BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
The construction industry suffers from victorian employment practices and victorian construction techniques. Lack of innovation is the problem, not lack of labour.TheBigBean said:
Higher rates would encourage those that are qualified, but are no longer working e.g. recently retired. That might not be a vast number, but it is some.rjsterry said:
It's not just hauliers. Construction has major shortages across the spectrum. Agency rates for the most basic unskilled labour have jumped from £90/day to £140/day.darkhairedlord said:
once everyone is off furlough they will have less time on their hands to buy tat, so fewer drivers needed.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Sensible hauliers might start by putting drivers on proper employment contracts rather than zero hours scrape a living contracts. Sure, delivery costs will rise but FFS, shouldn't they?
Sensible hauliers might start using rail to between hubs, and use vans instead of private cars with half an MoT and a baby in the boot.
Anyway, what i'm driving at is rebalancing of the economy to reflect supply and demand. Bound to be changes, get on with it.
Also, construction has always been like that. In space 10 years, the cost of buildings I have worked on has gone from £3700/m2 to £1900/m2 and then back to £4000/m2. It is the reason companies like Carillion no longer exist.0 -
Speak for yourself paldarkhairedlord said:
The construction industry suffers from victorian employment practices and victorian construction techniques. Lack of innovation is the problem, not lack of labour.TheBigBean said:
Higher rates would encourage those that are qualified, but are no longer working e.g. recently retired. That might not be a vast number, but it is some.rjsterry said:
It's not just hauliers. Construction has major shortages across the spectrum. Agency rates for the most basic unskilled labour have jumped from £90/day to £140/day.darkhairedlord said:
once everyone is off furlough they will have less time on their hands to buy tat, so fewer drivers needed.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Sensible hauliers might start by putting drivers on proper employment contracts rather than zero hours scrape a living contracts. Sure, delivery costs will rise but FFS, shouldn't they?
Sensible hauliers might start using rail to between hubs, and use vans instead of private cars with half an MoT and a baby in the boot.
Anyway, what i'm driving at is rebalancing of the economy to reflect supply and demand. Bound to be changes, get on with it.
Also, construction has always been like that. In space 10 years, the cost of buildings I have worked on has gone from £3700/m2 to £1900/m2 and then back to £4000/m2. It is the reason companies like Carillion no longer exist.
We're always looking for new construction techniques, ways of working and systems processes to make things more efficient. The contracts are even designed to reward innovation.
0 -
You’ll be hard pressed to find any working poor not in favour of wage inflation.
Even though higher costs for employers inevitably reflect in higher prices for goods and services, the models are not linear and there is also profit distribution which is not fixed.0 -
I still don't understand the chart
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
It is inflationary however if my wage goes up 10% but the cost of things goes up less than the tax difference then I am quids in and I have more money to spend. It is time to accept that the foreign worker drag wages is now government controlled through an immigration policy and businesses will evolve to be more efficient in terms of profit for employees hours.rick_chasey said:
So that chart I posted is illustratinc the price of *everything* including wages, and the demand is the demand of *everything* and the supply of *everything*john80 said:
Wage costs increases are not directly linked to product cost. Is it that hard to understand.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
Brexit is basically a stagflationary event as it increases friction in the economy.
Short reminder, paying more for the same en masse is just inflationary.0 -
What if instead of workers coming here, jobs go 'there'?
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
How does that work for HGV drivers, nannies etc.? Do Nandos simply open up a few extra branches in the EU and hope Brits don't mind the additional journey time for their dinner?tailwindhome said:What if instead of workers coming here, jobs go 'there'?
1 -
This. Things have moved on hugely in the last 10-20 years. So much more stuff being done off-site with the increased quality control. I think the bigger issue, in housing construction at least, is that the end user struggles to get away from traditional (mortgage lenders don't help either).elbowloh said:
Speak for yourself paldarkhairedlord said:
The construction industry suffers from victorian employment practices and victorian construction techniques. Lack of innovation is the problem, not lack of labour.TheBigBean said:
Higher rates would encourage those that are qualified, but are no longer working e.g. recently retired. That might not be a vast number, but it is some.rjsterry said:
It's not just hauliers. Construction has major shortages across the spectrum. Agency rates for the most basic unskilled labour have jumped from £90/day to £140/day.darkhairedlord said:
once everyone is off furlough they will have less time on their hands to buy tat, so fewer drivers needed.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Sensible hauliers might start by putting drivers on proper employment contracts rather than zero hours scrape a living contracts. Sure, delivery costs will rise but FFS, shouldn't they?
