Dyson job losses
Discussion
gruffalo said:
So the two graphs together seem to show that manufacturing grew as stated but other sectors grew much faster.
Over all production grew, but the sector itself has been in decline for decades.In essence, as part of the structure of our economy, manufacturing is being left behind.
fblm said:
cardigankid said:
...she was mistakenly destroying the industrial infrastructure...
...she also smashes up Britain’s industrial base...
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat it. It's not true. Industrial production rose 20% under Thatcher and another 15% in the following decade....she also smashes up Britain’s industrial base...
G
So now the Brexiteers say, don’t worry it will be fine. Are we supposed to just trust them on that? With a potential left wing government around the corner which will make Harold Wilson look like Pinochet, and the SNP raring to go for a break up of the UK. the UK has not sorted its own problems out in living memory, and it is not going to start now.
cardigankid said:
Tuna old son, I’m not sure if you are trying to agree with me but you have got so much wrong there it’s hard to know where to start.
That's funny... I've heard that line somewhere before...cardigankid said:
If Dyson owns 25,000 acres in UK, and I’ll take your word for it, it means nothing either way. Keep or sell, it won’t benefit the rest of us.
Earlier, it was claimed Dyson was 'getting out of Dodge'. The fact that he owns more of Dodge than the Queen does suggests that is complete b
ks.cardigankid said:
Next, it’s a common belief that what matters is keeping the R&D function in UK irrespective of where the manufacturing takes place. That is an old delusion that was sold to Margaret Thatcher’s Ministers in the 80’s when she was mistakenly destroying the industrial infrastructure and encouraging asset strippers. Creative destruction, don’t you know? Keep the high value jobs and let the blue collar factory jobs go to India or wherever. They duly parroted it out at supporters business lunches to show how clever they were. The reality is however that ultimately the research and design function ends up being located where the manufacturing happens because they are so closely related. That is how China got so powerful.
Well, as my FiL ran a number of factories in China, I've seen first hand how it works. Their main strength is simply that of a very large base of extremely low cost workers. Interestingly, as they've pulled themselves up by their boot straps, those workers have got more expensive. Go to Shenzhen and you'll find it's a smart region with good facilities - and workers who no longer want to do fiddly manual jobs for minimal pay.Which brings us back to your nonsense about industry in the UK. It's changed - crudely from heavy industry to light. The significance is that heavy industry works best with a low skilled, low cost workforce. You're right, that has been decimated. Good - it left workers in poor conditions and often with associated poor health and lifespans. What you've missed is that it has been more than replaced by high skilled, specialised industry. We produce more, of more value than we ever did.
Certainly, that's gone down as a proportion of the economy - not through some failure of industry (even given it was undergoing such a huge transformation) - but simply because services have become the dominant economic force across the whole of the western world. Industry still does very well in the UK.
The point with workers though is important. The old, heavy industry that you appear to be so keen on requires feeding with a large, low cost labour force. That would be possible if we endlessly grew the population with low skilled immigrants (and has been what has been happening for the last decade or so), but the consequences are that productivity flatlines, wages stagnate and pressure on social services rises. The evidence for this is very clear. You may be nostalgic for the 'old ways', but they're simply not sustainable in a small country with limited resources.
So we have to find better ways to add value - and high skilled industry, research and development are exactly what we should be doing (and, in the case of Dyson, have been doing). Can it move off-shore? Yes of course it can, it's not immune - but significantly, it is more immune than old school heavy industry. I've worked for a number of companies that have tried to move their technological development to cheaper regions, and almost universally it has failed. Moving low cost workers though is far easier. Back in China, Shenzhen is struggling as mass manufacture is actually moving out of the region to cheaper places like South America and Korea.
Clearly, your personal politics will not accept such a view, but the hard numbers are there if you want to look. Certainly our economy has gone through a difficult transformation, but we've not 'lost' industry by any reasonable measure.
zygalski said:
That's not the full story.
The full story is that industrial production grew substantially under Thatcher and for a decade after whilst employment in the sector shrank and the service sector grew faster, as it did across the developed world. To describe our industrial sector as having been ''destroyed'' and "smashed up" is a nonsense (output up 20%+) and to then attribute manufacturing's fall as a % of GDP to Thatcher is yet more nonsense unless she was in charge of industrial policy across the entire developed world. Neither become any truer no matter how many times they're repeated. No world leader has managed to stop the decline of manufacturing as a % of their economy any more than they could stop the ''decline'' of agriculture previously. I don't like it either but the facts don't care.
The relative decline of manufacturing started well before Thatcher and continued long after, in every developed country. To blame Thatcher is, to be polite, daft.
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 27th January 16:49
For goodness sake you can see what happened to heavy industry in UK. I live in Glasgow where it is a great deal more obvious than many others while you are simply using charts to argue black is white.
As for high tech research exemplified by Dyson, I can only repeat. Vacuum cleaners and hand driers. Square root of diddly squat.
I source manufactured products from China and guess what it’s a lot cheaper than the UK.
Funnily enough, if you go to Germany, they can still build ships, not to mention cars, high value consumer goods, building products, you name it, high wage economy or not. And these industries are not dangerous or unhealthy to work in. What’s more, many of them are still family controlled. Therefore they build up financial and industrial muscle which for all the talent hard work and creativity in the UK we do not. Because the UK model is build up and sell out. Therefore our best home grown industries are on a tiny scale.
Anyway, I am not going to convince you, you are for sure not going to convince me, and it’s time to move on.
As for high tech research exemplified by Dyson, I can only repeat. Vacuum cleaners and hand driers. Square root of diddly squat.
I source manufactured products from China and guess what it’s a lot cheaper than the UK.
Funnily enough, if you go to Germany, they can still build ships, not to mention cars, high value consumer goods, building products, you name it, high wage economy or not. And these industries are not dangerous or unhealthy to work in. What’s more, many of them are still family controlled. Therefore they build up financial and industrial muscle which for all the talent hard work and creativity in the UK we do not. Because the UK model is build up and sell out. Therefore our best home grown industries are on a tiny scale.
Anyway, I am not going to convince you, you are for sure not going to convince me, and it’s time to move on.
cardigankid said:
... you are simply using charts to argue black is white. ..
It's called using evidence from respectable sources to form an opinion rather than extrapolating from limited personal experience. Do you dispute the industrial production figures?
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 28th January 00:56
zygalski said:
Two of those charts show values relative to the overall situation. They're pointless as a result. Manufacturing could have increased 100 fold but if everything else went up at a greater rate the charts would look the same. It's a nonsense. Post absolute charts if you want to derive anything.The persons employed in manufacturing table is inevitable. We are an expensive place to make things due to many factors. It is inevitable that we will find more efficient ways of making them. Again, plot that chart against absolute output and we can start to have a proper debate. It's likely we should be proud that we are able to be more productive in this sector.
The last chart...talks b
ks. The widening trade deficit is down to a decline in demand of UK made goods at home and abroad is it? Then why does the chart show exports rising?Yup, imports grew quicker. I'd suggest we look at the cost of manufacturing here and, therefore, the sort of things that are made here. Versus what people are actually buying. Unless the view is that we should pay people next to nothing, degrade workers' rights and/or force people to pay much more for foreign made goods to level the playing field (which wouldn't guarantee people bought British anyway...as it depends what they are buying that caused the imports increase).
cardigankid said:
For goodness sake you can see what happened to heavy industry in UK. I live in Glasgow where it is a great deal more obvious than many others while you are simply using charts to argue black is white.
You do understand that's exactly what I just said? Heavy industry has been replaced by light, and in the process we're more able to compete globally, produce more goods of higher value, and have a healthier, wealthier workforce. You might as well complain about the decimation of the typist industry in the 70's. I've got a local newspaper from '64 somewhere that has four pages in the back of adverts for touch typists. Now, not so much.
You're right of course that cities like Glasgow will have felt the brunt of the change - I lived in Liverpool in the 90's when it was in complete state, and, yes it was a mess. It's changed a lot since then.
As for the nonsense about 'just hairdryers' - the company generates approximately £60,000 per employee. Compare that to Glasgow, which averages about £38,000 per employee (GDP figures from 2012). Which do you think is better? Would you want an employer like Dyson to be based in Glasgow - offering nearly double the average income, or are you too proud to work on 'frivolous stuff'?
I take it that you have heard the Nissan announcement. Where does that fit on your charts? What the UK has signally failed to do is invest in and build its own industry. You may have been unaware of the move to services under Thatcher (whom I do not criticise for that - she set out to make the country independent of the big union controlled industries) and of the subsequent increasing dependence of the economy on consumer spending.
What the UK has done instead is rather like what the Irish have done which is to encourage inward investment. So those who have industrial muscle, principally the Americans, Japanese and Germans, have pumped the money in. That is what has made the British car industry successful. It is not a home grown success. But it is dependent on EU membership, and the process is now reversing.
We are going to be left with Morgan, God bless ‘em. That is about the size of car business which the UK can capitalise. It’s marvellous, but it is not going to run a country. A large element of the country has got delusions of grandeur and we are all now going to suffer for it. I have no problem with making money out of frivolities, your expression not mine, so long as we recognise them for what they are, and that they can disappear as fast as they rise.
Do you honestly think the country would vote for Brexit today? Now that we are seeing reality as opposed to rose tinted claptrap from obvious liars like Boris and Nigel?
What the UK has done instead is rather like what the Irish have done which is to encourage inward investment. So those who have industrial muscle, principally the Americans, Japanese and Germans, have pumped the money in. That is what has made the British car industry successful. It is not a home grown success. But it is dependent on EU membership, and the process is now reversing.
We are going to be left with Morgan, God bless ‘em. That is about the size of car business which the UK can capitalise. It’s marvellous, but it is not going to run a country. A large element of the country has got delusions of grandeur and we are all now going to suffer for it. I have no problem with making money out of frivolities, your expression not mine, so long as we recognise them for what they are, and that they can disappear as fast as they rise.
