Off Topic Congratulations We're Out

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Agency worker: many companies use agencies that only recruit from Eastern Europe. They bus them in daily into London and bus them all over the country. I have used them in differnt companies so know how it works. They are given a job and a house to share and they get rent, transport, utilities deducted and even though the company is charged an hourly rate that doesnt mean the worker gets anything like that. he/she is also given orma to fill in so that they are given housing benefit and any benefit they can get. They are brought in on anualised hours which means if its quiet Incan send them home and when its busy I can have them working 7 days and 12 hour shifts, the rate I get charged is the same.

In other words they are cheap labour, brought in because it saves a business paying 12.5% NI on top of normal hourly rate and ovwrtime and bank holiday pay. So Cojones or whoever said its more expensive using agency is wrong. Wages are driven down by unscrupulous employers and agencies who get as many cheap workers as they need because even though they get peanuts from the agency it is still miles more than what they get in Eastern Europe
 
Doc said:
Agency worker: many companies use agencies that only recruit from Eastern Europe. They bus them in daily into London and bus them all over the country. I have used them in differnt companies so know how it works. They are given a job and a house to share and they get rent, transport, utilities deducted and even though the company is charged an hourly rate that doesnt mean the worker gets anything like that. he/she is also given orma to fill in so that they are given housing benefit and any benefit they can get. They are brought in on anualised hours which means if its quiet Incan send them home and when its busy I can have them working 7 days and 12 hour shifts, the rate I get charged is the same.

In other words they are cheap labour, brought in because it saves a business paying 12.5% NI on top of normal hourly rate and ovwrtime and bank holiday pay. So Cojones or whoever said its more expensive using agency is wrong. Wages are driven down by unscrupulous employers and agencies who get as many cheap workers as they need because even though they get peanuts from the agency it is still miles more than what they get in Eastern Europe
Click to expand...
It was Glory that was wrong again.
 
Whitejock said:
:D You've never met Mick, have you? :D

He could probably pop your head off with one hand, just like the cork out of a bottle. :D

Not getting involved. Just presenting a first hand observation.
Click to expand...

I was only having a laugh anyway. I'm not getting involved either. Calling people sheep is just a stupid argument. That was my only observation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whitejock
leedsrevolution said:
I was only having a laugh anyway. I'm not getting involved either. Calling people sheep is just a stupid argument. That was my only observation.
Click to expand...

Ffs... There was a ruck and i wasnt involved and then peace broke out.
What a let down.
You might want to reappraise when I tell you that jock is bullshitting you.
Olof is 4ft10 with an 18" quiff.
 
lifecheshirewhite said:
No the word I mistakenly missed out was 50% Polish agency workers.Once they can no longer come in wages will rise.
Click to expand...

Doesn't make a blind bit of difference which country they come from. It's not going to stop the onslaught of market forces on wages. You see you've forgotten this one tiny little thing - employers pay low wages because they don't want to pay high wages. As long as they can get away with it they will pay lower and lower wages. With lower wages comes lower aggregate demand which reduces the number of jobs available. So in 5 years time when we're rid of all the EU migrants but we're still just as poor as before the brexit vote because the number of available jobs has also gone down because there's fewer people spending money because nobodys ****ing got any, I'll be turning to brexit voters to ask you what we're going to do next.

If you spent 5 minutes processing the fundamental basics of economics you'd understand that, but brexit voters never do. All just blither on about how it's all the immigrants fault. The only things that can make wages go back up is union representation or failing that, individual empowerment through a strong welfare state and cheap public services. Once you have that, the working classes and lower middle classes have more disposable income and stimulate job creation for everyone else. The number of available jobs exceeds the labour supply and wages keep going up. That's what happened in the post war years. But you don't seem to want those either, or you wouldn't keep voting Tory/UKIP.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BillysStatue
lifecheshirewhite said:
I'm afraid its true,Glory's only a pretend socialist.
Click to expand...

Oh really?

Well I'm a real, proper socialist and I'm not too arsed either way what glory thinks.

I'm just sick of economically illiterate right wingers and brexit voters talking bollocks and pretending as if they know everything. The anti-expert brigade whose non-arguments cause cognitive dissonance in a person of above average intelligence.
 
