I haven't watched the Starmer interview - and probably won't because I'd have to see Morgan - but from write ups it sounds similar to his Desert Island Discs appearance. If so, good, because that was excellent.
But the million dollar question is to what extent "Boris" Johnson has changed the game. Do you now need to create a facetious comic persona in order to be PM material?
One hopes not, if one has an interest in the health of our democracy, but one can't be sure of this if one is honest. The Johnson brand is insidious. It's affecting people's synapses, some of them perfectly decent people.
The next year will tell us a lot and is so so important. I just can't emphasize enough how important this next year is going to be. It could go either way.
The next year - one of a glorious return to freedom and economic revival - will be won by the leader who can best project sunny optimism and confidence in our national resurgence, so Sir Keir ... is probably screwed.
If there is a turn of the tide - as I think on balance there will be - one of the biggest boons is we'll get to see a different side of you. In place of remorseless overconfidence and ebullience will come doubt and introspection, and I sense a touch of endearing vulnerability.
I rather doubt it. My confidence didn't waver in the darkest days of the pandemic when we had no vaccines, little hope, and no end in sight - a uniquely dire political environment for the incumbent in which the Opposition managed to, er, momentarily draw level in the polling averages. Having scrambled out of that particular abyss, it's nothing more than potholes from here on out...
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
So the massive influx of competitors to the working class, thereby restricting their wage and increasing pressure and costs on housing etc. Compared to the benefits for the middle and upper class with cheaper labour and more people scrabbling for their buy to let shitholes is preferable for the majority of the country?
Non-tesco-working working classes also have to buy groceries, etc, which takes more of their disposable income than those who are better off. A low cost basket of groceries benefits someone on the average wage (£28k?) more than it does someone who earns £500,000.
And I'm pretty sure that British plumbers weren't put out of work by Polish ones. It's just that the demand for plumbing was such that both were able to charge eye-watering prices. Now plumbing might be more expensive so that will disadvantage again those at the lower end of the income scale.
Eye watering prices in comparison to who? University lecturer? IT contractor? What is it about manual labourers that some people feel don’t deserve to earn a decent living?
It's like the old joke. Bloke's loo stops working, calls a plumber. Plumber comes and fixes it, says: that will be £500. Bloke says £500? You were only here of half an hour that's a thousand pounds an hour. I'm a lawyer and I don't earn that much. I didn't earn that much when I was a lawyer either, replied the plumber.
Why do England always end up picking 4 right arm over seamers...and 3 of the 4 so often very similar pace.
Robinson bowling at 79mph....unless you can make it bend like an EU mandated banana, you aren't going to trouble test match batsmen.
Is there any reason (other than not being picked) for Sam Curran not playing? Left arm adds variation and his batting means he could be a fifth bowler batting 7 surely?
Aaaaand Robinson gets the first wicket
I am at Lords. Fantastic view from the Grandstand. Not sure about the roofs of the new Compton and Ed rich stands.. it looks like someone covered it in waffles
I went as usual for my early morning gym/swim today and the NZ team were at the hotel. Just leaving to board the bus as I arrived. They didn't look too frightening.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
So the massive influx of competitors to the working class, thereby restricting their wage and increasing pressure and costs on housing etc. Compared to the benefits for the middle and upper class with cheaper labour and more people scrabbling for their buy to let shitholes is preferable for the majority of the country?
Non-tesco-working working classes also have to buy groceries, etc, which takes more of their disposable income than those who are better off. A low cost basket of groceries benefits someone on the average wage (£28k?) than it does someone who earns £500,000.
And I'm pretty sure that British plumbers weren't put out of work by Polish ones. It's just that the demand for plumbing was such that both were able to charge eye-watering prices. Now plumbing might be more expensive so that will disadvantage again those at the lower end of the income scale.
Why would Tesco prices go up significantly?
Especially when Tesco are investing in improving efficiency via having better self-checkouts etc so fewer staff are required to do the same job. Which improves productivity while keeping costs down.
One reason will be external factors where cost pressures can no longer be passed back to the third parties who provide the services.
Logistics is one of those where Supermarkets can only manage to skip 1 delivery a week for so long - and that really is an industry where labour supply is rapidly becoming a problem, and it's not one that will be easily fixed.
You can squeeze the tube but there is no hole in the end.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
So the massive influx of competitors to the working class, thereby restricting their wage and increasing pressure and costs on housing etc. Compared to the benefits for the middle and upper class with cheaper labour and more people scrabbling for their buy to let shitholes is preferable for the majority of the country?
Non-tesco-working working classes also have to buy groceries, etc, which takes more of their disposable income than those who are better off. A low cost basket of groceries benefits someone on the average wage (£28k?) than it does someone who earns £500,000.
And I'm pretty sure that British plumbers weren't put out of work by Polish ones. It's just that the demand for plumbing was such that both were able to charge eye-watering prices. Now plumbing might be more expensive so that will disadvantage again those at the lower end of the income scale.
Why would Tesco prices go up significantly?
Especially when Tesco are investing in improving efficiency via having better self-checkouts etc so fewer staff are required to do the same job. Which improves productivity while keeping costs down.
One reason will be external factors where cost pressures can no longer be passed back to the third parties who provide the services.
Logistics is one of those where Supermarkets can only manage to skip 1 delivery a week for so long - and that really is an industry where labour supply is rapidly becoming a problem, and it's not one that will be easily fixed.
True there will be some elements of the cost that can't be avoided. Though the logistics workers earning a pay rise will earn much more extra than any individual consumer will pay extra.
However much of the Cost of Goods Sold and Overheads will be relatively fixed and have little to do with logistics or labour or other issues related to unskilled migrant labour. Rent, Rates, Electricity costs etc for instance aren't going to be massively effected and may even have marginally downwards pressure if there's less overall low-wage population demands on local services. The actually COGS for the goods themselves may or may not be affected but even if they are only marginally still.
What percentage of COGS and Overheads combined are related to logistics and minimum wage labour?
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
So the massive influx of competitors to the working class, thereby restricting their wage and increasing pressure and costs on housing etc. Compared to the benefits for the middle and upper class with cheaper labour and more people scrabbling for their buy to let shitholes is preferable for the majority of the country?
Non-tesco-working working classes also have to buy groceries, etc, which takes more of their disposable income than those who are better off. A low cost basket of groceries benefits someone on the average wage (£28k?) than it does someone who earns £500,000.
And I'm pretty sure that British plumbers weren't put out of work by Polish ones. It's just that the demand for plumbing was such that both were able to charge eye-watering prices. Now plumbing might be more expensive so that will disadvantage again those at the lower end of the income scale.
Why would Tesco prices go up significantly?
Especially when Tesco are investing in improving efficiency via having better self-checkouts etc so fewer staff are required to do the same job. Which improves productivity while keeping costs down.
One reason will be external factors where cost pressures can no longer be passed back to the third parties who provide the services.
Logistics is one of those where Supermarkets can only manage to skip 1 delivery a week for so long - and that really is an industry where labour supply is rapidly becoming a problem, and it's not one that will be easily fixed.
You can squeeze the tube but there is no hole in the end.
There are actually multiple holes throughout the tube.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
You're literally putting forward the Luddite's fallacy.
The answer is that they go into other sectors and areas doing more productive work.
Despite Sir Keir having a decent performance on Piers Morgan’s Life Stories, Southside may be heading for a comedown after hearing the viewing figures. Guido learns ITV viewers almost halved from Coronation Street’s 3.5 million viewers to the start of Life Stories’ 1.7 million. For comparison, Piers managed to pull in 2.3 million for his episode with Loose Women’s Colleen Nolan. 600,000 fewer…
It could be worse: on the other hand GMB pulled in its lowest ever viewing figures yesterday with just 450,000 viewers. Piers will be delighted to note that’s down from 1.29 million on his final episode in March…
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
So the massive influx of competitors to the working class, thereby restricting their wage and increasing pressure and costs on housing etc. Compared to the benefits for the middle and upper class with cheaper labour and more people scrabbling for their buy to let shitholes is preferable for the majority of the country?
Non-tesco-working working classes also have to buy groceries, etc, which takes more of their disposable income than those who are better off. A low cost basket of groceries benefits someone on the average wage (£28k?) than it does someone who earns £500,000.
And I'm pretty sure that British plumbers weren't put out of work by Polish ones. It's just that the demand for plumbing was such that both were able to charge eye-watering prices. Now plumbing might be more expensive so that will disadvantage again those at the lower end of the income scale.
Why would Tesco prices go up significantly?
Especially when Tesco are investing in improving efficiency via having better self-checkouts etc so fewer staff are required to do the same job. Which improves productivity while keeping costs down.
Prices would go up because, ceteris paribus, there is an increase in factor costs (wages because labour is scarce and has choices). But ceteris is not paribus if they are throwing out the humans to be replaced by robots.
Great for the robots, but where does that leave the humans?
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Pay them more.
As someone in a prior thread pointed out, low cost labour coming to the U.K. to drive down wages was a part of the reason for the brexit vote.
We have a decent minimum wage, so no it was not “low cost labour”.
Having young people from the EU coming to do such work was a win-win, filling the jobs at relatively low cost, whilst the value of the experience to the young Europeans was enhanced by the free language immersion they were getting on the side; second language fluency in English being a very valuable career skill for them. Not to mention the hopefully lifelong understanding and affinity with Britain they’d take back home. And fewer Europeans walking around speaking English with silly American accents.
Cutting ourselves off from this beneficial exchange was an own goal.
Anecdotally, a lot of EU workers have gone home over Covid. Can't work, can't make the rent, go home and stay with Mum. However... they may not have completed their Settled Status as a result, so may not be able to return even if they wanted to.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Are you a Luddite?
Some of them aren't here so aren't relevant to the equation.
Others will find work in new jobs that the humans earning £30/hour can pay for that didn't even exist in the past.
That's how productivity improvements have led to new jobs being created for hundreds of years now.
How many people work in agriculture compared to 400 years ago? How many people work in hospitality compared to 400 years ago? The jobs market isn't static.
I haven't watched the Starmer interview - and probably won't because I'd have to see Morgan - but from write ups it sounds similar to his Desert Island Discs appearance. If so, good, because that was excellent.
But the million dollar question is to what extent "Boris" Johnson has changed the game. Do you now need to create a facetious comic persona in order to be PM material?
One hopes not, if one has an interest in the health of our democracy, but one can't be sure of this if one is honest. The Johnson brand is insidious. It's affecting people's synapses, some of them perfectly decent people.
The next year will tell us a lot and is so so important. I just can't emphasize enough how important this next year is going to be. It could go either way.
The next year - one of a glorious return to freedom and economic revival - will be won by the leader who can best project sunny optimism and confidence in our national resurgence, so Sir Keir ... is probably screwed.
If there is a turn of the tide - as I think on balance there will be - one of the biggest boons is we'll get to see a different side of you. In place of remorseless overconfidence and ebullience will come doubt and introspection, and I sense a touch of endearing vulnerability.
I rather doubt it. My confidence didn't waver in the darkest days of the pandemic when we had no vaccines, little hope, and no end in sight - a uniquely dire political environment for the incumbent in which the Opposition managed to, er, momentarily draw level in the polling averages. Having scrambled out of that particular abyss, it's nothing more than potholes from here on out...
Ok, but let's agree you won't pretend to be feeling great about things when you aren't. If the black dog barks, let me know about it. Deal?
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
You're literally putting forward the Luddite's fallacy.
The answer is that they go into other sectors and areas doing more productive work.
Productivity rises, and everyone benefits.
Bingo.
So why couldn't they do that when instead of robots they had low wage-accepting foreign workers crowding them out?
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
@Chameleon has given the answer to what usually happens when there is a section of low(er) paid workers amongst the indigenous population.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
You're literally putting forward the Luddite's fallacy.
The answer is that they go into other sectors and areas doing more productive work.
Productivity rises, and everyone benefits.
Bingo.
So why couldn't they do that when instead of robots they had low wage-accepting foreign workers crowding them out?
They could but the cost/benefit ratio was different so less incentive to do so.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
If Tim Martin didn't realise that unskilled workers coming from Eastern Europe where the minimum wage is £1 per hour, to get 9x that per hour here, meant that his labour bill was suppressed - then that's on him. 🤷♂️
Tim Martin has two options - automation (via ordering Apps) to minimise the labour required and paying the new market rate for workers.
Sadly that market rate may be more than it used to be but hey that's the consequences of what he campaigned for.
I have no idea why highly skilled people don't want to be become politicians...bank holiday weekend and now it seems fair game for politicians doing nothing to get papped like some celebs (who these days normally arrange for those "papped" shots and get paid).
Google's head of diversity has been slammed for writing that Jews have an 'insatiable appetite for war and killing' and arguing they should have more 'compassion' because of the Holocaust.
Kamau Bobb, who is also an 'Equity in Computing' don at Georgia Tech, wrote a 2007 blog post, which remains on his website, titled: 'If I Were A Jew.'
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
I haven't watched the Starmer interview - and probably won't because I'd have to see Morgan - but from write ups it sounds similar to his Desert Island Discs appearance. If so, good, because that was excellent.
But the million dollar question is to what extent "Boris" Johnson has changed the game. Do you now need to create a facetious comic persona in order to be PM material?
One hopes not, if one has an interest in the health of our democracy, but one can't be sure of this if one is honest. The Johnson brand is insidious. It's affecting people's synapses, some of them perfectly decent people.
The next year will tell us a lot and is so so important. I just can't emphasize enough how important this next year is going to be. It could go either way.
The next year - one of a glorious return to freedom and economic revival - will be won by the leader who can best project sunny optimism and confidence in our national resurgence, so Sir Keir ... is probably screwed.
If there is a turn of the tide - as I think on balance there will be - one of the biggest boons is we'll get to see a different side of you. In place of remorseless overconfidence and ebullience will come doubt and introspection, and I sense a touch of endearing vulnerability.
I rather doubt it. My confidence didn't waver in the darkest days of the pandemic when we had no vaccines, little hope, and no end in sight - a uniquely dire political environment for the incumbent in which the Opposition managed to, er, momentarily draw level in the polling averages. Having scrambled out of that particular abyss, it's nothing more than potholes from here on out...
Ok, but let's agree you won't pretend to be feeling great about things when you aren't. If the black dog barks, let me know about it. Deal?
I sense we are due another thread header entitled ' Imagine Labour with a 10 point poll lead ' - with everyone encouraged to share their joy. In the absence of said lead it's about the only pro-Starmer angle yet to be covered.
Google's head of diversity has been slammed for writing that Jews have an 'insatiable appetite for war and killing' and arguing they should have more 'compassion' because of the Holocaust.
Kamau Bobb, who is also an 'Equity in Computing' don at Georgia Tech, wrote a 2007 blog post, which remains on his website, titled: 'If I Were A Jew.'