Do you honestly think the country would vote for Brexit today? Now that we are seeing reality as opposed to rose tinted claptrap from obvious liars like Boris and Nigel?
Edited by cardigankid on Sunday 3rd February 22:46
There is another matter to factor into the Dyson/Brexit debate. There is the long standing ‘mystery’ about UK productivity. This is, in brief, why UK productivity is so low when we work longer hours than Germany for example. That is only a mystery if you assume all other factors are the same ( which is why the charts above are so misleading ) and ignore the full story. The key factor is investment. In the UK investment is low because the constant focus is sucking money out of the company for various purposes or indeed selling up altogether which just means that the company has to show a return on investment or actually pay the cost of its acquisition. There are various reasons for this, one is the ‘aristocratic’ legacy where what is most admired is power and money without responsibility. Another is the penal UK tax system which rips off every one of us, least of all ironically the super rich. In that kind of tax environment you take what you can before someone takes it away from you.
Dyson does appear to own most or all of the company, which is fine, but of course it is now going to leave the UK due in part to EU / UK bureaucracy, which follows from the above. He clearl has little faith in the UKs ability to sort itself out post Brexit so should maybe have kept his mouth shut during the referendum.
Dyson does appear to own most or all of the company, which is fine, but of course it is now going to leave the UK due in part to EU / UK bureaucracy, which follows from the above. He clearl has little faith in the UKs ability to sort itself out post Brexit so should maybe have kept his mouth shut during the referendum.
CoolHands said:
I always wonder about France. They appear to do fk-all work, they’re always shut, there’s not many apparent industries, and they work about 30 hours a week if you’re lucky. How come we are all slaving away over here? My hours are 8-5 and I rarely have lunch. That’s 45 hour week.
Yes but they're still not happy, apparantly. k-all work, they’re always shut, there’s not many apparent industries, and they work about 30 hours a week if you’re lucky. How come we are all slaving away over here? My hours are 8-5 and I rarely have lunch. That’s 45 hour week.cardigankid said:
There is another matter to factor into the Dyson/Brexit debate. There is the long standing ‘mystery’ about UK productivity. This is, in brief, why UK productivity is so low when we work longer hours than Germany for example. That is only a mystery if you assume all other factors are the same ( which is why the charts above are so misleading ) and ignore the full story. The key factor is investment. In the UK investment is low because the constant focus is sucking money out of the company for various purposes or indeed selling up altogether which just means that the company has to show a return on investment or actually pay the cost of its acquisition.
Ask a lot of people who voted for Brexit and they'll politely tell you that you've missed the elephant in the room. Over the last decade, mass immigration of low cost workers has kept wages low and productivity low - it's cheaper to just bring in more workers (flat line productivity) than invest in better machinery and processes (increased productivity).You appear not to like actual evidence and charts, but the numbers are very straightforward. Blair introduced his 'open door' immigration policy and at pretty much exactly the same time productivity ground to a halt. It stayed that way roughly until the last couple of years.
In the last couple of years, Brexit (and economic changes in Europe) has made it harder to just import cheap new workers. Take a look at the figures and you'll see - what a surprise - that productivity has started rising again, to the highest level in the last decade, along with real wage growth.
So, nothing to do with the heartless bosses. If the economic situation makes investing in machinery pay more, they'll do it in a heartbeat - that's how you make more money - but if there is cheap labour to take advantage of, they will. You appear to want both to happen - lots of investment and lots of people employed - but businesses aren't an endless source of money, whatever the unions may have told you.
cardigankid said:
There are various reasons for this, one is the ‘aristocratic’ legacy where what is most admired is power and money without responsibility. Another is the penal UK tax system which rips off every one of us, least of all ironically the super rich. In that kind of tax environment you take what you can before someone takes it away from you.
Dyson does appear to own most or all of the company, which is fine, but of course it is now going to leave the UK due in part to EU / UK bureaucracy, which follows from the above. He clearl has little faith in the UKs ability to sort itself out post Brexit so should maybe have kept his mouth shut during the referendum.
You can't actually take in new information can you? "Aristocratic legacy" - do you think bosses sit in oak panelled board rooms, twirling their moustaches and polishing their top hats? As has been pointed out, if Dyson had 'little faith' in the UK, he wouldn't be one of the largest landowners, wouldn't be pouring tens of millions of pounds into university sponsorship and wouldn't have thousands of workers employed in an expanding research and development site right here.Dyson does appear to own most or all of the company, which is fine, but of course it is now going to leave the UK due in part to EU / UK bureaucracy, which follows from the above. He clearl has little faith in the UKs ability to sort itself out post Brexit so should maybe have kept his mouth shut during the referendum.
Go and have a read: https://www.jamesdysonfoundation.co.uk/
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:steve_k said:
I took the Dyson years ago and bought a Henry
I wouldn't buy a Dyson because of the reputation they had (have?) in the industry for breaking.But if I had a perfectly working one I wouldn't bin it because of Dyson moving his HQ.
The chances of someone doing that and doing it at exactly the same time as someone who tweets about Brexit a lot happening to be at the local tip to speak to them and ask them why seems too much of a stretch to me.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff