There's even a new law targeted towards people perceived as being "lazy" that will make them work for free. WTF.
Anyone in the UK on this forum that has any intel on this?
Anyone in the UK on this forum that has any intel on this?
Quote: (01-28-2012 11:51 PM)misterstir Wrote:
I have a very good friend in the UK, and even his grandfather who was white english was poor and there was a general lack of jobs there. You can try to blame immigrants, but its not immigrants fault there are no jobs, its globalizations fault and there were not many jobs in england back in the day anyways. In the 1930s anyone in the british empire could move freely throughout it. So a black person from Nigeria could move to England, but most didn't because there were no jobs until the economy picked up in the 60s there. It was really just a flash in the pan, they had a good economy for 30-40 years and now its ruined for all but the rich.
Sure there is a benefit culture and general laziness and people not wanting to work. But in a way I can see why, they jobs suck, are low paying slave labourer jobs and for many people they'd rather just stay home than do a shit job that pays shit money. Can't blame immigrants for doing the shit jobs no one else wants to do.
The benefits are what keep the rich rich. Thats right, end welfare, and then those poor welfare people will protest in the streets and rob the rich people store and overthrow the government. So the welfare is not there to help the poor, it is there to protect the rich. In times gone by, the rich would enter into regular wars to keep the poor away from home. I mean if you shut down the US army for a decade, you'd have millions of angry young men with no jobs, no skills and are good with guns, aggression and killing, a revolution would likely occur.
Quote: (01-29-2012 06:31 AM)MSW2007 Wrote:
There's also a lack of youthful employment here in the United States. Jobs which would normally be open to high school youths, such as cashiering jobs, restaurant gigs, and lawn work, are often dominated by cheap, under-the-table Hispanic labor.
Quote: (01-29-2012 10:03 PM)misterstir Wrote:
Sure prices would go up if we end globalization but when I think of who had it better, me or my parents in 1960 who could work their way from the mailroom of goldman sachs or some other company to the top, compared to today, where a MBA in finance from a top school might not even get you a branch manager job.
Quote: (01-29-2012 10:03 PM)misterstir Wrote:
All I know is jobs where just easier to get before they were all in China.
Quote: (01-29-2012 10:56 PM)kosko Wrote:
In regards to welfare. you do need certain social protections. Your population needs to be healthy and smart, healthcare and education need to be accessible and free or low cost. You need energy to run your economy so that also should be managed carefully, and nobody should go hungry.
Quote: (01-29-2012 11:16 PM)P Dog Wrote:
FYI What you've described is Social Democracy, which is the aim of most center left political parties in the world including the Democratic Party.
Quote: (01-30-2012 12:22 AM)kosko Wrote:
Quote: (01-29-2012 11:16 PM)P Dog Wrote:
FYI What you've described is Social Democracy, which is the aim of most center left political parties in the world including the Democratic Party.
Like Sweden?!!!?
I hope this isn't the case. I would not call myself a social democrat I would be more of a libertarian with a for society at large. A thin layer of protections is all you need, with no freebies for corps and no freebies on power for Govt either. I feel you have to take care of the tree to make sure the fruit is good.
Quote: (01-29-2012 11:16 PM)P Dog Wrote:I know unemployed mbas in toronto, can't get a branch manager job at a bank, they are competing with lots of other grads, everyone comes here and applies to the same jobs. People take courses in far off universities with no jobs near by and all come down to toronto. Can't speak for America though.
Quote: (01-29-2012 10:03 PM)misterstir Wrote:
Sure prices would go up if we end globalization but when I think of who had it better, me or my parents in 1960 who could work their way from the mailroom of goldman sachs or some other company to the top, compared to today, where a MBA in finance from a top school might not even get you a branch manager job.
If you actually believe the bold part, your either insane or your definition of a "top school" is retarded.
Quote: (01-29-2012 10:03 PM)misterstir Wrote:
All I know is jobs where just easier to get before they were all in China.
Yeah, manufacturing jobs. The make up of the economy changes dude. There was once a time when the average American was a farmer and then a factory worker. Today it's moving towards the Service sector. The only way to keep manufacturing alive in America is heavy subsidies and tarriffs, which as a "conservative" I think you'd be pretty opposed to. Protectionism destroys industry by making them inefficient. The same logic you used to oppose the Welfare State is the same logic to argue in favour of outsourcing manufacturing to China. To keep manufacturing going in America, you'd basically have to put the entire industry on "welfare" so to speak.
Unless you're only a social conservative and not a free market conservative, you should've already known that.
Quote: (01-29-2012 10:56 PM)kosko Wrote:
In regards to welfare. you do need certain social protections. Your population needs to be healthy and smart, healthcare and education need to be accessible and free or low cost. You need energy to run your economy so that also should be managed carefully, and nobody should go hungry.
FYI What you've described is Social Democracy, which is the aim of most center left political parties in the world including the Democratic Party.
Quote: (01-29-2012 11:16 PM)P Dog Wrote:
Today it's moving towards the Service sector. The only way to keep manufacturing alive in America is heavy subsidies and tarriffs, which as a "conservative" I think you'd be pretty opposed to.
Quote:Quote:
Protectionism destroys industry by making them inefficient. The same logic you used to oppose the Welfare State is the same logic to argue in favour of outsourcing manufacturing to China. To keep manufacturing going in America, you'd basically have to put the entire industry on "welfare" so to speak.
Quote: (01-31-2012 01:15 AM)P Dog Wrote:
China doesn't manipulate it's currency, it keeps a currency peg. The same is true for many countries.
Quote: (01-31-2012 01:23 AM)T and A Man Wrote:
Quote: (01-31-2012 01:15 AM)P Dog Wrote:
China doesn't manipulate it's currency, it keeps a currency peg. The same is true for many countries.
A peg is a government policy, or intervention. If it is an arbitrary outcome, and not a determinant of market forces, how is that not manipulation by the chinese government?
Quote: (01-31-2012 01:26 AM)P Dog Wrote:
Quote: (01-31-2012 01:23 AM)T and A Man Wrote:
Quote: (01-31-2012 01:15 AM)P Dog Wrote:
China doesn't manipulate it's currency, it keeps a currency peg. The same is true for many countries.
A peg is a government policy, or intervention. If it is an arbitrary outcome, and not a determinant of market forces, how is that not manipulation by the chinese government?
It's insidious, but currency pegs are common. No one complains when a host of other countries do the same thing. They only get pissed about China because it allows them to make its exports cheap.
Quote: (01-31-2012 01:22 AM)P Dog Wrote:
Your use of Japan and Germany is spot on. Hence why I wrote America needs to play to its strengths.
China vs. America = China wins manufacturing wise. Right now China is trying to keep itself from losing all it's manufacturing to Vietnam and Cambodia. It will happen eventually, the infrastructure in the South East hasn't caught up yet, but it will. The days of American manufacturing are long since over.
Quote: (01-31-2012 02:25 AM)misterstir Wrote:
But the German and Japanese who copied America are better manufacturers and that is there strength?