The Good News thread, local jobs, economy etc

[Rincewind]

By him working hard he kept you in a job. If he'd been unemployed and died at 60 you'd have blamed the heartless govt.

I think you missed my point.He didn't keep me in a job. There were others working there that alson contributed. If I had not done my jon properly I would have lost it. Same with the sales team warehouse staff tea lady and cleaner all had a job to do or lose it. If he was not there there would have been another to fill his shoes.

 

Smudge it was in response to start with nothing do nothing end with nothing

 

Some may do something and progress and on the way up they may pass a person who they consider to be an unsavory type. If said person should fall upon hard times he will start to retrace his steps and pass the unsavory type that he dismissed on the way up.

As I have said I do not begrudge anyone that works hard for their money.

I'm not envious of anyone. I just think the cheats at the top should be punished as well as the cheats at the bottom. What is wrong with that? What is unfair about that?

Edited 24 August 2013 by Rincewind

[ADK]

Well lets be honest anyone who knows a little about economics knows that people get paid based on their skills and abilities not on how hard they work.

 

Does Wayne Rooney earn £150,000 a week (or whatever it actually is) because he works harder than a man doing 60 hours manual labour including some night shifts?

 

So what do you define as hard work anyway?

[The People's Hero]

 

I'm doing quite well actually , but anyone that genuinely believes that harder work = greater rewards , and those that are on higher pay actually earn it , are fookin deluded.

 

 

Each to their own.

 

I'm going to keep working hard and making the best of myself (professionally) that I can do for the sake of myself and my family.

 

I've been accused of being condescending for having this viewpoint, but each to their own, if you don't see the value in hard work, I'm not going to try to persuade you.

 

Sorry if this doesn't sit well with the consensus FT view!

[The People's Hero]

Well lets be honest anyone who knows a little about economics knows that people get paid based on their skills and abilities not on how hard they work.

 

Does Wayne Rooney earn £150,000 a week (or whatever it actually is) because he works harder than a man doing 60 hours manual labour including some night shifts?

 

So what do you define as hard work anyway?

 

Yes absolutely, but presumably Rooney has worked hard at his game.

 

Just as, to use an example, accountants and doctors (I am neither) have to work hard and make sacrifices to get qualified and gain the skills and knowledge to do their own jobs.

 

There is ordinarily hard work involved at some stage - the sort of hard work which would put many people off.

 

There are of course exceptions.

[Rincewind]

Of course. But I'm thinking the point is there is more than one definition of success in this life, and it's not just about material gain.

 

How so?

I would rather have a healthy life friends and family  and a social life than money and possessions. Obviously you need some money but it is not a priority.

 

My brother does the occasional accountancy work. He sorts out and works out budget plans for people. Some run their own businesses and he says its shocking how they cannot manage their own spending and personal bank account.

 

He's semi-retired after being a teacher an hotel owner and a poker player after selling up to take things easy,

He charges around £60 per hour for consultations.

Edited 24 August 2013 by Rincewind

[Smudge]

I think you missed my point.He didn't keep me in a job. There were others working there that alson contributed. If I had not done my jon properly I would have lost it. Same with the sales team warehouse staff tea lady and cleaner all had a job to do or lose it. If he was not there there would have been another to fill his shoes.

 

Smudge it was in response to start with nothing do nothing end with nothing

 

Some may do something and progress and on the way up they may pass a person who they consider to be an unsavory type. If said person should fall upon hard times he will start to retrace his steps and pass the unsavory type that he dismissed on the way up.

As I have said I do not begrudge anyone that works hard for their money.

Fine, it stills seem like a non-sequitur to me.

 

However, as a response to your point your understanding of climbing the ladder is based on tv drama rather than how i have observed career success.

 

Most of those I know, including myself, have needed the support and encouragement of their fellow workers to get on

[The People's Hero]

I would rather have a healthy life friends and family  and a social life than money and possessions.

 

Good for you. Same as almost everybody else.

 

You do realise that these things are not mutually exclusive?

 

You've had health problems recently, so as you see, you cannot simply choose. You could be rich and healthy or poor and sick. Its not a choice anyone ever has to make! (Unless taking a very stressful job purely for the money I suppose)

[MooseBreath]

How so?

"People have a reason to be angry at the government... We're heading for mass disruption on the streets"

Nonsense. Social mobility has never been higher. Education and in-demand skills are available to all. Anyone who wants a decent standard of living can get one. A massively generous welfare state looks after not only the incapable but also the feckless.

