BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
So the obvious difference is people from beyond UK shores volunteer to do the jobs that are now in shortage.TheBigBean said:Slightly naughty comment, but some of you are making all the same arguments used against ending slavery. Sugar prices will increase, the locals won't do the job, someone has invested a lot of money, think about the rest of the economy etc.
No one has a right to free labour, they also don't have a right to labour at a certain price.
Which is about as critical difference as you can make.
You’d be better off using child labour as an example (for obvious reasons) if you want to go down that road.0 -
Not that it is relevant, but slavery was replaced by indentured labourers in many places. They volunteered to do a very similar job.rick_chasey said:
So the obvious difference is people from beyond UK shores volunteer to do the jobs that are now in shortage.TheBigBean said:Slightly naughty comment, but some of you are making all the same arguments used against ending slavery. Sugar prices will increase, the locals won't do the job, someone has invested a lot of money, think about the rest of the economy etc.
No one has a right to free labour, they also don't have a right to labour at a certain price.
Which is about as critical difference as you can make.
You’d be better off using child labour as an example (for obvious reasons) if you want to go down that road.
It seems to have been missed, but I was comparing the arguments being used against, not the jobs themselves. The point being the arguments against are pretty poor.
0 -
It is quite basic BB - creating friction in an economy ultimately harms it.
Creating shortages of things harms it.
In the long run it is not beneficial to do those things.
I don’t really understand your argument unless you think there is some moral reason to have those?0 -
TBB - They haven't really understood your point, have they?
He isn't arguing one way or the other, he is saying that the arguments made for both situations are similar, not the situations.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Unless there’s a moral imperative that I’m missing here it’s entirely irrelevant if they’re similar arguments.0
-
I don’t really have anything much more to add right now without repeating myself anymore than I already have so will part with this.
Where is the virtue in having a successful economy if it only benefits a minority within it?
To clarify, the minority is not especially small as I type this today but it is shrinking. The logical progression of the current trajectory of rapidly growing wealth disparity is not good. Don’t be surprised when the serfs take issue.1 -
So I tend to agree with the middle paragraph.morstar said:I don’t really have anything much more to add right now without repeating myself anymore than I already have so will part with this.
Where is the virtue in having a successful economy if it only benefits a minority within it?
To clarify, the minority is not especially small as I type this today but it is shrinking. The logical progression of the current trajectory of rapidly growing wealth disparity is not good. Don’t be surprised when the serfs take issue.
I just think brexit is an incredibly idiotic answer to the question.0 -
It’s not even an answer to it.Jezyboy said:
So I tend to agree with the middle paragraph.morstar said:I don’t really have anything much more to add right now without repeating myself anymore than I already have so will part with this.
Where is the virtue in having a successful economy if it only benefits a minority within it?
To clarify, the minority is not especially small as I type this today but it is shrinking. The logical progression of the current trajectory of rapidly growing wealth disparity is not good. Don’t be surprised when the serfs take issue.
I just think brexit is an incredibly idiotic answer to the question.
It has nothing to do with inequality0 -
And there you go still totally failing to grasp why some people voted for it.rick_chasey said:
It’s not even an answer to it.Jezyboy said:
So I tend to agree with the middle paragraph.morstar said:I don’t really have anything much more to add right now without repeating myself anymore than I already have so will part with this.
Where is the virtue in having a successful economy if it only benefits a minority within it?
To clarify, the minority is not especially small as I type this today but it is shrinking. The logical progression of the current trajectory of rapidly growing wealth disparity is not good. Don’t be surprised when the serfs take issue.
I just think brexit is an incredibly idiotic answer to the question.
It has nothing to do with inequality0 -
I agree. But I can see why people may think differently or be sufficiently disengaged to rock the apple cart.Jezyboy said:
So I tend to agree with the middle paragraph.morstar said:I don’t really have anything much more to add right now without repeating myself anymore than I already have so will part with this.
Where is the virtue in having a successful economy if it only benefits a minority within it?
To clarify, the minority is not especially small as I type this today but it is shrinking. The logical progression of the current trajectory of rapidly growing wealth disparity is not good. Don’t be surprised when the serfs take issue.
I just think brexit is an incredibly idiotic answer to the question.
If you’ve nothing to lose…0 -
The strawiest of straw men.TheBigBean said:Slightly naughty comment, but some of you are making all the same arguments used against ending slavery. Sugar prices will increase, the locals won't do the job, someone has invested a lot of money, think about the rest of the economy etc.
