May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

Right on Grouse, Germany, and its people are impressive.

Listen, fat head, if you want a sensible discussion I'm listening

 

1) In Germany they have a a much better rental sector (50%)  due to proper regulations and security

 

2) If you build a new house, you are encouraged (fiscally, financially) to include a granny flat

 

3) In Denmark, mortgages stay with the property. One may buy a house by taking over several existing mortgages with different fixed term rates. 10% of the purchase price is held in escrow against undisclosed defects.

 

OK???

[talahtnut]

15 hours ago, Grouse said:

Listen, fat head, if you want a sensible discussion I'm listening

 

1) In Germany they have a a much better rental sector (50%)  due to proper regulations and security

 

2) If you build a new house, you are encouraged (fiscally, financially) to include a granny flat

 

3) In Denmark, mortgages stay with the property. One may buy a house by taking over several existing mortgages with different fixed term rates. 10% of the purchase price is held in escrow against undisclosed defects.

 

OK???

No need to be abusive..I have lived in Germany before the wall came down, and had a German GF for 18 months, so I know a little about Germany.   Why the aggression?

[sandyf]

On 12/21/2017 at 9:06 PM, nauseus said:

I don't mind electoral system change in the UK but to say the the EU Commission selection is democratic is totally absurd.

Do not make things up to suit your own agenda. Where in these words  "EU commissioners are chosen by the governments of the member states" does it say the selection is based on some democratic method.

By the same token brexiteers would make out that the selection of the UK cabinet is totally democratic.

TM created a position in the cabinet for her mate and then had to sack him but that would be more democratic than how the government chooses the UK EU commissioner.

There is a tendency for people to forget that they have elected a government to send one of these "unelected bureaucrats" to Brussels  and then start moaning about having "unelected bureaucrats" in Brussels.

[mommysboy]

11 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

I'm having difficulty understanding this, if I take it at face value then I have even more difficulty understanding why that should be! I grew up without the benefit of computers or mobile phones or even a university degree plus I grew up in a class ridden society in which I had no connections, AND I was from the North to boot! I left home with no money to speak of, I moved, I took chances, I worked hard, I took chances and I never lived off the state - I was 35 before I bought my first home in the UK. So please, do tell me MMB, why young people today can't aspire to achieving what I achieved and why it's just fantasy?

 

It should need no explanation whatsoever!  Take a house for instance.  Even supposing millions have parents who can still stump up the tens of thousands needed for a deposit, the mortgage is way beyond even a comparatively well qualified youngster.  When you bought the ratio was something like 3-1, I believe it is 6-1.

[mommysboy]

10 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

I don't buy that things are any harder today than forty-five years ago, the challenges are different but there's more tools at your disposal plus the worlds a lot smaller place than it was, that's all. Pensions - get a SIPP and do it yourself rather than expecting a company to hand it to you on a plate. Salary too low at the bottom - do something about it, change jobs, change countries, change your field, change your education level, change something!

Things are pretty bad across the board!

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, oldhippy said:

ive on the island?

And you told us before you are into buddhism?

 

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

Well I've been visiting Singapore regularly for 35 years. I do my banking there.

 

Its a very controlled environment (which it needs to be). But, controlled nevertheless. I like several elements including the superannuation / mortgage / pension set up.

 

The hot house children's training (it's not education) is not my style

 

Its NOT a democracy

 

Finally, it's just not British (though they have made a much better fist of it than we did!)

 

Anyway, off topic....

But it's more democratic than the EU is 

[SheungWan]

5 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

But it's more democratic than the EU is 

Another Brexiteer supporter of Royal Prerogative Vs Parliament venturing forth on democratic comparisons.

[nauseus]

8 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Another Brexiteer supporter of Royal Prerogative Vs Parliament venturing forth on democratic comparisons.

It was easy, Meg.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

Do not make things up to suit your own agenda. Where in these words  "EU commissioners are chosen by the governments of the member states" does it say the selection is based on some democratic method.

By the same token brexiteers would make out that the selection of the UK cabinet is totally democratic.

TM created a position in the cabinet for her mate and then had to sack him but that would be more democratic than how the government chooses the UK EU commissioner.

There is a tendency for people to forget that they have elected a government to send one of these "unelected bureaucrats" to Brussels  and then start moaning about having "unelected bureaucrats" in Brussels.

From that, it looks like you are the great creator!

[aright]

30 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

But it's more democratic than the EU is 

True . Grouse complains about an article which holds up Singapore as an economic model then criticises its social and political values. A course in focus and constructive argument might help.  