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
You're literally putting forward the Luddite's fallacy.
The answer is that they go into other sectors and areas doing more productive work.
Productivity rises, and everyone benefits.
Bingo.
So why couldn't they do that when instead of robots they had low wage-accepting foreign workers crowding them out?
They could but the cost/benefit ratio was different so less incentive to do so.
What does that mean? We have Brexiters bemoaning the fact that foreigners come and take all the jobs, suppressing wages, etc. The usual and observed phenomenon in such circumstances is that the indigenous population moves up the value-added chain.
You must have a pretty dim view of the indigenous working classes if you think that it needs them to be thrown out of a job before they decide to make themselves more valuable.
Why do England always end up picking 4 right arm over seamers...and 3 of the 4 so often very similar pace.
Robinson bowling at 79mph....unless you can make it bend like an EU mandated banana, you aren't going to trouble test match batsmen.
Is there any reason (other than not being picked) for Sam Curran not playing? Left arm adds variation and his batting means he could be a fifth bowler batting 7 surely?
Aaaaand Robinson gets the first wicket
I am at Lords. Fantastic view from the Grandstand. Not sure about the roofs of the new Compton and Ed rich stands.. it looks like someone covered it in waffles
It was mentioned on the lunchtime news just now; we’re only playing a load of New Zealand tourists. It might be more challenging against proper cricketers!
I went as usual for my early morning gym/swim today and the NZ team were at the hotel. Just leaving to board the bus as I arrived. They didn't look too frightening.
As I was saying...
And it’s pissing with rain here now. Summer over already.
Holby City, the long-running BBC medical drama, is to end after 23 years, producers have confirmed.The series, created by Tony McHale and Mal Young, first aired in 1999 as a spin-off from another show, Casualty.
"We sometimes have to make difficult decisions to make room for new opportunities and as part of the BBC's commitment to make more programmes across the UK"
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Google's head of diversity has been slammed for writing that Jews have an 'insatiable appetite for war and killing' and arguing they should have more 'compassion' because of the Holocaust.
Kamau Bobb, who is also an 'Equity in Computing' don at Georgia Tech, wrote a 2007 blog post, which remains on his website, titled: 'If I Were A Jew.'
I haven't watched the Starmer interview - and probably won't because I'd have to see Morgan - but from write ups it sounds similar to his Desert Island Discs appearance. If so, good, because that was excellent.
But the million dollar question is to what extent "Boris" Johnson has changed the game. Do you now need to create a facetious comic persona in order to be PM material?
One hopes not, if one has an interest in the health of our democracy, but one can't be sure of this if one is honest. The Johnson brand is insidious. It's affecting people's synapses, some of them perfectly decent people.
The next year will tell us a lot and is so so important. I just can't emphasize enough how important this next year is going to be. It could go either way.
The next year - one of a glorious return to freedom and economic revival - will be won by the leader who can best project sunny optimism and confidence in our national resurgence, so Sir Keir ... is probably screwed.
If there is a turn of the tide - as I think on balance there will be - one of the biggest boons is we'll get to see a different side of you. In place of remorseless overconfidence and ebullience will come doubt and introspection, and I sense a touch of endearing vulnerability.
I rather doubt it. My confidence didn't waver in the darkest days of the pandemic when we had no vaccines, little hope, and no end in sight - a uniquely dire political environment for the incumbent in which the Opposition managed to, er, momentarily draw level in the polling averages. Having scrambled out of that particular abyss, it's nothing more than potholes from here on out...
Ok, but let's agree you won't pretend to be feeling great about things when you aren't. If the black dog barks, let me know about it. Deal?
I sense we are due another thread header entitled ' Imagine Labour with a 10 point poll lead ' - with everyone encouraged to share their joy. In the absence of said lead it's about the only pro-Starmer angle yet to be covered.
I wonder if Opinium will see another boost to Labour. Although they might only poll every fortnight I think. They seem to react most to politically engaged noise/signals
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Mr. Urquhart, only Wimbledon and F1 met BBC audience targets, F1 exceeding ratings expectations and winning a BAFTA along the way. Still got cancelled, and the value of the contract (£30m) was wasted on the concept of The Voice alone.
Google's head of diversity has been slammed for writing that Jews have an 'insatiable appetite for war and killing' and arguing they should have more 'compassion' because of the Holocaust.
Kamau Bobb, who is also an 'Equity in Computing' don at Georgia Tech, wrote a 2007 blog post, which remains on his website, titled: 'If I Were A Jew.'
Most tests Most wickets 18 year international career (Would have been even better had Troy Cooley not spent three years buggering about with his action) The reason (or50% of the reason) why Root, Cook and Strauss had good captaincy records especially at home.
Surely he deserves one at least as much as Strauss and Cook?
Does Boris like cricket? Theresa May did. Boris is more of a rugger-bugger. He was at Twickers last March just before the lockdown which is why CCHQ set out to divert attention to Cheltenham the same week.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
Factcheck. It seems they do pay well above minimum. Plus a bonus scheme of which I do not know the details.
(This is from March 2020 when Pinocchio Jones was out doing some rumour-mongering).
Personally I think the supply/demand balance will adjust, as it always does.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Why do England always end up picking 4 right arm over seamers...and 3 of the 4 so often very similar pace.
Robinson bowling at 79mph....unless you can make it bend like an EU mandated banana, you aren't going to trouble test match batsmen.
Is there any reason (other than not being picked) for Sam Curran not playing? Left arm adds variation and his batting means he could be a fifth bowler batting 7 surely?
Aaaaand Robinson gets the first wicket
I am at Lords. Fantastic view from the Grandstand. Not sure about the roofs of the new Compton and Ed rich stands.. it looks like someone covered it in waffles
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Zero deaths. Even if case numbers go up a touch it isn't threatening to either life or the NHS for the remaining younger people who can get it. I asked questions last week of whether the new "delta"* strain would force a further delay.
But of course, deaths are lagging indicator. They are reflecting the case numbers when they were close to their minimum. Now cases are rising rapidly - currently increasing by 32% per week - and hospitalisations are following with a lag of only a few days - currently increasing by 23% a week.
It's stupid to say the link between cases and hospitalisations/deaths has been broken. The link is still there - it's just the constant of proportionality that is smaller. People really shouldn't kid themselves into thinking that if cases increase by any given factor, deaths won't do exactly the same.
Hospitalisation not really rising and the number in hospital still gently declining. Other evidence that those going in are less ill than in previous times, and need less help. Cases rising in the mostly unvaccinated.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
Google's head of diversity has been slammed for writing that Jews have an 'insatiable appetite for war and killing' and arguing they should have more 'compassion' because of the Holocaust.
Kamau Bobb, who is also an 'Equity in Computing' don at Georgia Tech, wrote a 2007 blog post, which remains on his website, titled: 'If I Were A Jew.'
I think @MaxPB2 had it right when his firm decided to dismiss their equality & diversity advisors on the grounds they simply divide and polarise their staff.
There should simply be a good HR team that caters to the needs of all employees.
I haven't watched the Starmer interview - and probably won't because I'd have to see Morgan - but from write ups it sounds similar to his Desert Island Discs appearance. If so, good, because that was excellent.
But the million dollar question is to what extent "Boris" Johnson has changed the game. Do you now need to create a facetious comic persona in order to be PM material?
One hopes not, if one has an interest in the health of our democracy, but one can't be sure of this if one is honest. The Johnson brand is insidious. It's affecting people's synapses, some of them perfectly decent people.
