wren Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 A more balanced work ethic is what will be needed - some anti-work ethic to balance too much "work ethic". People and newspapers always like to go on about "hard-working" and NuLiebour always goes on about "hard-working families" (I thought child labour was abolished). Now every time I see this "hard-working" phrase I subsitute "hard-consuming" because that's what it really comes down to. People work to get more money in order to consume more. People are competing for resources. Hence all the rage on this site from frustrated wannabe house buyers. In future people will consume less. Not as a matter of choice, but out of necessity owing to resource limitations. This is not 30 years in the future. It is starting now. Energy supply limitations will mean never-ending economic depression. Last year was possibly the peak year. Peak consumerism, peak "hard-working". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 (edited) Your stupidity is really starting to annoy me. Let's say that tomorrow MegaCorp Inc announces that all desktop and laptop PC's can now be assembled by an automated production line, and all manafacturers adopt their technology. Does this...a) Increase the number of people working to assemble computers b.) decrease the number of people working to assemble computers Let's say that over the following few years MegaCorp Inc applies their technology to other industries, all but eliminating the need for human workers. Does this... a) Increase the size of the job market b.) decrease the size of the job market So MegaCorp Inc roll out their capital investment and who do you think will be building their machines..., Robots? Whats more you think that you can dictate the sort of investments that companies should be allowed to take based on the criteria of whether or not their decisions 'increase the size of the job market'. This is laughable. Jobs don't need to be manipulated in a way that you suggest, they arise naturally from human demand. When one demand is saturated another crops up as humans decide they want faster/more powerful/more effecient/more x type of goods. You're nothing but a modern luddite. Edited August 31, 2009 by chefdave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BoomBoomCrash Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 So MegaCorp Inc roll out their capital investment and who do you think will be building their machines..., Robots? Whats more you think that you can dictate the sort of investments that companies should be allowed to take based on the criteria of whether or not their decisions 'increase the size of the job market'. This is laughable. Jobs don't need to be manipulated in a way that you suggest, they arise naturally from human demand. When one demand is saturated another crops up as humans decide they want faster/more powerful/more effecient/more x type of goods. You're nothing but a modern luddite. Right, but like with the combine harvester these machines replace millions of hours of human labour over their lifetime. If they required the same man hours to build as they replaced they would be worthless.Where have I stated that companies should be constrained in developing technologies that replace human labour? I see this as part of our march towards a technological singularity , but for that to happen we have to prevent society collapsing which is why I strongly advocate a citizens wage. At the moment the problem is that e have a shrinling labour market and nothing in place to support those that have been permamently removed from the workforce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 (edited) Right, but like with the combine harvester these machines replace millions of hours of human labour over their lifetime. If they required the same man hours to build as they replaced they would be worthless.Where have I stated that companies should be constrained in developing technologies that replace human labour? I see this as part of our march towards a technological singularity , but for that to happen we have to prevent society collapsing which is why I strongly advocate a citizens wage. At the moment the problem is that e have a shrinling labour market and nothing in place to support those that have been permamently removed from the workforce. This is fairly simple so should be no problem to resolve. We have three factors of production: Land, labour and capital (tools). The increase in the use of tools doesn't deny anyone else the oportunities for wealth creation so we should have nothing to fear from technological advances. Just because you can produce more it doesn't follow that I can produce less; I can either carry on producing the same amount or employ the tools that you're using to gain the same advantage as you. If anything a shrinking labour market should be celebrated, wouldn't it be great if we could produce all the things we needed with close to zero effort? The major snag is that some people are denied the opportuinty afforded to others because they're shut out from a vital and irreplaceable piece of production: land. Its this that people have to keep paying for which artificially keeps workers poor, if there were no restriction on the amount of land available then the increase in productivity resulting from the improvements to capital would raise living standards through the roof. Edited August 31, 2009 by chefdave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 (edited) A more balanced work ethic is what will be needed - some anti-work ethic to balance too much "work ethic".People and newspapers always like to go on about "hard-working" and NuLiebour always goes on about "hard-working families" (I thought child labour was abolished). Now every time I see this "hard-working" phrase I subsitute "hard-consuming" because that's what it really comes down to. People work to get more money in order to consume more. People are competing for resources. Hence all the rage on this site from frustrated wannabe house buyers. In future people will consume less. Not as a matter of choice, but out of necessity owing to resource limitations. This is not 30 years in the future. It is starting now. Energy supply limitations will mean never-ending economic depression. Last year was possibly the peak year. Peak consumerism, peak "hard-working". The poor have put up with resource contrainsts for hundreds of years, limiting their ability to provide for themsleves by disallowing their access to land keeps them in a state of poverty, to the benefit of others. Edited August 31, 2009 by chefdave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BoomBoomCrash Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 