RJD

Nov 18 2014, 04:33 PM

Major Sinic

Nov 18 2014, 04:27 PM

jaguar

Nov 18 2014, 04:03 PM

papasmurf

Nov 18 2014, 11:24 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Who's going to revolt, certainly not the working classes, unless you mean the unions.

The Tories have now proven themselves totally unfit for office.

And you really believe Labour are.

I think there is an element here of Cameron getting any possible excuse in first! He is afterall a politician approaching an unforecastable general election.

Against the prophesy of a third global Armageddon is the continuing recovery in the US economy, forecast to grow by over 3% in 2015. Emerging and frontier economies are always more volatile than the first world economies but most are still growing even if the pace is lower and certainly there is increasingly effective market governance at least in Asia. The UK is still forcast to grow at around 2.9% in 2015, while finally the EU is stopping sitting on its hands wondering what to do and is showing signs through the ECB and Draghi, that they may start quantitative easing. It is not all doom and gloom.

On the other hand we have Islamic State, Ukraine v. Russia, Ebola and now Japan in recession which unsettles trading economies.

Global economic recovery is by no means certain but I think that Cameron is over stating the downside. So do the markets!

All just in preparation for the claim "you have done a good job so far, still a lot of risks and a way to go so don't let those Labour idiots, the ones that got us all into this mess, ruin all your hard work". It is predictable. It is the fear factor, but this time not of the unknown and that is Milli's problem, you see he has been fingered.

marybrown

Nov 18 2014, 04:37 PM

RJD

Nov 18 2014, 04:33 PM

Major Sinic

Nov 18 2014, 04:27 PM

jaguar

Nov 18 2014, 04:03 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

I think there is an element here of Cameron getting any possible excuse in first! He is afterall a politician approaching an unforecastable general election.

Against the prophesy of a third global Armageddon is the continuing recovery in the US economy, forecast to grow by over 3% in 2015. Emerging and frontier economies are always more volatile than the first world economies but most are still growing even if the pace is lower and certainly there is increasingly effective market governance at least in Asia. The UK is still forcast to grow at around 2.9% in 2015, while finally the EU is stopping sitting on its hands wondering what to do and is showing signs through the ECB and Draghi, that they may start quantitative easing. It is not all doom and gloom.

On the other hand we have Islamic State, Ukraine v. Russia, Ebola and now Japan in recession which unsettles trading economies.

Global economic recovery is by no means certain but I think that Cameron is over stating the downside. So do the markets!

All just in preparation for the claim "you have done a good job so far, still a lot of risks and a way to go so don't let those Labour idiots, the ones that got us all into this mess, ruin all your hard work". It is predictable. It is the fear factor, but this time not of the unknown and that is Milli's problem, you see he has been fingered.

Ed Milliband is doing more for the Conservative government than he will ever know..

RJD

Nov 18 2014, 04:49 PM

marybrown

Nov 18 2014, 04:37 PM

RJD

Nov 18 2014, 04:33 PM

Major Sinic

Nov 18 2014, 04:27 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

All just in preparation for the claim "you have done a good job so far, still a lot of risks and a way to go so don't let those Labour idiots, the ones that got us all into this mess, ruin all your hard work". It is predictable. It is the fear factor, but this time not of the unknown and that is Milli's problem, you see he has been fingered.

Ed Milliband is doing more for the Conservative government than he will ever know..

I think he knows Mary, he has been told often enough, but he is a Politician and they are all a bit power crazy.

marybrown

Nov 18 2014, 04:53 PM

RJD

Nov 18 2014, 04:49 PM

marybrown

Nov 18 2014, 04:37 PM

RJD

Nov 18 2014, 04:33 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Ed Milliband is doing more for the Conservative government than he will ever know..

I think he knows Mary, he has been told often enough, but he is a Politician and they are all a bit power crazy.

He can hardly string a sentence together...Can you imagine it..Can you?

We would be the laughing stock of the world..

RJD

Nov 18 2014, 04:28 PM

You must admit Mr Smurf that that chappy IDS is doing a grand job, he has managed, in the face of all those vested interests to get hundreds of thousands of people off their idle arses and back into work, so he says. Mind you "work" what's that in the scheme of things?