No one has a right to free labour, they also don't have a right to labour at a certain price.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
If you look back in time I am not sure there was much of a safety net for the working poor. There now is so you have to pay more to attract those in to work or alternatively start reducing benefits till you die on them. Yet to see an argument that a say 20% increase in the lowest paid results in an equivalent inflation but yeah crack on with this logic.rjsterry said:
We've had working poor since the ice sheets retreated. The idea that the income from any full time job should automatically tally with the cost of living is the stuff of unicorns. In John's fantasy Britain, there is full employment; lower earners all get paid more and all that extra money just appears in employers' bank accounts without causing any inflation or increase in the cost of living.morstar said:
The thing here is we are generally not miles apart (with the notable exception that you believe the country can accommodate infinite residents).rick_chasey said:
I'm of the view that a free as market as possible is optimal, and that the solution to the negative externalities of it, like things like poor conditions, is not to restrict the size of the labour pool but to legislate to improve conditions.TheBigBean said:
I don't care about their nationality just that they have the legal right to work in the UK. You seem to be arguing that truck driving should be some sort of special skill that anyone from anywhere can do. I don't understand why truck driving is special in this regard.rick_chasey said:
You can open the market up to international competition and set minimum standards.TheBigBean said:
The international market rate would include drivers from all over the world. You could abolish the minimum wage, import workers from all over the world and give them worse entitlements like the UAE, but most people, sensibly, are against that.rick_chasey said:Why is it artificial? It's the international market rate.
Surely introducing barriers around nationality is more artificial then just opening up the market to international competition? It would be on the supply & demand chart.
You seem to want to use market restrictions to improve conditions rather than just legislate for better conditions.
Why do you care what nationality a lorry driver is?
The problem with jobs like haulage is there is limited value you can add - it's quite hard to compete on anything other than price as the nature of the work means you can't suddenly add more value by getting there twice as fast or whatever. So the employer is always going to go for the cheapest option (within reason).
I'd argue that the fact Brits don't do those jobs suggests that Brits are better suited to other jobs, and the focus shouldn't be on making low-value-add jobs more attractive by restricting supply (which has knock on effects to the rest of the economy), but focus on getting people into more value-add jobs.
I don't think there is a big advantage in getting people into lorry jobs or equivalent. I don't think there is a missed opportunity to have to pay 2x the amount for fruit picking because it's now Brits doing it over Romanians or whoever is doing it.
I'd suggest you're better off getting those Brits into jobs and careers with bigger upside.
You blame national policies for the plight of the working poor and I 100% agree with you.
However, when assessing Brexit, you are confusing economic theory with practical considerations. The fact is we have had working poor under both colours of government while in the Eu.
The economy has let people down and whilst lots voted Brexit for lots of different reasons of which I disagree with many, the working poor (some anyway) have actually been better served by Brexit than any other domestic policy in my lifetime when they are seeing significant wage jumps.
Do you think less choice in shops is a price worth paying for a small wage being converted into a living wage? Many will.0 -
Yes people in sh!t situations have a habit for voting for populist nonsense.morstar said:
And there you go still totally failing to grasp why some people voted for it.rick_chasey said:
It’s not even an answer to it.Jezyboy said:
So I tend to agree with the middle paragraph.morstar said:I don’t really have anything much more to add right now without repeating myself anymore than I already have so will part with this.
Where is the virtue in having a successful economy if it only benefits a minority within it?
To clarify, the minority is not especially small as I type this today but it is shrinking. The logical progression of the current trajectory of rapidly growing wealth disparity is not good. Don’t be surprised when the serfs take issue.
I just think brexit is an incredibly idiotic answer to the question.
It has nothing to do with inequality
Doesn’t mean it isn’t populist nonsense. Nor does it make it correct.
If you boil down the argument it is an iteration of blame the foreigner, which is the one thread that united the vote leave spectrum.
Either it’s the low wage immigrants or it’s the distrustful EU big wigs. Either way, the problem with them is they they’re foreign.
Unfortunately, this whole Brexit thing will only make it harder to help the people in tough spots. There will be less surplus to channel their way, less money for investment in the kinds of things that will help.
It’s a populist lie.
