Estate where only one person has a job. Enjoy

[Bing o]

Johnnytheboy said:

Engineer1 said:

Yes but it would be nearly doubling the length of the journey. The whole point is people don't expect to have to cycle to work motoring has been cheap enough that a low paid worker could own and run a car, now it is getting too expensive. The issue really comes down to pre-car the factory was across the road from the houses, now the factory is out on the outskirts. I suspect the Chinese worker's house is close to the factory and also that they are starting to expect improved living conditions.

So what's the solution?

Workhouses by the factory gates.

[Kermit power]

Digga said:

Engineer1 said:

The 9 miles could be motorway, or fast dual carriageway which in this case it was I really wouldn't have fancied cycling the route at 7am on a winter morning atleast with the walk I could keep well out of the way of the cars.

Quite right.

It's one thing cycling to work when several million other people do likewise, but another thing when the roads are already operating beyond capacity with other vehicles. The UK's provision for cycling is laughable compared to many of our European neighbours especailly.

To add to E1's opint, we've been 'targeted' by some seat-shiner in the LA to fill in a "Transport Plan". We are on an industrial estate, the nearest bus stop is miles away and the provision for cycling - other than some recently added (and admittedly pretty good) cycle paths is non-existant. (I see pople commuting on bikes, but shudder at the risk they take on narrow, congested roads, populated by numpties.)

Most employees have no option but to drive.

<Subtitles for Southerners and Government 'Transport' Ministers; we are nowhere near a tube station.>

This really does demonstrate the depth to which the problem is ingrained. There's always a reason why it's someone else's fault.

I have plenty of experience of cycling to work through London traffic at around 13 miles each way, and am about to start doing so again at a new location, which will be around 16 miles each way, right into Central London.

Strangely, I have somehow managed to avoid being killed all this time! Of course, it's very possible that Northern roads are far more congested than those in the South East. Maybe this explains it?

You don't need a car. You want one.

[Morningside]

fido said:

Johnnytheboy said:

A lot of people have suggested that unemployment is a result of us not making stuff any more.

We make high tech stuff that requires people who are technical, create, innovative and a good grasp of science. Most of the skiprats on this estate can't even read or write properly let alone apply for these 21st century jobs.

So true. But did they not call that the 'brain drain' in the 80s? Where all the skilled people were moving abroad due to lack of support in the UK.

Did I read somewhere that Sinclair was at one time the WORLDS largest personal computer manufacturer? Shame the UK computer industry was ignored.

Perhaps we can blame Schools for this. I was shocked that chemistry, physics and biology were not being taught as a separate entity and were all grouped together as 'science'.

Edited by Morningside on Tuesday 11th January 10:35

[Johnnytheboy]

Morningside said:

fido said:

Johnnytheboy said:

A lot of people have suggested that unemployment is a result of us not making stuff any more.

We make high tech stuff that requires people who are technical, create, innovative and a good grasp of science. Most of the skiprats on this estate can't even read or write properly let alone apply for these 21st century jobs.

So true. But did they not call that the 'brain drain' in the 80s? Where all the skilled people were moving abroad due to lack of support in the UK.

Did I read somewhere that Sinclair was at one time the WORLDS largest personal computer manufacturer? Shame the UK computer industry was ignored.

Ignored by whom?

[Digga]

Kermit power said:

I have plenty of experience of cycling to work through London traffic at around 13 miles each way, and am about to start doing so again at a new location, which will be around 16 miles each way, right into Central London.

Strangely, I have somehow managed to avoid being killed all this time!

Your sample of 1 is interesting but not qwholly represantative. I think you will find a number of topics on PH which indicate this.

Kermit power said:

Of course, it's very possible that Northern roads are far more congested than those in the South East. Maybe this explains it?

