On a lighter note, this is hilarious
The Daily Mash - SOUTHERNERS RELUCTANT TO EAT FRUIT PICKED BY NORTHERNERS
- 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!
Reply to: Let Northerners pick fruit
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Let Northerners pick fruit"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by shaunbhoy View PostYou are making the mistake of thinking the only two solutions lie at opposite ends of the scale. I would not fancy that much either, but nor am I happy with a state that panders too easily to a high proportion of the lame and lazy. The utopia we seek is somewhere in the midst of the two extremes. About high time we started heading back towards some kind of equilibrium.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Old Greg View PostWhich is back to my point about a police state. It was certainly the response in Latin America for much of the post-war period, but I don't fancy living in that kind of country.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shaunbhoy View PostWe've faced it before, we'll manage again. It will give the Army something to do when we pull out of Afghanistan anyway.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Old Greg View PostThen you risk Lord Hailsham's dilemma.
Originally posted by Old Greg View Post
And do you think Gordon took over from Tony in Ireland etc. etc.?
Yeuuuuurrghh!
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shaunbhoy View PostOf course you can. Introduce relative hunger. Works every time.
Nonsense. See my answer above. An empty belly trumps ideological posturing everytime.
Gordon took over from Tony.
HTH
And do you think Gordon took over from Tony in Ireland etc. etc.?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Old Greg View PostYou cannot eliminate relative unwillingness.
Of course you can. Introduce relative hunger. Works every time.
Originally posted by Old Greg View PostAnd you cannot have fewer unproductive people as they are needed to drive down wages.
Originally posted by Old Greg View PostWhy are there more unproductive people now than three years ago? Has there been an idleness pandemic?
HTH
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shaunbhoy View PostThis is the nub of things. Eliminate this issue and I can handle the rest.
Another factor in this scenario is that we have created an unfair safety net for too many people who have no moral entitlement to it. They are taking advantage of a glaring loophole that allows them to remain financially better off by NOT taking a job than they would be if they DID take it. At least the new HMG are attempting to plug this gap.
It may well be that "Full Employment" is an unfeasible target in a modern technological society. However, I would argue that we do not NEED it, as a great many people can support a very satisfactory lifestyle with only one partner working, or at least one of them working only part-time.
We need to look at ways to encourage jobsharing where possible, and spreading the wealth that way.
We also need less unproductive people than we currently have, and if we have to coerce some of them into voluntary work in return for state assistance, then so be it. I can live with that. We have an ageing population, chores like gardening and helping the elderly where possible ought to help foster a community spirit.
I have high hopes that we are, at last, moving in the right direction again.
Here's hoping.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Old Greg View PostIndividuals' unemployment (long-term, I mean) is usually the result of their relative incapacity, inflexibility or unwillingness, simply because the most able and willing will take those jobs that there are.
Another factor in this scenario is that we have created an unfair safety net for too many people who have no moral entitlement to it. They are taking advantage of a glaring loophole that allows them to remain financially better off by NOT taking a job than they would be if they DID take it. At least the new HMG are attempting to plug this gap.
It may well be that "Full Employment" is an unfeasible target in a modern technological society. However, I would argue that we do not NEED it, as a great many people can support a very satisfactory lifestyle with only one partner working, or at least one of them working only part-time.
We need to look at ways to encourage jobsharing where possible, and spreading the wealth that way.
We also need less unproductive people than we currently have, and if we have to coerce some of them into voluntary work in return for state assistance, then so be it. I can live with that. We have an ageing population, chores like gardening and helping the elderly where possible ought to help foster a community spirit.
I have high hopes that we are, at last, moving in the right direction again.
Here's hoping.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DodgyAgent View PostI think you will find that giving people benefits is more likely to create resentment than not giving benefits. It is amazing how resourceful people are when they have to feed themselves with no state handouts. Such resourcefulness should be nurtured by removing everyone from benefits. Paying benefits is of no use to anyone.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Old Greg View PostThen why was the big growth in unemployment and transfer of people onto IB in the '80s? I would suggest that the rationale was to make industry more efficient. Having done so, it created a pool of people on benefits, who have to be kept from rioting / revolting.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shaunbhoy View PostNice try. You are clearly bored today. The Government that created this "situation" was not one of my choosing, so I accept no part of the blame. Whilst we are on that issue though, I would say that those who ARE to blame are those foolish enough to believe that we must be, come what may, saddled with a large percentage of lazy people that have never been made to face up to their social responsibilities. That does not need to be the case, and has only come about due to the insufferably pious toleration of the champagne socialist classes, when we were foolish enough to hand them the reins of power.
The truth of the matter is that any society will always have a minority in need of help and support. The biggest issue in this country today is that those most in need of this help are being deprived of much of it due to a bloated underclass that have made it a career choice to milk a totally inept system for every penny they can.
The notion that able-bodied people of working age should be required to follow what work there is and be as flexible as possible is entirely fair, and is a concept as old as the hills. And we might succeed in achieving that veritable nirvana if a few less of the Kismet-obsessed woolyheads stopped piping up with ludicrous notions of one's lot in life being hamstrung entirely by luck. The harder you work, the luckier you get.
To test this thesis, consider whether when unemployment rises by 1,000,000, this is because employers' have shed jobs or because workers have become idle.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Old Greg View PostHey Dodgy, love your signature!
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: