• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK PoliGAF thread of tell me about the rabbits again, Dave.

W

Walshicus

Member
Napoleonthechimp said:
I can't deal with the Scottish referendum thread anymore. I just can't let go of the outright anger I feel towards all of those bullshit promises Salmond is making that come at the UK's expense.

I genuinely fear I'm going to do something completely dumb in the next general election like vote for UKIP or whichever party that would end up as hardline as possible when it comes to this issue.
Click to expand...

It kind of looks like you actually hate the Scottish. I mean you seem to tolerate them as long as they know their place propping up England... but now it looks like they could go their own way I get the impression you want to fuck things up for them more than you want to actually benefit England.

Scots won't be voting for independence to spite you, personally, man! We can all get along (better than ever) even after the Yes vote.
 
W

Walshicus

Member
Best said:
The chance of Britain and Scotland retaining a good relationship after a yes vote is practically 0. The SNP can't deliver on its promises and will blame Westminster.
Click to expand...
Nonsense.

Both sides have incentives to work together, England needing Scotland's conversions more than the reverse.

But the answer lies in recent history. Ireland, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Newfoundland... All these countries became independent of England and retain great relations with us because of it.
 
phisheep

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
I currently have a rather repetitive "on hold" message from a utility company on loudspeaker.

For the last 15 minutes this recorded female with a distinct Scottish accent has been banging on about the big advantage of their having a UK-based call centre.

Just sayin'
 
Nicktendo86

Nicktendo86

Member
The Tories have a 25 point lead over labour on the economy. I know that won't translate to votes and are behind overall, but that is staggering.
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
Nicktendo86 said:
The Tories have a 25 point lead over labour on the economy. I know that won't translate to votes and are behind overall, but that is staggering.
Click to expand...

I wonder what the most Labour could have was though, ceteris paribus (sans Ed - such latin, much wisdom). I mean, let's say Ed hadn't won the leadership election but everything else had gone as it did - Labour crash out during a massive downturn, the first few Coalition years are very rocky but ends up in a very positive trajectory right now. Ed's obviously a shithead as a leader but given those set of parameters, could Labour ever be doing well? Even with a popular, personable leader (a la Blair)? I'm not sure!

Still, not 25 points difference.
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
Pussy patrol around Liverpool

BxmcxYSIMAAwdhw.jpg
 
W

WayneMorse

Banned
Best said:
The chance of Britain and Scotland retaining a good relationship after a yes vote is practically 0. The SNP can't deliver on its promises and will blame Westminster.
Click to expand...

Any good feelings about independence will be over soon after the referendum when Salmond and the SNP show they have no fucking idea how to run the country.
 
W

Walshicus

Member
WayneMorse said:
Any good feelings about independence will be over soon after the referendum when Salmond and the SNP show they have no fucking idea how to run the country.
Click to expand...

Seems to have done better already compared to the fuckwits in London we have to deal with.

On a funnier note, my autocorrect replaced fuckwits with cockpits, which might actually be a better insult.
 
A

anonymous_abc

Member
CyclopsRock said:
Shame about the wage growth, but I guess we're basically using that to pay for the extra employment. All things considered, I think that's probably preferable.
Click to expand...

Depends how that is distributed amongst the wage groups. I assume it will be lopsided towards the top earners earning more and against the low wage employees earning less. And then I would not automatically see it as preferable.
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
FliXFantatier said:
Depends how that is distributed amongst the wage groups. I assume it will be lopsided towards the top earners earning more and against the low wage employees earning less. And then I would not automatically see it as preferable.
Click to expand...

I dunno. Depends what you mean by "top earners" really. And yeah, it's definitely arguable - there's something to be said for having higher wages improving people's lives, obviously, but every person with a job is another person paying tax and not receiving - at least as much - welfare. When we have deficit targets, that might be the difference between services getting cut and withdrawn vs not.
 
A

anonymous_abc

Member
CyclopsRock said:
I dunno. Depends what you mean by "top earners" really. And yeah, it's definitely arguable - there's something to be said for having higher wages improving people's lives, obviously, but every person with a job is another person paying tax and not receiving - at least as much - welfare. When we have deficit targets, that might be the difference between services getting cut and withdrawn vs not.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree,... if everyone takes a just share of the hit on income increase. And I doubt that is the case.
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
FliXFantatier said:
Oh I agree,... if everyone takes a just share of the hit on income increase. And I doubt that is the case.
Click to expand...

