|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On February 15 2017 22:08 bardtown wrote:
It is not 'completely irrelevant' just because it doesn't fit with your bias, and the increase is from the same period the previous year so your odd comment about bonuses is, actually, completely irrelevant.
My bias? lol.
If Bonuses icreased from last year then so would total wages. Learn basic math please.
If directors get a pay increase yet basic workers do not, the average (depending on the ratio of icrease) will go up but not benefit the gross majority of people. Again math.
Just keep on with your blind faith in an unelected leader who models herself on the worst aspects of the witch thatcher. I'm sure your farming industries will do great with US-style regulation. I'm sure all the other major international financial hubs of the world will allow London to take their market share. Yes yes. Seems like the Irish are going to get som revenge, taking a lot of the HQs from London and with "no hard border" will have access to both markets.
|
If you want to look at median values then go and find them. It may be that they have fallen in real terms - inequality has been increasing for a long time - but these figures make it unlikely. Also note that inequality has been increasing for years. Long before there was a conservative administration. Again: how are you going to address this when open borders give employers no incentive to increase wages for the working class? Tax the rich so they leave and the entire country becomes poorer but relatively more equal, I suppose.
|
On February 15 2017 22:08 bardtown wrote:It is not 'completely irrelevant' just because it doesn't fit with your bias, and the increase is from the same period the previous year so your odd comment about bonuses is, actually, completely irrelevant. Show nested quote +On February 15 2017 22:01 Oshuy wrote:On February 15 2017 21:06 bardtown wrote:On February 15 2017 21:03 Gorsameth wrote:On February 15 2017 20:57 bardtown wrote:So: Wages grew 2.6% in the three months to December, faster than the rate of inflation, figures show."The UK labour market continues to confound the doom-mongers with its resilience to the Brexit shock," he said. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38979582Record high for employment and low for unemployment. However: Anyone have suggestions for the cause of this? Outcompeting of the UK labour market by the (obviously much larger and diversified) global labour market? It strikes me time and again that the only way socialists could possibly achieve their goals would be outside the EU. Without stricter immigration controls it seems clear that the standard of living for the working class will continue to diverge from the middle class as there will be absolutely no reason to train/recruit natives. Although this graph shows the increase is almost entirely from outside the EU (probably partly a Brexit effect), so more control is needed across the board. Funny how the graph talks about EU members working in the UK but the twitter talks about UK natives... Yeah, the graph is confusing me. Doesn't seem to fit with what he's saying. Think that is just a mistake by him... (Edit: as you say, it's just the second part of his statement. EU employment dips in Q4 2016 but is still higher than Q4 2015). But the figures are in the ONS report: If you look at the ONS report itself: www.ons.gov.ukThe comment is not linked to a specific graph. It is made after graph 6a (non-UK nationals working in the UK) and before 6b (non-UK born people working in the UK) and can be verified on neither of them. Data contains: UK nationals working in the UK increased by 70,000 to 28.44 million
non-UK nationals working in the UK increased by 233,000 to 3.48 million and UK born people working in the UK decreased by 120,000 to 26.37 million
non-UK born people working in the UK increased by 431,000 to 5.54 million and non-UK nationals from the EU working in the UK increased by 190,000 to 2.24 million
non-UK nationals from outside the EU working in the UK increased by 42,000 to 1.24 million So ... - out of 5.54 million non-UK born people working, 2.9 million were UK nationals born abroad - in the 233 000 non-UK nationals increase, 190 000 were from EU, 42 000 from outside EU - the 70 000 increase for UK nationals contains the decrease of 120 000 for UK born people working in the UK and an increase of ~198 000 (431 000 - 233 000) for UK nationals born abroad. (or something like that) Thanks for looking it up. That makes the data more encouraging, if anything. Also makes the importance of EU immigration seem much higher, if the majority of non-EU immigration actually consists of non-UK born UK nationals.
I found this but it's from 2015:
Immigrants do not account for a majority of new jobs. The immigrant share in new jobs is – and always has been – broadly the same as the share of immigrants in the working age population.
There is still no evidence of an overall negative impact of immigration on jobs, wages, housing or the crowding out of public services. Any negative impacts on wages of less skilled groups are small. One of the largest impacts of immigration seems to be on public perceptions.
So I doubt it's due to immigration.
cep.lse.ac.uk
Low wage growth is easily explained by the low inflation environment and the abysmal growth of productivity of the UK. An increase in immigrants doesn't automatically put downward pressure on wages since it'll also affect demand.
|
UK research suggests that immigration has a small impact on average wages of existing workers but more significant effects along the wage distribution: low-wage workers lose while medium and high-paid workers gain.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-labour-market-effects-of-immigration/
They would ideally return findings so that the influx of unskilled labour can be plotted against wage growth of the poorest natives, because skilled immigration is really a separate topic to free movement. Low wage growth is also somewhat separate from inequality.
|
On February 15 2017 23:01 bardtown wrote:
If you want to look at median values then go and find them. It may be that they have fallen in real terms - inequality has been increasing for a long time - but these figures make it unlikely. Also note that inequality has been increasing for years. Long before there was a conservative administration. Again: how are you going to address this when open borders give employers no incentive to increase wages for the working class? Tax the rich so they leave and the entire country becomes poorer but relatively more equal, I suppose.
This is the Brexit 350million/week bus all over again. If you can't prove it's not true than it must be true!
http://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/global-europe-secures-trade-deal-canada-uk-gets-shut/15/02/ Oh look my native country seems to think that a deal with the largest economy in the world is more important than a lonely once upon a time empiric island. What a surprise.
|
Apparently you just learnt about CETA? Also, largest economy in the world  . Next you'll be telling me you won the Olympics by fielding 28x more athletes than the other participants. Even if it wasn't 28 different economies, the US already has a larger economy than the EU, and when the UK leaves it will be significantly larger.
|
On February 16 2017 00:46 bardtown wrote:Apparently you just learnt about CETA? Also, largest economy in the world . Next you'll be telling me you won the Olympics by fielding 28x more athletes than the other participants. Even if it wasn't 28 different economies, the US already has a larger economy than the EU, and when the UK leaves it will be significantly larger.
The CETA does not necessarilly incorporate the US either. That's TTIP. zzzz
Basic addition of EU countries GDP will get you a different result.
For the record I don't even like CETA, but since all you care about is the economy..
|
As usual you make no sense. The article you just posted is about CETA. I know that CETA has nothing to do with the US. That is exactly my point. It's not a trade deal with the largest economy because it's not a trade deal with the US.
|
The EU is the larges economy he mentions in his post.
I had to read it twice because its strangely written, but its 100% clear if you read the article.
|
I know that. But the EU is not the largest economy.
1 United States 18,561,930
— European Union[n 1][19] 17,110,523
Now subtract ~2.5 trillion for Brexit.
|
I don't know why the guy called it biggest, felt strange (he mentions population but... china/india), the whole angle felt strange.
But i do agree with the gist of it. When the UK will deal with Canada (or anyone else) its position is MUCH weaker.
|
|
|
He made a mistake, so I called him on it. That's all.
Of course the EU is larger than the UK. Still, the UK is sufficiently large to warrant signing trade deals with, and they can be tailored more effectively between two single countries. A deal with Canada will surely happen, even if it has to wait until the feminist in chief is gone. One of the conservative leadership candidates has gone full CANZUK, although I don't know enough about Canadian politics to say if he has a chance of winning. At any rate, there are many other countries interested in the meantime and the UK is also prioritising the big economies, obviously.
|
Point awarded to you in crazy imagination bardtown land. Congratulations. Most of the biggest economies barely want anything to do with you. India for example wants free movement of people for an open trade deal (sound familiar?). Canada says you're back of the queue. The orange buffoon is chummy with farage so has randomly promised a pile of horseshit without understanding anything he's saying. China and Russia will continue to attempt to buy up half of London. Maybe South Africa has become corrupt enough for T. May to give them a go?
The last conservative leader of Canada was a train wreck, I can't imagine them to be that stupid. Especially given the recent populist opportunistic candidate of their Southern neighbour, they should be wary but who knows.
|
Just give it time and watch all your predictions be proved wrong. Again.
|
What predictions would you be assuming would be proved wrong?
What prediction of his has been proved wrong?
And finally, why has none of your predictions come to pass?
At this point, you aren't talking with, or even at him. You are just talking.
|
My goal is to get him to stop talking to me, because he ignores everything I say anyway. Feel free to do the same, as you are equally guilty.
|
Then you are really bad at achieving your goal. Just stop talking to him, and eventually he will stop talking to you. As long as you are talking to him, he will also talk to you.
|
On February 16 2017 06:32 Simberto wrote:
Then you are really bad at achieving your goal. Just stop talking to him, and eventually he will stop talking to you. As long as you are talking to him, he will also talk to you.
I have to agree.
In fact, if you look at the hundred pages or so, you could assume that bardtown's only goal is to keep mythical talking him as much as possible.
|
Classic case of both parties wanting to get the last word in, because they think it makes them "win".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