The irony is of course we all make out that truckies is some kind of super low paid work - it’s not that badly paid - a lot of them can afford to retire early!0 -
You do know money is just the way to measure output and value, right?john80 said:
If you look back in time I am not sure there was much of a safety net for the working poor. There now is so you have to pay more to attract those in to work or alternatively start reducing benefits till you die on them. Yet to see an argument that a say 20% increase in the lowest paid results in an equivalent inflation but yeah crack on with this logic.rjsterry said:
We've had working poor since the ice sheets retreated. The idea that the income from any full time job should automatically tally with the cost of living is the stuff of unicorns. In John's fantasy Britain, there is full employment; lower earners all get paid more and all that extra money just appears in employers' bank accounts without causing any inflation or increase in the cost of living.morstar said:
The thing here is we are generally not miles apart (with the notable exception that you believe the country can accommodate infinite residents).rick_chasey said:
I'm of the view that a free as market as possible is optimal, and that the solution to the negative externalities of it, like things like poor conditions, is not to restrict the size of the labour pool but to legislate to improve conditions.TheBigBean said:
I don't care about their nationality just that they have the legal right to work in the UK. You seem to be arguing that truck driving should be some sort of special skill that anyone from anywhere can do. I don't understand why truck driving is special in this regard.rick_chasey said:
You can open the market up to international competition and set minimum standards.TheBigBean said:
The international market rate would include drivers from all over the world. You could abolish the minimum wage, import workers from all over the world and give them worse entitlements like the UAE, but most people, sensibly, are against that.rick_chasey said:Why is it artificial? It's the international market rate.
Surely introducing barriers around nationality is more artificial then just opening up the market to international competition? It would be on the supply & demand chart.
You seem to want to use market restrictions to improve conditions rather than just legislate for better conditions.
Why do you care what nationality a lorry driver is?
The problem with jobs like haulage is there is limited value you can add - it's quite hard to compete on anything other than price as the nature of the work means you can't suddenly add more value by getting there twice as fast or whatever. So the employer is always going to go for the cheapest option (within reason).
I'd argue that the fact Brits don't do those jobs suggests that Brits are better suited to other jobs, and the focus shouldn't be on making low-value-add jobs more attractive by restricting supply (which has knock on effects to the rest of the economy), but focus on getting people into more value-add jobs.
I don't think there is a big advantage in getting people into lorry jobs or equivalent. I don't think there is a missed opportunity to have to pay 2x the amount for fruit picking because it's now Brits doing it over Romanians or whoever is doing it.
I'd suggest you're better off getting those Brits into jobs and careers with bigger upside.
You blame national policies for the plight of the working poor and I 100% agree with you.
However, when assessing Brexit, you are confusing economic theory with practical considerations. The fact is we have had working poor under both colours of government while in the Eu.
The economy has let people down and whilst lots voted Brexit for lots of different reasons of which I disagree with many, the working poor (some anyway) have actually been better served by Brexit than any other domestic policy in my lifetime when they are seeing significant wage jumps.
Do you think less choice in shops is a price worth paying for a small wage being converted into a living wage? Many will.
If everyone is doing the same job they were before at the same productivity rate for the same hours and pay is increased, no one gets any richer.
Brexit categorically will not and cannot help British inequality.
It is nothing to do with it.0 -
“Sir, we need to solve inequality in the uk and help the poorest”
“Great let’s leave the biggest single market in the world”
People would think you were mad0 -
Maybe this should be in the trivial intrigue thread but always thought the bin men were screwed over when they were outsourced yet there are no stories of the drivers jumping ship to Tesco for the £1k bounty.
Bins not being emptied would be very noticeable which suggests that the working conditions are an important factor.0 -
Our collections have become intermittent. Rumours has it Covid related.surrey_commuter said:Maybe this should be in the trivial intrigue thread but always thought the bin men were screwed over when they were outsourced yet there are no stories of the drivers jumping ship to Tesco for the £1k bounty.
Bins not being emptied would be very noticeable which suggests that the working conditions are an important factor.
Quite possibly driver related? Hmmmm. 🤔The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58424343surrey_commuter said:Maybe this should be in the trivial intrigue thread but always thought the bin men were screwed over when they were outsourced yet there are no stories of the drivers jumping ship to Tesco for the £1k bounty.
Bins not being emptied would be very noticeable which suggests that the working conditions are an important factor.
