I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
£20bn is the cost of a couple of fvcked up NHS IT systems. Bargain.
This exemplifies the wider public response to Big Numbers - people have real trouble deciding whether X billion is a lot or a little. The common newspaper device is to divide by the population, so £20 bn would be about £30,000/head, which sounds quite a lot although it'll be borrowed by Government and repaid (perhaps) over many years.
I'm not a legal or financial expert: my specialty is more understanding Continental politics. Alastair is right to imply (paraphrasing) that if Britain doesn't have a credible final package in view (with exact numbers to be negotiated) and relies on breast-beating, then the response will also be breast-beating. The general public on the Continent isn't really paying attention to Brexit - it's seen as mildly regrettable but ultimately a matter for the Brits. But the political class is human, and currently balanced between people who want a reasonable deal (Merkel, for instance) and people who want to make a horrible example of us (Verhofstadt, for instance). If the impression given is that the British government thinks it has a powerful hand and plans to play it aggressively, the "huh, we'll show them" tendency will get the upper hand (the £60bn figure is an early example) and it won't end well.
While the British public will like a bit of mood music like this to reassure them that May isn't a patsy, ultimately most people want May it get on with it and reach some sort of deal that works for Britain. More quiet, sensible discussion and less posturing would be wise at this point, even if that means downgrading Boris, who really doesn't do sensible discussion. There will come a crisis at some stage where the negotiations seem about to collapse, and some strident rhetoric may be needed then - but not at the moment.
I'm not sure a House of Lords Parliamentary report is really "posturing". The UK seems to have been signalling they want a sensible deal: e.g. patent opt in, offer on guaranteeing rights if reciprocal, saying that the EU benefits from access to the City, highlighting the value we can add in security, hinting we might make payments under a transitional deal.
£20bn is the cost of a couple of fvcked up NHS IT systems. Bargain.
This exemplifies the wider public response to Big Numbers - people have real trouble deciding whether X billion is a lot or a little. The common newspaper device is to divide by the population, so £20 bn would be about £30,000/head, which sounds quite a lot although it'll be borrowed by Government and repaid (perhaps) over many years.
I'm not a legal or financial expert: my specialty is more understanding Continental politics. Alastair is right to imply (paraphrasing) that if Britain doesn't have a credible final package in view (with exact numbers to be negotiated) and relies on breast-beating, then the response will also be breast-beating. The general public on the Continent isn't really paying attention to Brexit - it's seen as mildly regrettable but ultimately a matter for the Brits. But the political class is human, and currently balanced between people who want a reasonable deal (Merkel, for instance) and people who want to make a horrible example of us (Verhofstadt, for instance). If the impression given is that the British government thinks it has a powerful hand and plans to play it aggressively, the "huh, we'll show them" tendency will get the upper hand (the £60bn figure is an early example) and it won't end well.
While the British public will like a bit of mood music like this to reassure them that May isn't a patsy, ultimately most people want May it get on with it and reach some sort of deal that works for Britain. More quiet, sensible discussion and less posturing would be wise at this point, even if that means downgrading Boris, who really doesn't do sensible discussion. There will come a crisis at some stage where the negotiations seem about to collapse, and some strident rhetoric may be needed then - but not at the moment.
£60bn figure is helpful in a sense that whatever is agreed will be miles and miles away from that. So May can at least argue she has reduced it by 70% or whatever....
How well she can sell that depends on how well she is generally doing when it is agreed I suppose.
@Ishmael_Z Yeah, I don't think that history started with the Beatles. Comissioning a report isn't exactly the same thing as actively supporting something and advocating it for a start.
If history was already under way in the 1950s you could actually read a bit about the report rather than speculating about it. And if it wasn't that report which led to the 1967 Act being passed (through the efforts of the tory Lord Arran and the socialist Leo Abse, perhaps you could point to the specific group of Tolpuddle Martyrish demonstrators which you say was responsible.
The discussion yesterday was about turning around and convincing public opinion. I'd have thought that you'd have followed the discussion.
I think you know that in regard to protesting it's usually not a specific set of protestors at a given place on a given day which swings things but rather campaigning over a period of time which was the whole point.
Your argument accredits the report as being the main thing which led to the decriminalisation of homosexuality but there was a ten year gap between that report and the decriminalisation.
I retract my previous advice. If you think there can be no causal relationship between two events because they are a decade apart, I don't think you will benefit much from studying the history of anything.
I don't believe I asked for your advice or your opinions on what I should study. This was a debate, not a councilling session.
£20bn is the cost of a couple of fvcked up NHS IT systems. Bargain.
This exemplifies the wider public response to Big Numbers - people have real trouble deciding whether X billion is a lot or a little. The common newspaper device is to divide by the population, so £20 bn would be about £30,000/head, which sounds quite a lot although it'll be borrowed by Government and repaid (perhaps) over many years.
I'm not a legal or financial expert: my specialty is more understanding Continental politics. Alastair is right to imply (paraphrasing) that if Britain doesn't have a credible final package in view (with exact numbers to be negotiated) and relies on breast-beating, then the response will also be breast-beating. The general public on the Continent isn't really paying attention to Brexit - it's seen as mildly regrettable but ultimately a matter for the Brits. But the political class is human, and currently balanced between people who want a reasonable deal (Merkel, for instance) and people who want to make a horrible example of us (Verhofstadt, for instance). If the impression given is that the British government thinks it has a powerful hand and plans to play it aggressively, the "huh, we'll show them" tendency will get the upper hand (the £60bn figure is an early example) and it won't end well.
While the British public will like a bit of mood music like this to reassure them that May isn't a patsy, ultimately most people want May it get on with it and reach some sort of deal that works for Britain. More quiet, sensible discussion and less posturing would be wise at this point, even if that means downgrading Boris, who really doesn't do sensible discussion. There will come a crisis at some stage where the negotiations seem about to collapse, and some strident rhetoric may be needed then - but not at the moment.
I'm not sure a House of Lords Parliamentary report is really "posturing". The UK seems to have been signalling they want a sensible deal: e.g. patent opt in, offer on guaranteeing rights if reciprocal, saying that the EU benefits from access to the City, highlighting the value we can add in security, hinting we might make payments under a transitional deal.
That doesn't look to me like breast-beating.
The only breast beating I've seen so far is the EU's €60billion - and no pre-talks on residency rights......
Though in my field, the uncertainty is already having influence. Tbere is a 90% reduction in applications for professional registration by EU nurses for example:
I haven't seen published figures on EU doctors, but think it broadly similar. PB Leavers do seem particularly keen on free movement for people like themselves, just not for others.
Do you think for even three seconds that a doctor or nurse applying for a visa after Brexit will be rejected?
The figures speak for themselves. It is not that they do not think that they cannot legally work, it is that they do not want to work here.
Of course there is a sliver lining, by stopping the influx of cheap foreign workers, wages and conditions will be forced up for people like me. Isn't that the purpose of Brexit?
Not for "people like you" although you will benefit. But, yes, restricting the pool of cheap unskilled/semi-skilled labour should have an impact on wages and conditions. And that will be a good thing. People who work hard deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts.
In which industries should we expect this to happen?
Low end services, casual labour and trade work.
So we should expect to be paying more for which goods and services?
Your morning coffee will probably be more expensive.
My heart bleeds for you
I wouldn't worry about me. Like you, Brexit will make no real difference to my lifestyle. But whisper it quietly Charles, there are people who like to buy a morning coffee who do have to watch the pennies. Yes, they exist, honestly. If they decide they can no longer afford such a treat, what happens then?
The answer's obvious. They drink tea. It's what made the Empire great!
With that, I have to go for my weekly session on the organ. Have a good morning.
Though in my field, the uncertainty is already having influence. Tbere is a 90% reduction in applications for professional registration by EU nurses for example:
I haven't seen published figures on EU doctors, but think it broadly similar. PB Leavers do seem particularly keen on free movement for people like themselves, just not for others.
Do you think for even three seconds that a doctor or nurse applying for a visa after Brexit will be rejected?