The next year will tell us a lot and is so so important. I just can't emphasize enough how important this next year is going to be. It could go either way.
The next year - one of a glorious return to freedom and economic revival - will be won by the leader who can best project sunny optimism and confidence in our national resurgence, so Sir Keir ... is probably screwed.
If there is a turn of the tide - as I think on balance there will be - one of the biggest boons is we'll get to see a different side of you. In place of remorseless overconfidence and ebullience will come doubt and introspection, and I sense a touch of endearing vulnerability.
I rather doubt it. My confidence didn't waver in the darkest days of the pandemic when we had no vaccines, little hope, and no end in sight - a uniquely dire political environment for the incumbent in which the Opposition managed to, er, momentarily draw level in the polling averages. Having scrambled out of that particular abyss, it's nothing more than potholes from here on out...
Ok, but let's agree you won't pretend to be feeling great about things when you aren't. If the black dog barks, let me know about it. Deal?
I sense we are due another thread header entitled ' Imagine Labour with a 10 point poll lead ' - with everyone encouraged to share their joy. In the absence of said lead it's about the only pro-Starmer angle yet to be covered.
The desperation for SKS and Labour to be doing better is palpable on this site. Any poll with a slight hint of a turn against Boris is highlighted, all the negative ones for Labour and SKS are ignored.
I like the latest line that tories only like Boris cause he is popular. Im sure it would be much better to have an unpopular leader 20 points behind in the polls than a popular one.
Important that people aren't blindly thinking that things are either a-ok or laden with doom. I've only had one jab so far, so even if things unlock properly I'll still be keeping in mind that I'm not properly vaccinated.
Of course, I'm also a huge introvert so this is more an academic than practical consideration, but still.
Why do England always end up picking 4 right arm over seamers...and 3 of the 4 so often very similar pace.
Robinson bowling at 79mph....unless you can make it bend like an EU mandated banana, you aren't going to trouble test match batsmen.
Is there any reason (other than not being picked) for Sam Curran not playing? Left arm adds variation and his batting means he could be a fifth bowler batting 7 surely?
Aaaaand Robinson gets the first wicket
I am at Lords. Fantastic view from the Grandstand. Not sure about the roofs of the new Compton and Ed rich stands.. it looks like someone covered it in waffles
It was mentioned on the lunchtime news just now; we’re only playing a load of New Zealand tourists. It might be more challenging against proper cricketers!
I went as usual for my early morning gym/swim today and the NZ team were at the hotel. Just leaving to board the bus as I arrived. They didn't look too frightening.
As I was saying...
And it’s pissing with rain here now. Summer over already.
Living up to the old "three fine days and a thunderstorm".
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The more jobs are automated and not replaced by new jobs, the more a UBI funded by a robot tax becomes inevitable
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Pay them more.
As someone in a prior thread pointed out, low cost labour coming to the U.K. to drive down wages was a part of the reason for the brexit vote.
We have a decent minimum wage, so no it was not “low cost labour”.
Having young people from the EU coming to do such work was a win-win, filling the jobs at relatively low cost, whilst the value of the experience to the young Europeans was enhanced by the free language immersion they were getting on the side; second language fluency in English being a very valuable career skill for them. Not to mention the hopefully lifelong understanding and affinity with Britain they’d take back home. And fewer Europeans walking around speaking English with silly American accents.
Cutting ourselves off from this beneficial exchange was an own goal.
Anecdotally, a lot of EU workers have gone home over Covid. Can't work, can't make the rent, go home and stay with Mum. However... they may not have completed their Settled Status as a result, so may not be able to return even if they wanted to.
One stat that I have found interesting is that 800k+ Romanians have applied for settled status. And nearly a million Poles.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The more jobs are automated and not replaced by new jobs, the more a UBI funded by a robot tax becomes inevitable
Who would give the Prime Minister a reasonably sympathetic interview, which by the sound of it Piers did for SKS?
I think people are writing off SKS a little bit too early btw. There is a long way to go until the next election and “events” are coming a bit thick and fast so far since the last one. Having someone who is seen as boringly competent could very well be a great selling point.
I don’t know I’d go that far. I can’t quite see him leading Labour to government.
His job however was to restore normality and sanity after the Corbyn years so Labour will eventually be taken seriously again and not as a bunch of freeloading racists with small brains, greedy minds and gross self-centredness.
Remember, if Long Bailey had won we would in all probability be talking very seriously about a substantiallyincreased Tory majority next time. At that stage, we would have to ponder whether Labour could ever hope to return to power or whether their vote would fracture to the Lib Dems and Greens.
Starmer had killed that talk stone dead. He may never be PM. Probably won’t. But he has salvaged an opposition from Corbyn’s wreckage that looks, with faults and drawbacks, like something that will again a reasonably credible alternative party of government. And for that, he deserves all our heartfelt thanks.
Alternatively, Corbyn introduced the variance Labour need. Yes he got whacked in 2019 but he almost won in 2017. Miliband, Brown, and maybe Starmer, are continuity Blair without the charisma so can’t win, but don’t get a hiding.
It’s the difference between going to a Man City as a non top 4 club and defending for your life and getting beat 2-0 or going for a 4-3 win whilst risking a 6-0 loss
Actually Miliband, Brown and Starmer are left of Blair without Blair's charisma, Corbyn was far left of Blair but with some charisma
I haven't watched the Starmer interview - and probably won't because I'd have to see Morgan - but from write ups it sounds similar to his Desert Island Discs appearance. If so, good, because that was excellent.
But the million dollar question is to what extent "Boris" Johnson has changed the game. Do you now need to create a facetious comic persona in order to be PM material?
One hopes not, if one has an interest in the health of our democracy, but one can't be sure of this if one is honest. The Johnson brand is insidious. It's affecting people's synapses, some of them perfectly decent people.
The next year will tell us a lot and is so so important. I just can't emphasize enough how important this next year is going to be. It could go either way.
The next year - one of a glorious return to freedom and economic revival - will be won by the leader who can best project sunny optimism and confidence in our national resurgence, so Sir Keir ... is probably screwed.
If there is a turn of the tide - as I think on balance there will be - one of the biggest boons is we'll get to see a different side of you. In place of remorseless overconfidence and ebullience will come doubt and introspection, and I sense a touch of endearing vulnerability.
I rather doubt it. My confidence didn't waver in the darkest days of the pandemic when we had no vaccines, little hope, and no end in sight - a uniquely dire political environment for the incumbent in which the Opposition managed to, er, momentarily draw level in the polling averages. Having scrambled out of that particular abyss, it's nothing more than potholes from here on out...
Ok, but let's agree you won't pretend to be feeling great about things when you aren't. If the black dog barks, let me know about it. Deal?
I sense we are due another thread header entitled ' Imagine Labour with a 10 point poll lead ' - with everyone encouraged to share their joy. In the absence of said lead it's about the only pro-Starmer angle yet to be covered.
Oh, I'm sure Boris' honeymoon period will soon be over on pb.com!
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The more jobs are automated and not replaced by new jobs, the more a UBI funded by a robot tax becomes inevitable
What if the robots refuse to pay?
It would be the employers who would pay, though unless we ever give robots the vote it does not matter if they protest their opinion would be irrelevant (not that they have consciousness or an opinion beyond what they are programmed to do at present anyway)
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The other point is, of course, we are talking of shortages of staff in particular areas aren't we? Chefs, tutors and construction have been mentioned. How are these automated? And said Tesco workers will be in no position to take up these posts without years of retraining. Years without access to student loans, nor Universal Credit. And years of many thousands of fees to shell out. So unless they have savings, an inheritance or a lottery win, who will fund them? Not HMG, if today's education announcement is any guide.
