He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
There is a decent essay on English food in this week’s “Vittles” substack.
https://vittles.substack.com/p/the-english-food-store?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=copy0 -
Yes. Which can be paid for because salaries have gone up more, as the least productive trade is no longer occurring.Daveyboy1961 said:
so costs and therefore prices go up?Philip_Thompson said:
They either care enough to pay enough for their goods to make it productive, or they'll cease to get it.Daveyboy1961 said:
So what happens to the customers for the least productive hauls?Philip_Thompson said:
Exactly! Now you're getting it.Daveyboy1961 said:
So the least productive hauls don't happen then.Philip_Thompson said:
One option is to increase the pay for lorry drivers so that more drivers are attracted to the industry and all drivers in the industry are better off.Daveyboy1961 said:
Ok, I'll rephrase. Can you tell me how 516000 HGV drivers can suddenly start doing the work of at least 650000 lorry drivers? Assuming that you aren't expecting them to do illegal overtime?felix said:
Golly - stop - you're really embarrassing yourself now.Daveyboy1961 said:
Can you tell me how an HGV driver can drive more than one truck at once?Philip_Thompson said:
No you don't.Daveyboy1961 said:
Not according to the last GDP figures. Also in a full employment situation you can't create workers, you need to import them.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes.Daveyboy1961 said:
Are you sure it hasn't? So many industries down the toilet, short of HGV drivers, short of workers? Not collecting customs at the borders to save queues? City of London individual earnings up the creek?Philip_Thompson said:
Though if that were the case then our economy should have shrank £500mn a week post-Brexit.ydoethur said:
Yes. ‘The EU adds £500 million a week to our economy.* If we leave, the NHS is screwed’ would have been far more effective.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, if Remain had made that argument, it would've won.
*Very approximate figure based on the estimate EU membership had increased the size of the economy by around 10%.
Strip out the Covid effects and that's absolutely not happened. So it was never the case.
The reason there's a supposed "shortage of workers" is because we're doing so very well that we've got full employment and burgeoning demand, not because of a collapsing economy leading to mass layoffs.
In a full employment situation you become more productive, raising the incomes of everyone and culling the least productive jobs altogether.
Another option is for 516,000 lorry drivers could carry the most productive 516,000 hauls meaning the least productive 134,000 hauls don't get carried. The average value of the hauls carried would be higher then as a result (because the useless valueless hauls aren't being taken anymore) justifying a pay increase.
Reality would be something between these two. Prices go up, paying for pay rises, meaning more drivers, and the least productive hauls find its not worth paying the higher prices so they drop.
That is supply and demand 101. First lesson in an Economics class.
Every year we should be innovating more new productive ways of doing things, and losing the least productive ways of doing so. That's what generates growth, leads to sustainable pay rises, and allows for us to pay for pensions and other niceties.
If you want a good enough to pay what is needed for it, you'll get it. If you don't, you won't and you'll move on and pay for what you do want instead.
Keeping prices down is not a good thing, if it means uncompetitive behaviour and lower salaries.1 -
Not to mention the small matter of the loading bays in the supermarkets etc, and those things called 'roads'.rcs1000 said:
Isn't 90+% of the haulage industry standardv sized containers?theProle said:
To a certain extent drivers will be becoming more productive - in some cases by driving bigger vehicles, in others by their companies working harder to secure back loads, reducing empty mileage.Daveyboy1961 said:
Can you tell me how an HGV driver can drive more than one truck at once?Philip_Thompson said:
No you don't.Daveyboy1961 said:
Not according to the last GDP figures. Also in a full employment situation you can't create workers, you need to import them.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes.Daveyboy1961 said:
Are you sure it hasn't? So many industries down the toilet, short of HGV drivers, short of workers? Not collecting customs at the borders to save queues? City of London individual earnings up the creek?Philip_Thompson said:
Though if that were the case then our economy should have shrank £500mn a week post-Brexit.ydoethur said:
Yes. ‘The EU adds £500 million a week to our economy.* If we leave, the NHS is screwed’ would have been far more effective.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, if Remain had made that argument, it would've won.
*Very approximate figure based on the estimate EU membership had increased the size of the economy by around 10%.
Strip out the Covid effects and that's absolutely not happened. So it was never the case.
The reason there's a supposed "shortage of workers" is because we're doing so very well that we've got full employment and burgeoning demand, not because of a collapsing economy leading to mass layoffs.
In a full employment situation you become more productive, raising the incomes of everyone and culling the least productive jobs altogether.0 -
I rather fancied wage growthGardenwalker said:
About the only worthwhile promise of Brexit was that this country would get over its Euro-obsessions, but it turns out that was total bullshit as well!Alanbrooke said:Oh dear
another thread of Brexit whining
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9937313/Waitrose-lorry-drivers-earning-lawyers-architects-salaries-soar-amid-shortage.html
all that middle class angst and then the blokes in white vans get what they voted for4 -
If you don't have much in the way of fruit, how else to get one's vitamin C?Daveyboy1961 said:
....there's nothing more enticing than the whiff of boiled cabbage....Theuniondivvie said:
I imagine a whiff of boiled cabbage was an occasional occurrence? I read on Wiki that they transformed into 'civic restaurants' and in some cases survived till the late 60s. I guess it's not impossible that I may have been taken to one, though they'd have been an improvement on my school dinners.Carnyx said:
Not fair, you need parsley to put into the white sauce for the boiled cod.Theuniondivvie said:I reckon I've stumbled on the one person still using that True Blue Cookery Book. Bring back the British Restaurants, down with foreign muck like water, beans and lemons!
My gran and mum used to live above a British Restaurant.1 -
But its not true, not all jobs need doing regardless of the rate.dixiedean said:
You will notice I said regardless of the rate.Philip_Thompson said:
Why should bums being wiped be a minimum wage job?dixiedean said:
You are arguing a point I haven't made. I was clear that this isn't fundamentally a Brexit issue.Philip_Thompson said:
But we are advancing others. Better and more productive jobs that pay more (and will thus pay more in taxes/demand less in benefits too).dixiedean said:
It is. It is one out of a number of ways of addressing the fundamental issue. Which is demography. Efficiency and automation are other ways of tinkering with it.Scott_xP said:
Of course it's a Brexit issue.dixiedean said:This is not a Brexit issue, but a demographic one.
One way of changing the demographics is 'free movement of people'...
We need more working taxpayers. Brexiteers have closed off one solution. It is up to them to advance others.
How is importing people to work minimum wage jobs, then giving them Universal Credit including Housing Benefit and Child Benefits "solving the issue"?
However. Minimum wage jobs will need doing. Regardless of the rate of the NMW. Who will do them if everyone has better and more productive jobs?
Bins need collecting, small ahops need staff, bogs need cleaning, bums need wiping. These are not tasks easily done by exhortations to higher productivity.
If the only way to get bums wiped is to pay more than minimum wage, then pay more than minimum wage.
The minimum is supposed to be a minimum not a maximum. The culture that you can fill almost any of certain types of roles at no more than the minimum wage is one I'd be happy to see the back of.
If instead of having eight cafes and coffee shops on the same High Street we only have seven, with the staff in all seven paid better and the least productive coffee shop closes - then that may be a shame for the owner of that shop, but is society any poorer for that? Or better off for that?0 -
Aye, I believe sauerkraut was one of the first antiscorbutics. I actually quite like (lightly) boiled cabbage, and sauerkraut for that matter.Carnyx said:
Certainly the smell of cooking, though she didn't express an opinion on the quality. She did remark on such things as whale and snoek but I'm not sure if that was in the context of the BR as opposed to their own home kitchen rations. Though dried egg was very good for baking!Theuniondivvie said:
I imagine a whiff of boiled cabbage was an occasional occurrence? I read on Wiki that they transformed into 'civic restaurants' and in some cases survived till the late 60s. I guess it's not impossible that I may have been taken to one, though they'd have been an improvement on my school dinners.Carnyx said:
Not fair, you need parsley to put into the white sauce for the boiled cod.Theuniondivvie said:I reckon I've stumbled on the one person still using that True Blue Cookery Book. Bring back the British Restaurants, down with foreign muck like water, beans and lemons!
My gran and mum used to live above a British Restaurant.
Interesting to see that cabbage was regarded as important in the battle against scurvy etc.
Edit: they were off the ration, too, and also a godsend for people whose workplaces had no decent feeding system. Or homes for that matter, esp if doing a lot of overtime. These were the days when your landlady often gave you beetroot sandwiches day in day out.1 -
RobD said:
So you agree with Daveyboy, it's the UK's money and not Scotland's?malcolmg said:
You will give him a sore head trying to understand that.Daveyboy1961 said:
No such thing as EU money?, like UK government money? or even BBC money? Tesco money?, Leisure centre money?Philip_Thompson said:
You're the one being dishonest and not saying the whole story, claiming that charities and organisations received funding from the EU in Pembrokeshire but the local populace "threw it away". They didn't, there was no such thing as EU money. People in Pembrokeshire got a fraction of their own taxes back recycled to them.Daveyboy1961 said:
It depends what the other £10 was for, such as access to free trade markets helping to grow our trade? You Tories are all the same, never telling the whole story.Philip_Thompson said:
No you didn't get any subsidies from the EU. You got a fraction of the UK's own money back.Daveyboy1961 said:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7847/RobD said:
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).Daveyboy1961 said:
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.HYUFD said:
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.Philip_Thompson said:
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?HYUFD said:
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
If you give me a £20 note, then I give you back a £10 note along with a letter saying "this £10 note has been given to you by Philip Thompson", then is that a good arrangement for you or not?