Sensible hauliers might start using rail to between hubs, and use vans instead of private cars with half an MoT and a baby in the boot.
Anyway, what i'm driving at is rebalancing of the economy to reflect supply and demand. Bound to be changes, get on with it.
Also, construction has always been like that. In space 10 years, the cost of buildings I have worked on has gone from £3700/m2 to £1900/m2 and then back to £4000/m2. It is the reason companies like Carillion no longer exist.
We're always looking for new construction techniques, ways of working and systems processes to make things more efficient. The contracts are even designed to reward innovation.
I'm not sure about the labour practices either. In my 30 odd years in the industry things have changed from Contractors with their own plant and labour to everything being subbed out. I don't know many trades that would prefer to be employed than working sub-Contract.0 -
That ship has sailed literally decades ago. I am currently at a sailing event where not a single sail from a big sail loft has been made in the UK.tailwindhome said:What if instead of workers coming here, jobs go 'there'?
0 -
No, sillyTheBigBean said:
How does that work for HGV drivers, nannies etc.? Do Nandos simply open up a few extra branches in the EU and hope Brits don't mind the additional journey time for their dinner?tailwindhome said:What if instead of workers coming here, jobs go 'there'?
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
My last place was generally 70% own plant and labour and it was a real selling point for clients, as we could mobilise much quicker than many other contractors.Pross said:
This. Things have moved on hugely in the last 10-20 years. So much more stuff being done off-site with the increased quality control. I think the bigger issue, in housing construction at least, is that the end user struggles to get away from traditional (mortgage lenders don't help either).elbowloh said:
Speak for yourself paldarkhairedlord said:
The construction industry suffers from victorian employment practices and victorian construction techniques. Lack of innovation is the problem, not lack of labour.TheBigBean said:
Higher rates would encourage those that are qualified, but are no longer working e.g. recently retired. That might not be a vast number, but it is some.rjsterry said:
It's not just hauliers. Construction has major shortages across the spectrum. Agency rates for the most basic unskilled labour have jumped from £90/day to £140/day.darkhairedlord said:
once everyone is off furlough they will have less time on their hands to buy tat, so fewer drivers needed.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Sensible hauliers might start by putting drivers on proper employment contracts rather than zero hours scrape a living contracts. Sure, delivery costs will rise but FFS, shouldn't they?
Sensible hauliers might start using rail to between hubs, and use vans instead of private cars with half an MoT and a baby in the boot.
Anyway, what i'm driving at is rebalancing of the economy to reflect supply and demand. Bound to be changes, get on with it.
Also, construction has always been like that. In space 10 years, the cost of buildings I have worked on has gone from £3700/m2 to £1900/m2 and then back to £4000/m2. It is the reason companies like Carillion no longer exist.
We're always looking for new construction techniques, ways of working and systems processes to make things more efficient. The contracts are even designed to reward innovation.
I'm not sure about the labour practices either. In my 30 odd years in the industry things have changed from Contractors with their own plant and labour to everything being subbed out. I don't know many trades that would prefer to be employed than working sub-Contract.
It also really helped with maintaining the company culture. Many people working there had been there 30-40 years, with quite a few spending their entire working lives up to retirement working there.0 -
What objective?morstar said:
I agree but had said a few posts earlier that just because something is difficult, doesn’t mean it’s wrong.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Short to mid term inconvenience on the road to a bigger objective is maybe a price worth paying if you believe in the objective..
To clarify, I’m still anti Brexit, I just don’t think that difficult adjustments are enough justification to say something hasn’t worked / won’t work.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
That's pretty rare these days. I'm struggling to think of a large contractor I've worked with over the last 20 years that have any trades on their books (maybe a few for setting up site compounds).elbowloh said:
My last place was generally 70% own plant and labour and it was a real selling point for clients, as we could mobilise much quicker than many other contractors.Pross said:
This. Things have moved on hugely in the last 10-20 years. So much more stuff being done off-site with the increased quality control. I think the bigger issue, in housing construction at least, is that the end user struggles to get away from traditional (mortgage lenders don't help either).elbowloh said:
Speak for yourself paldarkhairedlord said:
The construction industry suffers from victorian employment practices and victorian construction techniques. Lack of innovation is the problem, not lack of labour.TheBigBean said:
Higher rates would encourage those that are qualified, but are no longer working e.g. recently retired. That might not be a vast number, but it is some.rjsterry said:
It's not just hauliers. Construction has major shortages across the spectrum. Agency rates for the most basic unskilled labour have jumped from £90/day to £140/day.darkhairedlord said:
once everyone is off furlough they will have less time on their hands to buy tat, so fewer drivers needed.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Sensible hauliers might start by putting drivers on proper employment contracts rather than zero hours scrape a living contracts. Sure, delivery costs will rise but FFS, shouldn't they?
Sensible hauliers might start using rail to between hubs, and use vans instead of private cars with half an MoT and a baby in the boot.
Anyway, what i'm driving at is rebalancing of the economy to reflect supply and demand. Bound to be changes, get on with it.
Also, construction has always been like that. In space 10 years, the cost of buildings I have worked on has gone from £3700/m2 to £1900/m2 and then back to £4000/m2. It is the reason companies like Carillion no longer exist.
We're always looking for new construction techniques, ways of working and systems processes to make things more efficient. The contracts are even designed to reward innovation.
I'm not sure about the labour practices either. In my 30 odd years in the industry things have changed from Contractors with their own plant and labour to everything being subbed out. I don't know many trades that would prefer to be employed than working sub-Contract.
It also really helped with maintaining the company culture. Many people working there had been there 30-40 years, with quite a few spending their entire working lives up to retirement working there.0 -
No it doesn't.darkhairedlord said:
The construction industry suffers from victorian employment practices and victorian construction techniques. Lack of innovation is the problem, not lack of labour.TheBigBean said:
Higher rates would encourage those that are qualified, but are no longer working e.g. recently retired. That might not be a vast number, but it is some.rjsterry said:
It's not just hauliers. Construction has major shortages across the spectrum. Agency rates for the most basic unskilled labour have jumped from £90/day to £140/day.darkhairedlord said:
once everyone is off furlough they will have less time on their hands to buy tat, so fewer drivers needed.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Sensible hauliers might start by putting drivers on proper employment contracts rather than zero hours scrape a living contracts. Sure, delivery costs will rise but FFS, shouldn't they?
Sensible hauliers might start using rail to between hubs, and use vans instead of private cars with half an MoT and a baby in the boot.
Anyway, what i'm driving at is rebalancing of the economy to reflect supply and demand. Bound to be changes, get on with it.
Also, construction has always been like that. In space 10 years, the cost of buildings I have worked on has gone from £3700/m2 to £1900/m2 and then back to £4000/m2. It is the reason companies like Carillion no longer exist.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Ask the Brexiteers.rjsterry said:
What objective?morstar said:
I agree but had said a few posts earlier that just because something is difficult, doesn’t mean it’s wrong.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Short to mid term inconvenience on the road to a bigger objective is maybe a price worth paying if you believe in the objective..
To clarify, I’m still anti Brexit, I just don’t think that difficult adjustments are enough justification to say something hasn’t worked / won’t work.
Whatever it is we are supposed to be gaining, change rarely happens without some inconvenience along the way. You don’t have to be a Brexiteer to understand that.0 -
Lol, just remembered David Davis's sector-by-sector Brexit impact forecasts
Good times
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
I see what you are saying but surely the intrinsic problem is that only an idiot would be in favour of Brexit. If you weren’t an idiot then there are endless ways you could Brexit whilst causing less economic pain.morstar said:
I agree but had said a few posts earlier that just because something is difficult, doesn’t mean it’s wrong.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Short to mid term inconvenience on the road to a bigger objective is maybe a price worth paying if you believe in the objective..
To clarify, I’m still anti Brexit, I just don’t think that difficult adjustments are enough justification to say something hasn’t worked / won’t work.0 -
This is happening in certain roles in financial services already.tailwindhome said:What if instead of workers coming here, jobs go 'there'?
This is the first year my team (who cover Europe from London) has done more work on across the channel than in the UK in 25 years.0 -
Brexit was a stupid idea, me and you are agreed on that.surrey_commuter said:
I see what you are saying but surely the intrinsic problem is that only an idiot would be in favour of Brexit. If you weren’t an idiot then there are endless ways you could Brexit whilst causing less economic pain.morstar said:
I agree but had said a few posts earlier that just because something is difficult, doesn’t mean it’s wrong.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Short to mid term inconvenience on the road to a bigger objective is maybe a price worth paying if you believe in the objective..