Sorry, I forgot sole rights to the congestion card had been 'bagged' by the S.E. I can assure you that locally, the volumes of traffic - on very poor A and B roads which were designed for 1950's sized vehicles and traffic volumes - do not allow other road users to pass cyclists easily, further hindered by random, mysterious central refuges (chicanes) and I have witnessed a number of idiot drivers misjudge cycles with very nearly disastrous consequnces. (Unlike urban roads, the traffic does move reasonably quickly.)

Kermit power said:

You don't need a car. You want one.

If you work odd shifts and long days, it is still, by far and a way, the fastest and most cost effective option.

[Morningside]

Johnnytheboy said:

Morningside said:

fido said:

Johnnytheboy said:

A lot of people have suggested that unemployment is a result of us not making stuff any more.

We make high tech stuff that requires people who are technical, create, innovative and a good grasp of science. Most of the skiprats on this estate can't even read or write properly let alone apply for these 21st century jobs.

So true. But did they not call that the 'brain drain' in the 80s? Where all the skilled people were moving abroad due to lack of support in the UK.

Did I read somewhere that Sinclair was at one time the WORLDS largest personal computer manufacturer? Shame the UK computer industry was ignored.

Ignored by whom?

Not by Thatcher but I think Majors Government onwards.

[JagLover]

otolith said:

cazzer said:

Yes ok. So we'll all move to london then the world will be perfect.
Because heaven forbid anywhere else needs to exist.

I give up.

They don't need to move that far - we're talking about relatively small areas that are seriously depressed because the local community existed to serve a now extinct industry, not the whole of the UK outside the South East.

Indeed


Consider a typical example a pit town. It grew because there was good local employment and as long as the work was there it was worth maintaining. Now the pit is shut and this town is suffering, you can have upteen 'regeneration' schemes, but if this place has no good local employers and poor transport links with any area that does why should we freeze development in place and say that just because a town grew there, it must be maintained for all time at the taxpayers expense.

[Kermit power]

Digga said:

Kermit power said:

I have plenty of experience of cycling to work through London traffic at around 13 miles each way, and am about to start doing so again at a new location, which will be around 16 miles each way, right into Central London.

Strangely, I have somehow managed to avoid being killed all this time!

Your sample of 1 is interesting but not wholly representative. I think you will find a number of topics on PH which indicate this.

104 cyclists were killed on British roads in 2009. You were more than twice as likely to die by accidentally hanging yourself.

Cyclist deaths were 44% lower than 15 years previously, despite miles cycled having increased by 22%.

These are figures from the Department of Transport (or, in the case of accidental hangings, the ONS), rather than a sample of one. The vast majority of people who cycle do so perfectly safely whether you want to believe it or not.

Digga said:

Kermit power said:

Of course, it's very possible that Northern roads are far more congested than those in the South East. Maybe this explains it?

Sorry, I forgot sole rights to the congestion card had been 'bagged' by the S.E. I can assure you that locally, the volumes of traffic - on very poor A and B roads which were designed for 1950's sized vehicles and traffic volumes - do not allow other road users to pass cyclists easily, further hindered by random, mysterious central refuges (chicanes) and I have witnessed a number of idiot drivers misjudge cycles with very nearly disastrous consequences. (Unlike urban roads, the traffic does move reasonably quickly.)

Yup. That's a description of roads. Nothing unusual there.

Digga said:

Kermit power said:

You don't need a car. You want one.

If you work odd shifts and long days, it is still, by far and a way, the fastest and most cost effective option.

It's certainly the fastest. How is it the most cost effective?

[Digga]

JagLover said:

otolith said:

cazzer said:

Yes ok. So we'll all move to london then the world will be perfect.
Because heaven forbid anywhere else needs to exist.

I give up.

They don't need to move that far - we're talking about relatively small areas that are seriously depressed because the local community existed to serve a now extinct industry, not the whole of the UK outside the South East.

Indeed


Consider a typical example a pit town. It grew because there was good local employment and as long as the work was there it was worth maintaining. Now the pit is shut and this town is suffering, you can have upteen 'regeneration' schemes, but if this place has no good local employers and poor transport links with any area that does why should we freeze development in place and say that just because a town grew there, it must be maintained for all time at the taxpayers expense.

This is precisely where we are based - on a redevelopment zone, on the site of a former colliery.

the trouble is that, for whatever reason, despite having (at some opint) been sufficiently hardworking to relocate for work - many families colliery came here from both Sctoland and the North East - at some point the work ethic fell down. For a number of households, there was a sense that when the pit went 'their jobs' went, full stop and the LA has been battling with homes filled with tqwo or three generations of unemployed.

Sadly, when we and other businesses relocated, we were only ever able to draw a limited percentage of our workforce from the local community. Our presence generates secondary (service sector) wealth and is better than a derelict mine, but brings other problems - commuting to a pit town whose previous transport links with the resat of the world were the railway sidings moving coal.

[IainT]

cazzer said:

So when it became cheaper to manufacture this stuff abroad thats exactly what they did. All the cotton spinning has gone, 200 mills, 500 people+ per mill. Platts went. Ferranti went in a share dealing fraud.
None of these, and countless other businesses, went because the workforce was bad, or workshy. They went, in general, because the business owners found brown people to exploit.

Most of the original industry went 40+ eyars ago yet still the locals continue to breed in an unsustainable manner.

That's not capitalism, that's socialism.

[Kermit power]

Digga said:

JagLover said:

otolith said:

cazzer said:

Yes ok. So we'll all move to london then the world will be perfect.
Because heaven forbid anywhere else needs to exist.

I give up.

They don't need to move that far - we're talking about relatively small areas that are seriously depressed because the local community existed to serve a now extinct industry, not the whole of the UK outside the South East.

Indeed


Consider a typical example a pit town. It grew because there was good local employment and as long as the work was there it was worth maintaining. Now the pit is shut and this town is suffering, you can have upteen 'regeneration' schemes, but if this place has no good local employers and poor transport links with any area that does why should we freeze development in place and say that just because a town grew there, it must be maintained for all time at the taxpayers expense.

This is precisely where we are based - on a redevelopment zone, on the site of a former colliery.

the trouble is that, for whatever reason, despite having (at some opint) been sufficiently hardworking to relocate for work - many families colliery came here from both Sctoland and the North East - at some point the work ethic fell down. For a number of households, there was a sense that when the pit went 'their jobs' went, full stop and the LA has been battling with homes filled with tqwo or three generations of unemployed.

Sadly, when we and other businesses relocated, we were only ever able to draw a limited percentage of our workforce from the local community. Our presence generates secondary (service sector) wealth and is better than a derelict mine, but brings other problems - commuting to a pit town whose previous transport links with the resat of the world were the railway sidings moving coal.

To what extent do you think the situation would change if that local workforce was given a choice of work or go hungry?

[Digga]

Kermit power said:

Digga said:

JagLover said:

otolith said:

cazzer said:

Yes ok. So we'll all move to london then the world will be perfect.
Because heaven forbid anywhere else needs to exist.

I give up.

They don't need to move that far - we're talking about relatively small areas that are seriously depressed because the local community existed to serve a now extinct industry, not the whole of the UK outside the South East.

Indeed


Consider a typical example a pit town. It grew because there was good local employment and as long as the work was there it was worth maintaining. Now the pit is shut and this town is suffering, you can have upteen 'regeneration' schemes, but if this place has no good local employers and poor transport links with any area that does why should we freeze development in place and say that just because a town grew there, it must be maintained for all time at the taxpayers expense.

This is precisely where we are based - on a redevelopment zone, on the site of a former colliery.

the trouble is that, for whatever reason, despite having (at some opint) been sufficiently hardworking to relocate for work - many families colliery came here from both Sctoland and the North East - at some point the work ethic fell down. For a number of households, there was a sense that when the pit went 'their jobs' went, full stop and the LA has been battling with homes filled with tqwo or three generations of unemployed.

Sadly, when we and other businesses relocated, we were only ever able to draw a limited percentage of our workforce from the local community. Our presence generates secondary (service sector) wealth and is better than a derelict mine, but brings other problems - commuting to a pit town whose previous transport links with the resat of the world were the railway sidings moving coal.

To what extent do you think the situation would change if that local workforce was given a choice of work or go hungry?

You can force a man to look for work, but you {i]cannot{/i] force him to be employable.

[cazzer]

IainT said:

cazzer said:

So when it became cheaper to manufacture this stuff abroad thats exactly what they did. All the cotton spinning has gone, 200 mills, 500 people+ per mill. Platts went. Ferranti went in a share dealing fraud.
None of these, and countless other businesses, went because the workforce was bad, or workshy. They went, in general, because the business owners found brown people to exploit.

Most of the original industry went 40+ eyars ago yet still the locals continue to breed in an unsustainable manner.

That's not capitalism, that's socialism.

Indeed. We should sterilise them at birth.

[Digga]

Kermit power said:

104 cyclists were killed on British roads in 2009. You were more than twice as likely to die by accidentally hanging yourself.

Cyclist deaths were 44% lower than 15 years previously, despite miles cycled having increased by 22%.

Deaths say one thing, but injuries another.

Please be very careful out there: Sorry mate I didn't see you

[cazzer]

I have a friend who's a time served coded welder. (Bloody useful to have)
I've know him 9 years.
In that time he has been made redundant 8 times. Everytime after 11 months of employment.
He's usually been contacted by the same companies after a couple of months offering him a "different job".

He's sacked that off now and works minimum wage cutting fabric.
What a waste of a time served welder. Still...profits first eh?

[Engineer1]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

What is the average speed in London during Rushhour? I know the average speed on the dual carriageway commute I was talking about was 70, and for the alternate route would be speed limit dependant, i.e. no congestion to slow drivers.

[limpsfield]

cazzer said:

Yes ok. So we'll all move to london then the world will be perfect.
Because heaven forbid anywhere else needs to exist.

I give up.

It won't be perfect because as the case has been made a few times here, even if there were jobs in the sunny south too many of these lazy fckers would not get off their arse anyway.

There are plenty of lazy ones down here too - but there does seem to be more of this almost sense of entitlement in pockets of the north that industry should be served up on a plate for them somehow because the world has changed and the mills/mining/cars have gone.

They are like children.

[Kermit power]

cazzer said:

I have a friend who's a time served coded welder. (Bloody useful to have)
I've know him 9 years.
In that time he has been made redundant 8 times. Everytime after 11 months of employment.
He's usually been contacted by the same companies after a couple of months offering him a "different job".

He's sacked that off now and works minimum wage cutting fabric.
What a waste of a time served welder. Still...profits first eh?

Surely under those circumstances it would've made more sense to offer himself as a welding contractor to the various companies he's worked for in the past?

From what you've said, it sounds as though he starts a job, works it for 11 months, takes a month or two to find the next job, then the cycle starts again. If he'd agreed up front with one of the companies that he'd be on an 11 month contract, then after 9 months he can start putting calls out to the other companies he's worked for to set up his next contract.

If he went into every job expecting it to be permanent and then got made redundant and lost a couple of months' wages then of course he's going to be despondent. If he went in to each job with both him and his employer agreeing up front the terms of engagement so that he could line up his next contract, then surely everyone is happier?

[Chris_w666]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

We should orgaise a PH bus trip to see this in action.

[Engineer1]

Kermit power said:

If he went into every job expecting it to be permanent and then got made redundant and lost a couple of months' wages then of course he's going to be despondent. If he went in to each job with both him and his employer agreeing up front the terms of engagement so that he could line up his next contract, then surely everyone is happier?

That only works if you know why the company made him redundant, lack of orders? moving business? etc, the businesses took him on as Permanent. Without knowing the market and regulations is there any restriction on being a sub contractor, I suspect the liability insurance requirements would be different dependant on the product being welded.