Date: 17 November 2014
Authors: Andrew Hood
Publisher: Institute for Fiscal Studies

Over the course of this parliament, the government have made changes to benefits and tax credits that, at the time they were announced, were expected to reduce spending in 2014–15 by £19 billion relative to a world of no policy change. In fact, real spending (after adjusting for CPI inflation) will be only £2.5 billion lower in 2014–15 than it was in 2010–11. This observation explains why.

If we adjust for prices using the CPI, the move from RPI to CPI for uprating benefits (expected to save over £4 billion in 2014–15) did not bring about a cut in spending over time – rather it meant benefits were no longer expected to increase in real terms. So we’re left with around £15 billion of cuts to explain, compared to an actual fall in real terms spending of around £2.5 billion.

Over a third of the remaining £12.5 billion gap is down to higher spending on pensioner benefits. Combined spending on state pensions, pension credit, and universal pensioner benefits such as the winter fuel payment will be £5 billion higher in 2014–15 than in 2010–11. All of that increase is explained by the rising cost of state pensions. To some extent this reflects an ageing population, with the number getting the state pension up 400,000 over the period. But it is mostly the result of higher spending per pensioner, with each recipient getting nearly £500 a year more on average. This was, for the most part, planned – as each new cohort of pensioners retire, they benefit from past decisions giving them more generous entitlements than previous generations.

Once we strip out pensioner benefits, we’re left with around £7.5 billion of extra spending to explain. In order to help with that task, Table 1 shows real terms spending on major working-age benefits in 2010–11 and 2014–15, alongside announced cuts (excluding the move from RPI to CPI indexation).

Table 1. Changes in spending and announced cuts for some major working-age benefits





Notes: Spending figures adjusted for CPI inflation. Spending on employment and support allowance not shown as cuts announced by previous government. Disability living allowance figures include personal independence payment. Cut to JSA is from 1% uprating and is approximate.

Source: Department for Work and Pensions benefit expenditure tables, Office for Budget Responsibility policy measures database.

The first thing to draw from the table is that there is actually more than £7.5 billion of extra spending to explain, once you take account of the fact that spending on JSA has fallen by around £1.3 billion as a result of lower unemployment.

Housing benefit explains £3 billion of the extra spending. Despite announced cuts of over £2 billion, real terms housing benefit spending will be nearly £1 billion higher in 2014­–15 than 2010–11. This was unanticipated – the OBR’s welfare trends report shows expected spending in 2014–15 has risen by nearly £3 billion since their June 2010 forecast. As they explain, the private rented sector has grown faster than expected, private rents have grown faster than expected, and earnings have grown more slowly than expected – all of which increase housing benefit spending. That slower-than-expected earnings growth also increases tax credit spending. Government cuts to tax credits total £4.6 billion, but spending in 2014–15 is expected to be down less than £3 billion on its 2010–11 level.

It’s not all about macroeconomic conditions though. The difference between the £1.2 billion cut to DLA spending that was announced and the £1.6 billion increase in spending that is now expected reflects the significant delays to the government’s replacement of DLA with the less generous personal independence payment. And although the introduction of employment and support allowance is not included in the £19 billion of cuts (since it was announced by the previous government), it too has saved much less than expected (for reasons discussed here).

All this has important fiscal consequences. Working-age benefit spending has always been sensitive to the unemployment rate. But the rapid growth of housing benefit and tax credits over the couple of decades (documented in this briefing note published today) means that slow earnings growth now has the potential to push up spending too. Much of the hoped-for savings from the introduction of ESA have failed to materialise, and it is an open question whether the personal independence payment will be any different. Mr Osborne wants further cuts to social security spending to help reduce the deficit. He may end up having to make cuts just to stay on track.

Note: The DWP benefit expenditure tables https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/benefit-expenditure-and-caseload-tables-2014 adjust spending figures for economy-wide inflation (as measured by the GDP deflator) – in those terms spending is expected to be £5 billion higher in 2014–15 than 2010–11.

