General Election 2015

[beorhthelm]

The Office For National Statistics also says that the national debt has hit £1.457 Trillion, having increased by £89.7 billion in 12 months, despite an increase in VAT and welfare cuts that take the living standards of the poor back to 1930s levels.

no they have not. the office for national statistics does not make such emotive statements. they've said government spending as a % of GDP has returned to a similar level, and this has been latched onto, ignoring it is also the same level as 12 years ago. living standards have not and are not in the foreseeable future going to approach 1930s for anyone. they might in a couple of decades if we dont start sorting out the massive cost of the state though, because there's no way we can sustain the current model of spending.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Hmmm that means if we can't risk more of the same then more cuts are coming to our public services doesn't it, how is that going to work when more and more people are coming to the UK and using our services because of things like open borders with EU?

 

[beorhthelm]

This has been discussed before. The vast majority of the "record" is low paid and zero hour contract based.

it may have been discussed, it doesnt mean you are correct in your assertions its all low paid and zero hours. if the ONS says 95% of the increase in jobs are full time, that rather flys in the face of the wisdom that its zero hours or self-employed. so without digging around in reams of stats and analysis the pictures isnt as clear as some would like. its funny though how after so many decade spent focusing on basic jobs number, its now the wrong sort of jobs, dont recall self employed or zero hours being a problem in the past. and they have been around, building trade for one has been self employed and ask NHS or councils that have used zero hours for decades.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

As someone who voted Labour in the last election, but won't be voting for them this time for a number of reasons (though I'd like to be persuaded back in the future), I'd take your posts more seriously if you stopped picking and choosing polls to fit your agenda.

Today's polls:

Opinium/Observer – CON 29%(nc), LAB 36%(+2), LDEM 6%(nc), UKIP 16%(-3), GRN 5%
YouGov/Sunday Times – CON 32%, LAB 34%, LDEM 6%, UKIP 15%, GRN 8%

Okay, but both polls you have selected point to a Labour victory.

 

[seagulls4ever]

Okay, but both polls you have selected point to a Labour victory.

Of course, as do most polls at this point in time. But 2% and 7% is quite a difference, and 7% isn't indicative of where Labour currently are.

 

[Brighton Mod]

it may have been discussed, it doesnt mean you are correct in your assertions its all low paid and zero hours. if the ONS says 95% of the increase in jobs are full time, that rather flys in the face of the wisdom that its zero hours or self-employed. so without digging around in reams of stats and analysis the pictures isnt as clear as some would like. its funny though how after so many decade spent focusing on basic jobs number, its now the wrong sort of jobs, dont recall self employed or zero hours being a problem in the past. and they have been around, building trade for one has been self employed and ask NHS or councils that have used zero hours for decades.

Zero hours jobs are no bad thing, without these positions the economy could not cope with the fluctuations in demand. It also suggests that people are sitting around at home and earning zero money which clearly is not the case. I know those who are on a so called 'zero hours contract' who earn in excess of £700 a week. Its a labour smoke screen, which forgets how many who work in the public sector are on zero hours contracts, members of the armed forces reserve called to service and then dismissed the second they return home and forgets that for many its a lifestyle choice to work under such a contract as they have family commitments, social commitments or are just getting themselves into the workplace for experience. I also know that the internships previously offered by large companies are now dwindling as all work has to be paid for, thus fewer opportunities for graduates to get experience and demonstrate their ability.

 

[The Birdman]

Greens( Lucas) still favourite to win Brighton poor old residents .

 

[drew]

We live in a democracy and it's what the voters want at the end of the day, but people never learn do they. By the time Labour are finished in power the population would have risen by a further 3-4 million.

I say to people now, don't complain when your standard of living doesn't change, don't complain when it takes you longer to access your local services because of the extra cuts and more people using the services, don't complain when your roads are falling apart and constaintly congested, don't complain when the EU grabs more power, because at the end of the day you voted for it.

With the cuts that the tories will have to make peoples standard of living will change but not in a positive way.

Hmmm that means if we can't risk more of the same then more cuts are coming to our public services doesn't it, how is that going to work when more and more people are coming to the UK and using our services because of things like open borders with EU?

Would you like to back that up with some facts?

Have a look at these.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/05/telegraph-mail-headline-migrants-cost-contribution

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1114/051114-economic-impact-EU-immigration

and one particular snippet from the latter that you won't like ; Over the period from 2001 to 2011, European immigrants from the EU-15 countries contributed 64% more in taxes than they received in benefits. Immigrants from the Central and East European ‘accession’ countries (the ‘A10’) contributed 12% more than they received. - See more at: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-arti...ic-impact-EU-immigration#sthash.RAhapX6N.dpuf


Granted, it isn't clear whether they take into account the cost of education for immigrants children but it just shows that your sweeping statement isn't quite as clear cut as you would like everyone to believe.

 

[Brighton Mod]

The Office For National Statistics also says that the national debt has hit £1.457 Trillion, having increased by £89.7 billion in 12 months, despite an increase in VAT and welfare cuts that take the living standards of the poor back to 1930s levels.

Despite this Cameron announced £7 billion of unfunded tax cuts if the Tories achieve something that they have failed to do since 1992 and win the next election.

The question should be can we risk more of the same?

Having suffered a massive shock to the economic system for three years after 2007, it has taken a long time for business to recover. Tax receipts have been low because many companies have been writing off losses made during the bad years against profits made since the recovery got underway. Its is only now that profits can be judged without any protection from previous losses and as such I see that corporation tax revenues will now start to rise rapidly throughout the next year. This I suggest is where the boost will come from, it will be a different picture next year. Please keep the madman Balls away from the exchequer!!

