few days shows that they would rather leave the single market than have the four freedoms, the government listened, which is kind of its job.
I agree that leaving the single market has become inevitable. Yesterday's speech was therefore an exercise in making it appear that was the strategy all along, good politics for the faithful but won't change the financial consequences unfortunately.
All the "walking away" bravado plays well with her chosen audience but it is really no more than trying to put the best face on the realisation that we are likely to crash out without any deal.
She has played the cards she was dealt as well as anyone could have but the political chest beating doesn't disguise the weak position we are in.
Edit: 169 job vacancies for forklift truck drivers. In Stevenage.
A moments inspection of which will show you that many of the jobs are the same job being advertised by different agencies.
A further moments inspection will show you most of those jobs are not in Stevenage, unless Harlow, Watford and Bishop Stortford suddenly moved when I wasnt looking
Thank you, so you agree that there are plenty of jobs for forklift truck drivers in Stevenage and its environs.
The claim that there is 160+ jobs in Hertfordshire and the surrounding counties (including many duplicates from different agences) is slightly less impressive than the original suggestion that there was than many in Stevenage I think you will agree.
Even were this the case, how does this compare to the wages a couple of decades ago, and how many are full time jobs compared to a couple of decades ago.
The issue you continually dodge is that the number of semi skilled and unskilled workers in part time work is 5 times the number it was a couple of decades ago, and yet with more work all around due to the wonders of the single market, pray tell why that is ?
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. Th money
2. Some people - a la Corbyn and those who have little knowledge of the EU - seem think that most EU regulation concerns workers rights. Not only has the Government not suggested trimming these, May explicitly said they would be protected yesterday. The point is that there are huge reams of regulation which the EU piles on, over and above what a functioning economy needs. In agriculture - there is the crazy 3 crop rule and much bureaucracy. In biotech there is a hostile environment to GM. In ports there is coming price controls. In tech there are about to be fines for platforms that carry too much American content. Data protection laws now mean costly requirements for companies to have data protection officers, as well as just following standards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
There's been confusion in recent days about the UK's potential pursuit of a new economic model:
1. That it means laundered money
2. Some people - a lastandards. Etc.
3. Low wages. Somehow this has joined the lexicon. It is unclear why lowering corporate tax and regulation would lower wages. If anything, the opposite
If you build an economy that is designed to compete internationally on cost, then low wages are a part of that.
And in Ireland there is no free at the point of use health service, even though the government has far lower defence spending obligations than the UK does.
and yet nobody dies on the streets
Great.
yes it is, you seem to struggle with things that are a bit different to here, dont you do diversity or innovation ? :-)
I wonder how many people would consider introducing charges for being seen at A&E a positive innovation. You and I would be fine, of course.
President Barack Obama will leave office Friday with his highest approval rating since 2009, his presidency largely viewed as a success, and a majority saying they will miss him when he is gone.
A new CNN/ORC poll finds Obama's approval rating stands at 60%, his best mark since June of his first year in office. Compared with other outgoing presidents, Obama lands near the top of the list, outranked only by Bill Clinton's 66% in January 2001 and Ronald Reagan's 64% in January 1989. About two-thirds (65%) say Obama's presidency was a success, including about half (49%) who say that was due to Obama's personal strengths rather than circumstances outside his control.
"Britain's Brexit deal must be inferior to EU membership" says Malta's pm. Wishful thinking. For the 27 it will surely be inferior. For the UK anything, including WTO fallback, is superior.
There's actually room for a good outcome here.
The EU thinks being outside the single market is inferior. The UK does not. So both sides can get what they want.
If we have to have slightly higher transaction costs through not being full CU members, so be it. Not huge deal to to the economy overall and outweighed by benefits of being able to pursue global trade and outside of growth restricting single market.
Except, according to sane, rationale people (ie Remainers) being inside the single market is superior for the UK's economy with necessary oversight by the ECJ resulting in negligible impingement upon sovereignty, while, according to swivel-eyed loons (ie Leavers), being inside the single market is inferior for the UK on account of the huge diminution of sovereignty and the concomitant oppressive yoke of the EU bureaucracy.
The government realised (or was told) that there was no option to stay in the single market without the four freedoms. The trading benefits of the single market were expounded at length in the campaign, and the dangers of leaving it were also expounded at length by Osborne and Cameron amongst others. The voters decided to leave, and recent polling in the last few days shows that they would rather leave the single market than have the four freedoms, the government listened, which is kind of its job.
Oh absolutely. That wasn't what I said in my post. I was just comparing the views of the sane, rationale folk with the swivel-eyed loons.
I suspect the view looks a little different between working in the City for a finance company and driving a forklift in Stevenage. The former can appreciate how much better off the Single Market will make him, the later can't see how it will change his life at all, doesn't care if the first is richer or not, and is concerned about Eastern Europeans coming and offering to do his job for less money, or for more hours and pushing him into a part time job.
You might want to consider that those "swivel-eyed loons" are making a perfectly rational decision based on the world as it appears from where they sit.
The easy part was convincing your Stevenage forklift driver that leaving the EIU and single market would solve all his problems and make him better off, the hard part is going to be delivering on that.
Edit: 169 job vacancies for forklift truck drivers. In Stevenage.
A moments inspection of which will show you that many of the jobs are the same job being advertised by different agencies.
A further moments inspection will show you most of those jobs are not in Stevenage, unless Harlow, Watford and Bishop Stortford suddenly moved when I wasnt looking
Thank you, so you agree that there are plenty of jobs for forklift truck drivers in Stevenage and its environs.
The claim that there is 160+ jobs in Hertfordshire and the surrounding counties (including many duplicates from different agences) is slightly less impressive than the original suggestion that there was than many in Stevenage I think you will agree.
Even were this the case, how does this compare to the wages a couple of decades ago, and how many are full time jobs compared to a couple of decades ago.
The issue you continually dodge is that the number of semi skilled and unskilled workers in part time work is 5 times the number it was a couple of decades ago, and yet with more work all around due to the wonders of the single market, pray tell why that is ?
Automation. In 5-10 years almost all forklift trucks will be driven by robots.
Comments
Not listening/watching.
28s
anya @anyabike
Corbyn should be wiping the floor with May on this material. He's barely wiping his own nose
He then lost it a bit
Lucky he isn't involved in any sensitive upcoming negotiations...
I think the hypothesis is:
Ǝ £15 C2D(Wage) ∴ Med( (C2DWage)) >/ Med*( (C2DWage))
* = Lower immigration, outside single market.
How you'd prove or disprove that is left as an exercise for the reader.
Dr Palmer might be right. He could be that kindly old geriatric confused by modern living. I sympathise.
No I didnt look at Forklift Truck drivers in Stevenage specifically, it was illustrative, pick another semi-skilled or unskilled job and location to suit yourself, the fact remains semi-skilled and unskilled workers are five times more likely to be working part time now compared to a couple of decades ago.
Like many Remain answers you dont actually answer the question. You might be comfortable, those semi-skilled and unskilled workers that are having to sign on to benefits to support their family when they used to have a full time job, not so much.
https://www.gov.uk/duty-free-goods/arrivals-from-eu-countries
The issue is the amount. If they think you have got so much that you are likely to be selling rather than drinking yourself.
Although there are no limits to the alcohol and tobacco you can bring in from EU countries, you’re more likely to be asked questions if you have more than the amounts below.
No limits, you just have to say it's for personal consumption. If you travel once a year you could fill your car up
Ǝ £15 C2D(Wage) ∴ Med( (C2DWage)) >/ Med*( (C2DWage))
* = Lower immigration, outside single market.
How you'd prove or disprove that is left as an exercise for the reader.
There is clearly a shortage of labour. Otherwise there would not be excessive vacancies for any particular job, in this case forklift truck drivers, and hence the market is not in equilibrium. If there is an demand for labour exceeds the supply of labour, then the market clearing wage should if anything move up.
Hence the number of foreigners is not affecting the wages or availability of jobs in this instance.
I have specifically answered your question and provided supporting evidence for my answer. What on earth else do you want?
If you want to choose another occupation, go for it; we shall have a look at that also.
Edit: because it needs saying again: 169 full time forklift truck driver jobs in Stevenage (perhaps not as many as 169 but there or thereabouts, I haven't gone through each advert).
A further moments inspection will show you most of those jobs are not in Stevenage, unless Harlow, Watford and Bishop Stortford suddenly moved when I wasnt looking
Singapore is the place that I believe will be first in requiring compulsory mass microchip implantation. Whether in the first instance that will only be for "workers" or whether it will extend to those whom the regime and its media designate as "talents" is an open question.
Lee Hsien Loong, who took over from pater Lee Kwan Yew, was Senior Wrangler at Cambridge (top in the undergraduate maths finals - for more than 200 years a highly respected achievement) one year in the early 1970s. He was allowed to sit the exams in a room on his own. Why? Because when he was doing them he shouted a lot.
https://twitter.com/wondermarkfeed/status/821633933695680512
. May seemed more confident than at previous PMQs, and her mockery of Corbyn’s response to her speech yesterday was effective. She will be satisfied that that she saw Corbyn off.
£15-£16 per hour is more than I earn as an Engineer!
A new CNN/ORC poll finds Obama's approval rating stands at 60%, his best mark since June of his first year in office. Compared with other outgoing presidents, Obama lands near the top of the list, outranked only by Bill Clinton's 66% in January 2001 and Ronald Reagan's 64% in January 1989. About two-thirds (65%) say Obama's presidency was a success, including about half (49%) who say that was due to Obama's personal strengths rather than circumstances outside his control.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/18/politics/obama-approval-rating-cnn-orc-poll/index.html
Good but probably too subtle for the non elite.
@Alison1mackITV: My colleague @DanielHewittITV has spoken to Paul Nuttall : he hasn't yet decided on Stoke Central .. but he didn't rule out running!
All the "walking away" bravado plays well with her chosen audience but it is really no more than trying to put the best face on the realisation that we are likely to crash out without any deal.
She has played the cards she was dealt as well as anyone could have but the political chest beating doesn't disguise the weak position we are in.
Even were this the case, how does this compare to the wages a couple of decades ago, and how many are full time jobs compared to a couple of decades ago.
The issue you continually dodge is that the number of semi skilled and unskilled workers in part time work is 5 times the number it was a couple of decades ago, and yet with more work all around due to the wonders of the single market, pray tell why that is ?
https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/821698864113664000
Are you Chartered?
Come ahead if you think you're hard enough...
@CharHayward: Merkel: I'm not afraid. I think we’ll stick together. Europe must not be divided.
First rule of PB is assume all data is cherry picked, especially ones selected at "random". The first job on that page is
Forklift Driver - Immediate Start
£8.50 - 8.50 per hour| Baldock| Temporary/Seasonal
The 15-16 pound one is for a rough terrain forklift driver holding several special qualifications for handling specialist loads on construction sites.
Is that the going rate for an engineer???? Begining to think the people who choose a life on the dole have it about right.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/18/guy-verhofstadt-europe_n_4808819.html.
Anyone want to bet on UKIP winning Stoke or Copeland, i.e., against me?
Crushed we are, crushed...
Quicker than sea and cheaper than air cargo
Fantastic
despite being part of the EU