It reminds me of the old joke about a Bed+Breakfast.
"The morning bill was larger than usual, and when queried the proprietor says there is an extra charge of £1 for the cruet set. The customer said that he didn't use it, yet the proprietor said it was there anyway. In retaliation the customer gave back a bill for £10, for sleeping with his wife. The proprietor said no way, it wasn't me. The customer replied 'but she was there anyway'.
Now you may claim that being net contributors was worthwhile in order to get access to trade markets, in which case make that argument. You're wrong IMHO, but at least that is a credible argument to be had. But to claim people got money from the EU when that was just a tiny fraction of the UK's own money returned back to us having had a massive haircut? That's preposterous.
When you buy a service, such as membership of a leisure centre the money ceases to be your money, but the Leisure centre's money. If someone in the community gets cheap use of the pool before 8am that's still leisure centre money paying for it. When I taught in a private school, the school offered scholarships. That was school money not parents' money.
*innocent face*
0 -
Done.Philip_Thompson said:
That's going to asda the confusion.Daveyboy1961 said:
There are aldi-ternatives....ydoethur said:
Maybe she exaggerated a Lidl.MarqueeMark said:
There are other supermarkets than Waitrose, luv....Theuniondivvie said:I reckon I've stumbled on the one person still using that True Blue Cookery Book. Bring back the British Restaurants, down with foreign muck like water, beans and lemons!
I would be happy to stake £100 at evens that the UK grows per capita faster than the Euro Area, as measured by the World Bank national accounts data, in the decade 2023-2032.Gardenwalker said:
2019-2022 data is out.DavidL said:
I am pretty confident that we will have higher growth this year than the EU average and very probably the top growth amongst the larger countries. But the figures are too distorted by Covid to be particularly meaningful. Next year might give us a better indication although the detritus of Covid will still be with us.Gardenwalker said:
Well I have 5 years of data so far, and you have zero.Philip_Thompson said:
Completely disagreed. It is entirely appropriate to look at a long term trend to look at the impact of Brexit. Only a liar or an idiot would seek to exclude the big picture.Gardenwalker said:
It is not relevant to use 2010-2014 to look at the impact of Brexit. Only a liar or an idiot would seek to do so.Philip_Thompson said:
No it is absolutely not. Looking over the course of a decade gives a big picture.Gardenwalker said:
It is retarded to use 2010-2014 as in any way relevant to Brexit, though, isn’t it?Philip_Thompson said:
By a rounding error.Gardenwalker said:
Pre Covid, the period 2015-2019 saw our rate of growth fall behind peer nations.Philip_Thompson said:
Though if that were the case then our economy should have shrank £500mn a week post-Brexit.ydoethur said:
Yes. ‘The EU adds £500 million a week to our economy.* If we leave, the NHS is screwed’ would have been far more effective.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, if Remain had made that argument, it would've won.
*Very approximate figure based on the estimate EU membership had increased the size of the economy by around 10%.
Strip out the Covid effects and that's absolutely not happened. So it was never the case.
Pre-Covid, the period 2010-2019 saw our rate of growth increase beyond that of our peer nations. "Despite Brexit" referendum result being in that period.
Plus the referendum was announced with accompanying "uncertainty" around the start of the decade not the middle of it.
If your argument is that the referendum result led to a drop in GDP so utterly inconsequential that we still grew faster than Europe over the course of the entire decade, then it can't have been a very significant drop now, can it?
In terms of the impact of Brexit, the analysis I’ve seen suggests our growth rate has dropped compared to peer economies, and in fact this is broadly in line with the Treasury’s estimates before the vote.
Year on year it’s not very noticeable.
Give it 5 or 10 more years and people will be wondering why they are noticeably poorer than European travellers.
Covid has swamped everything, temporarily.
We'll see what happens in 5 or 10 more years time but I expect that our GDP per capita will grow more not less than the EU's will over the next decade, just as it has done every decade since the Euro was launched without the UK, which will really put a stake through the heart of your argument would it not?
So, thus far at least the stake is rather thrusting at your argument not mine.
Let us also all note for the future that you think GDP growth post the the financial crisis (2010-2014) is relevant to Brexit effects. You are usually, at least, more careful than to admit to such a fallacy.
I notice Philip has not yet taken up my offer to bet real money on U.K. performance 2023 onwards.
I’d like to think I won’t be on here in 2032, but I likely will be, haha.0 -
you are completely barkingPhilip_Thompson said:
Yes.Daveyboy1961 said:
Are you sure it hasn't? So many industries down the toilet, short of HGV drivers, short of workers? Not collecting customs at the borders to save queues? City of London individual earnings up the creek?Philip_Thompson said:
Though if that were the case then our economy should have shrank £500mn a week post-Brexit.ydoethur said:
Yes. ‘The EU adds £500 million a week to our economy.* If we leave, the NHS is screwed’ would have been far more effective.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, if Remain had made that argument, it would've won.
*Very approximate figure based on the estimate EU membership had increased the size of the economy by around 10%.
Strip out the Covid effects and that's absolutely not happened. So it was never the case.
The reason there's a supposed "shortage of workers" is because we're doing so very well that we've got full employment and burgeoning demand, not because of a collapsing economy leading to mass layoffs.0 -
For the avoidance of doubt, I do not support the (paid) murder of the homeless.Philip_Thompson said:Why should bums being wiped be a minimum wage job?
1 -
NutjobGardenwalker said:The “money” wasn’t Pembrokeshire’s either.
Only the Greater South East (London and the
greater commuter belt) actually makes money in this country.
The rest live on handouts.0 -
LOL fair play!Gardenwalker said:
Done.Philip_Thompson said:
That's going to asda the confusion.Daveyboy1961 said:
There are aldi-ternatives....ydoethur said:
Maybe she exaggerated a Lidl.MarqueeMark said:
There are other supermarkets than Waitrose, luv....Theuniondivvie said:I reckon I've stumbled on the one person still using that True Blue Cookery Book. Bring back the British Restaurants, down with foreign muck like water, beans and lemons!
I would be happy to stake £100 at evens that the UK grows per capita faster than the Euro Area, as measured by the World Bank national accounts data, in the decade 2023-2032.Gardenwalker said:
2019-2022 data is out.DavidL said:
I am pretty confident that we will have higher growth this year than the EU average and very probably the top growth amongst the larger countries. But the figures are too distorted by Covid to be particularly meaningful. Next year might give us a better indication although the detritus of Covid will still be with us.Gardenwalker said:
Well I have 5 years of data so far, and you have zero.Philip_Thompson said:
Completely disagreed. It is entirely appropriate to look at a long term trend to look at the impact of Brexit. Only a liar or an idiot would seek to exclude the big picture.Gardenwalker said:
It is not relevant to use 2010-2014 to look at the impact of Brexit. Only a liar or an idiot would seek to do so.Philip_Thompson said:
No it is absolutely not. Looking over the course of a decade gives a big picture.Gardenwalker said:
It is retarded to use 2010-2014 as in any way relevant to Brexit, though, isn’t it?Philip_Thompson said:
By a rounding error.Gardenwalker said:
Pre Covid, the period 2015-2019 saw our rate of growth fall behind peer nations.Philip_Thompson said:
Though if that were the case then our economy should have shrank £500mn a week post-Brexit.ydoethur said:
Yes. ‘The EU adds £500 million a week to our economy.* If we leave, the NHS is screwed’ would have been far more effective.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, if Remain had made that argument, it would've won.
*Very approximate figure based on the estimate EU membership had increased the size of the economy by around 10%.
Strip out the Covid effects and that's absolutely not happened. So it was never the case.
Pre-Covid, the period 2010-2019 saw our rate of growth increase beyond that of our peer nations. "Despite Brexit" referendum result being in that period.
Plus the referendum was announced with accompanying "uncertainty" around the start of the decade not the middle of it.
If your argument is that the referendum result led to a drop in GDP so utterly inconsequential that we still grew faster than Europe over the course of the entire decade, then it can't have been a very significant drop now, can it?
In terms of the impact of Brexit, the analysis I’ve seen suggests our growth rate has dropped compared to peer economies, and in fact this is broadly in line with the Treasury’s estimates before the vote.
Year on year it’s not very noticeable.
Give it 5 or 10 more years and people will be wondering why they are noticeably poorer than European travellers.
Covid has swamped everything, temporarily.
We'll see what happens in 5 or 10 more years time but I expect that our GDP per capita will grow more not less than the EU's will over the next decade, just as it has done every decade since the Euro was launched without the UK, which will really put a stake through the heart of your argument would it not?
So, thus far at least the stake is rather thrusting at your argument not mine.
Let us also all note for the future that you think GDP growth post the the financial crisis (2010-2014) is relevant to Brexit effects. You are usually, at least, more careful than to admit to such a fallacy.
I notice Philip has not yet taken up my offer to bet real money on U.K. performance 2023 onwards.
I’d like to think I won’t be on here in 2032, but I likely will be, haha.
I've been here since 2007 so 🤷♂️0 -
Somebody more self-aware might wonder about the lengths her parents will go to to avoid her....Theuniondivvie said:I reckon I've stumbled on the one person still using that True Blue Cookery Book. Bring back the British Restaurants, down with foreign muck like water, beans and lemons!
3 -
What I say is 95% true.malcolmg said:
NutjobGardenwalker said:The “money” wasn’t Pembrokeshire’s either.
Only the Greater South East (London and the
greater commuter belt) actually makes money in this country.
The rest live on handouts.
I’ll make an exception for Edinburgh and Aberdeen.
I wish it weren’t so.0 -
You are still saying they should be minimum wage jobs though. I imagine what will happen is jobs that need to be done like bin emptying and bum wiping will become more than minimum wage and jobs that don't really need doing such as barista will stay minimum wagedixiedean said:
You will notice I said regardless of the rate.Philip_Thompson said:
Why should bums being wiped be a minimum wage job?dixiedean said:
You are arguing a point I haven't made. I was clear that this isn't fundamentally a Brexit issue.Philip_Thompson said:
But we are advancing others. Better and more productive jobs that pay more (and will thus pay more in taxes/demand less in benefits too).dixiedean said:
It is. It is one out of a number of ways of addressing the fundamental issue. Which is demography. Efficiency and automation are other ways of tinkering with it.Scott_xP said:
Of course it's a Brexit issue.dixiedean said:This is not a Brexit issue, but a demographic one.
One way of changing the demographics is 'free movement of people'...
We need more working taxpayers. Brexiteers have closed off one solution. It is up to them to advance others.
How is importing people to work minimum wage jobs, then giving them Universal Credit including Housing Benefit and Child Benefits "solving the issue"?
However. Minimum wage jobs will need doing. Regardless of the rate of the NMW. Who will do them if everyone has better and more productive jobs?
Bins need collecting, small ahops need staff, bogs need cleaning, bums need wiping. These are not tasks easily done by exhortations to higher productivity.
If the only way to get bums wiped is to pay more than minimum wage, then pay more than minimum wage.
The minimum is supposed to be a minimum not a maximum. The culture that you can fill almost any of certain types of roles at no more than the minimum wage is one I'd be happy to see the back of.0 -
Nah, this is post-pandemic labour shortage stuff.Alanbrooke said:
I rather fancied wage growthGardenwalker said:
About the only worthwhile promise of Brexit was that this country would get over its Euro-obsessions, but it turns out that was total bullshit as well!Alanbrooke said:Oh dear
another thread of Brexit whining
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9937313/Waitrose-lorry-drivers-earning-lawyers-architects-salaries-soar-amid-shortage.html
all that middle class angst and then the blokes in white vans get what they voted for0 -
Not even for minimum wage? 😂rcs1000 said:
For the avoidance of doubt, I do not support the (paid) murder of the homeless.Philip_Thompson said:Why should bums being wiped be a minimum wage job?
0 -
Have you never watched how the economy actually works. The wage a job pays bears zero resemblance to it's social value.Pagan2 said:
You are still saying they should be minimum wage jobs though. I imagine what will happen is jobs that need to be done like bin emptying and bum wiping will become more than minimum wage and jobs that don't really need doing such as barista will stay minimum wagedixiedean said:
You will notice I said regardless of the rate.Philip_Thompson said:
Why should bums being wiped be a minimum wage job?dixiedean said:
You are arguing a point I haven't made. I was clear that this isn't fundamentally a Brexit issue.Philip_Thompson said:
But we are advancing others. Better and more productive jobs that pay more (and will thus pay more in taxes/demand less in benefits too).dixiedean said:
It is. It is one out of a number of ways of addressing the fundamental issue. Which is demography. Efficiency and automation are other ways of tinkering with it.Scott_xP said:
Of course it's a Brexit issue.dixiedean said:This is not a Brexit issue, but a demographic one.
One way of changing the demographics is 'free movement of people'...
We need more working taxpayers. Brexiteers have closed off one solution. It is up to them to advance others.
How is importing people to work minimum wage jobs, then giving them Universal Credit including Housing Benefit and Child Benefits "solving the issue"?
However. Minimum wage jobs will need doing. Regardless of the rate of the NMW. Who will do them if everyone has better and more productive jobs?
Bins need collecting, small ahops need staff, bogs need cleaning, bums need wiping. These are not tasks easily done by exhortations to higher productivity.
If the only way to get bums wiped is to pay more than minimum wage, then pay more than minimum wage.
The minimum is supposed to be a minimum not a maximum. The culture that you can fill almost any of certain types of roles at no more than the minimum wage is one I'd be happy to see the back of.
Otherwise why would a lawyer working for a bank be paid so much (sorry TSE)...0 -
2022 data is out? Has someone got a time machine I'm not aware of...Gardenwalker said:
2019-2022 data is out.DavidL said:
I am pretty confident that we will have higher growth this year than the EU average and very probably the top growth amongst the larger countries. But the figures are too distorted by Covid to be particularly meaningful. Next year might give us a better indication although the detritus of Covid will still be with us.Gardenwalker said:
Well I have 5 years of data so far, and you have zero.Philip_Thompson said:
Completely disagreed. It is entirely appropriate to look at a long term trend to look at the impact of Brexit. Only a liar or an idiot would seek to exclude the big picture.Gardenwalker said:
It is not relevant to use 2010-2014 to look at the impact of Brexit. Only a liar or an idiot would seek to do so.Philip_Thompson said:
No it is absolutely not. Looking over the course of a decade gives a big picture.Gardenwalker said:
It is retarded to use 2010-2014 as in any way relevant to Brexit, though, isn’t it?Philip_Thompson said:
By a rounding error.Gardenwalker said:
Pre Covid, the period 2015-2019 saw our rate of growth fall behind peer nations.Philip_Thompson said:
Though if that were the case then our economy should have shrank £500mn a week post-Brexit.ydoethur said:
Yes. ‘The EU adds £500 million a week to our economy.* If we leave, the NHS is screwed’ would have been far more effective.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, if Remain had made that argument, it would've won.
*Very approximate figure based on the estimate EU membership had increased the size of the economy by around 10%.
Strip out the Covid effects and that's absolutely not happened. So it was never the case.
Pre-Covid, the period 2010-2019 saw our rate of growth increase beyond that of our peer nations. "Despite Brexit" referendum result being in that period.
Plus the referendum was announced with accompanying "uncertainty" around the start of the decade not the middle of it.
If your argument is that the referendum result led to a drop in GDP so utterly inconsequential that we still grew faster than Europe over the course of the entire decade, then it can't have been a very significant drop now, can it?
In terms of the impact of Brexit, the analysis I’ve seen suggests our growth rate has dropped compared to peer economies, and in fact this is broadly in line with the Treasury’s estimates before the vote.
Year on year it’s not very noticeable.
Give it 5 or 10 more years and people will be wondering why they are noticeably poorer than European travellers.
Covid has swamped everything, temporarily.
We'll see what happens in 5 or 10 more years time but I expect that our GDP per capita will grow more not less than the EU's will over the next decade, just as it has done every decade since the Euro was launched without the UK, which will really put a stake through the heart of your argument would it not?
So, thus far at least the stake is rather thrusting at your argument not mine.
Let us also all note for the future that you think GDP growth post the the financial crisis (2010-2014) is relevant to Brexit effects. You are usually, at least, more careful than to admit to such a fallacy.
I notice Philip has not yet taken up my offer to bet real money on U.K. performance 2023 onwards.0 -
One more empty shop, mind.Philip_Thompson said:
But its not true, not all jobs need doing regardless of the rate.dixiedean said:
You will notice I said regardless of the rate.Philip_Thompson said:
Why should bums being wiped be a minimum wage job?dixiedean said:
You are arguing a point I haven't made. I was clear that this isn't fundamentally a Brexit issue.Philip_Thompson said:
But we are advancing others. Better and more productive jobs that pay more (and will thus pay more in taxes/demand less in benefits too).dixiedean said:
It is. It is one out of a number of ways of addressing the fundamental issue. Which is demography. Efficiency and automation are other ways of tinkering with it.Scott_xP said:
Of course it's a Brexit issue.dixiedean said:This is not a Brexit issue, but a demographic one.
One way of changing the demographics is 'free movement of people'...
We need more working taxpayers. Brexiteers have closed off one solution. It is up to them to advance others.
How is importing people to work minimum wage jobs, then giving them Universal Credit including Housing Benefit and Child Benefits "solving the issue"?
However. Minimum wage jobs will need doing. Regardless of the rate of the NMW. Who will do them if everyone has better and more productive jobs?
Bins need collecting, small ahops need staff, bogs need cleaning, bums need wiping. These are not tasks easily done by exhortations to higher productivity.
If the only way to get bums wiped is to pay more than minimum wage, then pay more than minimum wage.
The minimum is supposed to be a minimum not a maximum. The culture that you can fill almost any of certain types of roles at no more than the minimum wage is one I'd be happy to see the back of.
If instead of having eight cafes and coffee shops on the same High Street we only have seven, with the staff in all seven paid better and the least productive coffee shop closes - then that may be a shame for the owner of that shop, but is society any poorer for that? Or better off for that?0 -
Strange that the Labour Party delights in being anti-Brexit. They complain that with the loss of the Eastern Europeans, the era of cheap labour for farmers is ending, and thus so must the era of cheap food. A point that John Harris made in the Guardian recently. Therefore it is bad?
