Politics

[Dr Gloom 22159]

The job market is a good news story.

 

The economy is going to bubble along the bottom for years to come. There is no magic bubble out there to change that like there was during the last 30 years.

 

This is now all about re-allignment be that wages, benefits etc. Not great I give you that, but thats the world we are in.

 

the job markets ISN"T a good news story, whichever way the Tories try to spin it.

 

and savings made by cutting benefits are a drop in the ocean and will barely scratch the surface if the deficit. that particular policy is about the tory party winning favour with daily mail readers who whine about going to work when neighbours haven't opened their curtains yet.

 

as i have said previusly. this government's much criticised extreme austerity drive is all about making their long desired changes to the social contract.

[Christmas Tree 4834]

the job markets ISN"T a good news story, whichever way the Tories try to spin it.

 

and savings made by cutting benefits are a drop in the ocean and will barely scratch the surface if the deficit. that particular policy is about the tory party winning favour with daily mail readers who whine about going to work when neighbours haven't opened their curtains yet.

 

as i have said previusly. this government's much criticised extreme austerity drive is all about making their long desired changes to the social contract.

 

The job news is good, regardless of which way you or the Guardian try to spin it.

 

As to the other points the whole welfare state does need overhauling and has done so for years. It has totally changed from what it was intended for.

 

Its a shame people cant take the politics out of the state of the country / economy.

 

We had become a large bloated state living beyond our means on past glories or jam tomorrow. (for decades under all parties)

 

We were never going to stop the job drain to the third world so we could either keep borrowing and kid ourselves that good times are around the corner be realistic and realise a lot of whats going on needs addressing.

 

We are going to have to work longer for less money.

 

Anyone who thinks a return to good times are not too far away are dreaming. Even Labour wont fight the next election claiming to undo cuts, lower retirement age, restore public sector pensions etc etc.

 

They know only too well the state we are in. Sure they will score political points but from a global view point looking in, there is a fag paper between the two parties.

[Dr Gloom 22159]

The job news is good, regardless of which way you or the Guardian try to spin it.

 

As to the other points the whole welfare state does need overhauling and has done so for years. It has totally changed from what it was intended for.

 

Its a shame people cant take the politics out of the state of the country / economy.

 

We had become a large bloated state living beyond our means on past glories or jam tomorrow. (for decades under all parties)

 

We were never going to stop the job drain to the third world so we could either keep borrowing and kid ourselves that good times are around the corner be realistic and realise a lot of whats going on needs addressing.

 

We are going to have to work longer for less money.

 

Anyone who thinks a return to good times are not too far away are dreaming. Even Labour wont fight the next election claiming to undo cuts, lower retirement age, restore public sector pensions etc etc.

 

They know only too well the state we are in. Sure they will score political points but from a global view point looking in, there is a fag paper between the two parties.

 

not true. the tories are trying to being opportunist and are using the situation to rewrite the social contract established after the second world war. this includes making fundamental changes to the nhs and welfare state.

 

they are using the austerity drive, which is extremely severe, to cover this up.

 

the deficit needs to be reduced. the poor don't need to be made to suffer. particularly as they aren't the ones that caused the crisis. it was the bankers, not the people on benefits that got us into this mess ffs.

Edited January 24, 2013 by Dr Gloom

[NJS 4411]

I see the propaganda is still working. Theyve convinced you that were fucked and to expect misery for years while the rich just rake it in.

 

If they just imposed a 25% tax on INCREASE in the wealth of the one percent since the crunch it would clear the deficit.

[Christmas Tree 4834]

not true. the tories are trying to being opportunist and are using the situation to rewrite the social contract established after the second world war. this included fundamental changes to the nhs and welfare state.

 

they are using the austerity drive, which is extremely severe, to cover this up.

 

the deficit needs to be reduced. the poor don't need to be made to suffer. particularly as they aren't the ones that caused the crisis. it was the bankers, not the people on benefits that got us into this mess ffs.

 

1. All politicians are opportunistic.

2. The social contract probably didnt forsee people on £100,000 a year or more getting handouts.

3. The austerity policies from both parties at the last general election were virtually identical.

[Christmas Tree 4834]

I see the propaganda is still working. Theyve convinced you that were fucked and to expect misery for years while the rich just rake it in.

 

If they just imposed a 25% tax on INCREASE in the wealth of the one percent since the crunch it would clear the deficit.

 

I've felt the same on this for years under different parties.

 

To me its a re alignment which is basically us (and other western countries) getting used to life without boom and bust, without a housing bubble or a finance bubble to mask what was really going on.

 

Lots of mass employment jobs going and virtually everything getting made cheaper elsewhere.

 

Misery is not a word I would use for society as a whole. Life will go on and even if we are working for less our overall standards of living will keep on increasing from generation to generation. IE, Compare what kids have today compared to 70's 80's 90's kids or what the average worker has in his life compared to the average worker of other decades.

 

The alternative to trying to "sort our problems" out is continued borrowing / screwing up future generations.

[Tooj 17]

The job market is a good news story.

 

The economy is going to bubble along the bottom for years to come. There is no magic bubble out there to change that like there was during the last 30 years.

 

This is now all about re-allignment be that wages, benefits etc. Not great I give you that, but thats the world we are in.

The job market is a good news story.

 

The economy is going to bubble along the bottom for years to come. There is no magic bubble out there to change that like there was during the last 30 years.

 

This is now all about re-allignment be that wages, benefits etc. Not great I give you that, but thats the world we are in.

 

How about perhaps getting back that lost Corporation Tax instead of hitting those that are already struggling?

[Renton 22002]

 

 

Im sure you are intelligent enough to understand that the very fact that they have been doing it the same way for 20 odd years should be enough for you to realise there is no great conspiracy here.

 

The line "guidelines set out by the International Labour Organisation" should really have been enough.

 

And then on top of all that the ONS is actually independent.

 

Shame that some cant simply enjoy a good news story.

 

Without getting into a pointless political argument with you, you've completely ignored my point and have either deliberately distorted the facts and thrust of that article or you are just basically stupid. Which is it?

Edited January 24, 2013 by Renton

[Renton 22002]

Life will go on and even if we are working for less our overall standards of living will keep on increasing from generation to generation.

 

Stagnant or decreasing GDP well below inflation means that our standard of living is actively going down. What planet are you on? The crash happened 5 years, ago now ffs and there is still NO growth.

[Christmas Tree 4834]

Without getting into a pointless political argument with you, you've completely ignored my point and have either deliberately distorted the facts and thrust of that article or you are just basically stupid. Which is it?

 

Employment figures were good, Guardian looks for lame bad spin, shocker.

[Christmas Tree 4834]

Stagnant or decreasing GDP well below inflation means that our standard of living is actively going down. What planet are you on? The crash happened 5 years, ago now ffs and there is still NO growth.

 

It a very simple point. Take any average worker over each of the last so many decades and the current fella always has "a better life".

 

Thats just the way life works. Sure we are all getting used to cutting up credit cards or not re-mortgaging our houses for holidays and cars etc

 

Technology gets better, entertainment gets better, food gets better etc etc

[Christmas Tree 4834]

 

How about perhaps getting back that lost Corporation Tax instead of hitting those that are already struggling?

 

What most governments would love but struggle to achieve due to world regulations that allow companies to play the system from country to country.

 

Cameron actually made a speech about that today...

 

David Cameron has declared that companies who want to do business in Britain must pay their fair share of tax in a strident speech at Davos.

 

The Prime Minister said abuse of tax systems was "an issue whose time has come" and that he wanted to make sure individuals and companies "pay their fair share".

 

He vowed that Britain would use its presidency of the G8 group of rich nations to push for global action against tax evasion and "aggressive" tax avoidance by firms and the super-rich.

 

At the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, he told an audience of CEOs and investors: "I am a low-tax Conservative but I'm not a companies-should-pay-no-tax Conservative."

 

"Individuals and businesses must pay their fair share," he insisted as he urged world leaders to ramp up their efforts. "This is a problem for all countries not just for Britain," he said.

 

In some of his strongest language about the issue to date, Mr Cameron turned on businesses using intricate mechanisms to minimise their payments.

 

"Any businesses who think that they can carry on dodging that fair share or that they can keep on selling to the UK and setting up ever-more complex tax arrangements abroad to squeeze their tax bill right down - well, they need to wake up and smell the coffee because the public who buy from them have had enough," he said.

 

The Prime Minister did not mention any companies by name but both Starbucks and Google have recently come under fire for manipulating transfer prices to shift profits into low tax jurisdictions.

 

Starbucks and Google both insist that they fully comply with UK tax law but the revelations about their payments, among those of other firms, sparked a major backlash last year.

 

"There's nothing wrong with sensible tax planning, and there are some things governments want people to do that reduce tax bills, such as investing in pensions, start-up businesses or charities," Mr Cameron said.

 

"But some forms of avoidance have become so aggressive that I think it is right to say these raise ethical issues and it's time to call for more responsibility and for governments to act accordingly."

 

During a brief question and answer session, Mr Cameron shrugged off concerns that his stance on tax, coupled with his position on Britain and the European Union, would deter investors.

 

He insisted the changes in Europe could not be ignored and pointed to low corporation tax rates in Britain as a boost for businesses.

 

"I think Britain has a great offer for businesses. We are cutting our tax rates and going to be one of the most tax competitive countries anywhere in the world," he said.

 

"It is a perfectly fair argument to make to say we will cut our tax rates and be competitive but in return we do ask that people pay their fair share."

 

TUC general secretary Frances O'Grady said global efforts to tackle avoidance need to be matched by "tougher action" domestically.

 

"The UK remains a global leader for tax secrecy, both through the City and its crown dependencies," she said.

 

"The Government should start to close the UK's multi-billion tax gap with a far tighter general anti-avoidance principle and minimum tax rates so that the super-rich begin to pay their fair share."

[Happy Face 29]

Good old Dave, hard as nails in a speech.

 

But Vodafone telt HMRC to fuck off over £7bn in tax and he's their bitch....

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8334832/David-Cameron-intervenes-for-Cairn-and-Vodafone-in-India.html

[Renton 22002]

 

 

Employment figures were good, Guardian looks for lame bad spin, shocker.

 

No. You're still missing the point. You cherry pick good news stories which aren't representative of the economic reality, then cut half sentences out of valid arguments to make a spurious and opposite point. That's bad form.If unemployment was reported as going up, would you have made a post? No. That's the point.

Edited January 24, 2013 by Renton

[Renton 22002]

 

 

It a very simple point. Take any average worker over each of the last so many decades and the current fella always has "a better life".

 

Thats just the way life works. Sure we are all getting used to cutting up credit cards or not re-mortgaging our houses for holidays and cars etc

 

Technology gets better, entertainment gets better, food gets better etc etc

 

Used to be true but isn't at the moment. 'Managed decline'.

[Christmas Tree 4834]

No. You're still missing the point. You cherry pick good news stories which aren't representative of the economic reality, then cut half sentences out of valid arguments to make a spurious and opposite point. That's bad form.If unemployment was reported as going up, would you have made a post? No. That's the point.

 

I see, so its a conservative supporter cherry picks good conservative stories shocker.

 

Thats the way it tends to go in here from both sides. Sometimes that will lead to a bit of debate, sometimes it doesnt, but dont pretend as though you dont understand.

[Christmas Tree 4834]

Used to be true but isn't at the moment. 'Managed decline'.

 

I guarantee that you'r average worker will have a better lifestyle in 2015 that his 2005 equivalent.

[Renton 22002]

I see, so its a conservative supporter cherry picks good conservative stories shocker.

 

Thats the way it tends to go in here from both sides. Sometimes that will lead to a bit of debate, sometimes it doesnt, but dont pretend as though you dont understand.

 

I could have posted a bad news story for the government every day for the past few years, with some justification with regard to the economy, but I don't. You however only pop up on this thread to report "positive" news but then aren't interested in further analysis. If unemployment is really falling, as in people getting proper jobs and not pointless schemes (which I admit every government since Thatcher has done), then why is GDP not correspondingly increasing? It's a fair question.

 

Tbh an admission you're at least as biased as the rest of us would be something.

[Renton 22002]

I guarantee that you'r average worker will have a better lifestyle in 2015 that his 2005 equivalent.

 

I htink you are almost certainly wrong using any meaningful economic metric, unless some miracle happens in the next two years.

Edited January 24, 2013 by Renton

[Christmas Tree 4834]

I could have posted a bad news story for the government every day for the past few years, with some justification with regard to the economy, but I don't. You however only pop up on this thread to report "positive" news but then aren't interested in further analysis. If unemployment is really falling, as in people getting proper jobs and not pointless schemes (which I admit every government since Thatcher has done), then why is GDP not correspondingly increasing? It's a fair question.

 

Tbh an admission you're at least as biased as the rest of us would be something.

 

Is Conservative Supporter not Bias enough for you?

 

Anyway, I did engage in further discussion by pointing out (as you have just done yourself tbf) the stupidity of the article Gloom posted.

 

The Independednt ONS is following the same international format is has used for 20 odd years. That means that not only do all governments include some schemes, but this is also not a new thing so any increase in employment year on year is not effected by such schemes to any great extent.

[Christmas Tree 4834]

I htink you are almost certainly wrong using any meaningful economic metric, unless some miracle happens in the next two years.

 

You cant judge such a thing simply by economics though.

 

2005 man may have been mortgaged to the hilt, up to his eyes in credit cards etc etc. As most people have tried to pay down debt or cant get credit as before he could easily have very increase in wages but actually have more disposable income.

 

However my point was more to do with NJS's misery comment as highlighted by a chil comparison from average families. We all just have more stuff, more things to do whether that be watching loads of football, playing computer games, cooking, getting outdoors etc.

 

Life generally keeps on getting better for Mr Average from decade to decade.

[Renton 22002]

Is Conservative Supporter not Bias enough for you?

 

Anyway, I did engage in further discussion by pointing out (as you have just done yourself tbf) the stupidity of the article Gloom posted.

 

The Independednt ONS is following the same international format is has used for 20 odd years. That means that not only do all governments include some schemes, but this is also not a new thing so any increase in employment year on year is not effected by such schemes to any great extent.

 

Yes, but the government has created new schemes. You know, ones that weren't there before? I'm not arguing with the way unemployment is being measured, I'm saying this apparent fall probably isn't to do with real job creation.

[Christmas Tree 4834]

Yes, but the government has created new schemes. You know, ones that weren't there before? I'm not arguing with the way unemployment is being measured, I'm saying this apparent fall probably isn't to do with real job creation.

 

Which new schemes and what are the figures?

[Christmas Tree 4834]

Even this piece in todays Guardian, Employment figures, Ask The Experts concludes that the news is good. (and not fiddled) Whether it lasts etc etc is all down the road, but the figures are as genuine as they usually are from the ONS.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/jan/23/uk-unemployment-experts

[Renton 22002]

You cant judge such a thing simply by economics though.

 

2005 man may have been mortgaged to the hilt, up to his eyes in credit cards etc etc. As most people have tried to pay down debt or cant get credit as before he could easily have very increase in wages but actually have more disposable income.

 

However my point was more to do with NJS's misery comment as highlighted by a chil comparison from average families. We all just have more stuff, more things to do whether that be watching loads of football, playing computer games, cooking, getting outdoors etc.

 

Life generally keeps on getting better for Mr Average from decade to decade.

 

Well if you can't measure standard of living then your guarantee is worthless, isn't it? It isn't measured by technological advancement though.

 

It seems you are talking from personal experience or have recall bias. I am certainly worse off than I was in 2005, having had a pay freeze for 3 years but with inflation constantly on the increase. I'm in no way struggling but I'm feeling less flush and much more insecure financially. And I realise I am lucky.

 

I remember in about 2005 having a discussion with Alreetlike about paying someone bi-weekly to clean the inside of your green waste bin. Seriously. People had much more disposable income back then and, it seemed to me anyway, were simply frittering it away on nonsense like that. It actually bought it home to me that we might be on the threshold of a bubble bursting because it was such an insane concept to me, but I brushed that aside like most others did. I think, on average, most people are much worse off now, and the only way to prove this is through the statistics you dismiss.