Quote:

 

Britain's job-rich recovery will strengthen next year, with robust growth in permanent employment paving the way for the broadest rise in real pay since before the financial crisis, according to a respected survey.
The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said half of all businesses planned to step-up hiring in 2015, with growth expected in every region of the UK next year.

disgruntled porker

Dec 22 2014, 09:33 AM

If this ballbag of a govnt told ReJinalD that penguins lived in trees and ate pencils, he'd believe them!

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 09:19 AM

Quote:

 

Britain's job-rich recovery will strengthen next year, with robust growth in permanent employment paving the way for the broadest rise in real pay since before the financial crisis, according to a respected survey.
The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said half of all businesses planned to step-up hiring in 2015, with growth expected in every region of the UK next year.

This is certainly not what the Jeremiahs who always wish to talk Britain down wish to hear. No doubt they will claim such statements are pure propaganda.


Job rich recovery

papasmurf

Dec 22 2014, 09:25 AM

RJD, a lot of low paid jobs, even if full time, do nothing to help the government finances. The much trumpeted 2 million jobs thus far are not much of a success when the zero hours contracts, part time employment and spurious self employed are taken into account. There is nothing Jeremiah about that, just the Torygraph does not mention it.

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 12:21 PM

Then there is the problem that 11% of males and 17% of females in the low income bracket are on antidepressants.

Set to increase as the callousness of this government expands catching even more people in the low income bracket?

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 01:41 PM

This Gov. has increased Tax Thresholds.

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 01:41 PM

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 12:21 PM

Then there is the problem that 11% of males and 17% of females in the low income bracket are on antidepressants.

Set to increase as the callousness of this government expands catching even more people in the low income bracket?

Best you show how such nets have been set up? This Gov. has increased Tax Thresholds. As for those receiving antidepressants I wonder what conclusions you are able to draw from this? Or is it just another load of steaming unscientific sewage from the Red Nag? You can tell when the left is on the run.

papasmurf

Dec 22 2014, 02:03 PM

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 01:41 PM

This Gov. has increased Tax Thresholds.

Which has not even come close to compensation for inflation and wages staying static for millions of people for years.

krugerman

Dec 22 2014, 03:58 PM

One of the reasons why the governments deficit reduction plans are way off course, is the fact that the amount of taxation flowing into the treasurey has not risen, even though employment is rising, which tells you a story.

Almost all the jobs been created are low paid jobs, most paying national minimum wage, retail work, zero hours contracts are booming, your rights as an employee are far worse now than they were in 2010, all part of Camerons race to the bottom.

Lots of cheap jobs on the cheap, driving down living standards, no security, no prosperity, a dead end future from a soon to be dead government.

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 04:19 PM

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 01:41 PM

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 12:21 PM

Then there is the problem that 11% of males and 17% of females in the low income bracket are on antidepressants.

Set to increase as the callousness of this government expands catching even more people in the low income bracket?

Best you show how such nets have been set up? This Gov. has increased Tax Thresholds. As for those receiving antidepressants I wonder what conclusions you are able to draw from this? Or is it just another load of steaming unscientific sewage from the Red Nag? You can tell when the left is on the run.

The information I posted came from a medical backed comment on TV.
The fact that the use of antidepressants has increased over the last 30 years is not in dispute, you can google it if you wish.

While greater access to psychological assessments and the ability to diagnose actual depression have increased, it does not remove the fact that the use of antidepressants has increased faster since the international financial meltdown.

Your post only exposes your own inner conflict, a rather nasty distrust of others and a need for others to see the world as you do. Perhaps you would benefit from seeing a good counsellor? You might even benefit from a spell on the right antidepressants. (Don not take tranquilizers for more that a few weeks).

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 04:22 PM

papasmurf

Dec 22 2014, 02:03 PM

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 01:41 PM

This Gov. has increased Tax Thresholds.

Which has not even come close to compensation for inflation and wages staying static for millions of people for years.

Apparently the low paid are £300 a year worse off than in 2008.

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 04:27 PM

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 04:19 PM

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 01:41 PM

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 12:21 PM

Then there is the problem that 11% of males and 17% of females in the low income bracket are on antidepressants.

Set to increase as the callousness of this government expands catching even more people in the low income bracket?

Best you show how such nets have been set up? This Gov. has increased Tax Thresholds. As for those receiving antidepressants I wonder what conclusions you are able to draw from this? Or is it just another load of steaming unscientific sewage from the Red Nag? You can tell when the left is on the run.

The information I posted came from a medical backed comment on TV.
The fact that the use of antidepressants has increased over the last 30 years is not in dispute, you can google it if you wish.

While greater access to psychological assessments and the ability to diagnose actual depression have increased, it does not remove the fact that the use of antidepressants has increased faster since the international financial meltdown.

Your post only exposes your own inner conflict, a rather nasty distrust of others and a need for others to see the world as you do. Perhaps you would benefit from seeing a good counsellor? You might even benefit from a spell on the right antidepressants. (Don not take tranquilizers for more that a few weeks).

I believe you, I just cannot find the logical connection you wish to make. Seems it just suits your dogma so you assume it to be so. Not very scientific. Oh by the way we are now taking a lot more Statins than we used to and the populous is more obese, so what do you conclude from that?

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 04:28 PM

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 04:22 PM

papasmurf

Dec 22 2014, 02:03 PM

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 01:41 PM

This Gov. has increased Tax Thresholds.

Which has not even come close to compensation for inflation and wages staying static for millions of people for years.

Apparently the low paid are £300 a year worse off than in 2008.

Only £300. Well if we could get rid of the Payroll Taxes they would be a net £400 better off.

Quote:

 

No doubt they will claim such statements are pure propaganda.

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 04:24 PM

krugerman

Dec 22 2014, 03:58 PM

One of the reasons why the governments deficit reduction plans are way off course, is the fact that the amount of taxation flowing into the treasurey has not risen, even though employment is rising, which tells you a story.

Almost all the jobs been created are low paid jobs, most paying national minimum wage, retail work, zero hours contracts are booming, your rights as an employee are far worse now than they were in 2010, all part of Camerons race to the bottom.

Lots of cheap jobs on the cheap, driving down living standards, no security, no prosperity, a dead end future from a soon to be dead government.

But nothing from Labour about how they are going to reengineer the UK's role in the Global Economy in order to change this and with a stroke of Brownian magic suddenly everyone will be much better paid. The left whinge and whine, but thus far not one glimmer of a solution. How can anyone vote for a Party that is totally without any strategy for the economy and just about everything else? Truth is that unless value is added then customers are not going to pay higher prices to cover higher wages, so the low wages will have to be subsidised by others.

Pro Veritas

Dec 22 2014, 07:37 PM

Is a " jobs rich recovery" just a euphemism for "modern wage-slavery"?


A "jobs rich recovery" is a meaningless phrase.

The only recovery that matters to the majority is a "living standards recovery" and living standards are still in decline.

It is a mark of shame on this government and previous governments that a country that has the 6th largest economy on the planet is also a country that is seeing the necessity of food-banks increase almost exponentially.

This shows us, beyond doubt, that a "jobs rich recovery" is just slang for a "debt slavery recovery".

Anyone, and I mean anyone, who dare to try and crow about the economic achievements of this country over the last 5 years really should hang their heads in shame.

Crippling the NHS to the point where the police are having to use their vehicles as proxy ambulances is not indicative of a recovery.

Millions of people needing assistance from food banks is not indicative of a recovery.

A massive increase in In-Work benefits spending because the jobs being created are low-wage, low-hours temporary contract tax-burdens is not indicative of a recovery.

We may have a "jobs recovery" but all other indicators are that we are a long way don shit-creek and Scameron is busy selling our last paddle to the next round of city-spivs looking for yet another undervalued IPO.

Shameful, by any civilised measure shameful.

All The Best

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 09:19 AM

Quote:

 

Britain's job-rich recovery will strengthen next year, with robust growth in permanent employment paving the way for the broadest rise in real pay since before the financial crisis, according to a respected survey.
The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said half of all businesses planned to step-up hiring in 2015, with growth expected in every region of the UK next year.

This is certainly not what the Jeremiahs who always wish to talk Britain down wish to hear. No doubt they will claim such statements are pure propaganda.


Job rich recovery

Tigger

Dec 22 2014, 08:56 PM

Pro Veritas

Dec 22 2014, 07:37 PM

Is a " jobs rich recovery" just a euphemism for "modern wage-slavery"?


A "jobs rich recovery" is a meaningless phrase.

The only recovery that matters to the majority is a "living standards recovery" and living standards are still in decline.

It is a mark of shame on this government and previous governments that a country that has the 6th largest economy on the planet is also a country that is seeing the necessity of food-banks increase almost exponentially.

This shows us, beyond doubt, that a "jobs rich recovery" is just slang for a "debt slavery recovery".

Anyone, and I mean anyone, who dare to try and crow about the economic achievements of this country over the last 5 years really should hang their heads in shame.

Crippling the NHS to the point where the police are having to use their vehicles as proxy ambulances is not indicative of a recovery.

Millions of people needing assistance from food banks is not indicative of a recovery.

A massive increase in In-Work benefits spending because the jobs being created are low-wage, low-hours temporary contract tax-burdens is not indicative of a recovery.

We may have a "jobs recovery" but all other indicators are that we are a long way don shit-creek and Scameron is busy selling our last paddle to the next round of city-spivs looking for yet another undervalued IPO.

Shameful, by any civilised measure shameful.

All The Best

Good post, my biggest worry as a fifty something year old who has been lucky enough to live through a period of easy to find jobs and cheap access to education and training is that the current shower of shit that sits in Parliament is intent on denying the present upcoming generations the same feather bed that I got to lay on.

It also expects those denied these advantages to pay for me in my retirement, if you are under forty refuse to pay and punish those at the ballot box who ignore your plight.

Some of my generation would be happy to live in gated communities and turn their noses up at the plight facing this country, not me...........

ACH1967

Dec 23 2014, 08:28 AM

There you go Tigger...castigated for giving a shit. Says it all really.

Quote:

 

You have to recognise the effect of an over supply of a commodity such as unskilled labour

Pro Veritas

Dec 23 2014, 08:52 AM

ACH1967

Dec 23 2014, 08:28 AM

There you go Tigger...castigated for giving a shit. Says it all really.

Really is quite shocking.

Still, we are, by and large, a nation indoctrinated by Thatcherism and its "lite version" Blairism to care only about ourselves, to aspire to nothing more than greed, and to spend money we can't afford on shit we don't need, and then send it to landfill.

Rich strikes me as an honest, hard-working, plain-speaking working-class man. And I, unlike our political leaders, do not use the term "working class" as a term of scorn or ridicule, but as one of pride.

But it does surprise me that Rich doesn't seem able to grasp that he, like 99% of working class people, is probably only ever two pay checks away from being among the group of people he seems most eager to scorn and slander.

Maybe that is Thatcher and Blair's greatest legacy - we have been indoctrinated to not see just how close we are to socio-economic peril.

All The Best

disgruntled porker

Dec 23 2014, 09:16 AM

ReJinalD said:

Quote:

 

You have to recognise the effect of an over supply of a commodity such as unskilled labour

And here's the real bugger of it. ReJinald only sees people as a commodity. Part of a business. One day he may realise that the country is not a business and that it's inhabitants are not merely factors of production to be discarded if they do not make a profit as individual entities.

Affa

Dec 23 2014, 11:17 AM

To interject a little alternative narrative - I read that people (here) generally accept that high unemployment is an unavoidable fact of life of the modern era, and (worse) that the low skilled, low intelligent, cannot expect to be gainfully employed, to be in a position to earn a living.

I accept none of that.
There are literally millions of jobs to do, and most of them demanding low skills. The roads are full of pot holes, our parks growing wild, the streets littered, the bins overflowing, are just examples of work not done = none jobs some will say, but the big challenge is "who's to pay for it"?

So it isn't that there are not enough jobs to be done. It is a shortage of funding, of investment, of political will to do the right thing.

Rich

Dec 23 2014, 01:58 AM

Tigger

Dec 22 2014, 08:56 PM

Pro Veritas

Dec 22 2014, 07:37 PM

Is a " jobs rich recovery" just a euphemism for "modern wage-slavery"?


A "jobs rich recovery" is a meaningless phrase.

The only recovery that matters to the majority is a "living standards recovery" and living standards are still in decline.

It is a mark of shame on this government and previous governments that a country that has the 6th largest economy on the planet is also a country that is seeing the necessity of food-banks increase almost exponentially.

This shows us, beyond doubt, that a "jobs rich recovery" is just slang for a "debt slavery recovery".

Anyone, and I mean anyone, who dare to try and crow about the economic achievements of this country over the last 5 years really should hang their heads in shame.

Crippling the NHS to the point where the police are having to use their vehicles as proxy ambulances is not indicative of a recovery.

Millions of people needing assistance from food banks is not indicative of a recovery.

A massive increase in In-Work benefits spending because the jobs being created are low-wage, low-hours temporary contract tax-burdens is not indicative of a recovery.

We may have a "jobs recovery" but all other indicators are that we are a long way don shit-creek and Scameron is busy selling our last paddle to the next round of city-spivs looking for yet another undervalued IPO.

Shameful, by any civilised measure shameful.

All The Best

Good post, my biggest worry as a fifty something year old who has been lucky enough to live through a period of easy to find jobs and cheap access to education and training is that the current shower of shit that sits in Parliament is intent on denying the present upcoming generations the same feather bed that I got to lay on.

It also expects those denied these advantages to pay for me in my retirement, if you are under forty refuse to pay and punish those at the ballot box who ignore your plight.

Some of my generation would be happy to live in gated communities and turn their noses up at the plight facing this country, not me...........

All bow to saint Tigger, the new martyr of the oppressed, I wonder when he will give his wealth to the poor and open his home to the homeless? perhaps he could ask Russell brand for some advice on that one, oh, and don't forget saint Geldof et al who are at the debtors courts trying to make ends meet.

ACH1967

Dec 23 2014, 11:26 AM

Affa

Dec 23 2014, 11:17 AM

To interject a little alternative narrative - I read that people (here) generally accept that high unemployment is an unavoidable fact of life of the modern era, and (worse) that the low skilled, low intelligent, cannot expect to be gainfully employed, to be in a position to earn a living.

I accept none of that.
There are literally millions of jobs to do, and most of them demanding low skills. The roads are full of pot holes, our parks growing wild, the streets littered, the bins overflowing, are just examples of work not done = none jobs some will say, but the big challenge is "who's to pay for it"?

So it isn't that there are not enough jobs to be done. It is a shortage of funding, of investment, of political will to do the right thing.

I am not accepting that high unemployment is such for the low skilled low intelligence. If you want to employ them for production of goods for export then it is unlikely they will be in a position to earn a living due to competition.

If you want to employ them for the domestic market then as you say somebody needs to pay. Now if you are offering to pay excellent, if you are suggesting that somebody else pay well I guess we will see what you are suggesting if you respond.

Pro Veritas

Dec 23 2014, 08:52 AM

ACH1967

Dec 23 2014, 08:28 AM

There you go Tigger...castigated for giving a shit. Says it all really.

Really is quite shocking.

Still, we are, by and large, a nation indoctrinated by Thatcherism and its "lite version" Blairism to care only about ourselves, to aspire to nothing more than greed, and to spend money we can't afford on shit we don't need, and then send it to landfill.

Rich strikes me as an honest, hard-working, plain-speaking working-class man. And I, unlike our political leaders, do not use the term "working class" as a term of scorn or ridicule, but as one of pride.

But it does surprise me that Rich doesn't seem able to grasp that he, like 99% of working class people, is probably only ever two pay checks away from being among the group of people he seems most eager to scorn and slander.

Maybe that is Thatcher and Blair's greatest legacy - we have been indoctrinated to not see just how close we are to socio-economic peril.

All The Best

C-too

Dec 23 2014, 11:45 AM

Thatcher's legacy completely ignored the plight of the poor, Blair's did not.

Affa

Dec 23 2014, 11:41 AM

ACH1967

Dec 23 2014, 11:26 AM

Affa

Dec 23 2014, 11:17 AM

To interject a little alternative narrative - I read that people (here) generally accept that high unemployment is an unavoidable fact of life of the modern era, and (worse) that the low skilled, low intelligent, cannot expect to be gainfully employed, to be in a position to earn a living.

I accept none of that.
There are literally millions of jobs to do, and most of them demanding low skills. The roads are full of pot holes, our parks growing wild, the streets littered, the bins overflowing, are just examples of work not done = none jobs some will say, but the big challenge is "who's to pay for it"?

So it isn't that there are not enough jobs to be done. It is a shortage of funding, of investment, of political will to do the right thing.

I am not accepting that high unemployment is such for the low skilled low intelligence. If you want to employ them for production of goods for export then it is unlikely they will be in a position to earn a living due to competition.

If you want to employ them for the domestic market then as you say somebody needs to pay. Now if you are offering to pay excellent, if you are suggesting that somebody else pay well I guess we will see what you are suggesting if you respond.

You want details, sorry, not yet anyhow, ..... but a reminder that the country, small as it is, is still among the richest there is.

That wealth could be distributed a lot better, to do a lot more, than it currently is.

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 05:14 PM

RJD

Dec 22 2014, 04:28 PM

C-too

Dec 22 2014, 04:22 PM

papasmurf

Dec 22 2014, 02:03 PM

Quoting limited to 4 levels deep

Apparently the low paid are £300 a year worse off than in 2008.

Only £300. Well if we could get rid of the Payroll Taxes they would be a net £400 better off.

But as the situation stands?

RJD

Dec 23 2014, 04:04 PM

Castigate the Gov. by all means but the only stick you have is for not cutting fast enough.

Pro Veritas

Dec 23 2014, 04:24 PM

RJD

Dec 23 2014, 04:04 PM

Castigate the Gov. by all means but the only stick you have is for not cutting fast enough.

Rubbish.

They could cut less and still achieve the rebalancing they need if they taxed companies and the wealthy at the same level as they tax the poor.

All The Best

RJD

Dec 23 2014, 04:04 PM

The UK is not a low tax country, quite the contrary, and there is no evidence to show that higher taxes will help, the likelihood is that they will hinder and possibly result in lower overall revenues. There is no other route to cutting VAT and Payroll Taxes than first to cut the size of the State, relying on GDP growth is fanciful as we have seen. And no the quality of the GDP growth experienced by this Gov. would have been no better had the last lot continued only the volume might have been lower. You cannot buck the market there are just too many people chasing too few jobs.

RJD

Dec 23 2014, 04:34 PM

Also ask yourself why is the UK currently a magnet for inward investment,