Support NeoGAF

[zomgbbqftw]

It's just a shame we have to choose. Argentina is now growing faster than Brazil (I think). But a combination of the Falklands and the fact that they've bucked the Washington consensus will do them no favours with the political elite in the UK.

Argentina are not growing faster than Brazil. Their official statistics may say so, but they are very untrustworthy. Inflation in Argentina is around 20-23% depending on which bank you ask and GDP growth is around 3-5% annually, again depending on which bank you ask. Officially inflation is 8% and GDP growth is 9%. The Economist have stopped publishing official Argentinian economic statistics in protest of the lies coming from the government. They are looking at publishing unofficial statistics, but aren't sure where to get reliable ones from.

 

[twobear]

Do you have a source other than The Economist?

It's not that I don't trust The Economist to not lie through their teeth about Argentina, it's just tha-

No wait, sorry, it's that.

 

[SteveWD40]

I have read that as well but I can't remember where (I don't read the Economist though so it wasn't there).

Isn't that why she is rattling their rusty, broken sabre about the Falklands, to distract people from the economic reality they are in?

 

[zomgbbqftw]

It's pretty much every bank in the world. None will say it outright like the Economist as they may or may not have some kind of interest in the country.

I can quote you our internal estimates of Argentinian economic statistics:

GDP - 4.3% growth YoY
Inflation ~ 21%
PPI Input ~ 5%
PPI Output ~ 3%

I'm not certain about what the latest official statistics are, but if The Economist say they don't trust the statistics, then they are not trustworthy. I don't know why you don't trust The Economist, but either way Argentinian statistics are not worth the paper they are written on.

Not only that but Kirchner's politicking on the Falklands at the Summit of the Americas won her few friends, basically all of Argentina's "partners" deserted them when they asked for Argentinian sovereignty of the islands to be put on the official agenda, the US were forced to veto the inclusion and Argentina left in protest.

Edit: We also shouldn't forget their seizure of assets from Repsol which has basically destroyed any inward investment into their economy and will hamper growth even further.

 

[PJV3]

I really believe Cameron is going to end up being blamed for some of this, it will be worded to minimise the damage, but he's really upto his neck in it. Making out it was to save £1000 on a security check is stupid
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/may/14/leveson-security-vetting-andy-coulson

Leveson said: "It might be worthwhile identifying if and when each of the comparative equivalent holders of that particular post received the higher level of vetting … only to demonstrate that there isn't a smoking gun here. If there is, then there is."

The Guardian understands that most, if not all, of the senior media advisers to prime ministers from John Major to Gordon Brown were cleared to a higher security level than the former News International employee.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Good. Bunch of incompetents.

The sooner we get rid of Cameron and his Cabinet of chums and incompetents the better off our country will be. Give me a government run by 20 Philip Hammonds and David Laws rather than this bunch of cunts.

 

[twobear]

[edit]You know what, never mind. I told myself I wasn't going to get involved with this thread any more. Please ignore me.

 

[ZombieFred]

Good. Bunch of incompetents.

The sooner we get rid of Cameron and his Cabinet of chums and incompetents the better off our country will be. Give me a government run by 20 Philip Hammonds and David Laws rather than this bunch of cunts.

Sadly have to agree here, Cameron has really did damage to the party and its potential when he brought in his crew who have selfishly fucked many things up. I think the best thing I have seen from them, from my personal interest, has been grove and the educational section (it’s where I work in right now and all my life has been around) and that man has really brought in great advice to shake up to bringing the curriculum to prepare for the future. I still can't trust that badger on running Labour.

 

[Nicktendo86]

Good. Bunch of incompetents.

The sooner we get rid of Cameron and his Cabinet of chums and incompetents the better off our country will be. Give me a government run by 20 Philip Hammonds and David Laws rather than this bunch of cunts.

Have to agree, should have voted for David Davis.

 

[PJV3]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/may/16/eurozone-crisis-greece-elections-stock-markets
Sir Mervyn King is warning now that the eurozone crisis is the single biggest threat to Britain's recovery from recession. Indeed, a disorderly break-up of the eurozone would be so catastrophic that the Bank of England continues to exclude it from its forecasts.

Nice. at least it will be a suprise. Cameron needs to get his arse over to Brussels and get involved. Lock 'em all in a room and don't let them out 'til they have a pan european growth strategy.

 

[killer_clank]

In a piece of good news for once, unemployment has fallen again:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18084679

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Great news, youth unemployment down by 17k overall as well. Jobs growth rarely occurs in a downturn or recession. I think it is now clear that the ONS are bullshitting when they say that we saw a contraction in Q1, construction may or may not have been poor, but services growth and retail growth was massive, we upped our estimate this morning from +0.4% to +0.6% in the services sector.

 

[PJV3]

Great news, youth unemployment down by 17k overall as well. Jobs growth rarely occurs in a downturn or recession. I think it is now clear that the ONS are bullshitting when they say that we saw a contraction in Q1, construction may or may not have been poor, but services growth and retail growth was massive, we upped our estimate this morning from +0.4% to +0.6% in the services sector.

I think flat is the best way to describe the UK economy, but we broadly agreed(i think) that when the figures for growth Q1 came out. Looking at the unemployment data.

Last month's figures in brackets
March 2012 - Seasonally adjusted

ILO Unemployed: 2.625mn (2.650mn)
Inactive - wants a job: 2.339mn (2.318mn)
Total wanting work (4.964mn) 4.968mn
Part-time wanting full-time job 1.418mn (1.400mn)
Vacancies 0.459mn (0.463mn)
People per vacancy 10.81 (10.73)

Discouraged/inactive wanting a job but not counted as unemployed-up
Sick both long and short term-up
Part time jobs- up
people working part time but want full time- up
Full time jobs-down


Also of interest is the movement within the Labour party over Europe, Balls and Mandy have said a referendum on memebership is a good idea, and now the new head of policy-Cruddas is a well known supporter of the in/out vote as well. That may split Labour apart or split the UKIP movement(god knows which)

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Yes, the economy is probably flat, I would say +0.2% on these employment figures.

What we're seeing is people working part time and businesses taking on more people in expectation of some kind of recovery, if the Eurozone doesn't implode then I expect many of those part-time jobs will become full time ones.

The total number of hours worked is also up by around 1% YoY but the figures are pretty fuzzy and it's difficult to make out, but as ever with more part time work, productivity is down. As the economy is flat it means the same or slightly more work is just spread across more people, that is usually a good foundation for a proper economic recovery in the private sector as more people feel they can afford luxuries since they are earning.

A stimulus led recovery would be more like the US, where a lot more jobs are created initially most full-time but eventually the money runs out and the extra demand created will die down and the jobs will go with them. What we need is a sustainable recovery in the employment market not supported by extra spending or extra borrowing (private, commercial or public). That is no easy task, and this government clearly aren't up to it...

On Labour and Europe, it is very, very unlikely that the electorate will believe anything Labour say about Europe given that they reneged on a referendum already with Lisbon. I very much doubt that they will benefit from such a move.

 

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

What's this, a story about the UK automobile industry that doesn't involve plants closing and hundreds of jobs being lost?

General Motors saves Vauxhall factory at Ellesmere Port

 

[PJV3]

What's this, a story about the UK automobile industry that doesn't involve plants closing and hundreds of jobs being lost?

General Motors saves Vauxhall factory at Ellesmere Port

Yeah it's good news, everyone worked together to secure the deal. The pay freeze isn't much different to what's happening for other workers anyway.
Being open 24hrs and working Christmas ect will be a big change though, but it's better than losing the plant.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Great news for people working for GM in Ellesmere!

As much as I have ragged on the government lately this scalp belongs to George Osborne who I heard made a very convincing case to keeping Ellesmere open vs two plants in Germany. The efficiency is higher at the plant here than both in Germany by some distance and the quality of work output is also higher, however unit labour costs are cheaper in Germany because they have a very weak currency. Cost per car is actually cheaper in Germany than it is in Ellesmere, but I heard the Chancellor made for a very convincing case to keep Ellesmere going.