Yet this is the party of the trades unions, the very party that owes its existence to the trade unions The party that idolises the Tolpuddle martyrs as brave men who fought against the lowering of wages for agricultural labourers by trying to form a union.
Did those Dorset men die in vain?
Perhaps, Labour should call themselves the Hypocrites-r-Us party?
1 -
Ah yes, anything you dont want to explain is pandemic and when you fancy a bit of agitprop its Brexit.Gardenwalker said:
Nah, this is post-pandemic labour shortage stuff.Alanbrooke said:
I rather fancied wage growthGardenwalker said:
About the only worthwhile promise of Brexit was that this country would get over its Euro-obsessions, but it turns out that was total bullshit as well!Alanbrooke said:Oh dear
another thread of Brexit whining
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9937313/Waitrose-lorry-drivers-earning-lawyers-architects-salaries-soar-amid-shortage.html
all that middle class angst and then the blokes in white vans get what they voted for
Fair enough1 -
So I am moving to New York.
I am currently agonising about where to live and where to send the nearly 7 yo girl to school.
I’m not sure I can be arsed with the Upper West Side; Park Slope seems like a cliche; the Long Island commuter belt seems as boring as Buckinghamshire; Summit NJ et al are infested with Republicans.
I’m at a bit of a loss.0 -
What’s good for the goose, etc.Alanbrooke said:
Ah yes, anything you dont want to explain is pandemic and when you fancy a bit of agitprop its Brexit.Gardenwalker said:
Nah, this is post-pandemic labour shortage stuff.Alanbrooke said:
I rather fancied wage growthGardenwalker said:
About the only worthwhile promise of Brexit was that this country would get over its Euro-obsessions, but it turns out that was total bullshit as well!Alanbrooke said:Oh dear
another thread of Brexit whining
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9937313/Waitrose-lorry-drivers-earning-lawyers-architects-salaries-soar-amid-shortage.html
all that middle class angst and then the blokes in white vans get what they voted for
Fair enough0 -
But thanks to self-determination the Republic has been able to go with a business model that suits it. The Republic's voters elect governments that prioritise the Republic.Charles said:
The relative economic performance isn’t quite as simple as that - Belfast was the industrialised part of Ireland while the rest was much more agricultural.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
The shift on wealth is more about the failure of the UK to manage de-industrialisation plus the stresses of the Troubles vs the success of the RoI’s parasitic business model
Thanks to being an inconvenient nuisance province of the United Kingdom, the UK has not prioritised Northern Ireland. The UK's voters do not elect governments that prioritise Belfast.
Self-determination works. As part of a United Ireland, Belfast would be a large part of a small country, that would be prioritised by its own government. Instead of an inconvenient provincial backwater that has no say at elections over the government of the day almost all the time.0 -
Out as in I won’t accept it.eek said:
2022 data is out? Has someone got a time machine I'm not aware of...Gardenwalker said:
2019-2022 data is out.DavidL said:
I am pretty confident that we will have higher growth this year than the EU average and very probably the top growth amongst the larger countries. But the figures are too distorted by Covid to be particularly meaningful. Next year might give us a better indication although the detritus of Covid will still be with us.Gardenwalker said:
Well I have 5 years of data so far, and you have zero.Philip_Thompson said:
Completely disagreed. It is entirely appropriate to look at a long term trend to look at the impact of Brexit. Only a liar or an idiot would seek to exclude the big picture.Gardenwalker said:
It is not relevant to use 2010-2014 to look at the impact of Brexit. Only a liar or an idiot would seek to do so.Philip_Thompson said:
No it is absolutely not. Looking over the course of a decade gives a big picture.Gardenwalker said:
It is retarded to use 2010-2014 as in any way relevant to Brexit, though, isn’t it?Philip_Thompson said:
By a rounding error.Gardenwalker said:
Pre Covid, the period 2015-2019 saw our rate of growth fall behind peer nations.Philip_Thompson said:
Though if that were the case then our economy should have shrank £500mn a week post-Brexit.ydoethur said:
Yes. ‘The EU adds £500 million a week to our economy.* If we leave, the NHS is screwed’ would have been far more effective.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, if Remain had made that argument, it would've won.
*Very approximate figure based on the estimate EU membership had increased the size of the economy by around 10%.
Strip out the Covid effects and that's absolutely not happened. So it was never the case.
Pre-Covid, the period 2010-2019 saw our rate of growth increase beyond that of our peer nations. "Despite Brexit" referendum result being in that period.
Plus the referendum was announced with accompanying "uncertainty" around the start of the decade not the middle of it.
If your argument is that the referendum result led to a drop in GDP so utterly inconsequential that we still grew faster than Europe over the course of the entire decade, then it can't have been a very significant drop now, can it?
In terms of the impact of Brexit, the analysis I’ve seen suggests our growth rate has dropped compared to peer economies, and in fact this is broadly in line with the Treasury’s estimates before the vote.
Year on year it’s not very noticeable.
Give it 5 or 10 more years and people will be wondering why they are noticeably poorer than European travellers.
Covid has swamped everything, temporarily.
We'll see what happens in 5 or 10 more years time but I expect that our GDP per capita will grow more not less than the EU's will over the next decade, just as it has done every decade since the Euro was launched without the UK, which will really put a stake through the heart of your argument would it not?
So, thus far at least the stake is rather thrusting at your argument not mine.
Let us also all note for the future that you think GDP growth post the the financial crisis (2010-2014) is relevant to Brexit effects. You are usually, at least, more careful than to admit to such a fallacy.
I notice Philip has not yet taken up my offer to bet real money on U.K. performance 2023 onwards.
Contaminated by covid effects.1 -
Which frees the land up for more productive use.Carnyx said:
One more empty shop, mind.Philip_Thompson said:
But its not true, not all jobs need doing regardless of the rate.dixiedean said:
You will notice I said regardless of the rate.Philip_Thompson said:
Why should bums being wiped be a minimum wage job?dixiedean said:
You are arguing a point I haven't made. I was clear that this isn't fundamentally a Brexit issue.Philip_Thompson said:
But we are advancing others. Better and more productive jobs that pay more (and will thus pay more in taxes/demand less in benefits too).dixiedean said:
It is. It is one out of a number of ways of addressing the fundamental issue. Which is demography. Efficiency and automation are other ways of tinkering with it.Scott_xP said:
Of course it's a Brexit issue.dixiedean said:This is not a Brexit issue, but a demographic one.
One way of changing the demographics is 'free movement of people'...
We need more working taxpayers. Brexiteers have closed off one solution. It is up to them to advance others.
How is importing people to work minimum wage jobs, then giving them Universal Credit including Housing Benefit and Child Benefits "solving the issue"?
However. Minimum wage jobs will need doing. Regardless of the rate of the NMW. Who will do them if everyone has better and more productive jobs?
Bins need collecting, small ahops need staff, bogs need cleaning, bums need wiping. These are not tasks easily done by exhortations to higher productivity.
If the only way to get bums wiped is to pay more than minimum wage, then pay more than minimum wage.
The minimum is supposed to be a minimum not a maximum. The culture that you can fill almost any of certain types of roles at no more than the minimum wage is one I'd be happy to see the back of.
If instead of having eight cafes and coffee shops on the same High Street we only have seven, with the staff in all seven paid better and the least productive coffee shop closes - then that may be a shame for the owner of that shop, but is society any poorer for that? Or better off for that?
We shouldn't reserve our land for unproductive uses should we?0 -
It's not the savings rate, it's the perpetual austerity. The former is a symptom of the latter. Countries that have austerity policies will naturally have higher savings rates. The government pursues perpetual austerity in those places to maintain a permanent competitive advantage and force the population to save. It's a policy objective.Gardenwalker said:
I tend to agree that a persistent balance of trade deficit is not ideal. This has been the case in NZ for example.MaxPB said:
Trade is a zero sum game. Only countries that live in a perpetual state of austerity can win out of it by using beggar-thy-neighbour policies.Gardenwalker said:
Weird mercantilism.DavidL said:
Absolutely not so. The real cost of membership of the SM was an £80bn a year trade deficit with the EU year after year after year. The cost of that was roughly 1m well paid jobs in this country and low tens of billions of foregone tax revenue.kinabalu said:
And the bottom line below that bottom line was that the wider economic benefits exceeded the net contribution. Whether that was true - and if so the extent of its truth - will become clear in due course.felix said:
The bottom line is that the UK paid in to the EU much more than it got back. I voted remain in spite of that but to pretend otherwise is frankly absurd.Daveyboy1961 said:
No such thing as EU money?, like UK government money? or even BBC money? Tesco money?, Leisure centre money?Philip_Thompson said:
You're the one being dishonest and not saying the whole story, claiming that charities and organisations received funding from the EU in Pembrokeshire but the local populace "threw it away". They didn't, there was no such thing as EU money. People in Pembrokeshire got a fraction of their own taxes back recycled to them.Daveyboy1961 said:
It depends what the other £10 was for, such as access to free trade markets helping to grow our trade? You Tories are all the same, never telling the whole story.Philip_Thompson said:
No you didn't get any subsidies from the EU. You got a fraction of the UK's own money back.Daveyboy1961 said:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7847/RobD said:
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).Daveyboy1961 said:
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.HYUFD said:
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.Philip_Thompson said:
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?HYUFD said:
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
If you give me a £20 note, then I give you back a £10 note along with a letter saying "this £10 note has been given to you by Philip Thompson", then is that a good arrangement for you or not?
It reminds me of the old joke about a Bed+Breakfast.
"The morning bill was larger than usual, and when queried the proprietor says there is an extra charge of £1 for the cruet set. The customer said that he didn't use it, yet the proprietor said it was there anyway. In retaliation the customer gave back a bill for £10, for sleeping with his wife. The proprietor said no way, it wasn't me. The customer replied 'but she was there anyway'.
Now you may claim that being net contributors was worthwhile in order to get access to trade markets, in which case make that argument. You're wrong IMHO, but at least that is a credible argument to be had. But to claim people got money from the EU when that was just a tiny fraction of the UK's own money returned back to us having had a massive haircut? That's preposterous.
When you buy a service, such as membership of a leisure centre the money ceases to be your money, but the Leisure centre's money. If someone in the community gets cheap use of the pool before 8am that's still leisure centre money paying for it. When I taught in a private school, the school offered scholarships. That was school money not parents' money.
You can make arguments that we did not play the game well, that it was our own fault that we were so inept at exporting and so prone to import, that government policy in this country positively encourages excess consumption etc but the fact remains that being in the SM was economically ruinous for this country and free trade with the EU is not actually in our interests until we can improve our competitiveness.
I thought this kind of thinking died out in the early 19th century.
I used to think it wasn't. Evidence has shown me that the most cynical players win because they have already accepted it is a zero sum game and their gains will necessarily mean other nations will have to lose.
That realisation isn't a Brexit issue either, it's more an acceptance that there are fundamental issues with how the world conducts business. As usual, I've got no answers but I do recognise there's an issue.
Now, NZ has delivered years of growth and low unemployment etc, and the balance of trade issue is not at all politically salient there, but it does mean that NZ is forced to keep selling its businesses to overseas investors so that all the sums balance. Over time that pushes NZ toward a branch economy model.
I tend to follow young Smithson though in believing the issue is NOT access to a free trading area, which has been an utter boon for NZ via trade agreements, but rather domestic savings rates which are amenable to govt policy.
NZers (and Brits) don’t save enough.0 -
I had not foreseen Johnson and the fact that if he did ever come to pass as PM, he would not immediately capitulate to the extreme-Brexiteers. I certainly had no idea that he would cast out lifelong Conservatives who were in the grand scheme of things more loyal Conservatives than he was. I guess I hadn't realised in the Johnson Party, Soviet style loyalty to him trumped the greater good of the party and the nation.isam said:
This was the arch remainers folly - they were prepared to risk a harder Brexit if it meant a shot at overturning the referendum result - serves them right for being greedy.Mexicanpete said:
I would have opposed on all three occasions. I was outraged Mrs May brought the same deal back on a one more heave basis.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Pete, it seemed bizarre to me that pro-EU MPs didn't even attempt (they had three shots) to slip in a confirmatory referendum clause and back May's deal.
By what means would they get something better? And, if they opposed her deal, what alternative except a harder departure was on the table?
However, knowing what I know now, I would have voted it through on the first time of asking, such is Johnson's thin gruel deal.
How many times I posted this while the deal was on offer Lord only knows. It was astonishing to see them try it on like that
I admit I called it wrong. I was convinced enough in the Conservative Party would see Brexit for the folly that experience of Brexit is teaching us. I reiterate, I had no idea he would jettison Cameron Conservatives and turn the party into UKIP-lite.
So yes, I am wholly responsible for Johnson and Johnson's foolish version of Brexit. It is an albatross I will carry around my neck until I shuffle off this mortal coil.
God bless Mrs May!0 -
But jobs that need to be done will have to be filled so if they are now competing for workers because there are more jobs than workers then wages will have to rise to ensure these necessary jobs are done.eek said:
Have you never watched how the economy actually works. The wage a job pays bears zero resemblance to it's social value.Pagan2 said:
You are still saying they should be minimum wage jobs though. I imagine what will happen is jobs that need to be done like bin emptying and bum wiping will become more than minimum wage and jobs that don't really need doing such as barista will stay minimum wagedixiedean said:
You will notice I said regardless of the rate.Philip_Thompson said:
Why should bums being wiped be a minimum wage job?dixiedean said:
You are arguing a point I haven't made. I was clear that this isn't fundamentally a Brexit issue.Philip_Thompson said:
But we are advancing others. Better and more productive jobs that pay more (and will thus pay more in taxes/demand less in benefits too).dixiedean said:
It is. It is one out of a number of ways of addressing the fundamental issue. Which is demography. Efficiency and automation are other ways of tinkering with it.Scott_xP said:
Of course it's a Brexit issue.dixiedean said:This is not a Brexit issue, but a demographic one.
One way of changing the demographics is 'free movement of people'...
We need more working taxpayers. Brexiteers have closed off one solution. It is up to them to advance others.
How is importing people to work minimum wage jobs, then giving them Universal Credit including Housing Benefit and Child Benefits "solving the issue"?
However. Minimum wage jobs will need doing. Regardless of the rate of the NMW. Who will do them if everyone has better and more productive jobs?
Bins need collecting, small ahops need staff, bogs need cleaning, bums need wiping. These are not tasks easily done by exhortations to higher productivity.
If the only way to get bums wiped is to pay more than minimum wage, then pay more than minimum wage.
The minimum is supposed to be a minimum not a maximum. The culture that you can fill almost any of certain types of roles at no more than the minimum wage is one I'd be happy to see the back of.
Otherwise why would a lawyer working for a bank be paid so much (sorry TSE)...0 -
The North will bankrupt the Republic and destroy its social fabric. Nobody in Belfast does gratitude.Philip_Thompson said:
But thanks to self-determination the Republic has been able to go with a business model that suits it. The Republic's voters elect governments that prioritise the Republic.Charles said:
The relative economic performance isn’t quite as simple as that - Belfast was the industrialised part of Ireland while the rest was much more agricultural.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
The shift on wealth is more about the failure of the UK to manage de-industrialisation plus the stresses of the Troubles vs the success of the RoI’s parasitic business model
Thanks to being an inconvenient nuisance province of the United Kingdom, the UK has not prioritised Northern Ireland. The UK's voters do not elect governments that prioritise Belfast.
Self-determination works. As part of a United Ireland, Belfast would be a large part of a small country, that would be prioritised by its own government. Instead of an inconvenient provincial backwater that has no say at elections over the government of the day almost all the time.1 -
Do the German mittelstanders, in their comfy Rhenish cellars, think they are living in austerity?MaxPB said:
It's not the savings rate, it's the perpetual austerity. The former is a symptom of the latter. Countries that have austerity policies will naturally have higher savings rates. The government pursues perpetual austerity in those places to maintain a permanent competitive advantage and force the population to save. It's a policy objective.Gardenwalker said:
I tend to agree that a persistent balance of trade deficit is not ideal. This has been the case in NZ for example.MaxPB said:
Trade is a zero sum game. Only countries that live in a perpetual state of austerity can win out of it by using beggar-thy-neighbour policies.Gardenwalker said:
Weird mercantilism.DavidL said:
Absolutely not so. The real cost of membership of the SM was an £80bn a year trade deficit with the EU year after year after year. The cost of that was roughly 1m well paid jobs in this country and low tens of billions of foregone tax revenue.kinabalu said:
And the bottom line below that bottom line was that the wider economic benefits exceeded the net contribution. Whether that was true - and if so the extent of its truth - will become clear in due course.felix said:
The bottom line is that the UK paid in to the EU much more than it got back. I voted remain in spite of that but to pretend otherwise is frankly absurd.Daveyboy1961 said:
No such thing as EU money?, like UK government money? or even BBC money? Tesco money?, Leisure centre money?Philip_Thompson said:
You're the one being dishonest and not saying the whole story, claiming that charities and organisations received funding from the EU in Pembrokeshire but the local populace "threw it away". They didn't, there was no such thing as EU money. People in Pembrokeshire got a fraction of their own taxes back recycled to them.Daveyboy1961 said:
It depends what the other £10 was for, such as access to free trade markets helping to grow our trade? You Tories are all the same, never telling the whole story.Philip_Thompson said:
No you didn't get any subsidies from the EU. You got a fraction of the UK's own money back.Daveyboy1961 said:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7847/RobD said:
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).Daveyboy1961 said:
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.HYUFD said:
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.Philip_Thompson said:
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?HYUFD said:
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
If you give me a £20 note, then I give you back a £10 note along with a letter saying "this £10 note has been given to you by Philip Thompson", then is that a good arrangement for you or not?
It reminds me of the old joke about a Bed+Breakfast.
"The morning bill was larger than usual, and when queried the proprietor says there is an extra charge of £1 for the cruet set. The customer said that he didn't use it, yet the proprietor said it was there anyway. In retaliation the customer gave back a bill for £10, for sleeping with his wife. The proprietor said no way, it wasn't me. The customer replied 'but she was there anyway'.
Now you may claim that being net contributors was worthwhile in order to get access to trade markets, in which case make that argument. You're wrong IMHO, but at least that is a credible argument to be had. But to claim people got money from the EU when that was just a tiny fraction of the UK's own money returned back to us having had a massive haircut? That's preposterous.
