Discussion:
UK "sleep-walking to disaster"
(too old to reply)
John
2017-01-07 08:30:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Ian Jackson
2017-01-07 08:38:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
We are certainly NOT "sleepwalking".

While we are certainly in a nightmare, we are actually fully awake, and
we know exactly what we are doing.

After all, 17 million voters CAN'T be wrong (can they?).
--
Ian
R. Mark Clayton
2017-01-07 09:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
We are certainly NOT "sleepwalking".
While we are certainly in a nightmare, we are actually fully awake, and
we know exactly what we are doing.
After all, 17 million voters CAN'T be wrong (can they?).
--
Ian
Maybe: -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_March_1933

17,277,190 44% of the vote.
Handsome Jack
2017-01-07 10:15:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Remain supporter opposes Brexit. Hold the front page.
--
Jack
John
2017-01-07 11:12:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Handsome Jack
Remain supporter opposes Brexit. Hold the front page.
Did you read what was actually said?

"The engineering firm chairman said at least one of his factories was almost
'entirely dependent on access to it."

"It" referring to access to the EU single market.
Fredxxx
2017-01-07 12:38:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by Handsome Jack
Remain supporter opposes Brexit. Hold the front page.
Did you read what was actually said?
"The engineering firm chairman said at least one of his factories was almost
'entirely dependent on access to it."
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
John
2017-01-07 13:08:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage", but presumably if he can't recruit
competent UK resident staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere -
either that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be allowed
into the country.

One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the EU)imported labour will
not be a problem - if it is really needed.
Fredxxx
2017-01-07 15:16:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in work
benefits.

Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been required,
prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident staff he'll
end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either that or "cheap
Eastern European" staff will continue to be allowed into the
country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you didn't
understand the concept of supply and demand.

You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this case Cook
knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to import EU low paid
workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK wages for the skills he wants.
Post by John
One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the EU)imported
labour will not be a problem - if it is really needed.
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
pamela
2017-01-08 00:10:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in
work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident staff
he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either that or
"cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be allowed into
the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you didn't
understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this case
Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to import
EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK wages for
the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are certain
jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as working in a fish
factory, labouring on a farm, hospital cleaning or whatever.
Foreign workers will do these jobs.

In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
which some natives seem to have forgotten. It would be nice if
this work ethic sets a good example to the less enthusiastic
Brits.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the EU)imported
labour will not be a problem - if it is really needed.
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
MM
2017-01-08 08:25:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
I think that could be because they grew up in countries under the
Soviet yoke. We on the other hand were featherbedded by the welfare
state. But we have never had a strong work ethic. You might think that
during the war patriotic Britons would never have gone on strike, yet
there were strikes all the time.

"Until 1941 when the Soviet Union entered the war, communists in
Britain, having little commitment to the war effort, refused to be
bound by the national unity consensus and in particular the ban on
strike action. During the first few months of the war, there were over
900 strikes, almost all of them very short but illegal nonetheless.
Despite the provisions of Order 1305 there were very few prosecutions
until 1941 since Bevin, anxious to avoid the labour unrest of the
First World War, sought to promote conciliation rather than conflict.
The number of strikes increased each year until 1944, almost half of
them in support of wage demands and the remainder being defensive
actions against deteriorations in workplace conditions. Coal and
engineering were particularly affected. A strike in the Betteshanger
colliery in Kent in 1942 prompted the first mass prosecutions under
Order 1305. Three officials of the Betteshanger branch were imprisoned
and over a thousand strikers were fined. Such repression and the
general 'shoulders to the wheel' approach to industrial production in
support of the war effort (strongly backed by the Communist Party
after 1941) did not stop strikes. The fact that so many strikes took
place in the mining industry was due in the main to the fact that the
designation of coal mining as essential war work entailed the
direction of selected conscripts to work in the mines ('Bevin boys').
This was very unpopular among regular miners.

"In 1943 there were two major stoppages, one was a strike of 12,000
bus drivers and conductors and the other of dockers in Liverpool and
Birkenhead. Both were a considerable embarrassment to Bevin since they
involved mainly TGWU members. 1944 marked the peak of wartime strike
action with over two thousand stoppages involving the loss of
3,714,000 days' production. This led to the imposition of Defence
Regulation 1AA, supported by the TUC, which now made incitement to
strike unlawful."
http://www.unionhistory.info/timeline/1939_1945.php

3,714,000 lost days in 1944! Count 'em!

Those so-called British patriots were just the kind who today would
vote for Brexit.

MM
Fredxxx
2017-01-08 11:05:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
I think that could be because they grew up in countries under the
Soviet yoke. We on the other hand were featherbedded by the welfare
state.
You have never employed Polish or Romanian workers. The experience most
employers experience is exemplary work ethics in the first year or so
for malaise and unreliability to kick in. After 2 years they become
indistinguishable from their indigenous work colleagues.

<Snip MM's usual anti-British and unpatriotic propaganda>
pamela
2017-01-08 14:17:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
I think that could be because they grew up in countries under
the Soviet yoke. We on the other hand were featherbedded by the
welfare state. But we have never had a strong work ethic. You
might think that during the war patriotic Britons would never
have gone on strike, yet there were strikes all the time.
"Until 1941 when the Soviet Union ..[snip].. This led to the
imposition of Defence Regulation 1AA, supported by the TUC,
which now made incitement to strike unlawful."
http://www.unionhistory.info/timeline/1939_1945.php
3,714,000 lost days in 1944! Count 'em!
Those so-called British patriots were just the kind who today
would vote for Brexit.
MM
In those (pre-Beveridge) war years the poor work ethic perhaps
came from a sense of complacency at having an Empire to draw upon
and a general feeling of entitlement.

Those Polish workers we've had here in recent years have an
amazing work ethic but instead of learning from their positive
attitude we resent their enthusiasm and their willingness to do
difficult work.

Perhaps this gets reflected in the surveys showing the educational
attainment of white working class children reamins lower than
several other peer groups.

It all seems like a different form of British Disease. I kind of
felt, just as a hunch, we were getting our act together by
learning from the ways of rapidly improving countries in the
European Union which made huge improvements in the decades after
the war. After Brexit we will probably once again be lords of our
own failure to keep up.
MM
2017-01-09 08:25:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by MM
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
I think that could be because they grew up in countries under
the Soviet yoke. We on the other hand were featherbedded by the
welfare state. But we have never had a strong work ethic. You
might think that during the war patriotic Britons would never
have gone on strike, yet there were strikes all the time.
"Until 1941 when the Soviet Union ..[snip].. This led to the
imposition of Defence Regulation 1AA, supported by the TUC,
which now made incitement to strike unlawful."
http://www.unionhistory.info/timeline/1939_1945.php
3,714,000 lost days in 1944! Count 'em!
Those so-called British patriots were just the kind who today
would vote for Brexit.
MM
In those (pre-Beveridge) war years the poor work ethic perhaps
came from a sense of complacency at having an Empire to draw upon
and a general feeling of entitlement.
Those Polish workers we've had here in recent years have an
amazing work ethic but instead of learning from their positive
attitude we resent their enthusiasm and their willingness to do
difficult work.
Perhaps this gets reflected in the surveys showing the educational
attainment of white working class children reamins lower than
several other peer groups.
It all seems like a different form of British Disease. I kind of
felt, just as a hunch, we were getting our act together by
learning from the ways of rapidly improving countries in the
European Union which made huge improvements in the decades after
the war. After Brexit we will probably once again be lords of our
own failure to keep up.
Indeed. Couldn't have said it better myself.

MM
Vidcapper
2017-01-09 10:16:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by pamela
It all seems like a different form of British Disease. I kind of
felt, just as a hunch, we were getting our act together by
learning from the ways of rapidly improving countries in the
European Union which made huge improvements in the decades after
the war. After Brexit we will probably once again be lords of our
own failure to keep up.
Indeed. Couldn't have said it better myself.
Except that you *do* bore us with that, all the time!
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
Fredxxx
2017-01-08 11:00:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in
work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident staff
he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either that or
"cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be allowed into
the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you didn't
understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this case
Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to import
EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK wages for
the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are certain
jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as working in a fish
factory, labouring on a farm, hospital cleaning or whatever.
Foreign workers will do these jobs.
You pay me enough, I would work in these places. The simple fact that
Remoaners deny, is that there is no need to when you can get Eastern
European workers for minimum wage.
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
which some natives seem to have forgotten. It would be nice if
this work ethic sets a good example to the less enthusiastic
Brits.
Agreed, but employers I have talked to say even immigrants after 2 or so
years working here get the 'English' disease and assume 'Brit' like work
ethics.
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the EU)imported
labour will not be a problem - if it is really needed.
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
pamela
2017-01-08 14:11:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in
work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU
migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident
staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either
that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be
allowed into the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you
didn't understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this
case Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to
import EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK
wages for the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are
certain jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as
working in a fish factory, labouring on a farm, hospital
cleaning or whatever. Foreign workers will do these jobs.
You pay me enough, I would work in these places. The simple fact
that Remoaners deny, is that there is no need to when you can
get Eastern European workers for minimum wage.
The converse of that is for employers to pay inflated wages over
and above what the job commands because no Brit will get out of
bed for less.