To clarify, I’m still anti Brexit, I just don’t think that difficult adjustments are enough justification to say something hasn’t worked / won’t work.
However, on the current specific pain points, the working man Brexiteer who has argued cheap labour has supressed wages can currently see positives in what is happening even though we are all seeing some current disruption.
Ricks chart is pointlessly academic to the working poor. If you work productively and can’t earn a living wage when the economy is otherwise successful, the wealth distribution model is broken. This is one of the reasons we have Brexit. There are many more drivers behind that chart than solely the wages of front line staff. If not, Ricks case is that the low paid are being selfish for wanting more and harming the economy to the detriment of the people choosing to pay them peanuts.
As for filling the skills gap, it will take time, turning an economic model on its head is never going to be without problems. But I’m sure more will be tempted to train for take up jobs that pay better. Will it be enough? Possibly, possibly not.
Re the vets bit. I think it needs to modernise and diversify. In the same way health care is using nurses and pharmacists more widely, I’d argue the abbatoir doesn’t need a fully qualified vet to carry out repeatable basic health checks on a very narrow range of animals.
I also think more need to be trained but it’s a bit of a closed shop environment with no capacity to expand without some innovation.1 -
Oi Morstar, you're totally misunderstanding what i'm trying to say here, and misrepresenting it too.
I am not making any comment on "working poor" or anything. It is literally just a chart that helps illustrate what increased friction in the economy does (which in this instance Brexit has created) on a macro level with respect to two things - overall economic output and inflation.
It's got f*ck all to do with economic distribution, the working poor or anything else.
So stop saying that as that is not the point.
Restricting supply of stuff or people is not normally the route to economic growth. In fact, I can't think of an instance where that is the case.
I think you are arguing that by creating a shortage in lower-skilled parts of the labour market gives a bit more power to those who do have the skills in the market. I would argue that the way to redress the balance of power in labour v capital is not necessarily to create supply restrictions that, overall, does net damage.0 -
Morstar's replies seemed perfectly reasonable so I'd suggest you're not making your point as well as you think.rick_chasey said:Oi Morstar, you're totally misunderstanding what i'm trying to say here, and misrepresenting it too.
I am not making any comment on "working poor" or anything. It is literally just a chart that helps illustrate what increased friction in the economy does (which in this instance Brexit has created) on a macro level with respect to two things - overall economic output and inflation.
It's got f*ck all to do with economic distribution, the working poor or anything else.
So stop saying that as that is not the point.
Restricting supply of stuff or people is not normally the route to economic growth. In fact, I can't think of an instance where that is the case.
I think you are arguing that by creating a shortage in lower-skilled parts of the labour market gives a bit more power to those who do have the skills in the market. I would argue that the way to redress the balance of power in labour v capital is not necessarily to create supply restrictions that, overall, does net damage.
Case in point, the "helpful" chart.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono1 -
We’re not in total disagreement. I just think you are too academic in your arguments.rick_chasey said:Oi Morstar, you're totally misunderstanding what i'm trying to say here, and misrepresenting it too.
I am not making any comment on "working poor" or anything. It is literally just a chart that helps illustrate what increased friction in the economy does (which in this instance Brexit has created) on a macro level with respect to two things - overall economic output and inflation.
It's got f*ck all to do with economic distribution, the working poor or anything else.
So stop saying that as that is not the point.
Restricting supply of stuff or people is not normally the route to economic growth. In fact, I can't think of an instance where that is the case.
I think you are arguing that by creating a shortage in lower-skilled parts of the labour market gives a bit more power to those who do have the skills in the market. I would argue that the way to redress the balance of power in labour v capital is not necessarily to create supply restrictions that, overall, does net damage.
Right now, the Brexit supporter argument that immigration has supressed wages is largely winning in many areas.
The long term impacts of that at a national level will not cut through to somebody seeing direct gains in a modest pay packet.