When you buy a service, such as membership of a leisure centre the money ceases to be your money, but the Leisure centre's money. If someone in the community gets cheap use of the pool before 8am that's still leisure centre money paying for it. When I taught in a private school, the school offered scholarships. That was school money not parents' money.
You can make arguments that we did not play the game well, that it was our own fault that we were so inept at exporting and so prone to import, that government policy in this country positively encourages excess consumption etc but the fact remains that being in the SM was economically ruinous for this country and free trade with the EU is not actually in our interests until we can improve our competitiveness.
I thought this kind of thinking died out in the early 19th century.
I used to think it wasn't. Evidence has shown me that the most cynical players win because they have already accepted it is a zero sum game and their gains will necessarily mean other nations will have to lose.
That realisation isn't a Brexit issue either, it's more an acceptance that there are fundamental issues with how the world conducts business. As usual, I've got no answers but I do recognise there's an issue.
Now, NZ has delivered years of growth and low unemployment etc, and the balance of trade issue is not at all politically salient there, but it does mean that NZ is forced to keep selling its businesses to overseas investors so that all the sums balance. Over time that pushes NZ toward a branch economy model.
I tend to follow young Smithson though in believing the issue is NOT access to a free trading area, which has been an utter boon for NZ via trade agreements, but rather domestic savings rates which are amenable to govt policy.
NZers (and Brits) don’t save enough.
Twenty years ago, maybe, but now?0 -
Good luck finding somewhere infested with LibDems.... 😉Gardenwalker said:So I am moving to New York.
I am currently agonising about where to live and where to send the nearly 7 yo girl to school.
I’m not sure I can be arsed with the Upper West Side; Park Slope seems like a cliche; the Long Island commuter belt seems as boring as Buckinghamshire; Summit NJ et al are infested with Republicans.
I’m at a bit of a loss.1 -
The True Blue Cookery Book is delightful. Some wonderful recipes.Theuniondivvie said:I reckon I've stumbled on the one person still using that True Blue Cookery Book. Bring back the British Restaurants, down with foreign muck like water, beans and lemons!
0 -
Ah hello again, Stocky. You've been gadding around, I suppose.Stocky said:
You still identify as European surely? What has being a member of an organisation such as the EU got to do with it?kinabalu said:
No, not my reason either. Mine was the same as most people - IDENTITY. It applies to hard Remainers as well as hard Leavers.felix said:
May well be - although money was not the reason I voted remain. BTW is this the same 'due course' we've been hearing about from the Labour since 2010 about the polls on the turn from Miliband/Corbyn/Starmer et al? Or is it the 'due course' beloved of Sir Humphrey?kinabalu said:
And the bottom line below that bottom line was that the wider economic benefits exceeded the net contribution. Whether that was true - and if so the extent of its truth - will become clear in due course.felix said:
The bottom line is that the UK paid in to the EU much more than it got back. I voted remain in spite of that but to pretend otherwise is frankly absurd.Daveyboy1961 said:
No such thing as EU money?, like UK government money? or even BBC money? Tesco money?, Leisure centre money?Philip_Thompson said:
You're the one being dishonest and not saying the whole story, claiming that charities and organisations received funding from the EU in Pembrokeshire but the local populace "threw it away". They didn't, there was no such thing as EU money. People in Pembrokeshire got a fraction of their own taxes back recycled to them.Daveyboy1961 said:
It depends what the other £10 was for, such as access to free trade markets helping to grow our trade? You Tories are all the same, never telling the whole story.Philip_Thompson said:
No you didn't get any subsidies from the EU. You got a fraction of the UK's own money back.Daveyboy1961 said:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7847/RobD said:
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).Daveyboy1961 said:
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.HYUFD said:
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.Philip_Thompson said:
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?HYUFD said:
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
If you give me a £20 note, then I give you back a £10 note along with a letter saying "this £10 note has been given to you by Philip Thompson", then is that a good arrangement for you or not?
It reminds me of the old joke about a Bed+Breakfast.
"The morning bill was larger than usual, and when queried the proprietor says there is an extra charge of £1 for the cruet set. The customer said that he didn't use it, yet the proprietor said it was there anyway. In retaliation the customer gave back a bill for £10, for sleeping with his wife. The proprietor said no way, it wasn't me. The customer replied 'but she was there anyway'.
Now you may claim that being net contributors was worthwhile in order to get access to trade markets, in which case make that argument. You're wrong IMHO, but at least that is a credible argument to be had. But to claim people got money from the EU when that was just a tiny fraction of the UK's own money returned back to us having had a massive haircut? That's preposterous.
When you buy a service, such as membership of a leisure centre the money ceases to be your money, but the Leisure centre's money. If someone in the community gets cheap use of the pool before 8am that's still leisure centre money paying for it. When I taught in a private school, the school offered scholarships. That was school money not parents' money.
Yes, "in due course" - as in at some point before the 12th of Never a settled consensus will form as to the long term economic impact on the UK of Brexit.
No, I don't mean it quite like that. I feel English and British more than European. Same now as before.
I'm talking about identity in the broader sense. What sort of person you are. What's most important to you. Or important cf unimportant. The things you feel are true cf not true. Eg, the one I used, did you feel ruled by Brussels or not. Did you feel that yoke on your shoulder as you went about your daily grind. Some truly did. Some - like me - not only didn't but couldn't see how anyone could.
Remainers and Leavers are different types of people. Not totally, of course, and there's lots of overlap, but there is a material difference and it is NOT to do with just all wanting the same thing but seeing different ways of achieving it. That's just PC comfort blanket talk.
Like, if you had a social gathering of 25 people, one of them all Remainers, the other all Leavers, and you banned all talk of politics, these 2 events would nevertheless have a completely different feel to them. The IDENTITY of the 2 gatherings would be markedly different.1 -
Imperial were predicting 5,000 hospital admissions per day by this point in August.
Just saying...0 -
Nobody ever does when they get pandered to.Alanbrooke said:
The North will bankrupt the Republic and destroy its social fabric. Nobody in Belfast does gratitude.Philip_Thompson said:
But thanks to self-determination the Republic has been able to go with a business model that suits it. The Republic's voters elect governments that prioritise the Republic.Charles said:
The relative economic performance isn’t quite as simple as that - Belfast was the industrialised part of Ireland while the rest was much more agricultural.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
The shift on wealth is more about the failure of the UK to manage de-industrialisation plus the stresses of the Troubles vs the success of the RoI’s parasitic business model
Thanks to being an inconvenient nuisance province of the United Kingdom, the UK has not prioritised Northern Ireland. The UK's voters do not elect governments that prioritise Belfast.
Self-determination works. As part of a United Ireland, Belfast would be a large part of a small country, that would be prioritised by its own government. Instead of an inconvenient provincial backwater that has no say at elections over the government of the day almost all the time.
Do the Scots do gratitude for the fact we're constantly giving them more money too? (pipe down malcolmg)
Socialism doesn't work, getting people to work for a living with low taxes does.2 -
If the alternative is to import low wage competition from, say, Eastern Europe I'd have thought you'd be in favour. Do you want a low wage, low skill economy or something more equitable?Daveyboy1961 said:
so costs and therefore prices go up?Philip_Thompson said:
They either care enough to pay enough for their goods to make it productive, or they'll cease to get it.Daveyboy1961 said:
So what happens to the customers for the least productive hauls?Philip_Thompson said:
Exactly! Now you're getting it.Daveyboy1961 said:
So the least productive hauls don't happen then.Philip_Thompson said:
One option is to increase the pay for lorry drivers so that more drivers are attracted to the industry and all drivers in the industry are better off.Daveyboy1961 said:
Ok, I'll rephrase. Can you tell me how 516000 HGV drivers can suddenly start doing the work of at least 650000 lorry drivers? Assuming that you aren't expecting them to do illegal overtime?felix said:
Golly - stop - you're really embarrassing yourself now.Daveyboy1961 said:
Can you tell me how an HGV driver can drive more than one truck at once?Philip_Thompson said:
No you don't.Daveyboy1961 said:
Not according to the last GDP figures. Also in a full employment situation you can't create workers, you need to import them.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes.Daveyboy1961 said:
Are you sure it hasn't? So many industries down the toilet, short of HGV drivers, short of workers? Not collecting customs at the borders to save queues? City of London individual earnings up the creek?Philip_Thompson said:
Though if that were the case then our economy should have shrank £500mn a week post-Brexit.ydoethur said:
Yes. ‘The EU adds £500 million a week to our economy.* If we leave, the NHS is screwed’ would have been far more effective.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, if Remain had made that argument, it would've won.
*Very approximate figure based on the estimate EU membership had increased the size of the economy by around 10%.
Strip out the Covid effects and that's absolutely not happened. So it was never the case.
The reason there's a supposed "shortage of workers" is because we're doing so very well that we've got full employment and burgeoning demand, not because of a collapsing economy leading to mass layoffs.
In a full employment situation you become more productive, raising the incomes of everyone and culling the least productive jobs altogether.
Another option is for 516,000 lorry drivers could carry the most productive 516,000 hauls meaning the least productive 134,000 hauls don't get carried. The average value of the hauls carried would be higher then as a result (because the useless valueless hauls aren't being taken anymore) justifying a pay increase.
Reality would be something between these two. Prices go up, paying for pay rises, meaning more drivers, and the least productive hauls find its not worth paying the higher prices so they drop.
That is supply and demand 101. First lesson in an Economics class.
Every year we should be innovating more new productive ways of doing things, and losing the least productive ways of doing so. That's what generates growth, leads to sustainable pay rises, and allows for us to pay for pensions and other niceties.
If you want a good enough to pay what is needed for it, you'll get it. If you don't, you won't and you'll move on and pay for what you do want instead.1 -
I thought it was really difficult to move to the United States.Gardenwalker said:So I am moving to New York.
I am currently agonising about where to live and where to send the nearly 7 yo girl to school.
I’m not sure I can be arsed with the Upper West Side; Park Slope seems like a cliche; the Long Island commuter belt seems as boring as Buckinghamshire; Summit NJ et al are infested with Republicans.
I’m at a bit of a loss.0 -
New York has everything.MarqueeMark said:
Good luck finding somewhere infested with LibDems.... 😉Gardenwalker said:So I am moving to New York.
I am currently agonising about where to live and where to send the nearly 7 yo girl to school.
I’m not sure I can be arsed with the Upper West Side; Park Slope seems like a cliche; the Long Island commuter belt seems as boring as Buckinghamshire; Summit NJ et al are infested with Republicans.
I’m at a bit of a loss.
There’s bound to be a Lib Dem chapter there somewhere.0 -
Probably.Andy_JS said:
I thought it was really difficult to move to the United States.Gardenwalker said:So I am moving to New York.
I am currently agonising about where to live and where to send the nearly 7 yo girl to school.
I’m not sure I can be arsed with the Upper West Side; Park Slope seems like a cliche; the Long Island commuter belt seems as boring as Buckinghamshire; Summit NJ et al are infested with Republicans.
I’m at a bit of a loss.
Job and visa offer help though.0 -
I thought New York was famous for its liberal Democrats?MarqueeMark said:
Good luck finding somewhere infested with LibDems.... 😉Gardenwalker said:So I am moving to New York.
I am currently agonising about where to live and where to send the nearly 7 yo girl to school.
I’m not sure I can be arsed with the Upper West Side; Park Slope seems like a cliche; the Long Island commuter belt seems as boring as Buckinghamshire; Summit NJ et al are infested with Republicans.
I’m at a bit of a loss.
Of course some of them cease to be Democrats, or liberal.
0 -
Your final point is a fair one Morris.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Isam, I kind of disagree.
They never had a shot. If they had, it might make sense. But they never even tabled such an amendment.
All they did was successively oppose any kind of deal, helping to remove all softer options. The clue should have been when they were regularly voting alongside Mark Francois.1 -
Labour's new masters are the middle-classes who are worried abour flaked parmesan in the shops and how little they can pay to nanny the brats.CD13 said:Strange that the Labour Party delights in being anti-Brexit. They complain that with the loss of the Eastern Europeans, the era of cheap labour for farmers is ending, and thus so must the era of cheap food. A point that John Harris made in the Guardian recently. Therefore it is bad?
Yet this is the party of the trades unions, the very party that owes its existence to the trade unions The party that idolises the Tolpuddle martyrs as brave men who fought against the lowering of wages for agricultural labourers by trying to form a union.
Did those Dorset men die in vain?
Perhaps, Labour should call themselves the Hypocrites-r-Us party?2 -
26,476 cases, 48 deaths (no Wales / NI).
Cases 3k down in England, but Bank holiday so...0 -
I mean, I freely admit to annoyance at the price of nannying and I’m concerned about flaked parmesan to the extent that I wouldn’t actually buy it on account of its crap-ness.felix said:
Labour's new masters are the middle-classes who are worried abour flaked parmesan in the shops and how little they can pay to nanny the brats.CD13 said:Strange that the Labour Party delights in being anti-Brexit. They complain that with the loss of the Eastern Europeans, the era of cheap labour for farmers is ending, and thus so must the era of cheap food. A point that John Harris made in the Guardian recently. Therefore it is bad?
Yet this is the party of the trades unions, the very party that owes its existence to the trade unions The party that idolises the Tolpuddle martyrs as brave men who fought against the lowering of wages for agricultural labourers by trying to form a union.
Did those Dorset men die in vain?
Perhaps, Labour should call themselves the Hypocrites-r-Us party?
But I’m more Lib Dem, see above.0 -
The land is already occupied. And shops are not fungible land. The shop has to be rented out as such, and if it is not used it lies cold, unheated, and rots. And so does the owner's bank balance. Which is why for instance this closure is bad.Philip_Thompson said:
Which frees the land up for more productive use.Carnyx said:
One more empty shop, mind.Philip_Thompson said:
But its not true, not all jobs need doing regardless of the rate.dixiedean said:
You will notice I said regardless of the rate.Philip_Thompson said:
Why should bums being wiped be a minimum wage job?dixiedean said:
You are arguing a point I haven't made. I was clear that this isn't fundamentally a Brexit issue.Philip_Thompson said:
But we are advancing others. Better and more productive jobs that pay more (and will thus pay more in taxes/demand less in benefits too).dixiedean said:
It is. It is one out of a number of ways of addressing the fundamental issue. Which is demography. Efficiency and automation are other ways of tinkering with it.Scott_xP said:
Of course it's a Brexit issue.dixiedean said:This is not a Brexit issue, but a demographic one.
One way of changing the demographics is 'free movement of people'...
We need more working taxpayers. Brexiteers have closed off one solution. It is up to them to advance others.
How is importing people to work minimum wage jobs, then giving them Universal Credit including Housing Benefit and Child Benefits "solving the issue"?
However. Minimum wage jobs will need doing. Regardless of the rate of the NMW. Who will do them if everyone has better and more productive jobs?
Bins need collecting, small ahops need staff, bogs need cleaning, bums need wiping. These are not tasks easily done by exhortations to higher productivity.
If the only way to get bums wiped is to pay more than minimum wage, then pay more than minimum wage.
The minimum is supposed to be a minimum not a maximum. The culture that you can fill almost any of certain types of roles at no more than the minimum wage is one I'd be happy to see the back of.
If instead of having eight cafes and coffee shops on the same High Street we only have seven, with the staff in all seven paid better and the least productive coffee shop closes - then that may be a shame for the owner of that shop, but is society any poorer for that? Or better off for that?
We shouldn't reserve our land for unproductive uses should we?
https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/news/the-flat-earths-controversial-hq-in-inverness-appears-to-ha-242960/0 -
Straw in the wind...rottenborough said:Imperial were predicting 5,000 hospital admissions per day by this point in August.
Just saying...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXu4N3vYyuk
Cliff notes, yes they are seeing double vaxxed break through cases, plenty among the frontline staff although mostly mild, yes some double vaxxed end up in hospital, however all but 1 person in their ICU is not vaxxed.0 -
There's a new German poll with the CDU/CSU on 20% and the SPD on 25%
https://twitter.com/wahlen_de/status/14323577521568686100 -
The worst thing about this is that it gives Keir hope.williamglenn said:There's a new German poll with the CDU/CSU on 20% and the SPD on 25%
https://twitter.com/wahlen_de/status/14323577521568686100 -
The "Community Leaders" can do gratitude. You just have to pay them 6 figures a year. For multiple jobs. In return for not much work. They are grateful, in some cases, for whole yoctoseconds, after the cheques clear.Alanbrooke said:
The North will bankrupt the Republic and destroy its social fabric. Nobody in Belfast does gratitude.Philip_Thompson said:
But thanks to self-determination the Republic has been able to go with a business model that suits it. The Republic's voters elect governments that prioritise the Republic.Charles said:
The relative economic performance isn’t quite as simple as that - Belfast was the industrialised part of Ireland while the rest was much more agricultural.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
The shift on wealth is more about the failure of the UK to manage de-industrialisation plus the stresses of the Troubles vs the success of the RoI’s parasitic business model
Thanks to being an inconvenient nuisance province of the United Kingdom, the UK has not prioritised Northern Ireland. The UK's voters do not elect governments that prioritise Belfast.
Self-determination works. As part of a United Ireland, Belfast would be a large part of a small country, that would be prioritised by its own government. Instead of an inconvenient provincial backwater that has no say at elections over the government of the day almost all the time.0 -
NEW THREAD
0 -
They can take some tips on how to borrow beyond their means from Rishi. I wouldn't worry too much. Both the US and the EU will fund unification to success. One because they want it to succeed, the other to rub plucky England's nose in the dirt.Alanbrooke said:
The North will bankrupt the Republic and destroy its social fabric. Nobody in Belfast does gratitude.Philip_Thompson said:
But thanks to self-determination the Republic has been able to go with a business model that suits it. The Republic's voters elect governments that prioritise the Republic.Charles said:
The relative economic performance isn’t quite as simple as that - Belfast was the industrialised part of Ireland while the rest was much more agricultural.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
The shift on wealth is more about the failure of the UK to manage de-industrialisation plus the stresses of the Troubles vs the success of the RoI’s parasitic business model
Thanks to being an inconvenient nuisance province of the United Kingdom, the UK has not prioritised Northern Ireland. The UK's voters do not elect governments that prioritise Belfast.