Yesterday0 -
As mentioned before, you really don't get why those left behind voted for Brexit. As has been explained to you numerous times, it was a vote against the status quo. When you think thinks can't be any worse you are will to vote for change, any change. These people voted against the status quo. That meant a bloody nose for BOTH the British establishment and the European establishment, both of which these people felt (feel) had failed them over the previous 40 years.rick_chasey said:
Yes people in sh!t situations have a habit for voting for populist nonsense.morstar said:
And there you go still totally failing to grasp why some people voted for it.rick_chasey said:
It’s not even an answer to it.Jezyboy said:
So I tend to agree with the middle paragraph.morstar said:I don’t really have anything much more to add right now without repeating myself anymore than I already have so will part with this.
Where is the virtue in having a successful economy if it only benefits a minority within it?
To clarify, the minority is not especially small as I type this today but it is shrinking. The logical progression of the current trajectory of rapidly growing wealth disparity is not good. Don’t be surprised when the serfs take issue.
I just think brexit is an incredibly idiotic answer to the question.
It has nothing to do with inequality
Doesn’t mean it isn’t populist nonsense. Nor does it make it correct.
If you boil down the argument it is an iteration of blame the foreigner, which is the one thread that united the vote leave spectrum.
Either it’s the low wage immigrants or it’s the distrustful EU big wigs. Either way, the problem with them is they they’re foreign.
Unfortunately, this whole Brexit thing will only make it harder to help the people in tough spots. There will be less surplus to channel their way, less money for investment in the kinds of things that will help.
It’s a populist lie.
The irony is of course we all make out that truckies is some kind of super low paid work - it’s not that badly paid - a lot of them can afford to retire early!
1 -
Couple of things.rick_chasey said:
Yes people in sh!t situations have a habit for voting for populist nonsense.morstar said:
And there you go still totally failing to grasp why some people voted for it.rick_chasey said:
It’s not even an answer to it.Jezyboy said:
So I tend to agree with the middle paragraph.morstar said:I don’t really have anything much more to add right now without repeating myself anymore than I already have so will part with this.
Where is the virtue in having a successful economy if it only benefits a minority within it?
To clarify, the minority is not especially small as I type this today but it is shrinking. The logical progression of the current trajectory of rapidly growing wealth disparity is not good. Don’t be surprised when the serfs take issue.
I just think brexit is an incredibly idiotic answer to the question.
It has nothing to do with inequality
Doesn’t mean it isn’t populist nonsense. Nor does it make it correct.
If you boil down the argument it is an iteration of blame the foreigner, which is the one thread that united the vote leave spectrum.
Either it’s the low wage immigrants or it’s the distrustful EU big wigs. Either way, the problem with them is they they’re foreign.
Unfortunately, this whole Brexit thing will only make it harder to help the people in tough spots. There will be less surplus to channel their way, less money for investment in the kinds of things that will help.
It’s a populist lie.
The irony is of course we all make out that truckies is some kind of super low paid work - it’s not that badly paid - a lot of them can afford to retire early!
I don’t like the clear racist undertones common to many Brexiteers and agree there is much populist nonsense behind it.
However, to have a less open borders policy than you espouse is almost certainly a very mainstream view.
Very few people believe in the unlimited immigration you support. I personally don’t come from a racist perspective but do find the country fairly full. As has been shown during Covid, the country is packed tight e.g. 40 minute queues at Snowdon as just one random example.
But, you also can’t dismiss it all as nonsense when one of the beliefs people had in Brexit is being proved correct with the wage increases.
Whether this is a wise outcome for the good of the nation is a very valid argument but you can’t dismiss current facts as nonsense just because you don’t like the bigger picture.
Wages have gone up as a direct result of Brexit policies. Many believed that would happen and it has.
Personally, I just thought we’d see the same immigration levels, just from different regions. Maybe we will yet.0 -
For the love of god morstar we get it ok...morstar said:
And there you go still totally failing to grasp why some people voted for it.rick_chasey said:
It’s not even an answer to it.Jezyboy said:
So I tend to agree with the middle paragraph.morstar said:I don’t really have anything much more to add right now without repeating myself anymore than I already have so will part with this.
Where is the virtue in having a successful economy if it only benefits a minority within it?
To clarify, the minority is not especially small as I type this today but it is shrinking. The logical progression of the current trajectory of rapidly growing wealth disparity is not good. Don’t be surprised when the serfs take issue.
I just think brexit is an incredibly idiotic answer to the question.
It has nothing to do with inequality
You've said it many many times.