Academic and long term arguments are a luxury for those of us with disposable income. If you only look at this on a national economic level, you will never understand why Brexit happened.2 -
This is an excellent article.
https://www.ft.com/content/5f832d86-827e-4596-999d-e0618364dbe3?shareType=nongift0 -
If there is no clear conception of the changes that 'we' want, we are never going to achieve them. The endless delaying of even basic changes like customs checks and more recently the UKCA scheme and the absence of any real attempt to mitigate the effect of at least several hundred thousand workers leaving the country, all suggest that there is no objective.morstar said:
Ask the Brexiteers.rjsterry said:
What objective?morstar said:
I agree but had said a few posts earlier that just because something is difficult, doesn’t mean it’s wrong.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Short to mid term inconvenience on the road to a bigger objective is maybe a price worth paying if you believe in the objective..
To clarify, I’m still anti Brexit, I just don’t think that difficult adjustments are enough justification to say something hasn’t worked / won’t work.
Whatever it is we are supposed to be gaining, change rarely happens without some inconvenience along the way. You don’t have to be a Brexiteer to understand that.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
If you think like that all you're doing is arguing for populist policies, and not for policies that actually help everyone (**including the poor/lower earners**).
Creating supply shortages in certain areas to improve your bargaining power is not a long-term route for success. It is in fact the opposite.
It is extra self-defeating when in order to do so you end up putting the party in charge who is literally opposed to any trade unionism.
We are all happy to discuss the pros and cons of collective action in fairly academic terms, but when it comes to brexit related suddenly it's too academic.
I'm not interested in the Brexit argument "winning" or not. Funnily enough, populism has success not because it helps everyone, but because it is persuasive to the uninitiated.
I'm mainly interested in what is the best way to run a country for everyone involved. Increasing the friction in the economy is not the way to go about it. It reduces real output and bumps up inflation at the same time.
0 -
In the political leadership I would say the objective is the downfall of the EU.rjsterry said:
If there is no clear conception of the changes that 'we' want, we are never going to achieve them. The endless delaying of even basic changes like customs checks and more recently the UKCA scheme and the absence of any real attempt to mitigate the effect of at least several hundred thousand workers leaving the country, all suggest that there is no objective.morstar said:
Ask the Brexiteers.rjsterry said:
What objective?morstar said:
I agree but had said a few posts earlier that just because something is difficult, doesn’t mean it’s wrong.rjsterry said:
They've removed labour full stop, not just 'cheap' labour. However much you offer, you can't turn an unemployed theatre worker into a qualified plumber or haulier overnight.morstar said:
Everything. It’s the mechanism for why it’s happening.rick_chasey said:
What has any of the above got to do with the model I posted?morstar said:That’s too simplistic though, it isn’t a completely closed system.
The counter argument is that too much profit has been driven to shareholders and senior management on the back of artificially low labour costs.
The working class Brexiteer expects a redistribution of some of those profits through actual living wages.
I sit on the fence. I think there is some deluded gullibility there but conversely, wealth disparity is growing so the argument isn’t totally unfounded.
The shortage is caused by the removal of cheap labour.
The workers Brexit argument is that the labour will be replaced by better paid uk labour. Costs and prices will go up but once the labour is replaced, there is no reason why productivity remains suppressed.
Just slapping up a chart saying oh woe is us and not addressing the mechanisms is a pointless exercise.
What response do you want?
Short to mid term inconvenience on the road to a bigger objective is maybe a price worth paying if you believe in the objective..
To clarify, I’m still anti Brexit, I just don’t think that difficult adjustments are enough justification to say something hasn’t worked / won’t work.
Whatever it is we are supposed to be gaining, change rarely happens without some inconvenience along the way. You don’t have to be a Brexiteer to understand that.
Their actions suggest they put no value on the wellbeing of the UK economy0 -
"Winning" it may be, but it was never actually true though...morstar said:
Right now, the Brexit supporter argument that immigration has supressed wages is largely winning in many areas.
About the only success the May Government had was obfusticating that reality
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
First it was the Nandos and KFC, now its the Maccy D Milkshakes.
There will be an uprising at this rate. All it will take is for Greggs sausage rolls to go down. Don't mess with peoples food.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-583151520 -
wait till it hits the supply of booze.elbowloh said:First it was the Nandos and KFC, now its the Maccy D Milkshakes.
There will be an uprising at this rate. All it will take is for Greggs sausage rolls to go down. Don't mess with peoples food.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58315152
My SiL works for a massive wine producer and they have their stock on ships as they don't have the lorries to offload it0