The poor have put up with resource contrainsts for hundreds of years, limiting their abilty to provide for themsleves by disallowing their access to land keeps them in a state of poverty, to the benefit of others. And a citizens wage is a workable way of addressing this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 And a citizens wage is a workable way of addressing this. It depends how its implemented. Some people already receive a citizens wage and they take it in the form of rents and higher house prices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody777 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 The Idle young are not as stupid as you think the fools are the idiots like me who belived in hard work and a good self financed early retirement well the pots run dry now we have means tested care homes means tested pensions called pensioners tax credits and now the age of 70 to retire is being flashed around and now taking the credit crunch the truth is coming out theirs nothing left if you dont qualify for the means tested whatever in the mix in the future your hard work wont be worth a penny wait for means tested health care in general some kind of property thieft and pension thieft consider dividend thieft windfall taxes and onething is guarenteed a lot more of this redistribution or thieft as I see it dont fight the markets so to speak if you work hard and save the powers that be will work hard taking it from you to give it away to the idle whatever so its simple work hard and accept you will be ripped off or let this stupid state of affairs work for you the idle young so whoes the fool? If I have offended some hard working person please forgive me sometimes the truth hurts and you can do a few things stop working yourself spend what you earned on yourself before the government spends it for you or attempt to change government policy promoting scroungers removing the means tested things and promote enterprise but for me no chance of success until the country is broke and it will be broke soon buckle up and prepare yourself buy gold put it under the bed and most important spend and enjoy your savings now when they are gone the idle young so to speak cant have anymore of your savings good luck we need it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogs Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 The Idle young are not as stupid as you think the fools are the idiots like me who belived in hard work and a good self financed early retirement well the pots run dry now we have means tested care homes means tested pensions called pensioners tax credits and now the age of 70 to retire is being flashed around and now taking the credit crunch the truth is coming out theirs nothing left if you dont qualify for the means tested whatever in the mix in the future your hard work wont be worth a penny wait for means tested health care in general some kind of property thieft and pension thieft consider dividend thieft windfall taxes and onething is guarenteed a lot more of this redistribution or thieft as I see it dont fight the markets so to speak if you work hard and save the powers that be will work hard taking it from you to give it away to the idle whatever so its simple work hard and accept you will be ripped off or let this stupid state of affairs work for you the idle young so whoes the fool?If I have offended some hard working person please forgive me sometimes the truth hurts and you can do a few things stop working yourself spend what you earned on yourself before the government spends it for you or attempt to change government policy promoting scroungers removing the means tested things and promote enterprise but for me no chance of success until the country is broke and it will be broke soon buckle up and prepare yourself buy gold put it under the bed and most important spend and enjoy your savings now when they are gone the idle young so to speak cant have anymore of your savings good luck we need it I'd give up speed as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stars Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Your stupidity is really starting to annoy me. Let's say that tomorrow MegaCorp Inc announces that all desktop and laptop PC's can now be assembled by an automated production line, and all manafacturers adopt their technology. Does this...a) Increase the number of people working to assemble computers b.) decrease the number of people working to assemble computers Let's say that over the following few years MegaCorp Inc applies their technology to other industries, all but eliminating the need for human workers. Does this... a) Increase the size of the job market b.) decrease the size of the job market If a technology (somehow) results in people having less, people can fill that gap themselves irrespective of that technology by producing what they need without it. It's a big red herring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cogs Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Actually, national service isn't such a bad thing. They have it in Norway, Greece, Austria, Switzerland and a couple of other countries and it seems to turn out responsible young men and women. If we'd kept national service, it might have been a threat to the social engineering of Europe and creation of the EU. They don't want well armed citizens because they could "get in the way" of integration and could be deployed against the agenda. A more acute reason for avoiding national service is that countries that use it tend to have constitutional limits on what the army can be used for and under what circumstances, whereas a professional force can be fielded on the politician's whim in the service of 'national interest' (e.g., whatever large corporations and cronies want). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Potwalloper Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I have no problem with technology, indeed I embrace the changes it will bring. I advocate a citizens wage, national divident or whatever you want to call it as a solution. I have stated this many times stop being so ******ing obtuse you tedious little shit. Your ability to communicate appears to be very poor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domo Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 The Idle young are not as stupid as you think the fools are the idiots like me who belived in hard work and a good self financed early retirement well the pots run dry now we have means tested care homes means tested pensions called pensioners tax credits and now the age of 70 to retire is being flashed around and now taking the credit crunch the truth is coming out theirs nothing left if you dont qualify for the means tested whatever in the mix in the future your hard work wont be worth a penny wait for means tested health care in general some kind of property thieft and pension thieft consider dividend thieft windfall taxes and onething is guarenteed a lot more of this redistribution or thieft as I see it dont fight the markets so to speak if you work hard and save the powers that be will work hard taking it from you to give it away to the idle whatever so its simple work hard and accept you will be ripped off or let this stupid state of affairs work for you the idle young so whoes the fool?If I have offended some hard working person please forgive me sometimes the truth hurts and you can do a few things stop working yourself spend what you earned on yourself before the government spends it for you or attempt to change government policy promoting scroungers removing the means tested things and promote enterprise but for me no chance of success until the country is broke and it will be broke soon buckle up and prepare yourself buy gold put it under the bed and most important spend and enjoy your savings now when they are gone the idle young so to speak cant have anymore of your savings good luck we need it Obviously don't believe in punctuation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I haven't lived in the UK for over 10 years.Was all this bashing of the unemployed going on a few years ago during the "boom times"? Just that it seems to me that that was a time when the problem of the long-term unemployed could have been usefully addressed and complaints about idle shirkers possibly justified. Now in a severe recession the number of jobs is down and it will only get harder for people to find new jobs, even if they try hard. Why bash the unemployed now of all times? ****** yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogbrush Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 The whole thing was so predictable and obvious. Some people behave as if unemployment was a new thing and people now have no chance. This is idiocy. My grandad was a ships joiner in 1930's Liverpool and would turn up at the docks hoping for work and often being disappointed. Imagine telling him that technology has spoilt what he had. There is no getting away from the simple fact that the better the safety net the lower the incentive to be active becomes. It takes a person of retarded sense to fail to grasp this inevitable fact. It is from the fear of destitution and death that incentive to do anything to live grows, and from there can spring the work ethic typical of the British working class up to the mid-20th century. Remeber when people marched for jobs and the like. Seen any marches for jobs lately? It was not so much that people then were paragons of virtue, simply that idleness had severe evolutionary disincentives. The late 20th century and early 21st has seen the erosion of that condition not because of technology or anything, but because the safety nets have pushed rational behaviour toward idleness in some situations. Anyone engaged in the job market in any way over the last 15 years can tell you that, and I for one have rejoiced in immigration not for wage rates (as mine have gone up far faster than inflation over that period) but because of the appearance of a large stock of people who are averse to idleness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentimmo Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Plenty of young people want to work and start their own business. I know a few. Problem they are facing is the cost of commercial property is sky high. Add in rates, etc and there's no way a young person under 30 is going to take the plunge , unless their parents fund the business. Even worse are the old boomers who are now retiring and looking to sell on their business. Asking for 80-100K for a butcher's shop because "it's for their pension". End result is that no-one buys the business, it closes and the customers end up going to tescos/sainsburys etc. Im still quite young ( ) - can anyone tell me if it was easy/difficult to open a business in the 50s/60s/70s ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogbrush Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Plenty of young people want to work and start their own business. I know a few. Problem they are facing is the cost of commercial property is sky high. Add in rates, etc and there's no way a young person under 30 is going to take the plunge , unless their parents fund the business. Even worse are the old boomers who are now retiring and looking to sell on their business. Asking for 80-100K for a butcher's shop because "it's for their pension". End result is that no-one buys the business, it closes and the customers end up going to tescos/sainsburys etc. Im still quite young ( ) - can anyone tell me if it was easy/difficult to open a business in the 50s/60s/70s ? What business do you want to go into? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wires 74 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 (edited) Blimey -typicaL Tory who wants to attack both the poor and the young... Don`t you think kids today have enough to put up with -we have our Nu labour police state making virtually any form of enjoyment subject to ASBO ... We have an Industrial base which has been destroyed under the watch of their parents generation making any form of upward meritocracy difficult if not impossible ... We have insane property prices which expect the under-35`s to mortgage themselves to penury in order to enable the over-50`s to feel smug about themselves... Then we have Tory tossers like Portillo spouting off in the media... When I was in my teens during the late seventies I lived in a squat and took drugs all day -if kids carried on like that nowadays the Daily Mail would be going into hyperdrive ... Edited August 31, 2009 by Wires 74 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the wizard Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 (edited) Post #148 - The rules, part 1. 