It doesn't, however, make it correct.We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
Lolmorstar said:
I personally don’t come from a racist perspective but do find the country fairly full.As has been shown during Covid, the country is packed tight e.g. 40 minute queues at Snowdon as just one random example.
Ever been to Hong Kong?Or any tourist site ever?We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
Exactly my point. I don’t choose to live places like that.ddraver said:
Lolmorstar said:
I personally don’t come from a racist perspective but do find the country fairly full.As has been shown during Covid, the country is packed tight e.g. 40 minute queues at Snowdon as just one random example.
Ever been to Hong Kong?Or any tourist site ever?0 -
Isn't Snowdon more down to a collective lack of imagination than the country being particularly full?
Aside from HGV drivers (who as far as I'm aware weren't really what you'd consider working poor) what other sectors have seen rises?
That 8% rise that's screwing up the triple lock is more a weird furlough/covid effect right?0 -
Amazon are offering £50 per week for actually turning up to warehouse jobs without sickness.
That must equate to a 10-15% increase depending on exact remuneration.0 -
You really don't understand what percentage of the companies expense is wage costs if you think an increase in wages results in a equivalent increase in living costs.rick_chasey said:
You do know money is just the way to measure output and value, right?john80 said:
If you look back in time I am not sure there was much of a safety net for the working poor. There now is so you have to pay more to attract those in to work or alternatively start reducing benefits till you die on them. Yet to see an argument that a say 20% increase in the lowest paid results in an equivalent inflation but yeah crack on with this logic.rjsterry said:
We've had working poor since the ice sheets retreated. The idea that the income from any full time job should automatically tally with the cost of living is the stuff of unicorns. In John's fantasy Britain, there is full employment; lower earners all get paid more and all that extra money just appears in employers' bank accounts without causing any inflation or increase in the cost of living.morstar said:
The thing here is we are generally not miles apart (with the notable exception that you believe the country can accommodate infinite residents).rick_chasey said:
I'm of the view that a free as market as possible is optimal, and that the solution to the negative externalities of it, like things like poor conditions, is not to restrict the size of the labour pool but to legislate to improve conditions.TheBigBean said:
I don't care about their nationality just that they have the legal right to work in the UK. You seem to be arguing that truck driving should be some sort of special skill that anyone from anywhere can do. I don't understand why truck driving is special in this regard.rick_chasey said:
You can open the market up to international competition and set minimum standards.TheBigBean said:
The international market rate would include drivers from all over the world. You could abolish the minimum wage, import workers from all over the world and give them worse entitlements like the UAE, but most people, sensibly, are against that.rick_chasey said:Why is it artificial? It's the international market rate.
Surely introducing barriers around nationality is more artificial then just opening up the market to international competition? It would be on the supply & demand chart.
You seem to want to use market restrictions to improve conditions rather than just legislate for better conditions.
Why do you care what nationality a lorry driver is?
The problem with jobs like haulage is there is limited value you can add - it's quite hard to compete on anything other than price as the nature of the work means you can't suddenly add more value by getting there twice as fast or whatever. So the employer is always going to go for the cheapest option (within reason).
I'd argue that the fact Brits don't do those jobs suggests that Brits are better suited to other jobs, and the focus shouldn't be on making low-value-add jobs more attractive by restricting supply (which has knock on effects to the rest of the economy), but focus on getting people into more value-add jobs.
I don't think there is a big advantage in getting people into lorry jobs or equivalent. I don't think there is a missed opportunity to have to pay 2x the amount for fruit picking because it's now Brits doing it over Romanians or whoever is doing it.
I'd suggest you're better off getting those Brits into jobs and careers with bigger upside.
You blame national policies for the plight of the working poor and I 100% agree with you.
However, when assessing Brexit, you are confusing economic theory with practical considerations. The fact is we have had working poor under both colours of government while in the Eu.
The economy has let people down and whilst lots voted Brexit for lots of different reasons of which I disagree with many, the working poor (some anyway) have actually been better served by Brexit than any other domestic policy in my lifetime when they are seeing significant wage jumps.
Do you think less choice in shops is a price worth paying for a small wage being converted into a living wage? Many will.
If everyone is doing the same job they were before at the same productivity rate for the same hours and pay is increased, no one gets any richer.
Brexit categorically will not and cannot help British inequality.
It is nothing to do with it.0 -
Other costs such as material costs.
Purchased from companies who will also have to adjust to increased wages.