Self-determination works. As part of a United Ireland, Belfast would be a large part of a small country, that would be prioritised by its own government. Instead of an inconvenient provincial backwater that has no say at elections over the government of the day almost all the time.0 -
Completely unsurprisingly, there is very considerable interest in double trailers for HGVs at the moment.rcs1000 said:
Isn't 90+% of the haulage industry standardv sized containers?theProle said:
To a certain extent drivers will be becoming more productive - in some cases by driving bigger vehicles, in others by their companies working harder to secure back loads, reducing empty mileage.Daveyboy1961 said:
Can you tell me how an HGV driver can drive more than one truck at once?Philip_Thompson said:
No you don't.Daveyboy1961 said:
Not according to the last GDP figures. Also in a full employment situation you can't create workers, you need to import them.Philip_Thompson said:
Yes.Daveyboy1961 said:
Are you sure it hasn't? So many industries down the toilet, short of HGV drivers, short of workers? Not collecting customs at the borders to save queues? City of London individual earnings up the creek?Philip_Thompson said:
Though if that were the case then our economy should have shrank £500mn a week post-Brexit.ydoethur said:
Yes. ‘The EU adds £500 million a week to our economy.* If we leave, the NHS is screwed’ would have been far more effective.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. kinabalu, if Remain had made that argument, it would've won.
*Very approximate figure based on the estimate EU membership had increased the size of the economy by around 10%.
Strip out the Covid effects and that's absolutely not happened. So it was never the case.
The reason there's a supposed "shortage of workers" is because we're doing so very well that we've got full employment and burgeoning demand, not because of a collapsing economy leading to mass layoffs.
In a full employment situation you become more productive, raising the incomes of everyone and culling the least productive jobs altogether.
This kind of thing
0 -
Right. Thats why Macron is pushing for abolishing Irfeland tax breaks and the US is pushing for minimum corporate rates which will tank RoIs finances.Mexicanpete said:
They can take some tips on how to borrow beyond their means from Rishi. I wouldn't worry too much. Both the US and the EU will fund unification to success. One because they want it to succeed, the other to rub plucky England's nose in the dirt.Alanbrooke said:
The North will bankrupt the Republic and destroy its social fabric. Nobody in Belfast does gratitude.Philip_Thompson said:
But thanks to self-determination the Republic has been able to go with a business model that suits it. The Republic's voters elect governments that prioritise the Republic.Charles said:
The relative economic performance isn’t quite as simple as that - Belfast was the industrialised part of Ireland while the rest was much more agricultural.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
The shift on wealth is more about the failure of the UK to manage de-industrialisation plus the stresses of the Troubles vs the success of the RoI’s parasitic business model
Thanks to being an inconvenient nuisance province of the United Kingdom, the UK has not prioritised Northern Ireland. The UK's voters do not elect governments that prioritise Belfast.
Self-determination works. As part of a United Ireland, Belfast would be a large part of a small country, that would be prioritised by its own government. Instead of an inconvenient provincial backwater that has no say at elections over the government of the day almost all the time.
Deluded.0 -
That is the Corbyn view of what the EU can do for us and why he hates it. He would probably agree with your analysis too about the current Labour party.CD13 said:Strange that the Labour Party delights in being anti-Brexit. They complain that with the loss of the Eastern Europeans, the era of cheap labour for farmers is ending, and thus so must the era of cheap food. A point that John Harris made in the Guardian recently. Therefore it is bad?
Yet this is the party of the trades unions, the very party that owes its existence to the trade unions The party that idolises the Tolpuddle martyrs as brave men who fought against the lowering of wages for agricultural labourers by trying to form a union.
Did those Dorset men die in vain?
Perhaps, Labour should call themselves the Hypocrites-r-Us party?
These Eastern European workers were on minimum wage, they were not being exploited any more than someone from the UK working in a field or a bar is being exploited. Your view by implication is the one that Johnny Foreigner was stealing our jobs by undercutting domestic Labour, well that has proven to be a falsehood from what I can see, as the harvest begins to rot in the fields of Eastern England.0 -
Not one to bear ill-will to others.....but if some of these COVIDidiots caught it I wouldn't be terribly upset:
https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/19546595.protests-halt-opening-new-churchill-square-covid-vaccination-centre-brighton/0 -
So you want this country to be in an organisation which wants to 'rub England's nose in the dirt' ?Mexicanpete said:
They can take some tips on how to borrow beyond their means from Rishi. I wouldn't worry too much. Both the US and the EU will fund unification to success. One because they want it to succeed, the other to rub plucky England's nose in the dirt.Alanbrooke said:
The North will bankrupt the Republic and destroy its social fabric. Nobody in Belfast does gratitude.Philip_Thompson said:
But thanks to self-determination the Republic has been able to go with a business model that suits it. The Republic's voters elect governments that prioritise the Republic.Charles said:
The relative economic performance isn’t quite as simple as that - Belfast was the industrialised part of Ireland while the rest was much more agricultural.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
The shift on wealth is more about the failure of the UK to manage de-industrialisation plus the stresses of the Troubles vs the success of the RoI’s parasitic business model
Thanks to being an inconvenient nuisance province of the United Kingdom, the UK has not prioritised Northern Ireland. The UK's voters do not elect governments that prioritise Belfast.
Self-determination works. As part of a United Ireland, Belfast would be a large part of a small country, that would be prioritised by its own government. Instead of an inconvenient provincial backwater that has no say at elections over the government of the day almost all the time.0 -
If you pay more taxes than you get in child benefit, that is entirely what child benefit is.Daveyboy1961 said:
It isn't. UK money (and other countries) were for access to trade markets at a favourable rate. Cost/benefit.RobD said:
That's just the UK's money recycled back, it isn't a subsidy.Daveyboy1961 said:
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7847/RobD said:
The UK would have had to have a significantly lower GDP to receive vast subsidies from the EU. Instead it got its own recycled money back (well, a small fraction of it).Daveyboy1961 said:
I suspect they are also benefiting from UK companies getting a foothold in Ireland to make trading with the rest of the EU easier. Also just as a matter of interest, Ireland may have benefitted from subsidies, like a lot of EU countries, but in return they joined a free trade area and customs Union etc. It's a shame we never made use of EU subsidies as much when we were in.HYUFD said:
Every region and country of the UK is net subsidised apart from London, the South East and East.Philip_Thompson said:
So committed to the union you want to continue to impoverish your "brothers" [and forgotten sisters no doubt] across the sea?HYUFD said:
Yes well we would expect no different from a republican, non Unionist, non conservative as you are.Philip_Thompson said:
Its an anomaly that should have never happened that has been almost criminally devastating to the people of Northern Ireland.Charles said:
The partition of Ireland is a historical anomaly, driven by decisions hundreds of years ago and then a political miscalculation by Carson combined with shameless manipulation and opportunism by Craig. It were better that it had never happened.kle4 said:A united Ireland makes sense on a number of points, but occasionally people stumble into arguing for it on the basis that both current entities are in the same island so should be together or words to that effect, which I doubt they hold consistently for other islands like hispaniola, new guinea or Britain, as if islands are required to have unified politics.
Unfortunately we are where we are - unless and until our brothers and sisters in the North chose differently they remain part of the United kingdom (which is why @Philip_Thompson ‘s approach - “good riddance” - is so inappropriate)
Unless I'm very much mistaken Northern Ireland was the relatively wealthier part of Ireland when partition happened. Now its completely the other way around as quite frankly the Republic has in recent decades much better managed their own business than the United Kingdom has managed Northern Ireland.
Which is hardly a surprise because the people of Northern Ireland are quite frankly a forgotten irrelevance to British politics. They're not even a part of Britain proper and the British parties don't even stand properly in Northern Ireland either.
Median full time salary in Northern Ireland is £28,000
Median full time salary in the Republic of Ireland is €48,946 which converts to £42,000
What possible good reason is there that the people of Northern Ireland should be worth 2/3rds of a person just over the border? Its a disgraceful and shameful situation and I unashamedly will say good riddance to it the day that the people in NI vote to end this ridiculous mess that should have never occurred. That's entirely appropriate in my eyes.
Some of us proper Conservatives however remain committed to our Unionist brothers across the sea.
The Republic of course has no NHS either unlike the UK, it has hospital charges instead which pay for its very low taxes to boost its median income. It also has investment from the EU you voted to leave
The union has failed Northern Ireland because the people of Northern Ireland are alternatively either forgotten about, misunderstood or treated as an inconvenience by their "brethren".
Self determination works better than subsidies which is why no amount of "subsidising" NI has made them succeed like the Republics self-determination has allowed them to succeed.
I wonder which is better off for a household's income - avoiding a £50 charge rarely needed, or £14,000 extra in annual salary? 🤔
On that basis the only parts of the UK left would be those 3 regions.
Ireland has also had vast subsidy from the EU, as almost every development project there has had EU funding.
It also benefits from very low corporation tax attracting multinational companies which Biden and the G7 want to end
We used to receive a lot of subsidies based on a like for like basis I think. I remember a large number of local charities and organisations also received funding from the EU, (CADW etc), in Pembrokeshire. It's a shame the local populace threw it away by putting their cross in the wrong box.
Anything we got back after was a subsidy.
It's like saying child benefit is a taxpayers tax recycled back, which is obvious rubbish.
The difference between that and EU funding is that a parent can decide how to spend child benefit however they wish.0
This discussion has been closed.