We all pay your benefits

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

Well yes and no.

If the price of labour rises then the businesses will try to introduce better processes to improve efficiency.

So more output for less input.

Businesses that fail to adapt will decline or go out of business.

With the WTC there is less incentive to improve productivity as it is the tax payer that is picking up part of the cost of production.

So better to reduce labour subsidy and allow the market to work its magic.

Presumably there are a number of NMW jobs that are by their nature labour/person intensive where the ability to streamline process is limited.

CLAPTON

rabbit_burrow wrote: »

Certainly. Here are a few to start you off with. Feel free to browse around. Quite a lot of listings are for students only at the moment (which isn't surprising with all the new student developments around here now, the private landlords are struggling a bit it seems)

http://thisis.zoopla.co.uk/to-rent/details/29726019?search_identifier=373e57f72dcb6de0ea74c353b6e18d7b
http://www.expertagent.co.uk/EstateAgentSoftware/EstateAgencyProperties.aspx?pid=80b51896-bab9-4b6d-afbc-153fb3a68322&aid={34A7169B-5167-4447-887F-17101D1295D3}
http://content.zoopla.co.uk/5e321b41637eeab1bcc0e44a003130e1d270f3ea.pdf - another favourite of mine, where they reword the "no DSS" spiel by saying "professionals" instead.
http://thisis.zoopla.co.uk/to-rent/details/29550250?search_identifier=1d317163b9177e9654ce7cd0e305d86c - this one adds "no smoking" to the list (understandable)
http://thisis.zoopla.co.uk/to-rent/details/18722710?search_identifier=1d317163b9177e9654ce7cd0e305d86c - changes the word DSS to "lha"
http://www.kirkhamgould.com/propertydet.asp?id=EX43ET&propind=L
http://thisis.zoopla.co.uk/to-rent/details/28879493?search_identifier=1d317163b9177e9654ce7cd0e305d86c - "ideal for professionals only"
http://thisis.zoopla.co.uk/to-rent/details/29074802?search_identifier=1d317163b9177e9654ce7cd0e305d86c

I could continue.

The ones in the paper that are placed by the landlords themselves, I do not have links to I'm afraid, but I'm sure you get the idea.

With regards to the amount of HB being paid (where is the link?) - there will of course be local authority & housing association homes that will be paid by HB (usually the statistics will show the proportion), which would contribute to the figure. Some claimants will also be in private accomodation, there will be those who obtained their private tenancy whilst working, but then found themselves redundant and claiming HB (the agency/landlord wouldn't know as HB is paid to the tenant), and those who were lucky enough to find a private tenancy whilst claiming HB.

interesting

I put Exeter into the website and looked at the first ten properties

50% said no DSS

I tried the same with 'Manchester' and there only 1 in 10 said no DSS

Maybe reflects the type of neighbourhood and the relative ease of letting property

CLAPTON

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Presumably there are a number of NMW jobs that are by their nature labour/person intensive where the ability to streamline process is limited.

what's your guess ?

of the number of NMW jobs, what percentage are incapable of being streamlined in some way or other?

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

what's your guess ?

of the number of NMW jobs, what percentage are incapable of being streamlined in some way or other?

In direct service roles very few without screwing, well service to unacceptable levels. The fact they are NMW jobs suggests they have already been stripped down to a low denominator.

If we improve efficiency then that usually involves some form of capital investment which needs to show benefits to pay for it. That is often a reduction in the workforce cost.

Greta er efficiency may lead you to produce more for less, fine if there is an ever growing market otherwise someone else will lose resulting in unemployment.

Do you believe there is lots of scope to streamline at this level if so in how? Perhaps you simply mean rationalisation?

CLAPTON

grizzly1911 wrote: »

In direct service roles very few without screwing, well service to unacceptable levels. The fact they are NMW jobs suggests they have already been stripped down to a low denominator.

If we improve efficiency then that usually involves some form of capital investment which needs to show benefits to pay for it. That is often a reduction in the workforce cost.

Greta er efficiency may lead you to produce more for less, fine if there is an ever growing market otherwise someone else will lose resulting in unemployment.

Do you believe there is lots of scope to streamline at this level if so in how? Perhaps you simply mean rationalisation?

you must long for the days when most worked on the land and dreaded the invention of tractos, plows, drilling machine as that would lead to about 85% of the population being unemployed...

it didn't turn out like that

rabbit_burrow

CLAPTON wrote: »

you must long for the days when most worked on the land and dreaded the invention of trackers, plows, drilling machine as that would lead to about 85% of the population being unemployed...

it didn't turn out like that

You're right there, however, things like tractors etc would have been a necessity for a growing population. Nowadays, streamlining is done as a profit-boosting exercise. I've seen, over the last several years, the company I work for streamline quite a few processes & thus not replace the workers once they decide to leave.

Whilst there are some machines that are there to help mass-produce products in a shorter space of time than manual labour, with a growing population something has to give.

I am all for progression - I am always looking at ways to maximise my own profits both personal & business, but surely I am not the only person who sees some sort of link with the large companies' booming profits & the increasing number of unemployment?

CLAPTON

rabbit_burrow wrote: »

You're right there, however, things like tractors etc would have been a necessity for a growing population. Nowadays, streamlining is done as a profit-boosting exercise. I've seen, over the last several years, the company I work for streamline quite a few processes & thus not replace the workers once they decide to leave.

Whilst there are some machines that are there to help mass-produce products in a shorter space of time than manual labour, with a growing population something has to give.

I am all for progression - I am always looking at ways to maximise my own profits both personal & business, but surely I am not the only person who sees some sort of link with the large companies' booming profits & the increasing number of unemployment?

I'm sure when farmers introduced tractors they were not motivated by concern for the world increasing population.

I'm sure then manufacturers invented / improved farming equipment they were not concerned about the increasing world population.

They were concerned about making EVIL profits and by doing so they have saved the world from starvation.

It's by improving things and 'streamlining ' processes that gives us all our fantastic standard of living.

You are not the only person that laments anyone being made redundant; I'm sure many would like all the miners and steel workers back but without progress (which does temporally mean redundancies) we all become poorer.


Employment is increasing.

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

it didn't turn out like that

Didn't it.

I am not quite sure how you speed up a carer wiping someone bum or cleaning and refreshing the bed please tell.

Automation and computers were our saviour we would all be working 4 day weeks and and live in milk and honey.

Gone are the days when a mechanic could fix my car without plugging it into a computer and charging me £35 a time minimum for the privilege.

Indeed large scale agri businesses have given greater productivity in the past.

I am just interested in how we move forward. Where these large scale employment opportunities are going to derived from at ever lower wages..

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

They were concerned about making EVIL profits and by doing so they have saved the world from starvation.

You are not the only person that laments anyone being made redundant; I'm sure many would like all the miners and steel workers back but without progress (which does temporally mean redundancies) we all become poorer.

Employment is increasing.

Profits themselves are not EVIL it is what they are used for that is where the problems arise.

I am sure the mining and steel communities were happy to suffer the "temporary redundancy" which panned out into long term employment deserts. Some did indeed become much poorer.

Employment may be increasing, as is the population. It is a pity so many of those jobs are part time, temporary, zero hours with little or no prospects. It is also a pity that the young have to put themselves into extreme debt to stand any chance of achieving the chance of career with decent prospects. Many of course will not make it but their debt has primed the economy for a little longer.

It is good to see progress bringing such benefits.

CLAPTON

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Didn't it.

I am not quite sure how you speed up a carer wiping someone bum or cleaning and refreshing the bed please tell.

Automation and computers were our saviour we would all be working 4 day weeks and and live in milk and honey.

Gone are the days when a mechanic could fix my car without plugging it into a computer and charging me £35 a time minimum for the privilege.

Indeed large scale agri businesses have given greater productivity in the past.

I am just interested in how we move forward. Where these large scale employment opportunities are going to derived from at ever lower wages..

'ever lower wages'?

if we have them, then it's because we are in a recession caused by a banking crisis and not because we are becoming more efficient or producing new inventions.


employment is increasing


and yes, you could easily be richer than a 18th century farm labourer without working at all.


aren't you ever grateful for the wonderful world in which you are a rich man?