Right you lot - Let's Change The World - Take 2

fc123

wageslave wrote: »

Don't drink and post.

Take it from one who has woken up the next day completely mortified:o

I can't type after 2 glasses....so handy huh?:D

wageslave

fc123 wrote: »

I can't type after 2 glasses....so handy huh?:D

Lucky cow.

michaels

Soz C - not sure about this - yes their is a tradition of industrial jobs but I suspect the closure of the mines has really improved the health outcomes of the ex miners.

Similarly a lot of manufacturing jobs are boring, repetitive, dead-end jobs - I certainly wouldn't fancy the idea of stitching shoes every day for 45 years and no doubt either I would need to earn 5p per day or the shoes would have to sell for about 200 quid protected by tariffs from the imports that cost 20 quid in which case everyone in the country who wears shoes (which is pretty much everyone tbh) would be worse off.

carolt wrote: »

Or bringing more manufacturing home - that seems pretty win-win to me.

carolt

It wasn't my idea, actually, michaels - I was simply responding to this post above, which I thought made some goood points:

GingerSte wrote: »

A few serious suggestions, if I may...

Promote manufacturing in the UK. At the moment the top end manufacturing seems to be taking off again here, and this is good. Top end mechanical engineering in particular seems to be enjoying something of a renaissance, although this is not my particular field.

However this work doesn't suit everybody. We need to look again at mass manufacture. We were turning it round in the 90's, and the quality was rising, until the money men (and women) decided they could get a quicker return making their widgets in China. I know we'll never beat them on price, but I have heard a lot of anecdotal evidence recently that people are regretting outsourcing work to developing countries, as the quality has suffered. I freely admit, however, that this will be harder to achieve now that we've lost a lot of our knowledge in this area.

Having said this I don't want places to turn into one-company-towns, where there is one huge employer, and everybody either works for them or one of their suppliers. I come from Yorkshire, where whole towns were rendered unemployed by the closure of collieries.

I suppose I'm trying to say, we should not keep all our eggs in one basket. We've found out the hard way that we can't all be doctors and lawyers and accountants. We've also found out that you can't base your entire local economy on the local pit. There's got to be some happy medium out there. It would also be nice if we could make decisions based on a long-term outlook, rather than just going for the quick buck every time.

(P.S. If I've missed any cliches in the above, please do not hesitate to let me know. Thanks.)

fc123

carolt wrote: »

Or bringing more manufacturing home - that seems pretty win-win to me.

It just won't happen......the UK consumer has got used to goods costing a lot less as they are now manufactured with a very low labour rate and the extra margin has been gobbled by high costs to trade (ie; shop rents etc).

I have been doing costings this week and there is no way I can do the 'deal' made in UK...no way at all yet the mark up from my cost to retail price is huge...way bigger than the mark ups of 30 years ago.

The landowners win every time...Fed Harrisons book spelt it out well.

IveSeenTheLight

carolt wrote: »

Why reduce tax on petrol/diesel?

It would seem fairly obvious that reducing the burdon on transportation will help the economy to be able to transport their products.

IveSeenTheLight

carolt wrote: »

I think Hamish/Spartacus are best ignored - like naughty children when mum's having a serious conversation, who keep wanting to blow raspberries. It reminds me of my 3 year old's behaviour when I'm on the phone.

Cute, in his case, if slightly annoying. In his case, obviously, he is only 3, so it is to be expected, and I assume he'll grow out of it.

In Hamish's/Spartacus' case? Hmm.

Some little boys never do grow up.

Why not be positive carol?
Hamish has came up with many ideas that can be discussed.
Instead you choose to ignore.

Ignorance is not a vitue

treliac

Change the world? Change human nature. The world would be perfect if you could. But as it ain't possible.................. we're stuck where we are, much the same as where we've always been.

fedupfreda

carolt wrote: »

I liked your ideas, fc, esp the last one - I don't see the point in taxing people with one hand and giving it back in tax credits with the other. Far too little incentive too work, too little pride in work, too great an incentive to lie eg about being in a relationship, or worse still, to end a relationship, for financial reasons, far too much bureaucracy involved and paid for, far too much opportunity for fraud...I think the whole tax credits thing is loopy.

Make work pay enough - then no need to top it up or choose to stay on benefits. Reduce benefits back to a safety net level, except for those who GENUINELY CAN'T- not won't work.

Yep, hit nail on head there. Crazy situation. Makes no sense at all. How about the following:-

1) No tax for earnings under £20K (makes work pay).
2) Ban tax credits (No one will need them if they are earning a decent wage in the first place).
3) Wider sliding scale for tax. (Say under £20k - nothing. £20-£30k - 15%. £30k-£60k - 30% £60k-100k - 40%. 50% everything over that).
4) People to keep more of their savings/redundancy pay before losing entitlement to benefits (I think the cut off is £6k, which does not get you far these days. Especially if you are responsible for paying for your own house maintenance. IMO you should be able to keep £25k before benefits stopped)
5) Bigger inheritance tax (if granny has earned it, granny has the right to enjoy it - why do people feel they have a 'right' to an inheritance??)
6) Benefits to be paid on sliding scale according to the number of years stamps paid (carers would be covered by home responsibilities protection, which comes through child benefit and certain other carers benefits, I believe). If you have worked, and paid into the system, you should be entitled to get something back. If you haven't paid in, you're stuck with a minimum subsistence level - unless there is a case of a genuine disability.

Think that's about enough to be going on with

GingerSte

fc123 wrote: »

It just won't happen......the UK consumer has got used to goods costing a lot less as they are now manufactured with a very low labour rate and the extra margin has been gobbled by high costs to trade (ie; shop rents etc).

I have been doing costings this week and there is no way I can do the 'deal' made in UK...no way at all yet the mark up from my cost to retail price is huge...way bigger than the mark ups of 30 years ago.

The landowners win every time...Fed Harrisons book spelt it out well.

It will be very difficult to bring manufacturing back to the UK in great quantities. As well as the high cost of land, machinery and people over here, there is also the fact that we are losing the skills from this former workforce (if only we had taken a long-term view instead of going for the quck buck). But hopefully over time it will happen to some extent. As I said earlier things like maintaining high quality (even if not for high-end goods) will help in this regard, as will keeping rates fairly low (sorry guys).

There are two reasons I want to see manufacturing back. Firstly, it would help us bring money IN to the UK through exports, rather than the haemorrhage of money currently taking place. We can't go on losing money in the long term. The second is that there is a huge proportion of our workforce that is unsuitable for the service industries (doctors, lawyers, accountants as well as the receptionists, shop-workers, hairdressers). We can either let them fester on the dole for a few generations, costing us boat-loads of money in the process, or we can invest in proper jobs for these people (rather than sending them on useless course after useless course).

One example of the above. I would rather buy my shirts from a company I know that is based in Wakefield (where I used to live). These shirts may cost a few pounds more, but the quality is there, and I can be (fairly) sure that it isn't a sweatshop (based on it being in England, but that's another story). Those workers will pay taxes in the UK, and some of those taxes will end up paying for the structures I design (I'm a civil engineer). If I bought shirts made in China, India or wherever, then those taxes would go to their respective governments, and it is less likely that they would employ me to design bridges.

I have to admit that I'm surprised that shop rents remain so high. I would have thought that with internet shopping taking such a large (an increasing) market share, that there would be a strong downward pressure on rents. Instead I see Westfield buying and building shopping centres left, right and centre. I imagine that rents are being held up by high land/house prices overall, and rent reductions would only be in the long term.