State of the Market

[rocktronAMP]

So, you have no experience of Abu Dhabi, but have already managed to get all your prejudices out there.
"Attractive to Love Islanders or Lasses"
"Covering for someone who has determined the politics of the whole region is not worth it for them or their family"

Based on your personal prejudice, it's definitely not for you.
For those of us who have been to parts of the Middle East, or are open to new experiences, maybe its worth considering.
€8000 in your personal bank account is better than £0 in a company account waiting for an outside IR35 contract.

Oh, and your Inside/Outside numbers seem a bit off, but I realise people have various ways of employing family members, etc, so no one calculation is 100% reflective of everyone.
But throwing the numbers into Contractor Calculator:
Net income per month of £6,944
- To earn the same contracting, outside of IR35, you would need a rate of £673 per day
- To earn the same contracting, inside of IR35, you would need a rate of £796 per day

Neither of which is near the £515 you quoted

Sure. I have unconscious bias so does 99.9% of the global population. Your calculations are better. Cool.
What matters is, is this a good monthly rate for the professional skillset and the role for Abu Dhabi?
It is an opportunity for somebody who wants to take it. I agree.

If you'd like, I can pass on the recruiter?

[WTFH]

But all that means is we replace a generic European set of rules with our own set of rules, without the risk of being overridden by a non-UK judiciary. Since we wrote most of the original rules after WW2, we aren't about to step back into the dark ages, merely set our own parameters.

Unfortunately the loons that come out with the slogans are keen on “let’s leave this and do it ourselves”, but refuse to put details on the “do it ourselves”, or how it would be policed. The “risk” as you describe it is the “security”. If the UK judiciary system is no longer just, if fair trials are replaced by trial by media and the loudest voices or deepest pockets always win, then it’s good to have a fall-back, and not a reliance on “our own parameters”
It’s a bit like Patel’s argument for bringing back the death penalty as a deterrent. Sure, a few innocent people might die, but it would be worth it to deter others - that was her argument.

[malvolio]

Unfortunately the loons that come out with the slogans are keen on “let’s leave this and do it ourselves”, but refuse to put details on the “do it ourselves”, or how it would be policed. The “risk” as you describe it is the “security”. If the UK judiciary system is no longer just, if fair trials are replaced by trial by media and the loudest voices or deepest pockets always win, then it’s good to have a fall-back, and not a reliance on “our own parameters”
It’s a bit like Patel’s argument for bringing back the death penalty as a deterrent. Sure, a few innocent people might die, but it would be worth it to deter others - that was her argument.

Which ignores my salient argument. A home-legislated Human Rights Act, to replace the one foisted on us by Blair, ruled by our own judiciary and reflecting our values would not be inferior or more draconian than the one we have now. It should, however, allow us to decide where and how to apply it. A convicted criminal's child's fondness for chicken nuggets, to take an extreme example, is unlikely to be part of the decision tree.

Unless of course you prefer the UK to be ruled by unrealistic legalities decreed by unelected judges in a court based on Napoleonic Law?

[WTFH]

Which ignores my salient argument. A home-legislated Human Rights Act, to replace the one foisted on us by Blair, ruled by our own judiciary and reflecting our values would not be inferior or more draconian than the one we have now. It should, however, allow us to decide where and how to apply it. A convicted criminal's child's fondness for chicken nuggets, to take an extreme example, is unlikely to be part of the decision tree.

Unless of course you prefer the UK to be ruled by unrealistic legalities decreed by unelected judges in a court based on Napoleonic Law?

Can you tell me who this group referred to as "our" and "us" are? The argument you claim to be "salient" is about how "we take back control", where "we" is a term used by populist politicians to appeal to their followers, when what they tend to mean is "those running the party and the finance behind us".
You also mention that you don't want "unelected judges", that leads on to the simple question of "who elects the judges?" Are they elected by "the people", or by "the current government", or some other plan? How often do the judges get elected? Do they serve a fixed term, or is it until death?
Of course, your idea of having elections for the judicial system contradicts English law, where the judiciary are supposed to be independent.

[uk contractor]

Its not just IT jobs which are scarce.....Many of the IB's I used to work at are dumping MD's & other expensive front office staff like its going out of fashion! The sea change is rapid I think the entire job industry is constantly changing & evolving but no-one really knows where its heading or why its just a race to the bottom to contain costs & boost profits.

AI is not really a game changer at all its just another fad that will quickly become a background toolset as it can only successfully do what its human master tells it to do!

[TheDude]

AI is not really a game changer at all its just another fad that will quickly become a background toolset as it can only successfully do what its human master tells it to do!

AI is not yet up to the job but employers are in a state of hiring paralysis waiting to see what will happen.

[edison]

The AI bonanza/mania (delete as appropriate) just keeps carrying on.

All of the mega US Tech companies have recently reported better than expected earnings in the last week or two.

Morgan Stanley bank issued a research note saying that due to Trump's recent budget bill, Big Tech can accelerate the rate at which they write off infrastructure and R&D investment, in turn raising free cash flow. Amazon alone will benefit by $15B a year for the next few years.

Much of this extra cash will be diverted into even more AI investment. Big Tech also announced hundreds of billions of capex spending.

Not sure this will help many of the posters on here as very few of us seem to be in working in areas that will be directly be impacted by this.

There's no shortage of cash in big tech, only GPUs it seems!

[malvolio]

Can you tell me who this group referred to as "our" and "us" are? The argument you claim to be "salient" is about how "we take back control", where "we" is a term used by populist politicians to appeal to their followers, when what they tend to mean is "those running the party and the finance behind us".
You also mention that you don't want "unelected judges", that leads on to the simple question of "who elects the judges?" Are they elected by "the people", or by "the current government", or some other plan? How often do the judges get elected? Do they serve a fixed term, or is it until death?
Of course, your idea of having elections for the judicial system contradicts English law, where the judiciary are supposed to be independent.

Having lived in he UK for almost all the last 70-odd years, "us" is a fairly clear group, I would have thought. Ditto the values and behaviours that evolved over the centuries to encompass how the population of the UK like to live and be treated.

Similarly, the group calling itself the "EU", which is more properly Germany and France plus a gaggle of economic co-dependents (it's not coincidence that the Euro was set as 1 Mark initially) employs a discrete judiciary and legal system that feels it has the right to overrule any member country's legal framework and impose it's own interpretations and rules. And those rules are governed in turn by an unelected bureaucracy independent of the soi-disant Parliament that has very few real powers. Unlike ours.

If you can't easily distinguish between the two macro-entities, then perhaps you should not try arguing about their pros and cons...

But I'm not that bothered either way. I stick to my beliefs you stick to yours.

And where did I say I supported an elected judiciary? Stupid idea...

[WTFH]

Similarly, the group calling itself the "EU",... <snip>usual twaddle</snip>

If you can't easily distinguish between the two macro-entities, then perhaps you should not try arguing about their pros and cons...

If you can't distinguish between the EU and the ECHR, then perhaps you should not try arguing about their pros and cons.

And where did I say I supported an elected judiciary? Stupid idea...

It was here, where you felt that unelected judiciary is a bad thing.

Unless of course you prefer the UK to be ruled by unrealistic legalities decreed by unelected judges in a court based on Napoleonic Law?

[ensignia]

"State of the Market"

Expect better from a mod.