Rick might be abstracting to the problem to too macro an extent. But, purely looking at a single company's balence sheet for the impact of wage rises is too simplified.0 -
That’s not what I was trying to illustrate but ok.john80 said:
You really don't understand what percentage of the companies expense is wage costs if you think an increase in wages results in a equivalent increase in living costs.rick_chasey said:
You do know money is just the way to measure output and value, right?john80 said:
If you look back in time I am not sure there was much of a safety net for the working poor. There now is so you have to pay more to attract those in to work or alternatively start reducing benefits till you die on them. Yet to see an argument that a say 20% increase in the lowest paid results in an equivalent inflation but yeah crack on with this logic.rjsterry said:
We've had working poor since the ice sheets retreated. The idea that the income from any full time job should automatically tally with the cost of living is the stuff of unicorns. In John's fantasy Britain, there is full employment; lower earners all get paid more and all that extra money just appears in employers' bank accounts without causing any inflation or increase in the cost of living.morstar said:
The thing here is we are generally not miles apart (with the notable exception that you believe the country can accommodate infinite residents).rick_chasey said:
I'm of the view that a free as market as possible is optimal, and that the solution to the negative externalities of it, like things like poor conditions, is not to restrict the size of the labour pool but to legislate to improve conditions.TheBigBean said:
I don't care about their nationality just that they have the legal right to work in the UK. You seem to be arguing that truck driving should be some sort of special skill that anyone from anywhere can do. I don't understand why truck driving is special in this regard.rick_chasey said:
You can open the market up to international competition and set minimum standards.TheBigBean said:
The international market rate would include drivers from all over the world. You could abolish the minimum wage, import workers from all over the world and give them worse entitlements like the UAE, but most people, sensibly, are against that.rick_chasey said:Why is it artificial? It's the international market rate.
Surely introducing barriers around nationality is more artificial then just opening up the market to international competition? It would be on the supply & demand chart.
You seem to want to use market restrictions to improve conditions rather than just legislate for better conditions.
Why do you care what nationality a lorry driver is?
The problem with jobs like haulage is there is limited value you can add - it's quite hard to compete on anything other than price as the nature of the work means you can't suddenly add more value by getting there twice as fast or whatever. So the employer is always going to go for the cheapest option (within reason).
I'd argue that the fact Brits don't do those jobs suggests that Brits are better suited to other jobs, and the focus shouldn't be on making low-value-add jobs more attractive by restricting supply (which has knock on effects to the rest of the economy), but focus on getting people into more value-add jobs.
I don't think there is a big advantage in getting people into lorry jobs or equivalent. I don't think there is a missed opportunity to have to pay 2x the amount for fruit picking because it's now Brits doing it over Romanians or whoever is doing it.
I'd suggest you're better off getting those Brits into jobs and careers with bigger upside.
You blame national policies for the plight of the working poor and I 100% agree with you.
However, when assessing Brexit, you are confusing economic theory with practical considerations. The fact is we have had working poor under both colours of government while in the Eu.
The economy has let people down and whilst lots voted Brexit for lots of different reasons of which I disagree with many, the working poor (some anyway) have actually been better served by Brexit than any other domestic policy in my lifetime when they are seeing significant wage jumps.
Do you think less choice in shops is a price worth paying for a small wage being converted into a living wage? Many will.
If everyone is doing the same job they were before at the same productivity rate for the same hours and pay is increased, no one gets any richer.
Brexit categorically will not and cannot help British inequality.
It is nothing to do with it.
How come you’re not advocating a higher minimum wage rather than advocating for restrictions on supply?0 -
Exactly. Virtually all the other hills in Snowdonia will only see keen walkers and you can walk the Cambrians without seeing another person. I walked a 14 mile route in the Beacons recently around the Pen-y-Fan 'horseshoe' and saw maybe a dozen people on the whole walk other than Pen-y-Fan itself which was heaving. Like Snowdon it is well known and easily accessible.Jezyboy said:
Aside from HGV drivers (who as far as I'm aware weren't really what you'd consider working poor) what other sectors have seen rises?
That 8% rise that's screwing up the triple lock is more a weird furlough/covid effect right?
I posted photos on here of that walk the last time people were saying the country was crowded, that's not to say parts aren't crowded or that I want the countryside to become more densely developed but we are currently the 8th most densely populated country in Europe at 272 people per km2 (Monaco has nearly 19,000, London has 'only' 5,700!).0