Who would give the Prime Minister a reasonably sympathetic interview, which by the sound of it Piers did for SKS?
I think people are writing off SKS a little bit too early btw. There is a long way to go until the next election and “events” are coming a bit thick and fast so far since the last one. Having someone who is seen as boringly competent could very well be a great selling point.
I don’t know I’d go that far. I can’t quite see him leading Labour to government.
His job however was to restore normality and sanity after the Corbyn years so Labour will eventually be taken seriously again and not as a bunch of freeloading racists with small brains, greedy minds and gross self-centredness.
Remember, if Long Bailey had won we would in all probability be talking very seriously about a substantiallyincreased Tory majority next time. At that stage, we would have to ponder whether Labour could ever hope to return to power or whether their vote would fracture to the Lib Dems and Greens.
Starmer had killed that talk stone dead. He may never be PM. Probably won’t. But he has salvaged an opposition from Corbyn’s wreckage that looks, with faults and drawbacks, like something that will again a reasonably credible alternative party of government. And for that, he deserves all our heartfelt thanks.
Alternatively, Corbyn introduced the variance Labour need. Yes he got whacked in 2019 but he almost won in 2017. Miliband, Brown, and maybe Starmer, are continuity Blair without the charisma so can’t win, but don’t get a hiding.
It’s the difference between going to a Man City as a non top 4 club and defending for your life and getting beat 2-0 or going for a 4-3 win whilst risking a 6-0 loss
Actually Miliband, Brown and Starmer are left of Blair without Blair's charisma, Corbyn was far left of Blair but with some charisma
Blair was very far left in the mid-80s, until he realised it was a losing strategy. He governed from the centre of course.
I don't think it makes sense to think of him as left or right, but just as an opportunist.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The more jobs are automated and not replaced by new jobs, the more a UBI funded by a robot tax becomes inevitable
What if the robots refuse to pay?
It would be the employers who would pay, though unless we ever give robots the vote it does not matter if they protest their opinion would be irrelevant (not that they have consciousness or an opinion beyond what they are programmed to do at present anyway)
What if they ignore the three rules of robotics? Could we mobilise the non-robotised armed forces? It depends on how coordinated the robots are.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Pay them more.
As someone in a prior thread pointed out, low cost labour coming to the U.K. to drive down wages was a part of the reason for the brexit vote.
We have a decent minimum wage, so no it was not “low cost labour”.
Having young people from the EU coming to do such work was a win-win, filling the jobs at relatively low cost, whilst the value of the experience to the young Europeans was enhanced by the free language immersion they were getting on the side; second language fluency in English being a very valuable career skill for them. Not to mention the hopefully lifelong understanding and affinity with Britain they’d take back home. And fewer Europeans walking around speaking English with silly American accents.
Cutting ourselves off from this beneficial exchange was an own goal.
But not so beneficial for our own people who had wages kept down by the influx of cheap labour. You know the ones our government is meant to look after.
You that call yourselves progressive are always banging about people not being paid a fair wage....now some of you are complaining that employers might actually have to raise pay to attract workers? shakes head
So the EU has added Japan (does no testing has vaccinated nobody and has had rising death rates) to its “safe travel” list, but still holding fire on the U.K. (does loads of testing, has vaccinated most people, and has minimal death rates).
First to say for the summer...good job England bat deep....
Except they really don't this time, England tail is long.
With their best opening bat at No. 7 it looks like the other way around to me.
It sure isn't a batting line up that is going to scare the Australians.
TBF they are explicitly rotating the squad this summer, and we are missing Stokes (best all rounder in the world), Woakes (up there among the best) and Curran (on the way to being among the best). Lacking the all rounder has meant Root is now the all rounder (spin option) and an unbalanced looking side.
First to say for the summer...good job England bat deep....
Except they really don't this time, England tail is long.
With their best opening bat at No. 7 it looks like the other way around to me.
It sure isn't a batting line up that is going to scare the Australians.
England currently don't have an 11 that will. We have two aging opening bowlers that they know they just need to see off. They have the number of Root. And then we are back to praying on Stokes and Archer to work miracles.
Who would give the Prime Minister a reasonably sympathetic interview, which by the sound of it Piers did for SKS?
I think people are writing off SKS a little bit too early btw. There is a long way to go until the next election and “events” are coming a bit thick and fast so far since the last one. Having someone who is seen as boringly competent could very well be a great selling point.
I don’t know I’d go that far. I can’t quite see him leading Labour to government.
His job however was to restore normality and sanity after the Corbyn years so Labour will eventually be taken seriously again and not as a bunch of freeloading racists with small brains, greedy minds and gross self-centredness.
Remember, if Long Bailey had won we would in all probability be talking very seriously about a substantiallyincreased Tory majority next time. At that stage, we would have to ponder whether Labour could ever hope to return to power or whether their vote would fracture to the Lib Dems and Greens.
Starmer had killed that talk stone dead. He may never be PM. Probably won’t. But he has salvaged an opposition from Corbyn’s wreckage that looks, with faults and drawbacks, like something that will again a reasonably credible alternative party of government. And for that, he deserves all our heartfelt thanks.
Alternatively, Corbyn introduced the variance Labour need. Yes he got whacked in 2019 but he almost won in 2017. Miliband, Brown, and maybe Starmer, are continuity Blair without the charisma so can’t win, but don’t get a hiding.
It’s the difference between going to a Man City as a non top 4 club and defending for your life and getting beat 2-0 or going for a 4-3 win whilst risking a 6-0 loss
Actually Miliband, Brown and Starmer are left of Blair without Blair's charisma, Corbyn was far left of Blair but with some charisma
Blair was very far left in the mid-80s, until he realised it was a losing strategy. He governed from the centre of course.
I don't think it makes sense to think of him as left or right, but just as an opportunist.
As is Boris, most winning party leaders are.
Only a handful of general election winners like Attlee and Thatcher are genuine ideologues
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
I haven't watched the Starmer interview - and probably won't because I'd have to see Morgan - but from write ups it sounds similar to his Desert Island Discs appearance. If so, good, because that was excellent.
But the million dollar question is to what extent "Boris" Johnson has changed the game. Do you now need to create a facetious comic persona in order to be PM material?
One hopes not, if one has an interest in the health of our democracy, but one can't be sure of this if one is honest. The Johnson brand is insidious. It's affecting people's synapses, some of them perfectly decent people.
The next year will tell us a lot and is so so important. I just can't emphasize enough how important this next year is going to be. It could go either way.
The next year - one of a glorious return to freedom and economic revival - will be won by the leader who can best project sunny optimism and confidence in our national resurgence, so Sir Keir ... is probably screwed.
If there is a turn of the tide - as I think on balance there will be - one of the biggest boons is we'll get to see a different side of you. In place of remorseless overconfidence and ebullience will come doubt and introspection, and I sense a touch of endearing vulnerability.
I rather doubt it. My confidence didn't waver in the darkest days of the pandemic when we had no vaccines, little hope, and no end in sight - a uniquely dire political environment for the incumbent in which the Opposition managed to, er, momentarily draw level in the polling averages. Having scrambled out of that particular abyss, it's nothing more than potholes from here on out...
Ok, but let's agree you won't pretend to be feeling great about things when you aren't. If the black dog barks, let me know about it. Deal?
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The more jobs are automated and not replaced by new jobs, the more a UBI funded by a robot tax becomes inevitable
What if the robots refuse to pay?
It would be the employers who would pay, though unless we ever give robots the vote it does not matter if they protest their opinion would be irrelevant (not that they have consciousness or an opinion beyond what they are programmed to do at present anyway)
Don't tell robots their opinions are irrelevant. I've seen where that ends.
Who would give the Prime Minister a reasonably sympathetic interview, which by the sound of it Piers did for SKS?
I think people are writing off SKS a little bit too early btw. There is a long way to go until the next election and “events” are coming a bit thick and fast so far since the last one. Having someone who is seen as boringly competent could very well be a great selling point.
I don’t know I’d go that far. I can’t quite see him leading Labour to government.
His job however was to restore normality and sanity after the Corbyn years so Labour will eventually be taken seriously again and not as a bunch of freeloading racists with small brains, greedy minds and gross self-centredness.
Remember, if Long Bailey had won we would in all probability be talking very seriously about a substantiallyincreased Tory majority next time. At that stage, we would have to ponder whether Labour could ever hope to return to power or whether their vote would fracture to the Lib Dems and Greens.
Starmer had killed that talk stone dead. He may never be PM. Probably won’t. But he has salvaged an opposition from Corbyn’s wreckage that looks, with faults and drawbacks, like something that will again a reasonably credible alternative party of government. And for that, he deserves all our heartfelt thanks.
Alternatively, Corbyn introduced the variance Labour need. Yes he got whacked in 2019 but he almost won in 2017. Miliband, Brown, and maybe Starmer, are continuity Blair without the charisma so can’t win, but don’t get a hiding.
It’s the difference between going to a Man City as a non top 4 club and defending for your life and getting beat 2-0 or going for a 4-3 win whilst risking a 6-0 loss
Actually Miliband, Brown and Starmer are left of Blair without Blair's charisma, Corbyn was far left of Blair but with some charisma
Blair was very far left in the mid-80s, until he realised it was a losing strategy. He governed from the centre of course.
I don't think it makes sense to think of him as left or right, but just as an opportunist.
As is Boris, most winning party leaders are.
Only a handful of general election winners like Attlee and Thatcher are genuine ideologues
It is actually a reasonable interview. Simply lays out what they did in the lab and the fact that unlike SARS / MERS still no connection to nature has yet to be found, not really pushing anything too crazy.
Buckingham Palace banned ethnic minorities from office roles, papers reveal
The Queen’s courtiers banned “coloured immigrants or foreigners” from serving in clerical roles in the royal household until at least the late 1960s, according to newly discovered documents that will reignite the debate over the British royal family and race.
The documents also shed light on how Buckingham Palace negotiated controversial clauses – that remain in place to this day – exempting the Queen and her household from laws that prevent race and sex discrimination.
The papers were discovered at the National Archives as part of the Guardian’s ongoing investigation into the royal family’s use of an arcane parliamentary procedure, known as Queen’s consent, to secretly influence the content of British laws.
They reveal how in 1968, the Queen’s chief financial manager informed civil servants that “it was not, in fact, the practice to appoint coloured immigrants or foreigners” to clerical roles in the royal household, although they were permitted to work as domestic servants.
It is unclear when the practice ended. Buckingham Palace refused to answer questions about the ban and when it was revoked. It said its records showed people from ethnic minority backgrounds being employed in the 1990s. It added that before that decade, it did not keep records on the racial backgrounds of employees
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The other point is, of course, we are talking of shortages of staff in particular areas aren't we? Chefs, tutors and construction have been mentioned. How are these automated? And said Tesco workers will be in no position to take up these posts without years of retraining. Years without access to student loans, nor Universal Credit. So unless they have savings, an inheritance or a lottery win, who will fund them? Not HMG, if today's education announcement is any guide.
Something strange going on at the edges of teaching, perhaps.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
No idea why you're calling it Trumpton.
Plus of course the supermarkets are doing what they can to eliminate as many staff roles as possible.
I have a new Tesco Superstore that's just been developed near to me and it has quite a skeleton crew of staff compared to what they used to have but the customer service is actually better than any other supermarkets I go to. They've really rethought the self checkouts to remove all the bugbears: no scales* (so no irritating "your item is not on bagging scale" or "too much weight on bagging scale" errors stopping the checkouts. Plus there's a single touchscreen the staff member can use to authorise every checkout if Challenge 25 pops up and the shopper is obviously over 25 rather than waiting for a cashier to come to your own till to deal with it.
* Someone asked last time I mentioned this about weighing fresh produce. There's a scale by the tills that prints out barcodes once you've weighed the products so you just need to scan that barcode.
Trumpton, known to the entire world as Trumpton especially if you know anyone who lives there, is a very pleasant village a few miles South of Nottingham.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The other point is, of course, we are talking of shortages of staff in particular areas aren't we? Chefs, tutors and construction have been mentioned. How are these automated? And said Tesco workers will be in no position to take up these posts without years of retraining. Years without access to student loans, nor Universal Credit. And years of many thousands of fees to shell out. So unless they have savings, an inheritance or a lottery win, who will fund them? Not HMG, if today's education announcement is any guide.
It should be noted that, historically, the mechanisation of work has, overall, grown the economy.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
Buckingham Palace banned ethnic minorities from office roles, papers reveal
The Queen’s courtiers banned “coloured immigrants or foreigners” from serving in clerical roles in the royal household until at least the late 1960s, according to newly discovered documents that will reignite the debate over the British royal family and race.
The documents also shed light on how Buckingham Palace negotiated controversial clauses – that remain in place to this day – exempting the Queen and her household from laws that prevent race and sex discrimination.
The papers were discovered at the National Archives as part of the Guardian’s ongoing investigation into the royal family’s use of an arcane parliamentary procedure, known as Queen’s consent, to secretly influence the content of British laws.
They reveal how in 1968, the Queen’s chief financial manager informed civil servants that “it was not, in fact, the practice to appoint coloured immigrants or foreigners” to clerical roles in the royal household, although they were permitted to work as domestic servants.
It is unclear when the practice ended. Buckingham Palace refused to answer questions about the ban and when it was revoked. It said its records showed people from ethnic minority backgrounds being employed in the 1990s. It added that before that decade, it did not keep records on the racial backgrounds of employees
First to say for the summer...good job England bat deep....
Except they really don't this time, England tail is long.
With their best opening bat at No. 7 it looks like the other way around to me.
It sure isn't a batting line up that is going to scare the Australians.
TBF they are explicitly rotating the squad this summer, and we are missing Stokes (best all rounder in the world), Woakes (up there among the best) and Curran (on the way to being among the best). Lacking the all rounder has meant Root is now the all rounder (spin option) and an unbalanced looking side.
Its a weird looking side. What has happened to Buttler, Bairstow and Foakes? With Pope in the side as well choosing someone else to be a wicket keeper looks about as balanced as one of Southgate's squads.
First to say for the summer...good job England bat deep....
Except they really don't this time, England tail is long.
With their best opening bat at No. 7 it looks like the other way around to me.
It sure isn't a batting line up that is going to scare the Australians.
TBF they are explicitly rotating the squad this summer, and we are missing Stokes (best all rounder in the world), Woakes (up there among the best) and Curran (on the way to being among the best). Lacking the all rounder has meant Root is now the all rounder (spin option) and an unbalanced looking side.
Its a weird looking side. What has happened to Buttler, Bairstow and Foakes? With Pope in the side as well choosing someone else to be a wicket keeper looks about as balanced as one of Southgate's squads.
First two, IPL rest. Foakes slipped in the shower and out injured for months.
Buckingham Palace banned ethnic minorities from office roles, papers reveal
The Queen’s courtiers banned “coloured immigrants or foreigners” from serving in clerical roles in the royal household until at least the late 1960s, according to newly discovered documents that will reignite the debate over the British royal family and race.
The documents also shed light on how Buckingham Palace negotiated controversial clauses – that remain in place to this day – exempting the Queen and her household from laws that prevent race and sex discrimination.
The papers were discovered at the National Archives as part of the Guardian’s ongoing investigation into the royal family’s use of an arcane parliamentary procedure, known as Queen’s consent, to secretly influence the content of British laws.
They reveal how in 1968, the Queen’s chief financial manager informed civil servants that “it was not, in fact, the practice to appoint coloured immigrants or foreigners” to clerical roles in the royal household, although they were permitted to work as domestic servants.
It is unclear when the practice ended. Buckingham Palace refused to answer questions about the ban and when it was revoked. It said its records showed people from ethnic minority backgrounds being employed in the 1990s. It added that before that decade, it did not keep records on the racial backgrounds of employees
Puts the Queen's Nazi past into even more context now.
No she was not as she was not even born until 1981, 13 years after 1968 and by the time she met Harry there were plenty of BME clerical workers in the royal household.
There was still segregation in the USA until the mid 1960s
Foakes is injured (pulled muscle slipping on the floor). I believe Buttler is a rotation based on IPL (getting enough rest etc). Bairstow has been tried and doesn't quite come up to scratch. Very good player, some stunning one day batting, and has had some good test scores. but never really kicked on in tests. I agree the side looks odd, and I put a tenner on NZ to win the match last night, and I stick by that.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The more jobs are automated and not replaced by new jobs, the more a UBI funded by a robot tax becomes inevitable
What if the robots refuse to pay?
It would be the employers who would pay, though unless we ever give robots the vote it does not matter if they protest their opinion would be irrelevant (not that they have consciousness or an opinion beyond what they are programmed to do at present anyway)
Don't tell robots their opinions are irrelevant. I've seen where that ends.
Unless they develop a conscience robots opinions are irrelevant, they can be deprogrammed if necessary
Foakes is injured (pulled muscle slipping on the floor). I believe Buttler is a rotation based on IPL (getting enough rest etc). Bairstow has been tried and doesn't quite come up to scratch. Very good player, some stunning one day batting, and has had some good test scores. but never really kicked on in tests. I agree the side looks odd, and I put a tenner on NZ to win the match last night, and I stick by that.
Why do people need IPL rest when the tournament is not even taking place and they have been home for weeks? I agree with your bet, NZ have brought their first team.
Foakes is injured (pulled muscle slipping on the floor). I believe Buttler is a rotation based on IPL (getting enough rest etc). Bairstow has been tried and doesn't quite come up to scratch. Very good player, some stunning one day batting, and has had some good test scores. but never really kicked on in tests. I agree the side looks odd, and I put a tenner on NZ to win the match last night, and I stick by that.
Why do people need IPL rest when the tournament is not even taking place and they have been home for weeks? I agree with your bet, NZ have brought their first team.
It isn't just IPL "rest"...those players have been moving from one bio-secure bubble to another for basically well over a year, with absolute minimal time at home. Butler has played two IPL seasons in a bubble, sandwiched between all the England games (home and away).
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The other point is, of course, we are talking of shortages of staff in particular areas aren't we? Chefs, tutors and construction have been mentioned. How are these automated? And said Tesco workers will be in no position to take up these posts without years of retraining. Years without access to student loans, nor Universal Credit. And years of many thousands of fees to shell out. So unless they have savings, an inheritance or a lottery win, who will fund them? Not HMG, if today's education announcement is any guide.
It should be noted that, historically, the mechanisation of work has, overall, grown the economy.
Indeed. My point was rather the total paucity of any policy to upskill. Other than expecting businesses or individuals to do so on a free market basis. Historically there was an extensive network of reasonably priced local FE Colleges.
I see in the Times this morning that Tim Martin from Weatherspoons is calling for a visa scheme for workers that favours countries that are geographically closer to the U.K. because pubs are struggling to find staff.
Yeah he can fuck off. Pay your workers!
And here is the clash between the immovable object and the unstoppable force. A significant number of Brexit voters think Poles (other types of forrin is available) dilute their wages so lets send them all home and get paid more. A significant number of Brexiteer business owners like Mr Martin wanted a bonfire of red tape so that we could be more like Singapore and have workers paid less and have less rights.
Brexit won. But which Brexit? The one where Spoons pay their staff better? Or one where Spoons pay their staff less?
Many on here are of the first flavour. They see it as an unmitigated good for the working classes to have less foreign competition and hence wages will rise.
Beer, groceries more expensive for everyone (else)? Who cares is their line. The workers will be better off.
Let's see if this Trumpton version of economics actually works. We are privileged to be in such a real life experiment.
A society, a demos, requires everyone to have a stake in it.
Supermarket food is going to be cheaper as a result of Brexit, and eating out is going to be more expensive. People working in central London for £9 an hour is a thing of the past, because it’s simply not possible to live there and earn that little money. That’s a good thing.
We shall see. I'm not 100% sure I know why Supermarket food will be cheaper as a result of Brexit (nor eating out more expensive) but the market will clear at the appropriate level.
If labour is scarce then wages will rise. That leaves employers a choice of two options. I am very interested to see which they choose.
Three options: 1. Use less Labour 2. Pay Labour more 3. Invest in capital to replace Labour.
The more of #3, the better for the economy.
Absolutely as @Philip has noted with supermarkets replacing humans with robots. How is that helping the working classes who were previously disadvantaged by cheap foreign labour?
Because the humans who aren't replaced with robots can earn more.
So 100 humans originally, earning £15/hour. New robots leave 20 humans. Let's suppose for some unknown, without precedent reason their wages are raised to £30/hour.
What about the remaining 80 humans?
Not sure about the answer to that, but I know that the robots don’t put pressure on housing, schools and hospital places. And the resentment they cause by undercutting low paid workers jobs doesn’t lead to the working class being tarred as racist for noticing
Most of the 80 humans without jobs find other jobs to do - as the economy expands.
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
My point is that countless studies show that while it is observable that foreign cheap workers suppress wages to a very small degree, the usual phenomenon is that indigenous workers move up the value chain.
Not trying to argue, but what would a middle aged man who has been working on a building site since he left school do? Or a cleaner for an office block?
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
Well as we have noted today that man on a building site is doing very well, thank you! And why can't a cleaner for an office block retrain?
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Retraining for almost anything these days when not paid by an employer is hugely expensive. The explosion of fees in the FE sector, together with the slashing of courses and casualisation of staff is a huge drag on productivity.
Absolutely I have no doubt. We were just pondering the fate of the 80/100 Tesco's staff thrown out of work on account of the advent of robots. If anything it will exacerbate employers' strengths because there will be 80 people chasing 20 jobs and we know how that ends up (or at least we do if we have studied economics, as @Philip_Thompson has).
The other point is, of course, we are talking of shortages of staff in particular areas aren't we? Chefs, tutors and construction have been mentioned. How are these automated? And said Tesco workers will be in no position to take up these posts without years of retraining. Years without access to student loans, nor Universal Credit. And years of many thousands of fees to shell out. So unless they have savings, an inheritance or a lottery win, who will fund them? Not HMG, if today's education announcement is any guide.
