• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Challenge for the UKIP

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by sasguru View Post
    You don't raise it by making it harder for working women to have children
    ...and going further, found this from OECD;

    It is clear that labour market conditions do affect when people have children and how many they have. But this simple answer hides a dramatic change in the effect of labour markets on childbearing in the past 25 years. In the past, fertility rates were higher in those OECD countries where most women remained outside the paid labour market. Today, the reverse is the case: fertility rates are higher in those countries where women’s employment rates are higher. The type of work is also important. Birth rates are higher in countries where a larger share of women work part-time – suggesting that these jobs often provide women with an effective means to reconcile work and family responsibilities. For society as a whole, paid work and childbearing no longer substitute for each other. It remains true that women who have a paid job have fewer children than women who do not, but the extent to which this occurs has declined over time.
    So it seems they're saying the determinant is the proportion of women working, and their option to work part time. There's no mention of rights for pregnant workers here, and I think the most important thing in getting the birth rate up is probably to get as many women as possible into work; something that threatens to raise the cost and risk of employing women is unlikely to help with that
    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

    Comment


      Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post
      So why don´t the UKIP MEP´s bring this corruption to the attention of the European Parliament and propose a motion to have the relevant commissioner sacked, which is the main function of the European Parliament.
      Probably because they don't want to upset their own gravy train (and corruptness)
      Brexit is having a wee in the middle of the room at a house party because nobody is talking to you, and then complaining about the smell.

      Comment


        Originally posted by darmstadt View Post
        Probably because they don't want to upset their own gravy train (and corruptness)
        Or because they're all too pissed up in Brussels pubs to comprehend a word of what anyone's saying. More likely, their strategy is one of 'wrecking'; they want bad legislation to pass in the European parliament because that fuels the anger against the EU.
        And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

        Comment


          Originally posted by DodgyAgent View Post
          My goodness that's a hard one (said the actress to the bishop)

          I suggest you just type in the word corruption and EU into Google add in any of its functions (CAP, Fisheries) and Bobs your uncle.
          Did that (corruption EU CAP Fisheries) and there was nothing on the first page to show any corruption apart from the last entry which just happened to be from a UKIP (Devon) website) and the next entry is this thread...
          Brexit is having a wee in the middle of the room at a house party because nobody is talking to you, and then complaining about the smell.

          Comment


            Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
            ...and going further, found this from OECD;



            So it seems they're saying the determinant is the proportion of women working, and their option to work part time. There's no mention of rights for pregnant workers here, and I think the most important thing in getting the birth rate up is probably to get as many women as possible into work; something that threatens to raise the cost and risk of employing women is unlikely to help with that
            You're suffering from a severe logic failure: is it likely that improved rights for pregnant women will lead to more particiaption in the workforce? Of course - and the rise in working women is possibly due to those rights that have come in over the last 20-30 years.

            And your other logic failure is your rants about the French. You do know almost every study show that their productivity per worker is higher than Britain's and has been for decades? Since 2008, French growth has also been higher than Britain's in spite of the fact that they don't have their own currency to play with.
            You seem to assume that Britain belongs to the Northern Europe group of nations, but its behaviour is more on a par with the Southern: extremely high debt (the highest per capita in Europe, 3rd highest in the world), "wealth" based on housing bubble and excessive debt.
            Hard Brexit now!
            #prayfornodeal

            Comment


              Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post
              So why don´t the UKIP MEP´s bring this corruption to the attention of the European Parliament and propose a motion to have the relevant commissioner sacked, which is the main function of the European Parliament.
              EU Corruption - UK MEP Expose The EU Commission as Currupt To The Core - YouTube
              Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

              Comment


                Originally posted by sasguru View Post
                You're suffering from a severe logic failure: is it likely that improved rights for pregnant women will lead to more particiaption in the workforce?
                I don't think so; I think that rights for women with children have contributed, but even more rights migt have no effect at all, or even a detrimental effect if employers choose men instead of women.
                And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                Comment


                  Originally posted by sasguru View Post
                  You're suffering from a severe logic failure: is it likely that improved rights for pregnant women will lead to more particiaption in the workforce? Of course - and the rise in working women is possibly due to those rights that have come in over the last 20-30 years.

                  And your other logic failure is your rants about the French. You do know almost every study show that their productivity per worker is higher than Britain's and has been for decades? Since 2008, French growth has also been higher than Britain's in spite of the fact that they don't have their own currency to play with.
                  You seem to assume that Britain belongs to the Northern Europe group of nations, but its behaviour is more on a par with the Southern: extremely high debt (the highest per capita in Europe, 3rd highest in the world), "wealth" based on housing bubble and excessive debt.
                  I am entirely with Mitch on this one. The cost of supporting pregnant women for small businesses is crippling and a pox on UKIP for endorsing this legislation. It is not just the direct cost but a pregnant woman is invulnerable to ANY form of the mildest challenge to her work, discipline, behaviour.
                  Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

                  Comment


                    It´s basically a character assiassinations i.e. previous wrong doings, but what about actual
                    corruption?

                    ...and what about corruption in the UKIP.

                    Junius on UKIP: John West on Nigel Farage and UKIP corruption


                    That video of Nigel Farage is the pot calling the kettle black.
                    I'm alright Jack

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by darmstadt View Post
                      Did that (corruption EU CAP Fisheries) and there was nothing on the first page to show any corruption apart from the last entry which just happened to be from a UKIP (Devon) website) and the next entry is this thread...
                      You must have the EU's own censored version of Google

                      Try typing this in:

                      corruption administering common agricultural policy
                      Let us not forget EU open doors immigration benefits IT contractors more than anyone

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X