Scrutable

sheldrake wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 10:51 am If a Tory is in a safe seat, it's because a significant majority of people in that place want to be represented by them,

sheldrake wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:42 pm It's not a distraction tactic, it's a sincere attempt to get people to the left of the tories to look for opportunities to create something positive instead of just moaning about something that happened 5 years ago.

sheldrake wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 3:21 pm I think the main problem with this data is that it ignores the effect of unemployment on incomes by only looking at data for people with jobs. I will keep looking for something better.

Millennie Al wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 1:34 am

sheldrake wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 3:21 pm I think the main problem with this data is that it ignores the effect of unemployment on incomes by only looking at data for people with jobs. I will keep looking for something better.

How about you look for the data before making up your mind rather than spouting nonsense and then trying to find something to support it?

plodder wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:25 am it was a fair comment IMO.

sheldrake wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 12:29 pm

plodder wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:25 am it was a fair comment IMO.

It would have been if I'd already made up my mind, but unlike some people here I'm actually willing to post data supporting my points (I have here) and examine data that counters my point, and think about it.

plodder wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 12:45 pm

sheldrake wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 12:29 pm

plodder wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 11:25 am it was a fair comment IMO.

It would have been if I'd already made up my mind, but unlike some people here I'm actually willing to post data supporting my points (I have here) and examine data that counters my point, and think about it.

In other words: spam post, get caught out, think about it.

Just stop spam posting and pretending you've "thought about it" and the problem will go away.

sheldrake wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 11:58 am

plodder wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 11:42 am be interesting to know how many “employed” people are also getting tax credits or UC, HB etc, ie their roles are subsidised by the state.

my impression is that a lot of jobs are marginal at best.

they won’t be working in the new intel factory, that’s for sure.

The Intel factory is unlikely have employed more than 10-20 people. Modern chip fabs are *extremely* automated. The profits would also likely be shunted to Luxembourg or Ireland (as a stepping stone to a caribbean tax haven) via licensing fees (we hardly made any profit on these chips gov'nor, we have to pay for the patent royalties for the design which is owned by Inteltec Dublin Ltd, sorry mate).

Yes, we do subsidise low pay for big corporations. Gordon brown really took a lead there. It's long been my belief that Blairite-style centre left politics is a ruse to convince well meaning people (like the people on this board) to support corporate economic interests at the expense of the working class. It is a tragedy that the Tory party has recently been more active in actually trying to raise pay for blue collar work than the labour party, even if it is only b.llsh.t rhetoric that Boris won't deliver against.

sheldrake wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 1:58 pm That's all fair, but I do think focussing on a single company is misleading. Overall, investment is increased, as is employment. For every intel story, there are Apple, Google etc.. stories on the other side, the big picture is told in economic metrics.

sheldrake wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:42 pm It's not a distraction tactic, it's a sincere attempt to get people to the left of the tories to look for opportunities to create something positive instead of just moaning about something that happened 5 years ago.

Woodchopper wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 2:14 pm

sheldrake wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 1:58 pm That's all fair, but I do think focussing on a single company is misleading. Overall, investment is increased, as is employment. For every intel story, there are Apple, Google etc.. stories on the other side, the big picture is told in economic metrics.

The high point for foreign direct investment in the UK was 2017. The trend has been downward since then.
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kin ... investment
https://d3fy651gv2fhd3.cloudfront.net/e ... =300&w=600

nekomatic wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 2:45 pm
The thing that happened five years ago was the referendum, but the policy decisions that have been made on the basis of that referendum result and the consequences of those policy decisions are still very much ongoing, as far as I can see, and quite legitimate topics for debate and disagreement.

Not to mention that the ERG types spent forty-three years moaning about the previous referendum result rather than looking for opportunities to create something positive with our EU membership.

sheldrake wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 2:55 pm

Woodchopper wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 2:14 pm

sheldrake wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 1:58 pm That's all fair, but I do think focussing on a single company is misleading. Overall, investment is increased, as is employment. For every intel story, there are Apple, Google etc.. stories on the other side, the big picture is told in economic metrics.

The high point for foreign direct investment in the UK was 2017. The trend has been downward since then.
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kin ... investment
https://d3fy651gv2fhd3.cloudfront.net/e ... =300&w=600

This is net investment, which is reduced when people in the UK invest in other countries.

Overall though, you have a point, when I look at just investment in the UK, it looks fairly flat from 2016, then drops for the pandemic before showing strong recovery recently https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kin ... 0of%202005.

Woodchopper wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 3:11 pm Fair enough. However we look at it, there hasn't been an upward trend in investment since 2016.

sheldrake wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 11:58 am

plodder wrote: Thu Oct 07, 2021 11:42 am be interesting to know how many “employed” people are also getting tax credits or UC, HB etc, ie their roles are subsidised by the state.

my impression is that a lot of jobs are marginal at best.

they won’t be working in the new intel factory, that’s for sure.

The Intel factory is unlikely have employed more than 10-20 people. Modern chip fabs are *extremely* automated. The profits would also likely be shunted to Luxembourg or Ireland (as a stepping stone to a caribbean tax haven) via licensing fees (we hardly made any profit on these chips gov'nor, we have to pay for the patent royalties for the design which is owned by Inteltec Dublin Ltd, sorry mate).

This build-out [of 2 fabs in Arizona] represents an investment of approximately $20 billion, which is expected to create over 3,000 permanent high-tech, high-wage jobs; over 3,000 construction jobs; and approximately 15,000 local long-term jobs.

jimbob wrote: Fri Oct 08, 2021 7:07 pm You do realise that it's not just direct employment, but the whole ecosystem of high tech companies that support such a fab?

I'm sure veravista would have similar experiences about the completely different but also large-scale high-tech manufacturing and engineering he has experience in - because it is not industry-specific.