Jump to content


If the Conservatives win the election how high will unemployment rise?

Recommended Posts

Odd that. I heard on the radio that if Labour won the election there would be 10 million unemployed. Just who do you believe eh!

 

It may come as a shock to you but sometimes people say things on the radio that are just guesses rather than fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It may come as a shock to you but sometimes people say things on the radio that are just guesses rather than fact.

 

Unlike the 'facts' you come out with about everything from voting preferences of newspaper readers to birth rates based on social class you mean?

 

:hihi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Odd that. I heard on the radio that if Labour won the election there would be 10 million unemployed. Just who do you believe eh!

 

Current unemployment as yet to reach 3 million, there are approximately 29 million working in the country, do you seriously think that 1 in 4 of those people are going to lose their jobs to make up the other 7 million required to give us 10 million out of work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the argument is that the public sector workers you mention above, replace a benefits system. Which is true really, it's a form of insurance. But like all insurance it comes at a cost.

 

That cost slowly bleeds the wealth out of the economy which is OK when wealth creation more than makes up for it, but now...

 

I never mentioned a benefits system??

 

But since you mention it, as Milton Friedman observed of the Wall street crash Govt expenditure is required to cushion people from the impact of the market and to assist with the recovery.

 

Afterall compared with paying people benefits for doing nothing it makes much more sense to employ them for a few thousand more to do something of use for the economy, like education, health or helping employers find good staff.

Edited by Wildcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unlike the 'facts' you come out with about everything from voting preferences of newspaper readers to birth rates based on social class you mean?

 

:hihi:

 

 

Exactly. My views are based on my experiences of the real world, which I suspect is far greater than yours.

 

You too may be surprised to know that not everything can be proved by linking to a wikipedia page or some biased online survey. :hihi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have mentioned those figures before, unfortunately there is now a generation that couldn’t even imagine interest rates at those levels, they will learn the hard way.

 

When I bought my first car you had to put a % upfront never mind an house, I had my first mortgage when interest rates were in double figures and rising, my family were miners(gone) I was a steelworker ( on its knees) and they expect us to vote for the Tories, not a chance I would rather vote BNP, well not quite.:)

 

 

People have such short memories!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Current unemployment as yet to reach 3 million, there are approximately 29 million working in the country, do you seriously think that 1 in 4 of those people are going to lose their jobs to make up the other 7 million required to give us 10 million out of work.

 

I was making a flippant remark in response to the completely stupid claim by another forumer. You would have perhaps noticed that if you removed your red goggles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been many claims on this thread about steel production. Perhaps Corus's own version might englighten people into how many people wandered around inside BSC doing not very much.

 

http://www.corusgroup.com/file_source/StaticFiles/Corporate/History_BS.pdf

History of British Steel

March 22nd 1967

The ‘Iron and Steel Act’ brought into public ownership

about 90% of British Steelmaking. The country's nonintegrated

steelmaking and re-rolling companies,

including half of the specialised steel production facilities

were left in the private sector with a number of small

companies.

July 28th 1967

BSC (British Steel Corporation) was formed from the

UK's 14 main steel producing companies. The formation

enabled the reshaping of a vital industry after years of

insufficient capital investment.

The 1970's

The Government approved a 10 year development

strategy with expenditure of £3,000 million from 1973

onwards, the objective of which was to convert BSC

from a large number of small scale works using largely

obsolete equipment, to a far more compact organisation

with highly competitive plant. Steelmaking was to be

concentrated in five main areas: South Wales, Sheffield,

Scunthorpe, Teesside and Scotland.

It was not until 1975 that a closure programme was

agreed after a 14 month review by Lord Beswick, the

then Minister of State for Industry.

By this time BSC was plunging into loss and important

parts of the investment programme was held back.

Despite this significant closures had taken place by the

end of the decade.

The 1980's

The start of the 1980s was heralded by a 13 week

national steel strike. The strike was the result of the

Corporation's pressure for change and a pay dispute.

By the end of 1980, BSC had completed the closure of a

number of outdated and lossmaking plants and reduced

its workforce to 130,000 - compared with a total of

268,500 employees at the time of nationalisation.

