Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Tories condemn Osbourne for tax credit cuts watch

Announcements
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Bornblue MatureStudent36


    I'm quite torn really- whilst I agree with Maturestudent about the number of jobs and that most people (myself included) quite like zero hour jobs i am concerned as to WHAT jobs are being created.

    For instance, in my local area the only real industries are gambling and fast food and-now some may think the jobs these industries create are worth the societal damages these create- i'm not so sure.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Bornblue MatureStudent36


    I'm quite torn really- whilst I agree with Maturestudent about the number of jobs and that most people (myself included) quite like zero hour jobs i am concerned as to WHAT jobs are being created.

    For instance, in my local area the only real industries are gambling and fast food and-now some may think the jobs these industries create are worth the societal damages these create- i'm not so sure.
    Well where I differ is that a job is not the end goal, people being financially secure and dependent is.


    A job which is insecure and doesn't pay well enough to live on is pointless.

    An example would be the massive increase in agency work. Take a cleaner at a hospital for example. Before agencies, she would have been given a secure contract with the hospital, been given guaranteed hours, sick pay and holiday pay. She would also have had a right of action for being unfairly dismissed. Now all this work is being outsourced to agencies where this same cleaner now has no guarantee of hours, no sick pay, no holiday pay and they have no cause of action for being sacked.

    I don't see how you can be pro-business without treating your workers well.
    I want a system where everyone gets a secure contract if they want one, where they have guaranteed hours and protections. Not one where we are making jobs more and more insecure and removing worker's rights do anything about it.

    And organisations such as unions, which represent their workers and help protect their rights are seen as evil.

    It's laughable.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Not quite.

    Zero hour contracts account for only 2.3% of jobs.

    60% of people on zero hour contracts want to be on them.

    That means that a little over 1% of jobs in the uk are filled by zero hour contract staff after more hours.

    https://fullfact.org/factcheck/econo...ts_facts-41165
    Your own source points out that while unemployment has gone down since the recession the proportion of part-time workers saying they cannot find a full-time job has not.

    I have taken the liberty of creating a graph based on the ONS data used by Full Fact to make that point.

    Name:  Untitled.png
Views: 43
Size:  25.7 KB

    You will see I have indicated the dates of the election of the Labour government, the start and end quarters of the recession, the election of the Conservative government and the 2012 omnishambles budget, whereafter Osborne began to backtrack on hard-line austerity.

    It gives the lie to your point about a general recovery in employment. It is far truer to say, as I have repeatedly, that there is a persistent depression in the employment market with the same amount of work as during the very worst of times post-recession, just spread among more people.

    If you attempt to make an essentialist explanation, it will go against your simplistic explanation about people not wanting to take on extra work. Under such an explanation, it would appear that the five years where the Tories have been quite happy to carry on with tax credits have seen the highest ever proportion of people desiring more work - but being unable to get it.

    The previous recession ended in 1991 Q3. Note this metric peaking with a lag of about a year and a half, staying high for a further year and then reducing. In terms of the 2008 recession this would mean a peak in 2011 Q2 and reduction from 2012 Q2. Instead we see a continued increase for an extra year until Osborne's Plan A is abandoned. Then we start the static period, which lasts about five quarters, before a reduction beginning at the end of 2013.

    It appears to me that Osborne's Plan A (austerity) retarded the (full time) jobs recovery. A far more competent, wetter, if still miserly, chancellor like Clarke would have had more success and not delayed our recovery. Osborne, conversely, panicked and has begun bubbles and giveaways.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Bornblue MatureStudent36


    I'm quite torn really- whilst I agree with Maturestudent about the number of jobs and that most people (myself included) quite like zero hour jobs i am concerned as to WHAT jobs are being created.

    For instance, in my local area the only real industries are gambling and fast food and-now some may think the jobs these industries create are worth the societal damages these create- i'm not so sure.
    Nobody's really going to create 200,000 £40k a head jobs over night. Those types of jobs grow as companies expand and employ more shop floor staff.

    I've changed job recently. 3 out of 4 of the job interviews I attended were due to expansion. That's not only in the manufacturing sector but middle management positions.

    There seems to be a can't do attitude amongst many.
    I can't get a job.
    I can't get a well paid job.

    These are the people who never seem to get on. Try being more positive and you'll be suprised what happens.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Nobody's really going to create 200,000 £40k a head jobs over night. Those types of jobs grow as companies expand and employ more shop floor staff.

    I've changed job recently. 3 out of 4 of the job interviews I attended were due to expansion. That's not only in the manufacturing sector but middle management positions.

    There seems to be a can't do attitude amongst many.
    I can't get a job.
    I can't get a well paid job.

    These are the people who never seem to get on. Try being more positive and you'll be suprised what happens.
    With self-help rubbish like that Grant Shapps will have you ghosting his next book. We all know it is best to have a positive attitude and develop skills.

    However, this is advice for the individual, and his success will always be at the expense of someone else.

    I know it's a difficult concept for Tories to understand, but when we discuss politics we are talking about trying to make the system better for everyone.

    Stop being so sanctimonious. Individual advice helps individuals only.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Nobody's really going to create 200,000 £40k a head jobs over night. Those types of jobs grow as companies expand and employ more shop floor staff.

    I've changed job recently. 3 out of 4 of the job interviews I attended were due to expansion. That's not only in the manufacturing sector but middle management positions.

    There seems to be a can't do attitude amongst many.
    I can't get a job.
    I can't get a well paid job.

    These are the people who never seem to get on. Try being more positive and you'll be suprised what happens.
    Oh I'm perfectly content and positive about my future, at least for now. I've done my share of crappy jobs too as well as speaking at length about the lazy entitled views of so much of my generation.

    My issue is that not obviously everyone can/ wants put in the requirements needed to climb up the corporate ladder (I speak as a healthy, able bodied white male) and often there are no real ways of progression through certain routes and in addition, i'm not certain about the wider costs of some of our economic success-

    for instance our recent kow-towing to Chinese and arab interests in addition to the growth of the fast food industry in the midst of a childhood obesity clinic or the very real widening gambling addictions.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    With self-help rubbish like that Grant Shapps will have you ghosting his next book. We all know it is best to have a positive attitude and develop skills.

    However, this is advice for the individual, and his success will always be at the expense of someone else.

    I know it's a difficult concept for Tories to understand, but when we discuss politics we are talking about trying to make the system better for everyone.

    Stop being so sanctimonious. Individual advice helps individuals only.
    It's the American dream nonsense. 'You can do anything if you just believe in yourself'. Never mind the gaping levels of inequality. Never mind the fact that society is bent in favour of those with money and the poor are having their means of support cut. Just smile and be confident and it will all work out'
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    With self-help rubbish like that Grant Shapps will have you ghosting his next book. We all know it is best to have a positive attitude and develop skills.

    However, this is advice for the individual, and his success will always be at the expense of someone else.

    I know it's a difficult concept for Tories to understand, but when we discuss politics we are talking about trying to make the system better for everyone.

    Stop being so sanctimonious. Individual advice helps individuals only.
    You're not trying to talk about helping everyone. You're generally picking on a minority, blank them for your troubles and demanding more money of them.

    The left has always tried to take the moral high ground. Do you actually believe that the conservatives are trying to penalise people? Have you ever thought that they try to help people by making sur future generations aren't saddled with huge amounts of national debt and that rather than give people money that thy might actually be happier standing on their own two feet rather than rely g on the state?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    You're not trying to talk about helping everyone. You're generally picking on a minority, blank them for your troubles and demanding more money of them.

    The left has always tried to take the moral high ground. Do you actually believe that the conservatives are trying to penalise people? Have you ever thought that they try to help people by making sur future generations aren't saddled with huge amounts of national debt and that rather than give people money that thy might actually be happier standing on their own two feet rather than rely g on the state?
    This is not about taking the moral high ground. If anything, it is you who are moralising here. The purpose of civil government is to improve life for the citizenry in a sustainable manner. It does not do to give advice targeted at individuals because for one individual to succeed another must lose out. It assuages Conservative consciences to dole out this kind of stuff and believe everything will be OK as long as we believe in ourselves. But do not kid yourself that it has any relevance to the real world.

    Please respond if you are not already to my meatier posts above into which I have invested some effort.

    Incidentally, future generations are likely to be saddled with a far worse form of debt than government debt. Osborne's surplus plan requires nothing less than transferring government debt onto households and businesses: it is an accounting fact that government debt is the inverse of private debt.

    Now, last I checked I didn't have a printing press in the basement or a seat on the Security Council or the world's financial transactions going through my home office or the ability to issue long-term gilts at under 1% interest, so I'm unsure as to why you think such a situation would give British people more financial security.

