The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

[Hiberno-Britannic Politics] Stay Alert Home Alert Stay Household

19495969798100»

Posts

  • jaziekjaziek Bad at everything And mad about it.Registered User regular
    Find a way to treat and pay British people exactly like the migrants = probably the government's ideal solution, but who knows if this is even feasible?

    I think probably the most likely thing. There are strong proponents of getting rid of the working time directive and minumum wage in the cabinet. I would expect to see them gone in the next year or so.
    That many people being treated that badly would surely require quite a huge change in how Britain does things as a society surely?

    I don't really think so. People were more than happy to treat the migrants that way. They just need a reason to think that they're better than the people doing these jobs, and I'm sure the papers will be happy to give them one, whatever it may be.

    Steam ||| SC2 - Jaziek.377 on EU & NA. ||| Twitch Stream
  • Rhesus PositiveRhesus Positive GNU Terry Pratchett Registered User regular
    Cambridge University is going online-only for the next academic year BBC article

    A lot of people on my Twitter feed are saying that paying nine grand for a glorified Open University course is ridiculous, which seems to me to be slightly missing the point that the fees were ridiculous anyway - I paid three grand a year and I didn't get 1/3 of the education that people a couple of years below me did

    Well, maybe I did, but that was because of procrastination and booze, not the lectures

    [Muffled sounds of gorilla violence]
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    It's only the lectures that are going online only as far as I can tell

    They seem to be saying that seminars and tutorials will still be face to face, albeit socially distanced, which is the majority of teaching time in the Oxbridge model anyway

  • Rhesus PositiveRhesus Positive GNU Terry Pratchett Registered User regular
    So if there are face to face tutorials happening, then students will still need to be in their accommodation to go into the various faculties

    In my uni days, I lived in halls where I'd be exposed to more people than in some of my lectures

    It seems like a half measure in those instances

    [Muffled sounds of gorilla violence]
  • Jam WarriorJam Warrior Registered User regular
    edited May 2020
    shryke wrote: »
    It's kind of weird that a lot of the most essential work is the lowest paid while some of the least essential is the highest paid. What an odd way to build a society.

    You don't get paid based on how essential you are. There's a bunch of factors but just think of, for example, competition. It doesn't matter how essential a job is if it's easy to find someone else to do it should you start asking for too much money.

    It's one of the (shitty) arguments against UBI. If people don't need to do the really unpleasant jobs in order to live then we'll have (shock, horror) to pay them more to do them to make them attractive! And then where would we be and who would I look down on!? I'm not paying more for X as a consumer or dropping my profit margin as a producer that's for sure!

    Jam Warrior on
    MhCw7nZ.gif
  • PerduraboPerdurabo Registered User regular
    Nah the trade off is cost. People want cheap food, but don't like the idea of cheap labour being behind it.

  • CasualCasual Wiggle Wiggle Wiggle Flap Flap Flap Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    It's kind of weird that a lot of the most essential work is the lowest paid while some of the least essential is the highest paid. What an odd way to build a society.

    You don't get paid based on how essential you are. There's a bunch of factors but just think of, for example, competition. It doesn't matter how essential a job is if it's easy to find someone else to do it should you start asking for too much money.

    In the case of fruit pickers though apparently it isn't yet they still want to pay low wages. That's the root of the issue here. The employers want to pretend that fruit picking labour is a buyer's market when it plainly isn't.

  • AlphaRomeroAlphaRomero Registered User regular
    It's kind of weird that a lot of the most essential work is the lowest paid while some of the least essential is the highest paid. What an odd way to build a society.

    Society is one big Pyramid scheme.

  • smofsmof [Growling historic on the fury road] Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    It's kind of weird that a lot of the most essential work is the lowest paid while some of the least essential is the highest paid. What an odd way to build a society.

    You don't get paid based on how essential you are. There's a bunch of factors but just think of, for example, competition. It doesn't matter how essential a job is if it's easy to find someone else to do it should you start asking for too much money.

    Thanks for the explanation, I had no idea.

  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    There is less of this labour available now than in the 90s or 2000s (because people get older and there are increasingly other opportunities)

  • Redcoat-13Redcoat-13 Registered User regular
    Cambridge University is going online-only for the next academic year BBC article

    A lot of people on my Twitter feed are saying that paying nine grand for a glorified Open University course is ridiculous, which seems to me to be slightly missing the point that the fees were ridiculous anyway - I paid three grand a year and I didn't get 1/3 of the education that people a couple of years below me did

    Well, maybe I did, but that was because of procrastination and booze, not the lectures

    You’ve got things like the sciences which are going to require you to do teaching labs. Students in Chemistry at any rate have practical exams in the first week so the University has an idea of what skills you’re coming in with.

    The 4th year of Chemistry is basically a year long lab project.

    In terms of costs I’m pretty sure once you take in to account all the lab equipment, chemicals, support, etc...the University is not rolling around in piles of cash.

    PSN Fleety2009
  • jaziekjaziek Bad at everything And mad about it.Registered User regular
    edited May 2020
    Cambridge university is, in fact, rolling around in piles of cash.

    https://www.cam.ac.uk/about-the-university/view-and-download-the-annual-report

    5.2 billion in assets and according to this last year they ran a surplus of 16 million, which is less than I expected tbh.

    jaziek on
    Steam ||| SC2 - Jaziek.377 on EU & NA. ||| Twitch Stream
  • HugglesHuggles Registered User regular
    edited May 2020
    jaziek wrote: »
    Cambridge university is, in fact, rolling around in piles of cash.

    https://www.cam.ac.uk/about-the-university/view-and-download-the-annual-report

    5.2 billion in assets and according to this last year they ran a surplus of 16 million, which is less than I expected tbh.

    Not to defend their financing priorities, but worth remembering cash isn't the same as assets, especially when no-one's in a position to buy it from you.

    Also, fun fact: those assets are mostly owned by the colleges, which operate independently from the faculties (though it's really a lot more complex than that). So the bonanza of rent earned by Trinity each year doesn't go into the same pool that (say) lab equipment is bought from. So the university as a whole is incredibly rich but the amount that gets spent on research activities compared to other top research universities in the country doesn't track with that difference in wealth.

    Huggles on
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    It's kind of weird that a lot of the most essential work is the lowest paid while some of the least essential is the highest paid. What an odd way to build a society.

    You don't get paid based on how essential you are. There's a bunch of factors but just think of, for example, competition. It doesn't matter how essential a job is if it's easy to find someone else to do it should you start asking for too much money.

    In the case of fruit pickers though apparently it isn't yet they still want to pay low wages. That's the root of the issue here. The employers want to pretend that fruit picking labour is a buyer's market when it plainly isn't.

    It was though until you guys screwed with your immigration system. Fruit pickers were available at the price point they wanted.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited May 2020
    Perdurabo wrote: »
    Nah the trade off is cost. People want cheap food, but don't like the idea of cheap labour being behind it.

    Yup. This is the big limiting factor across the entire food industry and why it looks the way it does. In the end basically everyone subsidizes the cost of food or cuts labour standards/pay or something similar somewhere in order to keep the price of food down. Consumers do not want to pay what food would actually cost if no corners were being cut somewhere.

    shryke on
  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    The current labour shortage has more to do with coronavirus and affects every single Western European country at the moment (and this comes on top of less and less people willing to do the job)

    Also every food isn't the same, carbohydrate-rich crops are less labor-intensive than berries or vegetables

  • PlatyPlaty Registered User regular
    edited May 2020
    People getting paid poorly is definitely part of the problem, this work is nowadays done less by Poles, the Czech etc. and more by Ukrainians, Belorussians, in some places Syrian refugees or African immigrants

    Especially the movement of people outside the EU is severely affected by the current pandemic

    Platy on
  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    People don't want to pay high prices for food, because they need food and the wealth in a great many societies is pooling near the top, leaving everyone else poorer. People could probably stand higher food costs, if they got paid higher wages. I don't know enough about the financial flow of the farming industry and grocery stores, I know some industries have less of a margin than others, but I also imagine that some of the difference in cost is simply some part of the industry which is unwilling to cut into its profits at all.

    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • AlphaRomeroAlphaRomero Registered User regular
    edited May 2020
    Platy wrote: »
    People getting paid poorly is definitely part of the problem, this work is nowadays done less by Poles, the Czech etc. and more by Ukrainians, Belorussians, in some places Syrian refugees or African immigrants

    Especially the movement of people outside the EU is severely affected by the current pandemic

    Pay is generally just poor all around if you're at the bottom. I work full time in banking in a branch. I'm currently having to deal with people face to face despite the pandemic while the people making the decision to make me do that are literally sat at home (because you can see on the many Zoom calls they make us participate in). Despite that, I earn equal to or less than someone sat at home on a variety of benefits, and am earning just above minimum wage, and this salary level is on par for this industry type so its not an outlier. I have to follow a checklist and hand out 4 different documents if someone wants to open a savings account with £1. I will be backchecked, observed, etc because it is so heavily regulated if someone wants to put £1 into an instant access savings account. Yet a car dealer can missell for days, no regulation, promise things and not deliver and gets paid more for getting someone to part with £12k over 5 years with optional balloon payment of £5000 at the end.

    Salary obviously informs my buying, because I have to pay general bills, and then as much as I'd like to go in Costco and get a £10 jar of fancy, imported honey, I go with the cheapest option in Tesco so I have money to actually have fun with. What I'd give to be earning as much as that QuestionTime guy who was ignorant of just how much he was earning.

    People should uniformly be paid more. Not a year goes by without some executive earning millions plus millions more as a bonus, yet a PM, even a competent one, earns low 6 figures for running a country. My particular CEO gets a million+ salary plus high 6 figures just in expenses allowances. Then you have "golden" parachutes and "golden" hellos. It's just a constant stream of wealth going into the pockets of the few while actual working people use food banks and have to decide between eating themselves or feeding their kids. You could pay everyone at the bottom probably at least an extra 20% while still handsomely paying your CEOs and executives, just not so handsomely that they can afford to have TWO pools instead of one.

    AlphaRomero on
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator Mod Emeritus
    After pressure from Labour, some of his own MPs and possibly the tiniest shred of human decency that lives within his empty, blasted soul Johnson will now apparently ask the Home Office to exempt immigrant NHS and care workers from the health surcharge. I imagine Priti Patel will hate it, because she’s a terrible person, but it’s unquestionably the right thing to do.

    It’s astonishing they tried to continue charging it, well, astonishing until you remember who these arseholes are.

  • Mr.WangtangMr.Wangtang Registered User regular
    But the cruelty is the point, not a by-product.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited May 2020
    People don't want to pay high prices for food, because they need food and the wealth in a great many societies is pooling near the top, leaving everyone else poorer. People could probably stand higher food costs, if they got paid higher wages. I don't know enough about the financial flow of the farming industry and grocery stores, I know some industries have less of a margin than others, but I also imagine that some of the difference in cost is simply some part of the industry which is unwilling to cut into its profits at all.

    This assumes it's a binary question. It's not "food" vs "not food" and it's just that people don't want to pay more because they can't afford it. Food is substitutable and highly price sensitive. If you push the price of your product up, people will move to other products. Especially in the lower income groups. This creates an enormous incentive to keep costs down, which is then reflected in the structure of the production chain.

    shryke on
  • Jam WarriorJam Warrior Registered User regular
    Anecdotally the Govs vague ‘stay alert’ advice has lead to a mass abandonment of the idea of lockdown when it comes to outside socialising. People are morons and we are so due a big boost in infection numbers. On the bright side the numbers going up again might pull the rug from the controversial school re-opening plans.

    MhCw7nZ.gif
  • NorgothNorgoth cardiffRegistered User regular
    Platy wrote: »
    People getting paid poorly is definitely part of the problem, this work is nowadays done less by Poles, the Czech etc. and more by Ukrainians, Belorussians, in some places Syrian refugees or African immigrants

    Especially the movement of people outside the EU is severely affected by the current pandemic

    Pay is generally just poor all around if you're at the bottom. I work full time in banking in a branch. I'm currently having to deal with people face to face despite the pandemic while the people making the decision to make me do that are literally sat at home (because you can see on the many Zoom calls they make us participate in). Despite that, I earn equal to or less than someone sat at home on a variety of benefits, and am earning just above minimum wage, and this salary level is on par for this industry type so its not an outlier. I have to follow a checklist and hand out 4 different documents if someone wants to open a savings account with £1. I will be backchecked, observed, etc because it is so heavily regulated if someone wants to put £1 into an instant access savings account. Yet a car dealer can missell for days, no regulation, promise things and not deliver and gets paid more for getting someone to part with £12k over 5 years with optional balloon payment of £5000 at the end.

    Salary obviously informs my buying, because I have to pay general bills, and then as much as I'd like to go in Costco and get a £10 jar of fancy, imported honey, I go with the cheapest option in Tesco so I have money to actually have fun with. What I'd give to be earning as much as that QuestionTime guy who was ignorant of just how much he was earning.

    People should uniformly be paid more. Not a year goes by without some executive earning millions plus millions more as a bonus, yet a PM, even a competent one, earns low 6 figures for running a country. My particular CEO gets a million+ salary plus high 6 figures just in expenses allowances. Then you have "golden" parachutes and "golden" hellos. It's just a constant stream of wealth going into the pockets of the few while actual working people use food banks and have to decide between eating themselves or feeding their kids. You could pay everyone at the bottom probably at least an extra 20% while still handsomely paying your CEOs and executives, just not so handsomely that they can afford to have TWO pools instead of one.