Creating a Fortress Britain like that of the sixties, with too
many surly idlers isn't going to produce a competitive economy.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
which some natives seem to have forgotten. It would be nice if
this work ethic sets a good example to the less enthusiastic
Brits.
Agreed, but employers I have talked to say even immigrants after
2 or so years working here get the 'English' disease and assume
'Brit' like work ethics.
I haven't seen that. Generally speaking if you're a hard worker
then you remain a hard-worker. For example, Chinese people are
known for their work ethic and it doesn't seem to diminish at all
the longer they've been here.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the
EU)imported labour will not be a problem - if it is really
needed.
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
Fredxxx
2017-01-08 22:55:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in
work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU
migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident
staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either
that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be
allowed into the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you
didn't understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this
case Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to
import EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK
wages for the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are
certain jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as
working in a fish factory, labouring on a farm, hospital
cleaning or whatever. Foreign workers will do these jobs.
You pay me enough, I would work in these places. The simple fact
that Remoaners deny, is that there is no need to when you can
get Eastern European workers for minimum wage.
The converse of that is for employers to pay inflated wages over
and above what the job commands because no Brit will get out of
bed for less.
Not sure where you get the idea about "inflated wages over and above
what the job commands". Perhaps you can explain why people should be
paid below market rates.
Post by pamela
Creating a Fortress Britain like that of the sixties, with too
many surly idlers isn't going to produce a competitive economy.
Then make work pay. In work benefits and cushy lifestyles don't help.
Means testing also promotes idleness.
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
which some natives seem to have forgotten. It would be nice if
this work ethic sets a good example to the less enthusiastic
Brits.
Agreed, but employers I have talked to say even immigrants after
2 or so years working here get the 'English' disease and assume
'Brit' like work ethics.
I haven't seen that. Generally speaking if you're a hard worker
then you remain a hard-worker. For example, Chinese people are
known for their work ethic and it doesn't seem to diminish at all
the longer they've been here.
Perhaps its just a European thing?
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the
EU)imported labour will not be a problem - if it is really
needed.
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
pamela
2017-01-09 00:00:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim
in work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU
migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident
staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either
that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be
allowed into the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you
didn't understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this
case Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to
import EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous
UK wages for the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are
certain jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as
working in a fish factory, labouring on a farm, hospital
cleaning or whatever. Foreign workers will do these jobs.
You pay me enough, I would work in these places. The simple
fact that Remoaners deny, is that there is no need to when you
can get Eastern European workers for minimum wage.
The converse of that is for employers to pay inflated wages
over and above what the job commands because no Brit will get
out of bed for less.
Not sure where you get the idea about "inflated wages over and
above what the job commands". Perhaps you can explain why people
should be paid below market rates.
People should not be paid below market rates. Nor should the
market be rigged by excluding foreign labour willing for work for
lower rates than another segment of the native workforce is
willing to.

One thing about some of these jobs is that British workers have
developed a distaste for the task rather than the task being
inherently difficult. Others are not so fussy.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Creating a Fortress Britain like that of the sixties, with too
many surly idlers isn't going to produce a competitive economy.
Then make work pay. In work benefits and cushy lifestyles don't
help. Means testing also promotes idleness.
However those things you mention doesn't explain why foreign
labour works harder and sometimes for lower rates than our
indigenous workforce.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
which some natives seem to have forgotten. It would be nice
if this work ethic sets a good example to the less
enthusiastic Brits.
Agreed, but employers I have talked to say even immigrants
after 2 or so years working here get the 'English' disease and
assume 'Brit' like work ethics.
I haven't seen that. Generally speaking if you're a hard
worker then you remain a hard-worker. For example, Chinese
people are known for their work ethic and it doesn't seem to
diminish at all the longer they've been here.
Perhaps its just a European thing?
To be honest, I haven't seen the British Disease be acquired after
a couple of years which you referred to.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the
EU)imported labour will not be a problem - if it is really
needed.
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
Fredxxx
2017-01-09 00:33:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim
in work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU
migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident
staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either
that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be
allowed into the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you
didn't understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this
case Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to
import EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous
UK wages for the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are
certain jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as
working in a fish factory, labouring on a farm, hospital
cleaning or whatever. Foreign workers will do these jobs.
You pay me enough, I would work in these places. The simple
fact that Remoaners deny, is that there is no need to when you
can get Eastern European workers for minimum wage.
The converse of that is for employers to pay inflated wages
over and above what the job commands because no Brit will get
out of bed for less.
Not sure where you get the idea about "inflated wages over and
above what the job commands". Perhaps you can explain why people
should be paid below market rates.
People should not be paid below market rates.
Then I don't get your claim "inflated wages over and above what the job
commands".

People are paid the market rate. One significant reason people voted
Brexit is because the market rate has gone down, despite us all being
told the economy was doing well.
Post by pamela
Nor should the
market be rigged by excluding foreign labour willing for work for
lower rates than another segment of the native workforce is
willing to.
The labour market has been rigged by immigration. You seem happy that
workers should suffer reduced wages. I take it you don't work.
Post by pamela
One thing about some of these jobs is that British workers have
developed a distaste for the task rather than the task being
inherently difficult. Others are not so fussy.
I'm not with you here. Many tasks are difficult and require skills and
mental ability. Nothing is new.
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Creating a Fortress Britain like that of the sixties, with too
many surly idlers isn't going to produce a competitive economy.
Then make work pay. In work benefits and cushy lifestyles don't
help. Means testing also promotes idleness.
However those things you mention doesn't explain why foreign
labour works harder and sometimes for lower rates than our
indigenous workforce.
OMG Do you think Polish and Romanian workers come here out of kindness?
Go and see what the average wage is in that country and it may just dawn
on you why they come to work here.

Post back with your findings.
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
which some natives seem to have forgotten. It would be nice
if this work ethic sets a good example to the less
enthusiastic Brits.
Agreed, but employers I have talked to say even immigrants
after 2 or so years working here get the 'English' disease and
assume 'Brit' like work ethics.
I haven't seen that. Generally speaking if you're a hard
worker then you remain a hard-worker. For example, Chinese
people are known for their work ethic and it doesn't seem to
diminish at all the longer they've been here.
Perhaps its just a European thing?
To be honest, I haven't seen the British Disease be acquired after
a couple of years which you referred to.
I work in places where I don't see any British disease, from indigenous
or migrant workers. It very much depends on the sector you work.
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the
EU)imported labour will not be a problem - if it is really
needed.
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
pamela
2017-01-09 10:30:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family
claim in work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU
migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident
staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere -
either that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will
continue to be allowed into the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you
didn't understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In
this case Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and
wants to import EU low paid workers to circumvent paying
indigenous UK wages for the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are
certain jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as
working in a fish factory, labouring on a farm, hospital
cleaning or whatever. Foreign workers will do these jobs.
You pay me enough, I would work in these places. The simple
fact that Remoaners deny, is that there is no need to when
you can get Eastern European workers for minimum wage.
The converse of that is for employers to pay inflated wages
over and above what the job commands because no Brit will get
out of bed for less.
Not sure where you get the idea about "inflated wages over and
above what the job commands". Perhaps you can explain why
people should be paid below market rates.
People should not be paid below market rates.
Then I don't get your claim "inflated wages over and above what
the job commands".
People are paid the market rate. One significant reason people
voted Brexit is because the market rate has gone down, despite
us all being told the economy was doing well.
I think we have some slightly different meanings for "market
rate" here. By definition, the market rate always applies. I
think we differ because I would be happy to let foreign labour
participate in our labour market and drive down the rate of pay.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Nor should the
market be rigged by excluding foreign labour willing for work
for lower rates than another segment of the native workforce is
willing to.
The labour market has been rigged by immigration. You seem happy
that workers should suffer reduced wages. I take it you don't
work.
Post by pamela
One thing about some of these jobs is that British workers have
developed a distaste for the task rather than the task being
inherently difficult. Others are not so fussy.
I'm not with you here. Many tasks are difficult and require
skills and mental ability. Nothing is new.
Also many tasks don't require those skills and abilities and these
are more likely to be the ones foreign workers take on.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Creating a Fortress Britain like that of the sixties, with
too many surly idlers isn't going to produce a competitive
economy.
Then make work pay. In work benefits and cushy lifestyles
don't help. Means testing also promotes idleness.
However those things you mention doesn't explain why foreign
labour works harder and sometimes for lower rates than our
indigenous workforce.
OMG Do you think Polish and Romanian workers come here out of
kindness? Go and see what the average wage is in that country
and it may just dawn on you why they come to work here.
Those Polish and Romanian workers are harder working than our own
in their own country. That's where theyy acquired the work ethic.
High wages alone do not create a work ethic.

They come here to apply their work ethic for higher pay but they
come with a work ethic.
Post by Fredxxx
Post back with your findings.
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work
ethic which some natives seem to have forgotten. It would
be nice if this work ethic sets a good example to the less
enthusiastic Brits.
Agreed, but employers I have talked to say even immigrants
after 2 or so years working here get the 'English' disease
and assume 'Brit' like work ethics.
I haven't seen that. Generally speaking if you're a hard
worker then you remain a hard-worker. For example, Chinese
people are known for their work ethic and it doesn't seem to
diminish at all the longer they've been here.
Perhaps its just a European thing?
To be honest, I haven't seen the British Disease be acquired
after a couple of years which you referred to.
I work in places where I don't see any British disease, from
indigenous or migrant workers. It very much depends on the
sector you work.
Your selective example does not negate the overall picture.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the
EU)imported labour will not be a problem - if it is
really needed.
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
Thanks for your views. I don't share many of them.
Ian Jackson
2017-01-09 08:43:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
However those things you mention doesn't explain why foreign
labour works harder and sometimes for lower rates than our
indigenous workforce.
Even the most staunch of us Remoaners can't deny that some foreign
workers can afford to work here because, while they're here, they don't
have (or don't have the expectation of having) the traditional UK
lifestyle of (say) a house, a wife, 2.4 kids and at least one car.
--
Ian
MM
2017-01-09 08:29:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Perhaps its just a European thing?
We are part of Europe!

MM
tim...
2017-01-09 09:17:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Perhaps its just a European thing?
We are part of Europe!
and we are the epitome of the "lazy" worker

tim
MM
2017-01-09 08:28:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in
work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident staff
he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either that or
"cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be allowed into
the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you didn't
understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this case
Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to import
EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK wages for
the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are certain
jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as working in a fish
factory, labouring on a farm, hospital cleaning or whatever.
Foreign workers will do these jobs.
You pay me enough, I would work in these places.
Pay you a king's ransom, sure, and then nobody could afford the
product, whether it be care homes, pizzas, or apples.
Post by Fredxxx
The simple fact that
Remoaners deny, is that there is no need to when you can get Eastern
European workers for minimum wage.
Living wage, if you please. Eastern European workers are usually over
25.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
which some natives seem to have forgotten. It would be nice if
this work ethic sets a good example to the less enthusiastic
Brits.
Agreed, but employers I have talked to say even immigrants after 2 or so
years working here get the 'English' disease and assume 'Brit' like work
ethics.
That's untrue.

MM
pamela
2017-01-09 10:36:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim
in work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU
migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident
staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either
that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be
allowed into the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you
didn't understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this
case Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to
import EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK
wages for the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are
certain jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as
working in a fish factory, labouring on a farm, hospital
cleaning or whatever. Foreign workers will do these jobs.
You pay me enough, I would work in these places.
Pay you a king's ransom, sure, and then nobody could afford the
product, whether it be care homes, pizzas, or apples.
We used to pay ourselves more than we should in order to afford
pricier home made goods. That unsustainable merry go round
stopped several decades ago.
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
The simple fact that
Remoaners deny, is that there is no need to when you can get
Eastern European workers for minimum wage.
Living wage, if you please. Eastern European workers are usually
over 25.
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
In addition, many foreign workers possess a strong work ethic
which some natives seem to have forgotten. It would be nice
if this work ethic sets a good example to the less
enthusiastic Brits.
Agreed, but employers I have talked to say even immigrants after
2 or so years working here get the 'English' disease and assume
'Brit' like work ethics.
That's untrue.
I have never heard of that either.
tim...
2017-01-08 11:39:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in
work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident staff
he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either that or
"cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be allowed into
the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you didn't
understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this case
Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to import
EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK wages for
the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are certain
jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as working in a fish
factory, labouring on a farm, hospital cleaning or whatever.
Foreign workers will do these jobs.
for the 999th time

there is no dispute that we will need to rely upon foreigners to do
agriculture/food processing work, just like we did for the 25 years before
we joined the EU with the Agricultural Workers Scheme.

But we absolutely do not need to rely upon them to do basic
factory/warehousing work

tim
Ophelia
2017-01-08 12:33:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in
work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident staff
he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either that or
"cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be allowed into
the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you didn't
understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this case
Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to import
EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK wages for
the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are certain
jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as working in a fish
factory, labouring on a farm, hospital cleaning or whatever.
Foreign workers will do these jobs.
for the 999th time

there is no dispute that we will need to rely upon foreigners to do
agriculture/food processing work, just like we did for the 25 years before
we joined the EU with the Agricultural Workers Scheme.

But we absolutely do not need to rely upon them to do basic
factory/warehousing work

tim

=========================

Back in the day students used to come over to work in the fields and they
went back at the end ... they didn't hang about to get benefits.
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
pamela
2017-01-08 14:21:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ophelia
Back in the day students used to come over to work in the fields
and they went back at the end ... they didn't hang about to get
benefits.
Generous benefits for all who come here is a big part of the
problem.

Those migrants in the former Calais Jungle weren't gagging to come
here for free speech, a democratic constitution, or escape from
persecution. Instead, they were trying to get on the gravy
train but we all know that.
Yellow
2017-01-08 17:01:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@81.171.118.178>, ***@nospam.com
says...
Post by pamela
Post by Ophelia
Back in the day students used to come over to work in the fields
and they went back at the end ... they didn't hang about to get
benefits.
Generous benefits for all who come here is a big part of the
problem.
Those migrants in the former Calais Jungle weren't gagging to come
here for free speech, a democratic constitution, or escape from
persecution. Instead, they were trying to get on the gravy
train but we all know that.
When you see interviews, the most common hope is to receive a free
education together with housing.
MM
2017-01-09 08:37:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
says...
Post by pamela
Post by Ophelia
Back in the day students used to come over to work in the fields
and they went back at the end ... they didn't hang about to get
benefits.
Generous benefits for all who come here is a big part of the
problem.
Those migrants in the former Calais Jungle weren't gagging to come
here for free speech, a democratic constitution, or escape from
persecution. Instead, they were trying to get on the gravy
train but we all know that.
When you see interviews, the most common hope is to receive a free
education together with housing.
Your 'housing' point is a complete red herring. They DON'T get free
housing. As for free education, why on earth should they not be
entitled to it if they're working and paying income tax and council
tax?

Do you want to withdraw free education for their children just because
they're foreigners?

MM
Handsome Jack
2017-01-09 09:16:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Your 'housing' point is a complete red herring. They DON'T get free
housing. As for free education, why on earth should they not be
entitled to it if they're working and paying income tax and council tax?
Do you want to withdraw free education for their children just because
they're foreigners?
No, we want to withdraw their automatic right to work here.
--
Jack
pamela
2017-01-08 14:16:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in
work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU
migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident
staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either
that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be
allowed into the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you
didn't understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this
case Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to
import EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK
wages for the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are
certain jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as
working in a fish factory, labouring on a farm, hospital
cleaning or whatever. Foreign workers will do these jobs.
for the 999th time
there is no dispute that we will need to rely upon foreigners to
do agriculture/food processing work, just like we did for the 25
years before we joined the EU with the Agricultural Workers
Scheme.
But we absolutely do not need to rely upon them to do basic
factory/warehousing work
tim
Anything which reduces the price of goods and services is good for
the consumer.

I don't want to go back to a time when Britain proudly produced
shoddy and uncompetitive goods. Back then, whenever I saw a
self-deluding "Made In Britain" Union Jack sticker on a product it
told me to buy the Japanese alternative.

Who wants those days again.
Yellow
2017-01-08 17:03:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@81.171.118.178>, ***@nospam.com
says...
Post by pamela
Anything which reduces the price of goods and services is good for
the consumer.
Not necessarily. I do not want cheap, I want good value. I want
something or someone that will do what it said it is going to do.
Post by pamela
I don't want to go back to a time when Britain proudly produced
shoddy and uncompetitive goods. Back then, whenever I saw a
self-deluding "Made In Britain" Union Jack sticker on a product it
told me to buy the Japanese alternative.
There was a time when Japanese goods where considered s2nd rate and
shoddy.
Post by pamela
Who wants those days again.
There was a time when a British built car was a laughing stock, but not
any more.
pamela
2017-01-08 21:29:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
Anything which reduces the price of goods and services is good
for the consumer.
Not necessarily. I do not want cheap, I want good value. I want
something or someone that will do what it said it is going to
do.
In saying that I am assuming the same quality but for a lower price.
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
I don't want to go back to a time when Britain proudly produced
shoddy and uncompetitive goods. Back then, whenever I saw a
self-deluding "Made In Britain" Union Jack sticker on a product
it told me to buy the Japanese alternative.
There was a time when Japanese goods where considered s2nd rate
and shoddy.
Those sort of comments tended to come from Johnny Englander who
either couldn't believe foreigners made goods of the same quality
as those from the UK or who knew how good Japanese goods were
becoming and needed to disparage them. The quality and
reliability of Japanese products soon spoke for themselves.
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
Who wants those days again.
There was a time when a British built car was a laughing stock,
but not any more.
A British car may not be a laughing stock any more because the mass
produced car companies operating in Britain are now nearly all
foreign owned. UK car production has become largely an assembly
operation for foreign-designed cars using many foreign components.
Fredxxx
2017-01-08 23:03:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
Anything which reduces the price of goods and services is good
for the consumer.
Not necessarily. I do not want cheap, I want good value. I want
something or someone that will do what it said it is going to
do.
In saying that I am assuming the same quality but for a lower price.
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
I don't want to go back to a time when Britain proudly produced
shoddy and uncompetitive goods. Back then, whenever I saw a
self-deluding "Made In Britain" Union Jack sticker on a product
it told me to buy the Japanese alternative.
There was a time when Japanese goods where considered s2nd rate
and shoddy.
Those sort of comments tended to come from Johnny Englander who
either couldn't believe foreigners made goods of the same quality
as those from the UK or who knew how good Japanese goods were
becoming and needed to disparage them. The quality and
reliability of Japanese products soon spoke for themselves.
They were second rate, but they vastly improved their act.
Post by pamela
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
Who wants those days again.
There was a time when a British built car was a laughing stock,
but not any more.
A British car may not be a laughing stock any more because the mass
produced car companies operating in Britain are now nearly all
foreign owned. UK car production has become largely an assembly
operation for foreign-designed cars using many foreign components.
I don't recall the more recent MG cars being a laughing stock.
pamela
2017-01-08 23:53:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
Anything which reduces the price of goods and services is
good for the consumer.
Not necessarily. I do not want cheap, I want good value. I
want something or someone that will do what it said it is
going to do.
In saying that I am assuming the same quality but for a lower
price.
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
I don't want to go back to a time when Britain proudly
produced shoddy and uncompetitive goods. Back then, whenever
I saw a self-deluding "Made In Britain" Union Jack sticker on
a product it told me to buy the Japanese alternative.
There was a time when Japanese goods where considered s2nd
rate and shoddy.
Those sort of comments tended to come from Johnny Englander who
either couldn't believe foreigners made goods of the same
quality as those from the UK or who knew how good Japanese
goods were becoming and needed to disparage them. The quality
and reliability of Japanese products soon spoke for themselves.
They were second rate, but they vastly improved their act.
Post by pamela
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
Who wants those days again.
There was a time when a British built car was a laughing
stock, but not any more.
A British car may not be a laughing stock any more because the
mass produced car companies operating in Britain are now nearly
all foreign owned. UK car production has become largely an
assembly operation for foreign-designed cars using many foreign
components.
I don't recall the more recent MG cars being a laughing stock.
And they're not going to be made in Britain soon.
MM
2017-01-09 08:45:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by pamela
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
Anything which reduces the price of goods and services is good
for the consumer.
Not necessarily. I do not want cheap, I want good value. I want
something or someone that will do what it said it is going to do.
In saying that I am assuming the same quality but for a lower price.
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
I don't want to go back to a time when Britain proudly produced
shoddy and uncompetitive goods. Back then, whenever I saw a
self-deluding "Made In Britain" Union Jack sticker on a product
it told me to buy the Japanese alternative.
There was a time when Japanese goods where considered s2nd rate
and shoddy.
Those sort of comments tended to come from Johnny Englander who
either couldn't believe foreigners made goods of the same quality
as those from the UK or who knew how good Japanese goods were
becoming and needed to disparage them. The quality and
reliability of Japanese products soon spoke for themselves.
They were second rate, but they vastly improved their act.
Post by pamela
Post by Yellow
Post by pamela
Who wants those days again.
There was a time when a British built car was a laughing stock,
but not any more.
A British car may not be a laughing stock any more because the mass
produced car companies operating in Britain are now nearly all
foreign owned. UK car production has become largely an assembly
operation for foreign-designed cars using many foreign components.
I don't recall the more recent MG cars being a laughing stock.
Remind us who makes 'em now!

It's Chinese company SAIC Motor, isn't it?

MM
MM
2017-01-09 08:43:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
There was a time when a British built car was a laughing stock, but not
any more.
But only since the British car industry was largely taken over by
foreign companies. When we were in charge, we constantly produced
dross due to short-termism and cutting corners.

MM
pamela
2017-01-09 10:17:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 17:03:51 -0000, Yellow
Post by Yellow
There was a time when a British built car was a laughing stock,
but not any more.
But only since the British car industry was largely taken over
by foreign companies. When we were in charge, we constantly
produced dross due to short-termism and cutting corners.
MM
You're right. We produced dross and, misguidedly, we thought it was
good quality and were proud of the hopeless tat we produced.

We thought faulty unreliable goods was normal and were stunned that
those early Japanese goods didn't arrive with manufacturing defects.
What's more, they kept on working.
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-01-09 10:44:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 17:03:51 -0000, Yellow
Post by Yellow
There was a time when a British built car was a laughing stock,
but not any more.
But only since the British car industry was largely taken over
by foreign companies. When we were in charge, we constantly
produced dross due to short-termism and cutting corners.
MM
You're right. We produced dross and, misguidedly, we thought it was
good quality and were proud of the hopeless tat we produced.
We thought faulty unreliable goods was normal and were stunned that
those early Japanese goods didn't arrive with manufacturing defects.
What's more, they kept on working.
The story of British motorbikes is especially sad, I think.
Fredxxx
2017-01-08 23:01:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by tim...
Post by pamela
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in
work benefits.
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been
required, prompted by the depression of wages from EU
migrants.
Post by John
but presumably if he can't recruit competent UK resident
staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere - either
that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be
allowed into the country.
You don't get it do you? I recall in an earlier topic you
didn't understand the concept of supply and demand.
You can get anything you want if you pay the price. In this
case Cook knows he can get the expertise abroad and wants to
import EU low paid workers to circumvent paying indigenous UK
wages for the skills he wants.
It's not only a question of supply and demand. There are
certain jobs which Britons seem unwilling to do. Such as
working in a fish factory, labouring on a farm, hospital
cleaning or whatever. Foreign workers will do these jobs.
for the 999th time
there is no dispute that we will need to rely upon foreigners to
do agriculture/food processing work, just like we did for the 25
years before we joined the EU with the Agricultural Workers
Scheme.
But we absolutely do not need to rely upon them to do basic
factory/warehousing work
tim
Anything which reduces the price of goods and services is good for
the consumer.
Not at all costs. I see no point in the state paying people or
subsidising incomes so they can purchase these cheap goods and service.
Post by pamela
I don't want to go back to a time when Britain proudly produced
shoddy and uncompetitive goods. Back then, whenever I saw a
self-deluding "Made In Britain" Union Jack sticker on a product it
told me to buy the Japanese alternative.
Who wants those days again.
The time around 2005 will do me, when the Eastern European countries
joined the EU.
MM
2017-01-09 08:33:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
But we absolutely do not need to rely upon them to do basic
factory/warehousing work
There are NOT ENOUGH unemployed British workers to fill the jib
requirement. Also, the situation in agriculture is becoming a bit of
an emergency, as already some EU migrant workers have shunned the
uncertainty of Brexit and are going elsewhere to do their guest
working. Some farmers fear it could turn into a crisis which would
mean crops not being planted, or harvested.

MM
Brian Reay
2017-01-09 08:54:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by tim...
But we absolutely do not need to rely upon them to do basic
factory/warehousing work
There are NOT ENOUGH unemployed British workers to fill the jib
requirement. Also, the situation in agriculture is becoming a bit of
an emergency, as already some EU migrant workers have shunned the
uncertainty of Brexit and are going elsewhere to do their guest
working. Some farmers fear it could turn into a crisis which would
mean crops not being planted, or harvested.
MM
There are 1.6m unemployed. Are you claiming there are more than 1.6m
such jobs?

Don't confuse people refusing to work with not being available, they
just need the right 'incentive'. Stop their benefits.
MM
2017-01-08 08:16:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in work
benefits.
So campaign for the British government to raise the living wage, not
blame the EU. The living wage is wholly *our* decision. If it's not
high enough, then *we*, that is, *our* government, are/is to blame.
Post by Fredxxx
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been required,
prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants.
"prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants" -- what is that
supposed to mean? Where did the Tories ever state that their living
wage was motivated by nasty British employers exploiting foreign
workers? Oh, and don't forget that there were hundreds of thousands of
migrants from non-EU countries coming to Britain last year, so what
effect did *they* have on the living wage?

[snip]
Post by Fredxxx
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!

Without migrant workers the UK economy would collapse across the
board: NHS, food production, transport, hospitality industry.

We. Need. Foreign. Workers!

MM
Fredxxx
2017-01-08 11:09:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
The living wage is not sufficient to prevent a family claim in work
benefits.
So campaign for the British government to raise the living wage, not
blame the EU. The living wage is wholly *our* decision. If it's not
high enough, then *we*, that is, *our* government, are/is to blame.
Why, Brexit is as good a solution caused by the inclusion of Eastern
European countries into the EU.
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Its only relatively recent where a minimum wage has been required,
prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants.
"prompted by the depression of wages from EU migrants" -- what is that
supposed to mean?
It means that most unskilled and even much skilled labour has not seen a
pay increase over 10 years.

[snip]
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Then you have entirely missed the point of Brexit.
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!
No it wouldn't. Indigenous workers would be paid the going rate.
Post by MM
Without migrant workers the UK economy would collapse across the
board: NHS, food production, transport, hospitality industry.
No collapse, just a rise in wages to match demand.
Post by MM
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!
If were working rather than being a parasite on those that do, you
wouldn't want foreign workers competing with your job and willing to
work for lower pay.
Yellow
2017-01-08 16:57:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!
We do, but only in areas where we have a skills shortage and it should
be the UK's decision that a particular worker is allowed to enter the
UK, not just the whim of the individual.
Fredxxx
2017-01-08 22:58:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by MM
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!
We do, but only in areas where we have a skills shortage and it should
be the UK's decision that a particular worker is allowed to enter the
UK, not just the whim of the individual.
When there is a skills shortage such that an an employer must pay more
than say a doctor or some other protected occupation then I might agree
with you. But saying there is a shortage of engineers and the like is
poppycock.
MM
2017-01-09 08:54:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
But saying there is a shortage of engineers and the like is
poppycock.
There IS a shortage of skilled people! You're letting fake news into
your Brexit mind.

See http://www.engineeringuk.com/View/?con_id=442

MM
tim...
2017-01-09 09:19:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
But saying there is a shortage of engineers and the like is
poppycock.
There IS a shortage of skilled people! You're letting fake news into
your Brexit mind.
See http://www.engineeringuk.com/View/?con_id=442
once again using the term engineer when they mean technician

tim
pamela
2017-01-09 00:02:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by MM
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!
We do, but only in areas where we have a skills shortage and it
should be the UK's decision that a particular worker is allowed
to enter the UK, not just the whim of the individual.
I can see the unions insisting on a say in that.
Yellow
2017-01-09 00:27:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@81.171.92.183>, ***@nospam.com
says...
Post by pamela
Post by Yellow
Post by MM
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!
We do, but only in areas where we have a skills shortage and it
should be the UK's decision that a particular worker is allowed
to enter the UK, not just the whim of the individual.
I can see the unions insisting on a say in that.
How so?
pamela
2017-01-09 10:45:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
says...
Post by pamela
Post by Yellow
Post by MM
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!
We do, but only in areas where we have a skills shortage and it
should be the UK's decision that a particular worker is allowed
to enter the UK, not just the whim of the individual.
I can see the unions insisting on a say in that.
How so?
The unions might well choose to exert pressure in order to influence
any regulations permitting foreigners to work in jobs which are
usually undertaken by union members.

Fredxxx
2017-01-09 00:36:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Yellow
Post by MM
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!
We do, but only in areas where we have a skills shortage and it
should be the UK's decision that a particular worker is allowed
to enter the UK, not just the whim of the individual.
I can see the unions insisting on a say in that.
You don't need unions when there is a Brexit referendum.
MM
2017-01-09 08:51:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by MM
We. Need. Foreign. Workers!
We do, but only in areas where we have a skills shortage
Does planting cabbages and harvesting peas count as a skill in your
world?

Or if it's work that "anyone" could do, why don't British workers rush
to fill the vacancies? Migrant workers make a 1500 mile journey to
pick veg here, so you can see how keen they are to WORK and earn
money! Shame about our own unemployed who live just down the road,
relatively speaking.

You should be PROUD of the fact that Britain offers such excellent
work opportunities which foreign workers take up, and you should be
ASHAMED that your fellow countrymen just can't be arsed to do the same
work.

MM
tim...
2017-01-07 16:00:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by putting
them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them employment rights
(that would otherwise cost money)

They can only do this because they have an almost in-exhaustible supply of
people prepared to put up with such terms. I'd wager that if the employment
market tightens by the removal of all of the foreign NMW workers there would
be few takers for these zero hours contracts and employers would have to
offer "proper" employment contracts in future.

tim
Ophelia
2017-01-07 16:40:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by putting
them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them employment rights
(that would otherwise cost money)

They can only do this because they have an almost in-exhaustible supply of
people prepared to put up with such terms. I'd wager that if the employment
market tightens by the removal of all of the foreign NMW workers there would
be few takers for these zero hours contracts and employers would have to
offer "proper" employment contracts in future.

tim

====================

Perhaps that is beginning to change now ...

"A tribunal found that Maggie Dewhurst, a courier with logistics firm City
Sprint, should be classed as a worker rather than self-employed.
As a worker, she would be entitled to basic rights including holiday and
sick pay and the national living wage."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38534524
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
tim...
2017-01-07 17:12:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by putting
them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them employment rights
(that would otherwise cost money)
They can only do this because they have an almost in-exhaustible supply of
people prepared to put up with such terms. I'd wager that if the employment
market tightens by the removal of all of the foreign NMW workers there would
be few takers for these zero hours contracts and employers would have to
offer "proper" employment contracts in future.
tim
====================
Perhaps that is beginning to change now ...
"A tribunal found that Maggie Dewhurst, a courier with logistics firm City
Sprint, should be classed as a worker rather than self-employed.
As a worker, she would be entitled to basic rights including holiday and
sick pay and the national living wage."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38534524
Though the "delivery" service sector is definitely the most egregious end of
this wedge

Whilst it ought to be possible to wipe out the onerous conditions that these
employers try to impose by such legal action (as, as has been shown to be
the case, they are almost certainly unlawful under current laws) the terms
of zero hours factory work are (usually) not so un-lawful.

I like the bit

"And that employment law has failed to keep up with innovative, often
technology-driven, business models"

Um, no it hasn't.

What has failed to keep up is TPTB's motivation to take enforcement action
against companies who have almost certainly imposed illegal terms and
conditions on their workers.

If your "innovative, technology-driven, business model" cannot exist without
forcing unlawful terms and condition onto your staff, then it is an
innovative, technology-driven, business model that does NOT deserve to exist
IMHO.

tim
Ophelia
2017-01-08 10:33:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by putting
them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them employment rights
(that would otherwise cost money)
They can only do this because they have an almost in-exhaustible supply of
people prepared to put up with such terms. I'd wager that if the employment
market tightens by the removal of all of the foreign NMW workers there would
be few takers for these zero hours contracts and employers would have to
offer "proper" employment contracts in future.
tim
====================
Perhaps that is beginning to change now ...
"A tribunal found that Maggie Dewhurst, a courier with logistics firm City
Sprint, should be classed as a worker rather than self-employed.
As a worker, she would be entitled to basic rights including holiday and
sick pay and the national living wage."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38534524
Though the "delivery" service sector is definitely the most egregious end of
this wedge

Whilst it ought to be possible to wipe out the onerous conditions that these
employers try to impose by such legal action (as, as has been shown to be
the case, they are almost certainly unlawful under current laws) the terms
of zero hours factory work are (usually) not so un-lawful.

I like the bit

"And that employment law has failed to keep up with innovative, often
technology-driven, business models"

Um, no it hasn't.

What has failed to keep up is TPTB's motivation to take enforcement action
against companies who have almost certainly imposed illegal terms and
conditions on their workers.

If your "innovative, technology-driven, business model" cannot exist without
forcing unlawful terms and condition onto your staff, then it is an
innovative, technology-driven, business model that does NOT deserve to exist
IMHO.

tim

====

Heh true. I wonder how long they will keep her on their books
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Brian Reay
2017-01-09 08:18:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by tim...
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by putting
them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them employment rights
(that would otherwise cost money)
They can only do this because they have an almost in-exhaustible supply of
people prepared to put up with such terms. I'd wager that if the employment
market tightens by the removal of all of the foreign NMW workers there would
be few takers for these zero hours contracts and employers would have to
offer "proper" employment contracts in future.
tim
====================
Perhaps that is beginning to change now ...
"A tribunal found that Maggie Dewhurst, a courier with logistics firm
City Sprint, should be classed as a worker rather than self-employed.
As a worker, she would be entitled to basic rights including holiday
and sick pay and the national living wage."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38534524
Though the "delivery" service sector is definitely the most egregious end of
this wedge
Whilst it ought to be possible to wipe out the onerous conditions that these
employers try to impose by such legal action (as, as has been shown to be
the case, they are almost certainly unlawful under current laws) the terms
of zero hours factory work are (usually) not so un-lawful.
I like the bit
"And that employment law has failed to keep up with innovative, often
technology-driven, business models"
Um, no it hasn't.
What has failed to keep up is TPTB's motivation to take enforcement action
against companies who have almost certainly imposed illegal terms and
conditions on their workers.
If your "innovative, technology-driven, business model" cannot exist without
forcing unlawful terms and condition onto your staff, then it is an
innovative, technology-driven, business model that does NOT deserve to exist
IMHO.
tim
====
Heh true. I wonder how long they will keep her on their books
She has priced herself out of a job, like so many British 'workers' who
went on strike after strike and wrecked our manufacturing industry. Now
we have families where no one has worked for years, preferring to
collect benefits and claim there are no jobs. What they really mean is,
they expect to be paid more than their skills warrant.
pamela
2017-01-07 18:35:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by
putting them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them
employment rights (that would otherwise cost money)
They can only do this because they have an almost in-exhaustible
supply of people prepared to put up with such terms. I'd wager
that if the employment market tightens by the removal of all of
the foreign NMW workers there would be few takers for these zero
hours contracts and employers would have to offer "proper"
employment contracts in future.
tim
Personally I would hate to work on zero hours.

Before he left so abruptly, David Cameron was fond of saying a
significant proportion of workers on zero hours contracts liked
the flexibility and didn't want to change.

This Guardian piece says the figure is as high as two-thirds which
is a bit hard to believe.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/10/zero-hours-co
ntracts-worse-jobs-for-life-work-unions
tim...
2017-01-07 18:48:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by tim...
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by
putting them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them
employment rights (that would otherwise cost money)
They can only do this because they have an almost in-exhaustible
supply of people prepared to put up with such terms. I'd wager
that if the employment market tightens by the removal of all of
the foreign NMW workers there would be few takers for these zero
hours contracts and employers would have to offer "proper"
employment contracts in future.
tim
Personally I would hate to work on zero hours.
Before he left so abruptly, David Cameron was fond of saying a
significant proportion of workers on zero hours contracts liked
the flexibility and didn't want to change.
This Guardian piece says the figure is as high as two-thirds which
is a bit hard to believe.
"and two thirds of people on zero-hours contracts say they don't want more
hours than they have already."

Sounds to me like a biased question

"hours that you already have" does not equal "hours that your employer is
obliged to give you"

The fact is that employers, in the main, don't employ workers on zero hours
contracts because they want them to work zero hours.

they usually want them to work a basic 37/40 or whatever

(it is only in the delivery sector that they require then for different
conditions)

but by giving then a zero hours contract means that they can reduce a
workers hours to zero (either for reasons specifically connected with that
particular worker or because of a general downturn in their business)
without compensation. Something that they could not do with a fixed hours
worker.

tim
Handsome Jack
2017-01-07 18:48:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by tim...
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by
putting them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them
employment rights (that would otherwise cost money)
They can only do this because they have an almost in-exhaustible
supply of people prepared to put up with such terms. I'd wager
that if the employment market tightens by the removal of all of
the foreign NMW workers there would be few takers for these zero
hours contracts and employers would have to offer "proper"
employment contracts in future.
Personally I would hate to work on zero hours.
Before he left so abruptly, David Cameron was fond of saying a
significant proportion of workers on zero hours contracts liked
the flexibility and didn't want to change.
This Guardian piece says the figure is as high as two-thirds which
is a bit hard to believe.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/10/zero-hours-co
ntracts-worse-jobs-for-life-work-unions
As one of the commenters says, it is amusing to read Deborah Orr's
vision of the average zero hours worker: people who "want to carry on
teaching a few yoga classes, doing up bits of furniture and selling them
on the internet, running a few food stalls at a few festivals, sleeping
in with the kids when they get an Airbnb client, slowly working through
a correspondence course".

Welcome to Planet Deborah. Just round the corner from Camden Town tube
station.
--
Jack
Yellow
2017-01-08 00:49:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@81.171.118.178>, ***@nospam.com
says...
Post by pamela
Post by tim...
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage",
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by
putting them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them
employment rights (that would otherwise cost money)
They can only do this because they have an almost in-exhaustible
supply of people prepared to put up with such terms. I'd wager
that if the employment market tightens by the removal of all of
the foreign NMW workers there would be few takers for these zero
hours contracts and employers would have to offer "proper"
employment contracts in future.
tim
Personally I would hate to work on zero hours.
I genuinely think it depends on the circumstances - yours and the
employers.

I left full time employment six months ago to have more time not having
to go to work, and have been doing a bit of part time work elsewhere
since then. Now, my former employer has approached me with a view to
doing some irregular work.

If I agree at all, I will be more than happy to do this on a zero hours
contract.

Why not? I do not want to be tied to fixed hours and the employer does
not want to commit to giving me work when they do not have it to give.
Post by pamela
Before he left so abruptly, David Cameron was fond of saying a
significant proportion of workers on zero hours contracts liked
the flexibility and didn't want to change.
<waves>

What would be the alternative for someone like me in the situation I
describe above?
Post by pamela
This Guardian piece says the figure is as high as two-thirds which
is a bit hard to believe.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/10/zero-hours-co
ntracts-worse-jobs-for-life-work-unions
How many people, really, can be having mortgages to pay and families to
feed while working a low paid zero hours contract? I just don't see how
many it can be because it just isn't possible to live like that if it is
your only income.

Where as people like me have enough to cover our basic needs either
because we have savings or a pension or another member of the family
with a decent job, and just need work to top that up to pay for extras
while also wanting the flexibility a zero hours contract can give.
Vidcapper
2017-01-08 07:31:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Before he left so abruptly, David Cameron was fond of saying a
significant proportion of workers on zero hours contracts liked
the flexibility and didn't want to change.
Then perhaps we should suggest that MP's only got paid for the time they
are in the House of Commons chamber... :p
Post by pamela
This Guardian piece says the figure is as high as two-thirds which
is a bit hard to believe.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/10/zero-hours-co
ntracts-worse-jobs-for-life-work-unions
While it's probably true that zero-hours contracts would suit some
people, it should be entirely their choice.

Therefore I suggest that employers must obtain written consent to put
someone on such a contract, and furthermore that it be made a criminal
offence to coerce someone into signing such an agreement.

i.e. saying 'sign it or you're fired' would see the employer end up
behind bars!
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
Yellow
2017-01-08 16:52:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <0VlcA.1024351$***@fx41.am4>, ***@yahoo.co.uk
says...
Post by Vidcapper
Post by pamela
Before he left so abruptly, David Cameron was fond of saying a
significant proportion of workers on zero hours contracts liked
the flexibility and didn't want to change.
Then perhaps we should suggest that MP's only got paid for the time they
are in the House of Commons chamber... :p
Post by pamela
This Guardian piece says the figure is as high as two-thirds which
is a bit hard to believe.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/10/zero-hours-co
ntracts-worse-jobs-for-life-work-unions
While it's probably true that zero-hours contracts would suit some
people, it should be entirely their choice.
Therefore I suggest that employers must obtain written consent to put
someone on such a contract, and furthermore that it be made a criminal
offence to coerce someone into signing such an agreement.
i.e. saying 'sign it or you're fired' would see the employer end up
behind bars!
It is already against employment law to arbitrarily change someone's
contract.

But surely most people with zero hours contracts agree to them on day
one and do not have them because their employer changed a contract that
was already in place.
John
2017-01-07 20:54:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by putting
them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them employment rights
(that would otherwise cost money)
More likely to happen after Brexit when workers' protection guaranteed by EU
membership is diluted or lost altogether.

There's one thing for sure that working people will not get a better deal
after withdrawal if the Tories have their way.
harry
2017-01-08 08:04:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by tim...
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by putting
them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them employment rights
(that would otherwise cost money)
More likely to happen after Brexit when workers' protection guaranteed by EU
membership is diluted or lost altogether.
There's one thing for sure that working people will not get a better deal
after withdrawal if the Tories have their way.
You really are a brain dead moron.
The UK has led the world in workers rights.

Workers are are suffering because of the surplus of desperate individuals flooding in from Eastern Europe.
Prepared to work under any conditions and undercutting native Brits.
And causing a housing shortage and shortages in the NHS.
tim...
2017-01-08 11:36:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by tim...
no, but employers have no started to lessen their staff costs by putting
them all on zero hours contracts in order to deny them employment rights
(that would otherwise cost money)
More likely to happen after Brexit when workers' protection guaranteed by
EU membership is diluted or lost altogether.
There is absolutely no evidence that that will happen

Most employee protection in the UK predates what the EU told us to do and
some of it still goes beyond that, there is no chance of that being unwound.
Post by John
There's one thing for sure that working people will not get a better deal
after withdrawal if the Tories have their way.
You have no current evidence to support that claim

tim
Yellow
2017-01-07 16:12:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by Fredxxx
He also said he wanted cheap Eastern European labour.
No such thing with the "living wage", but presumably if he can't recruit
competent UK resident staff he'll end up having to manufacture elsewhere -
either that or "cheap Eastern European" staff will continue to be allowed
into the country.
To keep his millionaire life style he want to pay less wages and make
more profits and the perfect way to do that is have the government pay
unemployment to British workers while he pays for cheap European labour.

What a hero! Yes, let's all do what he says......
Post by John
One thing is for sure and that is (in or out of the EU)imported labour will
not be a problem - if it is really needed.
Handsome Jack
2017-01-07 12:35:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by Handsome Jack
Remain supporter opposes Brexit. Hold the front page.
Did you read what was actually said?
"The engineering firm chairman said at least one of his factories was almost
'entirely dependent on access to it."
People often say things to support their political opinions. They may or
may not be strictly true. What this guy is saying is that it's easier
for him to export to EU member states if we remain in the EU. I don't
think anyone ever doubted that, but there's a lot more to the argument
than that.
Post by John
"It" referring to access to the EU single market.
"Access" is the BBC's word, not his. What do you think the writer meant
by it?
--
Jack
Yellow
2017-01-07 16:09:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Handsome Jack
Post by John
Post by Handsome Jack
Remain supporter opposes Brexit. Hold the front page.
Did you read what was actually said?
"The engineering firm chairman said at least one of his factories was almost
'entirely dependent on access to it."
People often say things to support their political opinions. They may or
may not be strictly true. What this guy is saying is that it's easier
for him to export to EU member states if we remain in the EU. I don't
think anyone ever doubted that, but there's a lot more to the argument
than that.
Post by John
"It" referring to access to the EU single market.
"Access" is the BBC's word, not his. What do you think the writer meant
by it?
Again the words "access" and "membership", with their completely
different meanings, are being used by pro-remain journos to confuse and
mislead the public.

What remain supporters should ask is why? Why, if it is all so clear
cut, do they need to mislead to make a what they claim to be a valid
case for their position?
MM
2017-01-08 08:05:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
... but there's a lot more to the argument
than that.
Okay, so tell us, what is that "lot more"? You must know. You claimed
there was.

MM
Handsome Jack
2017-01-08 08:55:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
... but there's a lot more to the argument
than that.
Okay, so tell us, what is that "lot more"? You must know. You claimed
there was.
Already pointed out on this thread and elsewhere. Depression of incomes
caused by cheap immigrant labour is one.
--
Jack
MM
2017-01-09 08:24:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Handsome Jack
Post by MM
... but there's a lot more to the argument
than that.
Okay, so tell us, what is that "lot more"? You must know. You claimed
there was.
Already pointed out on this thread and elsewhere. Depression of incomes
caused by cheap immigrant labour is one.
That has been found to be completely false, as the kind of jobs
migrant workers fulfil would never be considered by indigenous
workers.

MM
Brian Reay
2017-01-09 08:47:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Handsome Jack
Post by MM
... but there's a lot more to the argument
than that.
Okay, so tell us, what is that "lot more"? You must know. You claimed
there was.
Already pointed out on this thread and elsewhere. Depression of incomes
caused by cheap immigrant labour is one.
That has been found to be completely false, as the kind of jobs
migrant workers fulfil would never be considered by indigenous
workers.
MM
They would consider them if we reduced benefits.

It is stupid to 'import' labour while paying benefits to those who claim
they can't find work.

There should be no migration until there is all but zero unemployment,
including all those hidden cases who fake reasons why they can't work.
Handsome Jack
2017-01-09 09:15:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Handsome Jack
Already pointed out on this thread and elsewhere. Depression of incomes
caused by cheap immigrant labour is one.
That has been found to be completely false, as the kind of jobs
migrant workers fulfil would never be considered by indigenous
workers.
Lies. The construction industry, for example, is full of East Europeans
now.
--
Jack
tim...
2017-01-09 09:21:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Handsome Jack
Post by MM
... but there's a lot more to the argument
than that.
Okay, so tell us, what is that "lot more"? You must know. You claimed
there was.
Already pointed out on this thread and elsewhere. Depression of incomes
caused by cheap immigrant labour is one.
That has been found to be completely false, as the kind of jobs
migrant workers fulfil would never be considered by indigenous
workers.
Nonsense

There are factories/warehouses full of immigrant workers that indigenous
workers would be happy to do

tim
Vidcapper
2017-01-09 10:14:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Handsome Jack
Already pointed out on this thread and elsewhere. Depression of incomes
caused by cheap immigrant labour is one.
That has been found to be completely false, as the kind of jobs
migrant workers fulfil would never be considered by indigenous
workers.
Possibly because immigrant works are unaware of our minimum wage laws?
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
Yellow
2017-01-07 16:06:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
Post by Handsome Jack
Remain supporter opposes Brexit. Hold the front page.
Did you read what was actually said?
"The engineering firm chairman said at least one of his factories was almost
'entirely dependent on access to it."
And the one I worked for, as I have posted before, will be better off
outside the Single Market.

But because he supports your position and has said that he will bride
the government to get his own way, you support him and his position?
Post by John
"It" referring to access to the EU single market.
pullgees
2017-01-07 10:38:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
Ian Jackson
2017-01-07 12:16:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
It all depends on what you're selling (or buying).

The guy (Sir Andrew Cook) was on the radio this morning - and said that
almost everything he sold went to the EU. If we no longer had a free
trade arrangement, it would be easier for his competitors inside the EU
to take over his customers.

Of course, one glib response might be for him to get off his arse, and
find new customers in the rest of the world - but why should he have to
do this (assuming that there actually ARE customers out there who want
to buy his products)?

On the other hand, JCB is already a massive world-wide organisation, and
also sells its products world-wide. It's unlikely that established EU
customers are going to seriously start looking for alternative suppliers
inside the EU. Even if JCB did lose a few EU sales, these would be
likely to be fairly small in comparison to the total.

So it's not the established multi-national sort of organisations that
are going to feel the effects of Brexit, but much more likely it will be
the thousands of relatively small companies - especially those below the
radar that won't be getting a "Don't worry, chaps - we'll see you're OK"
from the government.
--
Ian
Handsome Jack
2017-01-07 12:37:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
It all depends on what you're selling (or buying).
The guy (Sir Andrew Cook) was on the radio this morning - and said that
almost everything he sold went to the EU. If we no longer had a free
trade arrangement, it would be easier for his competitors inside the EU
to take over his customers.
Of course, one glib response might be for him to get off his arse,
Another is that UK policy is not designed solely for his personal
financial benefit. Other people's needs and wishes count too. That's why
we had a referendum instead of just asking Cook's opinion.
--
Jack
Yellow
2017-01-07 16:03:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Handsome Jack
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
It all depends on what you're selling (or buying).
The guy (Sir Andrew Cook) was on the radio this morning - and said that
almost everything he sold went to the EU. If we no longer had a free
trade arrangement, it would be easier for his competitors inside the EU
to take over his customers.
Of course, one glib response might be for him to get off his arse,
Another is that UK policy is not designed solely for his personal
financial benefit. Other people's needs and wishes count too. That's why
we had a referendum instead of just asking Cook's opinion.
But this man seems to think that he can bribe his way to having policy
made for his personal benefit - and some people here are defending his
position!
pullgees
2017-01-08 08:34:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
It all depends on what you're selling (or buying).
The guy (Sir Andrew Cook) was on the radio this morning - and said that
almost everything he sold went to the EU. If we no longer had a free
trade arrangement, it would be easier for his competitors inside the EU
to take over his customers.
Of course, one glib response might be for him to get off his arse, and
find new customers in the rest of the world - but why should he have to
do this (assuming that there actually ARE customers out there who want
to buy his products)?
On the other hand, JCB is already a massive world-wide organisation, and
also sells its products world-wide. It's unlikely that established EU
customers are going to seriously start looking for alternative suppliers
inside the EU. Even if JCB did lose a few EU sales, these would be
likely to be fairly small in comparison to the total.
So it's not the established multi-national sort of organisations that
are going to feel the effects of Brexit, but much more likely it will be
the thousands of relatively small companies - especially those below the
radar that won't be getting a "Don't worry, chaps - we'll see you're OK"
from the government.
--
Ian
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's all going to go tits up. At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due to the fall in the pound. There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Ian Jackson
2017-01-08 08:50:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
It all depends on what you're selling (or buying).
The guy (Sir Andrew Cook) was on the radio this morning - and said that
almost everything he sold went to the EU. If we no longer had a free
trade arrangement, it would be easier for his competitors inside the EU
to take over his customers.
Of course, one glib response might be for him to get off his arse, and
find new customers in the rest of the world - but why should he have to
do this (assuming that there actually ARE customers out there who want
to buy his products)?
On the other hand, JCB is already a massive world-wide organisation, and
also sells its products world-wide. It's unlikely that established EU
customers are going to seriously start looking for alternative suppliers
inside the EU. Even if JCB did lose a few EU sales, these would be
likely to be fairly small in comparison to the total.
So it's not the established multi-national sort of organisations that
are going to feel the effects of Brexit, but much more likely it will be
the thousands of relatively small companies - especially those below the
radar that won't be getting a "Don't worry, chaps - we'll see you're OK"
from the government.
--
Ian
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
--
Ian
Sid
2017-01-08 09:45:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
You will never be a "winner" as long as you and keep being so negative.

If you think Mainland EU is so good. There is currently nothing stopping
you from moving there.
pamela
2017-01-08 14:24:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid
In message
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is
likely to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU,
and future exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in
exports due to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's
so good for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite
what it will do to the price of imports)? Or should our goal be
to become almost totally self-sufficient by the time we leave
the EU?
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going
to be a winner!
You will never be a "winner" as long as you and keep being so
negative.
If you think Mainland EU is so good. There is currently nothing
stopping you from moving there.
Similarly if you think relations with the EU are too much to
handle then there's currently nothing to stop you moving to
another continent. :-)
pullgees
2017-01-08 12:18:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
It all depends on what you're selling (or buying).
The guy (Sir Andrew Cook) was on the radio this morning - and said that
almost everything he sold went to the EU. If we no longer had a free
trade arrangement, it would be easier for his competitors inside the EU
to take over his customers.
Of course, one glib response might be for him to get off his arse, and
find new customers in the rest of the world - but why should he have to
do this (assuming that there actually ARE customers out there who want
to buy his products)?
On the other hand, JCB is already a massive world-wide organisation, and
also sells its products world-wide. It's unlikely that established EU
customers are going to seriously start looking for alternative suppliers
inside the EU. Even if JCB did lose a few EU sales, these would be
likely to be fairly small in comparison to the total.
So it's not the established multi-national sort of organisations that
are going to feel the effects of Brexit, but much more likely it will be
the thousands of relatively small companies - especially those below the
radar that won't be getting a "Don't worry, chaps - we'll see you're OK"
from the government.
--
Ian
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him? There are equally as many businesses looking forward to a prosperous future outside the EU and the customs union. And at the expense of sounding glib any business person worth their salt should always prepared to adapt and seek new markets.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Don't be silly the pound was overvalued and was in need of a correction. These things balance out always.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
--
Well you deserve to lose with your attitude.
Ian Jackson
2017-01-08 12:40:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him?
Please don't be silly.
Post by pullgees
There are equally as many businesses looking forward to a prosperous
future outside the EU and the customs union.
AIUI, although imports are subject to the standard EU rules and tariffs,
no one is restricting us from selling to customers outside the EU.
Post by pullgees
And at the expense of sounding glib any business person worth their
salt should always prepared to adapt and seek new markets.
But it's a bit much to expect them to be happy at the prospect of having
the carpet pulled from under them.
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Don't be silly the pound was overvalued and was in need of a
correction. These things balance out always.
So what should the value have been? Why did it take the referendum
result to make the money dealers realise that the value was too high? Is
the present value correct, or is it still too high? When you consider
that we both import and export, what should it be?
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
--
Well you deserve to lose with your attitude.
I'm only trying to consider both sides of the situation.
--
Ian
pullgees
2017-01-08 16:02:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him?
Please don't be silly.
It's catching
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There are equally as many businesses looking forward to a prosperous
future outside the EU and the customs union.
AIUI, although imports are subject to the standard EU rules and tariffs,
no one is restricting us from selling to customers outside the EU.
Being outside the customs union we can make our own deals with whomever we trade with, free from the CCT.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
And at the expense of sounding glib any business person worth their
salt should always prepared to adapt and seek new markets.
But it's a bit much to expect them to be happy at the prospect of having
the carpet pulled from under them.
I wouldn't say they been taken by surprise, besides other companies will reap benefits in leaving.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Don't be silly the pound was overvalued and was in need of a
correction. These things balance out always.
So what should the value have been? Why did it take the referendum
result to make the money dealers realise that the value was too high? Is
the present value correct, or is it still too high? When you consider
that we both import and export, what should it be?
Do you think I'm an expert in money markets? You tell me you seem to know. Remoaners have their little straws they cling onto, the value of the pound is one of them. But tomorrow it could rise and then what would you do? Oh I know it's back to the battle bus.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
--
Well you deserve to lose with your attitude.
I'm only trying to consider both sides of the situation.
I don't believe you as you omit obvious stuff that would balance you comments.
Ian Jackson
2017-01-08 16:40:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him?
Please don't be silly.
It's catching
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There are equally as many businesses looking forward to a prosperous
future outside the EU and the customs union.
AIUI, although imports are subject to the standard EU rules and tariffs,
no one is restricting us from selling to customers outside the EU.
Being outside the customs union we can make our own deals with whomever
we trade with, free from the CCT.
Yes - for those outside the EU, we are indeed obliged to impose the
EU-approved import duties. Admittedly, that's a bit of a bugger! But
with Trump in charge in the USA, I can't see them falling over backwards
to increase imports from the UK. And wasn't our PM told that India
wasn't likely to want much of what we produce?
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
And at the expense of sounding glib any business person worth their
salt should always prepared to adapt and seek new markets.
But it's a bit much to expect them to be happy at the prospect of having
the carpet pulled from under them.
I wouldn't say they been taken by surprise, besides other companies
will reap benefits in leaving.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Don't be silly the pound was overvalued and was in need of a
correction. These things balance out always.
So what should the value have been? Why did it take the referendum
result to make the money dealers realise that the value was too high? Is
the present value correct, or is it still too high? When you consider
that we both import and export, what should it be?
Do you think I'm an expert in money markets?
Just as well you're not. You know what Gove said about experts!
Post by pullgees
You tell me you seem to know.
I know that you seem to pick and choose what are advantages and
disadvantages. I try to see both sides of the situation. While being in
the EU certainly has its disadvantages, overall it's the lesser of the
two evils.
Post by pullgees
Remoaners have their little straws they cling onto, the value of the
pound is one of them. But tomorrow it could rise and then what would
you do? Oh I know it's back to the battle bus.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
--
Well you deserve to lose with your attitude.
I'm only trying to consider both sides of the situation.
I don't believe you as you omit obvious stuff that would balance you comments.
See above.
--
Ian
pullgees
2017-01-08 17:42:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him?
Please don't be silly.
It's catching
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There are equally as many businesses looking forward to a prosperous
future outside the EU and the customs union.
AIUI, although imports are subject to the standard EU rules and tariffs,
no one is restricting us from selling to customers outside the EU.
Being outside the customs union we can make our own deals with whomever
we trade with, free from the CCT.
Yes - for those outside the EU, we are indeed obliged to impose the
EU-approved import duties. Admittedly, that's a bit of a bugger! But
with Trump in charge in the USA, I can't see them falling over backwards
to increase imports from the UK. And wasn't our PM told that India
wasn't likely to want much of what we produce?
Countries that have expressed a desire to do secure a post Brexit trade deal with us either government of prominent business officials .
Australia Argentina Bolivia Brazil Canada Chile China Colombia Ecuador Germany Ghana Iceland India
Ireland Japan Kenya Korea Mexico New Zealand Pakistan Paraguay Peru Suriname Switzerland
United States Uruguay Venezuela
Yes I had to look that up of course
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
And at the expense of sounding glib any business person worth their
salt should always prepared to adapt and seek new markets.
But it's a bit much to expect them to be happy at the prospect of having
the carpet pulled from under them.
I wouldn't say they been taken by surprise, besides other companies
will reap benefits in leaving.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Don't be silly the pound was overvalued and was in need of a
correction. These things balance out always.
So what should the value have been? Why did it take the referendum
result to make the money dealers realise that the value was too high? Is
the present value correct, or is it still too high? When you consider
that we both import and export, what should it be?
Do you think I'm an expert in money markets?
Just as well you're not. You know what Gove said about experts!
And he was proved right amid all the scoffing from the experts.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
You tell me you seem to know.
I know that you seem to pick and choose what are advantages and
disadvantages. I try to see both sides of the situation. While being in
the EU certainly has its disadvantages, overall it's the lesser of the
two evils.
It wasn't economics alone that I made my decision
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Remoaners have their little straws they cling onto, the value of the
pound is one of them. But tomorrow it could rise and then what would
you do? Oh I know it's back to the battle bus.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
--
Well you deserve to lose with your attitude.
I'm only trying to consider both sides of the situation.
I don't believe you as you omit obvious stuff that would balance you comments.
See above.
Having said all that, I believe all the arguing will prove to be academic anyway as we are witnessing the dying days of the EU and by the time all the haggling between UK and EU is over, it probably will have collapsed.
tim...
2017-01-08 19:08:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him?
Please don't be silly.
It's catching
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There are equally as many businesses looking forward to a prosperous
future outside the EU and the customs union.
AIUI, although imports are subject to the standard EU rules and tariffs,
no one is restricting us from selling to customers outside the EU.
Being outside the customs union we can make our own deals with whomever
we trade with, free from the CCT.
Yes - for those outside the EU, we are indeed obliged to impose the
EU-approved import duties. Admittedly, that's a bit of a bugger! But
with Trump in charge in the USA, I can't see them falling over backwards
to increase imports from the UK. And wasn't our PM told that India
wasn't likely to want much of what we produce?
Countries that have expressed a desire to do secure a post Brexit trade
deal with us either government of prominent business officials .
Australia Argentina Bolivia Brazil Canada Chile China Colombia Ecuador
Germany Ghana Iceland India
Ireland Japan Kenya Korea Mexico New Zealand Pakistan Paraguay Peru Suriname Switzerland
United States Uruguay Venezuela
Though many of them will be an attempt at a land grab from a supposed
desperate other party and not worth considering in the real world

India specifically falls into that category, it has no interest at all in
wanting to let us sell what we have to offer in India and only wants
changes in the rules to export its IT workers, not truck loads of Mangos -
which it can sell here regardless.

How are Germany and Ireland on this list. They cannot enter into trade
agreements

Am surprise not to see South Africa on the list

tim
pullgees
2017-01-08 19:43:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him?
Please don't be silly.
It's catching
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There are equally as many businesses looking forward to a prosperous
future outside the EU and the customs union.
AIUI, although imports are subject to the standard EU rules and tariffs,
no one is restricting us from selling to customers outside the EU.
Being outside the customs union we can make our own deals with whomever
we trade with, free from the CCT.
Yes - for those outside the EU, we are indeed obliged to impose the
EU-approved import duties. Admittedly, that's a bit of a bugger! But
with Trump in charge in the USA, I can't see them falling over backwards
to increase imports from the UK. And wasn't our PM told that India
wasn't likely to want much of what we produce?
Countries that have expressed a desire to do secure a post Brexit trade
deal with us either government of prominent business officials .
Australia Argentina Bolivia Brazil Canada Chile China Colombia Ecuador
Germany Ghana Iceland India
Ireland Japan Kenya Korea Mexico New Zealand Pakistan Paraguay Peru
Suriname Switzerland
United States Uruguay Venezuela
Though many of them will be an attempt at a land grab from a supposed
desperate other party and not worth considering in the real world
India specifically falls into that category, it has no interest at all in
wanting to let us sell what we have to offer in India and only wants
changes in the rules to export its IT workers, not truck loads of Mangos -
which it can sell here regardless.
How are Germany and Ireland on this list. They cannot enter into trade
agreements
I did say desire and prominent business officials. Of course we shall see what influence they have and what the finalized deal is.
Post by tim...
Am surprise not to see South Africa on the list
tim
Ophelia
2017-01-08 12:37:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
It all depends on what you're selling (or buying).
The guy (Sir Andrew Cook) was on the radio this morning - and said that
almost everything he sold went to the EU. If we no longer had a free
trade arrangement, it would be easier for his competitors inside the EU
to take over his customers.
Of course, one glib response might be for him to get off his arse, and
find new customers in the rest of the world - but why should he have to
do this (assuming that there actually ARE customers out there who want
to buy his products)?
On the other hand, JCB is already a massive world-wide organisation, and
also sells its products world-wide. It's unlikely that established EU
customers are going to seriously start looking for alternative suppliers
inside the EU. Even if JCB did lose a few EU sales, these would be
likely to be fairly small in comparison to the total.
So it's not the established multi-national sort of organisations that
are going to feel the effects of Brexit, but much more likely it will be
the thousands of relatively small companies - especially those below the
radar that won't be getting a "Don't worry, chaps - we'll see you're OK"
from the government.
--
Ian
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him? There are equally as many
businesses looking forward to a prosperous future outside the EU and the
customs union. And at the expense of sounding glib any business person worth
their salt should always prepared to adapt and seek new markets.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Don't be silly the pound was overvalued and was in need of a correction.
These things balance out always.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
--
Well you deserve to lose with your attitude.

==================

I am surprised to read Ian's stuff most of the time. I always consider him
be different to the remoaner morons. He is often reasonable even if I don't
agree with his views.

Are you sure you want to keep fighting the remoaners side, Ian?
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
pullgees
2017-01-08 16:06:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
It all depends on what you're selling (or buying).
The guy (Sir Andrew Cook) was on the radio this morning - and said that
almost everything he sold went to the EU. If we no longer had a free
trade arrangement, it would be easier for his competitors inside the EU
to take over his customers.
Of course, one glib response might be for him to get off his arse, and
find new customers in the rest of the world - but why should he have to
do this (assuming that there actually ARE customers out there who want
to buy his products)?
On the other hand, JCB is already a massive world-wide organisation, and
also sells its products world-wide. It's unlikely that established EU
customers are going to seriously start looking for alternative suppliers
inside the EU. Even if JCB did lose a few EU sales, these would be
likely to be fairly small in comparison to the total.
So it's not the established multi-national sort of organisations that
are going to feel the effects of Brexit, but much more likely it will be
the thousands of relatively small companies - especially those below the
radar that won't be getting a "Don't worry, chaps - we'll see you're OK"
from the government.
--
Ian
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him? There are equally as many
businesses looking forward to a prosperous future outside the EU and the
customs union. And at the expense of sounding glib any business person worth
their salt should always prepared to adapt and seek new markets.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Don't be silly the pound was overvalued and was in need of a correction.
These things balance out always.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
--
Well you deserve to lose with your attitude.
==================
I am surprised to read Ian's stuff most of the time. I always consider him
be different to the remoaner morons. He is often reasonable even if I don't
agree with his views.
Are you sure you want to keep fighting the remoaners side, Ian?
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Well he says he's looking for balance but omits to mention the advantages of being free from the CCT or that the low pound is proving right now good for exports.
Ophelia
2017-01-08 16:40:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Yet JCB boss would not agree
Another anti Brexit story by the Beeb. Who would have thought?
It all depends on what you're selling (or buying).
The guy (Sir Andrew Cook) was on the radio this morning - and said that
almost everything he sold went to the EU. If we no longer had a free
trade arrangement, it would be easier for his competitors inside the EU
to take over his customers.
Of course, one glib response might be for him to get off his arse, and
find new customers in the rest of the world - but why should he have to
do this (assuming that there actually ARE customers out there who want
to buy his products)?
On the other hand, JCB is already a massive world-wide organisation, and
also sells its products world-wide. It's unlikely that established EU
customers are going to seriously start looking for alternative suppliers
inside the EU. Even if JCB did lose a few EU sales, these would be
likely to be fairly small in comparison to the total.
So it's not the established multi-national sort of organisations that
are going to feel the effects of Brexit, but much more likely it will be
the thousands of relatively small companies - especially those below the
radar that won't be getting a "Don't worry, chaps - we'll see you're OK"
from the government.
--
Ian
Sorry you are another armchair speculator professing to know how it's
all going to go tits up.
Are you seriously disagreeing with my examples of how Brexit is likely
to affect the two situations (future exports to the EU, and future
exports to non-EU)? Is Sir Andrew Cook wrong?
What are you some kind of lackey to him? There are equally as many
businesses looking forward to a prosperous future outside the EU and the
customs union. And at the expense of sounding glib any business person worth
their salt should always prepared to adapt and seek new markets.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
At present there are lots of companies enjoying a rise in exports due
to the fall in the pound.
Of course exporters are enjoying the fall of the pound. If it's so good
for us, should it be allowed to all further (despite what it will do to
the price of imports)? Or should our goal be to become almost totally
self-sufficient by the time we leave the EU?
Don't be silly the pound was overvalued and was in need of a correction.
These things balance out always.
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
There will always be winners and losers in any change.
Very profound. I have no problem with that - provided I'm going to be a
winner!
--
Well you deserve to lose with your attitude.
==================
I am surprised to read Ian's stuff most of the time. I always consider him
be different to the remoaner morons. He is often reasonable even if I don't
agree with his views.
Are you sure you want to keep fighting the remoaners side, Ian?
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Well he says he's looking for balance but omits to mention the advantages of
being free from the CCT or that the low pound is proving right now good for
exports.

==============

Good point:)
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Mike
2017-01-07 10:51:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Surely you are not so gullible as to believe the left wing BBC which
takes bribes from the EU.
Mike.
Fredxxx
2017-01-07 12:37:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Is this an article about cash for peerages or some other form of bribery?

Sounds like he's whingeing he won't have the supply of ultra cheap labour.
"EU citizens, with skills, [are] coming here to fill jobs that British
people are either unable to do or don't want to do,"

You can always get people with the right skills, he's just not willing
to pay more than Romanian wages.
harry
2017-01-07 16:01:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38540813
Is this an article about cash for peerages or some other form of bribery?
Sounds like he's whingeing he won't have the supply of ultra cheap labour.
"EU citizens, with skills, [are] coming here to fill jobs that British
people are either unable to do or don't want to do,"
You can always get people with the right skills, he's just not willing
to pay more than Romanian wages.
He doesn't want to train labour.
He nicks it from Eastern Europe to the detriment of wherever it comes from.
Their economies will never recover due to the likes of him.
Loading...