Originally posted by DodgyAgent
View Post
I believe you can judge a countries direction by how it tries to minimise this by giving mobility and opportunity.
This is my problem with the UK and US governments current tact - to judge everything by GDP.
I also believe that what makes perfect "business sense" from a GDP perspective doesn't always translate to whats best for the population - or best long term benefit.
For me, saying our industry was so inneffective that we may as well source from overseas cos its cheaper (at the time) is niave. We are now pretty much held to ransom on Coal and Gas , Shipping etc etc - but its not that cost that gets me - its the cost to these towns and cities (yup, mostly in the industrialised north) that 3 or 4 generations of ZERO chance of a job outside of retail and call centres (and there are not enough of them).
Newcastle Upon Tyne for example, is vibrant for a Northern City, yet over 3000 people apply for a single traffic wardens job.
For me, all we are doing is concentrating purely on economic output, saying that creates wealth and jobs - but for who? Those lucky enough to be born or have the mobility to work in the South East?
I understand this is a very 1 sided view, I'm trying to be extreme to get this point across.
Just how much have we spent extra on NHS, Police, Education etc to counter a culture where grandad lost his job he got at 15, illiterate and is sore and angry - then brought up kids who themselves get sore and angry at the lack of opportunity - who then have kids whilst kids.
GDP is not everything - the "average" standard of living is what counts. Right now we have more people below the poverty line than ever and it costs a lot of moolah to maintain this.
But, I also understand I'm a northerner and the right can just blame us all as workshy fops who can't be arsed to move.. Just what would society be like if everyone moved to the South East ? We'd soon see that employment and opportunity isnt quite as good as people think.
If we want to cut the benefit bill I believe we have to present accessible opportunties for manual labourers and the "non office" educated. Running things like manufacturing at a loss, or break even is better than no job at all and 20 years of benefits.
I fully back the idea of totally removing benefits from people who refuse to work though. If an opportunity comes up for a long term unemployed person I would back removal of benefits on lack of application.


Leave a comment: