Make Believe.
Glenallan
Scottish Executive that Scotland NEEDS immigration.
This is a notion that is quite false and is part of the
executive's agenda of turning everything on its head
and offering a world of make believe to the Scottish people.
It is a notion being put about by those with 'agenda'.
The plain fact is that Scotland, since the destruction of
Scottish industry in the seventies has been unable to
attract enough new real industry to sustain its population.
Armies of Scots no longer work beyond the age of 50
and a significant number of those are Social Security
spongers and redundantees on the make claiming for
medical conditions that they do not have.
And everybody knows it.
What IS needed is a twin incentive of jobs
provision and finite social security provision.
For as long as Scotland has the Social Security 'disease'
it will always be the home of a third rate people.
The Executive's assertion that we cannot provide services
and pensions to our people without an influx of immigrants
points to a grotesquely perverse agenda for Scotland
and betrays their essential defeatism and poverty of policy.
Glenallan
---------
R.Peffers.
"Glenallan" <robert...@boabby.com> wrote in message
news:7e-dnfUynJK...@pipex.net...
> There is a widespread notion being put about by the
> Scottish Executive that Scotland NEEDS immigration.
>
> This is a notion that is quite false and is part of the
> executive's agenda of turning everything on its head
> and offering a world of make believe to the Scottish people.
> It is a notion being put about by those with 'agenda'.
below 5 million but is now recovering thanks to that agenda and the
immigrants who have come to join us - and that includes the white ones, from
everywhere including England, as well as the coloured ones.
>
> The plain fact is that Scotland, since the destruction of
> Scottish industry in the seventies has been unable to
> attract enough new real industry to sustain its population.
> Armies of Scots no longer work beyond the age of 50
> and a significant number of those are Social Security
> spongers and redundantees on the make claiming for
> medical conditions that they do not have.
> And everybody knows it.
Indeed there are some but, like your other daft claims, facts and statistics
tell a very different story.
>
> What IS needed is a twin incentive of jobs
> provision and finite social security provision.
More rot - there are skilled people being encouraged to come to Scotland to
fill skilled jobs that we cannot fill from the existing population. The
health service would crumble without the foreign recruits from Consultants
to surgeons, doctors, nurses, radiographers, porters, cleaners and mortuary
attendants. Then we need dentists, vets and just about every other skill
that our lazy, spoilt children are too damned thick to bother training for.
We send them to school and they leave there with a large proportion partly
illiterate and innumerate. Even then we send them to Uni and they are far
too lazy to do anything that requires work. Instead they take the soft
opinions and avoid science, engineering and medical degrees. We have a
nation of very stupid Social Workers, Unmanageable Managers, Inartistic
Artists and a great need for Doctors, Scientists, Engineers and any other
really skilled job you care to thing on.
>
> For as long as Scotland has the Social Security 'disease'
> it will always be the home of a third rate people.
Your statistics cannot prove that.
>
> The Executive's assertion that we cannot provide services
> and pensions to our people without an influx of immigrants
> points to a grotesquely perverse agenda for Scotland
> and betrays their essential defeatism and poverty of policy.
>
> Glenallan
> ---------
The reason for the problem is a falling population and a low birth rate
while the existing population grows old. Just try this. Take away from the
Scottish population figures the number of other UK incomers, the Asylum
Seekers and the other immigrants and look at what the population would have
been without them. Then remember that much of the falling population was due
to young Scots going elsewhere and the picture is/was bleak.
--
Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
(When replying take pam away from peffers.
Scotland).
Entropy
"R.Peffers." <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:QNmdnXv3kYH...@bt.com...
>
>.Even then we send them to Uni and they are far
> too lazy to do anything that requires work. Instead they take the soft
> opinions and avoid science, engineering and medical degrees. We have a
> nation of very stupid Social Workers, Unmanageable Managers, Inartistic
> Artists and a great need for Doctors, Scientists, Engineers and any other
> really skilled job you care to thing on.
>
In the UK you cannot just walk into a medical degree even if you are
qualified - they are quite selective and snobby about it. In some Unis it
helps if your father was a doctor.
However, I agree with the fact that they do go for the soft options. The
solution is easy - give a large bursary for those studying Science and
Engineering (+ Medicine) and let the rest pay for their education like they
do over here and in many other countries. Actually I believe in free
education but in todays climate with silly degrees in everything it is time
to make people pay for all but the courses that will be of use to the
economy.
However, if we want to create more professional engineers we must stop
calling the local plumber,mechanic or landscape gardener an engineer, it's
not much incentive for the young to study.
Tam
The Real Fifeshire Bimbo
> "R.Peffers." <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote
It is if they want to be plumbers, mechanics or landscape gardeners. From
what I've been reading we desperately need to train plumbers, electricians
etc. since there will be a real shortage as baby boomers retire. You talk
about "snobby", but snobbery's what shines through from you every time you
beat this particular drum Tam!
Entropy
"The Real Fifeshire Bimbo" <h...@AwaAnBileYirHeid.com> wrote in message
news:4afihkF...@individual.net...
a difference - a big one. The professional engineer is a wealth creator for
the whole economy - thats' why the Far East is booming (well it was!). Every
time you buy a CD player, a mobile phone or PC or washing machine or car
ask yourself where was it designed? That's where the money is and it all
begins.Chances are it was in the US or Japan (maybe Finland or Germany or
Singapore). These people create the jobs for everybody else.By all means get
more plumbers and joiners and they will build more houses for you but that's
about all.The mechanics will fix your car but who will design the new ones?
The trouble with the UK is that during Thatchers reign we became dependant
on service industries - door openers and there are only so many of them you
need. Why am I explaining this to you anyway - awa back tae yer knitting
wuman!
Tam
Glenallan
>> The Executive's assertion that we cannot provide services
>> and pensions to our people without an influx of immigrants
>> points to a grotesquely perverse agenda for Scotland
>> and betrays their essential defeatism and poverty of policy.
>>
>> Glenallan
>> ---------
>
> The reason for the problem is a falling population and a low birth rate
> while the existing population grows old. Just try this. Take away from the
> Scottish population figures the number of other UK incomers, the Asylum
> Seekers and the other immigrants and look at what the population would
> have been without them. Then remember that much of the falling population
> was due to young Scots going elsewhere and the picture is/was bleak.
> --
You have fallen victim to the new orthodoxy,
which in reality is something like this.
Your political masters can solve neither the problem of
employment nor the problem of immigration but dare not admit it.
What they have actually conspired to do is sell you the idea
that this nation's prosperity depends on immigrants doing
jobs that supposedly no-one wants.
If we can engage in some 'levitation' of the visible and
hidden unemployed the problem of filling jobs would
simply disappear as would the 'need' for immigrants.
They cannot even solve the problem of Scots leaving Scotland.
What kind of new slave class do you wish to invite to
Scotland to support an ambulant Scottish population who
will neither work nor want.
G
Ian Morrison
> Actually it's elitism but I won't argue. We need the trades too but there is
> a difference - a big one. The professional engineer is a wealth creator for
> the whole economy - thats' why the Far East is booming (well it was!). Every
> time you buy a CD player, a mobile phone or PC or washing machine or car
> ask yourself where was it designed? That's where the money is and it all
> begins.Chances are it was in the US or Japan (maybe Finland or Germany or
> Singapore). These people create the jobs for everybody else.By all means get
> more plumbers and joiners and they will build more houses for you but that's
> about all.The mechanics will fix your car but who will design the new ones?
> The trouble with the UK is that during Thatchers reign we became dependant
> on service industries - door openers and there are only so many of them you
> need. Why am I explaining this to you anyway - awa back tae yer knitting
> wuman!
You have a gross tendency to confuse education with training, Tam. You
also have a gross tendency to confuse fact with prejudice. Not good
signs for an "engineer", I'm afraid. If you are in any way typical of
your stated profession, it is no wonder that so many systems (especially
those in your speciality) fail.
Ian Smith
Yes. Sadly, too many people are unwilling to do a hard day's work, and
are quite comfortable with the idea of being subsidised by those who do.
However, the state carries a lot of the blame, by perpetuating the problem.
We have a huge welfare system, paid for by punitive levels of taxation,
which stifles economic growth, which puts (by job loss or income erosion)
more people in a position to claim more handouts. Add into this the trend of
allowing cheap immigrant (and migrant) labour to take up those jobs shunned
by the benefit junkies as being too-lowly-paid, thus driving down the "going
rate" even further.
Migrant workers are sending their hard-earned cash back home to eastern
Europe or wherever; not spending it here. It is a vicious circle. Communism
doesn't work, and is doomed to failure. We cannot afford to pay people for
doing nothing (genuine hardship/disability/pensioners excepted). No wonder
that so many of our real grafters become disillusioned enough to emigrate.
Can't say I blame a single one of them, and I may follow suit once again if
the death-spiral continues much further. Though part of me says "stay and
fight"; I'm a stubborn bastard alright. :-)
Ian Smith
Bob, thanks for your latest post, all of which I read with interest. One
thing which springs to mind is that in a free market, supply and demand
coincide at the "right" price. If there is a skill shortage in a given
profession, then remuneration must increase until supply inevitably meets
demand. If we artificially "import" outsiders to increase supply, then
remuneration will remain low.
So, instead of increasing pay to attract/stop locals from leaving the
country, we're keeping the pay low, and the locals keep leaving. In other
words, we're replacing our own kind with foreigners, and exporting money at
the same time (they send it back home to eastern Europe or wherever). For
the life of me, I can't think of a single good reason for doing that. Except
maybe something to do with share prices and dividends. ;-)
R.Peffers.
>
> "R.Peffers." <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:QNmdnXv3kYH...@bt.com...
>>
>> "Glenallan" <robert...@boabby.com> wrote in message
>
>>> The Executive's assertion that we cannot provide services
>>> and pensions to our people without an influx of immigrants
>>> points to a grotesquely perverse agenda for Scotland
>>> and betrays their essential defeatism and poverty of policy.
>>>
>>> Glenallan
>>> ---------
>>
>> The reason for the problem is a falling population and a low birth rate
>> while the existing population grows old. Just try this. Take away from
>> the Scottish population figures the number of other UK incomers, the
>> Asylum Seekers and the other immigrants and look at what the population
>> would have been without them. Then remember that much of the falling
>> population was due to young Scots going elsewhere and the picture is/was
>> bleak.
>> --
>
> You have fallen victim to the new orthodoxy,
> which in reality is something like this.
>
> Your political masters can solve neither the problem of
> employment nor the problem of immigration but dare not admit it.
> What they have actually conspired to do is sell you the idea
> that this nation's prosperity depends on immigrants doing
> jobs that supposedly no-one wants.
Rubbish! They were bringing in doctors, dentists, radiographers, nurses,
engineers, teachers and many other skilled people because they could not
fill the vacancies from this country. No doubt they also brought in porters,
shithouse cleaners and so on too but the encouragements were for the skilled
people we desperately need.
>
> If we can engage in some 'levitation' of the visible and
> hidden unemployed the problem of filling jobs would
> simply disappear as would the 'need' for immigrants.
Get real! Do you for one moment suppose that those dole-drawers,
sudo-disabled and never-married mothers are magically going to suddenly gain
qualifications as doctors, surgeons, consultants, engineers, nurses, vets
and so on? If you read a little deeper you will find that this is the
declared policy of the Scottish executive. As I pointed out in another
thread there are more semi-literate and semi-numerate pupils leaving school
now than ever before. Have you not seen the Universities complaining that
they are getting students who need remedial classes? Even then the
home-grown students are taking the soft option courses so we are being
overrun with Social Workers, Art-Students, Computer Studies, management and
any other soft option while we are short of Engineers, doctors, dentists,
vets and scientists. The fact that so many are getting the soft option
degrees means that there is a great big gap between these degree holders and
the terminally thick. It was once from that group now holding useless
degrees the plumbers, joiners, electricians, mechanics, brickies and so on
used to come and many of those unemployed you complain about have fistfuls
of degrees that are really useless to them but they are not trained as
tradesmen either. These too are the people the executive want to bring to
Scotland. Most of the trouble is caused by, would you believe? Education!
Education! Education!
>
> They cannot even solve the problem of Scots leaving Scotland.
> What kind of new slave class do you wish to invite to
> Scotland to support an ambulant Scottish population who
> will neither work nor want.
>
> G
> --
The ones the Scottish executive are attempting to attract - people with the
skills we need. Anyway you are exaggerating the numbers of unemployed and
sudo-sick/disabled. Look on it as a percentage and it is not nearly as bad
as you make out. In fact here is the current figures - (from Rampant
Scotland) -
---------------------------------------------------------------
Unemployment in Scotland Lowest for 30 Years
The number of people claiming unemployment benefit (now called jobseekers'
allowance) dropped by 1100 in December to 87,900, its lowest level since
June 1975 and a decrease of 10,000 over the last 12 months. On this measure,
the unemployment rate is running at 3.3 per cent, down by 0.4 per cent over
the year. Employment rose by 9000 to 2.446 million, the highest since
records began in 1992 and 188,000 more than in 1997 (when Tony Blair and his
government took charge). Average earnings in the UK rose by 4.5% last
November, which means that they are hovering on the brink of pushing
inflation above the government's 2% target.
---------------------------------------------------------------
So you are blowing things out of all proportion the Scottish Unemployment
figure is only 3.3% of the population. Also remember that within that 3.3%
there will be a further percentage who have left one job, have another, but
who have not yet started. Furthermore the number of unfilled jobs far
exceeds that 3.3% figure.
As I said - don't take all you read in the popular press as gospel truth and
even when it is true extract the spin before you draw conclusions.
R.Peffers.
"Ian Smith" <ianin...@btinternet.naespam.com> wrote in message
news:114522829...@dyke.uk.clara.net...
The Scottish jobseekers figure is presently 3.3% and if you consider there
are a proportion of those who are between jobs you are peddling a myth.
> However, the state carries a lot of the blame, by perpetuating the
> problem. We have a huge welfare system, paid for by punitive levels of
> taxation, which stifles economic growth, which puts (by job loss or income
> erosion) more people in a position to claim more handouts.
3.3% unemployed means 96.7 are in work. Just what are you blethering about?
> Add into this the trend of allowing cheap immigrant (and migrant) labour
> to take up those jobs shunned by the benefit junkies as being
> too-lowly-paid, thus driving down the "going rate" even further.
Get real! 3.3% unemployed yet vacancies in so many areas. Furthermore jusy
how many of those, "benefit junkies", are traind to do the jobs that we
cannot fill, how many doctors, surgeons, nurses, teachers, vets,
radioographers, engineers, scientists, trained mechanics, electricians,
joiners, plumbers, gas fitters, teachers and so on could be recruited from
the ranks of those, "benefit junkies", you speak about?
> Migrant workers are sending their hard-earned cash back home to eastern
> Europe or wherever; not spending it here.
Rubbish! In the first place they need dig, food clothing and all the other
essentials of life. They probably have the odd pint or two and the real
biggy, THEY PAT TAX, Community charges. They use transport too.
> It is a vicious circle. Communism doesn't work, and is doomed to failure.
> We cannot afford to pay people for doing nothing (genuine
> hardship/disability/pensioners excepted).
Nope! That 3.3 unemployed is such a massive drain on the country even if
some of them are just between jobs. Strange too that there are far more
vacancies than there are unemployed people. I wonder how that comes about.
Seeing as you are such an expert perhaps you might enlighten us all?
> No wonder that so many of our real grafters become disillusioned enough to
> emigrate. Can't say I blame a single one of them, and I may follow suit
> once again if the death-spiral continues much further. Though part of me
> says "stay and fight"; I'm a stubborn bastard alright. :-)
>
Stubborn is not the word I was thinking about but - Hey!
Glenallan
Dearie me.!
I couldn't have put it better myself. ;-)
I'm going to bed now.
"Dearie, dearie me.!
Irene, wait tae ye hear the latest frae Rab Peffers"
Semi-illiterates and dole-drawers, never-married mothers,
an' yoo thought I wis reactionary. Dearie, dearie me."
"Aye, No' bad."
Boabby
---------
R.Peffers.
> "R.Peffers." <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:QNmdnXv3kYH...@bt.com...
>>
>> "Glenallan" <robert...@boabby.com> wrote in message
>> news:7e-dnfUynJK...@pipex.net...
Why? There are just not enough people to fill the jobs. I hate to keep
saying it but the unemployment figure is 3.3% and the vacancies exceed that
by a very long way. The fact is that the people coming in from abroad to
fill skilled jobs are filling jobs that we have no trained people for.
Within the 3.3% unemployed will be people who are changing jobs for better
pay and/or conditions and there will be those who are not able to be trained
to take the skilled jobs that need filling. The plain fact is that we not
only have a skill shortage vut we also need unskilled people to fill those
jobs that no one will take.
I only see one problem that could ease the situation and, as a genuine
disabled person, (and I worked until I was well over 65), I can say with
certainty there are people who still clain to be disabled but who have
managed to fake it somehow. This is slowly being sorted as they are forced
to take regular checks by doctors who are not their own. However the
Thatcher years caused a change of rules to hide the true figure of
unemployed people. This is when a person is signed off as sick and this
exceeds a given period. They then automatically get moved onto another stage
of long term sick. These are the ones who are caught playing golf and
working on the lump. Them we have the, "Self Employed", who sign on the dole
but who are actually earning. These are also the ones who fiddle the VAT
returns. The Black Economy far exceeds he cost to the country of the genuine
unemployed as does the large army of never-married single mothers.
> So, instead of increasing pay to attract/stop locals from leaving the
> country, we're keeping the pay low, and the locals keep leaving. In other
> words, we're replacing our own kind with foreigners, and exporting money
> at
> the same time (they send it back home to eastern Europe or wherever). For
> the life of me, I can't think of a single good reason for doing that.
> Except
> maybe something to do with share prices and dividends. ;-)
I think I have shown that you are perpetrating myths of many kinds. The
facts remain that Scottish Unemployment is only 3.3% and there are far more
vacancies than there are people to fill them and most of these are for high
to medium skilled jobs and the professions. Your average, "benefit junkies",
that you are so sure are the problem are not, and never could, be able to
fill those vacant places.
If you really want to know why the wages are so low you can blame the
publics views of the trade unions. For some strange reason the unions have
born the blame for the industrial troubles in the past. Yet it does not need
an massive intellect to know that all industrial disputes would not be
disputes unless there were two sides in conflict. So if THEY are not paying
good wages to US then consider that they still have their union, it is
called the CBI, while the workers have deserted their unions because of the
governments evil propaganda, (And NuLabour are no better in this than was
Thatcher.
The fact is quite plain, the conflict that was, "The Summer of Discontent",
would not have been a conflict unless there were two sides to the story.
R.Peffers.
way to train them as the highly skilled people that Scotland requires at
this point in her history. What on Earth do you think is reactionary about
that?
Entropy
"Ian Morrison" <iomor...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:FMz0g.80703$8Q3....@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
false though it used to be true a long time ago. Engineering now comes from
the Sciences though it used to come from trades and training. Your call.
Maybe you can enlighten me on the systems that fail...
Tam
Entropy
"The Real Fifeshire Bimbo" <h...@AwaAnBileYirHeid.com> wrote in message
news:4afihkF...@individual.net...
> It is if they want to be plumbers, mechanics or landscape gardeners. From
> what I've been reading we desperately need to train plumbers, electricians
> etc. since there will be a real shortage as baby boomers retire. You talk
> about "snobby", but snobbery's what shines through from you every time you
> beat this particular drum Tam!
>
>
Gosh I nearly forgot....there is major difference though - the best
education based on merit rather than who or what your father did - that's
the difference. That's one good thing about the US at least.
Tam
Ian Smith
Are you suggesting that there is a general labour shortage? Why isn't
the pay-rate climbing to attract/improve the supply of labour? A big enough
increase will result in many people opting to work rather than take
benefits. The law of supply and demand always rules, even if temporarily
(and stupidly) distorted by the (stupid) government.
Are you also suggesting that there are not a great number of people in
this country who are lazy bastards content to live off the state?
>
>> However, the state carries a lot of the blame, by perpetuating the
>> problem. We have a huge welfare system, paid for by punitive levels of
>> taxation, which stifles economic growth, which puts (by job loss or
>> income erosion) more people in a position to claim more handouts.
>
> 3.3% unemployed means 96.7 are in work. Just what are you blethering
> about?
How many people in Scotland between the ages of 18 and 65 (and not
disabled) are working? Actually, just curious. The government has been
messing around with unemployment figures for decades. To me, anyone not
working, but can, is unemployed. I figure that's much more than 3.3%. But I
may be biased on this issue, being one of those who pay "punitive taxes".
They have also messed around with inflation figures which have precious
little to do with the cost of buying a house, fuel and tax-burden nowadays.
>
>> Add into this the trend of allowing cheap immigrant (and migrant) labour
>> to take up those jobs shunned by the benefit junkies as being
>> too-lowly-paid, thus driving down the "going rate" even further.
> Get real! 3.3% unemployed yet vacancies in so many areas. Furthermore jusy
> how many of those, "benefit junkies", are traind to do the jobs that we
> cannot fill, how many doctors, surgeons, nurses, teachers, vets,
> radioographers, engineers, scientists, trained mechanics, electricians,
> joiners, plumbers, gas fitters, teachers and so on could be recruited from
> the ranks of those, "benefit junkies", you speak about?
And if demand increases for these professions, then pay for such must
increase, so supply will follow to match demand. How important are all these
professions to us? If they are that important, then we must pay them to
reflect this. Therefore the people will "train up" if they stand to benefit
from a worthwhile profession. It is a long-term thing. Governments are
short-term, which is why this country (and so many others) is so fucked up.
>
>> Migrant workers are sending their hard-earned cash back home to eastern
>> Europe or wherever; not spending it here.
>
> Rubbish! In the first place they need dig, food clothing and all the other
> essentials of life. They probably have the odd pint or two and the real
> biggy, THEY PAT TAX, Community charges. They use transport too.
Ok then, they spend some money here, and send the rest home. Net result,
we lose a lot of money.
>
>> It is a vicious circle. Communism doesn't work, and is doomed to failure.
>> We cannot afford to pay people for doing nothing (genuine
>> hardship/disability/pensioners excepted).
>
> Nope! That 3.3 unemployed is such a massive drain on the country even if
> some of them are just between jobs. Strange too that there are far more
> vacancies than there are unemployed people. I wonder how that comes about.
> Seeing as you are such an expert perhaps you might enlighten us all?
Does communism work? YES/NO. My strict answer is NO, except in
family/community affairs and not even all the time there. But
regionally/nationally? Absolutely no chance. People must profit from their
own efforts otherwise there is not point in trying.
Far more vacancies than unemployed people? That should mean a
constriction of supply, which should result in a price increase for labour,
which should result in an increase in the supply of said labour until things
balance out. I see none of this happening. Perhaps it's because we pay
people to do nothing.
>
>> No wonder that so many of our real grafters become disillusioned enough
>> to emigrate. Can't say I blame a single one of them, and I may follow
>> suit once again if the death-spiral continues much further. Though part
>> of me says "stay and fight"; I'm a stubborn bastard alright. :-)
>>
> Stubborn is not the word I was thinking about but - Hey!
Hey! We might disagree about some things, but I like to think we remain
gentlemen. I would still buy you a pint any day, out of respect. :-)
Adam Whyte-Settlar
> this country who are lazy bastards content to live off the state?
I found the idea very attractive in principle but, when I checked out the
contract, I discovered that the pay was pathetic - nowhere near the levels I
had seen advertised in the tabloid Newspapers.
I'm in awe of the 'Rab Nesbits' of the country who have the dedication to do
stick to it - it's a thankless full-time job being a jobless, skiving,
scrounger and the material rewards are few.
To make anything approaching a decent wage you first have to breed at least
6 kids, move into rent-paid state housing and then convincingly cripple your
husband/wife.
The latter might be fun at the time, but 6 kids?!
A W-S
Adam Whyte-Settlar
"Ian Smith" <ianin...@btinternet.naespam.com> wrote in message
> Yes. Sadly, too many people are unwilling to do a hard day's work, and
> are quite comfortable with the idea of being subsidised by those who do.
> However, the state carries a lot of the blame, by perpetuating the
> problem. We have a huge welfare system, paid for by punitive levels of
> taxation, which stifles economic growth,
Geez - where do you guys GET all this crap from!?
There is effectively zero unemployment in Scotland.
It is generally accepted that a 3% rate is, in reality, a zero rate as there
are always a percentage who are just between jobs or who have resigned and
not yet taken a new position etc.
I think you will find that Scotland has just about THE lowest unemployment
rate in the developed world at the moment. New Zealand held that record
until a few months ago with a rate of 3.4% - Now Scotland's rate stands at
3.3%.
Compare that with the Thatcher years when it stood at something approaching
29% - and that was just the 'official' figure. A figure that eventually
become so scewed the whole counting system had to be virtually restarted
from scratch once she had been ousted, as even her own civil servants
admitted that after 17 changes in the way the number was arrived at they
could no longer provide reliable figures. This from a party that was
supposed to be tough on the 'scroungers'/
But anyway - that last is just an aside - just today the Bank Of Scotland
Group economist Tim Crawford said the main threat to the "impressive" growth
was a rising skills shortage.
He has hardly got an axe to grind one way or another and he is quoting a new
report out today.
Measured on an index of 50 representing no change, Scotland's rate of
improvement rose from 60 in February to 62.7 last month.
This compared to 55.8 for the UK jobs market - where the figure a month
before was 55.7.
The report showed demand for permanent staff rose at its sharpest rate in
the 39-month survey's history during March, while for temporary staff the
increase was the largest in six months.
Growth in permanent staff pay in Scotland hit a four-month high as 34% of
all consultancies reported that average starting salaries had risen between
February and March.
The temporary/contract staff rate also accelerated in March, hitting its
highest rate of increase since November 2003.
However, the survey found skill shortages were becoming a growing problem.
Mr Crawford said: "Growth is particularly impressive when compared with the
performance of the wider UK jobs market.
"With Scottish data on temporary staff demand and billings equally
encouraging, the main threat to this momentum being carried forward would
appear to be rising skills shortages."
And yet in your peculiar world there are zillions of people scrounging on
the dole - FFS!
Impressive growth, wages rising, zero unemployment.
What MORE do you want?!
A W-S
R.Peffers.
> "R.Peffers." <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:sNidnRwxj_zyR9_Z...@bt.com...
>>
>> "Ian Smith" <ianin...@btinternet.naespam.com> wrote in message
>> news:114522829...@dyke.uk.clara.net...
>>> "Glenallan" <robert...@boabby.com> wrote in message
>>> news:F-KdnQsnzIM...@pipex.net...
>>>>
>>>> "R.Peffers." <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:QNmdnXv3kYH...@bt.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Glenallan" <robert...@boabby.com> wrote in message
quite comfortable with the idea of being subsidised by those who do.
>>
>> The Scottish jobseekers figure is presently 3.3% and if you consider
>> there are a proportion of those who are between jobs you are peddling a
>> myth.
>
> Are you suggesting that there is a general labour shortage? Why isn't
> the pay-rate climbing to attract/improve the supply of labour?
and Blair governments and abandoned their trade unions has something to do
with it. The bosses did not abandon their trade union, (The CBI), after the,
"Summer of Discontent", and the government's anti-Trade Union Laws. Just
remember that there are always at least two sides in any dispute and trade
disputes are no different. Why then only blame the TU side?.
> A big enough increase will result in many people opting to work rather
> than take benefits. The law of supply and demand always rules, even if
> temporarily (and stupidly) distorted by the (stupid) government.
It is not rocket science to check out the unemployment figures,the total job
vacancies and take one from the other. The total unemployed in Scotland
reached an all time low a short time ago but there has been several vert
recent job losses. However, there are jobs being created all the time and
all these figures have to be seasonally adjusted. The unemployment figures
are between 3.3% and around 5% depending on adjustment. That means the
employment figures are between 95% and 96.7% which is way above the UK
average.
>
> Are you also suggesting that there are not a great number of people in
> this country who are lazy bastards content to live off the state?
I suggest nothing. I made a statement of verifiable fact. If you consider an
employment rate of 96.7% and make allowance that at any one time there will
be people between jobs, people who are terminally sick, seriously ill, very
pregnant, had an accident, have small children, are insane, locked-up, just
gone bankrupt,etc., then the figures take on a very different shade of
meaning.
>
>>
>>> However, the state carries a lot of the blame, by perpetuating the
>>> problem. We have a huge welfare system, paid for by punitive levels of
>>> taxation, which stifles economic growth, which puts (by job loss or
>>> income erosion) more people in a position to claim more handouts.
>>
>> 3.3% unemployed means 96.7 are in work. Just what are you blethering
>> about?
>
> How many people in Scotland between the ages of 18 and 65 (and not
> disabled) are working? Actually, just curious. The government has been
> messing around with unemployment figures for decades. To me, anyone not
> working, but can, is unemployed.
Get real! I could give you quite a few reasons why people between 18 and 65
are not out working. Here are just a few. Independenly wealthy, (there are
more millionaires per head of population in Edinburgh that anywhere else in
the UK). There are famous actors and musicans between gigs, students over 18
but under 65 at university and further education, mothers who opt to bring
up their own kids full time for a few years and even a few fathers doing the
same. Detainees in Her Majesty's prisons,
> I figure that's much more than 3.3%. But I may be biased on this issue,
> being one of those who pay "punitive taxes".
Don't we all pay punitive taxes? It is rather a long time now since the main
taxes were direct income tax. Everyone in the UK pays VAT @ 17.5% on
everything, including services, that they buy. Everyone, one way or another,
pays fuel tax no matter how they travel.
> They have also messed around with inflation figures which have precious
> little to do with the cost of buying a house, fuel and tax-burden
> nowadays.
I'm an OAP, do you think I don't know?
This though has nothing to do with what you think are the lazy, unemployed,
benefit drawers in Scotland. The figures just do not pan out that this is
the case. Here is a figure though, that does. Scotland has a higher Gross
Domestic Product than the UK figure, (that means the Scots earn more for the
UK per head of population than any other UK country, (and the Scottish Oil
revenue does not even get counted for that figure).
>
>>
>>> Add into this the trend of allowing cheap immigrant (and migrant) labour
>>> to take up those jobs shunned by the benefit junkies as being
>>> too-lowly-paid, thus driving down the "going rate" even further.
>> Get real! 3.3% unemployed yet vacancies in so many areas. Furthermore
>> jusy how many of those, "benefit junkies", are traind to do the jobs that
>> we cannot fill, how many doctors, surgeons, nurses, teachers, vets,
>> radioographers, engineers, scientists, trained mechanics, electricians,
>> joiners, plumbers, gas fitters, teachers and so on could be recruited
>> from the ranks of those, "benefit junkies", you speak about?
>
> And if demand increases for these professions, then pay for such must
> increase, so supply will follow to match demand. How important are all
> these professions to us? If they are that important, then we must pay them
> to reflect this. Therefore the people will "train up" if they stand to
> benefit from a worthwhile profession. It is a long-term thing. Governments
> are short-term, which is why this country (and so many others) is so
> fucked up.
The problem lies with the people who opt to take useless, soft option,
degrees at Uni., rather than medical, science, teaching or engineering. How
many useless art degrees are there when there are not enough employment
opportunities to fill? How many business related degrees when there are not
enough places to employ them? Think how many study Social Science but who
will never need that qualification? How many computer studies?
Blame Tony! Education! Education! Education! Aye! Richt!
>
>
>>
>>> Migrant workers are sending their hard-earned cash back home to eastern
>>> Europe or wherever; not spending it here.
>>
>> Rubbish! In the first place they need dig, food clothing and all the
>> other essentials of life. They probably have the odd pint or two and the
>> real biggy, THEY PAT TAX, Community charges. They use transport too.
>
> Ok then, they spend some money here, and send the rest home. Net result,
> we lose a lot of money.
Wrong! In fact there were figures published last week that showed the
immigrants actually boost the tax intake of the UK by quite a large figure.
>
>>
>>> It is a vicious circle. Communism doesn't work, and is doomed to
>>> failure. We cannot afford to pay people for doing nothing (genuine
>>> hardship/disability/pensioners excepted).
>>
>> Nope! That 3.3 unemployed is such a massive drain on the country even if
>> some of them are just between jobs. Strange too that there are far more
>> vacancies than there are unemployed people. I wonder how that comes
>> about. Seeing as you are such an expert perhaps you might enlighten us
>> all?
>
> Does communism work? YES/NO. My strict answer is NO, except in
> family/community affairs and not even all the time there. But
> regionally/nationally? Absolutely no chance. People must profit from their
> own efforts otherwise there is not point in trying.
You are obviously not aware of what, "Communism", actually is. The word
comes from, "Commune", and is the way of life of communal living. If you
mean the system that was in force in the former USSR then it simply was not,
"Communism", in the first place. There is also the simple fact that
Capitalism is not too great either. The so called, "Capitalist", countries
are nothing of the sort. Let's see now - capitalism is the free market
economy but there are several flaws in that definition as far as those,
"Capitalist", economies go. In the first place the biggest Capitalist
Ecomony in the World is the USA and their ideas on Free Trade are laughable
in the extreme. Here are a few examples just to go on with. The USA had a
virtual monopoly on civil aviation aircraft manufacture in Boing but Boing
was subsidised. The Bush administrastion put trade sanctions on European
Steel entering the USA and quite a few other things too. Now to the second
thing that shoots down capitsalism. How can you explain that capitalist
countries only apply the free market rule to the business side of the
equation? Namely they do not allow the principle to applty to wages. The
simple fact is that the workers have a commodity for sale that is equally
tradeable on an open market. They sell their skill, knowledge and labour in
exchange for money. So why are there laws against Trade Union actions? Why
are there not similar laws against the CBI and local Round Tables?
How come the business can just hike up the price they charge to their
customers yet the worker cannot just up his price for his/her commodity to
their customers? Why must the trade unions be restricted when the CBI and
Round Tables are not? The simple answer is that the capitalist system is not
applied to the workers, ergo capitalism also does not work. You want the
answer? A mixture of both, a middle road that includes socialist principles
of caring for the weak, old, poor, sick and disabled while retaining the
benefits of free enterprise. Neither extreme will work in the long run.
>
> Far more vacancies than unemployed people? That should mean a
> constriction of supply, which should result in a price increase for
> labour, which should result in an increase in the supply of said labour
> until things balance out. I see none of this happening. Perhaps it's
> because we pay people to do nothing.
Perhaps it is because the free market economy is not allowed to be applied
by the workers or their unions but it is for the boss and the CBI.
Just ask yourself how the fuel prices have gone through the roof yet the
workers are restricted from bargaining for wage rises?
>
>>
>>> No wonder that so many of our real grafters become disillusioned enough
>>> to emigrate. Can't say I blame a single one of them, and I may follow
>>> suit once again if the death-spiral continues much further. Though part
>>> of me says "stay and fight"; I'm a stubborn bastard alright. :-)
>>>
>> Stubborn is not the word I was thinking about but - Hey!
>
> Hey! We might disagree about some things, but I like to think we remain
> gentlemen. I would still buy you a pint any day, out of respect. :-)
>
'Cept I don't drink. I'm not falling out with you. I'm debating with you -
we will both learn from doing so and that's how it should be.
Please never take too much to heart from the workings of Usenet but it is a
grand place for getting educated. Most of the things you though were stone
cold fact are just how the government, certain English interests and even
some Scots political activist would wish you to believe. However the things
I have claimed may be slightly out due to the fact that figures are slow to
filter through. They are, though, substantially right.You can find out lots
of information on the Scottish Executives website but here is a page to
start on - http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/11/2485808/58165
R.Peffers.
"Adam Whyte-Settlar" <grawi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4442...@clear.net.nz...
for NHS stamps in by account. I never had an unemployed day in my life.
Ian Smith
Great. All those good quality job opportunities and big wage rises will
more than offset the huge tax burden and stratospheric cost of living. Happy
days are here again!
Thought I did have some good points to make though. Lots of jobs doesn't
mean lots of good jobs. Wage rises? I don't know anyone who's had a decent
wage rise in years, ie. above inflation. I'm fortunate enough myself to have
kept up with government inflation figures, but that's it.
In a skill-shortage scenario, combined with full employment, I'd expect
some serious wage increases, well above inflation, in order to attract more
people into those important jobs, and discourage potential emigrants from
leaving.
However, I was in a funny mood last night, and may have exaggerated
certain problems. Hey, nobody's perfect!
Adam Whyte-Settlar
>
> "Adam Whyte-Settlar" <grawi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4442...@clear.net.nz...
>>
>> "Ian Smith" <ianin...@btinternet.naespam.com> wrote in message
>>> Are you also suggesting that there are not a great number of people
>>> in this country who are lazy bastards content to live off the state?
>>
>> I found the idea very attractive in principle but, when I checked out the
>> contract, I discovered that the pay was pathetic
> I wouldn't know as I have more than the required 50 year compliment of
> paid for NHS stamps in by account. I never had an unemployed day in my
> life.
I'm lucky enough to have had hundreds but I didn't claim unemployment
benifit because I had saved loads of money and to be honest it wasn't worth
the hassle for the pittance anyway.
Actually - that's not strictly true - I did claim it for about three months
back in 1972 I think it was, but only because the broo got really upset that
I wasn't claiming it. They liked to keep tabs on people even back then.
A W-S
Adam Whyte-Settlar
>> Are you suggesting that there is a general labour shortage? Why isn't
>> the pay-rate climbing to attract/improve the supply of labour?
Report out today.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4914272.stm
"Growth in permanent staff pay in Scotland hit a four-month high as 34% of
all consultancies reported that average starting salaries had risen between
February and March. The temporary/contract staff rate also accelerated in
March, hitting its highest rate of increase since November 2003."
And as for 'this country being so ****** up' as you put it Ian - it's the
fifth wealthiest in the world by the most commonly used global economic
measures.
You think *you've* got it tough - you wouldn't last a day in the colonies.
A W-S
Ian Smith
Alright then, I stand corrected. There are a lot less unemployed people
than there used to be.
>>
>>>
>>>> However, the state carries a lot of the blame, by perpetuating the
>>>> problem. We have a huge welfare system, paid for by punitive levels of
>>>> taxation, which stifles economic growth, which puts (by job loss or
>>>> income erosion) more people in a position to claim more handouts.
>>>
>>> 3.3% unemployed means 96.7 are in work. Just what are you blethering
>>> about?
>>
>> How many people in Scotland between the ages of 18 and 65 (and not
>> disabled) are working? Actually, just curious. The government has been
>> messing around with unemployment figures for decades. To me, anyone not
>> working, but can, is unemployed.
> Get real! I could give you quite a few reasons why people between 18 and
> 65 are not out working. Here are just a few. Independenly wealthy, (there
> are more millionaires per head of population in Edinburgh that anywhere
> else in the UK). There are famous actors and musicans between gigs,
> students over 18 but under 65 at university and further education, mothers
> who opt to bring up their own kids full time for a few years and even a
> few fathers doing the same. Detainees in Her Majesty's prisons,
Should the unemployment figure be the total able-bodied workforce minus
those actually working?
>> I figure that's much more than 3.3%. But I may be biased on this issue,
>> being one of those who pay "punitive taxes".
> Don't we all pay punitive taxes? It is rather a long time now since the
> main taxes were direct income tax. Everyone in the UK pays VAT @ 17.5% on
> everything, including services, that they buy. Everyone, one way or
> another, pays fuel tax no matter how they travel.
>
>> They have also messed around with inflation figures which have precious
>> little to do with the cost of buying a house, fuel and tax-burden
>> nowadays.
>
> I'm an OAP, do you think I don't know?
> This though has nothing to do with what you think are the lazy,
> unemployed, benefit drawers in Scotland. The figures just do not pan out
> that this is the case. Here is a figure though, that does. Scotland has a
> higher Gross Domestic Product than the UK figure, (that means the Scots
> earn more for the UK per head of population than any other UK country,
> (and the Scottish Oil revenue does not even get counted for that figure).
Impressive, to say the least.
Hmm. I've read somewhere about the reverse case being true. If I find
it, will dig it out for you. Anyway, the gist of it is that immigrants don't
bring a net gain to the economy.
I'm actually in agreement with you there. We must, as a society, avoid
the worst excesses of both communism and capitalism. My use of the word
communism was in reference to hard-working people subsidising those who
don't work hard, which is a practice ultimately doomed to failure.
>>
>> Far more vacancies than unemployed people? That should mean a
>> constriction of supply, which should result in a price increase for
>> labour, which should result in an increase in the supply of said labour
>> until things balance out. I see none of this happening. Perhaps it's
>> because we pay people to do nothing.
>
> Perhaps it is because the free market economy is not allowed to be applied
> by the workers or their unions but it is for the boss and the CBI.
> Just ask yourself how the fuel prices have gone through the roof yet the
> workers are restricted from bargaining for wage rises?
Yes, and companies apply restrictions on wage rises even when there are
marked improvements in profitability and worker productivity. The only
people to benefit are the shareholders, unless the company (unusually)
operates a profit-related bonus scheme for its workers. Perhaps I ought to
buy more shares.
>>
>>>
>>>> No wonder that so many of our real grafters become disillusioned enough
>>>> to emigrate. Can't say I blame a single one of them, and I may follow
>>>> suit once again if the death-spiral continues much further. Though part
>>>> of me says "stay and fight"; I'm a stubborn bastard alright. :-)
>>>>
>>> Stubborn is not the word I was thinking about but - Hey!
>>
>> Hey! We might disagree about some things, but I like to think we
>> remain gentlemen. I would still buy you a pint any day, out of respect.
>> :-)
>>
> 'Cept I don't drink. I'm not falling out with you. I'm debating with you -
> we will both learn from doing so and that's how it should be.
> Please never take too much to heart from the workings of Usenet but it is
> a grand place for getting educated. Most of the things you though were
> stone cold fact are just how the government, certain English interests and
> even some Scots political activist would wish you to believe. However the
> things I have claimed may be slightly out due to the fact that figures are
> slow to filter through. They are, though, substantially right.You can find
> out lots of information on the Scottish Executives website but here is a
> page to start on -
> http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/11/2485808/58165
Thank you for that information; appreciated. I'm aware that there are
many factions at work trying to make Scotland look bad economically. Like
the old argument about the UK spoon-feeding us, for example.
No, my concern is based on what I have seen "on the street" and with
people I know and know of. It is a grass-roots feeling, and as such is
unquantifiable in terms of percentages etc. The problems may be getting
better in some way, but they are still there.
R.Peffers.
Err! Yes it does. Those jobs are due to a skills shortage and a labour
shortage. That means they cannot fill the skilled jobs that are vacant nor
have they labour for those less desirable jobs that require few skills.
> Wage rises? I don't know anyone who's had a decent wage rise in years, ie.
> above inflation. I'm fortunate enough myself to have kept up with
> government inflation figures, but that's it.
