The thing is the work is often there but there is no incentive for companys to employ people full time,in my office (post) there are about 30 people on mostly 25 hour contracts (a few on 0-5 hour) this has been going on for 2 years the work is there as they all do a full week,the other hours as overtime.The office also calls in agency staff most days.
Yet despite all but one of them wanting a full time contract the company keeps them on this rolling part-time contract which means they get less holiday/sick pay/bonus etc
Exactly, and what sort of society are we creating? How are this present generation and the next going to build up a pension pot or hope to get a mortgage. If I was rich I would be starting to worry that this is only going to go one way.
No, it really hasn't. If I have million pounds and you have a thousand pounds, it doesn't matter whether the interest rate is 1% or 5% or 10%, we're both getting richer at the same rate but I'm always earning more cash than you over time. In theory having a big mortgage at low interest rates is helpful, but I doubt someone with a million pounds to invest has a big mortgage anyway. And you're always better off not having to pay a bill than having to.
The only situation where the richer are worse off than poorer is during a period of deflation, where the rich would effectively be losing more money over time than the poor. And even then it's a case of the amount of change being worse rather than the absolute situation being worse. I can't imagine any reasonable situation where having a million pounds is actually worse than only having a thousand.
Interesting post. However the wealthy still have bills to pay though i'm not sure i'd fancy paying any of them! Imagine just the heating bill alone for Caudwells Mayfair 'spread'! :o Then of course comes the dreaded maintenance of these palatial places. Not that he's worrying as he has a couple of billion to play with.
To me it makes more sense not to own properties like this and just live full time in a suite of rooms in a fancy Hotel. All meals whenever you like, no staff to mither about, no maintenance costs etc.
I've not viewed the second part yet but have it recorded and looking forward to it. I was impressed by the guy from Seattle in the first part and his views about the so called "trickle down effect". What he said was perfectly logical and plain common sense. If only more thought like him.
Interesting post. However the wealthy still have bills to pay though i'm not sure i'd fancy paying any of them! Imagine just the heating bill alone for Caudwells Mayfair 'spread'! :o Then of course comes the dreaded maintenance of these palatial places. Not that he's worrying as he has a couple of billion to play with.
To me it makes more sense not to own properties like this and just live full time in a suite of rooms in a fancy Hotel. All meals whenever you like, no staff to mither about, no maintenance costs etc.
I've not viewed the second part yet but have it recorded and looking forward to it. I was impressed by the guy from Seattle in the first part and his views about the so called "trickle down effect". What he said was perfectly logical and plain common sense. If only more thought like him.
When you've watched part 2 re-post and let us know what you think of it, especially one chap who really is a complete arse.
When you've watched part 2 re-post and let us know what you think of it, especially one chap who really is a complete arse.
Just watched today and found this angered me far more than the first. Some of the attitudes were so blatant and arrogant at times i was left thinking this cannot be real, i must be watching a fictional movie. Quite often i had to rewind parts because i just couldn't believe what i'd heard the first time......simply to double check that my hearing wasn't going!
The guy who was tasked with setting up a board to investigate rising Executive pay...."most of us are on average incomes between £500 - 750k so it's not as though we are biased....".
Naturally they found 'in favour' of the Executive pay scales. No surprises there.
Lots made me sick to the pit of my stomach. The business about sub prime mortgages for example which has seen thousands if not millions of people lose their homes.
Interesting at one time Bankers pay scales were on the same level as teachers! I can't ever remember that but i assume they got this right.
Two of my nephews are in Banking, one in London the other in South Africa. Both very nice lads though i now only see the one who lives in London. Understanding exactly what it is he's doing isn't easy as he loses any average joe in seconds the minute he starts talking figures. It's an alien language to me. All i know is he makes an awful lot of money. The last time i spoke to him he was working for a Greek billionaire on 'personal investments' and managing 'hedge funds' (my nephews explanation) for this man. I told my nephew Greece is an economical shipwreck and the rats have scarpered off with the loot....and he's working for one of them. My nephew looked at me sheepishly, grinned and replied, "i need a job!"
Once again, Seattle billionaire guy is talking common sense logic, doesn't mince his words, doesn't have his head stuck up his ar*e, and fully aware of the looming disaster. Obviously despite his huge wealth he alone cannot solve the problems and i feel his frustrations.
I've kept this episode on my pvr as i'm going to watch it again. I just wonder if there could possibly be more than one 'Seattle guy' out there?
The guy who thought zero hours contracts and everyone fighting for a few hours work was good for society left me speechless.
This was one of my many rewinds! First thought was 'no i didn't hear that right, i have to listen again'.
Simply staggering but there are people like him who think exactly this way.
I'm retired now and consider myself fortunate to have been in full employment throughout the 45 years i worked. However one thing i always had a problem with was the introduction of Agency workers.
The company i worked for began using them quite late really, around the early to mid 90's. At first just a handful but then more and more crept in.
I've always been against the idea of Agency work. For me it's either a contract of employment....or no job. Agency work is a 'half way house' and just doesn't sit easy with me at all. Naturally it's also a very useful tool to employers in keeping a tight rein on wage negotiations for fully contracted employees too.
There was often degrees of extreme bitterness between Agency workers and those of us who held full contracts. It was difficult for me to explain to an Agency worker, 'look it's not you personally i don't like......it's what the company i work for is doing and using Agencies to supply workers on a casual basis i don't like'. A few could understand but most couldn't.
The idea that everyone should be entrepreneurial is simply foolish. It's obvious that all businesses need people who will do a good job quietly, reliably and honestly, for a modest but liveable amount of money. There's nothing remotely shameful about being one of those quiet workers. A company consisting of nothing but self-starting go-getters will fail, because there'll be no-one to do all the boring infrastructure stuff.
So why do we keep being given the message that there's something heroic about being a pushy go-grabber, and that if you're just a reliable tell-me-what-to-do-and-I'll-do-it human, you deserve to die starving in a gutter?
In any case, the truth of our society is that most of the people in whom the wealth is more and more concentrated are not actually bold adventurers discovering new lands so that the rest of us can follow and enrich ourselves (or at least apply for a job in the accountancy department). They're not monarchs for whom our welfare is a matter of survival. They're essentially pirates, taking all they can and giving nothing back.
The idea that everyone should be entrepreneurial is simply foolish. It's obvious that all businesses need people who will do a good job quietly, reliably and honestly, for a modest but liveable amount of money. There's nothing remotely shameful about being one of those quiet workers.
I don't know when exactly it changed, but it used to be considered at the very least 'worthy' to be earning an honest living, even if there wasn't any golden age of universal prosperity - unfortunately comparisons with today are difficult because standards have changed so much and several decades ago, not having a TV was never considered a sign of "poverty".
People earning crap money could still afford to live.
A company consisting of nothing but self-starting go-getters will fail, because there'll be no-one to do all the boring infrastructure stuff.
I often watch The Apprentice with a view to compiling a list of people who, come the revolution, should be first against the wall... though slightly more seriously, it's exactly these kinds of people that gave us every business/financial bubble and for the most part never suffered because of it.
In the same vein, many of these 'go-getters' fail horrendously yet never have to learn because once you get to a particular level or have the right friends, your complete lack of actual ability doesn't make a blind bit of difference. It's fine if limited (necessary even, the occasional wild idea can be a good thing) but is now too widespread to work.
There's a news item about the richest 1% on the BBC today - it concerns the summit in Davos and comments from Oxfam. Try reading THIS
I'm afraid i don't have much time for Oxfam. My uncle (long deceased) was Professor of Economics at Oxford University and advised Oxfam on their finances. He was already earning a damned good salary from Oxford Uni yet Oxfam bunged him silly money just to keep him on board. Their Chief Exec is on £120k pa and last year in the space of just three years, received a pay increase of 19%.
How many MW workers or even average income earners received a 19% pay increase? None.
I'm afraid i don't have much time for Oxfam. My uncle (long deceased) was Professor of Economics at Oxford University and advised Oxfam on their finances. He was already earning a damned good salary from Oxford Uni yet Oxfam bunged him silly money just to keep him on board. Their Chief Exec is on £120k pa and last year in the space of just three years, received a pay increase of 19%.
How many MW workers or even average income earners received a 19% pay increase? None.
A radio interviewer i heard this morning pointed out to an Oxfam spokeswoman he was interviewing that Oxfam's CEO earns a very large amount of money and how did that combine with their stance? It was quite an awkward moment .
HOWEVER, the financial ne'erdowellings of the charity doesn't actually change the fundamental point - 1% of the population having 50% and growing of the entire planet's wealth is not an equitable or frankly sustainable position. Rank inequality pretty much always eventually breeds conflict in some form or other. In the end, it doesn't matter of you're fabulously wealthy if you're hanging from a lamp-post.
A radio interviewer i heard this morning pointed out to an Oxfam spokeswoman he was interviewing that Oxfam's CEO earns a very large amount of money and how did that combine with their stance? It was quite an awkward moment.
I can well imagine though they try to excuse it by comparing other CEO's salaries!
HOWEVER, the financial ne'erdowellings of the charity doesn't actually change the fundamental point - 1% of the population having 50% and growing of the entire planet's wealth is not an equitable or frankly sustainable position. Rank inequality pretty much always eventually breeds conflict in some form or other. In the end, it doesn't matter of you're fabulously wealthy if you're hanging from a lamp-post.
Dispatches on Channel4 tonight should prove interesting. I've recorded so not watched yet.
I've felt unease for a long time re the bib and not sure just how much longer it can continue. When i was still in employment, years of pathetic and laughable percent increases left us falling behind. Each pay negotiation, the TU put it to the vote with the usual recommendation of acceptance, as TU's do today because most have been 'bought'. I never ever voted to accept yet the majority of course just followed like sheep and meekly accepted. I got fed up of hearing "what else can we do" or "they'd close the place down".....i used to say if you aren't prepared to fight for better then you don't deserve it.
Adding gold to a facial treatment almost certainly has no chemical effect whatsoever - you'd have to heat it to a few hundred degrees before it would begin to react with anything, which would be very bad for your skin indeed.
Yes, I'd imagine the drawbacks outweigh any potential benefits at that point.
Excellent post- I think you're entirely right that it's about ostentation and ego-massage.
Comments
Exactly, and what sort of society are we creating? How are this present generation and the next going to build up a pension pot or hope to get a mortgage. If I was rich I would be starting to worry that this is only going to go one way.
To me it makes more sense not to own properties like this and just live full time in a suite of rooms in a fancy Hotel. All meals whenever you like, no staff to mither about, no maintenance costs etc.
I've not viewed the second part yet but have it recorded and looking forward to it. I was impressed by the guy from Seattle in the first part and his views about the so called "trickle down effect". What he said was perfectly logical and plain common sense. If only more thought like him.
When you've watched part 2 re-post and let us know what you think of it, especially one chap who really is a complete arse.
The guy who was tasked with setting up a board to investigate rising Executive pay...."most of us are on average incomes between £500 - 750k so it's not as though we are biased....".
Naturally they found 'in favour' of the Executive pay scales. No surprises there.
Lots made me sick to the pit of my stomach. The business about sub prime mortgages for example which has seen thousands if not millions of people lose their homes.
Interesting at one time Bankers pay scales were on the same level as teachers! I can't ever remember that but i assume they got this right.
Two of my nephews are in Banking, one in London the other in South Africa. Both very nice lads though i now only see the one who lives in London. Understanding exactly what it is he's doing isn't easy as he loses any average joe in seconds the minute he starts talking figures. It's an alien language to me. All i know is he makes an awful lot of money. The last time i spoke to him he was working for a Greek billionaire on 'personal investments' and managing 'hedge funds' (my nephews explanation) for this man. I told my nephew Greece is an economical shipwreck and the rats have scarpered off with the loot....and he's working for one of them. My nephew looked at me sheepishly, grinned and replied, "i need a job!"
Once again, Seattle billionaire guy is talking common sense logic, doesn't mince his words, doesn't have his head stuck up his ar*e, and fully aware of the looming disaster. Obviously despite his huge wealth he alone cannot solve the problems and i feel his frustrations.
I've kept this episode on my pvr as i'm going to watch it again. I just wonder if there could possibly be more than one 'Seattle guy' out there?
This was one of my many rewinds! First thought was 'no i didn't hear that right, i have to listen again'.
Simply staggering but there are people like him who think exactly this way.
I'm retired now and consider myself fortunate to have been in full employment throughout the 45 years i worked. However one thing i always had a problem with was the introduction of Agency workers.
The company i worked for began using them quite late really, around the early to mid 90's. At first just a handful but then more and more crept in.
I've always been against the idea of Agency work. For me it's either a contract of employment....or no job. Agency work is a 'half way house' and just doesn't sit easy with me at all. Naturally it's also a very useful tool to employers in keeping a tight rein on wage negotiations for fully contracted employees too.
There was often degrees of extreme bitterness between Agency workers and those of us who held full contracts. It was difficult for me to explain to an Agency worker, 'look it's not you personally i don't like......it's what the company i work for is doing and using Agencies to supply workers on a casual basis i don't like'. A few could understand but most couldn't.
Follow link in OP to program page, should list repeats or if it's on Iplayer.
So why do we keep being given the message that there's something heroic about being a pushy go-grabber, and that if you're just a reliable tell-me-what-to-do-and-I'll-do-it human, you deserve to die starving in a gutter?
In any case, the truth of our society is that most of the people in whom the wealth is more and more concentrated are not actually bold adventurers discovering new lands so that the rest of us can follow and enrich ourselves (or at least apply for a job in the accountancy department). They're not monarchs for whom our welfare is a matter of survival. They're essentially pirates, taking all they can and giving nothing back.
How did the English Civil War start again?
you can see why Boris bought the water cannons rebelion is on the horizon.
People earning crap money could still afford to live.
I often watch The Apprentice with a view to compiling a list of people who, come the revolution, should be first against the wall... though slightly more seriously, it's exactly these kinds of people that gave us every business/financial bubble and for the most part never suffered because of it.
In the same vein, many of these 'go-getters' fail horrendously yet never have to learn because once you get to a particular level or have the right friends, your complete lack of actual ability doesn't make a blind bit of difference. It's fine if limited (necessary even, the occasional wild idea can be a good thing) but is now too widespread to work.
How many MW workers or even average income earners received a 19% pay increase? None.
HOWEVER, the financial ne'erdowellings of the charity doesn't actually change the fundamental point - 1% of the population having 50% and growing of the entire planet's wealth is not an equitable or frankly sustainable position. Rank inequality pretty much always eventually breeds conflict in some form or other. In the end, it doesn't matter of you're fabulously wealthy if you're hanging from a lamp-post.
Dispatches on Channel4 tonight should prove interesting. I've recorded so not watched yet.
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches
I've felt unease for a long time re the bib and not sure just how much longer it can continue. When i was still in employment, years of pathetic and laughable percent increases left us falling behind. Each pay negotiation, the TU put it to the vote with the usual recommendation of acceptance, as TU's do today because most have been 'bought'. I never ever voted to accept yet the majority of course just followed like sheep and meekly accepted. I got fed up of hearing "what else can we do" or "they'd close the place down".....i used to say if you aren't prepared to fight for better then you don't deserve it.
The world needs more Seattle type guys.
Yes, I'd imagine the drawbacks outweigh any potential benefits at that point.
Excellent post- I think you're entirely right that it's about ostentation and ego-massage.
Dispatches Low Pay Britain.
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2042485
4Od http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/on-demand/60547-001