Even so, the prospects for steel sales in the markets

available to BSC were such that a corporate plan put

forward in December 1980 proposed further significant

improvements in cost and efficiency. The aim was to

regain a competitive position as a supplier to a world

market heavily over-supplied with steel products.

By early 1984, BSC was achieving better labour

productivity levels than most continental steelmakers and

by 1988/89, a figure of 4.7 man hours per tonne was

achieved - a threefold improvement since the end of the

1970s.The turnaround in British Steel's fortunes since the early

years of 1980s was very substantial. The heavy losses of

a few years before were replaced by a pre-tax profit in

1989/90 of £733 million.

1987

On the 3rd December 1987 the UK Government formally

announced its intention to privatise the British Steel

Corporation.

1988

The British Steel Act 1988 transferred the assets of the

Corporation to British Steel, a company registered under

the Companies Act & on 5 December 1988, dealings in

shares opened at The Stock Exchange.

The 1990's

The early 1990's saw reduced demand and it was not until

1993 that growth in the UK economy gradually gathered

pace and was reflected in a partial recovery in steel

demand and price levels. The trend continued into 1994

and helped by continuing efficiency and productivity gains,

British Steel returned to profit.

1999

On October 6, 1999 the merger with Koninklijke

Hoogovens to form Corus came into effect.

 

 

 

A 300% increase in productivity in 10 years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People have such short memories!

 

Same here, but not the BNP for me either, but I will never trust the Tories again, after my Thatcher experiences. I dislike the women, a lot! :gag:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have mentioned those figures before, unfortunately there is now a generation that couldn’t even imagine interest rates at those levels, they will learn the hard way.

 

When I bought my first car you had to put a % upfront never mind an house, I had my first mortgage when interest rates were in double figures and rising, my family were miners(gone) I was a steelworker ( on its knees) and they expect us to vote for the Tories, not a chance I would rather vote BNP, well not quite.:)

 

Getting a mortgage in the early 70s wasn't easy, nor was buying anything on credit - especially for a woman! We almost lost our (scrimped for) home due to the interest rates/lack of work in the 1980s. My OH was self employed, and couldn't get much work due to the reduction in jobs in mining, steel etc. No redundancy when you're a one man operation, and no eligibility for the dole based on NI contributions. :o

 

I on the other hand, worked for a nationalised industry from 1978, and experienced the positives, decent wages & conditions, secure employment, and the negatives, overmanning, the abuse of sick leave, and I always had a problem with demarcation. Those who resented the elite, seemed to feel it necessary to create their own. :huh:

 

I was brought up by parents who voted Tory, although my mother came from a working class, liberal background. And I had an uncle who was a communist. I have no allegiance to any political party, although there is at least one I'd never consider.

 

And in answer to the OP, I suspect unemployment will go up in the short term whoever is elected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never mentioned a benefits system??

 

But since you mention it, as Milton Friedman observed of the Wall street crash Govt expenditure is required to cushion people from the impact of the market and to assist with the recovery.

 

Afterall compared with paying people benefits for doing nothing it makes much more sense to employ them for a few thousand more to do something of use for the economy, like education, health or helping employers find good staff.

 

No I did. It wasn't supposed to derogatory. If the very rich want protection against crime, they pay for private protection. if they want health treatment, they pay for their own. They pay for their offsprings' education too.

 

For the rest of us, we make do with public servants. If there weren't any public servants, the Govt would just issue a check and we'd have to buy in our own provision instead, which was why I likened it to a quasi-benefits system.

 

I'd be interested to see the Friedman quote if you've got a link. My view is that if you want to kick start an economy, wealth producing jobs are what a Govt should invest in, not public servants; I'd be interested to read his.

 

On a slight aside, Japan has been trying to galvanize their economy through vast sums being thrown at big construction and technological projects. The result - nothing. The reason - if your finance system is poisoned, there's nothing you can do to promote economic growth until you have a clean fully functioning financial system. Ours is in a far worse shape than Japan's ever was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A 300% increase in productivity in 10 years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

10 years is a long time and having worked in the industry for 30 years I can tell you the equipment we used in the 70`s bared little resemblance to what we were using in the 80`s, if you can find a cut and paste job for technological improvements during the boom of the introduction of computerised equipment it might balance you previous cut and past job.

Edited by Grandad.Malky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.