Doc said:
Agency worker: many companies use agencies that only recruit from Eastern Europe. They bus them in daily into London and bus them all over the country. I have used them in differnt companies so know how it works. They are given a job and a house to share and they get rent, transport, utilities deducted and even though the company is charged an hourly rate that doesnt mean the worker gets anything like that. he/she is also given orma to fill in so that they are given housing benefit and any benefit they can get. They are brought in on anualised hours which means if its quiet Incan send them home and when its busy I can have them working 7 days and 12 hour shifts, the rate I get charged is the same.

In other words they are cheap labour, brought in because it saves a business paying 12.5% NI on top of normal hourly rate and ovwrtime and bank holiday pay. So Cojones or whoever said its more expensive using agency is wrong. Wages are driven down by unscrupulous employers and agencies who get as many cheap workers as they need because even though they get peanuts from the agency it is still miles more than what they get in Eastern Europe
Click to expand...

Market forces dictate that this can't happen unless the conditions were already there for it to happen in. IE, getting rid of union representation, workers rights and a strong welfare state is the reason why wages are so low, aggregate demand is low and there aren't enough jobs to go around. Polish agency workers are nothing more than a symptom.

And it wasn't me who said it was more expensive using agency workers. I merely said it's irrelevant. It's a dead cat and I wish you'd stop talking about it and address the real fundamental problem with thatcherism as an economic model so we can finally be rid of it, instead of voting brexit and voting tory and ukip and keeping it going for another 20 years while people like me in my generation struggle to make ends meet.
 
Cojones said:
Doesn't make a blind bit of difference which country they come from. It's not going to stop the onslaught of market forces on wages. You see you've forgotten this one tiny little thing - employers pay low wages because they don't want to pay high wages. As long as they can get away with it they will pay lower and lower wages. With lower wages comes lower aggregate demand which reduces the number of jobs available. So in 5 years time when we're rid of all the EU migrants but we're still just as poor as before the brexit vote because the number of available jobs has also gone down because there's fewer people spending money because nobodys ****ing got any, I'll be turning to brexit voters to ask you what we're going to do next.

If you spent 5 minutes processing the fundamental basics of economics you'd understand that, but brexit voters never do. All just blither on about how it's all the immigrants fault. The only things that can make wages go back up is union representation or failing that, individual empowerment through a strong welfare state and cheap public services. But you don't seem to want those either, or you wouldn't keep voting Tory/UKIP.
Click to expand...
Think you're being quite blinkered, Marko. Brexit means we return to the pre-EEC position. We had a buoyant economy then, and there is no reason why this cannot be re-established. Indeed, there is every indication that it can be substantially improved. There are fast-growing markets available now that didn't exist in pre-EEC days, which are prohibitively expensive to trade with because of the protectionist EU policy in place. We will be free of this restriction, and the EU economy has stagnated, as it happens anyway. For the same reason, we will be able to increase our trade again with the Commonwealth, which the EEC jealously prevented us from maintaining. Again, the gloves will be off, and trade should take off quickly on favourable terms.

The immigration issue has never bothered me. Having studied Economics, I would encourage immigration to boost growth. Controls? Why not, as long as good sense prevails. I also look forward to the end of wine lakes, butter mountains, subsidies to prevent farmers producing etc. and who knows, we might have enough money to develop our own infrastructure, having spent decades paying for new members to build railways, road systems etc. that we ourselves don't have.

Time to take the wider view, Marko. There are a lot of benefits out there to be had. It is foolish for people to bury their head in the sand just because change is going to happen. It's one of the great fears of humanity, but change sometimes has to be embraced in order to make great leaps forward. People of a certain age will see the parallels of the Remainers behaviours with the Remainers who did not want to join the EEC in the first place! Very true - read back & learn.

There are a number of downsides to Brexit. I cannot deny that. The one that worries me most is the fact that war breaking out in Europe is a bit of a rarity these days, whereas we have a long and dark history of warfare in Europe. Hopefully we can find a means to maintain and extend this peaceful period in our history. I also bemoan the loss of free movement, but have a strong feeling that the model will not change too much from the present - it benefits nations and individuals all round, and the will of the people will endure. I truly believe that. For example, will Spain evict the 1.5m Brits that live there? I seriously doubt it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: OLOF and ristac
Again for all you folk who wanted to see the country drown through lack of space, lack of schools, lack of doctors, lack of hospitals. We dont have the fooking room and the only way to stop immigration of unskilled migrants fromEurope is to leave.

You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: FORZA LEEDS
Whitejock said:
Think you're being quite blinkered, Marko. Brexit means we return to the pre-EEC position. We had a buoyant economy then, and there is no reason why this cannot be re-established. Indeed, there is every indication that it can be substantially improved. There are fast-growing markets available now that didn't exist in pre-EEC days, which are prohibitively expensive to trade with because of the protectionist EU policy in place. We will be free of this restriction, and the EU economy has stagnated, as it happens anyway. For the same reason, we will be able to increase our trade again with the Commonwealth, which the EEC jealously prevented us from maintaining. Again, the gloves will be off, and trade should take off quickly on favourable terms.

The immigration issue has never bothered me. Having studied Economics, I would encourage immigration to boost growth. Controls? Why not, as long as good sense prevails. I also look forward to the end of wine lakes, butter mountains, subsidies to prevent farmers producing etc. and who knows, we might have enough money to develop our own infrastructure, having spent decades paying for new members to build railways, road systems etc. that we ourselves don't have.

Time to take the wider view, Marko. There are a lot of benefits out there to be had. It is foolish for people to bury their head in the sand just because change is going to happen. It's one of the great fears of humanity, but change sometimes has to be embraced in order to make great leaps forward. People of a certain age will see the parallels of the Remainers behaviours with the Remainers who did not want to join the EEC in the first place! Very true - read back & learn.

There are a number of downsides to Brexit. I cannot deny that. The one that worries me most is the fact that war breaking out in Europe is a bit of a rarity these days, whereas we have a long and dark history of warfare in Europe. Hopefully we can find a means to maintain and extend this peaceful period in our history. I also bemoan the loss of free movement, but have a strong feeling that the model will not change too much from the present - it benefits nations and individuals all round, and the will of the people will endure. I truly believe that. For example, will Spain evict the 1.5m Brits that live there? I seriously doubt it.
Click to expand...

We had a buoyant Keynesian economy then. Now we don't.
 
Doc said:
Again for all you folk who wanted to see the country drown through lack of space, lack of schools, lack of doctors, lack of hospitals. We dont have the fooking room and the only way to stop immigration of unskilled migrants fromEurope is to leave.

You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...

Wasn't aware it was a competition?

We don't have school or hospital places because of cuts. It's as simple as that. Every time you vote UKIP for the sake of immigration you empower the Tories to make more cuts. Every vote for UKIP is a signal that you want more thatcherism, more privatisation, more cuts. But you're not listening. All you're interested in is blaming someone else when it's your own poor political choices that have led to this. Take some responsibility for ****s sake.
 
Doc said:
Just for you leftys
You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...
I wrote to one of our parliamentary reps a while ago on this subject. The person in question was advocating the acceptance of unlimited migrants into our country, supposed refugees and economic blood suckers, and prattling on about how we should welcome these people into our homes. At the time schools were being closed because of lack of teachers and, of course, financial cut backs. I suggested to the person to whom I was writing, that they close their local primary school and turn it into a migrant half-way house, canvass the surrounding houses about accepting a refugee family into their home until other accommodation could be arranged. Surprisingly, I never received a reply to my suggestion. I don't know if you have the same saying as we have, NIMBY, not in my backyard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FORZA LEEDS
Doc said:
Just for you leftys
You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...

What a ****ing **** argument. I'm calling for the country as a whole to provide for refugees, which it can only do by investing in infrastructure. I don't expect individuals to take these people into their homes, I expect our incredibly rich country to borrow money from its central bank (which it does anyway, more so under right wing Tory governments than it ever has under Labour) and invest it in housing, hospitals, schools and welfare. Running an economy is as simple as that. You keep destroying it by obsessing about immigration, voting UKIP and telling the tories you want more cuts, more thatcherism, more privatisation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back