Panorama, 13th feb - crumbling USA

[Gifter]

So you don't believe there are 900,000 vacancies in the UK economy at this moment in time?

Good luck to your wife.

She is the type of person who struggles.........employers think she'll leave at the first opportunity, which is probbly right.

People will less education do have better prospects than her at this moment in time.

I saw the link you posted with 900K but that is like saying there are 1M houses available because that is what estate agents are listing, the thing is, maybe 10-20% are already filled and left as CV enticers. 10-20% are probably already shoe ins for those already working for those companies (whose current posts will, as often as not, not be backfilled), and 10-20% are probably so specialised that they will only be filled by a miniscule percentage or filled by overseas applicants, or are indeed adverts for overseas posts where they would consider english/british applicants.

I'd be very surprised if the actual figure was much about half the 900K and when factoring in the rate of job loss against it, it might only be 1/3 in real terms.

 

[Leeds Spur]

The problem and it is very un pc of me to say it, there are to many people in the country. The recent influx of foreign labour has hurt the prospects of the british worker. The was a time a few years ago when if we had a recession then guys i knew on the building sites would go and work in a garage or a supermarket or something like that until things picked up again.

People can not do that now because we have an extra million people in the country compared with 15 years ago. But it is the left that wanted uncontrolled immgration combined with employers who got to keep wages low. So there it is, im not really bothered myself because this country always has and always will be about self interest and not giving a fudge about anyone but yourself.

I wish you and your wife good luck for the future but as a british man, i don't give a fudge just like the left did not give a fudge when they allowed uncontrolled immgration to happen and the right wing business owners did not care because they got to keep wages low and make bigger profits. Im sure some wise arse will come out and say that im just blaming foreingers because im racist. Which is not true i married an irish lady and am best mates with a latvian. But the people of the country have been let down by the politicans and some business owners.

Well said that man!

 

[Leeds Spur]

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_254579.pdf

500,000 vacancies according the the latest ONS report.

Interesting that page 5 confirms that 200,000 British nationals lost their jobs in the past year and 200,000 NON BRITISH NATIONALS got jobs.

I rest my case.

Obviously the official government data must be brick, it's probably a Daily Mail conspiracy.

 

[elltrev]

I'm just saying these people aren't unemployed due to lack of opportunity.

They re unemployable due to being thick clams, a product of brick parents and schools, and just being stupid.

It was argued that the underclass were a product of capitalism.....that's gonads IMO.

I agree that the existence of an underclass isn't an inevitable effect of capitalism*. But I do think that, once an underclass exists, the more capitalist a country is the less effective it will be at reducing the size of that underclass. Because a lot of those people don't have the ability / will to get themselves out of the rut that they are in or to change who they are as people, and so it requires some sort of outside intervention to do those things. And I suppose the entity that is best-placed to intervene is the state, which will need money to do so. Or Cameron's Big Society!

I also think it's important to stress that a lack of money, or even opportunity, needn't go hand-in-hand with some of the other characteristics that people might associate with an 'underclass' - anti-social behaviour, aggression, a lack of manners, a lack of respect, a lack of motivation etc. I've spent a lot of time in Central America and did some volunteering in Nicaragua - the second-poorest country in the Western Hempishphere after Haiti - and met so many people who were poor, unemployed and uneducated, but who were also friendly, humble and hard-working.

So what has caused the 'Underclass'? And how do we change underclasslings to working-class people?

*on a side note, what exactly is capitalism? The word gets thrown around a lot as if it's a concrete term, but surely it's more about degrees of capitalism? I.e. how much freedom is given to markets? When people talk about capitalism, what are the alternatives? Do people see our options as a number of points along a single line that stems from Capitalism on one hand to Communism on the other? Or is there some other line that I'm missing? Something that is completely different from capitalism OR communism?

 

[Leeds Spur]

Parenting - simple.

And you tend to find if you force people to work to survive, they will work.

If they rob and steal......throw them in the clink, forever if needs be.

The message will hit home soon enough.

Capitalism is based on markets, the freedom of capital, labour and goods. The idea that prices are set by supply and demand, it's not complicated.

Now, just like Socialism, it's used by some as a perjorative term.

The inequality of the western world isn't down to capitalism, it's down to regulation....which should be the checks and balances in the system. Human's are greedy, without checks and balances they will act greedily.

 

[monkeybarry]

Everyone gets UB, regardless of savings.

its means tested on household income (and takes into account core outgoings, rent, c.tax, food) and includes a savings threshold (2.5k if i remember correctly for JSA - but dont quote me on that)

 

[monkeybarry]

http://jobs.dorsetforyou.com/jobs.aspx?ssectors=56

Here you go mate.......

you also have to remember many jobs have over 100 applicants - so the number of jobs vs the number of applicants does become disproportionate

sadly, this is what happens when you have a country full of graduates and skill sets not inline with industry requirements
you also then have a culture of employers not being able to (or just not?) offering wages inline with the cost of living - now the country argument to that is "start low, work up". a great theory, but one which often doesnt prevail in SMEs, unless the SME is seeing serious growth (see current economic climate for the answer to that!), and doesnt work with a culture across business that requires far too many tick boxes to employ people (ie requiring graduates for entry levels admin posts in the misguided notion that a degree guarantees a better standard of candidate (inlcuding superceeding years of actual work experience)

 

[monkeybarry]

Parenting - simple.

And you tend to find if you force people to work to survive, they will work.

If they rob and steal......throw them in the clink, forever if needs be.

The message will hit home soon enough.

Capitalism is based on markets, the freedom of capital, labour and goods. The idea that prices are set by supply and demand, it's not complicated.

Now, just like Socialism, it's used by some as a perjorative term.

The inequality of the western world isn't down to capitalism, it's down to regulation....which should be the checks and balances in the system. Human's are greedy, without checks and balances they will act greedily.

just want to check - you are meaning regulation of capitalism there? to ensure capitalism doesnt become counter productive and is a cog in part of a functioning and fair society.

 

[elltrev]

Parenting - simple.

And you tend to find if you force people to work to survive, they will work.

If they rob and steal......throw them in the clink, forever if needs be.

The message will hit home soon enough.

Capitalism is based on markets, the freedom of capital, labour and goods. The idea that prices are set by supply and demand, it's not complicated.

Now, just like Socialism, it's used by some as a perjorative term.

The inequality of the western world isn't down to capitalism, it's down to regulation....which should be the checks and balances in the system. Human's are greedy, without checks and balances they will act greedily.

But if there aren't people / businesses willing to pay these people to work, because there isn't enough money in the economy and they're not attractive to employers (both of which are the case now), then you can't force them to work. Because you can't force people to give them work.

And throwing them in prison means taking them out of one bricky environment where they're surrounded by similar scummy people and throwing them into another bricky environment when they're surrounded by similar scummy people. I don't think 'the stick' is sufficient to change these people's behaviour - they need intervention which attempts to make some fundamental changes to who they are as people. Throwing them in jail for life is certainly an alternative option, but that obviously has a lot of ethical issues and would be extremely expensive to the state.

So presumably you mean inequality is down to a lack of regulation? I agree, and this is what I was trying to get at: are people who are 'anti-capitalism' just proponents of more regulation? Capitalism seems to me like the natural order of things, with the only variable being how much regulation there is (with socialism and communism having very high regulation). To people who say capitalism has failed - what are the alternatives that you're thinking of?

 

[Leeds Spur]

just want to check - you are meaning regulation of capitalism there? to ensure capitalism doesnt become counter productive and is a cog in part of a functioning and fair society.

Yes, checks and balances.

Its the lack of regulation that's the problem, not the ideology.

 

[Leeds Spur]

But if there aren't people / businesses willing to pay these people to work, because there isn't enough money in the economy and they're not attractive to employers (both of which are the case now), then you can't force them to work. Because you can't force people to give them work.

And throwing them in prison means taking them out of one bricky environment where they're surrounded by similar scummy people and throwing them into another bricky environment when they're surrounded by similar scummy people. I don't think 'the stick' is sufficient to change these people's behaviour - they need intervention which attempts to make some fundamental changes to who they are as people. Throwing them in jail for life is certainly an alternative option, but that obviously has a lot of ethical issues and would be extremely expensive to the state.

So presumably you mean inequality is down to a lack of regulation? I agree, and this is what I was trying to get at: are people who are 'anti-capitalism' just proponents of more regulation? Capitalism seems to me like the natural order of things, with the only variable being how much regulation there is (with socialism and communism having very high regulation). To people who say capitalism has failed - what are the alternatives that you're thinking of?

I believe people do bad things because they are bad, not due to their environment.

Otherwise all poor people would be bad, they aren't.

Life is full of choices.

 

[Leeds Spur]

you also have to remember many jobs have over 100 applicants - so the number of jobs vs the number of applicants does become disproportionate

sadly, this is what happens when you have a country full of graduates and skill sets not inline with industry requirements
you also then have a culture of employers not being able to (or just not?) offering wages inline with the cost of living - now the country argument to that is "start low, work up". a great theory, but one which often doesnt prevail in SMEs, unless the SME is seeing serious growth (see current economic climate for the answer to that!), and doesnt work with a culture across business that requires far too many tick boxes to employ people (ie requiring graduates for entry levels admin posts in the misguided notion that a degree guarantees a better standard of candidate (inlcuding superceeding years of actual work experience)

Global GDP per capita is $10k, that's around ?ú6400 per person.

UK GDP per capita is $37,000 per capita.

For all the chat about China being the coming force, their's is $8,000!

The west is dying.......the trend is irreversible.

THe resources will continue to move towards global equilibrium........the top 20 economies in 50 years time will look very different to today.

Nothing can be done, except a downward revision in our aspirations. The west has no right whatsoever to a disproportionate allocation of resources and wealth that they have now.

Lots of people need a MAJOR reality check. The welfare wet dream has been funded by debt, money borrowed from the rest of the developing world, now the part of over.

 

[spasm]

politicians everywhere suck

 

[monkeybarry]

Yes, checks and balances.

Its the lack of regulation that's the problem, not the ideology.

i totally agree (and hopefully there will be regulation - it'll do my job prospects the world of good!!)

this is maybe a little OT (but then the thread has veered OT, so what the hell) - but the whole increase in regulation argument (which i am whole heartedly in favour off - i would regulate the regulators if i could!!) is a bit of a rock and hard place scenario now as regulatory bodies have to be funded from somewhere

 

[monkeybarry]

Global GDP per capita is $10k, that's around ?ú6400 per person.

UK GDP per capita is $37,000 per capita.

For all the chat about China being the coming force, their's is $8,000!

The west is dying.......the trend is irreversible.

THe resources will continue to move towards global equilibrium........the top 20 economies in 50 years time will look very different to today.

Nothing can be done, except a downward revision in our aspirations. The west has no right whatsoever to a disproportionate allocation of resources and wealth that they have now.

Lots of people need a MAJOR reality check. The welfare wet dream has been funded by debt, money borrowed from the rest of the developing world, now the part of over.

exactly

but with life essentially being an excericse in paying bills, people need to earn enough to pay those bills - therein lies the problem

 

[Leeds Spur]

You don't need too much regulation, just effective regulation manned by well compensated and competent people.

For instance, the FSA were trying to regulate a system they didn't understand!

Solution - pay people at the FSA the same as the best city boys, get the best grads from Oxbridge......seperate all regulators from the industries they regulate, so no hospitality allowed, you cannot work for an industry you regulate for 5 years after leaving the regulator etc.

They are bringing this in in the states.

 

[Leeds Spur]

exactly

but with life essentially being an excericse in paying bills, people need to earn enough to pay those bills - therein lies the problem

Paying bills?

But what do you REALLY need?

In the rest of the world need food, shelter, warmth, dry accomodation........we woulddefine it as a TV, Radio, Sky? Family Holiday?

You see, when you start really looking at this, it gets quite scary in terms of ramifications for the west lifestyle.

 

[papaspur]

You don't need too much regulation, just effective regulation manned by well compensated and competent people.

For instance, the FSA were trying to regulate a system they didn't understand!

Solution - pay people at the FSA the same as the best city boys, get the best grads from Oxbridge......seperate all regulators from the industries they regulate, so no hospitality allowed, you cannot work for an industry you regulate for 5 years after leaving the regulator etc.

They are bringing this in in the states.

Here we have the SEC, and they don't have balls nor teeth. Looking at their records, many investigations into large financials like Goldman-Sachs and JP Morgan yielded leads, but those leads were never followed because assholes (and I cannot stress this word enough) who know how to game the system have friends in high places. Regulation is a joke. You're talking about putting poor bottom-feeders of society in jail. How about we start with these corporate assholes that bet on the markets crashing in order to turn a profit, and if that wasn't enough, WE the taxpayers bailed those same sons of bitches out and look how they're doing now. Many financials have recorded ridiculous profits and the bonuses they hand out to their executives get even more and more extravagant.

I am tired of seeing greed trump all else in this society, and those in a position of power and a lot to lose generally have the tools to try to keep that power and wealth. Unfortunately, this ethos is pervasive in all humans. It's just that some people have morals and aren't willing to sell their souls.

As the wise spasm said, fudge politicians. They're the biggest **** jugglers out there, but the most surprising thing is that "the people" buy their flimflam time and time again, despite being fed deliberate lies to make voters feel comfortable about themselves.

 

[papaspur]

Back sort of on topic, here's another NYT article on unemployment, but I found it pertinent to this discussion:
For London Youth, Down and Out Is Way of Life

 

[Leeds Spur]

British youth unemployment similar to the states, and amongst the lowest amongst major European countries.

It's a big problem, but we have aging populations and people are not retiring, so they are not making space in the workforce for the youth. We also churn out graduates with useless degrees in non-relevant subjects. If you had a small workforce, (SME's are the lifeblood getting youth into jobs) you would employ an older, more experienced worker every time over a youth that needed training.

Youth unemployment fell last quarter, hopfully the big push on apprentices by the government will turn the tide.

It's a very tough time to be young that's for sure.