2018 versus 1998

[Riedquat]

14 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

Entered my apprenticeship in 1978 - Year later Maggie got in. Well paid -world was your oyster feeling which only got better. Of the decades 80's,90's 00's My feeling was late 80's had the best vibe although closely matched by middle 90's - Had the feeling even late 90's that things were going off the boil.

I think I have said before 1980 -2000ish the world seemed in balance - hard work rewarded etc

Although it could be perception bias (since I didn't start work until the end of that) that fits with the general perception I have of the world. Maybe coincidence, maybe not that the acceleration in a direction I don't like coincided with Blair getting in to power. It's hard to let him off the hook but since some of the changes aren't confined to the UK it's difficult to pin it all on him.

[Kosmin]

10 hours ago, scottbeard said:

1998 was basically on the cusp of the internet age.  In 1996 if you wanted some news, you put the TV on at 6pm, 9pm or 10pm.  In 2000 your first port of call was the internet. 

In my experience it took a bit longer for the Internet to take off. Where were you getting news on the Internet in 2000? I remember downloading a lot of music from 2000 onwards, but in most other ways it was a lot more limited. I think it took several more years before it really got going.

[spyguy]

59 minutes ago, hurlerontheditch said:

not sure its as simple as that though

some of the migrants left places of abject poverty and even sharing a house with 10 other people in the UK is better than returning home. there is more immigration from outside the EU than in it. unless the western world helps sorting out the poorer nations in the world there will always be mass migration. simply handing money to poorer countries does not sort the problems.

Oh it is.

Most migrants are low skilled.

They cannot earn enough in the legal UK economy and pay for their kids to go to school - 5k/head.

80%+ of the migrnts to the UK in the last 20 years depend entirely or mainly on benefits

[scottbeard]

7 minutes ago, Kosmin said:

In my experience it took a bit longer for the Internet to take off. Where were you getting news on the Internet in 2000? I remember downloading a lot of music from 2000 onwards, but in most other ways it was a lot more limited. I think it took several more years before it really got going.

Same as today - the BBC website.  It actually started in 1997 but the first news story I ever read on it was Jill Dando's murder (April 1999).

[debtlessmanc]

55 minutes ago, rantnrave said:

Any older folk around who could contrast 1978 with 1998 for us?

i was in secondary school, the 70's were a really wierd decade poor and edgy, i remember my older brother dropping out of college in 1978 and being sent by the DHSS or whatever preceeded it to pick cabbages, my mother was in tears when he started getting back problems and refuesed to continue. He eventually joined the police, but hated that too, mainly because of the physical violence often meted out to suspects in police stations. My friend went to a recruitment fare and spoke to the army about being sponsored thro university. Their first comment was "Before you start the application, you will do two tours of northern ireland and you will get shot at" it was a tough decade

Houses were cheap tho, i was paid to go to university and there was a sense of community

Edited May 30, 2018 by debtlessmanc

[hurlerontheditch]

6 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Oh it is.

Most migrants are low skilled.

They cannot earn enough in the legal UK economy and pay for their kids to go to school - 5k/head.

80%+ of the migrnts to the UK in the last 20 years depend entirely or mainly on benefits

as a migrant I can say that I am not low skilled and most of my migrant friends are also highly skilled

 

quite a generalisation there

the UK does not have a skilled native population. low education standards, celebrity instagram ambitions and a general lack of drive will mean migrants are always needed.

[Errol]

By 'Liberal democracy' do they mean voting for the 'right' people and the 'right' things?

So if you vote for the 'wrong' people or things it is suddenly not a liberal democracy? Also, it's fine for the people to not want a liberal democracy. They can vote it out if they like.

Edited May 30, 2018 by Errol

[crashmonitor]

2 hours ago, rantnrave said:

This story on Sky News today seems timely:

https://news.sky.com/story/warning-that-nostalgia-in-politics-is-imperilling-liberal-democracy-11389504

Warning that nostalgia in politics is 'imperilling liberal democracy'

Two thirds of the public think life in Britain was better in a bygone age, a study by Sky Data and the think tank Demos suggests.

Two thirds of the public think life in Britain was better in a bygone age, and the increasing influence of nostalgia in politics is "imperilling liberal democracy," a new study by Sky Data and the think tank Demos suggests.

Some 63% of Britons think life is worse now than when they were growing up, against 21% who think it is better now, and 8% who think the quality of life has not changed.

That includes a clear majority of Britons in every age group - perhaps surprisingly, young people were most likely to think life in Britain was better when they were growing up (69% among those aged 18-34, against 59% of 35-54s and 61% of people aged 55 and over).

Similarly, 63% of the public think Britain's status on the world stage has declined since their youth, 55% think there are now lower quality job opportunities, and 71% think there used to be a greater sense of community.

Britons are divided as to whether immigration has been good (36%) or bad (40%) for the communities in which they have settled, with stark differences across political divides.

Labour voters and Remainers are much more likely to say it has been positive, Conservatives and Leave voters are much more likely to say it has been negative.

But the public is united in thinking immigration has divided the communities they settled in - 71% say immigration has caused greater division, including a clear majority across every demographic and across the political spectrum.

And Britons are worried that British values are under threat - 55% think the government is not doing enough to promote traditional British values, with 17% saying they go too far and 22% saying they get the balance about right.

Conservative voters are among the strongest critics of their own government on this measure - some 66% think they have not done enough to promote British values.

Demos also conducted qualitative research across Britain, France and Germany, which found many citizens of each country have been alienated by profound social, economic and cultural changes - and attracted towards nostalgic political messages as a result.

Demos's report warns that "the cost of mainstream politicians failing to respond to these developments may well be our societies becoming more exclusionary and less communal, underpinned by a more desperate, dangerous form of social competition - in short, the imperilling of our liberal democracies."

Yep the demographics and thoughts on the benefits of immigration differ from country to country. The left and young embrace it here, but apparently the rightwing backlash in Italy has been largely led by the young voter. Hard to imagine 600,000 (540,000 economic) migrants arriving over four years across the English channel as has been the case in Southern Italy from Libya and how that would affect your politics.

Meanwhile Japan still virtually bans settlement despite its demographic timebomb siting the failed European multicultural experiment. Careworkers on temporary visas only.

Edited May 30, 2018 by crashmonitor

[scottbeard]

12 minutes ago, spyguy said:

Oh it is.

Most migrants are low skilled.

They cannot earn enough in the legal UK economy and pay for their kids to go to school - 5k/head.

80%+ of the migrnts to the UK in the last 20 years depend entirely or mainly on benefits

Do you actually have any statistics to back this claim up?

It's easy to hear the word "migrant" and imagine refugees, or young east Europeans picking fruit or working in a bar.  But actually there are thousands of skilled migrants: I know of NHS workers from Australia, IT guys from India, plumbers and decorators from Poland....pretty much every day I'm interacting with people born outside the UK who have tons of skills I don't have.

There are unskilled migrants of course, but I'd be very surprised if over 80% of total inward migration to the UK over the last 20 years (probably about 5 million people) is people who depend mainly on benefits.

[debtlessmanc]

8 minutes ago, crashmonitor said:

Yep the demographics and thoughts on the benefits of immigration differ from country to country. The left and young embrace it here, but apparently the rightwing backlash in Italy has been largely led by the young voter. Hard to imagine 600,000 (540,000 economic) migrants arriving over four years across the English channel as has been the case in Southern Italy and how that would affect your politics.

Meanwhile Japan still virtually bans settlement despite its demographic timebomb siting the failed European multicultural experiment. Careworkers on temporary visas only.

But wont AI and Robotics start to reduce the effects of the democratic timebomb. As Japan is at the fore in this area, they may concentrate research on the care of the elderly first. Anybody who thinks that continuously expanding the population is a long term solution to shortage of materials and labour is a bit misguided in my opinion.  e.g,. London is on the UN's "at risk of water shortage" list now and if we had another drought like 76-77 things could get very difficult in the SE.

Edited May 30, 2018 by debtlessmanc

[Bruce Banner]

1997 was the game changer. 

From the moment Blair came to power things have been getting steadily worse.

I feel I'm in a minority here. Hands up anyone else who didn't vote for that clown.

[iamnumerate]

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

Or they stop gviing out benefits to migrants.

Stop benefitss esp. housign benefit for imiigrants, set an earnign thresholh - say 50k/single, 100k/family.

Poof! 90% of the UK's immigrants will go.

Start billing them for school and health care.

Very true.

[iamnumerate]

2 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

1997 was the game changer. 

From the moment Blair came to power things have been getting steadily worse.

I feel I'm in a minority here. Hands up anyone else who didn't vote for that clown.

+1, apart from technological changes internet etc which we would have under a different PM.

I was pleased when he won, now I think it was the worst thing to happen to the UK since World War II.

[Riedquat]

2 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

But wont AI and Robotics start to reduce the effects of the democratic timebomb. As Japan is at the fore in this area, they may concentrate research on the care of the elderly first. Anybody who thinks that continuously expanding the population is a long term solution to shortage of materials and labour is a bit misguided in my opinion.  e.g,. London is on the UN's "at risk of water shortage" list now and if we had another drought like 76-77 things could get very difficult in the SE.

The effects of the "timebomb" are largely social and economic (in that what drives the economy can divert from what people actually need) anyway. Even without technological advancements there'll still easily be enough people to do what needs doing, so  the only question is whether they'd rather do it or sit around and let robots do it instead. That would be the situation regardless. The challenge is how to get an economy that works for that, because the current one doesn't.

It's basic common sense that continually growing populations isn't the answer to anything, it's just a short term response with very bad long-term consequences.

[iamnumerate]

7 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

But wont AI and Robotics start to reduce the effects of the democratic timebomb. As Japan is at the fore in this area, they may concentrate research on the care of the elderly first. Anybody who thinks that continuously expanding the population is a long term solution to shortage of materials and labour is a bit misguided in my opinion.  e.g,. London is on the UN's "at risk of water shortage" list now and if we had another drought like 76-77 things could get very difficult in the SE.

I think  you are right, I can easily see Japanese built robots cleaning etc in care homes in 20 years time and the Japanese laughing us for importing unskilled labour rather than investing in technology.

[Riedquat]

3 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

1997 was the game changer. 

From the moment Blair came to power things have been getting steadily worse.

I feel I'm in a minority here. Hands up anyone else who didn't vote for that clown.

Nope, didn't vote for him. It was the first general election I could vote in but one thing hasn't changed - couldn't stomach the idea of doing anything to help any of them get in to power (can't remember who he was up against now mind you).

[Kosmin]

15 minutes ago, hurlerontheditch said:

as a migrant I can say that I am not low skilled and most of my migrant friends are also highly skilled

Skilled migrants are probably more likely to know other skilled migrants. Unskilled migrants are probably more likely to know other unskilled migrants.

The fact that most migrants you know are skilled doesn't tell us much about the migrant population as a whole. 

 

[GregBowman]

6 minutes ago, hurlerontheditch said:

as a migrant I can say that I am not low skilled and most of my migrant friends are also highly skilled

 

quite a generalisation there

the UK does not have a skilled native population. low education standards, celebrity instagram ambitions and a general lack of drive will mean migrants are always needed.

As a second generation son of a migrant and being bought up in North London in the 60'7 and 70's amongst my Asian, West Indian and fellow Eastern European ethnic groups. The migration since the mid 90's seems to be  80/20 unskilled versus skilled and/or ambitious in comparison to the waves of immigrants 1945 - 1970's. Glad to hear your highly skilled and of course many of us are highly skilled.

However including Lithuanians (my DNA)- the new wave seem coarser, ruder and less educated in many cases. In fact the new generation of Lithuanians   took the assets my Dad's generation had built up over 50's squabbled, and then corruptly destroyed the limited company that owned a house in Bayswater and a country estate in Hampshire. 

Sorry but many new wave immigrants have different values (not just to Brits) but to civilised behaviour - ask any policeman. I might have rose tinted specs re my Dad's generation but surely matched by yours re current migrants

However your last statement is so true! Long live the  lazy 3 generation on the Bennie Brit ?

[Riedquat]

2 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

I think  you are right, I can easily see Japanese built robots cleaning etc in care homes in 20 years time and the Japanese laughing us for importing unskilled labour rather than investing in technology.

Importing unskilled labour when there's lots of unskilled labour sitting around doing nothing here already, not for spending lots of time and effort developing very complicated machines to do things people are perfectly capable of doing. I find the latter laughable. You can rightly ask "well yes, but do you want to spend your life cleaning care homes?" Not every day, but I'd rather do that a couple of days a week than have no job, even if having no job carried no financial penalties. So just enough machines to make that viable I think.

Edited May 30, 2018 by Riedquat

[hurlerontheditch]

10 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

Do you actually have any statistics to back this claim up?

It's easy to hear the word "migrant" and imagine refugees, or young east Europeans picking fruit or working in a bar.  But actually there are thousands of skilled migrants: I know of NHS workers from Australia, IT guys from India, plumbers and decorators from Poland....pretty much every day I'm interacting with people born outside the UK who have tons of skills I don't have.

There are unskilled migrants of course, but I'd be very surprised if over 80% of total inward migration to the UK over the last 20 years (probably about 5 million people) is people who depend mainly on benefits.

exactly

 

it's an easy get out to blame migrants for stopping people getting what they think they deserve

[Bruce Banner]

2 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Nope, didn't vote for him. It was the first general election I could vote in but one thing hasn't changed - couldn't stomach the idea of doing anything to help any of them get in to power (can't remember who he was up against now mind you).

John Major.

[Riedquat]

1 minute ago, Bruce Banner said:

John Major.

Cheers, I'd assumed he'd stepped down by then but of course that was after losing. Major wasn't that bad a PM really. Being largely forgotten as a PM means not having p1ssed off half the country, and that's quite an achievement really.

[taderuk]

What's hilarious is there's a 50/50 split on the virtues of immigration but then a massive majority agree that immigration has created more division and less sense of community.

 

So how in God's name could you then answer in the same poll that immigration has been positive?

[hurlerontheditch]

4 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

John Major.

was it not William hague?

[spyguy]

12 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

Do you actually have any statistics to back this claim up?

It's easy to hear the word "migrant" and imagine refugees, or young east Europeans picking fruit or working in a bar.  But actually there are thousands of skilled migrants: I know of NHS workers from Australia, IT guys from India, plumbers and decorators from Poland....pretty much every day I'm interacting with people born outside the UK who have tons of skills I don't have.

There are unskilled migrants of course, but I'd be very surprised if over 80% of total inward migration to the UK over the last 20 years (probably about 5 million people) is people who depend mainly on benefits.

Sure.

https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/367

If these were single people, under 35,then there'd not be much problem.

The problem is they are not. Most migrants to the UK are families.

A family of 2 adults and kids needs to earning ~70k for the tax to pay for public services - mainly schooling and healthcare.

'18. Figure 14 shows that migrants from Eastern Europe (A10) have an income distribution very much biased towards the lower end of the income distribution of the UK-born population. Some 70% of people from these countries have earnings less than the median earnings of the UK-born, and nearly 90% less than an annualised £26,000. '

' 20. Earnings for people born in India match those for the UK-born very closely in the lower third of the income distribution but are then consistently higher. People born in Pakistan and Bangladesh tend to have very much lower earnings than the UK-born, with nearly 80% below the UK-born median '

A simple, colour/creed blind adjustment to UK mgration would demand a eanrignsto be maintained at 50k.

 

The UKs 'high skilled migrants' income is way too low - 26k.

And it needs to account for non working fmaily members.