You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
They may not all be genuine jobs though.. in fact it could all be lies..
I encountered quite a few job adverts that turned out to be an employer lining up a replacement as they where considering sacking a current employee.
andyrm - MemberWhat we seem to see at the moment (and I am talking in real life and on several comments here) is that people expect to be able to pick and choose.
Some people certainly do- I didn't just take the first job that was available, frinstance, I waited for a job more suited to my skills and experience and left the first job to someone who was more suited to it. Just sense really. As long as there is a choice, why not choose? When there is no choice, you can't choose.
But the issue isn't that there's only 1 job for every unemployed person and everyone's declining to take their 1 job. The issue is that even after the number fudging, even completely disregarding underemployment, 2.56 million people are unemployed, and that figure rose 70000 since the last set of figures went round.
"Picking and choosing" can explain why some people are unemployed when they might not have been. But that doesn't change the big picture as someone else takes the job.
"Picking and choosing"
Part of the problem I found with applying for work is an employers perception of how long you will hang about.
Often an employer doesn't want to hire the smart guy for menial jobs, they want to hire the guy that does the job and hangs around for years without causing any headaches like leaving for a better job.
Which is utterly bewildering in my case, I'm a bloody halfwit.
royal navy are well sort of submariners plent of well paid jobs, lad i know had his inteview on monday and has been told he will be going though basic training around oct.
shit job that pays well.
Do you know what the average age of an STW'er is?
I've always found work when Ive been made redundant, sacked whatever, there are jobs out there, Ive worked in kitchens, packed boxes in warehouses, call centre, cleaner, lab work, whatever came up quickly at the agencies,
most of those jobs have led to better positions within the companies themselves.
And havent stopped me going for interviews, or applying for other jobs.
I never felt i had to keep myself unemployed in order to wait for a job of my standing, I have no standing, I just do what I can when I can.
to me its a matter of attitude.
+1
In between jobs I wanted I've been a Freezer lorry driver in London,(hardest job I ever did,) worked in the Virgin mail post room, picked fruit, picked cabbages, been a labourer on site, worked behind the bar and as a glass collector. My attitude is I need money to live so I will go and earn it.
picked fruit, picked cabbages
Out of curiosity, how recently was this?
There are farms I know of that only advertise in two places, a notice board on the farm and eastern Europe. And everybody that gets a job also lives on the farm paying rent.
I made a good dozen (speculative) applications for work like this and never heard anything back from the Farms. I only found out what I did by stopping and having a chat with the Eastern European workers waiting at a bus stop.
In some respects I can see why some farmers do this, it's cheaper and they work bloody hard. Ultimately they need to compete.
To be fair knowing how crap my back is I wouldn't employ myself for anything that involves picking stuff up.
Was just googling for a news article ref a farm in Northants that was done for slavery and found this http://www.antislavery.org/english/campaigns/previous_actions/forced_labour_in_the_uk_2.aspx
Aleksander* a worker from Poland, was forced to work picking flowers in Scotland. He received only 4p per bunch picked, earning just £24 a day for a nine hour day. Huge deductions were made without his consent from his already sub-minimum wage earnings for accommodation and transport costs. He slept in a cramped room with eight other workers in accommodation which had only four toilets between 43 workers. He received a threatening letter from his boss stating that he was not free to leave before the end of his contract unless he paid £700, and if he did not pay the money it would be recovered from his family back home.
I have done all those as well. However I have recently spent 15 years at a graduate level job and wage which requires a post grad qual. Whilst factory work is not beneath me who exactly do you think would employ me to do this based on my cv?. I lack experience and it is obvious I dont really want to do this and will leave . There are also about 50other folk applying for this job many of whom will have experience etc.
It is a real eye opener to be unemployed in the current market and climate and it is blindingly obvious that unemployed is greater than vacancies by afactor of 40 ish. To keep telling us what we once did when it was good is to just try and suggest it us their fault rather than to accept there are not enough jobs.
If it was easy the work programme would expect greater than 5% success
Fruit picking was a common job where I grew up. It was only worth it if you'd grown up doing it and were incredibly fast. If any normal people went they'd be faced with backbreaking work all day and come back with maybe £3-£4.
The only jobs worth doing were the ones that were mechanised, cos you got paid by the hour. Potatoes and hops.
It was a real eye opener to be unemployed in the eighties, but I never went more than a week unemployed, I got whatever work there was, and applying for factory or other work I went through agencies so they just put you forward if you wanted to work.
You can apply for any job Sancho
Most unemployed people do apply for any job.
But they are applying for them with dozens to hundreds of other people.
Agencies books are very different now than to in the 80s. They have so many people on there books these days its unreal in comparison.
eg: http://www.reed.co.uk/jobs/warehouse-cargo-handlers-needed-asap/22836846#/jobs/temporary
Bloody hell, job posted today and 100+ applications
Personally I think there is an expectation issue in the UK, people now expect to get well paid, have a great life and be successful, we're educated to expect great things.
These arent always possible.
Sometimes its opportunity, sometimes its education, sometimes its attitude and effort, but the gap between the expectation and getting the success can be mahoosive grand canyon for many.
Attitude towards this can vary depending on where you are, unemployed, generational unemployed, comfoprtable, rich, a right toff, whatever. We are responsible for making the best of the situation we end up in, not the government, not society. Its our own responsibility to do what you want with your life.
I get a bit sick of people knocking the better off, it seems trendy to knock them. rich bashing. buiness bashing. tax bashiong. call it what you will. Everybody is to blame as long as it isnt you.
Ha.
Sancho - The 80's? Is that what you're basing your experience on? Seriously? Different ballgame nowadays I'm afraid fella.
You may not have noticed. There aren't any factories left! And about a million more immigrants who will work for well under minimum wage. Plus an estimated 1.4 million people underemployed (part time but want to be full time), as well as the 2.6 million unemployed.
Chuck in all new positions being zero hours contracts, and I can assure you of this. If you went into the present jobs market thinking it was going to be as easy to pick up work as it was in the 80's, then you'd be in for a bit of a rude awakening, to say the least!!
It was a real eye opener to be unemployed in the eighties, but I never went more than a week unemployed, I got whatever work there was, and applying for factory or other work I went through agencies so they just put you forward if you wanted to work
as folk note that was then and this is now. times move on and change etc.
Locally factories wont employ you for more than a year as you get rights and if you have worked for them before you can never do it again so not really a long term option.
WHy do folk keep saying this/suggesting this that it is somehow their fault - no one has yet bothered to dispute the ovbvious fact that there are more unemployed people than jobs so whatever you say and whatever they all do there will be unemployed folk
Personally I think there is an expectation issue in the UK, people now expect to get well paid, have a great life and be successful, we're educated to expect great things.
Yes i recall the heridtary heir to the throne lecturing us on how people expect something from nothing
Not really sure what your point is tbh people should accept crap low paid jobs and be grateful?
We are responsible for making the best of the situation we end up in, not the government, not society. Its our own responsibility to do what you want with your life.
Both yes and no and also luck. the millionairres sons who was educated at Eton got a better start to make his life what he wanted than the son of a unemployed ex miner for example. Which situations do you think is easier to "take responsibility" for yourself?
If it is just down to us then the argument is govt does nothing so there would be no need to do any changes to benefits or economics or anything as it has no effect.
It is a mixture if many factors
I get a bit sick of people knocking the better off, it seems trendy to knock them. rich bashing. buiness bashing. tax bashiong. call it what you will. Everybody is to blame as long as it isnt you.
Have you failed to realise this thread is about bashing the unemployed and blaiming them for their situation - are you tired of that or just joining in?
considering there were more people unemployed back then I dont see how it would be that different as for factories, I have only worked in one factory, but Im not trying to knock anyone for how hard it is finding work, and have applied for jobs where there were over a hundred applicants regularly, been for multiple interviews for jobs and been through the mill, but I dont think its any harder now than it was then, and agencies are just the same they are pretty useless but you have to make sure you get put forward.
and there are loads of factories still, but yeah its different being unemployed its different now, what exactly is different?
when youre out of work its the same and getting back in to work is the same.
its up to you/me to get back to work when out of work and you have to make it happen for yourself regardless of time/era.
that is the same now as then.
and there are loads of factories still, but yeah its different being unemployed its different now, what exactly is different?
I'm sorry, but the jobs market now compared with 25-30 years ago is a competely different animal. As myself or JY, and others have explained.
You are aware that graduate employment is presently about 40%? Thats well-educated, qualified people who can't find jobs. ANY jobs. Unemployment in the under 20's is 25% plus? And they can legally pay them a lot less than you! But they can't find jobs either
I'd suggest that instead of your "I'm so hard-working and resilient, and rugged, and determined, I could get a job anywhere, anytime, within a day' attitude, that you seem to be basing on experiences 30 years ago, you instead look a bit closer at the reality. Though obviously you won't. You'll just keep repeating yourself
you have to make it happen for yourself regardless of time/era.
[b]again[/b] this is to just hint at or suggest the fact that if you dont have a job it is because you failed and it is your fault yet you know there are fewer jobs that there are unemployed.
Tired of this
Are there more unemployed jobs than jobs?
Can they all get jobs?
Why is it their fault if they cannot?
Sancho, the simple fact that you keep overlooking is that there aren't enough jobs to go around, and for a lot of people permanent or semipermanent unemployment is the future they face, irrespective of whether they can find the money to uproot and move elsewhere.
Coupled with the rise of the despicable zero hours contracts which make it impossible for folk to obtain a mortgage, and nearly as difficult to rent a property due to the increasing need to prove income when renting, the future prospects for a lot of people are looking worse than for many decades.
JY you are completely missing my point.
I am not bashing the unemployed Ive been there enough times
But what I am saying is that it can only be down to you to get a job. people dont wander around looking for you to give you a job.
so you can moan about being unemployed, I've done plenty of that, and blamed everyone in my time for me being made redundant when it wasnt fair etc.
but no one has ever just wandered up to me and given me a job, ive had to go round agencies, applied for jobs, rung round and had to keep doing it until I got a job. And that if you say its harder now than before is just a reality the unemployed have to face, it wont get any easier, and you have to keep doing it until you get what you want be that a basic job to get you by, or the graduate job that you have been aiming for. its the same now as ever. and that is up to you.
there have never been enough jobs to go round.
ive had to go round agencies, applied for jobs, rung round and had to keep doing it until I got a job
I'm sure that none of the 2.6 million unemployed are doing any of that. It probably hasn't occured to them at all. Any of it. Only to you. Perhaps you could set yourself up as a consultant, like that woman at A4E. She made a fortune.
After all, all you'll need to do is stand in any high street and just grab any of the 2.6 million people presently just '[i]wandering around waiting for someone to give them a job[/i]' 🙄
FFS binners, its different but there are still millions unemployed now as there has been for 30 years, and Im not trying to preach. I understand more than most the predicament of unemployment. and can see how hard the current jobs market is. and im not patronising people for being unemployed, or suggesting they are wandering around, waiting for work, that is what you are suggesting I am saying.
But what I am saying is that it can only be down to you to get a job. people dont wander around looking for you to give you a job.
Depends really pretty sure the old school tie network and nepotism still exist but yes i get your broader point
You have to try to win the Tour De France but it does not mean I will do this even if I try my best
there have never been enough jobs to go round.
There has been "full employment" in the past but before your time [ and mine to be fair]
of course if you dont try you wont get a job but the opposite is not necessarily true...ie effort will result in employment.
I work with the unemoloyed the vast majority want work, the vast majority are angry at being out of work and trying to get work. It has never ever been tougher to get work at any level and this is the first time i hav eknow where folk [ with transport] [repared to do anything cannot gurantee getting work
It is tough out there right now so just have some sympathy rather than say MTFU and try harder as it worked for me
I must be getting confused then. I often do. I'm not very bright.
Just re-reading your posts though, it seems that what you've just said you're [i]not[/i] saying, is [i]exactly[/i] what you are saying.
So could you just clarify: are you actually saying what you're not saying? Or are you not really saying what you are saying?
Sancho - Member
and im not patronising people for being unemployed, or suggesting they are wandering around, waiting for work, that is what you are suggesting I am saying.
I find the tone of your posts condescending and patronising, and I've got a job!
Plus
Sancho - Member
but no one has ever just wandered up to me and given me a job
Why put that in (twice) unless you were suggesting that is what some are doing?
i've come to the conclusion, through banging head on wall, that there is very very few vacancies compared to those looking for work-- i refuse to get frothed up, chasing imaginary jobs, hopes dashed, the feeling of despair at not having money to do much, ---no , i will ride my bike, free in the knowledge that i am lucky to go out when i wish,not constrained by time or commitments-- and why should i not--after all it keeps me sane and healthy , ready for a return to the workforce when things improve/luck turns my way....
junkyard, I have sympathy for the unemployed more than people on here will understand and i agree with you totally, and Im not saying MTFU.
junkyard, I have sympathy for the unemployed more than people on here will understand and i agree with you totally, and Im not saying MTFU.
well, if thats the case, you seem to have a strange way of showing it.....
Ive been unemployed many times and been in your position rudebwoy so I know how you feel.
In that case, I'd recommend that you don't pursue a career in bereavement counseling
Though I've now become convinced that you are actually [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Harrison_%28entrepreneur%29 ]Emma Harrison[/url]
I dont know who she is, and again dont patronise me on bereavement as I have had to deal with a lot of that in my family.
sancho-- we all have different circumstances, but never berate someone who is unemployed-- like kicking sand in a babies face--its not big, its not clever...you need to turn your ire on a system that encourages division, low pay, poor terms and conditions and all for the benefit of those who have plenty.....
I havent berated anyone for being unemployed.
At least 4 people have read your posts in that way, perhaps you should me more delicate in your phrasing. And how is 'I'd recommend that you don't pursue a career in bereavement counseling' patronising you on bereavement? In the context of the conversation it's pretty obvious that's not what he was doing.
and I am not trying to aim any ire at the forum. just passing on my view of what Ive had to do in the 80's 90's and 00's.
as unemployment is something ive had to deal with regularly.
...merely informed them that they're lazy, and if they actually tried harder, instead of sitting around waiting for a job to land in their laps, then they would all be in gainful employment. All 2.6 million of them. As that's what it was like in 1986, and its no different now!
No... it doesn't sound remotely like berating, at all
lifer i take it that binners suggests that i have no support or sympathy for people dealing with bereavement. so I take it that way and find it offensive.
where do you get that from binners, you dont half fill in some blanks
I'm filling in blanks? You appear to be two different people who are alternating every few posts, unaware what the other one just typed.
And for that reason, I'm out.
I havent ever suggested the unemployed are lazy or not trying to find work, you are suggesting that, I have tried to explaing how hard it is to find work and the efforts I have had to go through, you then suggest I am saying everyone is lazy etc.
But what I am saying is that it can only be down to you to get a job.
I'm sure the 1700+ people that applied for 8 new jobs at one Costa disagree. [url= https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=costa%201700%20applicants&oq=&gs_l=&pbx=1&fp=12aa70344db8feb4&ion=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.45368065,d.d2k&biw=816&bih=602 ]Link[/url]
You can apply for as many jobs as you like but when hundreds of others are going for the same job it's down to a little more than just you.
I'm filling in blanks? You appear to be two different people who are alternating every few posts, unaware what the other one just typed.And for that reason, I'm out.
+1
well best give up then it impossible to get a job clearly.
Sancho - Member
lifer i take it that binners suggests that i have no support or sympathy for people dealing with bereavement. so I take it that way and find it offensive.
You're taking it wrong.
sancho-- there are others in this world with experiences of hardship and woe, its not good to tell them to try harder-- if you could see to it that i wasn't blacklisted for most of my working life, i'm sure that might assist in me getting more opportunities-- but really, it is not wise to foist your own experiences onto everyone else's predicament...comprende ?
well best give up then it impossible to get a job clearly.
Well it is impossible for all of them as their are fewer jobs than people applying
it is not impossible to win the Tour de france but that does not mean I can do it.
etc
What I can’t get my head around is this. The tory attitude is that they are the uber mensch, the leaders, the drivers of the economic power house, and you are either one of them or an unter mensch, a pleb, cannon fodder, idle, good for nothing.
So it is a very small step from there to “we are in charge and you are irrelevant” from a tory perspective. So given that, where does this “it’s the workers fault” attitude come from? Personally, if I believed that I was one of the chosen people I’d be very embarrassed and keep very quiet while the shits hitting the fan as it is now.
Berm Bandit - Member
So given that, where does this “it’s the workers fault” attitude come from?
Years and years and years of people credulously swallowing it and repeating it and reinforcing it. Then using the completely unrepresentative stories in the tabloids (Philpott et al) as proof.
Berm Bandit - Member
So given that, where does this “it’s the workers fault” attitude come from?
Hang over from the years of union demonisation- jobs are lost due to the unreasonable demands, both financial and working practices, demanded by the workers via the unions which lead to the destruction of industry in these isles.
If it wasn't for the saving grace of the Financial Industry in the Square Mile, and the resultant trickle down service industry job creation we'd all be on the dole.
I imagine it comes from the same half wits who think 'it's all the tories fault'
theocb - Member
I imagine it comes from the same half wits who think 'it's all the tories fault'
The people who think it's all the workers fault also think it's all the tories' fault?
Talk about cognitive dissonance.
I imagine it comes from the same half wits who think 'it's all the tories fault'
Nah..... pretty sure its the half wits who think that
...... or in fact that its actually in the square mile any longer, or even that its any form of saving grace for anyone apart from the very few self serving pricks who benefit from it.the saving grace is the Financial Industry in the Square Mile
EDIT: I hold shares in Lloyds TSB, and have personally lost substantially as a result of that, my penison fund is currently severely damaged as a result of the Financial Services industries malpractice, and as a stakeholder in GB plc, I dread to think what share of the umpteen billion used to bail said industry out is going to come from the sweat of my brow. So I'm not being flippant or dogamtic in the above response, merely truthful.
Nope. definately the half wits who think everything is the tories fault.
And yes Lifer the half wits also think 'it's all the workers fault'
Half wits don't have to all have the same opinion you know.. there are half wits at both ends of the spectrum; never seems like we get much chatter from the middle on these threads though does it?
If it wasn't for the saving grace of the Financial Industry in the Square Mile
So the financial industry is going to save us, is it?
Like when RBS, now state owned, provided the finance to Kraft, an American firm, for a leveraged buyout of Cadbury. Who on completion of the takeover close down the British manufacturing, moving it to Poland, and throwing all the British staff out of work
I'm guesssing here, but those ex-Cadbury employes probably wish the Financial Industry hadn't so bravely ridden to their rescue
Once again, the tongue-in-cheekness of my post seems to have disappeared during typing. 😕
I thought we were playing Colin Murray's 'defend the indefensible' 😉
It did allow me to illustrate the utter and complete madness of this countries financial sector. And somewhat unbelievable that some people, unfortunately the ones in power, seem to actually believe the statement you sarcastically made, despite all evidence to the contrary. Depressing
binners you mean the factory that in 2007 Cadbury (before being bought by Kraft) had confirmed would be closed by 2010.
Kraft then did what cadbury had planned to do in 2011, so your ill informed comments would make a forum reader like myself believe that all was well in Cadbury before the take over and as a result of bank intervention with Kraft with the takeover the fatory was closed.
never seems like we get much chatter from the middle on these threads though does it?
why thank you for ploughing the middle ground then and bringing a moment of sense and clarity to the debate by calling some folk half wits 😕
This whole page is obvious trolls are obvious tbh
Credit the nonworkingclasses with a bit more nouse please.
The "lazy" unemployed signed on the sick years ago,it pays better.
Sancho - you're saying that British taxpayers providing funds to foreign companies to buy British firms is a good thing? It seems like the very definition of insanity to me!
And You think that's the end of the redundancies, do you? The end of moving production offshore? I wish I shared your confidence. Because American multinationals don't have much track record for that kind of thing, do they? Bearing in mind that the Kraft management were asked to provide guarantees at the time, but refused.
And where are the tax revenues now going? That were coming into the exchequer before?
Its complete madness!!
there you go filling in the blanks again.
No Binners I dont think any of the above
I merely pointed out how your previous comment was misleading.
but you do tend to fill in what you want to believe.
I dont like Kraft as an organisation or how they operate. Is it the end of the redundancies, I have heard that there is development planned for other parts of Cadbury, but I cant comment on how that will materialise in the future.
I dont like how companies can buy the debts of other companies to then call in that debt and effectiveyl bankrupt a company only to buy the bankrupt company as what happened to Clinton cards (I think)
do you know where the revenues are going?
are they posting a profit in the uk?
can you advise on this factually or will you make something up? 😉
We do seem to have veered off on a tangent here. I think i'll leave it 😀
vinnyeh - Member
Once again, the tongue-in-cheekness of my post seems to have disappeared during typing.
I thought your use of 'trickle down' made it obvious it wasn't serious, but there you go.
No problem Junkyard. Honesty is the best policy.
The trolls were so obvious that you needed to reply to them 🙄
vinnyeh - Member
Once again, the tongue-in-cheekness of my post seems to have disappeared during typing.
Over this least week I've been totally blown away by the blatantly obviously unacceptable and unsustainable Thatcherite rhetoric on here, and some from folk whose right wing roots I had mistakenly taken to be a jest. 😯
As a result I am currently reviewing the bar at which ironic and sarcastic has formerly been pitched, as I am guessing that these societal weevils are more widespread than I had formerly assumed.
Regrettably your post fell south of that currently fluid bar. Apologies. 😉
Says the man who is worried about his shares in a bank! Thatcher would have loved you. 😉
Says the man who is worried about his shares in a bank! Thatcher would have loved you.
WTF are you talking about? They were actually forced upon me by Thatchers policies. I've never owned shares in my life up until then, and knowing no better I chose to include them into my pension provisions....foolishly. So your point is caller? 😉 right back at yer
Half wits don't have to all have the same opinion you know.. there are half wits at both ends of the spectrum; never seems like we get much chatter from the middle on these threads though does it?
you , i take it are from this mythical 'middle' of somewhere--wise and knowing,revelling in your wondrous wit 😯
I can imagine your fighting back saying no no I wont accept these shares and the policy saying take the damn shares i force them on you.
to which you had no way out and had to accept them. 😉
I wouldn't be suprised if Kraft got an EU development grant to set up that factory in Poland.
I heard today that the son of Thatcher's housing minister in office when 'right to buy' came in now has 40 ex council houses as part of his property portfolio!
Sancho - Member
I can imagine your fighting back saying no no I wont accept these shares and the policy saying take the damn shares i force them on you.to which you had no way out and had to accept them.
Clearly you are psychic, and yes you are right, it was part of a sequence of events around the demutualisation of the Halifax, something I objected very strongly to, and still do, the loss of my job, and compensation paid to me by the demutualised shower of **** that they became. The details are none of your business, but suffice to say given the options accepting what was offered was the only realistic choice at the time. Unfortunately, I ended up thoroughly shafted anyway by the subsequent takeover by LloydsTSB and then the fall by 80 % of what I received to compensate for the previous malpractice, so ironically I would have been better off to stick to my principles and lose out in the first instance.
I was working at the Halifax just before they de mutualised. I wrote my thesis on the benefits of becoming a bank and concluded that only the top 1% of management would benefit. I still think I was right my boss didn't like it and I left.
Apologies for dragging this thread back to the top again, but it provides good context and I'm kind of on topic. Shopping at Asda yesterday, they are replacing even more tills with self service lanes. Now I can understand how this makes sound business sense, but surely it is just a very visible example of what is going wrong in this labour economy? Constant cost savings by reducing, deskilling, outsourcing labour, less and less employment opportunities. It's been happening since the industrial revolution, I guess... But what is the logical conclusion? It strikes me that we'll end up only needing a tiny proportion of the population actually working, so what do we do with the rest of them? How can a human compete with a machine?
Were the Luddites right? Are we basically ****ed?
But what is the logical conclusion? It strikes me that we'll end up only needing a tiny proportion of the population actually working, so what do we do with the rest of them?
One of the greatest lies ever told was the one told when the successful development of the "silicon chip" was announced to the public. People were told to much fanfare that this new earth-shattering technological breakthrough would revolutionise their lives.
Tedious tasks would in future be preformed by machines freeing people to spend more time enjoying their lives. The new growth areas would be the leisure industries as they expanded and developed to deal with the new situation caused by people only needing to work 3 or 4 days per week.
Of course it resulted in no such and simply meant greater profits and a greater amount of people unemployed. In fact people are now expected to work even harder and for longer - despite the huge technological advances of recent decades.
So what happens if the present trend continues and more and more people are forced out of work by machines ? Well eventually the lack of wage earners will cause the markets to collapse, it isn't sustainable. The world will then enter into a new era.
Well that's depressing Ernie. Literally a bloody revolution. Or zombie apocalypse? I've shopped at Merry Hill so I know what that's like...
[i]What I can’t get my head around is this. The tory attitude is that they are the uber mensch, the leaders, the drivers of the economic power house, and you are either one of them or an unter mensch, a pleb, cannon fodder, idle, good for nothing.[/i]
IMO this is a cultural shift that came (this time) from the US, which is where first saw it personally in the early 90's.
In the last company I worked for there was a 'line', above it you got above-inflation rises, bonuses and consequently senior Managers/Directors started to outstrip the old salary 'ladder'. Whereas when I started working in the early 80's these Managers were often no more than 50% better off than their most senior employee, by mid-2000's I (for one) was earning twice what my No 2 got. And my boss was on twice my earnings.
Below it..., as lttle as was needed.