[simoh1490]

52 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

 

It should need no explanation whatsoever!  Take a house for instance.  Even supposing millions have parents who can still stump up the tens of thousands needed for a deposit, the mortgage is way beyond even a comparatively well qualified youngster.  When you bought the ratio was something like 3-1, I believe it is 6-1.

Housing is the one unique exception and I've already agreed that it's a deplorable situation. But as for the rest of it, young people aspiring to have what I had.....you should perhaps read through what we've said recently on this subject, especially the part about the facilities we had as young people versus the ones available to them today, the differences are astounding.

[mommysboy]

42 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

Housing is the one unique exception and I've already agreed that it's a deplorable situation. But as for the rest of it, young people aspiring to have what I had.....you should perhaps read through what we've said recently on this subject, especially the part about the facilities we had as young people versus the ones available to them today, the differences are astounding.

Facilities aren't really of benefit if everyone has them, rather they become a necessity, in that not having them is a real deprivation, ie, if everyone has a computer then everyone is chasing the same job. 

 

Housing is not an exception, but it is about half the game isn't it?.  Pensions will be far more costly and with less benefits, and youngsters will have to work until 70 and beyond.  In your day university was free, or at least affordable.  Today, a graduate will start his career with a debt in the region of 20-30k. 

 

Overall, there is a substantial public debt overhang that undoubtedly the young will have to shoulder. 

 

But I think the main thing you are not grasping is that there simply are not the quantity or quality of jobs there used to be.  For the average person one might be looking at just survival rates.  As the latest technology requires less and less human input, the situation can only get worse.  So change, change, change- not this way, that way, no this way.  That solution has been shopped out.

 

Wages have been stagnant, yet the real cost of living continues to rise.  The poor are particularly hardest hit.  For the poorest, a rise in GDP is meaningless. The trickle down notion of wealth- that a rise in wealth benefits those lower down, and so on seems not to apply anymore.  Inequality in wealth is deplorable.

 

I do agree that in some ways life is much better, eg, health care, availability of food, and cheap leisure activities.  But real life aspiration, no I don't think so at all, in fact the reverse is true.  Even in my working class background in the sixties dad's blue collar wage was enough for the essentials, and mum could stay at home.  Does that happen now?

 

I am not knocking what you have done, and take my hat off to you.  It could be that most are not built of the same stuff.  But you know so did mum and dad, and my uncle, but because of unfortunate life ends much of the relatively modest wealth they'd built up dissipated, particularly in mum's case because Alzheimers is not classed as a real illness.  We were not alone, so that is another way in which people will be worse off because there may be no family  house to inherit.

 

It is true that me and my brother have done ok, one way or another, so partly your argument must have something.  But I wonder if this will hold true for the next generation.

 

 

Edited December 22, 2017 by mommysboy

[aright]

Good News!

Britain’s economy grew by 0.4pc in the third quarter and by 1.7pc on the year, an unexpectedly strong result which indicates the UK is proving more resilient than feared.

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/12/22/gdp-grew-04pc-final-reading-third-quarter-says-ons/

[Khun Han]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

Do not make things up to suit your own agenda. Where in these words  "EU commissioners are chosen by the governments of the member states" does it say the selection is based on some democratic method.

By the same token brexiteers would make out that the selection of the UK cabinet is totally democratic.

TM created a position in the cabinet for her mate and then had to sack him but that would be more democratic than how the government chooses the UK EU commissioner.

There is a tendency for people to forget that they have elected a government to send one of these "unelected bureaucrats" to Brussels  and then start moaning about having "unelected bureaucrats" in Brussels.

From that, it looks like you are the great creator!

 

National governments are formed through a mandate from their electorate. The EU commission is formed without any public mandate whatsoever. Who are the majority grouping of like-minded politicians on the EU commission? What are their political leanings? Does anybody actually know?

[Khun Han]

58 minutes ago, aright said:

Good News!

Britain’s economy grew by 0.4pc in the third quarter and by 1.7pc on the year, an unexpectedly strong result which indicates the UK is proving more resilient than feared.

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/12/22/gdp-grew-04pc-final-reading-third-quarter-says-ons/

 

Christine Lagarde (who should be in prison: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/christine-lagarde-convicted-imf-head-found-guilty-of-negligence-in-fraud-trial-a7484586.html) tells the world that this steady growth in our economy is vindication of Project Fear's relentless fake forecasts of recession . That's what we get when criminal stooges are put in charge of our destinies, folks. Welcome to 1984.

[baansgr]

Gina Miller now saying Brits will have to pay 60 Euros for a two month visa. Heard shes gonna advertise that statement on the side of trains

[simoh1490]

2 hours ago, mommysboy said:

Facilities aren't really of benefit if everyone has them, rather they become a necessity, in that not having them is a real deprivation, ie, if everyone has a computer then everyone is chasing the same job. 

 

Housing is not an exception, but it is about half the game isn't it?.  Pensions will be far more costly and with less benefits, and youngsters will have to work until 70 and beyond.  In your day university was free, or at least affordable.  Today, a graduate will start his career with a debt in the region of 20-30k. 

 

Overall, there is a substantial public debt overhang that undoubtedly the young will have to shoulder. 

 

But I think the main thing you are not grasping is that there simply are not the quantity or quality of jobs there used to be.  For the average person one might be looking at just survival rates.  As the latest technology requires less and less human input, the situation can only get worse.  So change, change, change- not this way, that way, no this way.  That solution has been shopped out.

 

Wages have been stagnant, yet the real cost of living continues to rise.  The poor are particularly hardest hit.  For the poorest, a rise in GDP is meaningless. The trickle down notion of wealth- that a rise in wealth benefits those lower down, and so on seems not to apply anymore.  Inequality in wealth is deplorable.

 

I do agree that in some ways life is much better, eg, health care, availability of food, and cheap leisure activities.  But real life aspiration, no I don't think so at all, in fact the reverse is true.  Even in my working class background in the sixties dad's blue collar wage was enough for the essentials, and mum could stay at home.  Does that happen now?

 

I am not knocking what you have done, and take my hat off to you.  It could be that most are not built of the same stuff.  But you know so did mum and dad, and my uncle, but because of unfortunate life ends much of the relatively modest wealth they'd built up dissipated, particularly in mum's case because Alzheimers is not classed as a real illness.  We were not alone, so that is another way in which people will be worse off because there may be no family  house to inherit.

 

It is true that me and my brother have done ok, one way or another, so partly your argument must have something.  But I wonder if this will hold true for the next generation.

 

 

That's a good write up!

 

I don't want to get distracted by talking about pensions and housing to any great degree because I think they are mostly red herrings - pensions can be managed quite effectively via a SIPP and personal investments so I'm very happy to take that of the equation. Housing also, I think we get hung up about home ownership in the UK when renting can be a viable option. I agree fully that housing is a big issue for almost everybody but I don't think it's one that stands in the way of younger people today getting ahead, it hurts perhaps on the aspirations front but it doesn't prevent progress,

 

The key issue, as you've correctly identified, is the volume and quality of jobs that are available and I'm at a disadvantage on this point because I have been in Thailand for the past 16 years and out of the job market for just as long. But I do have some experience of automation and computerisation and what that has taught me is that as one role gets closed out, another usually opens and whilst it may not be of a similar quality, it is a job. During a recent trip back to the UK I got talking to a woman in the North who told me her son was a real go-getter. There's high unemployment in that area and not many quality jobs so he's gone out and he works three part time jobs which provide security, a good income and gives him three different chances to pursue a career, that's my idea of trying hard and being creative in today's job market. And if there are no jobs to be had in your town, what about the next town and even further afield, to not look further than where you live seems defeatist not really doing enough to solve the problem.

 

But the quality issue is a harder nut to crack, mostly, quality jobs come are offered to people who have some experience and are very good at the menial jobs they've been given, that system of apprenticeship and trialing has always existed, I'm hard-pressed to think of many quality entry-level positions. Once a young person gets that initial experience they've got a foot in the door they can use as leverage, from there on out it's about quality of their work, determination, flexibility, making contributions and above all, taking chances - if one roll doesn't suit perfectly, jump to an allied role; if one company doesn't promote fast enough, move to another one; if the UK doesn't offer sufficient opportunities, move to another country and come back later, those are all viable tactics that can be applied. But if the mindset is, my town only, a quality role, at salary level X, that's going to be problematic I would guess. Another drawback is expecting that generations take incremental steps in terms of earnings and opportunities, wanting the same or better than your parents is not a right and is not guaranteed, what happened with boomers was a one off, until the next global war that is!

 

The marketplace and potential roles in it are always going to evolve so the challenges are always going to be different. Pity the people who learned to weave and built up a small business, just as the Industrial Revolution came about, no doubt history will look back on today at people who learned certain trades, only to see them automated as the technology revolution takes the next step. But those weavers didn't just curl up and die, they adapted and moved on, despite what they saw at the time as a series of almost overwhelming and generationally unique obstacles. 

 

Finally, this thread is about Brexit and my comments earlier were about young people looking at EU membership as being responsible for their current woes. It isn't, progress is, and leaving the EU is only going to compound those woes as far as I can tell, I see no logical reason why it would actually improve things for them - leaving will reduce their ease of access to near job markets, almost certainly reduce available government support for them in the form of services and benefits and it will reduce the number of onshore employers, leaving the EU is a seriously detrimental move for young people..

 

[Grouse]

9 hours ago, talahtnut said:

No need to be abusive..I have lived in Germany before the wall came down, and had a German GF for 18 months, so I know a little about Germany.   Why the aggression?

I am so used to anti German stances that I took your comment as sarcasm. I apologise unreservedly 

[SheungWan]

Growth. (Bloomberg figs)

Edited December 23, 2017 by SheungWan

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed. 

[talahtnut]

21 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Christine Lagarde (who should be in prison: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/christine-lagarde-convicted-imf-head-found-guilty-of-negligence-in-fraud-trial-a7484586.html) tells the world that this steady growth in our economy is vindication of Project Fear's relentless fake forecasts of recession . That's what we get when criminal stooges are put in charge of our destinies, folks. Welcome to 1984.

Yeah, 'Animal Farm' springs to mind. Give the peasants TV ...there's the distraction to cover the truth.

[Grouse]

9 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

That's a good write up!

 

I don't want to get distracted by talking about pensions and housing to any great degree because I think they are mostly red herrings - pensions can be managed quite effectively via a SIPP and personal investments so I'm very happy to take that of the equation. Housing also, I think we get hung up about home ownership in the UK when renting can be a viable option. I agree fully that housing is a big issue for almost everybody but I don't think it's one that stands in the way of younger people today getting ahead, it hurts perhaps on the aspirations front but it doesn't prevent progress,

 

The key issue, as you've correctly identified, is the volume and quality of jobs that are available and I'm at a disadvantage on this point because I have been in Thailand for the past 16 years and out of the job market for just as long. But I do have some experience of automation and computerisation and what that has taught me is that as one role gets closed out, another usually opens and whilst it may not be of a similar quality, it is a job. During a recent trip back to the UK I got talking to a woman in the North who told me her son was a real go-getter. There's high unemployment in that area and not many quality jobs so he's gone out and he works three part time jobs which provide security, a good income and gives him three different chances to pursue a career, that's my idea of trying hard and being creative in today's job market. And if there are no jobs to be had in your town, what about the next town and even further afield, to not look further than where you live seems defeatist not really doing enough to solve the problem.

 

But the quality issue is a harder nut to crack, mostly, quality jobs come are offered to people who have some experience and are very good at the menial jobs they've been given, that system of apprenticeship and trialing has always existed, I'm hard-pressed to think of many quality entry-level positions. Once a young person gets that initial experience they've got a foot in the door they can use as leverage, from there on out it's about quality of their work, determination, flexibility, making contributions and above all, taking chances - if one roll doesn't suit perfectly, jump to an allied role; if one company doesn't promote fast enough, move to another one; if the UK doesn't offer sufficient opportunities, move to another country and come back later, those are all viable tactics that can be applied. But if the mindset is, my town only, a quality role, at salary level X, that's going to be problematic I would guess. Another drawback is expecting that generations take incremental steps in terms of earnings and opportunities, wanting the same or better than your parents is not a right and is not guaranteed, what happened with boomers was a one off, until the next global war that is!

 

The marketplace and potential roles in it are always going to evolve so the challenges are always going to be different. Pity the people who learned to weave and built up a small business, just as the Industrial Revolution came about, no doubt history will look back on today at people who learned certain trades, only to see them automated as the technology revolution takes the next step. But those weavers didn't just curl up and die, they adapted and moved on, despite what they saw at the time as a series of almost overwhelming and generationally unique obstacles. 

 

Finally, this thread is about Brexit and my comments earlier were about young people looking at EU membership as being responsible for their current woes. It isn't, progress is, and leaving the EU is only going to compound those woes as far as I can tell, I see no logical reason why it would actually improve things for them - leaving will reduce their ease of access to near job markets, almost certainly reduce available government support for them in the form of services and benefits and it will reduce the number of onshore employers, leaving the EU is a seriously detrimental move for young people..

 

Quite a philosophical discussion! I do hope we don't get the cane for straying slightly off topic though I do feel dissatisfaction is certainly one of the underlying reasons for supporting Brexit.

 

1) We can not stop progress. Many jobs have been lost in my lifetime and very many more are to come. When was the last time you had a secretary? (As it were). Expert systems will replace many knowledge based professions including teachers, lawyers, physicians, accountants etc. Robotics and automation are continuing to replace blue collar jobs. Neural networks and self taught machines will replace many key decision making jobs from city dealers to bank managers. Autonomous vehicles will replace taxis.

 

So, what to do?

 

We can allow increasing inequality or we can think up mechanisms to help us all. A guaranteed national minimum income would be a cool idea

 

2) Housing in the U.K. Has nearly bankrupted the economy. We can not afford to have so many retire wealthy just because they owned a house for a long time. 100x capital gain is not unusual

 

3) The UK rental sector is scandalous. No proper structure to the private rental sector. Selling off public housing at massive discount is utterly wrong. We should learn how to manage this much better from ourEuropean colleagues. Why is it that most of Northern Europeans have better houses which are also much more affordable?

 

As for pensions, well some luck involved here. If you manage to get through 40 years of work without major crisis then you are fortunate and should be OK. Sadly, we don't really do families in the U.K. Anymore. One area where Thailand does rather better

 

 

[ilostmypassword]

7 hours ago, SheungWan said:

Growth. (Bloomberg figs)

And the reason that the EU recovered so slowly is because of the Euro and the Eurozone. Unlike Eurozone natons, the UK is the master of its own fiscal policies. Which mostly gives it an advantage.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Sadly, we don't really do families in the U.K. Anymore. One area where Thailand does rather better

Can you explain what you mean by "Thailand does rather better" ?

In terms of the economy Thailand as a whole has been facing almost two decades of lower fertility rates and higher aging of the population that challenge future economic growth.

Plenty of references to this (one of many: http://www.thebigchilli.com/feature-stories/thailands-uncertain-future-as-the-population-and-workforce-go-into-decline ) but its clear that this evolving situation is recognized by Prayut who recently enacted a tax deduction for a second child to encourage larger families. This will prove to be ineffective.

 

[Grouse]

3 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Can you explain what you mean by "Thailand does rather better" ?

In terms of the economy Thailand as a whole has been facing almost two decades of lower fertility rates and higher aging of the population that challenge future economic growth.

Plenty of references to this (one of many: http://www.thebigchilli.com/feature-stories/thailands-uncertain-future-as-the-population-and-workforce-go-into-decline ) but its clear that this evolving situation is recognized by Prayut who recently enacted a tax deduction for a second child to encourage larger families. This will prove to be ineffective.

 

Of course there are very many issues in Thailand which are far worse than in Europe

 

I was referring specifically to respect for and care of family seniors.

 

Incidently, as economies and societies become more solidly established, birth rates tend to fall to about replacement level. This is why we will escape a Malthusian catastrophe 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

Of course there are very many issues in Thailand which are far worse than in Europe

 

I was referring specifically to respect for and care of family seniors.

 

Incidently, as economies and societies become more solidly established, birth rates tend to fall to about replacement level. This is why we will escape a Malthusian catastrophe 

If it were only a function of population that might be the case. But what is more germane is consumption per capita.

[Grouse]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

If it were only a function of population that might be the case. But what is more germane is consumption per capita.

Expand...

[ilostmypassword]

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Expand...

Let's say one American consumes the same amount of resources as 25 Bengalis.

Or let's say as those Bengalis on the average get richer they consume 3 times as much as the average Bengali did 20 years ago. For consumption to remain constant there would have to be only one third as many Bengalis. 

Without consumption per capita figures, population numbers don't reveal enough.

 

Edited December 23, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[aright]

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Let's say one American consumes the same amount of resources as 25 Bengalis.

Or let's say as those Bengalis on the average get richer they consume 3 times as much as the average Bengali did 20 years ago. For consumption to remain constant there would have to be only one third as many Bengalis. 

Without consumption per capita figures, population numbers don't reveal enough.

 

Are you Ronald McDonald?

[Grouse]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

Let's say one American consumes the same amount of resources as 25 Bengalis.

Or let's say as those Bengalis on the average get richer they consume 3 times as much as the average Bengali did 20 years ago. For consumption to remain constant there would have to be only one third as many Bengalis. 

Without consumption per capita figures, population numbers don't reveal enough.

 

OK, I see that

 

The point I was making was that with higher infant survival rates and a movement from the land to the cities, the requirement for large families is mitigated (subject to religious distortions)

 

But the point that I was making is that (with particular reference to the UK), the elderly are frequently alienated and their skills undervalued.