Osbourne Announces Benefit Changes for manifesto
Discussion
Rovinghawk said:
XJ Flyer said:
<reasons>
So you won't do it, you just think others should do it. Are you perchance a socialist?
As usual it is the so called 'Capitalists' who are the problem in preferring to invest the money in the far East and then put it on our trade deficit to take advantage of the cheap labour opportunities there as opposed to here.
JensenA said:
XJ said:
................Or for that matter importing higher priced goods from places like Germany to keep the German population happy for fear of them kicking off another war.
What a ridiculous statement! XJ Flyer said:
Supply and demand is just fine just so long as it isn't rigged in the form of exporting jobs to places like Mexico or China etc in the global free market economy or importing labour in the form of immigration.That would certainly produce a situation in which the 'natural level' wouldn't be the lowest.
You repeat these things as the root of all problems it seems. Supply and demand isn't rigged. We live in a global economy. Companies offshore because they believe there isn't the demand for services at a price point that accommodates our wage demands (minimum wage etc). Some of them were wrong and have onshored service as a selling point. So evidently supply and demand can work if we let it and we value the service sufficiently.
Incidentally, do you think it's the stinking rich who clamour for cheap services and products from places like China and India? My guess is these aren't the prime consumers...
Ref importing labour, my take on that is that if the unemployed were "encouraged" to work, there'd be little need. Evidently that's easier said than done.
sidicks said:
edh said:
Yes you said we'd get it back at some time in the future, well some of it anyway. I believe that much. Doesn't mean we shouldn't have the money now instead.
Unless it would have adverse consequences in the future, much worse than £50bn now...You want to cut spending yes?, I'm guessing you're not a Keynesian, so no counter cyclical spending to generate demand and growth, no borrowing for investment?
So why borrow to fund savings, just because you will get some of it back in the future? Let people make their own decisions about savings and pensions without trying to influence their behaviour with a massive bung.
Murph7355 said:
Ref importing labour, my take on that is that if the unemployed were "encouraged" to work, there'd be little need. Evidently that's easier said than done.
That's why outside our council refuse depot every morning there are 20-30 agency workers waiting on the off chance that someone won't turn up for his shift & they can get a few hours.There aren't enough hours to go round, too many part time jobs at present. May suit employers to keep people on 16h/week, I suspect to keep them under the threshold for employers NI
Now there's a tax that needs reforming - forget income tax thresholds & ask if NI makes any sense at all. Lots of rules about NI contribution to qualify for state pension, & some benefits.
Murph7355 said:
XJ Flyer said:
Supply and demand is just fine just so long as it isn't rigged in the form of exporting jobs to places like Mexico or China etc in the global free market economy or importing labour in the form of immigration.That would certainly produce a situation in which the 'natural level' wouldn't be the lowest.
You repeat these things as the root of all problems it seems. Supply and demand isn't rigged. We live in a global economy. Companies offshore because they believe there isn't the demand for services at a price point that accommodates our wage demands (minimum wage etc). Some of them were wrong and have onshored service as a selling point. So evidently supply and demand can work if we let it and we value the service sufficiently.
Incidentally, do you think it's the stinking rich who clamour for cheap services and products from places like China and India? My guess is these aren't the prime consumers...
Ref importing labour, my take on that is that if the unemployed were "encouraged" to work, there'd be little need. Evidently that's easier said than done.
Assuming that the domestic workforce is being employed at 'average' as opposed to minimum wage rates then they could afford to buy domestically made goods and contribute to the tax requirement.The money then stays in the domestic economy and doesn't go to make the Chinese Communist Party better off for example.
My take on the typical Con idea of 'encouraging people to work' is all about introducing a cheap labour Communist Chinese work ethic and wage structure in a so called Capitalist country to make the few at the top even richer.IE the Communist/Capitalist hybrid that is the global free market economy in action.Resistance to acceptance of the money on offer obviously just met by the importation of cheap immigrant labour in this case rather than force.