    Aside from those lucky enough to own the means of production, of course.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Worse. While he seems to support whatever line the Tory leadership pump out (the right have always known how to follow the leader better than anyone), his expressed opinions place him on the Thatcherite right of the party. On the economy these people are significantly further right than UKIP supporters.

    Although UKIP is funded and led by Thatcherite ultras often more extreme than say the CWF/Iain Duncan Smith axis of the Conservative Party, their voters, members and rhetoric are usually left-wing labour market protectionist.
    yeah his comments were a bit odd. whilst we all have our opinions set....i found his comments on the tax credits to be slightly harsh tbh
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Worse. While he seems to support whatever line the Tory leadership pump out (the right have always known how to follow the leader better than anyone), his expressed opinions place him on the Thatcherite right of the party. On the economy these people are significantly further right than UKIP supporters.

    Although UKIP is funded and led by Thatcherite ultras often more extreme than say the CWF/Iain Duncan Smith axis of the Conservative Party, their voters, members and rhetoric are usually left-wing labour market protectionist.
    Therein lies the problem. Left wing voters are increasingly attracted to UKIP, not Labour. Most of them don't even realise they are left wing.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Therein lies the problem. Left wing voters are increasingly attracted to UKIP, not Labour. Most of them don't even realise they are left wing.
    Labour cannot get out of its identity politics groupthink, in particular they need to be hard on immigrants. It's astounding that Corbyn doesn't seem to realise this but he has to very soon if they are to have a chance

    And it's excruciating watching them talk there is no intellectual weight behind any of their positions, far less passion. The Blairites are basically robots and the lefties are too young and new. The woman on question time yesterday a good example
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Therein lies the problem. Left wing voters are increasingly attracted to UKIP, not Labour. Most of them don't even realise they are left wing.
    Which makes you wonder why the Progress types in Labour adopt such a EU-phile position and refused to support an in/out referendum. If they are such pragmatists why are they so reluctant to drop there love in with the EU? Where is the Third Way?

    You have Tristrum Hunt saying Labour should be lead by the intellectual "1%". You can hear it now, "labour is full of the cosmopolitan elite champagne socialists". For all their bemoaning of ideology over practicality of the Corbyn supporters they really need to look in the mirror themselves.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)

    And it's excruciating watching them talk there is no intellectual weight behind any of their positions, far less passion. The Blairites are basically robots and the lefties are too young and new. The woman on question time yesterday a good example
    I sort of think the left needs to adopt a harder line against immigrants. Even if it is in the same sort of vein as the Tories where they just pretend to want to stop immigration, Just to get in :-/

    Aren't you like, 23 :sly:

    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Labour cannot get out of its identity politics groupthink, in particular they need to be hard on immigrants. It's astounding that Corbyn doesn't seem to realise this but he has to very soon if they are to have a chance
    Ye but even if he wanted to he can't. He seemed to want to adopt a more Eurosceptic stance with the EU at first, threatening to back an out campaign if the negotiations were bad for working people. It would be interesting t see how people would response to kind of bennite stance on Europe. The PLP will not have it though.

    My UKIP voting mum was all for voting for him them :-/
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Which makes you wonder why the Progress types in Labour adopt such a EU-phile position and refused to support an in/out referendum. If they are such pragmatists why are they so reluctant to drop there love in with the EU? Where is the Third Way?

    You have Tristrum Hunt saying Labour should be lead by the intellectual "1%". You can hear it now, "labour is full of the cosmopolitan elite champagne socialists". For all their bemoaning of ideology over practicality of the Corbyn supporters they really need to look in the mirror themselves.
    Well the pro-EU love in position on Labour's behalf all seems a bit fake. It was as if Miliband spotted an area in which the Tories were divided and wanted to make it his own to identify with all pro-EU voters.
    It didn't work, whatever he was trying.

    The left's big problem has always been infighting. As the quote goes 'while the Labour and Liberal dogs were squabbling and snarling at each other, the conservative dog ran off with the bone'.

    The tories are so much better at getting people who are even vaguely on their side of the political spectrum to vote for them. They lose a few to UKIP but that's it. Contrast that with the Labour who lose left votes to SNP, Greens, UKIP and other smaller left parties.

    When it comes down to it, all those right of centre vote for the tories, those on the left shoot themselves in the foot (electorally) with infighting.
    It's a product of the electoral system and it sucks but to a certain extent you have to play with the cards you are given, and the left are failing.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.