Have you not noticed that since the workers kicked the unions into touch
there are few jobs with standardised wages. Most positions are negotiated by
each person for themselves. Do you think your workmates are going to tell
you that they are earning more than you for doing the same job? Do you think
your boss will tell you the guy at the next desk.bench/machine/booth/counter
is earning more than you?
>
> In a skill-shortage scenario, combined with full employment, I'd expect
> some serious wage increases, well above inflation, in order to attract
> more people into those important jobs, and discourage potential emigrants
> from leaving.
Don't you think the first step before leaving, or emigrating, is to look for
a job that pays better and/or has better conditions/perks in the area you
live in? It saves all that disruption. What the hell have you got to lose?
Anyway as Scotland in particular, and the UK in general, is doing much
better than most other nations just now there are probably better
opportunities here than abroad. No one can stop you from looking for a
better job and you do not even need to be unemployed to do so. Then, if you
find a better job the next logical step is to speak to your present employer
and ask him/her if they would prefer to raise your wages or lose you to a
possible competitor? If he/she is suffering a skills shortage then you can
only now win and he/she can only now lose. If he/she, then say, "off you
go", then you already have a better berth to climb into. Just remember that
if you have skills in a skills shortage the proverbial ba is in your court.
If you have no required skills then just who's fault is that?
>
> However, I was in a funny mood last night, and may have exaggerated
> certain problems. Hey, nobody's perfect!
Hey! This is Usenet. No one is expecting perfection but in the spirit of
Usenet we all pretend we are. Guid innit?
--
Robert Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
(When replying take pam away from peffers.
Scotland).
R.Peffers.
What surprises me is that in this day and age when the workers saw fit to
boot the Unions into touch the same workers have not grasped the principle
of supply and demand in an age when the workers have the supply and the
bosses the demand.Perhaps that is why I was voted as union rep for 15 years
solid and a few extra years here and there. If you have the skills mate get
out there and market them and if you have no skills then get off yer bum and
go get them. They will even pay you to go get them.
R.Peffers.
No. There are always those who are not employed, are able bodied, but who
are not claiming to be unemployed. That is why they now call the dole, "Job
Seeker's Allowance". In effect if you are not seeking work you do not count
in the figures but you are also not getting an allowance. For example a
mother who opts to remain at home for a few years to bring up her family. A
self employed person who winds up one one business and has not yet started
another one.
There are people who do not work but these must do without an allowance if
they are not seeking work. Even the disabled people are regularly made to
prove they are still disabled and if the MHS doctor says they are fit for
limited employment they must seek work or lose their allowances.
>
>>> I figure that's much more than 3.3%. But I may be biased on this issue,
>>> being one of those who pay "punitive taxes".
>> Don't we all pay punitive taxes? It is rather a long time now since the
>> main taxes were direct income tax. Everyone in the UK pays VAT @ 17.5% on
>> everything, including services, that they buy. Everyone, one way or
>> another, pays fuel tax no matter how they travel.
>>
>>> They have also messed around with inflation figures which have precious
>>> little to do with the cost of buying a house, fuel and tax-burden
>>> nowadays.
>>
>> I'm an OAP, do you think I don't know?
>> This though has nothing to do with what you think are the lazy,
>> unemployed, benefit drawers in Scotland. The figures just do not pan out
>> that this is the case. Here is a figure though, that does. Scotland has a
>> higher Gross Domestic Product than the UK figure, (that means the Scots
>> earn more for the UK per head of population than any other UK country,
>> (and the Scottish Oil revenue does not even get counted for that figure).
>
> Impressive, to say the least.
This is the daft thing about it. The English keep preaching that they
subsidise Scotland but anyone can find the evidence that the boot is on the
other foot and Scotland has been subsidising the English over my entire
lifetime. Believe it or not I investigated these fact way back in the 1950s
before the oil was discovered. Yet to this day most Scots are frightened to
be independent. The true facts are there to be seen by anyone who cares to
look.
Last weeks figures show that they do. Perhaps you are being mixed up by the
terminology?
Immigrants, (as a whole), benefit the economy by a very large way. Asylum
seekers are not allowed to work until they are granted asylum status after
vwhich they become immigrants and more than pay their way. So the statement
that Asylum seekers cost the country is true but that immigrants are is not.
Then there is the confusion of, "Illegal immigrants", who, being illegal do
not pay tax. Make them legal and they do.
Does that, perhaps, explain the system? Simple really - it costs the country
to keep asylum seekers and illegal immigrants but all that changes when we
make them legal.
Do not for a moment think that all those Asylum Seekers are just labourers
looking for work cleaning toilets. There are doctors, vets, nurses,
engineers, tradesmen/women, scientists and everything else too among them.
Just think that Scotland is short of dentists yet there are fully qualified
dentiists not allowed to work and we are paying them while they wait to be
granted asylum status. Why not grant them states and gain a dentist while
losing a benefit drawer?
What the hell - even if they are economic migrants - they want work and we
need skilled people. Why should we bother if they are coloured or from
ethnic minorities. Employ them and there is every chance they will be good
Scots in a few years time, (and if they are not their Scots born kids will
probable think of themselves as Scots.
Not true - there is a big difference between won't work and can't work.
I have no problem with the latter but do with the former.
As it happens the rules in force now mean that if they refuse to seek work
they get taken off benefits and there is sometimes great force applied to
those who are not able to work to force them into work, (with disasterous
results).
>
>>>
>>> Far more vacancies than unemployed people? That should mean a
>>> constriction of supply, which should result in a price increase for
>>> labour, which should result in an increase in the supply of said labour
>>> until things balance out. I see none of this happening. Perhaps it's
>>> because we pay people to do nothing.
>>
>> Perhaps it is because the free market economy is not allowed to be
>> applied by the workers or their unions but it is for the boss and the
>> CBI.
>> Just ask yourself how the fuel prices have gone through the roof yet the
>> workers are restricted from bargaining for wage rises?
>
> Yes, and companies apply restrictions on wage rises even when there are
> marked improvements in profitability and worker productivity. The only
> people to benefit are the shareholders, unless the company (unusually)
> operates a profit-related bonus scheme for its workers. Perhaps I ought to
> buy more shares.
The worker has the solution to that little problem in their own hands. No
one stops you from seeking a new job while you are still working. Then you
can ask for a rise and if they refuse just hand in your notice and move to
the new job. Use their own, "Free Market Economy", against them. Your
commodity is your skills, your labour, or both. Get out there are sell
yourself. You do not own them loyalty if they do not show you loyalty. As it
happens you have a head start over the unemployed for the employer knows
he/she has an experienced worker.
There are still black spots where the unemployment figures are high but
these are offset by areas that have full employment and job vacancies.
Glasgow is probably still the worse area for unemployed people. I believe,
but stand to be corrected, the Glasgow figure is around 8% on jobseekers but
that this figure is added to by a large proportion of long tern sick and
disabled people. This could be more innocent than bare figures would
indicate. For example there was a great deal of asbestosis among former ship
building workers. Then the Glasgow way of life tends to cause more illness
of the cardiovascular type. Fife also has such problems from the ship
workers at Rosyth and Burntisland and the former miners lung and vibration
white finger disabilities. However there are areas that report minus figures
for unemployment, (from job vacancies).
If you ever feel you have doubts about Scotland's ability to stand alone
then remember this, Scotland is a net exporter of food, fuel and energy
while England are net importers of all three and Scotland's Gross Domestic
Product is consistently higher than England's, (GDP is the per capita
earnings of the country).
