Powerful. It helped that the blond lady was the perfect pantomime villain. Loathsome Leavers.....
Some people will cry when Brexit does not happen too, will it be powerful to see them weep and should that mean we should leave after all?
WE WILL DRINK DEEP OF THEIR DELICIOUS SALTY TEARS.
Whatever you think is a good time I guess. But as sad as it might be for people, that people will cry about something is not, in itself, an argument, however powerful it is emotionally.
Her argument was that they didn’t have enough workers for her husbands company. She could try paying them more.
It's almost like supply of workers is price elastic.
It hasn't been since about 2005. Badly run businesses have gotten used to having an almost unlimited pool of unskilled cheap labourers. It has held back investment in staff, machinery and efficient allocation of resources. I know how you loathe the productivity discussion, however, EU labour market is, IMO, the primary reason why UK productivity is so poor as it is coupled with generally poor short termist management we've always suffered from.
How many of the kind of businesses you describe couldn't employ labour more cheaply outside the UK?
Starbucks?
And you think the UK's low productivity is down to the lack of automation in coffee shops?
It isn't such a daft point. Hospitality industries are labour intensive because the customer experience is reliant on human interaction. Sitting by a vending machine isn't a great customer experience.
My sister in law runs catering establishments as a regional boss for a FTSE company and they could pay Barrista's 250K a year and still make a very large profit margin. Do they, of course not because the supply of labour has been an ever constant stream.
Even if there was negative immigration, a low skilled job would never pay £250,000 a year
I think it unlikely that voters in Scotland are any more obsessed with Brexit than is the case elsewhere in the UK. Much more likely that they are sick to death of the subject.
Edinburgh voters voted 74% Remain, they only voted 61% No.
At the risk of being hit over the head by certain parties on here, it may just be that Brexit (however well or badly it goes) doesn't prove to be an unalloyed good for the cause of Scottish independence.
For the UK, extricating itself from a bject to all manner of tariff and non-tariff barriers, depending upon the circumstances in which the two parties then find themselves.
All of this is doable (and, as I'ame it's one Hell of ovement happening since.
There is also the somewhat more than trivial issue of very large numbers of Westminster politicians advocating that people be told to vote again in a second referendum on something, because they have given an answer of which they don't approve in the first one. Even if Indyref2 is held and it produces a Yes vote, the Scottish Government may then have to endure a carrot-and-stick negotiation strategy from London: hardball in the divorce talks, coupled with a less-than-subtle campaign aimed at Scottish voters asking them if they're really sure they want to go through with this.
Brexit has probably made the SNP's ultimate aim harder, not easier, to achieve.
Not what the polling says, in fact Yes only gets over 50% in some polls with No Deal.
The fact voters voted for Brexit despite the risks also makes it easier for the SNP to say Scots could do the same with independence.
In fact in the event of No Deal the Government might have to go down the Spanish route with the Catalans and suspend Holyrood in order to prevent UDI
UDI is hardly an option when so many Scots oppose independence. How would it be enforced in the Borders or Edinburgh?
Given the Scottish government in Edinburgh is SNP in the event of No Deal the polling clearly suggests over 50% of Scots could back independence so if indyref2 is not granted the SNP could go ahead anyway
The Nats have already said they will not declare UDI. Only a few nutters see it as a possibility. The moderate Nats are not stupid. They know an illegal declaration of UDI gives Westminster all the excuse it needs to say NO to any new referendum for a long, long time, and most Scottish voters would be disturbed or appalled at such a move.
Have they? In the event of No Deal as far as I am aware the Nats are clear they will go full steam ahead with indyref2 and if Westminster try and block it UDI may well be on the cards
Powerful. It helped that the blond lady was the perfect pantomime villain. Loathsome Leavers.....
Some people will cry when Brexit does not happen too, will it be powerful to see them weep and should that mean we should leave after all?
WE WILL DRINK DEEP OF THEIR DELICIOUS SALTY TEARS.
Whatever you think is a good time I guess. But as sad as it might be for people, that people will cry about something is not, in itself, an argument, however powerful it is emotionally.
Her argument was that they didn’t have enough workers for her husbands company. She could try paying them more.
It's almost like supply of workers is price elastic.
It hasn't been since about 2005. Badly run businesses have gotten used to having an almost unlimited pool of unskilled cheap labourers. It has held back investment in staff, machinery and efficient allocation of resources. I know how you loathe the productivity discussion, however, EU labour market is, IMO, the primary reason why UK productivity is so poor as it is coupled with generally poor short termist management we've always suffered from.
How many of the kind of businesses you describe couldn't employ labour more cheaply outside the UK?
Starbucks?
And you think the UK's low productivity is down to the lack of automation in coffee shops?
It isn't such a daft point. Hospitality industries are labour intensive because the customer experience is reliant on human interaction. Sitting by a vending machine isn't a great customer experience.
My sister in law runs catering establishments as a regional boss for a FTSE company and they could pay Barrista's 250K a year and still make a very large profit margin. Do they, of course not because the supply of labour has been an ever constant stream.
Even if there was negative immigration, a low skilled job would never pay £250,000 a year
Comments