Nick Griffin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 28206
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The employement market is so skewed in favour of the employer it's gone beyond a joke.

A high wage/high cost economy is soon to become a low wage/high cost economy. People are rapidly running out of room to manouvre and hope.

Throw in a complete reluctance from the private sector to spend and a government reluctant public money on almost any type of stimulus and it worries me.

That said I think we'll soon see a big conservative push to stimulate the housing market and a psuedo attack on energy and oil companies to ensure they get back in.

Again, you are WAY off the mark.
The main reason we have high unemployment, especially among low skill workers is the minimum wage law.

The government makes it ILLEGAL to employ anyone for less than NMW. That means that if your productivity is not worth the NMW, an employer isn't going to employ you. That's just common sense. Employers don't have a duty to employ people; they have a duty to make money.

If your productivity is only worth £5ph then you have been priced out of work.

It IS to do with productivity, it's got nothing to do with "fairness".
 
Sorry, you guys are way off the mark on immigrants.

They get the jobs because they are more willing and able to work, and that's because our State welfare system makes it perfectly comfortable not to work, and pays people not to work.

Thank God for the immigrants, I say, otherwise without them there would be lots of unfilled lower skill jobs that the natives think is beneath them.

Mate I'm certainly with you in much of that . Airports are a great example , a large proportion of airport bar staff are 'immigrants'. The main reason is that they start work at 4 ish and when English born applicants find that out in many cases they frankly aren't interested.
 
images
 
Again, you are WAY off the mark.
The main reason we have high unemployment, especially among low skill workers is the minimum wage law.

The government makes it ILLEGAL to employ anyone for less than NMW. That means that if your productivity is not worth the NMW, an employer isn't going to employ you. That's just common sense. Employers don't have a duty to employ people; they have a duty to make money.

If your productivity is only worth £5ph then you have been priced out of work.

It IS to do with productivity, it's got nothing to do with "fairness".

And what's the reason we have the minimum wage my learned friend?

Also knowing what an employee costs an employer in a legitimate role, I would argue thats a far bigger factor than the NMW. Judging by 66-1 for retail. I'd say it's highly unlikely that once these people get the jobs they will sit around drinking tea.

There's a myth that the British are lazy that you seem to have readily bought into. Our car manufacturing is rated as the most productive in Europe. We have built one of the greatest countries on earth through our industry.

Our society has developed far beyond people earning £3ph and being took advantage of by unscrouplulous individuals. We have health & safety laws, unions and minimum wage to stop people being taken advantage of.

Immigrants will accept work without this in a lot of cases because the quality of life they are accustomed to is one far below that of what our government, elected by it's people, deems the minimum neccessary for our people. These have come about through people fighting for workers rights and a decent standard of living for all our citizens. If an employer canno9t run a profitbable business within the confines our our laws they have no place setting one up. £6p/h or 10-12k pa is hardly top wages.

Eventually the countries of the immigrants will also develop these if they are governed fairly and properly. The fact that they are willing to undermine our countries values is clearly now a massive issue for our nationals. That said it's not thier fault, it's ours that we allow it.
 
That's what I was saying before mate , it was an unsustainable economic policy based on financial slight of hand , massive rearmament and as you say in simplistic terms building roads. These magnificent financial policies without German expansionism would almat certainly been unsustainable in the long term.

Which is...

I edited my post a minute before you posted that mate ;) Yeah the 40s were a different story entirely - everything went t*ts up - but the way he rebuilt that economy in 1930's was just astonishing, it really was. It might sound crazy but if he hasn't been such a lunatic and had simply balanced the books and revised his economic policy in times of strength and peace (instead of going all Hitler on us xD) then he would have went down as one of the greatest leaders Germany ever had.

... what I said ;)

The position Germany were in at the time enabled them to use rearmament as a tool to boost economic growth, and if they had reached a plateau and then adopted more sensible economic growth and stability plans at that point then it would have been a superb strategy.

Rearmament was a solid plan for them for the short term and needed to be done. Even the taking back of the Rhineland, which they had a right to really, couldn't have been achieved without it and the notion of creating a permanently subservient Germany after the treaty of Versaille was not sustainable.
 
And what's the reason we have the minimum wage my learned friend?

Also knowing what an employee costs an employer in a legitimate role, I would argue thats a far bigger factor than the NMW. Judging by 66-1 for retail. I'd say it's highly unlikely that once these people get the jobs they will sit around drinking tea.

There's a myth that the British are lazy that you seem to have readily bought into. Our car manufacturing is rated as the most productive in Europe. We have built one of the greatest countries on earth through our industry.

Our society has developed far beyond people earning £3ph and being took advantage of by unscrouplulous individuals. We have health & safety laws, unions and minimum wage to stop people being taken advantage of.

Immigrants will accept work without this in a lot of cases because the quality of life they are accustomed to is one far below that of what our government, elected by it's people, deems the minimum neccessary for our people. These have come about through people fighting for workers rights and a decent standard of living for all our citizens. If an employer canno9t run a profitbable business within the confines our our laws they have no place setting one up. £6p/h or 10-12k pa is hardly top wages.

Eventually the countries of the immigrants will also develop these if they are governed fairly and properly. The fact that they are willing to undermine our countries values is clearly now a massive issue for our nationals. That said it's not thier fault, it's ours that we allow it.


You can talk about the politics all you want, but the laws of economics says that if you tax something you will have less of it and if you subsidize something you will have more of it. We tax employment by setting an artificial price floor on the cost of labour, and likewise we subsidize unemployment by paying people not to work.

No politician will admit to this but it is ABC economics.

If the minimum wage is such a good idea, why don't we make it £100 per hour?
 
Sorry, you guys are way off the mark on immigrants.

They get the jobs because they are more willing and able to work, and that's because our State welfare system makes it perfectly comfortable not to work, and pays people not to work.

Thank God for the immigrants, I say, otherwise without them there would be lots of unfilled lower skill jobs that the natives think is beneath them.

Do you read the daily mail?
 
You can talk about the politics all you want, but the laws of economics says that if you tax something you will have less of it and if you subsidize something you will have more of it. We tax employment by setting an artificial price floor on the cost of labour, and likewise we subsidize unemployment by paying people not to work.

No politician will admit to this but it is ABC economics.

If the minimum wage is such a good idea, why don't we make it £100 per hour?

The laws of economics do not take precedent over the laws of the land. This country and it's people do not exist purely to serve business. Our economy is one part of the fabric of society. Another is how we treat our citizens.

Exploitation of people has, for british nationals at least, gone out the window. If we do away with it I assume you would be happy to see people earning £1p/h and working 60-70 hours per week to make ends meet.

I agree that our benefits system has skewed attitudes towards working life and changes need to be made, these changes don't need to be at the expense of the most vulnerable members of society.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top