Adam Whyte-Settlar
>>
>> What MORE do you want?!
>
> more than offset the huge tax burden and stratospheric cost of living.
> Happy days are here again!
Well it's never enough is it?
Even (most) billionaires still continue to accumulate more, but it's all
relative as Einstein and I always say.
But I would have to hold that, broadly speaking, the economic situation in
Scotland is probably the best it's been certainly in my living memory.
I heard things were good in the 50's but I think that's rose-tinted
nostalgia myself - a lot to do with the war just ended.
Of course there are always different problems emerging - the return of the
gangs, a lot of the kids are drinking too much (it appears) and literacy
standards seem to be falling, but to hear some of you go on.
Geez.
One thing about living for a few years in a country that is much poorer than
Scotland - and not just economically - is you begin to appreciate what you
had a lot more.
Did you see the picture of Christchurch smog I posted in another thread? - a
huge percentage of people here live much as they did in Birmingham in the
early 60's. No decent heating and every (admittedly short) winter the place
thick with pea-soupers just for a start. Really basic quality of life stuff.
The health service is about mid 1970's standards and you have to pay for
most of it. If you want an MRI scan it's going to cost you about 800 quid
and you still have to wait. Lots of people die of illnesses that would be
treated for free in Scotland.
There is a lot of real poverty here. Not 'starvation' poverty but certainly
'no-shoes for the kids' poverty and very poor diets. Especially among the
Maori in the northlands.
Hundreds of thousands of people here work for less than 3:50p per hour and
try to bring up kids on it.
And yet this is still one of the *best* countries in the world to live in.
You auld yins - you don't know you're born.
> Thought I did have some good points to make though. Lots of jobs doesn't
> mean lots of good jobs. Wage rises? I don't know anyone who's had a decent
> wage rise in years, ie. above inflation. I'm fortunate enough myself to
> have kept up with government inflation figures, but that's it.
I think lots of jobs will eventually make lots of good jobs.
Or it at least follows that if the demand is there then anyone with half a
brain will train for them.
I know what you mean about wages though - but the workers deserve everything
they (don't) get if you ask me. It's up to them to ask for more or leave.
That's what I do anyway.
Maybe memories of 4.5 million long-term unemployed under Thatcher makes them
nervous still?
They *are* rising faster than at any time in the last 3 years though.
> In a skill-shortage scenario, combined with full employment, I'd expect
> some serious wage increases, well above inflation, in order to attract
> more people into those important jobs, and discourage potential emigrants
> from leaving. However, I was in a funny mood last night, and may have
> exaggerated certain problems. Hey, nobody's perfect!
Speak for yourself.
A W-S
The Highlander
Ensures that at least one will take pity on you in your old age and
get you off the streets.
The Highlander
Faodaidh nach ionann na beachdan anns
an pòst seo agus beachdan a' Ghàidheil.
The views expressed in this post are
not necessarily those of The Highlander.
Entropy
Indeed, I can just imagine the squeeling when he has to pay for a doctor or
ripped off by a dentist.Then you have to pay to get your rubbish bin
removed - per bag! Dear old Blighty has many good points.
Tam
Glenallan
"R.Peffers." <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote
> Then the Glasgow way of life tends to cause more illness of the
> cardiovascular type.
This sounds like an interesting concept I should bone up on.
Glenallan
----------
R.Peffers.
R.Peffers.
"Custos Custodum" <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2u89421ojlfasrv5e...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 18:14:16 +0100, "R.Peffers."
> <peff...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Glenallan" <robert...@boabby.com> wrote in message
>>> There is a widespread notion being put about by the
>>> Scottish Executive that Scotland NEEDS immigration.
>>>
>>> This is a notion that is quite false and is part of the
>>> executive's agenda of turning everything on its head
>>> and offering a world of make believe to the Scottish people.
>>> It is a notion being put about by those with 'agenda'.
>>Indeed they do have an agenda. It is the depopulation of Scotland whish
>>sank
>>below 5 million but is now recovering thanks to that agenda and the
>>immigrants who have come to join us - and that includes the white ones,
>>from
>>everywhere including England, as well as the coloured ones.
>>>
>>> The plain fact is that Scotland, since the destruction of
>>> Scottish industry in the seventies has been unable to
>>> attract enough new real industry to sustain its population.
>>> Armies of Scots no longer work beyond the age of 50
>>> and a significant number of those are Social Security
>>> spongers and redundantees on the make claiming for
>>> medical conditions that they do not have.
>>> And everybody knows it.
>>
>>Indeed there are some but, like your other daft claims, facts and
>>statistics
>>tell a very different story.
>>>
>>> What IS needed is a twin incentive of jobs
>>> provision and finite social security provision.
>>More rot - there are skilled people being encouraged to come to Scotland
>>to
>>fill skilled jobs that we cannot fill from the existing population.
>
> There aren't as many unfilled jobs as you seem to think.
You will, of course, have a reference for that statement?
>
>>The
>>health service would crumble without the foreign recruits from Consultants
>>to surgeons, doctors, nurses, radiographers, porters, cleaners and
>>mortuary
>>attendants. Then we need dentists, vets and just about every other skill
>>that our lazy, spoilt children are too damned thick to bother training
>>for.
>
> Utter nonsense. These courses are massively oversubscribed and always
> have been. With GPs earning £100k on average, it's hardly surprising.
> If there is a shortage, it is because the govt failed to fund
> sufficient training places, not because of a lack of adequately
> qualified applicants. The current shortage of dentists exists mainly
> because so many of them have withdrawn their services from the NHS.
> Offer them better contracts and they'll soon come back.
>
>>We send them to school and they leave there with a large proportion partly
>>illiterate and innumerate. Even then we send them to Uni and they are far
>>too lazy to do anything that requires work. Instead they take the soft
>>opinions and avoid science, engineering and medical degrees. We have a
>>nation of very stupid Social Workers, Unmanageable Managers, Inartistic
>>Artists and a great need for Doctors,
>
> Possibly.
>
>>Scientists, Engineers
>
> Not in Scotland. Ask anyone who has actually been looking for work in
> these fields. The pickings are very slim, I assure you.
Are you looking in the right places?
>
>>and any other
>>really skilled job you care to thing on.
>>
>>>
>>> For as long as Scotland has the Social Security 'disease'
>>> it will always be the home of a third rate people.
>>
>>Your statistics cannot prove that.
>>>
>>> The Executive's assertion that we cannot provide services
>>> and pensions to our people without an influx of immigrants
>>> points to a grotesquely perverse agenda for Scotland
>>> and betrays their essential defeatism and poverty of policy.
>>>
>>> Glenallan
>>> ---------
>>
>>The reason for the problem is a falling population and a low birth rate
>>while the existing population grows old. Just try this. Take away from the
>>Scottish population figures the number of other UK incomers, the Asylum
>>Seekers and the other immigrants and look at what the population would
>>have
>>been without them. Then remember that much of the falling population was
>>due
>>to young Scots going elsewhere and the picture is/was bleak.
>
> The main reason they continue to go elsewhere is to find work that
> doesn't involve answering phones or wiping arses for £5 an hour.
I'm talking about skilled jobs. You know the ones? They require training,
schooling and actually getting your arse out of joint to better yourself.