Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Employment going forward is a serious problem that has as yet no real solution. The changes brought about by technology have removed whole areas of employment. Retail is on its way out. Office jobs are disappearing do to computers. This will only get worse. The long term need for bums on seats is reducing every day. Manufacturing is shifting to the far East and then will move to Africa. There is little chance of full employment in the UK ever.

In the not too distant past people looked forward to a society where work would reduce to give us all more leisure time. Of course this was a pipe dream. Where would the money come from to fund masses of people doing very little.

The long term prospect is that no one will pay most people to do anything as their labour will not be required. If you look say 30 or 50 years ahead then there is going to be mass unemployment at all age levels. We may be talking about a half of all people never having a job. The effects on society will be considerable. Most developed nations will go broke at some point with maybe a third or more of their population living in extreme poverty.

While those living in Britain have to pay capital gains tax (CGT) of 18% or, more commonly, 28%, if they make a profit when reselling all but their main home, non-resident property owners are currently exempt for all their properties.


this has to be preposterous, even if it wouldn't raise huge sums

================

sticky - the trouble with you and a few of your other buddies is that you totally blinkered by prejudice

and an excellent observation from george too!

Hays - If you look say 30 or 50 years ahead then there is going to be mass unemployment at all age levels.

that is merely an updated version of what henry ford said about robots building cars

however, though the requirement for manpower moves about from industry to industry in time, lots of new industries are also created - eg the computer and aviation industries in the last 50/75 years, and leisure-focussed ones too have grown almost exponentially

Some of you "Con" party lot really do like to push the proper-gander don't you, I shall return this afternoon to join this debate with some relevant and eminently sensible solutions, and not CP proper-gander!... Bet you can't wait eh? -):

You can only have leisure industries if there is employment to give people to spend on leisure. There aren't any new industries that can give mass employment.

stan - you're just being an ass - quelle surprise!
i wasn't asked for a solution
i merely commented on sticky's (and now yours) blindly prejudiced posting

Hays,

Post 31948

You are catching up.

Have a look at Bertrand Russell's "In Praise of Laziness".

I agree with the first 2 and 1/2 paragraphs, but do not think the outcome you perceive as the only outcome possible.

But now I can understand why you seem to have a bleak view of the world.

===

I think that there is not enough thought about what are the goals of "production and raising outputs" and what is necessary for a functioning society and how daily allotment of individual hours "should" be "allotted".

Perhaps, more into "servicing" of "society".

=======

Cynic,

Once more I think you are projecting your own attributes once again.

I would suggest you look in a mirror and and repeat a few times "you totally blinkered by prejudice" and notice yourself nodding your head.

whatever you say fred ...... speaking from your pontiff's padded armchair, you must of course be correct - well i'm sure that a few would concur anyway

The world is substantialmy different now. The process of jobs disappearing due to technology is very fast and accelerating. A major difference in recent years is the moving the production of goods to developing countries. China has seen what is coming and are investing in Africa at a great pace. They are also renting and buying great swathes of land in Africa and South America where they are beginning to produce food. Food and water will be as important as natural resources in the future and will represent a currency.

Cynic.

You seem to be obtaining a grasp of reality at last.

Grasp on to it firmly and hold it close.

You never know what is around the corner.

probably a car or lorry on the wrong side of the road!

if creating new jobs was that easy, then even the last buffoons would have done something about it

however, to put it very simplistically, new jobs are only created by companies increasing sales and/or deciding to open up new plants or shops ...... that only happens slowly as domestic and worldwide economies improve as they irrefutably are

the growth of individual entrepreneurs with enterprises of all sizes and capabilities should also not be sneezed at, let alone mocked .... it may well be that force of circumstance led many to go it alone, but there's nothing wrong with that either

I can think of plenty of 'work' that needs doing around the place.

In my home:

Cleaning, painting and decorating, gardening, construction jobs of varying sorts, car cleaning.

As my wife and I get older, we will have 'care needs' of varying sorts too. These are also more diverse than one would initially think. We might need a longer lead on our kettle or help with cooking a meal. We might need help with having a bath or a shave or washing our hair.

Out in the local area:

Potholes need filling, the verges need cutting and weeding, the verges need litter removal and collecting, they need top soil additions and re-seeding, trees need pruning and cutting back where they overhang the pathways, road signs need cleaning. To smarten the whole place up, the list is endless.

I'm sure you get the general idea and I don't fell I need go on any further with examples.

IMHO, I don't agree with people sitting around doing 'nothing', and particularly so if they are drawing benefits, when we have all of these tasks which require some 'work effort' to be put in around the place.

Any person could do most of the above tasks and no particular supervisory skills are required for them either.

And the pay for doing them?

From 'Nil' to 'the going rate of the statutory minimum wage per hour'.

And if those doing it don't like it, then tell them to personally try harder to get something better.

:)

George said........

2517GEORGE - 31 Oct 2013 11:54 - 31947 of 31959

''Always been known as the party of unemployment and liars''. If that is the case gf, why on earth have you financially supported them for so long.
2517

George I havent financialy supported them for so long. Im the secratary/president of my local conservative club and we or should I say members voted not to support them this year as most members wanted a more pro active approach to leaving the EEC.

Its also happend in previous years aswel. Its put to the vote.

Hays your employment model going forward is flawed.

The main factor you fail to mention is the redistribution of wealth from the very rich to the middle ground and poorer class. And it will happen.

This will most certainly happen in all industrial countries and developing countries as the years go by thus further opening up the global economy to greater demand from ALL.

It won't happen. If there was a trend or signs of redistribution of wealth then the rich would move their money to safer areas. My son's housemate at uni has a father who took his money out of UK and he lives 6 months in Barbados, 3 months in Portugal and some time in UK etc. His money is somewhere where else where he pays no tax. It is very difficult to redistribute wealth. All you can do is make the working class and middle class the same. Serious money won't stand still for you to get it.

what is very rich?
if you tax "them" 100%, what will be the one-off financial benefit and/or have you even considered the case of diminishing returns?

it should not be forgotten that many if not most times, the "very rich" have created a great many jobs and many will continue to do so - but not if you tax them to death ...... sorry to say, but that draconian route has been tried several times in the past, and it fails for very obvious reasons

face up to it, there isn't actually a simple or quick solution, and the only true long term solution is through continuing economic growth, the seat and source for which is ever evolving

It has been tried before. Labour introduced a top rate of 87% and for investment income it was 98%. The result was a mass exodus of businesses and people. A lot of that money never came back.

Good luck I do hope you find some who can pander to your “needs” at the rate you see fit.
I hope that they don’t overvalue themselves and expect better than they have.

But, perhaps, after making an effort and attempting to do some of the things you suggest “need” doing, you may reconsider the appropriate rate of remuneration and compare both with your previous, or present occupation.
But I do like the status quo and every man and woman on this thread, should know that the proper place and value in this world should be below mine, especially as mine is due inherited wealth.

==============

Hays,

I wonder if the UK would miss another mass exodus.

I suppose the more Russian and Chinese "Mafia" could take their places.

Good God! It is already happening.

Im talking about the extreme conditions Hays makes out in his original post.

Do you think for one minute their wouldnt be an Arab Style Spring around the world. Another Russia.

Never mind the tax rates think death rates.

There would be serious civil unrest. However, it would do little to solve the problems as there would be no jobs and little money.