What can you expect from those who obviously profess to being Conservative but who apparently support and use the socialist idea of the NHS.Or who's idea of balancing the books is to pay a wage that is impossible to live on and then use benefits and tax breaks to top up the shortfall to add to the profits made from low wage employment.IE why would any employer want to pay a gross wage that covers the minimum wage plus tax when that employer can just pay the minimum wage with the state subsidising the difference.If that's Capitalism then I'm a gerbil.
Edited by XJ Flyer on Wednesday 1st October 19:41
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Even wikipedia also tells you that there was no 2.0 SD1 in 1976.Yes we know there were strikes throughout industry during the mid-late 1970's not just BL and I was one of those involved in them.The difference is in the Con version of history as opposed to the real version of history as to the 'reasons' for those strikes.That being workers expected to take pay cuts in the form of wage rises which didn't reflect the ( price led ) inflation rate and/or expected to do more work in a working day for effectively the same if not less money in real terms.IE exactly the same issues then as apply now.The difference being that the old wartime generations,who were at the forefront of those strikes,wouldn't stand for the type of exploitative economic policies which those in other cheap labour countries like Communist China and the recent generations of workers here do.Meanwhile as I've said the Germans got on with paying their workers a fair day's pay for a fair day's work and turning out those Mercs at the price of one Merc for more than the price of two Rovers.Assuming we're comparing like with like.
As for the Granada it 'would have been' better than an SD1,or for that matter a big Merc or BMW saloon,'if' it had been fitted with a decent V8 engine like the Rover and its South African and Australian versions.In which case,being lumbered with the V6,no it wouldn't have seen the tail lights of a manual V8 SD1.Which just left the shame of the poverty spec engineering and wage policies used by BL to keep the price down in the form its diabolical styling,build quality and live axle rear suspension.
The relevant bit for the topic in all this being that nothing changes in Lab,Lib or Con party policy in being closer to the Chinese Communist Party in their exploitative ideology than that of Kennedy's 1960's America.
Edited by XJ Flyer on Thursday 2nd October 11:13
Edited by XJ Flyer on Thursday 2nd October 11:14
XJ Flyer said:
Even wikipedia also tells you that there was no 2.0 SD1 in 1976.
Yes we know there were strikes throughout industry during the mid-late 1970's not just BL and I was one of those involved in them.The difference is in the Con version of history as opposed to the real version of history as to the 'reasons' for those strikes.That being workers expected to take pay cuts in the form of wage rises which didn't reflect the ( price led ) inflation rate and/or expected to do more work in a working day for effectively the same if not less money in real terms.IE exactly the same issues then as apply now.The difference being that the old wartime generations,who were at the forefront of those strikes,wouldn't stand for the type of exploitative economic policies which those in other cheap labour countries like Communist China and the recent generations of workers here do.Meanwhile as I've said the Germans got on with paying their workers a fair day's pay for a fair day's work and turning out those Mercs at the price of one Merc for more than the price of two Rovers.Assuming we're comparing like with like.
As for the Granada it 'would have been' better than an SD1,or for that matter a big Merc or BMW saloon,'if' it had been fitted with a decent V8 engine like the Rover and its South African and Australian versions.In which case,being lumbered with the V6,no it wouldn't have seen the tail lights of a manual V8 SD1.Which just left the shame of the poverty spec engineering and wage policies used by BL to keep the price down in the form its diabolical styling,build quality and live axle rear suspension.
The relevant bit for the topic in all this being that nothing changes in Lab,Lib or Con party policy in being closer to the Chinese Communist Party in their exploitative ideology than that of Kennedy's 1960's America.
The Germans were productive and earned their wages. Your lot didn't!Yes we know there were strikes throughout industry during the mid-late 1970's not just BL and I was one of those involved in them.The difference is in the Con version of history as opposed to the real version of history as to the 'reasons' for those strikes.That being workers expected to take pay cuts in the form of wage rises which didn't reflect the ( price led ) inflation rate and/or expected to do more work in a working day for effectively the same if not less money in real terms.IE exactly the same issues then as apply now.The difference being that the old wartime generations,who were at the forefront of those strikes,wouldn't stand for the type of exploitative economic policies which those in other cheap labour countries like Communist China and the recent generations of workers here do.Meanwhile as I've said the Germans got on with paying their workers a fair day's pay for a fair day's work and turning out those Mercs at the price of one Merc for more than the price of two Rovers.Assuming we're comparing like with like.
As for the Granada it 'would have been' better than an SD1,or for that matter a big Merc or BMW saloon,'if' it had been fitted with a decent V8 engine like the Rover and its South African and Australian versions.In which case,being lumbered with the V6,no it wouldn't have seen the tail lights of a manual V8 SD1.Which just left the shame of the poverty spec engineering and wage policies used by BL to keep the price down in the form its diabolical styling,build quality and live axle rear suspension.
The relevant bit for the topic in all this being that nothing changes in Lab,Lib or Con party policy in being closer to the Chinese Communist Party in their exploitative ideology than that of Kennedy's 1960's America.
Edited by XJ Flyer on Thursday 2nd October 11:13
Edited by XJ Flyer on Thursday 2nd October 11:14
XJ Flyer said:
I was one of those involved in them.The difference is in the Con version of history as opposed to the real version of history as to the 'reasons' for those strikes.That being workers expected to take pay cuts in the form of wage rises which didn't reflect the ( price led ) inflation rate and/or expected to do more work in a working day for effectively the same if not less money in real terms.
I remember one strike was in support of two guys on night shift who were sacked after being found tucked up in their sleeping bags with alarm clocks nearby.The union's position was that it was considered to be established custom & practice that a percentage of the night shift could sleep all night rather than work. That's rather different to your version of events.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I said I was part of the strikes going on during the same period 'throughout British industry' for the same reasons which were all about money nothing more nothing less.I had nothing to do with BL being involved in the specialist heavy vehicle sector.As for Rover if BL wanted to build a 'quality' product and if price didn't matter then they wouldn't have designed a cheap,ugly,compromised live axle shed in the form of the SD1.They would have made a direct competitor to the Merc at a Merc price and paid the workers who built it a German wage.
As for my area of the automotive industry during the period in question.
British v German guess which is British.The fact is the product is only as good as the money which the manufacturer wants to spend on building it and then charge for it.In this case the German product being the shed by comparison.Albeit a typically expensive German shed built by still better paid German workers.
www.saairforce.co.za/the-airforce/vehicles/5/pathf...
http://heavycherry.com/imgs/a/f/g/v/f/magirus_deut...
XJ Flyer said:
I said I was part of the strikes going on during the same period 'throughout British industry' for the same reasons which were all about money nothing more nothing less.I had nothing to do with BL being involved in the specialist heavy vehicle sector.
As for Rover if BL wanted to build a 'quality' product and if price didn't matter then they wouldn't have designed a cheap,ugly,compromised live axle shed in the form of the SD1.They would have made a direct competitor to the Merc at a Merc price and paid the workers who built it a German wage.
As for my area of the automotive industry during the period in question.
British v German guess which is British.The fact is the product is only as good as the money which the manufacturer wants to spend on building it and then charge for it.In this case the German product being the shed by comparison.Albeit a typically expensive German shed built by still better paid German workers.
www.saairforce.co.za/the-airforce/vehicles/5/pathf...
http://heavycherry.com/imgs/a/f/g/v/f/magirus_deut...
As for Rover if BL wanted to build a 'quality' product and if price didn't matter then they wouldn't have designed a cheap,ugly,compromised live axle shed in the form of the SD1.They would have made a direct competitor to the Merc at a Merc price and paid the workers who built it a German wage.
As for my area of the automotive industry during the period in question.
British v German guess which is British.The fact is the product is only as good as the money which the manufacturer wants to spend on building it and then charge for it.In this case the German product being the shed by comparison.Albeit a typically expensive German shed built by still better paid German workers.
www.saairforce.co.za/the-airforce/vehicles/5/pathf...
http://heavycherry.com/imgs/a/f/g/v/f/magirus_deut...
XJ Flyer said:
More like did much better out of the post war re building deal and Heath's EEC stitch up which saw us go from a trade surplus with Europe to a trade deficit.
Having seen your posts on several threads, you are either a troll or hold some very strange views.Oh and you have a terrible writing style and poor punctuation.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff