dugsbody

As is being unwilling to work 16 hour days and live in a tube hotel next to the office. Just imagine the career progression you could achieve if you were willing to do that. I'm ok with my choices. I left "bigcorp" when they started making murmurings of backtracking on their previous stance of being more open to flexible working. I joined "smallcorp" and now work almost fully remote, going in once a week maximum. I deliver results. I spend time on video calls mentoring others. I don't waste time locating meeting rooms and waiting for the previous people to leave and latecomers to show up. Meetings feel much more focused and I have the ability to work in the background if they do start to drag. Each team is encouraged to have their own permanent video meeting call going throughout the day and people optionally (some do, some don't) hang out on that call while they work. Remote working can and does work fantastically well, as long as you steer clear of employing dinosaurs who have a vested interest in it not working because their role is mostly to sell themselves upward and they require in office presence to do that.

I see you do internet stats.

👍

Nah. Lump of labour fallacy.

Why only low skilled? Why not medium or high skilled? In any case, I am not sure if you remember, but this has been explained to you before. It is called the lump of labour fallacy. This fallacy has been given a name and is a known thing precisely because people like you need it explaining over and over. Will an economy of 60mm people have lower wages than an economy of 30mm people? No, because people drive the economy. Each person who moves here needs the services of dentists, checkout tellers, bar staff, plumbers, builders, electricians, lawyers, and so on. They create the demand for more jobs, therefore in the overall picture have little downward impact on wages and in fact due to the positive effects of social mobility are good overall for an economy. That is why in the four nations of the UK we don't try to pin people to the geographical region they were born to even though people in Huddersfield would move to London and work for cheaper than a Londoner might do.

You could try asking the SMEs in the UK that have cut back trade with the EU. Perhaps they have the answer.

The demonstrates the problem that "remain" has faced for the last 50 years. We just want to get on with our lives and do productive things. Europhobes on the other hand have a strong motivation to invest enormous amounts of energy into producing anti-EU propaganda. They have no problem inventing things (lies) to do so. And that means the other side is forced onto the back foot to show each lie is untrue, only for the next one to come along, and then finally circling back to the first one again because it has now been repeated so many times that lots of people still think it is true. Propaganda works. Nations have know this for a long time.

Yes, but on the other hand you don't know what you're talking about. 👍

They don't want to save the planet. They just hate seeing people having more power over the corporates and daring to step outside of the rat maze that has been constructed for us all to run. Especially if those people are young people. Need to keep them funding their BTLs.

🤣

Because they're liars and the truth doesn't matter? Because they can't have a part of the UK doing better inside the single market than the rest of the UK? Because it helps them win votes from a certain section of our public?

But then the Tories can blame the cost of living on the EU for punishing us and mouth breathers will lap it up. It's perfect for the Conservative Party. They have the voters of this country figured out.

Do you really need to keep instigating on this issue? They've gone and moved on, you probably should too.

You should tell that to nearly every other country in the world. Maybe the US will see the light and start waving UK goods through too.

That isn't what all of this about though. They're not interested in "solving" the NI issue. They're worried that NI will be seen as doing very well with access to the EU single market and show brexit for what it is. They also know that keeping the brexit voters riled up and raging about the EU instead of looking at the Conservative Party is a vote winner. This is all for domestic consumption.

That is also how I think things would play out.

Well, the EU is made up of a set of binding treaties about trade policy internally and with third countries. The UK decided to leave the EU and become a third country. No-one has ever successfully explained to me how the EU was punishing the UK by treating it like other third countries.

That depends on what you think is causing inflation at the moment. I am very far from an expert but it seems to be a combination of (supply side) China being in lockdown still, the world economy stalling for a few years and not producing nearly as much, the Russia/Ukraine war, oil and gas prices impacting everything due to shipping. (Demand side) A lot of excess money pumped into the economy during covid and the effects of excess money since 2010. All of those things could go away in a couple of years. We don't know if they will, but their nature is temporary. Whereas, in my view, inflation over the last few decades has trended downward because we have become increasingly efficient at making and distributing things. Therefore consumables have become increasingly cheap. The world started globalising the minute tribe A realised they could swap their superior flint for better food from tribe B. That's what globalisation is. Maybe the food picked from tribe A became miffed because suddenly their tribal standing was less than the flint finders. Maybe they grumbled about globalisation. I think people expecting globalisation that has taken place over thousands of years to end because we're in a momentary phase are naive. Therefore, inflation could come right back down within a few years, if the temporary causes of high inflation go away.

If you take a hostage, threaten to shoot them if the other side doesn't give you what you want, you don't get to blame the other side when you shoot the hostage. (Sadly, in this analogy, the hostage was our own country).

The UK is already worse off because of brexit. In order to be better off in the long term then brexit will have to become a larger net positive for the UK economy in the future. This seems unlikely. So, my bet, based off where we are now, the UK will continue to be worse off because of brexit.

Are people better off in Asia, the US or Europe? I think most Europeans would prefer to live in Europe than the other two places, despite lack of tech giants.

I'm relatively sanguine anyway, which is why I can make fun of myself here. If I wasn't so lazy I would have locked in my next fix a few weeks back, but other stuff kept coming up.

False question anyway. We redistribute funding across regions for a good reason. It uplifts those regions directly and then indirectly uplifts all regions.

It is slightly less confusing to say an increase of 50 basis points. It always means a fixed value increase. Whereas if you say an increase of 0.5%, it could mean either a value increase of 0.5% or a 0.5% increase of the previous value. Example. Our base rate is currently 0.75% or 75 bps. An increase of 50 basis points is read by everyone as a fixed 75 bps + 50 bps = 125 bps = 1.25% Whereas if you say increased by 0.5%, it could be mistaken as 0.75 * (1.005) = 0.75375.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-being-anti-science-is-now-part-of-many-rural-americans-identity/