1. My Greed is good. 2. Your Envy is bad. 3. Get off my land. 4. Get back to work. Edited August 31, 2009 by the wizard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Blimey -typicaL Tory who wants to attack both the poor and the young...Don`t you think kids today have enough to put up with -we have our Nu labour police state making virtually any form of enjoyment subject to ASBO ... We have an Industrial base which has been destroyed under the watch of their parents generation making any form of upward meritocracy difficult if not impossible ... We have insane property prices which expect the under-35`s to mortgage themselves to penury in order to enable the over-50`s to feel smug about themselves... Then we have Tory tossers like Portillo spouting off in the media... When I was in my teens during the late seventies I lived in a squat and took drugs all day -if kids carried on like that nowadays the Daily Mail would be going into hyperdrive ... Do you actually know any of the youth of today ? The majority have it so easy it is incredible. Yes their future may be a bit ******ed - but that goes for all of us. Most get money of their parents, or get paid simply for going to school. They have nice wee scooters, buy new clothes every week, get wasted at the weekend, go on holiday and most do not even have part time jobs. "Enough to put up with".. You are having a laugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Posted August 31, 2009 Author Share Posted August 31, 2009 (edited) I fail to understand how the very low benefits on offer in the UK disincentivise work. 60 quid a week. Whoooooah. Let's have a party! Hey, Portillo, how about "Banksters should be entitled to nothing" rather than some rant targetting the young, many of whom genuinely can't find work. But then the Thatcherites and their ilk always like to target the most vulnerable in society don't they - single mothers, unemployed youngsters, etc., as they gulp down the cream. Shit rises... Last thing I saw was Portillo was earning around £600,000 per year (2005). Edited August 31, 2009 by gruffydd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikthe20 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Plenty of young people want to work and start their own business. I know a few. Problem they are facing is the cost of commercial property is sky high. Add in rates, etc and there's no way a young person under 30 is going to take the plunge , unless their parents fund the business. Even worse are the old boomers who are now retiring and looking to sell on their business. Asking for 80-100K for a butcher's shop because "it's for their pension". End result is that no-one buys the business, it closes and the customers end up going to tescos/sainsburys etc. Im still quite young ( ) - can anyone tell me if it was easy/difficult to open a business in the 50s/60s/70s ? Hmmm...not sure I agree on this one. Setting up a company itself is extremely simple in the UK and easier than most other countries - form to Companies House, solicitor to stamp it (£10), off-the-shelf memorandum and articles, form to VAT office if you want to register for VAT, annual tax return thereafter. Can be done for less than £50 (which I did last month). Much simpler, cheaper and quicker than most other countries. If it's a simple business you can do your own accounts. A few forms a year to the relevant authorities. If yo need an accountant but can do a cash book £200 a year should cover it to get your returns done. Most people start working from home and with Internet shopping and business in general I would say the need for commerical properties is diminishing. Even so, office space in serviced offices (inc. rates) these days is very cheap - say £150-£250 per month (top end is what I have paid in outer London) for enough space for 4 people. Retail store probably more but again there are so many empty shops that it shold be possible to get decent deals. As for butchers etc not selling because they can't get what they feel they deserve - just a market - if they are stupid enough to refuse £20k and take nothing instead out of pride then they obviously weren't particularly good businessmen in the first place. My local butcher sold up for less than he wanted, but he did actually sell, and moved off to fuengirola in Spain. Unfortunately the people who bought from him were clueless and it closed down. Only one butcher left in our town now compared to 3 a couple of years ago. People often look for excuses saying it's difficult to start a business - it's not. What is difficult is actually taking the plunge and doing it (and of course making it profitable and keeping it that way). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wires 74 Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Do you actually know any of the youth of today ? The majority have it so easy it is incredible. Yes their future may be a bit ******ed - but that goes for all of us.Most get money of their parents, or get paid simply for going to school. They have nice wee scooters, buy new clothes every week, get wasted at the weekend, go on holiday and most do not even have part time jobs. "Enough to put up with".. You are having a laugh. Yes I know plenty -not only my own and their friends but also the ones I get training at sea in my capacity as a shipmaster - 99% of them are tremendous . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Posted August 31, 2009 Author Share Posted August 31, 2009 Its most noticeable characteristic is a chronic lack of experience of and connection with the world outside politics. Its members make government their exclusive study and tend to have no significant experience of industry, commerce, or civil society. The former Tory Cabinet minister Michael Portillo - a pioneering member of the Political Class - lasted a very short time working for a shipping company where he developed a "deep distaste for his clerical and administrative duties". Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-47...l#ixzz0Pl1U6uUQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 I fail to understand how the very low benefits on offer in the UK disincentivise work. 60 quid a week. Whoooooah. Let's have a party! Hey, Portillo, how about "Banksters should be entitled to nothing" rather than some rant targetting the young, many of whom genuinely can't find work. But then the Thatcherites and their ilk always like to target the most vulnerable in society don't they - single mothers, unemployed youngsters, etc., as they gulp down the cream. Shit rises... Last thing I saw was Portillo was earning around £600,000 per year (2005). You really think most on benefits only get £60 per week ?! No rent, no mortgage, disability etc.. Many of these jokers are getting away with, in real terms, hundreds and hundreds per week. Simply to spend on booze, fags and mobile phones. I do love when you get a thread like this. You always get people saying 'it's not as cruisy as people think it is'. Really ?! No not really. Every person I see/know on benefits has a mobile phone, a place to stay, fags if they want it and booze. Some also go to the pics, have cars and go on the odd holiday. These people are having a ball, and you are paying for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.