RJD

Nov 18 2014, 08:01 AM

Second? 2nd. What about all those since the South Sea Bubble? Maybe not a crash but some form of economic malaise caused by global retrenchment brought about by distrust. Britain is no Island, must import or die, but we are probably now not the worse placed economy in the G20 to face the mini Tsunami. Italy will probably be washed away and take much of France with it.

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 12:03 AM

Tytoalba

Nov 17 2014, 11:02 PM

Do we play safe and believe him or do we just ignore him or stick our heads in the sand?

And do what exactly?

Cameron knows his gamble is going to fail, we have a growing economy (sic) but it has almost certainly been paid for with even more debt, increased productivity the real driver of genuine growth is nowhere to be seen.

And it's rather amusing that he can see a red light flashing on the dashboard but no one saw it flashing in 2007!

Pay more in taxes and make more government cuts. Increased productiuvity, is not going to do it especially when the return in GDP is divided between the increasing numbers of our population, many opf whom are immigrants and their decendents.
Paying out more for the NHS and social services benefits will not help.
We need a hard nosed government making the hard nosed decisions . no matter which party it is in power, be it Labour, Concervatives ,UKIP Greens or or the raving loonies.
We need what will be seen as a 'nasty party' within the constraints of a possible revolution.
Weak governments produce weak countries. and weak peope.

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 12:03 AM

Tytoalba

Nov 17 2014, 11:02 PM

Do we play safe and believe him or do we just ignore him or stick our heads in the sand?

And do what exactly?

Cameron knows his gamble is going to fail, we have a growing economy (sic) but it has almost certainly been paid for with even more debt, increased productivity the real driver of genuine growth is nowhere to be seen.

And it's rather amusing that he can see a red light flashing on the dashboard but no one saw it flashing in 2007!

Pay more in taxes and make more government cuts. Increased productiuvity, is not going to do it especially when the return in GDP is divided between the increasing numbers of our population, many opf whom are immigrants and their decendents.
Paying out more for the NHS and social services benefits will not help.
We need a hard nosed government making the hard nosed decisions . no matter which party it is in power, be it Labour, Concervatives ,UKIP Greens or or the raving loonies.
We need what will be seen as a 'nasty party' within the constraints of a possible revolution.
Weak governments produce weak countries. and weak peope.

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 09:51 PM

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 12:03 AM

Tytoalba

Nov 17 2014, 11:02 PM

Do we play safe and believe him or do we just ignore him or stick our heads in the sand?

And do what exactly?

Cameron knows his gamble is going to fail, we have a growing economy (sic) but it has almost certainly been paid for with even more debt, increased productivity the real driver of genuine growth is nowhere to be seen.

And it's rather amusing that he can see a red light flashing on the dashboard but no one saw it flashing in 2007!

Pay more in taxes and make more government cuts. Increased productiuvity, is not going to do it especially when the return in GDP is divided between the increasing numbers of our population, many opf whom are immigrants and their decendents.
Paying out more for the NHS and social services benefits will not help.
We need a hard nosed government making the hard nosed decisions . no matter which party it is in power, be it Labour, Concervatives ,UKIP Greens or or the raving loonies.
We need what will be seen as a 'nasty party' within the constraints of a possible revolution.
Weak governments produce weak countries. and weak peope.

More dozy wittering's, so the answer to a possible economic downturn is yet more of the tired rhetoric and screw the bottom end of society some more?

So far it's working a treat isn't it? We need to tackle the top end of society first otherwise any action is a waste of time, because after all shit runs downhill.

gansao

Nov 18 2014, 09:56 PM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 09:51 PM

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 12:03 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Pay more in taxes and make more government cuts. Increased productiuvity, is not going to do it especially when the return in GDP is divided between the increasing numbers of our population, many opf whom are immigrants and their decendents.
Paying out more for the NHS and social services benefits will not help.
We need a hard nosed government making the hard nosed decisions . no matter which party it is in power, be it Labour, Concervatives ,UKIP Greens or or the raving loonies.
We need what will be seen as a 'nasty party' within the constraints of a possible revolution.
Weak governments produce weak countries. and weak peope.

More dozy wittering's, so the answer to a possible economic downturn is yet more of the tired rhetoric and screw the bottom end of society some more?

So far it's working a treat isn't it? We need to tackle the top end of society first otherwise any action is a waste of time, because after all shit runs downhill.

Call me a romantic fool but I dont think that making the rich richer and the poor poorer is the way to make this country great again !nono!

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 10:01 PM

gansao

Nov 18 2014, 09:56 PM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 09:51 PM

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

More dozy wittering's, so the answer to a possible economic downturn is yet more of the tired rhetoric and screw the bottom end of society some more?

So far it's working a treat isn't it? We need to tackle the top end of society first otherwise any action is a waste of time, because after all shit runs downhill.

Call me a romantic fool but I dont think that making the rich richer and the poor poorer is the way to make this country great again !nono!

Indeed, we did not end up in the present mess because the poor had to much money and the rich to little!

Someone will be disagreeing with that tomorrow morning........

gansao

Nov 18 2014, 09:56 PM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 09:51 PM

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 12:03 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Pay more in taxes and make more government cuts. Increased productiuvity, is not going to do it especially when the return in GDP is divided between the increasing numbers of our population, many opf whom are immigrants and their decendents.
Paying out more for the NHS and social services benefits will not help.
We need a hard nosed government making the hard nosed decisions . no matter which party it is in power, be it Labour, Concervatives ,UKIP Greens or or the raving loonies.
We need what will be seen as a 'nasty party' within the constraints of a possible revolution.
Weak governments produce weak countries. and weak peope.

More dozy wittering's, so the answer to a possible economic downturn is yet more of the tired rhetoric and screw the bottom end of society some more?

So far it's working a treat isn't it? We need to tackle the top end of society first otherwise any action is a waste of time, because after all shit runs downhill.

Call me a romantic fool but I dont think that making the rich richer and the poor poorer is the way to make this country great again !nono!

Affa

Nov 18 2014, 07:45 PM

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 12:03 AM

Tytoalba

Nov 17 2014, 11:02 PM

Do we play safe and believe him or do we just ignore him or stick our heads in the sand?

And do what exactly?

Cameron knows his gamble is going to fail, we have a growing economy (sic) but it has almost certainly been paid for with even more debt, increased productivity the real driver of genuine growth is nowhere to be seen.

And it's rather amusing that he can see a red light flashing on the dashboard but no one saw it flashing in 2007!

Pay more in taxes and make more government cuts. Increased productiuvity, is not going to do it especially when the return in GDP is divided between the increasing numbers of our population, many opf whom are immigrants and their decendents.
Paying out more for the NHS and social services benefits will not help.
We need a hard nosed government making the hard nosed decisions . no matter which party it is in power, be it Labour, Concervatives ,UKIP Greens or or the raving loonies.
We need what will be seen as a 'nasty party' within the constraints of a possible revolution.
Weak governments produce weak countries. and weak peope.

It still hasn't registered with you that the country is among the wealthiest there are. The problem we have is that the wealth we record as a Nation is not being placed where it does most good for the Nation.
If it were then the opportunities for more people to share in this wealth creation AND increase it would escalate, business would be booming.

gansao

Nov 18 2014, 09:56 PM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 09:51 PM

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 12:03 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Pay more in taxes and make more government cuts. Increased productiuvity, is not going to do it especially when the return in GDP is divided between the increasing numbers of our population, many opf whom are immigrants and their decendents.
Paying out more for the NHS and social services benefits will not help.
We need a hard nosed government making the hard nosed decisions . no matter which party it is in power, be it Labour, Concervatives ,UKIP Greens or or the raving loonies.
We need what will be seen as a 'nasty party' within the constraints of a possible revolution.
Weak governments produce weak countries. and weak peope.

More dozy wittering's, so the answer to a possible economic downturn is yet more of the tired rhetoric and screw the bottom end of society some more?

So far it's working a treat isn't it? We need to tackle the top end of society first otherwise any action is a waste of time, because after all shit runs downhill.

Call me a romantic fool but I dont think that making the rich richer and the poor poorer is the way to make this country great again !nono!

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 08:24 AM

Affa

Nov 18 2014, 07:45 PM

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 12:03 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Pay more in taxes and make more government cuts. Increased productiuvity, is not going to do it especially when the return in GDP is divided between the increasing numbers of our population, many opf whom are immigrants and their decendents.
Paying out more for the NHS and social services benefits will not help.
We need a hard nosed government making the hard nosed decisions . no matter which party it is in power, be it Labour, Concervatives ,UKIP Greens or or the raving loonies.
We need what will be seen as a 'nasty party' within the constraints of a possible revolution.
Weak governments produce weak countries. and weak peope.

It still hasn't registered with you that the country is among the wealthiest there are. The problem we have is that the wealth we record as a Nation is not being placed where it does most good for the Nation.
If it were then the opportunities for more people to share in this wealth creation AND increase it would escalate, business would be booming.

Then tell us how to garner this wealth in a sustainable manner and how to spend such in a more sensible manner. If you are thinking about Politicians picking winners they forget it. Best let Customers do the picking.

AndyK

Nov 19 2014, 08:47 AM

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 08:24 AM

Affa

Nov 18 2014, 07:45 PM

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

It still hasn't registered with you that the country is among the wealthiest there are. The problem we have is that the wealth we record as a Nation is not being placed where it does most good for the Nation.
If it were then the opportunities for more people to share in this wealth creation AND increase it would escalate, business would be booming.

Then tell us how to garner this wealth in a sustainable manner and how to spend such in a more sensible manner. If you are thinking about Politicians picking winners they forget it. Best let Customers do the picking.

The big mistake was giving the QE money to the banks, because it went straight into the pockets of the rich.

It would have been better for everybody and the economy if they had given it to the people directly.

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 08:55 AM

Really so they can spend such on importing more South Korean TVs?

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 08:24 AM

Then tell us how to garner this wealth in a sustainable manner and how to spend such in a more sensible manner. If you are thinking about Politicians picking winners they forget it. Best let Customers do the picking.

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 08:30 AM

gansao

Nov 18 2014, 09:56 PM

Tigger

Nov 18 2014, 09:51 PM

Tytoalba

Nov 18 2014, 11:09 AM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

More dozy wittering's, so the answer to a possible economic downturn is yet more of the tired rhetoric and screw the bottom end of society some more?

So far it's working a treat isn't it? We need to tackle the top end of society first otherwise any action is a waste of time, because after all shit runs downhill.

Call me a romantic fool but I dont think that making the rich richer and the poor poorer is the way to make this country great again !nono!

Nobodies intention and this phenomena, if a phenomena it is, started a very long time ago before the present Gov. was formed. This Gov. which has done a lot more than the last one to address "net disposable" by lifting tax thresholds has not made an impact and the problem, as we have seen, is not just financial it is also cultural, social, much to do with education and stable homes with the nurture of a, dare I say it, Mummy and Daddy. Throwing even more money at this issue will not alone solve any of the problems. We had less in the 1940s and achieved much greater social mobility, just look at what all those Grammar School kids from poor homes achieved.

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 12:26 PM

As for grammar schools , yes they did help social mobility in the less well off but grammar schools are only a part of it. You should know that in your days in was far easier to get an apprenticeship, there was far better government training schemes too.

papasmurf

Nov 19 2014, 12:38 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 12:26 PM

As for grammar schools , yes they did help social mobility in the less well off but grammar schools are only a part of it. You should know that in your days in was far easier to get an apprenticeship, there was far better government training schemes too.

I had no problem getting an apprenticeship back in 1965, because I had paid for a one year intensive engineering course myself at a technical college before I applied for the apprenticeship. (Several days a week that engineering course were from 9am until 9pm.)
Today neither the engineering course, the apprenticeship, or the factory where I did it exist.

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 12:50 PM

Try to get worthwhile certified training or apprenticeship nowadays.Good luck with that..

papasmurf

Nov 19 2014, 12:38 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 12:26 PM

As for grammar schools , yes they did help social mobility in the less well off but grammar schools are only a part of it. You should know that in your days in was far easier to get an apprenticeship, there was far better government training schemes too.

I had no problem getting an apprenticeship back in 1965, because I had paid for a one year intensive engineering course myself at a technical college before I applied for the apprenticeship. (Several days a week that engineering course were from 9am until 9pm.)
Today neither the engineering course, the apprenticeship, or the factory where I did it exist.

AndyK

Nov 19 2014, 01:16 PM

papasmurf

Nov 19 2014, 12:38 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 12:26 PM

As for grammar schools , yes they did help social mobility in the less well off but grammar schools are only a part of it. You should know that in your days in was far easier to get an apprenticeship, there was far better government training schemes too.

I had no problem getting an apprenticeship back in 1965, because I had paid for a one year intensive engineering course myself at a technical college before I applied for the apprenticeship. (Several days a week that engineering course were from 9am until 9pm.)
Today neither the engineering course, the apprenticeship, or the factory where I did it exist.

Apprenticeships were good, but we no longer have any large scale engineering businesses to run apprenticeship schemes.

The chicken must come before the egg.

AndyK

Nov 19 2014, 01:16 PM

Apprenticeships were good, but we no longer have any large scale engineering businesses to run apprenticeship schemes.

papasmurf

Nov 19 2014, 09:00 AM

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 08:55 AM

Really so they can spend such on importing more South Korean TVs?

So they would not need to make a choice between heating or eating, or paying the rent or eating.

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 01:19 PM

AndyK

Nov 19 2014, 01:16 PM

papasmurf

Nov 19 2014, 12:38 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 12:26 PM

As for grammar schools , yes they did help social mobility in the less well off but grammar schools are only a part of it. You should know that in your days in was far easier to get an apprenticeship, there was far better government training schemes too.

I had no problem getting an apprenticeship back in 1965, because I had paid for a one year intensive engineering course myself at a technical college before I applied for the apprenticeship. (Several days a week that engineering course were from 9am until 9pm.)
Today neither the engineering course, the apprenticeship, or the factory where I did it exist.

Apprenticeships were good, but we no longer have any large scale engineering businesses to run apprenticeship schemes.

The chicken must come before the egg.

Apprenticeships and or training programmes do not have to only apply to large scale engineering industry.
I think that has been made plain in previous posts.

Also the question should asked WHY we do not have large scale engineering businesses

papasmurf

Nov 19 2014, 01:09 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 12:50 PM

Try to get worthwhile certified training or apprenticeship nowadays.Good luck with that..

Quite. It will be interesting to see how long it takes me find a qualified gas fitter to connect my new gas hob and certificate it.

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 05:16 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 01:19 PM

AndyK

Nov 19 2014, 01:16 PM

papasmurf

Nov 19 2014, 12:38 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Apprenticeships were good, but we no longer have any large scale engineering businesses to run apprenticeship schemes.

The chicken must come before the egg.

Apprenticeships and or training programmes do not have to only apply to large scale engineering industry.
I think that has been made plain in previous posts.

Also the question should asked WHY we do not have large scale engineering businesses

Manufacture of mechanically engineered products consumes a lot of labour, but they do not necessarily produce much in the way of value added per person. It is well established that we can make better profit margins per unit of labour cost from Financial Services, but unfortunately that sector does not require those that have only manual dexterity on offer. It is also true that modern factories, particularly electronics, brown and white goods are so automated these days that they to do not require much labour, but a lot of capital equipment. The truth is that for a long time now we have made more profit from the employment of capital than from labour.
Our problem here in the UK and worldwide is not what to do with those with educations and skills, they find their niche, but the abundance and massive surplus of unskilled workers. Unless we get them some skills I doubt that there is an acceptable easy solution to that problem.

We have spent far too much of our energy arguing about the sharing of the pie and not enough on it's quality.

jaguar

Nov 19 2014, 05:22 PM

Make sure He or She is Corgi or is it now Gas Safe Registered.

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 05:16 PM

We have spent far too much of our energy arguing about the sharing of the pie and not enough on it's quality.

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 05:36 PM

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 05:16 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 01:19 PM

AndyK

Nov 19 2014, 01:16 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Apprenticeships and or training programmes do not have to only apply to large scale engineering industry.
I think that has been made plain in previous posts.

Also the question should asked WHY we do not have large scale engineering businesses

Manufacture of mechanically engineered products consumes a lot of labour, but they do not necessarily produce much in the way of value added per person. It is well established that we can make better profit margins per unit of labour cost from Financial Services, but unfortunately that sector does not require those that have only manual dexterity on offer. It is also true that modern factories, particularly electronics, brown and white goods are so automated these days that they to do not require much labour, but a lot of capital equipment. The truth is that for a long time now we have made more profit from the employment of capital than from labour.
Our problem here in the UK and worldwide is not what to do with those with educations and skills, they find their niche, but the abundance and massive surplus of unskilled workers. Unless we get them some skills I doubt that there is an acceptable easy solution to that problem.

We have spent far too much of our energy arguing about the sharing of the pie and not enough on it's quality.

You seem to use 'we' a lot. However if one section of the economy makes a higher margin than the rest and that money is not spread across all of the society then there is no 'we' involved.
Anyone who believes that a society can be viable if wealth is created and contained by an elite section of that society without addressing the rest of it is deluded

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 06:07 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 05:36 PM

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 05:16 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 01:19 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Manufacture of mechanically engineered products consumes a lot of labour, but they do not necessarily produce much in the way of value added per person. It is well established that we can make better profit margins per unit of labour cost from Financial Services, but unfortunately that sector does not require those that have only manual dexterity on offer. It is also true that modern factories, particularly electronics, brown and white goods are so automated these days that they to do not require much labour, but a lot of capital equipment. The truth is that for a long time now we have made more profit from the employment of capital than from labour.
Our problem here in the UK and worldwide is not what to do with those with educations and skills, they find their niche, but the abundance and massive surplus of unskilled workers. Unless we get them some skills I doubt that there is an acceptable easy solution to that problem.

We have spent far too much of our energy arguing about the sharing of the pie and not enough on it's quality.

You seem to use 'we' a lot. However if one section of the economy makes a higher margin than the rest and that money is not spread across all of the society then there is no 'we' involved.
Anyone who believes that a society can be viable if wealth is created and contained by an elite section of that society without addressing the rest of it is deluded

"We" is understood and is different than "all". I do not believe in the Communist dogma about each to his needs, that one failed miserably and ended up with bread queues and just the Apperatachiks eating caviar. That said there does need to be a greater equity, but that should not be on the basis that we encourage idleness. I have made the challenge here at least a dozen times with no sensible outcome, just tell me how you intend to garner ~£20b PA from the top and distribute this in a sustainable manner without detriment to the economy. You have already seen that the tax base has become narrower how narrow do you think you can push it?

As for the "we" yes we cannot leave it to the left to look for solutions, they only do the anger bit.

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 06:07 PM

As for the "we" yes we cannot leave it to the left to look for solutions, they only do the anger bit.

RJD

Nov 19 2014, 05:16 PM

gansao

Nov 19 2014, 01:19 PM

AndyK

Nov 19 2014, 01:16 PM

papasmurf

Nov 19 2014, 12:38 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Apprenticeships were good, but we no longer have any large scale engineering businesses to run apprenticeship schemes.

The chicken must come before the egg.

Apprenticeships and or training programmes do not have to only apply to large scale engineering industry.
I think that has been made plain in previous posts.

Also the question should asked WHY we do not have large scale engineering businesses

Manufacture of mechanically engineered products consumes a lot of labour, but they do not necessarily produce much in the way of value added per person. It is well established that we can make better profit margins per unit of labour cost from Financial Services, but unfortunately that sector does not require those that have only manual dexterity on offer. It is also true that modern factories, particularly electronics, brown and white goods are so automated these days that they to do not require much labour, but a lot of capital equipment. The truth is that for a long time now we have made more profit from the employment of capital than from labour.
Our problem here in the UK and worldwide is not what to do with those with educations and skills, they find their niche, but the abundance and massive surplus of unskilled workers. Unless we get them some skills I doubt that there is an acceptable easy solution to that problem.

We have spent far too much of our energy arguing about the sharing of the pie and not enough on it's quality.