|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Bloody Brexiteers
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
But for some things, particularly services, the single market is still more of a theory than a practice due to local quirks. Like the requirement that all documentation be issued in local language. Meaning that you’re potentially be working with two sets of documentation. The local language one for the regulator and the English one for internal use.
Well, there are rough edges, and still areas that need working on. It is incorrect to call the 'single market for services' a 'theory' though, after all, for the purpose of cross-country selling financial products it already works.
quote:
And, if you’re a refugee seeking asylum, freedom of movement of people isn’t happening either. As many EU counties have closed their borders, including Sweden
Well, regardless of how you or I may feel about that issue of refugees, the facts are that freedom of movement applies to those who are already permitted to be resident in the EU. Essentially the camps in Greece have become the external border. Sweden hasn't completely closed their border either, at various periods people had to either had to be EU resident/have a visa, OR they had to claim asylum at the border. What they couldn't do was transit Sweden and go into Norway/Finland. Leaving/Staying in the EU is unlikely to change the situation wrt refugees (the UK is not particularly refugee friendly as is, and is unlikely to become any better post-Leave, so it's not like we are Leaving in order to fix that).
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
I sometimes consider this open area, together with all the other open areas in England, and the the fact it could probably house the entire world's population using modern building technology.
And all it would cost is the total destruction of the area itself. Who could possibly be against that?
There are those who think Hong Kong is a beautiful place, but for me it's not a patch on any equivalent square mileage of North Worcestershire countryside. I find the idea - however theoretical - that we should bulldoze the latter in order to build another of the former abhorrent.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
But, no one is actually suggesting that we will bulldoze the country to house an immigrant population. We can easily house a much larger population (say, an extra 5-10 million) without increasing the foot print of existing urban areas - maintaining both our countryside and urban parkland. The biggest problem isn't the growing population (whether from immigration or increased birthrate in the existing population), it's the increasing desire for larger houses. There was a time when a "decent family house" was a three bedroom, one bathroom, semi with a small garden - now that same category of "decent family house" would be a four, or more, bedroom detached house with at least two bathrooms and a large garden - often for families with less children.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Without wanting to push this thread too far in the direction of "housing", it strikes me that part of the problem is not that people want larger houses (IME many modern houses are tiny).
It is (a) that more people live alone or as couples; and (b) that most folk (including me) have a desire for a house with a garden, which is greedy of land. I have lived in Lisbon where the vast majority of people live in flats, this would be true in many other European cities. I know that the very word conjures up images of 1960s concrete ghettoes, but that does not need to be the reality.
I suspect that even in places such as Glasgow and Edinburgh apartment-living is ceding its place to house-living. But I may be wrong!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Marvin
Would you say that an immigrant family with 5 children living in a two bedroom flat is really having a greater impact on green space than the fairly wealthy family who own three properties; the family home, a flat for Dad to stay during the week and a holiday home? These are not on the rich list, they are just upper middle class.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
But, no one is actually suggesting that we will bulldoze the country to house an immigrant population. We can easily house a much larger population (say, an extra 5-10 million) without increasing the foot print of existing urban areas - maintaining both our countryside and urban parkland. The biggest problem isn't the growing population (whether from immigration or increased birthrate in the existing population), it's the increasing desire for larger houses. There was a time when a "decent family house" was a three bedroom, one bathroom, semi with a small garden - now that same category of "decent family house" would be a four, or more, bedroom detached house with at least two bathrooms and a large garden - often for families with less children.
Whilst, ironically, that four bedroom detached house has become unaffordable to anyone not on a very high income.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
But for some things, particularly services, the single market is still more of a theory than a practice due to local quirks. Like the requirement that all documentation be issued in local language. Meaning that you’re potentially be working with two sets of documentation. The local language one for the regulator and the English one for internal use.
Well, there are rough edges, and still areas that need working on. It is incorrect to call the 'single market for services' a 'theory' though, after all, for the purpose of cross-country selling financial products it already works.
quote:
And, if you’re a refugee seeking asylum, freedom of movement of people isn’t happening either. As many EU counties have closed their borders, including Sweden
Well, regardless of how you or I may feel about that issue of refugees, the facts are that freedom of movement applies to those who are already permitted to be resident in the EU. Essentially the camps in Greece have become the external border. Sweden hasn't completely closed their border either, at various periods people had to either had to be EU resident/have a visa, OR they had to claim asylum at the border. What they couldn't do was transit Sweden and go into Norway/Finland. Leaving/Staying in the EU is unlikely to change the situation wrt refugees (the UK is not particularly refugee friendly as is, and is unlikely to become any better post-Leave, so it's not like we are Leaving in order to fix that).
I'm being slightly mischievous about the services as in some sectors it works very well. In others, maybe not so much.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Just to mount my own hobby-horse for a moment have people considered how many could be housed in the homes that are currently empty? Overall the total approaches a million such homes. It wouldn't require much effort to take the quarter of a million or so that have been empty for more than six months and make homes for upwards of a million people in very short order.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie jon:
Marvin
Would you say that an immigrant family with 5 children living in a two bedroom flat is really having a greater impact on green space than the fairly wealthy family who own three properties; the family home, a flat for Dad to stay during the week and a holiday home? These are not on the rich list, they are just upper middle class.
Jengie
What's that got to do with the question of whether we should use our countryside to house the world?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Just to mount my own hobby-horse for a moment have people considered how many could be housed in the homes that are currently empty? Overall the total approaches a million such homes. It wouldn't require much effort to take the quarter of a million or so that have been empty for more than six months and make homes for upwards of a million people in very short order.
While I agree entirely with the proposal, it would only ever be a short-term solution. Once the houses were full we'd be right back where we are now, and that's without considering the impact on services and facilities.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
While I agree entirely with the proposal, it would only ever be a short-term solution. Once the houses were full we'd be right back where we are now, and that's without considering the impact on services and facilities.
No, we wouldn't.
We'd have housed a million families. Keeping those families in poorly maintained private accommodation is ruinously expensive to the public purse. Bringing back empty housing into use provides jobs. People use more services and facilities if they're in temporary accommodation.
In other words, it's a long term solution. Those who've learnt their skills doing up the old homes can then go on to build new ones, knowing they have somewhere safe for them and their families to sleep at the end of the working day, too.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
We'd have housed a million families. Keeping those families in poorly maintained private accommodation is ruinously expensive to the public purse.
How is it any more expensive than keeping them in well maintained accommodation?
quote:
Bringing back empty housing into use provides jobs. People use more services and facilities if they're in temporary accommodation.
The jobs would definitely only last until the houses were done. And while the second sentence may be statistically correct, I suspect it's more to do with the sort of people who end up in temporary accommodation than the accommodation itself. Put them in the penthouse of the London Hilton and they'll still need those services.
quote:
In other words, it's a long term solution. Those who've learnt their skills doing up the old homes can then go on to build new ones, knowing they have somewhere safe for them and their families to sleep at the end of the working day, too.
You almost make it sound like the reason for the housing shortage is lack of workers to build new ones.
[ 09. September 2016, 16:05: Message edited by: Marvin the Martian ]
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
We'd have housed a million families. Keeping those families in poorly maintained private accommodation is ruinously expensive to the public purse.
How is it any more expensive than keeping them in well maintained accommodation?
Because well maintained accommodation means they aren't ill so often. They're happier. There's less mould spores. There's heating and lighting and somewhere to cook. Stuff like that that means they're more likely to hold down a job and their kids get to school because they're not crippled with asthma and lung infections.
Of course, this being Hell, I can tell you you're a fucking solipsistic wanker for not giving that question a moment's thought, because it doesn't apply to you. But anyone who hasn't got their head up their arse and isn't in love with the smell of their own shit knows these things happen in the real world, and what their consequences are.
That's probably enough for now. Do come back when you fancy another clout with the clue bat.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
ThunderBunk
Stone cold idiot
# 15579
|
Posted
When, exactly, did we get the right to treat other people like shit just because they are guilty of being here without being born here? Treating each other with dignity might require more thought and effort, but it is what we are required to do, even if the people we are dealing with can't exact terrible revenge on us if we treat them like shit.
The assumption that exploitation is standard, and the only valid means by which other treatment can be triggered is fear of fatal reprisals, is much of what has led us into a hell of climatic disruption and endemic corruption. Is there any kind of manifesto for change anywhere?
--------------------
Currently mostly furious, and occasionally foolish. Normal service may resume eventually. Or it may not. And remember children, "feiern ist wichtig".
Foolish, potentially deranged witterings
Posts: 2208 | From: Norwich | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
You almost make it sound like the reason for the housing shortage is lack of workers to build new ones.
The housing shortage is to a great extent caused by a desire to keep the market "hot". Landlords and builders, with the connivance of governments have to carry the burden for that. In the "bad old days" the market was cooled down by governments of all colours which regarded social housing as an option for all, like the NHS and state education, rather than the inadequate and stigmatized safety net it has become.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
How is it any more expensive than keeping them in well maintained accommodation?
Because well maintained accommodation means they aren't ill so often.
and also because the massive shortage of social housing means that there is an artificial floor to rental prices (the maximum amount a landlord can charge a social housing tenant).
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
Liam Fox getting his excuses in early:
Britain lazy and fat says Fox
So when the economy goes down the Khazi it'll be nothing to do with Brexit, it'll be down to the fat lazy people, unworthy of being led by such political Titans as Fox, Davis and BoJo.
Come to think of it, this trio are not exactly sylph-like. Pot? Kettle? Black?
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Some people are talking of a bespoke deal, whereby the UK is sort of attached to the single market, and sort of has exemptions from free movement. The obvious counter-argument is, why should the EU be so generous? They don't want to make it easy to leave.
I want a divorce!
But we're going to keep having sex, right?
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Bring back the Migrant work force, all is forgiven.
Might be able to show us up in the top jobs aswell ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
[ 10. September 2016, 10:55: Message edited by: rolyn ]
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Liam Fox getting his excuses in early:
Britain lazy and fat says Fox
Will that be the same Liam Fox who rented his own home out, pocketed the cash, then rented somewhere else to live and charged that to the taxpayer? The same Liam Fox who once claimed for a car journey of 3p? The same Liam Fox who got his 'special advisor' included in MOD briefings and trips at the public expense, strictly against all rules?
Yes. Yes it will be.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Bringing back empty housing into use provides jobs. People use more services and facilities if they're in temporary accommodation.
The jobs would definitely only last until the houses were done. And while the second sentence may be statistically correct, I suspect it's more to do with the sort of people who end up in temporary accommodation than the accommodation itself. Put them in the penthouse of the London Hilton and they'll still need those services.
This is the direct analogue for the argument that unemployment is merely the result of laziness or inadequacy on the part of the unemployed. Granted, both these things exist but unemployment rates vary because of government policies and prevailing economic conditions. No-one seriously thinks that the British people were lazy and inadequate in the early 1930s and hard-working and entrepreneurial in the 1950s. If you ask an economic historian about the difference between unemployment rates during the two periods in question they will talk about the Great Depression on the one hand and the policies of the National Government and the post-war reconstruction and the commitment to successive governments to full employment. They won't say that a mysterious Spirit of Gumption descended upon the land in 1945. The same is true about housing. When you have a government, in propitious economic circumstances, which puts adequate housing as a priority then, Lo and Behold, you will get more adequate housing. You will still have people who struggle to look after themselves, or would rather ponce off the state than do a days honest work, but you will have rather fewer people who struggle to find adequate housing because they can't get a break.
This isn't terribly mysterious. People who claim it is are the political equivalents of the sort of people who think Mystic Meg is on the money.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
This isn't terribly mysterious. People who claim it is are the political equivalents of the sort of people who think Mystic Meg is on the money.
I think they are more the equivalent of people who give MM column inches or airtime. They do not care if it is fit to print as long as it is fit to purpose.
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Come to think of it, this trio are not exactly sylph-like. Pot? Kettle? Black?
BoJo the clown and the others aren't tossers because they are fat and lazy. They are tossers because they are bad politician and likely not that great humans.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Hard Brexit presumably means application of tariffs to trade; loss of passporting; slowdown in investment and growth.
Am I bid any more?
So please, will some clever person who did A-level Economics, or even a degree, tell me what I've missed out above.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
No economics qualification, but you also missed out:
unfilled gaps in the labour market due to considerably reduced labour pool
reduced cooperation between nations on law and order, and anti-terrrorism intelligence sharing
increases in smuggling (to avoid those tariffs) leading to increased availability of couterfeit and dangerous goods
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
Also not an economist, but just being the laughing stock of the entire world and our PM being treated like an embarrassing gatecrasher at G20 summits is humiliating in an interdisciplinary way.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
unfilled gaps in the labour market due to considerably reduced labour pool
Or to put it another way, an employment market where the power lies with employees rather than employers. And with all those jobs coming available unemployment rates should plummet!
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
unfilled gaps in the labour market due to considerably reduced labour pool
Or to put it another way, an employment market where the power lies with employees rather than employers. And with all those jobs coming available unemployment rates should plummet!
I expect employers would rather close factories and move offices than pay fair wages. Shit jobs at low wages will remain, but many farmers will allow crops to rot than pay a penny more to have them picked.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
unfilled gaps in the labour market due to considerably reduced labour pool
Or to put it another way, an employment market where the power lies with employees rather than employers. And with all those jobs coming available unemployment rates should plummet!
The imposition of tariffs and the end of access to the single market will mean manufacturers moving to where their markets are.
The end of the financial passport will mean banks & insurance companies moving their operations to Paris, Frankfurt etc., with all the knock-on effects in the wider economy.
We won't need to limit immigration, no-one will want to come here any more.
Of course, this will all take time. But should the government announce that hard Brexit is our chosen path (and you can bet that TM is doing her level best to put off that day as long as possible), expect to hear significant announcements of the "so long and thanks for all the regional development grants" variety shortly afterwards.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
unfilled gaps in the labour market due to considerably reduced labour pool
Or to put it another way, an employment market where the power lies with employees rather than employers. And with all those jobs coming available unemployment rates should plummet!
I expect employers would rather close factories and move offices than pay fair wages. Shit jobs at low wages will remain, but many farmers will allow crops to rot than pay a penny more to have them picked.
I suspect a variation on this will be true. The likes of Nissan - well paid jobs for skilled workers - will bugger off but the farmers will call for (and probably get) some kind on deal on immigration whereby they get cheap labour to harvest their crops.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I would think that Mrs May is trying to square the circle, that is, have some kind of membership of the single market, whilst getting rid of free movement. It sounds improbable, if not impossible, but there is talk of a bespoke deal. Kind of squidgy Brexit.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
unfilled gaps in the labour market due to considerably reduced labour pool
Or to put it another way, an employment market where the power lies with employees rather than employers. And with all those jobs coming available unemployment rates should plummet!
Yes, because world class academics to teach in our universities and do world beating research are sitting on the dole. As are plumbers, electricians and bricklayers. Or even people who know how to pick and sort fruit quickly and efficiently. And, we have a surplus of doctors and nurses just waiting for the immigrants to go somewhere else so they can do those jobs.
Heck, we don't even have anyone qualified to negotiate international trade deals.
Of course, we could have those people. We will need to start enrolling people on the appropriate university courses and apprenticeships. We can fill the gaps in, oh, 5-10 years (after study and gaining experience - less for some jobs, longer for others). Which leaves the country well and truly buggered for a few years after Brexit. It will of course require a government willing to spend money on education and training (because universities will be struggling after the income from overseas students that most rely on to make ends meet dries up). And, does assume we have any Brits able to teach the necessary skills ('cos we can't just ask some immigrants to do that - we'll have lost access to that labour pool).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
One thing that strikes me is how amateurish it all looks, building up to Brexit. No doubt there are serious negotiations going on in the background, but the politicians give the air of vaudeville performers on vacation. But isn't the whole of British politics like this? Look at Cameron and Osborne, kind of making it up as they go along, and Blair as well.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Yes, because world class academics to teach in our universities and do world beating research are sitting on the dole. As are plumbers, electricians and bricklayers. Or even people who know how to pick and sort fruit quickly and efficiently. And, we have a surplus of doctors and nurses just waiting for the immigrants to go somewhere else so they can do those jobs.
Heck, we don't even have anyone qualified to negotiate international trade deals.
Of course, we could have those people. We will need to start enrolling people on the appropriate university courses and apprenticeships. We can fill the gaps in, oh, 5-10 years (after study and gaining experience - less for some jobs, longer for others). Which leaves the country well and truly buggered for a few years after Brexit. It will of course require a government willing to spend money on education and training (because universities will be struggling after the income from overseas students that most rely on to make ends meet dries up). And, does assume we have any Brits able to teach the necessary skills ('cos we can't just ask some immigrants to do that - we'll have lost access to that labour pool).
So basically, it's the "Brits are Shit" argument? We're too useless a people to get anything done without those nice foreigners to do it for us?
There are plenty of British plumbers, electricians and builders. They can take on apprentices to help them with all the extra work they're going to get, and those apprentices when they have learnt their trade can take on apprentices of their own.
There are loads of doctors - my university alone graduates over 300 of them every year. In fact there's been talk of new graduates maybe not being guaranteed a job any more, because there are too many of them. As for nurses, that should never have become a profession that requires a degree. Your basic ward nurse could learn on the job just as easily, as they used to until quite recently.
Picking fruit is easy. It's just that nobody who has to actually live in Britain full time can do it for the money that's being paid to immigrant labourers. And as a number of my esteemed colleagues here have frequently pointed out, it's perfectly possible to pay a decent wage to fruit pickers without it negatively affecting prices in the shops.
I was amused at the idea of universities losing Overseas students, by the way, given that by definition they come from outside the EU, so nothing about their visas or education will change.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
So basically, it's the "Brits are Shit" argument?
Come on. you cannot be this stupid. Please tell me you are not this stupid. I take it for granted that we will not agree on somethings political, but tell me it is not because you are this stupid.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
So basically, it's the "Brits are Shit" argument? We're too useless a people to get anything done without those nice foreigners to do it for us?
No, we've built our economy and society around getting others to do our work for us - whether immigrants coming here, or our manufacturing going there. Of course Brits could do those jobs - but we'd need to restructure the way society works to train the people we need, and in almost all cases that will take more than the two years we'll have after Article 50 is eventually called.
We've structured society so that employers no longer take the risk of taking on apprentices. We've given the task of training people to colleges. Want to go into engineering? No more apprenticeships, get a degree first. Same with nursing. It means employers don't pay to train someone, risking them not working out or doing something very wrong while they're being trained.
quote:
I was amused at the idea of universities losing Overseas students, by the way, given that by definition they come from outside the EU, so nothing about their visas or education will change.
With the government tightening restrictions on all immigrants, to meet some arbitrarily set net migration limit, getting a student visa is becoming increasingly difficult. OK, not really to do with Brexit. But, it is symptomatic of the truly bizarre attitude to migration that the UK government, and large parts of our population, holds - which also seems to have played a large part in the Brexit vote.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I expect employers would rather close factories and move offices than pay fair wages. Shit jobs at low wages will remain, but many farmers will allow crops to rot than pay a penny more to have them picked.
If the brexit Make Britain Great again hardcore really want to get us back to the 60s Britain of full employment then we have to be talking subsidised wages. Plus a Welfare system that somehow says you don't get your Mobile phone or stag-nights abroad if you don't work, and work hard.
Some, including myself, might say the British attitude to work is so inherently negative it can never match that of our enthusiastic visitors. But then who is to say this cannot be turned around, look at how this has happened with the Olympics.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
unfilled gaps in the labour market due to considerably reduced labour pool
Or to put it another way, an employment market where the power lies with employees rather than employers. And with all those jobs coming available unemployment rates should plummet!
That's true of those areas of employment where the employers can't just move the jobs somewhere else.
In those areas where the employers can move the jobs about and employees can't move, power lies with employers. Giving the labour pool the right to move about simply rebalances the situation.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Marvin: quote:
So basically, it's the "Brits are Shit" argument?
We have it on good authority (from the Minister for Overseas Trade, or whatever he calls himself) that the British are fat and lazy. It doesn't have quite the same ring to it as your slogan, I must admit.
Also: quote:
I was amused at the idea of universities losing Overseas students, by the way, given that by definition they come from outside the EU, so nothing about their visas or education will change.
Quite right: the government has been making it harder for Overseas students to get visas for years and refusing to allow them to stay and work after they've finished their studies (unless their prospective employer is willing to jump through as many hoops as it takes to convince the Home Office that no one else can do the job). All to meet some arbitrary target set by the Daily Mail. So a lot of them have been going elsewhere, which is good news for the other countries they've been going to because a highly educated workforce boosts their economy and good news for the students too, if they're going somewhere they will actually be welcome.
Meanwhile, British universities slip down the global rankings because Overseas students are the only ones they can charge enough to make a profit from.
Remind me again why this is a good thing.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I expect employers would rather close factories and move offices than pay fair wages. Shit jobs at low wages will remain, but many farmers will allow crops to rot than pay a penny more to have them picked.
If the brexit Make Britain Great again hardcore really want to get us back to the 60s Britain of full employment then we have to be talking subsidised wages. Plus a Welfare system that somehow says you don't get your Mobile phone or stag-nights abroad if you don't work, and work hard.
Some, including myself, might say the British attitude to work is so inherently negative it can never match that of our enthusiastic visitors. But then who is to say this cannot be turned around, look at how this has happened with the Olympics.
It's interesting that you should allude to Britain's increased success in the Olympic games. That is entirely because of a political initiative, namely to direct £100+ millions (of Lottery money) into elite sport, targeting those sports in which Britain has good facilities and talent. It isn't done by telling our athletes to work harder for less, or we'll take your bike/boat/horse/whatever away.
This looks to me what's needed to get Britain working then. The political will, wisdom and funding. Austerity and threats won't do it.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Also not an economist, but just being the laughing stock of the entire world and our PM being treated like an embarrassing gatecrasher at G20 summits is humiliating in an interdisciplinary way.
The USA could help us out here in a few months.
At the G20 - and similar summits - leader photos are ordered by the amount of time you've been in the post. Which is why May got stuffed at the back. At the next one she'll move nearer the front because there will always be someone newer. Her position in the photo was nothing to do with Brexit. Sorry. Unlike some of the conversations during coffee hour.
Frankly, I've got no idea how these negotiations will go. I'm expecting something in between the worst and best case scenarios currently being discussed in the papers. We’re not going to get to keep all the things, but the sky probably won’t fall in on everyone’s heads. It’s going to take time for both sides to sort themselves out. I’ve been praying a lot.
Tubbs
[ 15. September 2016, 13:34: Message edited by: Tubbs ]
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Hard Brexit presumably means application of tariffs to trade; loss of passporting; slowdown in investment and growth.
Just to unpack this a little; the larger issue as above is the non-tariff barriers. The regulatory effect of which the most visible and intuitive is the loss of the financial passport.
However in the future it also affects supply lines (a lot of British manufacturing either makes high tech components for consumption elsewhere - or conversely relies on importing intermediate components from elsewhere). Without an overarching regulatory structure these become much slower - the Japanese conclusion would have been hugely influenced by this.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Look on the bright side, guys. We've got an unelected PM, a rise in hate crime, and more powerful toasters. Result.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Look on the bright side, guys. We've got an unelected PM, a rise in hate crime, and more powerful toasters. Result.
And we're back in control! What more could anyone want?
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Look on the bright side, guys. We've got an unelected PM, a rise in hate crime, and more powerful toasters. Result.
But your PM is elected, just as much as ours and those in Canada, NZ and so forth are. Ms May was elected by her constituency, and then the parliamentary party elected her (unopposed this time). In the UK case, the last PM not to have been elected by the parliamentary party was Douglas-Home. No PM anywhere that I'm aware o,f is elected to that position by a popular vote. Assuming the virtually impossible comes about, Corbyn will have gone through he same process.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
If the outcome post June 23rd was such a freaking disaster there would be rioting on the streets and the government which wrought such catastrophe would be outed.
Yet what have we got? Her Majesty's main opposition party in virtual meltdown, and yes also those sickening attacks and harrasment of migrants which most hope will soon be brought under control.
I read some of your link KLB re. the stringent rules applied to those seeking benefits. On the surface they do appear tedious and harsh, but I suspect necessary unless we want to return to a culture of malingerers or work/claim cheats.
Thinking about it this is probably the subject which led to much of the tension which assisted the brexit victory and, tragically, the rise in hate crime.
For example. One-- people were arriving on these shores and jumping straight on a dole system that had been tightened against indigenous people. Two-- factories and workshops were opening in regions where local 'job seekers', (made to feel indignant by said stringent rules), had not a hope in Hell of getting a job there because all the jobs were offered directly to migrants.
Along comes a contentious Referendum and ..... Booo--ff .
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
For example. One-- people were arriving on these shores and jumping straight on a dole system that had been tightened against indigenous people. Two-- factories and workshops were opening in regions where local 'job seekers', (made to feel indignant by said stringent rules), had not a hope in Hell of getting a job there because all the jobs were offered directly to migrants.
Do you ever bother checking your assertions rolyn? Can you offer some evidence for these assertions that don't come from the Daily Wail?
The Full Facts website on claiming benefits and a 2014 Daily Telegraph article discussing the amount of benefits being claimed by immigrants, both debunk that first myth.
Second myth - Guardian article debunks that one. I am sure the Full Facts site does too, if I bother to look.
Two minutes googling is all that it took to find pages of sites and articles giving facts and information that prove that the Daily Wail's headlines are just inflammatory tosh, so why, rolyn, do you keep buying into this nonsense?
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Look on the bright side, guys. We've got an unelected PM, a rise in hate crime, and more powerful toasters. Result.
But your PM is elected, just as much as ours and those in Canada, NZ and so forth are. Ms May was elected by her constituency, and then the parliamentary party elected her (unopposed this time). In the UK case, the last PM not to have been elected by the parliamentary party was Douglas-Home. No PM anywhere that I'm aware o,f is elected to that position by a popular vote. Assuming the virtually impossible comes about, Corbyn will have gone through he same process.
THANK YOU. Any time someone starts talking about the voting public electing a PM I feel the urge to whack them with a plank.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
I read some of your link KLB re. the stringent rules applied to those seeking benefits. On the surface they do appear tedious and harsh, but I suspect necessary unless we want to return to a culture of malingerers or work/claim cheats.
Return? That does rather presuppose that there was ever a time when there was a "culture of malingerers or work/claim cheats". I know expensive loo-roll like the Mail does think that was the case. That doesn't mean it ever existed.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Look on the bright side, guys. We've got an unelected PM, a rise in hate crime, and more powerful toasters. Result.
But your PM is elected, just as much as ours and those in Canada, NZ and so forth are. Ms May was elected by her constituency, and then the parliamentary party elected her (unopposed this time). In the UK case, the last PM not to have been elected by the parliamentary party was Douglas-Home. No PM anywhere that I'm aware o,f is elected to that position by a popular vote. Assuming the virtually impossible comes about, Corbyn will have gone through he same process.
In a British context, the phrase 'unelected PM' does not mean that she has not been elected by popular vote, since obviously no PM ever is. It means that she hasn't won an election as leader.
It's interesting to recall her own comments on Gordon Brown, also in this position, when she said that he lacked a mandate, and in fact, I think she said he was running scared.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