It may not be even, but a person going from on benefits to going to work every day will have their lives remarkably improved as a result - they'll have more money in their pocket, will very possibly be on a path to greater future reward and, well, I'm sure we all know how depressing and crippling the constant job search, no reply, job search, automated reply cycle can be. For the individuals involved who have a job who wouldn't otherwise if we had greater wage growth, you'll be hard pressed to convince them they'd be better off still unemployed.
 
A

anonymous_abc

Member
CyclopsRock said:
It may not be even, but a person going from on benefits to going to work every day will have their lives remarkably improved as a result - they'll have more money in their pocket, will very possibly be on a path to greater future reward and, well, I'm sure we all know how depressing and crippling the constant job search, no reply, job search, automated reply cycle can be. For the individuals involved who have a job who wouldn't otherwise if we had greater wage growth, you'll be hard pressed to convince them they'd be better off still unemployed.
Click to expand...

Thats not at all what I meant.
I was agreeing that I think its fine to see an overall wage decrease if this means more people in self sustainable work.
I don't think it's ok if the wage decrease only affects people on the lower wage spectrum!
That just leads to the gap between the (for lack of a better word) upper and lower class widening.
 
Z

zomgbbqftw

Banned
FliXFantatier said:
Depends how that is distributed amongst the wage groups. I assume it will be lopsided towards the top earners earning more and against the low wage employees earning less. And then I would not automatically see it as preferable.
Click to expand...
The drag on UK earning comes from banking, financial and business services where total pay is down YoY. Without that total pay is up by around 1.2%, lower income jobs are recovering and manufacturing jobs are showing pay growth of 2%. It is literally the other way around to what you think is happening
 
A

anonymous_abc

Member
zomgbbqftw said:
The drag on UK earning comes from banking, financial and business services where total pay is down YoY. Without that total pay is up by around 1.2%, lower income jobs are recovering and manufacturing jobs are showing pay growth of 2%. It is literally the other way around to what you think is happening
Click to expand...

That's fine then.
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
FliXFantatier said:
Thats not at all what I meant.
I was agreeing that I think its fine to see an overall wage decrease if this means more people in self sustainable work.
I don't think it's ok if the wage decrease only affects people on the lower wage spectrum!
That just leads to the gap between the (for lack of a better word) upper and lower class widening.
Click to expand...

Not that it matters based on what zomg just said, but my point was that even *if* it's heavily impacted the lower wage spectrum, I still think it's better than them being unemployed overall.
 
A

anonymous_abc

Member
CyclopsRock said:
Not that it matters based on what zomg just said, but my point was that even *if* it's heavily impacted the lower wage spectrum, I still think it's better than them being unemployed overall.
Click to expand...

I disagree, what is good for an individual is not necessarily good for economics overall.
It would just lead to a race to the bottom.
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
FliXFantatier said:
I disagree, what is good for an individual is not necessarily good for economics overall.
It would just lead to a race to the bottom.
Click to expand...

Well that always happens when there's a greater supply for labour than the demand. Wages catch up when that flips around, but for that to happen you need employment to increase first.
 
A

anonymous_abc

Member
CyclopsRock said:
Well that always happens when there's a greater supply for labour than the demand. Wages catch up when that flips around, but for that to happen you need employment to increase first.
Click to expand...

That's why I really appreciate the (more and sadly shrinking) social market economy we have in Germany as opposed to the pure capitalists free market economy.

As someone once said
neo liberalism means. A free fox is free to hunt free chicken in a free pen.
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
FliXFantatier said:
That's why I really appreciate the (more and sadly shrinking) social market economy we have in Germany as opposed to the pure capitalists free market economy.

As someone once said
neo liberalism means. A free fox is free to hunt free chicken in a free pen.
Click to expand...

I've never really understood what "neo liberalism" is. What's different between it and just "liberalism"? I think it's because people that aren't actually liberals in the traditional sense co-opted the word and had to therefore create a new word for actual liberals.

Eitherway, I'm not really sure what you're saying; That you think it'd be better if less people were employed but they earned more when they were employed, right? Well, that's OK, but how can you enforce that other than via a very high minimum wage?
 
Z

zomgbbqftw

Banned
FliXFantatier said:
That's why I really appreciate the (more and sadly shrinking) social market economy we have in Germany as opposed to the pure capitalists free market economy.

As someone once said
neo liberalism means. A free fox is free to hunt free chicken in a free pen.
Click to expand...
Germany, the country that refused to introduce a minimum wage until this month. Socially democratic. Pull the other one. Years of wage deflation, years of corporatism by both the SDP and CDU governments, Schroeder's famous €1 per hour jobs for H4 recipients. Who are you lying to, us or yourself? I'm not going to pretend that the UK is perfect in any way, we have a lot of problems but to take lectures on how we need to be more socially democratic especially in the work place from a German is a complete and utter joke.
 
Nicktendo86

Nicktendo86

Member
zomgbbqftw said:
Germany, the country that refused to introduce a minimum wage until this month. Socially democratic. Pull the other one. Years of wage deflation, years of corporatism by both the SDP and CDU governments, Schroeder's famous €1 per hour jobs for H4 recipients. Who are you lying to, us or yourself? I'm not going to pretend that the UK is perfect in any way, we have a lot of problems but to take lectures on how we need to be more socially democratic especially in the work place from a German is a complete and utter joke.
Click to expand...
Ooooooouch
 
D

dapperbandit

Banned
WayneMorse said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J39bBV7CBJk

Gordon's No speech today was incredible, if he acted like this when he was PM he would still be in No. 10 today.
Click to expand...

Yeah, great rhetoric. Like Cameron's, he worked the head and the body if you will, hitting both the emotive side of the argument and (what I hesitate to call) the "facts" of the economic consequences, all while painting Salmond as untrustworthy.

I thought both Cameron and Brown's were good speeches. I'm no doubt biased but I wasn't impressed with Salmond's speech today. Partly because his points didn't really resonate with me but also I don't think it was skillfuly delivered. For me his "don't forget we're the underdog" bit was typical of his playing to the "victim complex" crowd.

Anyway, I'll await the results tomorrow with no small amount of apprehension.
 
M

Maledict

Member
I'm normally the type of person who sits up all night watching election results, but for this one I'm going to go on complete blackout till Friday morning. The entire thing makes me feel slightly nauseous - I'm proud of the fact that the vote is happening, especially considering the attitudes in many other places. But at the same time I think splitting up the country is a huge mistake, it will have direct ramifications on my fiancé who doesn't get to vote and some of the language and rhetoric from the yes campaign is distinctly hostile.

Best result would be a no win that leads to further devolution for Scotland and as a result the same for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. We have, do and will do many great things together as a country and united, but sometimes a more local approach also delivers results.
 
A

anonymous_abc

Member
zomgbbqftw said:
Germany, the country that refused to introduce a minimum wage until this month. Socially democratic. Pull the other one. Years of wage deflation, years of corporatism by both the SDP and CDU governments, Schroeder's famous €1 per hour jobs for H4 recipients. Who are you lying to, us or yourself? I'm not going to pretend that the UK is perfect in any way, we have a lot of problems but to take lectures on how we need to be more socially democratic especially in the work place from a German is a complete and utter joke.
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with you that's why I said sadly shrinking.
The SPD has been a lost cause since Schröder.
In name however the social market economy is part of the German constitution and I hope our politicians will work towards that again and not remove us ever further away. I for one am working towards that goal.
Being German does not mean I agree with everything the Governments here have been getting up to or the direction the country is moving in.

[edit]
I am always very impressed by your numbers skills.
How do Britain and Germany currently compare on social justice / mobility / wealth distribution then? I'm trying to find a comprehensive report
This is the best I can come up with so far. And Bertelsmann is not really a source I would want to trust on the matter.
 
A

anonymous_abc

Member
One of the reasons surely.
That the real wages have been dropping is undisputed. In general it's been affecting all regular employees. What has not been dropping in contrast though is the capital income. This has lead to a widening of the wealth disparity.
Capital income is just not taxed enough (~26%) in comparison with real work (~42%).
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
FliXFantatier said:
One of the reasons surely.
That the real wages have been dropping is undisputed. In general it's been affecting all regular employees. What has not been dropping in contrast though is the capital income. This has lead to a widening of the wealth disparity.
Capital income is just not taxed enough (~26%) in comparison with real work (~42%).
Click to expand...

Could it not be the other way around?
 
C

CyclopsRock

Member
FliXFantatier said:
I don't understand what you are referring to?
Could the taxes be the other way around? Sure, but people with money and power hardly want that.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant that you said the problem is that capital gains aren't taxed enough. My proposition was that perhaps income is taxed too much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tell me about your favourite game ever.
2 3
119
4K
ReyBrujo replied
[VGC] Keighley weighs in on debate over Dave the Diver qualifying for Best Indie Game
Opinion News 2
86
6K
calistan replied
Shameless Bragging Thread. Tell me about your greatest gaming achievement.
2 3
146
3K
StreetsofBeige replied
Long live Tango Gameworks! 'Appreciation Thread'
2
63
5K
Hudo replied
Prozac made me go nuts (triggered a manic episode) and the resulting explosions ruined my relationship
0
1
Puscifer replied
Top Bottom