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

it may have been discussed, it doesnt mean you are correct in your assertions its all low paid and zero hours. if the ONS says 95% of the increase in jobs are full time, that rather flys in the face of the wisdom that its zero hours or self-employed. so without digging around in reams of stats and analysis the pictures isnt as clear as some would like. its funny though how after so many decade spent focusing on basic jobs number, its now the wrong sort of jobs, dont recall self employed or zero hours being a problem in the past. and they have been around, building trade for one has been self employed and ask NHS or councils that have used zero hours for decades.

Can you clarify what you mean. "Jobs" and "employment" mean different things. As far as I'm aware ONS typically provide employment and unemployment figures. And as far as I'm aware their definition of employment is just that, employment ie it covers zero hours and self-employed. I'm happy to be corrected though.

Edit: this from the government website suggests zero-hours are included.

What is an employee?
The majority of people in work are employees. You are classed as an employee if you are working under a contract of employment. A contract need not be in writing as it exists when you and your employer agree terms and conditions of employment. It can also be implied from your actions and those of the person you are working for.

Your contract will normally set out what you are expected to do and you will usually be expected to do the work yourself. Put simply, you cannot send someone else to do your work for you.

 

[Greyrun]

The Office For National Statistics also says that the national debt has hit £1.457 Trillion, having increased by £89.7 billion in 12 months, despite an increase in VAT and welfare cuts that take the living standards of the poor back to 1930s levels.

Despite this Cameron announced £7 billion of unfunded tax cuts if the Tories achieve something that they have failed to do since 1992 and win the next election.

The question should be can we risk more of the same?

Cuts take us back to early 80's levels of spending not the thirties.Government spending has to be cut across all departments in order to reduce the deficit, some will have to suffer larger cuts in order to protect the NHS.

 

[beorhthelm]

Can you clarify what you mean. "Jobs" and "employment" mean different things. As far as I'm aware ONS typically provide employment and unemployment figures. And as far as I'm aware their definition of employment is just that, employment ie it covers zero hours and self-employed. I'm happy to be corrected though.

employment as you note is broken down in to subsets, full time, part time, self employed, voluntary etc. clearly, full time is not the same as zero hours in anyones definitions and i know self-employed is counted seperatly. im not planning on running around the ONS site and pdfs, im taking Greyrun's claim on faith that the ONS cites 95% of new jobs as full-time, which i expect to exclude part time, zero hours and self empolyed.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

employment as you note is broken down in to subsets, full time, part time, self employed, voluntary etc. clearly, full time is not the same as zero hours in anyones definitions and i know self-employed is counted seperatly. im not planning on running around the ONS site and pdfs, im taking Greyrun's claim on faith that the ONS cites 95% of new jobs as full-time, which i expect to exclude part time, zero hours and self empolyed.

http://www.newstatesman.com/economics/2013/08/how-zero-hours-contracts-hide-real-unemployment

"When the ONS is counting employment, anyone who has a currently active zero-hours contract counts as "employed""

 

[beorhthelm]

http://www.newstatesman.com/economics/2013/08/how-zero-hours-contracts-hide-real-unemployment

"When the ONS is counting employment, anyone who has a currently active zero-hours contract counts as "employed""

im not questioning that. are they counting zero hours contracts as full-time employment? one would expect that zero hours would not, unless full-time counts once over a number of hours (i suspect it does). in that case what does it matter?

 

[Westdene Wonder]

Years ago i was a Labour supporter but not aware of their dependence on the unions,just imagine the consequences if Milliband is successful,Unite and their brother unions will run this country so it looks like a Tory/Ukip success.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

employment as you note is broken down in to subsets, full time, part time, self employed, voluntary etc. clearly, full time is not the same as zero hours in anyones definitions and i know self-employed is counted seperatly. im not planning on running around the ONS site and pdfs, im taking Greyrun's claim on faith that the ONS cites 95% of new jobs as full-time, which i expect to exclude part time, zero hours and self empolyed.

Although there is a 95% headline figure of full time jobs how many of them are truly full time (35 to 40+ hours per week) ? Many employers consider anything above 16 hours a week as full time because they know the state will top up earnings in the form of tax credits and work related benefits.

 

[T.G]

Years ago i was a Labour supporter but not aware of their dependence on the unions,just imagine the consequences if Milliband is successful,Unite and their brother unions will run this country so it looks like a Tory/Ukip success.

However being dependent on Tax Dodging, corrupt bankers and captains of Industry is just fine then?

 

[beorhthelm]

Although there is a 95% headline figure of full time jobs how many of them are truly full time (35 to 40+ hours per week) ? Many employers consider anything above 16 hours a week as full time because they know the state will top up earnings in the form of tax credits and work related benefits.

employers dont get to chose what defines full time and it doesnt make any sence they would care if they make a full or part time job, they just employ people to best suit meet their needs. also they dont "know" anything about an employees other employment or their financial circumstances. its boarderline conspiracy to claim company employ people to government determined spec in order that the employee is eligable for tax credits, and wouldnt make sence for governmet either (theyd push them for jobs that dont incurr further state support).

btw, ONS considers full time as 30 hrs.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Years ago i was a Labour supporter but not aware of their dependence on the unions,just imagine the consequences if Milliband is successful,Unite and their brother unions will run this country so it looks like a Tory/Ukip success.

How much French wine have you been drinking?

 

[London Irish]

Latest Scottish Poll (GE2010 change): SNP 48% (+28%) LAB 24% (-18%) CON 16% (-1%) LDEM 5% (-13%) OTH 5%....SNP extends lead to 24%