Globalisation

[avinalarf]

Thanks sidicks for your input.
Yes I know a tax on property is in place,I should have said a more onerous tax.
Yes I know that there are government training projects but they do not compensate for the wholesale decimation of industries and consequent job losses.
As I said in my original post I believe that globalisation has had its good and bad consequences that we have discussed,to a certain extent,but nobody has really addressed the question of how we should deal with the consequences.
Is it really an inevitable game changer,similar to the industrial revolution ,that will cause huge pain to a generation of the indigenous workforce ?
Is it only reasonable that Third World Economies be able to lift their populations from real poverty and compete on the World Stage ?
Are we in the age of Corporate Government where the large multi nationals dictate to governments the way in which trade is conducted ?
Has a nation's government an obligation to secure a fair playing field that offers its electorate a chance of a job and reasonable expectations of a decent standard of living ?
Are we in the "Wild West" where the rich get richer and the poor see no hope of bettering themselves ?
Do we believe in "Society" a society where it is thought that the well being of ALL its people is for the greater good ?

[avinalarf]

Dr Jekyll said:

If the playing field was completely level there would be no point in trade at all.

i
Yes there would.
I buy from companies that offer me a product that suits my perceived customer profile,that offer a reliable service,that offer resonable settlement terms etc.etc.
There is plenty of room for competition with many reasons from whom we wish to make a purchase within the parameters of a "level playing field".

[sidicks]

avinalarf said:

Thanks sidicks for your input.
Yes I know a tax on property is in place,I should have said a more onerous tax.
Yes I know that there are government training projects but they do not compensate for the wholesale decimation of industries and consequent job losses.

Playing devil's advocate, whose fault is it if people don't take the training and education opportunities available to them, resulting in them having limited employment opportunities?

avinalarf said:

As I said in my original post I believe that globalisation has had its good and bad consequences that we have discussed,to a certain extent,but nobody has really addressed the question of how we should deal with the consequences.
Is it really an inevitable game changer,similar to the industrial revolution ,that will cause huge pain to a generation of the indigenous workforce ?
Is it only reasonable that Third World Economies be able to lift their populations from real poverty and compete on the World Stage ?
Are we in the age of Corporate Government where the large multi nationals dictate to governments the way in which trade is conducted ?
Has a nation's government an obligation to secure a fair playing field that offers its electorate a chance of a job and reasonable expectations of a decent standard of living ?
Are we in the "Wild West" where the rich get richer and the poor see no hope of bettering themselves ?
Do we believe in "Society" a society where it is thought that the well being of ALL its people is for the greater good ?

1. The 'poor' have plenty of opportunity (through education and effort) to better themselves
2. People have to make some effort to help themselves, rather than expect other people do so on their behalf!

Edited by sidicks on Wednesday 7th December 12:58

[RYH64E]

avinalarf said:

Thanks sidicks for your input.
Yes I know a tax on property is in place,I should have said a more onerous tax.
Yes I know that there are government training projects but they do not compensate for the wholesale decimation of industries and consequent job losses.
As I said in my original post I believe that globalisation has had its good and bad consequences that we have discussed,to a certain extent,but nobody has really addressed the question of how we should deal with the consequences.
Is it really an inevitable game changer,similar to the industrial revolution ,that will cause huge pain to a generation of the indigenous workforce ?
Is it only reasonable that Third World Economies be able to lift their populations from real poverty and compete on the World Stage ?
Are we in the age of Corporate Government where the large multi nationals dictate to governments the way in which trade is conducted ?
Has a nation's government an obligation to secure a fair playing field that offers its electorate a chance of a job and reasonable expectations of a decent standard of living ?
Are we in the "Wild West" where the rich get richer and the poor see no hope of bettering themselves ?
Do we believe in "Society" a society where it is thought that the well being of ALL its people is for the greater good ?

In this country it's perfectly possibly to start off poor and end up very rich, not easy but possible. It's much easier to start off poor and end up comfortably off, the opportunities are there for those who choose to take them. It often means paying attention at school, a lot of hard work, and the occasional sleepless night, but that's the way it is.

Unfortunately the government can't just pass a law and make us all millionaires.

[avinalarf]

speedy_thrills said:

You can spin the wheel on a number of issues causing income growth to stagnate. Globalism is one but just as equally why not aging population demographics, low productivity growth, velocity of money, wealth inequalities, lack of genuine innovation, inflation targeting, misallocation of financial resources etc.

However as a lefty democratic socialist type my views on capitalism and it's discontents are certainly not the prevailing views of society the moment .

I think you have hit on part of the problem by describing yourself as a lefty democratic socialist.
It is such tribal allegiances that muddy the waters when discussing the type of society in which we wish to live.
There are good and bad consequences,given the nature of human instincts, whether one is a capitalist,democratic socialist or communist or whatever.
No political persuasion has yet proven to have top trumps or avoided the excesses that each persuasion exacerbate.
One can be an ardent capitalist and see the value of of a contented workforce.
Unless there is a complete change in our social values and indeed a change in human instinct it is inevitable not to realise that not all people are equal.
Some people are industrious some are entrepreneurs some have valued and important skills and such is the human instinct that they expect to be ,and usually are better rewarded,usually financially, than those that are lesser blessed.
So unless you can come up with a different"reward" scheme that society accepts we are stuck with what we have.
p.s. Post written for brevity it's a blooming complicated subject.

[Dr Jekyll]

avinalarf said:

Some people are industrious some are entrepreneurs some have valued and important skills and such is the human instinct that they expect to be ,and usually are better rewarded,usually financially, than those that are lesser blessed.
So unless you can come up with a different"reward" scheme that society accepts we are stuck with what we have.
p.s. Post written for brevity it's a blooming complicated subject.

Are you saying that people who have important skills shouldn't be better rewarded? If so then I won't make an effort to acquire useful skills but will practice my 'staring out of the window aimlessly' skill.

[avinalarf]

Sidicks and RYH.....
I am not suggesting that there are not oppurtunities through education etc to advance one's life chances and certainly I have never stated that we should all be millionaires.
I think that most workers are content with an honest day's pay for an honest day's work.
That if they "play the game" they and their children will be able to afford to buy or at least rent a place to live.
That ,if prudent, they will receive a fair interest on their savings.
You see guys not all people aspire or have the wherewithals to be business men,entrepreneurs or have financial expertise.
That doesn't mean they shouldn't have their own limited expectations fulfilled.

[crankedup]

RYH64E said:

In this country it's perfectly possibly to start off poor and end up very rich, not easy but possible. It's much easier to start off poor and end up comfortably off, the opportunities are there for those who choose to take them. It often means paying attention at school, a lot of hard work, and the occasional sleepless night, but that's the way it is.

Unfortunately the government can't just pass a law and make us all millionaires.

However with so many students waving handfuls of degree's they are in as much competition for a job as ever. Education they have sought and gained is not the passport to a good job as it used to be. Furthermore more Companies are seeing that taking on apprentices is at least as likely to better worker aspirations Companies wish for. At the same time it offers a chance to youngsters keen to learn and earn.
Of course there will always be some kids who can't be bothered to do or offer anything at all.

[speedyman]

avinalarf said:

speedy_thrills said:

You can spin the wheel on a number of issues causing income growth to stagnate. Globalism is one but just as equally why not aging population demographics, low productivity growth, velocity of money, wealth inequalities, lack of genuine innovation, inflation targeting, misallocation of financial resources etc.

However as a lefty democratic socialist type my views on capitalism and it's discontents are certainly not the prevailing views of society the moment .

I think you have hit on part of the problem by describing yourself as a lefty democratic socialist.
It is such tribal allegiances that muddy the waters when discussing the type of society in which we wish to live.
There are good and bad consequences,given the nature of human instincts, whether one is a capitalist,democratic socialist or communist or whatever.
No political persuasion has yet proven to have top trumps or avoided the excesses that each persuasion exacerbate.
One can be an ardent capitalist and see the value of of a contented workforce.
Unless there is a complete change in our social values and indeed a change in human instinct it is inevitable not to realise that not all people are equal.
Some people are industrious some are entrepreneurs some have valued and important skills and such is the human instinct that they expect to be ,and usually are better rewarded,usually financially, than those that are lesser blessed.
So unless you can come up with a different"reward" scheme that society accepts we are stuck with what we have.
p.s. Post written for brevity it's a blooming complicated subject.

Part of the problem is that the reward schemes we have now are over rewarding some and under rewarding many. Sure hard work should have its rewards, but something is wrong when a kicking a ball gets you 200k a week or failing companies CEO's are still picking up huge bonuses year on year. Meanwhile inequality continues to grow, Trump, Brexit etc. are peoples expression of anger with the status quo. Watch this space.

[crankedup]

[quote=sidicks]

Do private coffee companies deduct the cost of the coffee they buy as an expense when calculating their profits?

[footnote]Edited by sidicks on Wednesday 7th December 10:47[/footnote

The point is that we all have a choice, let the markets dictate to those Companies that are morally short or bankrupt by footfall past their doors. They soon get the message when profit margins drop.

[sidicks]

avinalarf said:

Sidicks and RYH.....
I am not suggesting that there are not oppurtunities through education etc to advance one's life chances and certainly I have never stated that we should all be millionaires.
I think that most workers are content with an honest day's pay for an honest day's work.
That if they "play the game" they and their children will be able to afford to buy or at least rent a place to live.
That ,if prudent, they will receive a fair interest on their savings.
You see guys not all people aspire or have the wherewithals to be business men,entrepreneurs or have financial expertise.
That doesn't mean they shouldn't have their own limited expectations fulfilled.

I think we are in agreement - not sure why you think otherwise!

[sidicks]

crankedup said:

The point is that we all have a choice, let the markets dictate to those Companies that are morally short or bankrupt by footfall past their doors. They soon get the message when profit margins drop.

Is using genuine expenses to reduce your tax bill really being 'morally bankrupt'?

Normally you are all for regulatory intervention, regardlsss of what the 'market dictates'!

[sidicks]

speedyman said:

Part of the problem is that the reward schemes we have now are over rewarding some and under rewarding many. Sure hard work should have its rewards, but something is wrong when a kicking a ball gets you 200k a week or failing companies CEO's are still picking up huge bonuses year on year. Meanwhile inequality continues to grow, Trump, Brexit etc. are peoples expression of anger with the status quo. Watch this space.

1. Scaricity of skill will come with associated value
2. If people spent more time working to improve their own lot and less time worrying about some irrelevant comparisons to the rich, they might be financially (and emptionally) better off!

[avinalarf]

crankedup said:

RYH64E said:

In this country it's perfectly possibly to start off poor and end up very rich, not easy but possible. It's much easier to start off poor and end up comfortably off, the opportunities are there for those who choose to take them. It often means paying attention at school, a lot of hard work, and the occasional sleepless night, but that's the way it is.

Unfortunately the government can't just pass a law and make us all millionaires.

However with so many students waving handfuls of degree's they are in as much competition for a job as ever. Education they have sought and gained is not the passport to a good job as it used to be. Furthermore more Companies are seeing that taking on apprentices is at least as likely to better worker aspirations Companies wish for. At the same time it offers a chance to youngsters keen to learn and earn.
Of course there will always be some kids who can't be bothered to do or offer anything at all.

I have always had a strong work ethic,mainly influenced by my father who instilled it in me through example.
I have three daughters that are working.
The youngest didn't want to go to University and only stayed on to take A levels at my behest,probably a waste of two years.
After a couple of years of mundane jobs she was offered the opportunity to go for a job in a company that only takes Uni graduates,she blagged it ,and now has as a better paid job in a very large company with better prospects than her elder sisters who went to Uni and got good results in their chosen subject.
My eldest is a journalist a profession that has changed enormously mainly due to the Internet and the way it has affected newspapers and magazines. She has maintained a job but it's been difficult .
Middle daughter works in PR ,just been made redundant through no fault of her own.

Edited by avinalarf on Wednesday 7th December 14:03

[avinalarf]

sidicks said:

speedyman said:

Part of the problem is that the reward schemes we have now are over rewarding some and under rewarding many. Sure hard work should have its rewards, but something is wrong when a kicking a ball gets you 200k a week or failing companies CEO's are still picking up huge bonuses year on year. Meanwhile inequality continues to grow, Trump, Brexit etc. are peoples expression of anger with the status quo. Watch this space.

1. Scaricity of skill will come with associated value
2. If people spent more time working to improve their own lot and less time worrying about some irrelevant comparisons to the rich, they might be financially (and emptionally) better off!

Most of these " people " are only kicking off because the pendulum of has swung too far.
In the past few years,since the financial crisis, the pendulum has swung to far in favour of the already wealthy,whilst their standard of living has proven ever more difficult to maintain.
They read the news papers and watch the tele....don't you know.
They hear of bankers,who they perceive,have taken advantage of loose regulation and thus exacerbating the financial crisis.
They read of CEO's having huge pay rises and share incentives.
They have to settle for zero rate contracts to get a job.
They have governments that don't know their arse from their tits.
Etc.etc etc.
Sidicks ....we've been down this road many times before.
It's not that they expect to earn mega money or live in mansions,they just want a fairer share of the cake.

[sidicks]

avinalarf said:

Most of these " people " are only kicking off because the pendulum of has swung too far.
In the past few years,since the financial crisis, the pendulum has swung to far in favour of the already wealthy,whilst their standard of living has proven ever more difficult to maintain.
They read the news papers and watch the tele....don't you know.
They hear of bankers,who they perceive,have taken advantage of loose regulation and thus exacerbating the financial crisis.

Don't believe all you read in the papers...

avinalarf said:

They read of CEO's having huge pay rises and share incentives.

Become a CEO then!

avinalarf said:

They have to settle for zero rate contracts to get a job.

Make yourself more employable - get some skills with the free education and training available.

avinalarf said:

They have governments that don't know their arse from their tits.
Etc.etc etc.
Sidicks ....we've been down this road many times before.
It's not that they expect to earn mega money or live in mansions,they just want a fairer share of the cake.

How about they learn to contribute to their own cake, rather than take the cake made on the back of someone else's hard work (who is already contributed a substantial amount to the running of the country!)

[crankedup]

sidicks said:

Is using genuine expenses to reduce your tax bill really being 'morally bankrupt'?

Normally you are all for regulatory intervention, regardlsss of what the 'market dictates'!

Seems the coffee company felt something was tainting their brand that made them change course. Bad publicity is not something Companies want or need which is why I believe in this case and others similar customer footfall can lead to a effect on Company policy.
In this I conclude that 'moral bankruptcy' can lead to Company share values falling through customer dissatisfaction not directly associated with the quality of the product.

Edited by crankedup on Wednesday 7th December 15:16

[avinalarf]

Sidicks ....how do you do that ?.....separate my post into bite size segments .....and then pass comment .
Easy boy...simple explanation please.

[crankedup]

avinalarf said:

I have always had a strong work ethic,mainly influenced by my father who instilled it in me through example.
I have three daughters that are working.
The youngest didn't want to go to University and only stayed on to take A levels at my behest,probably a waste of two years.
After a couple of years of mundane jobs she was offered the opportunity to go for a job in a company that only takes Uni graduates,she blagged it ,and now has as a better paid job in a very large company with better prospects than her elder sisters who went to Uni and got good results in their chosen subject.
My eldest is a journalist a profession that has changed enormously mainly due to the Internet and the way it has affected newspapers and magazines. She has maintained a job but it's been difficult .
Middle daughter works in PR ,just been made redundant through no fault of her own.

Edited by avinalarf on Wednesday 7th December 14:03

Indeed, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if your family scenario regarding work / education mix was much different throughout the Nation in the hundreds of thousands of households if not millions. It's all to easy to type out 'if people want better they should get educated' . This is a statement of fact perhaps but in reality it's hardly worth the bother of typing. Too many real World events dictate the nature of an individual's success or otherwise, unless that person has certain advantages over and above the norm'. Success can still be achieved but it's never been easy and that's unlikely to change without that additional 'born with a silver spoon' scenario.

[sidicks]

avinalarf said:

Sidicks ....how do you do that ?.....separate my post into bite size segments .....and then pass comment .
Easy boy...simple explanation please.

Just add:
quote=username at the start and /quote (both in square brackets) at the end of each chunk of text you want to use.