Breadline Britain

[OldBlueLady]

No, no, no. There was not a labour shortage; the government were paying 5m people (12% of the working age population) to sit at home and not work. There was certainly a demand for foreign labour because a large proportion of Brits either didn't have the skills or didn't have the financial incentives to work.

And also because immigrant workers were cheaper to employ (and exploit)....no pensions, no perks, no unions and a willingness to do the kind of jobs that too many of our work force deemed beneath them.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

Yogi,
Contrary to what many on SZ think, I don't actually have any mates on the Guardian(though I did once meet Peter Jenkins-in the pub next door- after a Tribune rally at Wesminster Hall).

I never thought you did.....................hence the wink. :smile:

 

[sufclee]

80% Blimey i must be a rich git..........

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

I just checked out where we would be if we hadn't fled to France and had both continued our life in teaching. Looks like we would be around 90%. However, I don't know whether my wife's widow benifits would have quite achieved those heights and you also have to consider what benifit it would have been to her, sitting in a cell in Runwell (is it still going?), looking at four bare walls!

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I just checked out where we would be if we hadn't fled to France and had both continued our life in teaching. Looks like we would be around 90%. However, I don't know whether my wife's widow benifits would have quite achieved those heights and you also have to consider what benifit it would have been to her, sitting in a cell in Runwell (is it still going?), looking at four bare walls!

Ask Shrimpero, it's his old alma mater,ie where he got his first work experience.:smile:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

.You missed the 2005 General Election then (though you are fortunate in this respect) as Michael Howard talked about virtually nothing else.

I did add the caveat significantTory politician.:winking: The only significant thing about MH was Ann Widdecombe's wonderful jibe:"there is something of the night about him"

As for your point about identifying large scale infrastructure projects, frankly I don't really think it matters too much which projects are chosen(digging up holes and filling them up again would serve some purpose),although bringing Britain's high speed railway network up to speed with the rest of Europe(eg France,Spain etc)and into the 21st century,would certainly be a good place to start.Getting more housing built would also be a jolly good idea.

Neil,
On Economics you're impressive but when it comes to Politics, I'm afraid you're distinctly ordinary.I'd stick to the day job,if I were you.:smile:
I'm enjoying your continual references to the "magical money tree", Btw.Did you by any chance get taken to see Jack and the Beanstalk as a youngster? :unsure::hilarious:

 

[callan]

I did add the caveat significantTory politician.:winking: The only significant thing about MH was Ann Widdecombe's wonderful jibe:"there is something of the night about him"

As for your point about identifying large scale infrastructure projects, frankly I don't really think it matters too much which projects are chosen(digging up holes and filling them up again would serve some purpose),although bringing Britain's high speed railway network up to speed with the rest of Europe(eg France,Spain etc)and into the 21st century,would certainly be a good place to start.Getting more housing built would also be a jolly good idea.

Neil,
On Economics you're impressive but when it comes to Politics, I'm afraid you're distinctly ordinary.I'd stick to the day job,if I were you.:smile:
I'm enjoying your continual references to the "magical money tree", Btw.Did you by any chance get taken to see Jack and the Beanstalk as a youngster? :unsure::hilarious:

You're hardly Robin Day yourself!....wait for it ....here she comes....:winking:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

You're hardly Robin Day yourself!....wait for it ....here she comes....:winking:

Robin Day was a pompous oaf.Why anybody would want to be like him I've no idea.:unsure:

 

[Napster]

I did add the caveat significantTory politician.:winking: The only significant thing about MH was Ann Widdecombe's wonderful jibe:"there is something of the night about him"

As for your point about identifying large scale infrastructure projects, frankly I don't really think it matters too much which projects are chosen(digging up holes and filling them up again would serve some purpose),although bringing Britain's high speed railway network up to speed with the rest of Europe(eg France,Spain etc)and into the 21st century,would certainly be a good place to start.Getting more housing built would also be a jolly good idea.

Neil,
On Economics you're impressive but when it comes to Politics, I'm afraid you're distinctly ordinary.I'd stick to the day job,if I were you.:smile:
I'm enjoying your continual references to the "magical money tree", Btw.Did you by any chance get taken to see Jack and the Beanstalk as a youngster? :unsure::hilarious:

I bet he's better at grammar as well.

 

[Neil_F]

On Economics you're impressive but when it comes to Politics, I'm afraid you're distinctly ordinary.

Quite true. I'd be a terrible politician.

 

[steveo]

Robin Day was a pompous oaf.Why anybody would want to be like him I've no idea.:unsure:

Robin Day....Barnablue...Pompous oaf.....anyone seeing a connection here?

 

[Pubey]

I'm pretty sure it's difficult to be both good at economics and politics, they don't seem to naturally align. Economics is about making difficult but objective decisions based on the here and now - mainly about resources. Politics seems to me more ideological, and is about authority and how the state and society relate. Obviously there are overlaps, but there is a reason why economists and politicians tend to be separate groups. A good example is my work for NICE as an economist. I help make decisions about expensive drugs for the NHS based on the costs and benefits they offer. As an economist it's quite pure and mainly based on the optimal distribution of finite resources. However sometimes the politician (the secretary of state, in this case) can overrule the 'no' decision - so to allow expensive Alzheimer's or cancer drugs. The decision seems perverse to an economist, but the politician is considering their relationship with the electorate, personally i call it cheap electioneering with very ill people, however I could understand a patient or family member not complaining - and them being happy a politician 'has their back'.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Robin Day....Stevo...Pompous oaf.....anyone seeing a connection here?

(corrected for you):winking:

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I bet he's better at grammar as well.

That's the trouble with right wingers.When they lose the argument they indulge in petty nitpicking.:tease:

 

[callan]

That's the trouble with right wingers.When they lose the argument they indulge in petty nitpicking.:tease:

I'm sure whatever the political leaning of the person reading your views, they can't help but admire your fortitude in ignoring the one question that has been asked of you by Neil F, which is where is all the money coming from for the projects ?
Perhaps it just me, but in order to proclaim victory in any argument or discussion you need to convince, thus far you have failed miserably :tease:

 

[Pubey]

I'm sure whatever the political leaning of the person reading your views, they can't help but admire your fortitude in ignoring the one question that has been asked of you by Neil F, which is where is all the money coming from for the projects ?
Perhaps it just me, but in order to proclaim victory in any argument or discussion you need to convince, thus far you have failed miserably :tease:

  Spoiler:  

  Spoiler:  

RIP Bluetonic

 

[Napster]

That's the trouble with right wingers.When they lose the argument they indulge in petty nitpicking.:tease:

What argument? Where's the money coming from? What infrastructure projects? How can you stop immigrant labour being used for the projects?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

What argument? Where's the money coming from? What infrastructure projects? How can you stop immigrant labour being used for the projects?

Scroll back and you'll see I've identified at least two major infrastructure projects,high speed rail networks and housing.

The answer to your last question is that you can't stop EU labour being used on these projects but you can regulate the use of non-EU labour.

As for an answer to your first question, I suggest you read (Nobel Prize Winner in Economics)Paul Krugman's "End this Depression Now!"

He advocates a 1930's style increase in Government spending to create growth,btw.

Where does the money come from? The Government prints it.QED.

Same as it's doing now actually but instead of giving it directly to the banks you put it in the hands of Joe Public who will spend it(unlike the banks who are using it to try and wipe out toxic debts imported from the US) and get the economy moving again.

 

[Pubey]

Thread to Neil_F, thread to Neil_F...

 

[Napster]

Scroll back and you'll see I've mentioned at least two major infrastructure projects,high speed rail networks and housing.

The answer to your last question is that you can't stop EU labour being used on these projects but you can regulate the use of non-EU labour.

As for an answer to your first question, I suggest you read (Nobel Prize Winner in Economics)Paul Krugman's "End this Depression Now!"

He advocates a 1930's style increase in Government spending to create growth,btw.Where does the money come from? The Government prints it.QED.Same as it's doing now actually but instead of giving it directly to the banks you put it in the hands of Joe Public who will spend it(unlike the banks who are using it to try and wipe out toxic debts imported from the US) and get the economy moving again.

1) Transport projects are complex to plan, and hard to see any real ROI. Plus, there isn't really the space. Housing - again, where and in what community? And will it be affordable?
The problem with plucking 2 areas out of thin air, is they need proper analysis
2) I might just read that book.
3) Extra money supply: more inflation. More consumer spending: more inflation. But hold on, the Bank of England's in charge of money supply, so they could control the interest rates. So, hike up the interest rates to control inflation. Oops, mortgage rates go up, interest on debt goes up, Pound is less attractive.

There is no panacea. But I think controlling our debts is the best way forward for now. Not huge infrastructure projects with no real benefit, and using the money supply.