The figures speak for themselves. It is not that they do not think that they cannot legally work, it is that they do not want to work here.
Of course there is a sliver lining, by stopping the influx of cheap foreign workers, wages and conditions will be forced up for people like me. Isn't that the purpose of Brexit?
Not for "people like you" although you will benefit. But, yes, restricting the pool of cheap unskilled/semi-skilled labour should have an impact on wages and conditions. And that will be a good thing. People who work hard deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts.
In which industries should we expect this to happen?
Any and all
The American banker working in the City isn't competing with the Romanian waitress at Honest Burger. The more highly skilled the industry the less prone it will be to labour shortages since they will already have a global recruitment process and be used to the visa process for non-EU workers.
I'm unsure that's the case when it gets to the very specialised, highly-skilled industry. Yes, the large companies will be used to the visa processes (and for a certain extent how to game them), but for start-ups that's not the case.
In addition, the UK becomes a less attractive place. Why move to Cambridge and go through the hassle of having to get a visa, when you could move elsewhere in the EU instead, especially if the visa process takes time (which it can do for non-EU recruitment currently).
Though in my field, the uncertainty is already having influence. Tbere is a 90% reduction in applications for professional registration by EU nurses for example:
I haven't seen published figures on EU doctors, but think it broadly similar. PB Leavers do seem particularly keen on free movement for people like themselves, just not for others.
Do you think for even three seconds that a doctor or nurse applying for a visa after Brexit will be rejected?
The figures speak for themselves. It is not that they do not think that they cannot legally work, it is that they do not want to work here.
Of course there is a sliver lining, by stopping the influx of cheap foreign workers, wages and conditions will be forced up for people like me. Isn't that the purpose of Brexit?
Not for "people like you" although you will benefit. But, yes, restricting the pool of cheap unskilled/semi-skilled labour should have an impact on wages and conditions. And that will be a good thing. People who work hard deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts.
In which industries should we expect this to happen?
Low end services, casual labour and trade work.
So we should expect to be paying more for which goods and services?
Your morning coffee will probably be more expensive.
My heart bleeds for you
I wouldn't worry about me. Like you, Brexit will make no real difference to my lifestyle. But whisper it quietly Charles, there are people who like to buy a morning coffee who do have to watch the pennies. Yes, they exist, honestly. If they decide they can no longer afford such a treat, what happens then?
Again, it's exactly that group of people who are most likely to see their wages increase, not just because of the NLW but also through lack of labour competition. The price of the coffee may rise from £2.10 to £2.50 but the wages are rising from £7.50 to £9 with the average wage in the bottom 20% rising at a faster rate overall.
Though in my field, the uncertainty is already having influence. Tbere is a 90% reduction in applications for professional registration by EU nurses for example:
I haven't seen published figures on EU doctors, but think it broadly similar. PB Leavers do seem particularly keen on free movement for people like themselves, just not for others.
Do you think for even three seconds that a doctor or nurse applying for a visa after Brexit will be rejected?
The figures speak for themselves. It is not that they do not think that they cannot legally work, it is that they do not want to work here.
Of course there is a sliver lining, by stopping the influx of cheap foreign workers, wages and conditions will be forced up for people like me. Isn't that the purpose of Brexit?
Not for "people like you" although you will benefit. But, yes, restricting the pool of cheap unskilled/semi-skilled labour should have an impact on wages and conditions. And that will be a good thing. People who work hard deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts.
In which industries should we expect this to happen?
Low end services, casual labour and trade work.
So we should expect to be paying more for which goods and services?
Your morning coffee will probably be more expensive.
My heart bleeds for you
I wouldn't worry about me. Like you, Brexit will make no real difference to my lifestyle. But whisper it quietly Charles, there are people who like to buy a morning coffee who do have to watch the pennies. Yes, they exist, honestly. If they decide they can no longer afford such a treat, what happens then?
The answer's obvious. They drink tea. It's what made the Empire great!
With that, I have to go for my weekly session on the organ. Have a good morning.
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a price ceiling, I agree. So it is likely to close outlets to reduce costs, rather than pass on any wages increases. Those who work in high end restaurants will also lose their jobs when they close, ditto hotels. High streets across the UK are already full of boarded up outlets and low rent charity shops. We'll just see more of these. As more people look for work, salaries will go down, not up. What Brexit is likely to do is actually increase inequality and entrench the advantages enjoyed by the better off.
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a price ceiling, I agree. So it is likely to close outlets to reduce costs, rather than pass on any wages increases. Those who work in high end restaurants will also lose their jobs when they close, ditto hotels. High streets across the UK are already full of boarded up outlets and low rent charity shops. We'll just see more of these. As more people look for work, salaries will go down, not up. What Brexit is likely to do is actually increase inequality and entrench the advantages enjoyed by the better off.
I think we just have different outlooks on life, I see the UK as an enterprising nation, clearly you don't. We'll have to agree to disagree.
£20bn is the cost of a couple of fvcked up NHS IT systems. Bargain.
This exemplifies the wider public response to Big Numbers - people have real trouble deciding whether X billion is a lot or a little. The common newspaper device is to divide by the population, so £20 bn would be about £30,000/head, which sounds quite a lot although it'll be borrowed by Government and repaid (perhaps) over many years.
I'm not a legal or financial expert: my specialty is more understanding Continental politics. Alastair is right to imply (paraphrasing) that if Britain doesn't have a credible final package in view (with exact numbers to be negotiated) and relies on breast-beating, then the response will also be breast-beating. The general public on the Continent isn't really paying attention to Brexit - it's seen as mildly regrettable but ultimately a matter for the Brits. But the political class is human, and currently balanced between people who want a reasonable deal (Merkel, for instance) and people who want to make a horrible example of us (Verhofstadt, for instance). If the impression given is that the British government thinks it has a powerful hand and plans to play it aggressively, the "huh, we'll show them" tendency will get the upper hand (the £60bn figure is an early example) and it won't end well.
While the British public will like a bit of mood music like this to reassure them that May isn't a patsy, ultimately most people want May it get on with it and reach some sort of deal that works for Britain. More quiet, sensible discussion and less posturing would be wise at this point, even if that means downgrading Boris, who really doesn't do sensible discussion. There will come a crisis at some stage where the negotiations seem about to collapse, and some strident rhetoric may be needed then - but not at the moment.
I'm not sure a House of Lords Parliamentary report is really "posturing". The UK seems to have been signalling they want a sensible deal: e.g. patent opt in, offer on guaranteeing rights if reciprocal, saying that the EU benefits from access to the City, highlighting the value we can add in security, hinting we might make payments under a transitional deal.
That doesn't look to me like breast-beating.
It's not what it looks like to you that matters.
Perhaps a more productive reply would be useful. Which of my list do you think the EU negotiators will view as "breast-beating"?
Pope Paul (Nuttall) requiring a miracle to survive as UKIP leader. Mind you he's performed so many miracles in the past - loaves and fishes for all after the BREXIT vote ....
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a price ceiling, I agree. So it is likely to close outlets to reduce costs, rather than pass on any wages increases. Those who work in high end restaurants will also lose their jobs when they close, ditto hotels. High streets across the UK are already full of boarded up outlets and low rent charity shops. We'll just see more of these. As more people look for work, salaries will go down, not up. What Brexit is likely to do is actually increase inequality and entrench the advantages enjoyed by the better off.
I'm unsure that's the case when it gets to the very specialised, highly-skilled industry. Yes, the large companies will be used to the visa processes (and for a certain extent how to game them), but for start-ups that's not the case.
In addition, the UK becomes a less attractive place. Why move to Cambridge and go through the hassle of having to get a visa, when you could move elsewhere in the EU instead, especially if the visa process takes time (which it can do for non-EU recruitment currently).
By adding 'hoops' (i.e. getting a visa) you add costs to come here. The more you earn, the smaller the relative cost of the hoops, and therefore the less of a disincentive.
Nevertheless, it does introduce a cost (it's a tariff of sorts) and will therefore discourage all groups to some extent. If you have a job offer with Google in Krakow and one in London, then the one in London needs to pay that little bit better than it did before to compensate you for spending time filling in forms and finding supporting documents.
The group we should be most worried about discouraging are those who are young and well educated, and come to the Cambridge/London/etc because they are tech hubs, but do not have actual job offers yet.
Though in my field, the uncertainty is already having influence. Tbere is a 90% reduction in applications for professional registration by EU nurses for example:
I haven't seen published figures on EU doctors, but think it broadly similar. PB Leavers do seem particularly keen on free movement for people like themselves, just not for others.
Do you think for even three seconds that a doctor or nurse applying for a visa after Brexit will be rejected?
The figures speak for themselves. It is not that they do not think that they cannot legally work, it is that they do not want to work here.
Of course there is a sliver lining, by stopping the influx of cheap foreign workers, wages and conditions will be forced up for people like me. Isn't that the purpose of Brexit?
Not for "people like you" although you will benefit. But, yes, restricting the pool of cheap unskilled/semi-skilled labour should have an impact on wages and conditions. And that will be a good thing. People who work hard deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts.
In which industries should we expect this to happen?
Low end services, casual labour and trade work.
So we should expect to be paying more for which goods and services?
Your morning coffee will probably be more expensive.
My heart bleeds for you
I wouldn't worry about me. an no longer afford such a treat, what happens then?
Again, it's exactly that group of people who are most likely to see their wages increase, not just because of the NLW but also through lack of labour competition. The price of the coffee may rise from £2.10 to £2.50 but the wages are rising from £7.50 to £9 with the average wage in the bottom 20% rising at a faster rate overall.
So the wages of coffee sellers will go up at a higher rate than the price of a cup of coffee? How long do you think investors will tolerate such a reduction on their returns?
Interesting article, Alastair. I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that the UK government isn't just poor at the Brexit negotiations; it isn't actually serious. The Guardian produced a table of those on each of the negotiating teams It's clear from the list that the focus of most people on the UK team is on shoring up the Brexit position internally within the UK and not on getting a good deal with the EU. The only experienced negotiator on that list is Tim Barrow, who has experience of dealing with the EU, although it wasn't his main career interest, replacing Ivan who really knew his EU onions. On the EU side you have mostly technocrats with a couple of stooges thrown in for balance. The UK team is led by David Davis, who produced a blueprint before taking office that was full of mistakes that 15 minutes on Google would have identified, and seems to think "the facts are at fault" whenever confronted with reality. His opposite number is Michel Barnier who has been doing this kind of negotiation for decades. Given the EU mostly controls the agenda and the timetable it doesn't inspire confidence.
Your morning coffee will probably be more expensive.
My heart bleeds for you
You'll probably survive. The NHS is pretty good with emergency heart surgery but a hike in the price of coffee will be terminal for the latte classes.
I drink instant - saves me £4 per day, £1,000 per year
Get a bean to cup machine. I made my trip to Has Bean yesterday and stocked up since I won't be back until Easter now. Overall it works out to 5p per espresso and it is probably a thousand times better than the best instant.
On topic: that idiot Juncker has shot his own fox by bragging about his "facture très salée" which a. suggests from the outset that his figures are not put forward in good faith and b. gives May an easy win when she "saves" us 30 bn or whatever the final figure is. The actual calculation will, I suspect, be pedestrian and boring and with very little controversial about it; it is in principle no different from let's say a sale of land where outgoing bills and incoming rent are apportioned around the completion date. Juncker's wiggle room is, I believe, that he wants to charge the UK not just for our proportion of specific projects already signed off - e.g. to build a new shipping container factory in Hungary - but also for being in the room when more general aspirations were decided in principle - e.g. we should be looking to fund 20 bn odd worth of roadbuilding in the Baltic states over the next 20 years. We will end up paying the first sort of commitment, but not the second.
And the fundamental point is always this: the 60 bn or whatever is not a sort of on-the-spot fine for being sales rosbifs, it is an attempt to quantify and compound for our ongoing liabilities had we stayed in and the bigger it gets, the bigger by implication those ongoing liabilities would be. So if we can't afford to get out then a fortiori we can even less afford to stay in.
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a price ceiling, I agree. So it is likely to close outlets to reduce costs, rather than pass on any wages increases. Those who work in high end restaurants will also lose their jobs when they close, ditto hotels. High streets across the UK are already full of boarded up outlets and low rent charity shops. We'll just see more of these. As more people look for work, salaries will go down, not up. What Brexit is likely to do is actually increase inequality and entrench the advantages enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings call a few weeks ago, and they were asked about the impact of higher wages in California on profit margins there. They said that as wage bills got above a certain level, it became more economic to replace people with machines. Right now they're moving to touch screens for ordering. Longer term they reckon they can automate larger and larger proportions of the food preparation work and dramatically cut down the number of people employed in their restaraunts.
So the wages of coffee sellers will go up at a higher rate than the price of a cup of coffee? How long do you think investors will tolerate such a reduction on their returns?
We're about to find out whether the British disease can be cured.
In addition, the UK becomes a less attractive place. Why move to Cambridge and go through the hassle of having to get a visa, when you could move elsewhere in the EU instead, especially if the visa process takes time (which it can do for non-EU recruitment currently).
Flip side is it becomes more attractive to non-EU residents. Despite having ILR my wife had to prove she was more qualified than any EU candidate in her last job . Now she'd just have to be better than 50m Brits
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a price ceiling, I agree. So it is likely to close outlets to reduce costs, rather than pass on any wages increases. Those who work in high end restaurants will also lose their jobs when they close, ditto hotels. High streets across the UK are already full of boarded up outlets and low rent charity shops. We'll just see more of these. As more people look for work, salaries will go down, not up. What Brexit is likely to do is actually increase inequality and entrench the advantages enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings call a few weeks ago, and they were asked about the impact of higher wages in California on profit margins there. They said that as wage bills got above a certain level, it became more economic to replace people with machines. Right now they're moving to touch screens for ordering. Longer term they reckon they can automate larger and larger proportions of the food preparation work and dramatically cut down the number of people employed in their restaraunts.
I think eventually we will have to move to a UBI based system or see a new Luddite uprising, "kill all the robots" or something along those lines.
So the wages of coffee sellers will go up at a higher rate than the price of a cup of coffee? How long do you think investors will tolerate such a reduction on their returns?
There is the Remain Left's problem in a nutshell.
It's supporters are now arguing that suppressed wages are a good and essential thing.
Sell that to the low paid backbone of the Labour vote.
On topic: that idiot Juncker has shot his own fox by bragging about his "facture très salée" which a. suggests from the outset that his figures are not put forward in good faith and b. gives May an easy win when she "saves" us 30 bn or whatever the final figure is. The actual calculation will, I suspect, be pedestrian and boring and with very little controversial about it; it is in principle no different from let's say a sale of land where outgoing bills and incoming rent are apportioned around the completion date. Juncker's wiggle room is, I believe, that he wants to charge the UK not just for our proportion of specific projects already signed off - e.g. to build a new shipping container factory in Hungary - but also for being in the room when more general aspirations were decided in principle - e.g. we should be looking to fund 20 bn odd worth of roadbuilding in the Baltic states over the next 20 years. We will end up paying the first sort of commitment, but not the second.
And the fundamental point is always this: the 60 bn or whatever is not a sort of on-the-spot fine for being sales rosbifs, it is an attempt to quantify and compound for our ongoing liabilities had we stayed in and the bigger it gets, the bigger by implication those ongoing liabilities would be. So if we can't afford to get out then a fortiori we can even less afford to stay in.
The analysis I've seen - admittedly written by an investment bank - suggested that the numbers were not discounted (i.e. were raw), and contained contingent liabilities, but that if we were to simply repeal the European Communities Act then we would probably be saddled with a bill of approximately that much after arbitration.
In reality, of course, there are a great many fudges that mean that the UK will likely not hand over a penny or Euro cent on exit, but will take on certain liabilities, and give up their calls on certain assets.
So the wages of coffee sellers will go up at a higher rate than the price of a cup of coffee? How long do you think investors will tolerate such a reduction on their returns?
There is the Remain Left's problem in a nutshell.
It's supporters are now arguing that suppressed wages are a good and essential thing.
Sell that to the low paid backbone of the Labour vote.
I still remember arguing with one of them about increased wages being an "economic cost" being told by a life long labour voter and member that higher wages were bad for the economy was a little be disappointing, but apparently nothing gets in the way of EUphilia, not even "the workers".
Poor Hillary Benn the HoC ctte he chairs on exiting the EU is being called "Michael Gove's" committee.....doubt Dominic Raab, John Whittingdale, Peter Lilley et al are too chuffed either....
I'm unsure that's the case when it gets to the very specialised, highly-skilled industry. Yes, the large companies will be used to the visa processes (and for a certain extent how to game them), but for start-ups that's not the case.
In addition, the UK becomes a less attractive place. Why move to Cambridge and go through the hassle of having to get a visa, when you could move elsewhere in the EU instead, especially if the visa process takes time (which it can do for non-EU recruitment currently).
By adding 'hoops' (i.e. getting a visa) you add costs to come here. The more you earn, the smaller the relative cost of the hoops, and therefore the less of a disincentive.
Nevertheless, it does introduce a cost (it's a tariff of sorts) and will therefore discourage all groups to some extent. If you have a job offer with Google in Krakow and one in London, then the one in London needs to pay that little bit better than it did before to compensate you for spending time filling in forms and finding supporting documents.
The group we should be most worried about discouraging are those who are young and well educated, and come to the Cambridge/London/etc because they are tech hubs, but do not have actual job offers yet.
It's not just or necessarily mainly salary costs. The recruiting company has to go through those hoops, which is easier for corporations with large HR departments than small companies where the MD is trying to flog the product, keep the cash flowing and ensuring targets and deadlines are met and really could do without this extra demand on his 12 hour day.
Do you think for even three seconds that a doctor or nurse applying for a visa after Brexit will be rejected?
The figures speak for themselves. It is not that they do not think that they cannot legally work, it is that they do not want to work here.
Of course there is a sliver lining, by stopping the influx of cheap foreign workers, wages and conditions will be forced up for people like me. Isn't that the purpose of Brexit?
Not for "people like you" although you will benefit. But, yes, restricting the pool of cheap unskilled/semi-skilled labour should have an impact on wages and conditions. And that will be a good thing. People who work hard deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts.
In which industries should we expect this to happen?
Low end services, casual labour and trade work.
So we should expect to be paying more for which goods and services?
Your morning coffee will probably be more expensive.
My heart bleeds for you
I wouldn't worry about me. Like you, Brexit will make no real difference to my lifestyle. But whisper it quietly Charles, there are people who like to buy a morning coffee who do have to watch the pennies. Yes, they exist, honestly. If they decide they can no longer afford such a treat, what happens then?
Again, it's exactly that group of people who are most likely to see their wages increase, not just because of the NLW but also through lack of labour competition. The price of the coffee may rise from £2.10 to £2.50 but the wages are rising from £7.50 to £9 with the average wage in the bottom 20% rising at a faster rate overall.
And we already see companies like Starbucks replacing labour with capital - automated coffee makers and order-takers, for example. In a world where capital / automation is getting cheaper all the time, there is a lowering of demand for unskilled labour.
Imagine the crap job that the company selling £200k automated car wash machines has had for the last few years, as imported labour replaced capital in that industry.
So the wages of coffee sellers will go up at a higher rate than the price of a cup of coffee? How long do you think investors will tolerate such a reduction on their returns?
There is the Remain Left's problem in a nutshell.
It's supporters are now arguing that suppressed wages are a good and essential thing.
Sell that to the low paid backbone of the Labour vote.
Sustainable jobs that pay good wages are a good thing, backed up by strong public services and equality of opportunity. I don't see Brexit delivering on any of these. Hopefully, I'll be proved wrong.
Marr going through labour's spending figures with McDonnell are eye watering and he has no answer to raising the revenue other than tax the rich and companies.
McDonnell cannot believe in this economic nonsense can he - it is embarrassing for a shadow chancellor
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a prices enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings call a few weeks ago, and they were asked about the impact of higher wages in California on profit margins there. They said that as wage bills got above a certain level, it became more economic to replace people with machines. Right now they're moving to touch screens for ordering. Longer term they reckon they can automate larger and larger proportions of the food preparation work and dramatically cut down the number of people employed in their restaraunts.
precisely my point
in the UK they are pushing people to do all the ordering and paying automtically
some of the staff are being redeployed to provide table service
Some will, immigration is always a crapshoot. But that's not the end of the disincentive. If you move somewhere, you want to know that your life won't get messed up if you lose your job, or change your job, or get sick, or get pregnant. If British employers can't tell applicants that, they will still be able to hire, but they'll have to pay a premium to cover the "UKBA may fuck up your life at any moment, probably the worst moment" tax.
Anecdotally, I know two unrelated highly-skilled IT people who had a number of applications for UK jobs pending which they've now withdrawn. They say essentially that they can't work out all the details but being a foreigner working in Britain seems potentially risky at the moent, so they prefer to look elsewhere. Like delayed investment decisions, it's a price of uncertainty.
there's always uncertainty in business
Sure. But part of good business is assessing relative risk. You can probably get a good potential return on investment in Venezuala, but the extreme uncertainty of the political climate there will probably deter you. The outlook in Britain is perceived as somewhat uncertain by many people (you can argue that they're wrong, if you like), and that's affecting decisions by individuals and compnies that we benefit from.
I don't think that's May's fault per se - it's obviously an uncertain period for objective reasons. But it would be good if the Government seemed to be approaching negotiations with the air of people expecting a positive result.
So the wages of coffee sellers will go up at a higher rate than the price of a cup of coffee? How long do you think investors will tolerate such a reduction on their returns?
There is the Remain Left's problem in a nutshell.
It's supporters are now arguing that suppressed wages are a good and essential thing.
Sell that to the low paid backbone of the Labour vote.
I still remember arguing with one of them about increased wages being an "economic cost" being told by a life long labour voter and member that higher wages were bad for the economy was a little be disappointing, but apparently nothing gets in the way of EUphilia, not even "the workers".
I am an EUphile, you are a willy-waver. Or we just see things differently.
Members?! Wow. The penny may finally be dropping....
Not a huge surprise. Those numbers will only get worse for Corbyn from here.
It looks like in the event of a third leadership election, Corbyn may not be likely to win after all....
Corbyn will only lose a further leadership election if the Momentum/Jezzbollah faction fractures and that is unlikely even now, most of whom have a lemming like approach to public elections. They want Jezza and they don't care.
Substitute any alternative Corbynista leader as required.
So the wages of coffee sellers will go up at a higher rate than the price of a cup of coffee? How long do you think investors will tolerate such a reduction on their returns?
There is the Remain Left's problem in a nutshell.
It's supporters are now arguing that suppressed wages are a good and essential thing.
Sell that to the low paid backbone of the Labour vote.
Labour have no answer to low pay. The right of th Labour Party actively encourages it for the sake of the economy (and their self interest); the left just wants to soak the rich with taxes.
Some will, immigration is always a crapshoot. But that's not the end of the disincentive. If you move somewhere, you want to know that your life won't get messed up if you lose your job, or change your job, or get sick, or get pregnant. If British employers can't tell applicants that, they will still be able to hire, but they'll have to pay a premium to cover the "UKBA may fuck up your life at any moment, probably the worst moment" tax.
Anecdotally, I know two unrelated highly-skilled IT people who had a number of applications for UK jobs pending which they've now withdrawn. They say essentially that they can't work out all the details but being a foreigner working in Britain seems potentially risky at the moent, so they prefer to look elsewhere. Like delayed investment decisions, it's a price of uncertainty.
there's always uncertainty in business
Sure. But part of good business is assessing relative risk. You can probably get a good potential return on investment in Venezuala, but the extreme uncertainty of the political climate there will probably deter you. The outlook in Britain is perceived as somewhat uncertain by many people (you can argue that they're wrong, if you like), and that's affecting decisions by individuals and compnies that we benefit from.
I don't think that's May's fault per se - it's obviously an uncertain period for objective reasons. But it would be good if the Government seemed to be approaching negotiations with the air of people expecting a positive result.
I would simply argue risk and uncertainty are always there all that changes is what risks are known. As a result Brexit makes some peoples risk less and others higher.
Members?! Wow. The penny may finally be dropping....
Not a huge surprise. Those numbers will only get worse for Corbyn from here.
It looks like in the event of a third leadership election, Corbyn may not be likely to win after all....
Corbyn will only lose a further leadership election if the Momentum/Jezzbollah faction fractures and that is unlikely even now, most of whom have a lemming like approach to public elections. They want Jezza and they don't care.
Substitute any alternative Corbynista leader as required.
Momentum has fractured. The Corbyn coalition is breaking up.
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a price ceiling, I agree. So it is likely to close outlets to reduce costs, rather than pass on any wages increases. Those who work in high end restaurants will also lose their jobs when they close, ditto hotels. High streets across the UK are already full of boarded up outlets and low rent charity shops. We'll just see more of these. As more people look for work, salaries will go down, not up. What Brexit is likely to do is actually increase inequality and entrench the advantages enjoyed by the better off.
I think youll find all Mcdonalds are fanchises so they are in effect in competition with each other but with price ceilings for products.
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a prices enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings call a few weeks ago, and they were asked about the impact of higher wages in California on profit margins there. They said that as wage bills got above a certain level, it became more economic to replace people with machines. Right now they're moving to touch screens for ordering. Longer term they reckon they can automate larger and larger proportions of the food preparation work and dramatically cut down the number of people employed in their restaraunts.
precisely my point
in the UK they are pushing people to do all the ordering and paying automtically
some of the staff are being redeployed to provide table service
Yep. It's happening in supermarkets too. Prices are not coming down, but fewer jobs are being created. Of course, this is a huge issue Brexit or non-Brexit, but it does rather argue against the idea that the low paid are on the verge of a wages bonanza.
Members?! Wow. The penny may finally be dropping....
Not a huge surprise. Those numbers will only get worse for Corbyn from here.
It looks like in the event of a third leadership election, Corbyn may not be likely to win after all....
Corbyn will only lose a further leadership election if the Momentum/Jezzbollah faction fractures and that is unlikely even now, most of whom have a lemming like approach to public elections. They want Jezza and they don't care.
Substitute any alternative Corbynista leader as required.
Momentum has fractured. The Corbyn coalition is breaking up.
There may be nibbles at the margin and a lot of factional piss and wind but the essentials of Corbyn's continued leadership remain intact, enhanced by the inability of the majority of Labour MP's to find a viable alternative.
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a prices enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings caeir restaraunts.
precisely my point
in the UK they are pushing people to do all the ordering and paying automtically
some of the staff are being redeployed to provide table service
Yep. It's happening in supermarkets too. Prices are not coming down, but fewer jobs are being created. Of course, this is a huge issue Brexit or non-Brexit, but it does rather argue against the idea that the low paid are on the verge of a wages bonanza.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
Mr. NorthWales, you do remember this is the person who threw the little red book at Osborne (Autumn Statement, was it?)?
Yes and Osborne humiliated him with his own book. It makes you weary to listen to someone who could, however unlikely, be in charge of the Country's finance and hasn't a clue on economics
As has always been the case, the Catholic Church is more interested in promoting personal acts of charity than actually doing something about the problem. Better to give your money to this lot:
Big f*ck-off headline about "European political leaders and diplomats react to Lords report arguing that Britain could leave EU without paying £52bn".
Reading the article, "European Leaders and Diplomats" seems to consist of one Faction-Leader from the Euro Parliament, who's Socialist group is not even the largest. And an unidentified alleged "senior diplomat".
And that is it.
Perhaps they would have a stronger argument had they asked Brigitte Bardot's pet hamster to strengthen the lineup.
Some will, immigration is always a crapshoot. But that's not the end of the disincentive. If you move somewhere, you want to know that your life won't get messed up if you lose your job, or change your job, or get sick, or get pregnant. If British employers can't tell applicants that, they will still be able to hire, but they'll have to pay a premium to cover the "UKBA may fuck up your life at any moment, probably the worst moment" tax.
Anecdotally, I know two unrelated highly-skilled IT people who had a number of applications for UK jobs pending which they've now withdrawn. They say essentially that they can't work out all the details but being a foreigner working in Britain seems potentially risky at the moent, so they prefer to look elsewhere. Like delayed investment decisions, it's a price of uncertainty.
there's always uncertainty in business
Sure. But part of good business is assessing relative risk. You can probably get a good potential return on investment in Venezuala, but the extreme uncertainty of the political climate there will probably deter you. The outlook in Britain is perceived as somewhat uncertain by many people (you can argue that they're wrong, if you like), and that's affecting decisions by individuals and compnies that we benefit from.
I don't think that's May's fault per se - it's obviously an uncertain period for objective reasons. But it would be good if the Government seemed to be approaching negotiations with the air of people expecting a positive result.
With respect Nick, the Government are approaching the negotiations expecting a positive result - it is some remainers who are casting doubt and even some wanting the Country to fail
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a prices enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings caeir restaraunts.
precisely my point
in the UK they are pushing people to do all the ordering and paying automtically
some of the staff are being redeployed to provide table service
Yep. It's happening in supermarkets too. Prices are not coming down, but fewer jobs are being created. Of course, this is a huge issue Brexit or non-Brexit, but it does rather argue against the idea that the low paid are on the verge of a wages bonanza.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
We may well need less immigration. Who is complaining about wages going up?
I am not understanding the discussion on Brexit driving up wages. Right now wages are increasing by less than inflation.
Edit, despite the big increases in the Living Wage
The stats at present do not confirm that though that is not to say that at sometime in the future wage increases and inflation converge and crossover takes place
I'm unsure that's the case when it gets to the very specialised, highly-skilled industry. Yes, the large companies will be used to the visa processes (and for a certain extent how to game them), but for start-ups that's not the case.
In addition, the UK becomes a less attractive place. Why move to Cambridge and go through the hassle of having to get a visa, when you could move elsewhere in the EU instead, especially if the visa process takes time (which it can do for non-EU recruitment currently).
By adding 'hoops' (i.e. getting a visa) you add costs to come here. The more you earn, the smaller the relative cost of the hoops, and therefore the less of a disincentive.
Nevertheless, it does introduce a cost (it's a tariff of sorts) and will therefore discourage all groups to some extent. If you have a job offer with Google in Krakow and one in London, then the one in London needs to pay that little bit better than it did before to compensate you for spending time filling in forms and finding supporting documents.
The group we should be most worried about discouraging are those who are young and well educated, and come to the Cambridge/London/etc because they are tech hubs, but do not have actual job offers yet.
Time is a cost as well. IME the visa process can take well over six months for non-EU nationals.
You are a brilliant engineer in Madrid, and you have a choice of jobs in Frankfurt, Cambridge or California. All require you to move. However you can start the job in Frankfurt immediately, whilst you have to wait for the visa process to go through for the jobs in Cambridge or California. You may not be earning during that period.
Before, Cambridge would have ranked up there with Frankfurt. Now it's down with the US (leaving aside other issues such as language).
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a prices enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings caeir restaraunts.
precisely my point
in the UK they are pushing people to do all the ordering and paying automtically
some of the staff are being redeployed to provide table service
Yep. It's happening in supermarkets too. Prices are not coming down, but fewer jobs are being created. Of course, this is a huge issue Brexit or non-Brexit, but it does rather argue against the idea that the low paid are on the verge of a wages bonanza.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
Some jobs are much less risk of automation. social care, hotel and catering workers, cleaning and agriculture for example.
One attractive feature of early retirement, then working as a locum, is that I don't have to struggle with covering rota gaps, I pick and choose what work to do. Fewer migrant staff makes both retiring morecattractive and more lucrative.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
Neither jobs nor supply are fixed. It's not my area, but the people who study this reckon each immigrant creates almost one new job thanks to his contribution to the economy. Marginally negative. However,immigrants also tend to be underpaid for their skill level, which means there are more higher paid jobs (supervisors, permanent rather than temporary staff etc) than there would otherwise be. Overall it's a wash, but the better paid benefit slightly from immigration while the lower paid have slightly fewer job opportunities than they would otherwise have.
There are significant benefits to immigration for public finances and those that are depending on the state for pensions, benefits and healthcare however.
I found this article pretty interesting re FISA and the changes made post 911.
The final sentence is the key point
"While it’s too early to say for sure, it may also be an example of what I thought would never actually happen: the government pretextually using its national-security authority to continue a criminal investigation after determining it lacked evidence of crimes."
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a prices enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings caeir restaraunts.
precisely my point
in the UK they are pushing people to do all the ordering and paying automtically
some of the staff are being redeployed to provide table service
Yep. It's happening in supermarkets too. Prices are not coming down, but fewer jobs are being created. Of course, this is a huge issue Brexit or non-Brexit, but it does rather argue against the idea that the low paid are on the verge of a wages bonanza.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
We may well need less immigration. Who is complaining about wages going up?
I am not understanding the discussion on Brexit driving up wages. Right now wages are increasing by less than inflation.
Edit, despite the big increases in the Living Wage
The stats at present do not confirm that though that is not to say that at sometime in the future wage increases and inflation converge and crossover takes place
I suppose it depends on whether the economy will contract faster or slower than immigration. I understand wages did rise significantly after the Black Death in the 14thC. Not that I would compare Brexit to the Black Death of course ....
I'm unsure that's the case when it gets to the very specialised, highly-skilled industry. Yes, the large companies will be used to the visa processes (and for a certain extent how to game them), but for start-ups that's not the case.
In addition, the UK becomes a less attractive place. Why move to Cambridge and go through the hassle of having to get a visa, when you could move elsewhere in the EU instead, especially if the visa process takes time (which it can do for non-EU recruitment currently).
By adding 'hoops' (i.e. getting a visa) you add costs to come here. The more you earn, the smaller the relative cost of the hoops, and therefore the less of a disincentive.
Nevertheless, it does introduce a cost (it's a tariff of sorts) and will therefore discourage all groups to some extent. If you have a job offer with Google in Krakow and one in London, then the one in London needs to pay that little bit better than it did before to compensate you for spending time filling in forms and finding supporting documents.
The group we should be most worried about discouraging are those who are young and well educated, and come to the Cambridge/London/etc because they are tech hubs, but do not have actual job offers yet.
Time is a cost as well. IME the visa process can take well over six months for non-EU nationals.
You are a brilliant engineer in Madrid, and you have a choice of jobs in Frankfurt, Cambridge or California. All require you to move. However you can start the job in Frankfurt immediately, whilst you have to wait for the visa process to go through for the jobs in Cambridge or California. You may not be earning during that period.
Before, Cambridge would have ranked up there with Frankfurt. Now it's down with the US (leaving aside other issues such as language).
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
Neither jobs nor supply are fixed. It's not my area, but the people who study this reckon each immigrant creates almost one new job thanks to his contribution to the economy. Marginally negative. However,immigrants also tend to be underpaid for their skill level, which means there are more higher paid jobs (supervisors, permanent rather than temporary staff etc) than there would otherwise be. Overall it's a wash, but the better paid benefit slightly from immigration while the lower paid have slightly fewer job opportunities than they would otherwise have.
There are significant benefits to immigration for public finances and those that are depending on the state for pensions, benefits and healthcare however.
no
if you ask me would I rather be a country with a smaller but richer population ( Switzerland )
or a bigger but less well off one ( USA) Im going for Switzerland
Though in my field, the uncertainty is already having influence. Tbere is a 90% reduction in applications for professional registration by EU nurses for example:
I haven't seen published figures on EU doctors, but think it broadly similar. PB Leavers do seem particularly keen on free movement for people like themselves, just not for others.
Do you think for even three seconds that a doctor or nurse applying for a visa after Brexit will be rejected?
The figures speak for themselves. It is not that they do not think that they cannot legally work, it is that they do not want to work here.
Of course there is a sliver lining, by stopping the influx of cheap foreign workers, wages and conditions will be forced up for people like me. Isn't that the purpose of Brexit?
Not for "people like you" although you will benefit. But, yes, restricting the pool of cheap unskilled/semi-skilled labour should have an impact on wages and conditions. And that will be a good thing. People who work hard deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts.
In which industries should we expect this to happen?
Low end services, casual labour and trade work.
So we should expect to be paying more for which goods and services?
You know what I'll happilly pay more if it means more british workers are hired. I suspect that is true for many people. You are really not a socialist if you rather your extension was cheaper than hiring British boys who could need the work.
Mr. 43, that's true, but the cost of food also increased substantially. The price of swords, however, fell.
The Black Death and its impact are very interesting things but I'm not sure they're useful as a comparison for leaving the EU.
On the charity thingummyjig below: worth noting some beggars will simply buy drugs, others are doing it by choice, and some are forced to by gangmasters. Better to get them some food and a drink, if you're so inclined.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
Neither jobs nor supply are fixed. It's not my area, but the people who study this reckon each immigrant creates almost one new job thanks to his contribution to the economy. Marginally negative. However,immigrants also tend to be underpaid for their skill level, which means there are more higher paid jobs (supervisors, permanent rather than temporary staff etc) than there would otherwise be. Overall it's a wash, but the better paid benefit slightly from immigration while the lower paid have slightly fewer job opportunities than they would otherwise have.
There are significant benefits to immigration for public finances and those that are depending on the state for pensions, benefits and healthcare however.
no
if you ask me would I rather be a country with a smaller but richer population ( Switzerland )
or a bigger but less well off one ( USA) Im going for Switzerland
We are talking about immigration. Switzerland has a lot of immigration. It's either rich because of that immigration or rich despite it.
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at the poorer end of the scale. And it's not just well off members of the middle class that go to Starbucks. An alternative to paying higher wages across the board, of course, is to employ fewer people and to close outlets. With high employment rates, we are almost certain to see that happen, with smaller businesses most affected. I am all for people getting higher wages, just as I am for higher taxes for the better off. I can afford both. I am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a price ceiling as well enforced by copious independent chicken and burger shops as well as global competition. It's the restaurants that the likes of you or I would visit that will become more expensive or have to close down unprofitable outlets.
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a price ceiling, I agree. So it is likely to close outlets to reduce costs, rather than pass on any wages increases. Those who work in high end restaurants will also lose their jobs when they close, ditto hotels. High streets across the UK are already full of boarded up outlets and low rent charity shops. We'll just see more of these. As more people look for work, salaries will go down, not up. What Brexit is likely to do is actually increase inequality and entrench the advantages enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings call a few weeks ago, and they were asked about the impact of higher wages in California on profit margins there. They said that as wage bills got above a certain level, it became more economic to replace people with machines. Right now they're moving to touch screens for ordering. Longer term they reckon they can automate larger and larger proportions of the food preparation work and dramatically cut down the number of people employed in their restaraunts.
If robots can eventually do everything, we'll be eloi, and they'll be morlocks.
I can't remember the last time I had a McDonald's. I think you'll find the demographics of fast food consumption are concentrated at am lucky.
Tbh, McDonald's have a pwe got
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
McDonald's has a prices enjoyed by the better off.
try going in to a macdonalds
I was listening to the MCD earnings caeir restaraunts.
precisely my point
in the UK they are pushing people to do all the ordering and paying automtically
some of the staff are being redeployed to provide table service
Yep. It's happening in supermarkets too. Prices are not coming down, but fewer jobs are being created. Of course, this is a huge issue Brexit or non-Brexit, but it does rather argue against the idea that the low paid are on the verge of a wages bonanza.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
Some jobs are much less risk of automation. social care, hotel and catering workers, cleaning and agriculture for example.
One attractive feature of early retirement, then working as a locum, is that I don't have to struggle with covering rota gaps, I pick and choose what work to do. Fewer migrant staff makes both retiring morecattractive and more lucrative.
Im not sure that's true there are loads of automated jbos coming down the line. They wont take out a person in one but an accumulation of them will gradually dissect tasks done by people meaning less people are needed.
Most people I know now look at google before going to a GP.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
Neither jobs nor supply are fixed. It's not my area, but the people who study this reckon each immigrant creates almost one new job thanks to his contribution to the economy. Marginally negative. However,immigrants also tend to be underpaid for their skill level, which means there are more higher paid jobs (supervisors, permanent rather than temporary staff etc) than there would otherwise be. Overall it's a wash, but the better paid benefit slightly from immigration while the lower paid have slightly fewer job opportunities than they would otherwise have.
There are significant benefits to immigration for public finances and those that are depending on the state for pensions, benefits and healthcare however.
no
if you ask me would I rather be a country with a smaller but richer population ( Switzerland )
or a bigger but less well off one ( USA) Im going for Switzerland
We are talking about immigration. Switzerland has a lot of immigration. It's either rich because of that immigration or rich despite it.
Switzerland also has a closed labour market to unskilled workers. Which immigrant is going to do a three year equivalency certificate to work as a hairdresser?
The point of a well-run coffee shop, whether a Starbucks, Cafe Nero or an indy, is not the coffee. That is just a catalyst.
They are a social hub; a meeting place for those who do no wish to go to the pub (and generally with more friendly opening times as well). A place to go and meet friends and chat about politics, science, literature, or sport; in fact, anything and everything.
Just as they were three hundred years ago.
Hence the location, decor, and ambience perhaps matter more than the coffee. Heck, from a quick straw poll of the missus and myself, the food or snacks available matter more than the coffee.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
Neither jobs nor supply are fixed. It's not my area, but the people who study this reckon each immigrant creates almost one new job thanks to his contribution to the economy. Marginally negative. However,immigrants also tend to be underpaid for their skill level, which means there are more higher paid jobs (supervisors, permanent rather than temporary staff etc) than there would otherwise be. Overall it's a wash, but the better paid benefit slightly from immigration while the lower paid have slightly fewer job opportunities than they would otherwise have.
There are significant benefits to immigration for public finances and those that are depending on the state for pensions, benefits and healthcare however.
no
if you ask me would I rather be a country with a smaller but richer population ( Switzerland )
or a bigger but less well off one ( USA) Im going for Switzerland
We are talking about immigration. Switzerland has a lot of immigration. It's either rich because of that immigration or rich despite it.
it controls its immigration , it doesnt just import people for the sake of it.
Though in my field, the uncertainty is already having influence. Tbere is a 90% reduction in applications for professional registration by EU nurses for example:
I haven't seen published figures on EU doctors, but think it broadly similar. PB Leavers do seem particularly keen on free movement for people like themselves, just not for others.
Do you think for even three seconds that a doctor or nurse applying for a visa after Brexit will be rejected?
The figures speak for themselves. It is not that they do not think that they cannot legally work, it is that they do not want to work here.
Of course there is a sliver lining, by stopping the influx of cheap foreign workers, wages and conditions will be forced up for people like me. Isn't that the purpose of Brexit?
Not for "people like you" although you will benefit. But, yes, restricting the pool of cheap unskilled/semi-skilled labour should have an impact on wages and conditions. And that will be a good thing. People who work hard deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts.
In which industries should we expect this to happen?
Low end services, casual labour and trade work.
So we should expect to be paying more for which goods and services?
You know what I'll happilly pay more if it means more british workers are hired. I suspect that is true for many people. You are really not a socialist if you rather your extension was cheaper than hiring British boys who could need the work.
I'm not a socialist and I don't have an extension. I did have my cellar done last year, though, and hired the best people for the job. I'd say 90% of them were Brits born and raised within 20 miles of my house.
As has always been the case, the Catholic Church is more interested in promoting personal acts of charity than actually doing something about the problem. Better to give your money to this lot:
This seems to me possibly to be prejudiced anti-Catholic sniping, and it does not help homeless people.
As I hope you know, the RCs run a very similar organisation out of Westminster Cathedral, called The Passage. The tag line is "The Passage to Ending Homelessness".
Though in my field, the uncertainty is already having influence. Tbere is a 90% reduction in applications for professional registration by EU nurses for example:
I haven't seen published figures on EU doctors, but think it broadly similar. PB Leavers do seem particularly keen on free movement for people like themselves, just not for others.
Do you think for even three seconds that a doctor or nurse applying for a visa after Brexit will be rejected?
The figures speak for themselves. It is not that they do not think that they cannot legally work, it is that they do not want to work here.
Of course there is a sliver lining, by stopping the influx of cheap foreign workers, wages and conditions will be forced up for people like me. Isn't that the purpose of Brexit?
Not for "people like you" although you will benefit. But, yes, restricting the pool of cheap unskilled/semi-skilled labour should have an impact on wages and conditions. And that will be a good thing. People who work hard deserve to be fairly remunerated for their efforts.
In which industries should we expect this to happen?
Low end services, casual labour and trade work.
So we should expect to be paying more for which goods and services?
You know what I'll happilly pay more if it means more british workers are hired. I suspect that is true for many people. You are really not a socialist if you rather your extension was cheaper than hiring British boys who could need the work.
I'm not a socialist and I don't have an extension. I did have my cellar done last year, though, and hired the best people for the job. I'd say 90% of them were Brits born and raised within 20 miles of my house.
I just had the wardrobes done in my Zurich place. Swiss labour rates are unbelievably high. Not a single migrant in sight (except me, of course!).
Do enjoy the withering sarcasm aimed at 'Mr Daniel Hannan', who certainly has not covered himself in glory in the last eighteen months.
Misplaced sarcasm. That piece is riddled with errors and assumptions stated as fact. Hardly surprising when it was written as part of a campaign to prevent Brexit. Hannan is a far more believable source than the NIESR which, for all its important sounding name, is simply a left wing pressure group.
Er, no. Hannan is not believable. He is the man who repeatedly claimed in the event of Brexit we would stay in the single market, which was a patent untruth and has left many hostages to fortune (most of all, a stick to beat Leavers with and feed into the 'we wuz robbed' narrative).
What errors have you identified in the post that in your view makes it untrustworthy?
The whopping great one is the % of trade in goods and services the UK represents to the EU.
All numbers according to the EU/Eurostat:
In 2014 total EU (excluding the UK) export value was €1,504 billion.
Why does the Chancellor give interviews the Sunday before the budget? Surely it would make more sense to have him on the following Sunday once we know what's in it?
The point of a well-run coffee shop, whether a Starbucks, Cafe Nero or an indy, is not the coffee. That is just a catalyst.
They are a social hub; a meeting place for those who do no wish to go to the pub (and generally with more friendly opening times as well). A place to go and meet friends and chat about politics, science, literature, or sport; in fact, anything and everything.
Just as they were three hundred years ago.
Hence the location, decor, and ambience perhaps matter more than the coffee. Heck, from a quick straw poll of the missus and myself, the food or snacks available matter more than the coffee.
The point of a well-run coffee shop, whether a Starbucks, Cafe Nero or an indy, is not the coffee. That is just a catalyst.
They are a social hub; a meeting place for those who do no wish to go to the pub (and generally with more friendly opening times as well). A place to go and meet friends and chat about politics, science, literature, or sport; in fact, anything and everything.
Just as they were three hundred years ago.
Hence the location, decor, and ambience perhaps matter more than the coffee. Heck, from a quick straw poll of the missus and myself, the food or snacks available matter more than the coffee.
The coffee is still important. Has to be up to a certain standard. I am unconvinced by the standard of automated machines to date. The costa coffee machines at BP garages are ok but for the barista is an important art and skill and unlikely to be automated . Barista recruitment will be hit hard by Brexit.
Encouraging. Let's hope this shift in opinion gains momentum!
That 72% support in Feb 2016 turned into 60% support in the September leadership election. Now it's 54%, with a steep rise in disapproval. This is only going one way.
As has always been the case, the Catholic Church is more interested in promoting personal acts of charity than actually doing something about the problem. Better to give your money to this lot:
This seems to me possibly to be prejudiced anti-Catholic sniping, and it does not help homeless people.
As I hope you know, the RCs run a very similar organisation out of Westminster Cathedral, called The Passage. The tag line is "The Passage to Ending Homelessness".
All of them work together, and each of them helps thousands of people every year.
Perhaps so. I don't just blame the Catholic Church here. Giving money to a beggar might make you feel good about yourself/ count as doing penance for your sins - but it is much better to give that money instead to an organised charity that provides real help to the homeless.
so if there are fewer jobs why do we need so much immigration ?
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
Neither jobs nor supply are fixed. It's not my area, but the people who study this reckon each immigrant creates almost one new job thanks to his contribution to the economy. Marginally negative. However,immigrants also tend to be underpaid for their skill level, which means there are more higher paid jobs (supervisors, permanent rather than temporary staff etc) than there would otherwise be. Overall it's a wash, but the better paid benefit slightly from immigration while the lower paid have slightly fewer job opportunities than they would otherwise have.
There are significant benefits to immigration for public finances and those that are depending on the state for pensions, benefits and healthcare however.
no
if you ask me would I rather be a country with a smaller but richer population ( Switzerland )
or a bigger but less well off one ( USA) Im going for Switzerland
We are talking about immigration. Switzerland has a lot of immigration. It's either rich because of that immigration or rich despite it.
I thought Switzerland got rich originally by robbing people passing through, which evolved into charging them for passage, and when these sources of income dried up moved on to selling themselves as military mercenaries and then financial ones? And by never having any wars, so never having to pay for them or suffer the damage, but making a good profit from other people's.
Comments
Follow that thought through to the logical end, we got to businesses closing. What does that do? It drives rents down which means new businesses open with a lower fixed cost base and that pushes employment up again. When wages rise, ultimately it's the rentier classes that pay for it, which is why most of them fought so hard for remain. Their unlimited pool of labour being closed off is going to hurt their yields quite badly.
Brexit is going to end up achieving what Labour stand for, a more equal society. Hopefully it will also help to achieve a society in which one can work hard and be rewarded as well.
http://fortune.com/2016/09/10/brexit-european-investment-bank/
Note again, a country with 8% of the QMV rights and 13% of the population is a 16% shareholder.
With that, I have to go for my weekly session on the organ. Have a good morning.
In addition, the UK becomes a less attractive place. Why move to Cambridge and go through the hassle of having to get a visa, when you could move elsewhere in the EU instead, especially if the visa process takes time (which it can do for non-EU recruitment currently).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd's_Coffee_House
Nevertheless, it does introduce a cost (it's a tariff of sorts) and will therefore discourage all groups to some extent. If you have a job offer with Google in Krakow and one in London, then the one in London needs to pay that little bit better than it did before to compensate you for spending time filling in forms and finding supporting documents.
The group we should be most worried about discouraging are those who are young and well educated, and come to the Cambridge/London/etc because they are tech hubs, but do not have actual job offers yet.
And the fundamental point is always this: the 60 bn or whatever is not a sort of on-the-spot fine for being sales rosbifs, it is an attempt to quantify and compound for our ongoing liabilities had we stayed in and the bigger it gets, the bigger by implication those ongoing liabilities would be. So if we can't afford to get out then a fortiori we can even less afford to stay in.
It's supporters are now arguing that suppressed wages are a good and essential thing.
Sell that to the low paid backbone of the Labour vote.
In reality, of course, there are a great many fudges that mean that the UK will likely not hand over a penny or Euro cent on exit, but will take on certain liabilities, and give up their calls on certain assets.
http://www.catholicnews.com/services/englishnews/2017/dont-worry-how-its-spent-always-give-homeless-a-handout-pope-says.cfm
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/exiting-the-european-union-committee/membership/
Imagine the crap job that the company selling £200k automated car wash machines has had for the last few years, as imported labour replaced capital in that industry.
McDonnell cannot believe in this economic nonsense can he - it is embarrassing for a shadow chancellor
in the UK they are pushing people to do all the ordering and paying automtically
some of the staff are being redeployed to provide table service
I drink Dunkin'Donuts at home
I don't think that's May's fault per se - it's obviously an uncertain period for objective reasons. But it would be good if the Government seemed to be approaching negotiations with the air of people expecting a positive result.
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/838322777186795521
Substitute any alternative Corbynista leader as required.
Edit, despite the big increases in the Living Wage
it's one of the huge inconsistencies in the Remainers arguments.
Likewise why are those who spent years demanding a living wage complaining when wages rise ?
http://www.mungos.org/
The Young Turks were mostly Bernie fans.
https://medium.com/theyoungturks/the-basic-formula-for-every-shocking-russia-trump-revelation-e9ae390d9f05#.fvaj05w5f
Big f*ck-off headline about "European political leaders and diplomats react to Lords report arguing that Britain could leave EU without paying £52bn".
Reading the article, "European Leaders and Diplomats" seems to consist of one Faction-Leader from the Euro Parliament, who's Socialist group is not even the largest. And an unidentified alleged "senior diplomat".
And that is it.
Perhaps they would have a stronger argument had they asked Brigitte Bardot's pet hamster to strengthen the lineup.
You are a brilliant engineer in Madrid, and you have a choice of jobs in Frankfurt, Cambridge or California. All require you to move. However you can start the job in Frankfurt immediately, whilst you have to wait for the visa process to go through for the jobs in Cambridge or California. You may not be earning during that period.
Before, Cambridge would have ranked up there with Frankfurt. Now it's down with the US (leaving aside other issues such as language).
One attractive feature of early retirement, then working as a locum, is that I don't have to struggle with covering rota gaps, I pick and choose what work to do. Fewer migrant staff makes both retiring morecattractive and more lucrative.
There are significant benefits to immigration for public finances and those that are depending on the state for pensions, benefits and healthcare however.
The final sentence is the key point
"While it’s too early to say for sure, it may also be an example of what I thought would never actually happen: the government pretextually using its national-security authority to continue a criminal investigation after determining it lacked evidence of crimes."
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/bc.marfeel.com/amp/www.nationalreview.com/article/443768/obama-fisa-trump-wiretap
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/06/13/guest-slot-the-impact-of-leaving-the-eu-on-londons-technology-start-up-scene/
if you ask me would I rather be a country with a smaller but richer population ( Switzerland )
or a bigger but less well off one ( USA) Im going for Switzerland
The Black Death and its impact are very interesting things but I'm not sure they're useful as a comparison for leaving the EU.
On the charity thingummyjig below: worth noting some beggars will simply buy drugs, others are doing it by choice, and some are forced to by gangmasters. Better to get them some food and a drink, if you're so inclined.
Most people I know now look at google before going to a GP.
They are a social hub; a meeting place for those who do no wish to go to the pub (and generally with more friendly opening times as well). A place to go and meet friends and chat about politics, science, literature, or sport; in fact, anything and everything.
Just as they were three hundred years ago.
Hence the location, decor, and ambience perhaps matter more than the coffee. Heck, from a quick straw poll of the missus and myself, the food or snacks available matter more than the coffee.
This seems to me possibly to be prejudiced anti-Catholic sniping, and it does not help homeless people.
As I hope you know, the RCs run a very similar organisation out of Westminster Cathedral, called The Passage. The tag line is "The Passage to Ending Homelessness".
http://passage.org.uk/
As do the CofE out of St Martins in the Fields with The Connection.
https://www.connection-at-stmartins.org.uk/
All of them work together, and each of them helps thousands of people every year.
@christopherhope: Ed Balls will NOT stand in Manchester Gordon. "I am not standing in a by-election." But he does not say "never". @pestononsunday
All numbers according to the EU/Eurostat:
In 2014 total EU (excluding the UK) export value was €1,504 billion.
http://exporthelp.europa.eu/thdapp/display.htm?page=st/st_Statistics.html&docType=main&languageId=en
In the same year total EU export value to the UK was €432 billion
http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu
That is just over 22%.