As an added bonus, I have heard the German government are spitting blood about the treachery of Osborne who has now won two in a row against them with this plant and with banking regulations in which he had a comprehensive victory over Germany and France. The EU only likes Britain when we sell out our workers and industry to the continent like with the Bombardier vs Siemens decision, when the government go out and win business they hate us.

Another good sign is that manufacturers are reporting that more and more of their supply chain is being locally sourced up from around 20% in 2007 to 34% in the year just gone. The rebuilding of Britain's parts supply is very important as it makes manufacturing, assembly and finishing of larger goods more attractive in the long term. That is a natural consequence of the weak pound and low corporation tax environment.

 

[ZombieFred]

Great news for people working for GM in Ellesmere!

As an added bonus, I have heard the German government are spitting blood about the treachery of Osborne who has now won two in a row against them with this plant and with banking regulations in which he had a comprehensive victory over Germany and France. The EU only likes Britain when we sell out our workers and industry to the continent like with the Bombardier vs Siemens decision, when the government go out and win business they hate us.

It's why I hate the EU so much when it comes to us actually doing thinks for the interest of this country. Fuck them and their behaviour on how they have treated us because of the whole EU coming to a mess. I am just glad we've got plans just in case if the whole thing crumbles.

 

[PJV3]

I think it is more down to Vince Cable than Osborne, He and the Unite union have been negotiating for months with GM. It's been a good team effort.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

I think it is more down to Vince Cable than Osborne, He and the Unite union have been negotiating for months with GM. It's been a good team effort.

Well I know a couple of people working on the GM side who say it was Unite and George Osborne who really won it. Unite made the right concessions and were very eager to keep the plant open while Osborne nailed the macro side, Cable, apparently was just full of rhetoric and platitudes.

 

[PJV3]

Well I know a couple of people working on the GM side who say it was Unite and George Osborne who really won it. Unite made the right concessions and were very eager to keep the plant open while Osborne nailed the macro side, Cable, apparently was just full of rhetoric and platitudes.

I will have to bow to your inside knowledge then, i know somebody who owns an Astra but that isn't as good.

 

[SteveWD40]

I will have to bow to your inside knowledge then, i know somebody who owns an Astra but that isn't as good.

glol

 

[zomgbbqftw]

I will have to bow to your inside knowledge then, i know somebody who owns an Astra but that isn't as good.

Haha, yeah it's really only because my bank has fingers in every pie and as an analyst I meet a lot of people across the industry working on all sorts of projects. The people I know were analysts on the project on behalf of GM looking at the business case for keeping one of three different EU plants open. Ellesmere was the least likely choice according to them, but the macro side has really swung into Britain's favour well with the weaker nations likely leaving the Euro and driving up unit labour costs in Germany and the Chancellor capitalised while Unite were not combative and very conciliatory, and upfront with what they could do to keep the plant open. All in all, it was a good day for British industry.

 

[Jackpot]

I will have to bow to your inside knowledge then, i know somebody who owns an Astra but that isn't as good.

His inside knowledge has frequently turned out to be wrong though.

 

[i_am_ben]

I wonder how much the UK paid for those jobs.

 

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

We might not have, for once. In any case, building up our manufacturing sector is really something we should have done years ago, even if we had to put money into it. Hedging our bets with the likes of the financial sector and services was not a smart play.

 

[Walshicus]

His inside knowledge has frequently turned out to be wrong though.

Blame whichever week's issue of The Economist that knowledge came from.

 

[blazinglord]

Good. Bunch of incompetents.

The sooner we get rid of Cameron and his Cabinet of chums and incompetents the better off our country will be. Give me a government run by 20 Philip Hammonds and David Laws rather than this bunch of cunts.

I know Philip Hammonds is the flavour of the month at the moment among conservative thinkers, but I am honestly not seeing it. He's the mixture of John Major and John Redwood. Beneath that plain and dull persona, hides a pretty radical cutter who is ideologically much further on the right socially and economically than Cameron. I don't think the Conservatives would benefit very much with having another Michael Howard at the helm of the party, nor could I see them retaining the support of the Liberal Democrat MPs in this parliament.

 

[nib95]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/may/16/eurozone-crisis-greece-elections-stock-markets
Sir Mervyn King is warning now that the eurozone crisis is the single biggest threat to Britain's recovery from recession. Indeed, a disorderly break-up of the eurozone would be so catastrophic that the Bank of England continues to exclude it from its forecasts.

Nice. at least it will be a suprise. Cameron needs to get his arse over to Brussels and get involved. Lock 'em all in a room and don't let them out 'til they have a pan european growth strategy.

Cameron has a terrible and failing growth plan for the UK...you really have faith in him or his cronies to come up with something worthwhile for the whole of Europe?

 

[Speedymanic]

Cameron has a terrible and failing growth plan for the UK...you really have faith in him or his cronies to come up with something worthwhile for the whole of Europe?

What is his growth plan?

 

[phisheep]

What is his growth plan?

I'm not entirely sure that he has one. Or that he needs to have one (OK, I either have done or am about to display some alarming naivety here).

What is it with growth anyway? I suspect (perhaps wrongly) that what we call economic growth more-or-less tracks population increase anyway. More people=more economic activity=more growth, that sort of thing. Now, I'm not overall convinced that is a good thing. Maybe fewer people would be better. Might mean economic shrinkage but if it is pro-rata per-capita who the hell cares?

Seems to me this bit of the argument isn't fully resolved yet.

Entirely happy to receive alternative views/get variously lambasted, but I really don't see why 'growth' itself is (necessarily) a sensible target.

 

[nib95]

What is his growth plan?

Not even really sure lol. Cuts cuts cuts (except on the richest earning!), reduce the deficit and hope there's some how growth at the same time.

 

[Walshicus]

I'm not entirely sure that he has one. Or that he needs to have one (OK, I either have done or am about to display some alarming naivety here).

What is it with growth anyway? I suspect (perhaps wrongly) that what we call economic growth more-or-less tracks population increase anyway. More people=more economic activity=more growth, that sort of thing. Now, I'm not overall convinced that is a good thing. Maybe fewer people would be better. Might mean economic shrinkage but if it is pro-rata per-capita who the hell cares?

Seems to me this bit of the argument isn't fully resolved yet.

Entirely happy to receive alternative views/get variously lambasted, but I really don't see why 'growth' itself is (necessarily) a sensible target.

Everybody loves "growth", but you're right in that it's not the be-all and end-all. I think most normal people would like to see as much focus on efficiency and quality of life. I'd kill for a standard four day week.

 

[Speedymanic]

Everybody loves "growth", but you're right in that it's not the be-all and end-all. I think most normal people would like to see as much focus on efficiency and quality of life. I'd kill for a standard four day week.

Surely poor/no growth affects stuff like quality of life. If your economy can't/isn't growing (make more money, have people spending more money, etc), quality of life stagnates/isn't able to improve.

It's important in that regard, at least in my opinion. There's also the employment factor, not having growth means fewer jobs, which ties back into quality of life, people spending money, etc.

I'm sure someone else will be along shortly to correct me thiugh.

 

[Walshicus]

Surely poor/no growth affects stuff like quality of life. If your economy can't/isn't growing (make more money, have people spending more money, etc), quality of life stagnates/isn't able to improve.

It's important in that regard, at least in my opinion. There's also the employment factor, not having growth means fewer jobs, which ties back into quality of life, people spending money, etc.

I'm sure someone else will be along shortly to correct me thiugh.

Quality of life shows correlation with growth, but it's not an exact identity. You can have billion % growth, but if that's not distributed equitably then QoL won't change (indeed, it could get worse). You can have growth which follows from longer work hours (though this relationship itself shows diminishing returns), but that wouldn't result in QoL improvements.


I suppose it's like "being healthy" and "losing weight". There are times when they go hand in hand and times when they don't so much.

 

[phisheep]

Surely poor/no growth affects stuff like quality of life.

Sure it does. But I'm not at all convinced that the correlation is a negative one.

I spend quite a lot of time in doing what is referred to as 'uneconomic activity' (mostly doing stuff that is either fun or helpful to others or preferably both), and I'm all the happier for it.

So why not go for Sir Fragula's desire - shrink the economy by 20% and give everybody Fridays off - the way Sundays used to be?

Doesn't seem to me that would necessarily be a bad thing.

 

[Pie and Beans]

Not... sure if phisheep is... trolling.

A growing economy means more homegrown businesses earning money and in turn paying more tax, which in turn goes towards paying off that big ol' nasty deficit boogeyman the ConDems keep gesturing towards the closet about. Cuts, cuts, and more cuts, are the short term goal of reducing that ever-present beast while a healthy growing economy is the longterm goal (or should be) of all nation's governments.

I mean, I'm not even sure how this could possibly be up for debate... unless the alternative suggestion is to legitimately enforce a maximum child bearing quantity. Like China.

 

[PJV3]

Growth is profit (marxist/19th century classical theory) and it should be around the 3% mark for everything to be tickety boo. For stationary growth to work you need a shrinking population. Stationary growth is the end point for the capitalist system in the classical theories, as no return is being made on investment'


Phisheep is John Stuart Mill, who had similar ideas.

'I cannot . . . regard the stationary state of capital and wealth with the unaffected aversion
so generally manifested towards it by political economists of the old school. I am
inclined to believe that it would be, on the whole, a very considerable improvement on
our present condition. I confess I am not charmed with the ideal of life held out by those
who think that the normal state of human beings is that of struggling to get on; that the
trampling, crushing, elbowing, and treading on each other's heels, which form the
existing type of social life, are the most desirable lot of human kind, or anything but the
disagreeable symptoms of one of the phases of industrial progress'.

 

[Walshicus]

There is a growing body of opinion that views the pursuit of "growth" in of itself to be fruitless and dangerous. Post-growth economics puts the emphasis on localism, sustainability and quality of life above on-paper GDP increments.

 

[phisheep]

Not trolling at all. I'm genuinely curious about this unexamined assumption that

a healthy growing economy is the longterm goal (or should be) of all nation's governments.

Why should it be?

I don't know. I really don't.

 

[frankie_baby]

did anybody see the documentery on bbc2 "the town that took on china" was about a guy that owned a company making cushions who closed 1 of his 2 factories in the uk and set up 1 in china a few years ago but thanks to rising costs in china he experimented with moving production back to the uk, was fascinating to see in china there were more jobs than workers meaning wages were skyrocketing, they tested it out and now the cost difference to make in china was minimal

could we finally be seeing the start of manufacturing coming back

oh and a surprising/amusing thing to me was realising the nice new cushions i bought the other week had been made in that factory

 

[SteveWD40]

did anybody see the documentery on bbc2 "the town that took on china" was about a guy that owned a company making cushions who closed 1 of his 2 factories in the uk and set up 1 in china a few years ago but thanks to rising costs in china he experimented with moving production back to the uk, was fascinating to see in china there were more jobs than workers meaning wages were skyrocketing, they tested it out and now the cost difference to make in china was minimal

could we finally be seeing the start of manufacturing coming back

Maybe yes, no one ever disagreed that UK workers are very skilled and quality of manufacture here is very high. It was inevitable that wages would start to rise in the developing world as quality of life improves, we should start to see call centres and manufacturing jobs come back but if too many move too fast they may just take a hit to keep the jobs.

UK company's will have more and more pressure to do so however.

 

[Little Old Man]

Maybe yes, no one ever disagreed that UK workers are very skilled and quality of manufacture here is very high. It was inevitable that wages would start to rise in the developing world as quality of life improves, we should start to see call centres and manufacturing jobs come back but if too many move too fast they may just take a hit to keep the jobs.

UK company's will have more and more pressure to do so however.

And by being in/close to the market where those manufactured goods are sold, it makes the business far more flexible to changing market conditions and tastes.

 

[frankie_baby]

Maybe yes, no one ever disagreed that UK workers are very skilled and quality of manufacture here is very high. It was inevitable that wages would start to rise in the developing world as quality of life improves, we should start to see call centres and manufacturing jobs come back but if too many move too fast they may just take a hit to keep the jobs.

UK company's will have more and more pressure to do so however.

i bloody hope call centre jobs all come back, foreign call centres are hell to speak to and whoever thought they were a good idea needs taking round the back a given a kicking

 

[nib95]

Everybody loves "growth", but you're right in that it's not the be-all and end-all. I think most normal people would like to see as much focus on efficiency and quality of life. I'd kill for a standard four day week.

Not when you're recovering from a major down turn and recession. Growth is one of the most important things in preventing things from spiralling further out of control, and business, housing and finance sector's losing complete confidence.

 

[sohois]

There is a growing body of opinion that views the pursuit of "growth" in of itself to be fruitless and dangerous. Post-growth economics puts the emphasis on localism, sustainability and quality of life above on-paper GDP increments.

I think given evidence that happiness doesn't really increase past a certain level of income that a some countries are really reaching a point where some 1st world countries have a significant majority making that level of income (something like $80'000 is the cut-off IIRC) and thus for these countries the primary economic aim should really be to reduce inequality such that more people can reach this level. Of course, given that research also suggests that relative income levels can play a big role in happiness (i.e. going from 80k to 90k would only increase happiness if it made you better off than those around you) its an idea that would probably struggle to gain traction.

did anybody see the documentery on bbc2 "the town that took on china" was about a guy that owned a company making cushions who closed 1 of his 2 factories in the uk and set up 1 in china a few years ago but thanks to rising costs in china he experimented with moving production back to the uk, was fascinating to see in china there were more jobs than workers meaning wages were skyrocketing, they tested it out and now the cost difference to make in china was minimal

could we finally be seeing the start of manufacturing coming back

oh and a surprising/amusing thing to me was realising the nice new cushions i bought the other week had been made in that factory

China's rising costs won't drive manufacturing back to the West; instead China's even cheaper competitors will get the bulk of it, the likes of Indonesia & Vietnam.

 

[frankie_baby]

China's rising costs won't drive manufacturing back to the West; instead China's even cheaper competitors will get the bulk of it, the likes of Indonesia & Vietnam.

i honestly dont think it will, constantly chasing cheap manufacturing just wont add up when factoring in relocation costs every few years

 

[sohois]

i honestly dont think it will, constantly chasing cheap manufacturing just wont add up when factoring in relocation costs every few years

Well, first that kind of thinking is too long-term for most companies these days, maybe for smaller companies without shareholders but then those kind of companies are pretty likely to have stayed in the UK anyway. Secondly, I think you are overestimating wage growth in these places, it has taken years & years for China to start hitting the point where it is uneconomical, I wouldn't expect somewhere like Indonesia to hit that point for a decade or more, so it wouldn't be every few years.

 

[frankie_baby]

Well, first that kind of thinking is too long-term for most companies these days, maybe for smaller companies without shareholders but then those kind of companies are pretty likely to have stayed in the UK anyway. Secondly, I think you are overestimating wage growth in these places, it has taken years & years for China to start hitting the point where it is uneconomical, I wouldn't expect somewhere like Indonesia to hit that point for a decade or more, so it wouldn't be every few years.

This guy in the documentery open his Chinese factory in 2004 I think and now there is a negliable difference in cost and I would assume next year it will actually be cheaper to make in the uk

 

[PJV3]

This guy in the documentery open his Chinese factory in 2004 I think and now there is a negliable difference in cost and I would assume next year it will actually be cheaper to make in the uk

Why was it only certain products that had become competitive? i must've missed a bit of the doc.