To suggest that people are about to rise up against the government is absolute crap. We've never had it so easy. Of course there will always be people more successful and better off and yes some of those people will not necessarily be any more deserving than you are. But that's life. There's a lot of luck and randomness involved. All you can really ask for is the opportunity to develop your skills and the chance to apply them. We have that in abundance. Anyone who wants a decent career in this country can get one if he is willing to work for it. I think most people know that, which is why we're not going to see any of these mass protests or whatever.

The biggest danger to our society at the moment is the way so many people are starting to associate success with wrongdoing, and how this apparent wrongdoing entitles them to a share in that success for nothing. The blame for this lies at the door of the lefties, who were too naive to realise that if you give some people an inch they'll take a mile. The result is that we now have a generation of people who have been brought up thinking they're owed something; thinking that they don't need to work hard but instead that they inherently deserve to be able to steal from others. And that is a very real threat to the future of this country and attitudes like zingy's can take a lot of the blame.

[leicsmac]

Each to their own.

 

I'm going to keep working hard and making the best of myself (professionally) that I can do for the sake of myself and my family.

 

I've been accused of being condescending for having this viewpoint, but each to their own, if you don't see the value in hard work, I'm not going to try to persuade you.

 

Sorry if this doesn't sit well with the consensus FT view!

 

No.

 

I have no problem whatsoever with that viewpoint at all, in fact it's a damn good one. What was the problem was the sarcastic and yes, condescending, manner in which you phrased it. Obviously that may not have been your intention and if it wasn't then I apologise, but the issue are far more complicated than simply 'hard workers' and 'shirkers' and as you're obviously a smart person you know that too. 

 

 

Good for you. Same as almost everybody else.

 

You do realise that these things are not mutually exclusive?

 

You've had health problems recently, so as you see, you cannot simply choose. You could be rich and healthy or poor and sick. Its not a choice anyone ever has to make! (Unless taking a very stressful job purely for the money I suppose)

 

Depends on how long you spend at work, I would think. Surely spending a lot of time working hard precludes the opportunity for much of a social life and could put a burden (either physical or mental) on your health (dependent on the job, of course).

[The People's Hero]

"People have a reason to be angry at the government... We're heading for mass disruption on the streets"

Nonsense. Social mobility has never been higher. Education and in-demand skills are available to all. Anyone who wants a decent standard of living can get one. A massively generous welfare state looks after not only the incapable but also the feckless.

To suggest that people are about to rise up against the government is absolute crap. We've never had it so easy. Of course there will always be people more successful and better off and yes some of those people will not necessarily be any more deserving than you are. But that's life. There's a lot of luck and randomness involved. All you can really ask for is the opportunity to develop your skills and the chance to apply them. We have that in abundance. Anyone who wants a decent career in this country can get one if he is willing to work for it. I think most people know that, which is why we're not going to see any of these mass protests or whatever.

The biggest danger to our society at the moment is the way so many people are starting to associate success with wrongdoing, and how this apparent wrongdoing entitles them to a share in that success for nothing. The blame for this lies at the door of the lefties, who were too naive to realise that if you give some people an inch they'll take a mile. The result is that we now have a generation of people who have been brought up thinking they're owed something; thinking that they don't need to work hard but instead that they inherently deserve to be able to steal from others. And that is a very real threat to the future of this country and attitudes like zingy's can take a lot of the blame.

 

I agree with every word.

 

Moosebreath, Ken, Zingari and I should share a house. No sorry - a commune/crackhouse/whatever or even just live on the streets together.

Sitcom gold.

 

I'm writing to Channel 5.

[Smudge]

Well lets be honest anyone who knows a little about economics knows that people get paid based on their skills and abilities not on how hard they work.

 

Does Wayne Rooney earn £150,000 a week (or whatever it actually is) because he works harder than a man doing 60 hours manual labour including some night shifts?

 

So what do you define as hard work anyway?

I don't agree with that, unskilled workers have to work hard otherwise they are replaced.

[Zingari]

Each to their own.

 

I'm going to keep working hard and making the best of myself (professionally) that I can do for the sake of myself and my family.

 

I've been accused of being condescending for having this viewpoint, but each to their own, if you don't see the value in hard work, I'm not going to try to persuade you.

 

Sorry if this doesn't sit well with the consensus FT view!

I certainly wouldn't and haven't criticised you or anyone else for working hard and doing their best and hopefully getting well rewarded for it.All the best to you  ,

 

 But if you really believe you are immune to your life crashing down through little or no fault of your own and becoming a victim of horrendous circumstances   , then I still think you (and anyone else who thinks this) are deluded.There are a million reasons your life could change in the blink of an eye. Believe me I've seen it happen on a couple of occasions 

 

Hopefully  you'll avoid all the slings and arrows though 

 

I agree with every word.

 

Moosebreath, Ken, Zingari and I should share a house. No sorry - a commune/crackhouse/whatever or even just live on the streets together.

Sitcom gold.

 

I'm writing to Channel 5.

Edited 24 August 2013 by Zingari

[Zingari]

I don't agree with that, unskilled workers have to work hard otherwise they are replaced.

whereas top bankers get us in the shite and walk away with millions 

[ADK]

"People have a reason to be angry at the government... We're heading for mass disruption on the streets"

Nonsense. Social mobility has never been higher. Education and in-demand skills are available to all. Anyone who wants a decent standard of living can get one. A massively generous welfare state looks after not only the incapable but also the feckless.

To suggest that people are about to rise up against the government is absolute crap. We've never had it so easy. Of course there will always be people more successful and better off and yes some of those people will not necessarily be any more deserving than you are. But that's life. There's a lot of luck and randomness involved. All you can really ask for is the opportunity to develop your skills and the chance to apply them. We have that in abundance. Anyone who wants a decent career in this country can get one if he is willing to work for it. I think most people know that, which is why we're not going to see any of these mass protests or whatever.

The biggest danger to our society at the moment is the way so many people are starting to associate success with wrongdoing, and how this apparent wrongdoing entitles them to a share in that success for nothing. The blame for this lies at the door of the lefties, who were too naive to realise that if you give some people an inch they'll take a mile. The result is that we now have a generation of people who have been brought up thinking they're owed something; thinking that they don't need to work hard but instead that they inherently deserve to be able to steal from others. And that is a very real threat to the future of this country and attitudes like zingy's can take a lot of the blame.

 

I would agree with the first two paragraphs. The last one is just a load of typical right-wing nonsense.

[leicsmac]

"People have a reason to be angry at the government... We're heading for mass disruption on the streets"

Nonsense. Social mobility has never been higher. Education and in-demand skills are available to all. Anyone who wants a decent standard of living can get one. A massively generous welfare state looks after not only the incapable but also the feckless.

To suggest that people are about to rise up against the government is absolute crap. We've never had it so easy. Of course there will always be people more successful and better off and yes some of those people will not necessarily be any more deserving than you are. But that's life. There's a lot of luck and randomness involved. All you can really ask for is the opportunity to develop your skills and the chance to apply them. We have that in abundance. Anyone who wants a decent career in this country can get one if he is willing to work for it. I think most people know that, which is why we're not going to see any of these mass protests or whatever.

The biggest danger to our society at the moment is the way so many people are starting to associate success with wrongdoing, and how this apparent wrongdoing entitles them to a share in that success for nothing. The blame for this lies at the door of the lefties, who were too naive to realise that if you give some people an inch they'll take a mile. The result is that we now have a generation of people who have been brought up thinking they're owed something; thinking that they don't need to work hard but instead that they inherently deserve to be able to steal from others. And that is a very real threat to the future of this country and attitudes like zingy's can take a lot of the blame.

 

Yeah, I disagree with the mass disruption on the streets, but I do think that regardless of the Government people are going to be angry with it. Democracy at work. 

 

I do however think that most else of what he's saying here is sound though.

 

As for the rest of your post, I agree with opportunity being random, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it. Surely we should attempt to continue moving towards a pure meritocracy rather than just throwing our hands up and saying "that's life"? 

 

It's a very Randian belief to believe that there is a legion of people out there who think success is evil. Doesn't make it any less true, mind you, but I think it might be less people than you believe. I personally have no problem with success being rewarded as I have said before, but at the moment it is not rewarded evenly (as well as failure not being punished equally), which again bring me back to the idea that hard work isn't rewarded the way it should be some of the time. Again, it might be a fact of life but it's wrong just to sit down and take it IMO.

 

Perhaps I'm a bit too idealistic when it comes to people in general, but I do think that if you offer people the opportunities, they will take them, and that most of the unemployed in this country genuinely want to work. And mass employment works wonders for the economy of a country. Surely it's better to have them working for a minimum wage doing something for a company/on the Government payroll than on benefits? Mind you, I think we've had that discussion before. 

[Zingari]

"People have a reason to be angry at the government... We're heading for mass disruption on the streets"

Nonsense. Social mobility has never been higher. Education and in-demand skills are available to all. Anyone who wants a decent standard of living can get one. A massively generous welfare state looks after not only the incapable but also the feckless.

To suggest that people are about to rise up against the government is absolute crap. We've never had it so easy. Of course there will always be people more successful and better off and yes some of those people will not necessarily be any more deserving than you are. But that's life. There's a lot of luck and randomness involved. All you can really ask for is the opportunity to develop your skills and the chance to apply them. We have that in abundance. Anyone who wants a decent career in this country can get one if he is willing to work for it. I think most people know that, which is why we're not going to see any of these mass protests or whatever.

The biggest danger to our society at the moment is the way so many people are starting to associate success with wrongdoing, and how this apparent wrongdoing entitles them to a share in that success for nothing. The blame for this lies at the door of the lefties, who were too naive to realise that if you give some people an inch they'll take a mile. The result is that we now have a generation of people who have been brought up thinking they're owed something; thinking that they don't need to work hard but instead that they inherently deserve to be able to steal from others. And that is a very real threat to the future of this country and attitudes like zingy's can take a lot of the blame.

I think the biggest danger to society is that abject failure at high levels  is so greatly rewarded . 

 

So people aren't going to take to the streets  right?  But if they do it's all my fault is it ?

i like that , blaming me for all the problems . Have you been talking to my missus ?   

 

 

Mass disruption on the streets is like the Spanish Inquisition , Nobody expects it . 

Edited 24 August 2013 by Zingari

[Rincewind]

Moose I admire your determination to convince yourself of your simplistic views.

 

You are a FoxesTalk legend.

[MooseBreath]

Yeah, I disagree with the mass disruption on the streets, but I do think that regardless of the Government people are going to be angry with it. Democracy at work.

I do however think that most else of what he's saying here is sound though.

As for the rest of your post, I agree with opportunity being random, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it. Surely we should attempt to continue moving towards a pure meritocracy rather than just throwing our hands up and saying "that's life"?

It's a very Randian belief to believe that there is a legion of people out there who think success is evil. Doesn't make it any less true, mind you, but I think it might be less people than you believe. I personally have no problem with success being rewarded as I have said before, but at the moment it is not rewarded evenly (as well as failure not being punished equally), which again bring me back to the idea that hard work isn't rewarded the way it should be some of the time. Again, it might be a fact of life but it's wrong just to sit down and take it IMO.

Perhaps I'm a bit too idealistic when it comes to people in general, but I do think that if you offer people the opportunities, they will take them, and that most of the unemployed in this country genuinely want to work. And mass employment works wonders for the economy of a country. Surely it's better to have them working for a minimum wage doing something for a company/on the Government payroll than on benefits? Mind you, I think we've had that discussion before.

Would you have a welfare state in a pure meritocracy? I assume you'd have to have 100% inheritance tax. You'd have to ban private schools. Really you'd have to ban everything which would give one child any advantage over another. How would you manage that? You'd not only have to provide assistance to help those at the bottom up, you'd also need to actively pull those at the top down. I'm having visions of government agents going round the nice neighbourhoods and burning books to prevent those kids from learning something which the other kids don't have access to. For it to properly work wouldnt you need a flat rate salary for everyone regardless of their output? I can't see any way of ensuring each generation starts from zero without artificially flat lining the achievements of the previous generation.

[The People's Hero]

Moose I admire your determination to convince yourself of your simplistic views.

 

 

Are you serious?

Moose is not my biggest fan and I know it but I have to jump to his defence here.

 

He clearly knows his own mind and I think expresses it pretty concisely considering that this is an internet forum and the level of discussion has to be kept reasonably accessible.

 

How you can accuse his argument (which is very close to mine) of being simplistic is ridiculous when no one can even work out what your argument is..?

 

You have certain key (admirable principles) but some which are ridiculous:

 

- anti homeless (good)

- pro welfare for those who really need it (good)

- pro welfare for those who don't really need it (bad, refuse to see the bad in anyone on benefits. Not all but some are lazy. To some it is a lifestyle choice)

- anti-success - see all who better themselves and get promotions as self-seeking fatcats (bad, delusional, chip on shoulder?)

 

But I can't piece these ideas together in to an actual argument - and bearing in mind you think Moose's is simplistic, I look forward to benefiting from your deeper understanding of the issues at hand, that's if they are not too complex for the likes of Moosebreath and myself to understand?

[The People's Hero]

Would you have a welfare state in a pure meritocracy? I assume you'd have to have 100% inheritance tax. You'd have to ban private schools. Really you'd have to ban everything which would give one child any advantage over another. How would you manage that? You'd not only have to provide assistance to help those at the bottom up, you'd also need to actively pull those at the top down. I'm having visions of government agents going round the nice neighbourhoods and burning books to prevent those kids from learning something which the other kids don't have access to. For it to properly work wouldnt you need a flat rate salary for everyone regardless of their output? I can't see any way of ensuring each generation starts from zero without artificially flat lining the achievements of the previous generation.

 

A pure meritocracy simply cannot work, as you say. In a civilised society, you really must have welfare. It may surprise some but I'm uncomfortable even with the situation in the US where I think until recently there was no NHS equivalent and many could not afford health care. That is not a position people should be in. 

 

But yeah, pure meritocracy is great in my head, but not so great when you really examine the impact it would have, how you'd have to achieve it and the problems you'd cause for many people.

[Zingari]

You seem to be getting back to your old self a bit more TPH . and that's all good. 

 

I'm not prying or anything but you seemed a little out of sorts a few times you've been on in the last few months . It might have been my imagination but you seemed very  angry about something . I don't sense it so much recently .

 

if it was just my imagination i'm sorry just ignore me .

[leicsmac]

Would you have a welfare state in a pure meritocracy? I assume you'd have to have 100% inheritance tax. You'd have to ban private schools. Really you'd have to ban everything which would give one child any advantage over another. How would you manage that? You'd not only have to provide assistance to help those at the bottom up, you'd also need to actively pull those at the top down. I'm having visions of government agents going round the nice neighbourhoods and burning books to prevent those kids from learning something which the other kids don't have access to. For it to properly work wouldnt you need a flat rate salary for everyone regardless of their output? I can't see any way of ensuring each generation starts from zero without artificially flat lining the achievements of the previous generation.

 

 

A pure meritocracy simply cannot work, as you say. In a civilised society, you really must have welfare. It may surprise some but I'm uncomfortable even with the situation in the US where I think until recently there was no NHS equivalent and many could not afford health care. That is not a position people should be in. 

 

But yeah, pure meritocracy is great in my head, but not so great when you really examine the impact it would have, how you'd have to achieve it and the problems you'd cause for many people.

 

I agree that a totally pure meritocracy wouldn't be possible, it would be unworkable due to the sheer amount of work it would take to establish. It would be interesting to see how close we could get, though.

 

I guess what I'm looking for really in the short term is just a little more accountability and a continued drive to make sure that hard work at any level is rewarded as deserved, and more and more opportunities are available for people to do that hard work and get that reward, if they so choose. But also that is people choose to be comfortable where they are, and just work and earn enough to enjoy their life through other means, for that not to be stigmatised either.

[Rincewind]

I am not anti success. I highlighted one person to illustrate how some succeed but it may not have the outcome they  desire. I do not think failure should be rewarded with a big payout. If you make an huge error at work costing the company thousands of pounds it would come as no surprise to you if you were fired. But if your boss said to you, you deserve a bonus and a promotion for the work you have done it may surprise you even more. (unless you are the boss).

Anyone that cheats the system whether it is benefits or taxes are still cheats rich or poor and are equally accountable for their actions.

[Rincewind]

I agree that a totally pure meritocracy wouldn't be possible, it would be unworkable due to the sheer amount of work it would take to establish. It would be interesting to see how close we could get, though.

 

I guess what I'm looking for really in the short term is just a little more accountability and a continued drive to make sure that hard work at any level is rewarded as deserved, and more and more opportunities are available for people to do that hard work and get that reward, if they so choose. But also that is people choose to be comfortable where they are, and just work and earn enough to enjoy their life through other means, for that not to be stigmatised either.

This

[Zingari]

if leicmac ain't invited to TPH's  commune i ain't goin either