    Whilst my company at least has everyone working from home, they decided to do these video conferences where the executives thank us for all our hard work, and talked about how it's tough for everyone and that we're all suffering. One was in her massive conservatory. One was in his piano room.

    Yes, it's tough for everyone, but this really gets my goat, because its this insipid insinuation that everyone is suffering the same, when it's not true. Must be nice, to have a big conservatory and garden. I have two rooms. Total. It's also an attitude you see on social media, this total seemingly lack of perspective. There's this weird unspoken undercurrent of classism under all of this. Lots of parents complaining about sourdough starters and having to home school kids, clapping for the NHS whilst totally ignoring that most essential workers wouldn't be in a position to not work even if they were allowed to not come in.

  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    A few weeks back I had a management call where the boss of my boss, and all the other team leaders, talked about just shit in general

    And she was like "you know it's really important to have a work life balance. I've converted my attic into an office so I can go there and work, and then have a completely separate space to live in"

    One of my colleagues said "what if you don't have an attic on hand to convert Theresa? What's the plan then?" She was like oh well surely everyone must have some sort of spare room? Like if I had nothing else I'd just go and work in my stables and people were like, are you a real fucking human being

  • klemmingklemming Registered User regular
    Yeah, if you're worried about money during the lockdown, why don't you just use your other money? You know, the sum set aside for when you need it that everyone surely has?

    Nobody remembers the singer. The song remains.
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    Well I think it ties in to this general problem we have in our society, I think, where you can go your entire life in an extremely middle to upper middle class existence and assume that you're totally normal. Representative. Sure you know some people have it tough, but only a small minority. Most people are like me. I'm not privileged or anything. Most people have a nice house (that they own) with a big garden, two cars, go on skiing holidays and so on. Most people went to university and had a good school. Most people got to do the things I did.

    That bloke who earns 85k on question time and thought he was below the national average. People just assume that they aren't that far out of the norm, because all the people they know are like that, family and friends and such. People have no idea how fucking good they've got it. And why would they? It doesn't ever get challenged. They don't need to go anywhere to interact with anyone else.

    I'm relatively well spoken and a mate of mine at school used to rib me about it, call me posh. A few years ago we were sat in a pub and he said "you know when I went to uni that's when I realised... I thought you were posh. I had no idea. You're not posh at all, you just were raised by teachers who for some reason wanted you to speak in whatever way. But these guys? They are something else, and they think that they're totally normal. It's bizarre." We all know someone who's Daddy bought them a car and a flat when they went to uni and they just had no idea that their family was absolutely loaded. It's a fact of our society.

  • SharpyVIISharpyVII Registered User regular
    edited May 2020
    Anecdotally the Govs vague ‘stay alert’ advice has lead to a mass abandonment of the idea of lockdown when it comes to outside socialising. People are morons and we are so due a big boost in infection numbers. On the bright side the numbers going up again might pull the rug from the controversial school re-opening plans.

    Also anecdotally, part of my job is collating reports of people ignoring the social distancing rules etc.

    These past two weeks have seen a huge increase in reports and generally those reports all involve very large groups of people. Before the lockdown was loosened people were reporting a couple of people breaking to social distancing rules.

    Now it's groups of 20 or 30 people.

    SharpyVII on
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    How much of that is policy changes and how much of that is quarantine fatigue would be an interesting bit of data

  • Rhesus PositiveRhesus Positive GNU Terry Pratchett Registered User regular
    SharpyVII wrote: »
    Anecdotally the Govs vague ‘stay alert’ advice has lead to a mass abandonment of the idea of lockdown when it comes to outside socialising. People are morons and we are so due a big boost in infection numbers. On the bright side the numbers going up again might pull the rug from the controversial school re-opening plans.

    Also anecdotally, part of my job is collating reports of people ignoring the social distancing rules etc.

    These past two weeks have seen a huge increase in reports and generally those reports all involve very large groups of people. Before the lockdown was loosened people were reporting a couple of people breaking to social distancing rules.

    Now it's groups of 20 or 30 people.

    But were all those groups staying alert?

    [Muffled sounds of gorilla violence]
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator Mod Emeritus
    This government's base love talk about common sense because they think they have a monopoly on it and it means whatever they want at any particular time. It was obvious that switching over from STAY HOME to USE YOUR COMMON SENSE, WHATEVER THAT MIGHT TELL YOU would end up as a shitshow. People phoned the police after KFC ran out of chicken last year ffs.

This discussion has been closed.