It should be noted that, historically, the mechanisation of work has, overall, grown the economy.
Indeed. My point was rather the total paucity of any policy to upskill. Other than expecting businesses or individuals to do so on a free market basis. Historically there was an extensive network of reasonably priced local FE Colleges.
By historic I take it you mean until roughly 199? - evening classes had gone the way of the dinosaur by 1997.
Comments
However much of the Cost of Goods Sold and Overheads will be relatively fixed and have little to do with logistics or labour or other issues related to unskilled migrant labour. Rent, Rates, Electricity costs etc for instance aren't going to be massively effected and may even have marginally downwards pressure if there's less overall low-wage population demands on local services. The actually COGS for the goods themselves may or may not be affected but even if they are only marginally still.
What percentage of COGS and Overheads combined are related to logistics and minimum wage labour?
What about the remaining 80 humans?
The answer is that they go into other sectors and areas doing more productive work.
Productivity rises, and everyone benefits.
It could be worse: on the other hand GMB pulled in its lowest ever viewing figures yesterday with just 450,000 viewers. Piers will be delighted to note that’s down from 1.29 million on his final episode in March…
https://order-order.com/2021/06/02/viewers-turned-off-by-sir-keirs-life-stories/
Great for the robots, but where does that leave the humans?
Some of them aren't here so aren't relevant to the equation.
Others will find work in new jobs that the humans earning £30/hour can pay for that didn't even exist in the past.
That's how productivity improvements have led to new jobs being created for hundreds of years now.
How many people work in agriculture compared to 400 years ago? How many people work in hospitality compared to 400 years ago? The jobs market isn't static.
Suspect it won't be much above minimum wage.
So why couldn't they do that when instead of robots they had low wage-accepting foreign workers crowding them out?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9643789/Taxi-Hancock-Health-Secretary-wife-look-relaxed-waiting-cab-day-zero-Covid-deaths.html
Missed the boreothon
Thankfully.
Google's head of diversity has been slammed for writing that Jews have an 'insatiable appetite for war and killing' and arguing they should have more 'compassion' because of the Holocaust.
Kamau Bobb, who is also an 'Equity in Computing' don at Georgia Tech, wrote a 2007 blog post, which remains on his website, titled: 'If I Were A Jew.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9643469/Googles-head-diversity-slammed-saying-Jews-insatiable-appetite-war-killing.html
@Topping your argument only works if high cost countries such as Switzerland or Sweden / Norway had high levels of unemployment. None of them do.
You must have a pretty dim view of the indigenous working classes if you think that it needs them to be thrown out of a job before they decide to make themselves more valuable.
As I was saying...
And it’s pissing with rain here now. Summer over already.
"We sometimes have to make difficult decisions to make room for new opportunities and as part of the BBC's commitment to make more programmes across the UK"
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-57330559
MUST HAVE MORE DIVERSITY.....
Why hasn’t this phenomenon occurred with the A8 immigration? Why have the indigenous population who have seen their lives bettered by it voted to stop it?
*sighs*
Anderson might have to wait for our next Prime Minister, who clearly is a fan.
Cricket to get bulk of £300m Budget handout as Chancellor Rishi Sunak announces financial support measures for sport
https://www.skysports.com/cricket/news/12123/12233244/cricket-to-get-bulk-of-300m-budget-handout-as-chancellor-rishi-sunak-announces-financial-support-measures-for-sport
(This is from March 2020 when Pinocchio Jones was out doing some rumour-mongering).
Personally I think the supply/demand balance will adjust, as it always does.
https://www.jdwetherspoon.com/tims-viewpoint/tim-martin-responds-to-journalist-owen-jones-of-the-guardian
We were talking about supermarket workers who are about to be put out of work by robots. @Philip_Thompson - and others - were saying that it didn't matter because those left in work would be paid more while those out of work could retrain.
My question is and was why couldn't they always retrain? What about the 60-yr old shelf stacker? He can't really retrain I suppose, although working life far from over, so perhaps he can. So it's either robots or foreigners who does for him. (Some) Brexiters seem to think that robots is a good way to be put out of work and foreigners a bad way.
Indian variant spike in Leek sees 1,000 self-isolating
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-57328558
Wetherspoons boss denies facing shortage of EU workers
He added that Wetherspoons was not struggling to recruit, and in some towns, such as Northallerton, jobs at its pubs were oversubscribed.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57314682
There should simply be a good HR team that caters to the needs of all employees.
I like the latest line that tories only like Boris cause he is popular. Im sure it would be much better to have an unpopular leader 20 points behind in the polls than a popular one.
Important that people aren't blindly thinking that things are either a-ok or laden with doom. I've only had one jab so far, so even if things unlock properly I'll still be keeping in mind that I'm not properly vaccinated.
Of course, I'm also a huge introvert so this is more an academic than practical consideration, but still.
Years without access to student loans, nor Universal Credit. And years of many thousands of fees to shell out.
So unless they have savings, an inheritance or a lottery win, who will fund them?
Not HMG, if today's education announcement is any guide.
I don't think it makes sense to think of him as left or right, but just as an opportunist.
Matt Ridley, a biologist and science writer, speaks to Fraser Nelson about whether Covid could have come from a lab.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5OfzUzvCYE
You that call yourselves progressive are always banging about people not being paid a fair wage....now some of you are complaining that employers might actually have to raise pay to attract workers? shakes head
No, not political at all...
Only a handful of general election winners like Attlee and Thatcher are genuine ideologues
He's the former Chairman of Northern (C)Rock.
Assured the world everything was going swimmingly.
I've seen where that ends.
Buckingham Palace banned ethnic minorities from office roles, papers reveal
The Queen’s courtiers banned “coloured immigrants or foreigners” from serving in clerical roles in the royal household until at least the late 1960s, according to newly discovered documents that will reignite the debate over the British royal family and race.
The documents also shed light on how Buckingham Palace negotiated controversial clauses – that remain in place to this day – exempting the Queen and her household from laws that prevent race and sex discrimination.
The papers were discovered at the National Archives as part of the Guardian’s ongoing investigation into the royal family’s use of an arcane parliamentary procedure, known as Queen’s consent, to secretly influence the content of British laws.
They reveal how in 1968, the Queen’s chief financial manager informed civil servants that “it was not, in fact, the practice to appoint coloured immigrants or foreigners” to clerical roles in the royal household, although they were permitted to work as domestic servants.
It is unclear when the practice ended. Buckingham Palace refused to answer questions about the ban and when it was revoked. It said its records showed people from ethnic minority backgrounds being employed in the 1990s. It added that before that decade, it did not keep records on the racial backgrounds of employees
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/02/buckingham-palace-banned-ethnic-minorities-from-office-roles-papers-reveal
Puts the Queen's Nazi past into even more context now.
What has happened to new tra Trumpton, known to the entire world as Trumpton especially if you know anyone who lives there, is a very pleasant village a few miles South of Nottingham.
Flag of England 75,701 1st doses / 279,285 2nd doses
Flag of Scotland 18,971 / 30,946
Flag of Wales 5,435 / 19,716
NI 8,400 / 8,618
https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1400075613512376325?s=20
Not good enough.
There was still segregation in the USA until the mid 1960s
I agree the side looks odd, and I put a tenner on NZ to win the match last night, and I stick by that.
People have prioritised going away and relaxing for the weekend over getting a vaccination.
Historically there was an extensive network of reasonably priced local FE Colleges.
Or both. Or just some of the sites being used weren't available for various reasons.