UKIP go from strength to strength

Status
Not open for further replies.
Meanwhile all this distracts nicely from the underlying economic difficulties faced by the UK.

Although unemployment is falling, real wages are falling as well; meaning lower income tax returns to the treasury, and meaning increasing cuts to public services. And an increasing budget deficit.

Also an increasing level of personal indebtedness.

None of which has anything to do with the effects of immigration, imo.
 
Meanwhile all this distracts nicely from the underlying economic difficulties faced by the UK.

Although unemployment is falling, real wages are falling as well; meaning lower income tax returns to the treasury, and meaning increasing cuts to public services. And an increasing budget deficit.

Also an increasing level of personal indebtedness.

None of which has anything to do with the effects of immigration, imo.
Much as I detest UKIP, there is a link with falling wages. If our Polish etc. friends and neighbours were sent back, some employers (aristocrats wanting au pairs) would raise wages to attract qualified Brits, though other employers (colleges, ) would either move to Asia or close completely.

The question that neither UKIP nor the democratic parties want to answer is why Brits don't get more of these jobs and don't get more jobs in other EU countries. I think a key problem is that Brits still think they can get away with just speaking English, which means they will lose out to other EU citizens who speak are multilingual. (Younger Brits reading this, play less Civ and learn another language!)
 
Meanwhile all this distracts nicely from the underlying economic difficulties faced by the UK.

Although unemployment is falling, real wages are falling as well; meaning lower income tax returns to the treasury, and meaning increasing cuts to public services. And an increasing budget deficit.

Also an increasing level of personal indebtedness.

None of which has anything to do with the effects of immigration, imo.

Unemployment is falling thanks to "creative accounting" more than anything- "Sanctioned" claimants who are late for job interviews etc and so forfeit their JSA payments are discounted, people on the "workfare" scheme are classed as employed by the Labour Force Survey, people who get working tax benefits yet are not currently gainfully employed they class as self employed as well as Zero-hour contracts folks and people on such casual work and irregular income as to be at the unable to sustain a regular living.

But then, every politically significant statistic is fiddled.

If you take those statistics to be the fraud that they are and take unemployment as much higher than the official figures suggest, this wage compression makes a lot more sense.

The question that neither UKIP nor the democratic parties want to answer is why Brits don't get more of these jobs and don't get more jobs in other EU countries. I think a key problem is that Brits still think they can get away with just speaking English, which means they will lose out to other EU citizens who speak are multilingual. (Younger Brits reading this, play less Civ and learn another language!)

Well we have an education system that lets an appalling number of young people down, not just working class inner city comprehensive leavers who leave knowing less than when they came in, but leafy suburban comprehensive types like myself, lured into university to do a, frankly, useless BA degree, by an insane government policy that arbitrarily decreed that 50% of young people go to university (something I don't think the coalition has attempted to reverse, barring increasing tuition fees). So we have a whole host of university graduates who are office fodder, unemployable inner-city comp leavers, and the few remaining who did the sensible thing and learned a trade. That's not to mention a disregard for some types of honest manual labour, probably bought about by the continuing, failed, self-esteem movement, but then, I'm not picking vegetables either so who am I to comment.

As for language; I'm not a natural linguist; I've tried French and German but I've found them hard work beyond basically useful holiday phrases and inane statements. The incentive isn't there what with English being the international second language. It becomes a dilemma, too, as to which one to learn, which is most useful? I'm not going to apply for a foreign job without knowing the language, but I'm unlikely to learn a language if there's no incentive to (such as a job)
 
Peck of Arabia said:
But then, every politically significant statistic is fiddled.

That is the law of Peter Hitchens you've just quoted :)
 
Oh, I see. That's OK then.
Don't worry, their rebellion will be crushed sooner than they think.
Borachio said:
Now you're just making wordlets up. Which is fine.
Well, the word should exist as it does in other languages. 'Inflected according to declension rules' =declense. I'd better write my own dictionary.
As for language; I'm not a natural linguist; I've tried French and German but I've found them hard work beyond basically useful holiday phrases and inane statements. The incentive isn't there what with English being the international second language. It becomes a dilemma, too, as to which one to learn, which is most useful? I'm not going to apply for a foreign job without knowing the language, but I'm unlikely to learn a language if there's no incentive to (such as a job)
Learn any language. It improves your mind in a lot of ways with many indirect benefits. Also, if you speak more than one language, then learning additional ones is easier.
 
As for language; I'm not a natural linguist; I've tried French and German but I've found them hard work beyond basically useful holiday phrases and inane statements. The incentive isn't there what with English being the international second language. It becomes a dilemma, too, as to which one to learn, which is most useful? I'm not going to apply for a foreign job without knowing the language, but I'm unlikely to learn a language if there's no incentive to (such as a job)

I think you're really going to find it hard getting a job.

Firstly, you seem convinced that you're dimmer or lazier than the 80%+ of Dutch people who've learned a foreign language fluently or the 95%+ of French and German adults who found those languages easier than you.

Secondly, if you think that foreign languages are only necessary for 'a foreign job', then you must be expecting British firms to give up exporting or serving tourists, which is really going to be a very controversial line to take at interviews.

Thirdly, if you think that you can achieve things without hard work.... 'Nuff said.

Fourthly, re the dilemma: people are different, so just apply whatever principle you use in dating ;-)

These are exactly the kinds of myths that British governments need to kill if British workers are to get jobs.
 
I'm touched by your concern for my well being :)

Most of what you say is fair enough, I guess. Comparing me to the Dutch is like comparing apples and oranges (so to speak) though.

There are pressures on learning different languages like French, German or English that just do not apply to me learning Dutch (and French and German)

There just aren't; starting with a the simple numbers game: 27 million people speak Dutch as a first or second language, between 900 and 1500 million do so for English. Dutch isn't the language of Hollywood, or of the cultural and economic behemoth that is the US as a whole.

Britain is not sandwiched between larger nations with different languages through sheer geography if nothing else. I don't hear French, German or Dutch spoken as a might do if I were in a hub of languages, right at the heart of Western Europe like the Netherlands, and have no way to practice and brush up by talking to someone in their native tongue (after all, it's one thing to learn a language, but if you're not going to use it regularly the ability withers away). I'm less likely to travel over the border to Belgium or France, or Germany, as it's not down the (borderless, thanks to the Schengen Agreement) road- it requires planning, airports, passports and the like and if I'm going to the effort of that I may as well go further afield, or at least vary it so it's somewhere different every time.

Were the situation otherwise, I have no doubt I'd be in that 80%, but then, I'd also be a different person, with a different upbringing.


Also, there's a difference between your first and other languages- one is a subconscious acquisition, the other is a concious learning- if my father was French, or I'd spent great chunks of my childhood in Germany, I'd certainly be bilingual, if it was both, I'd be trilingual. There's nothing special about learning your mother tongue(s), it just happens.


Right, point 2.

Learning a language is a skill set. I don't have it but I have others to compensate. I'm not going to demand a company changes it's business practice to suit me in a job interview, I'll apply for positions where the skills I do have matter more than the skills I don't. Like I would do with any other skill, why is language an exception?

Point 3

It wasn't just that it was hard, but also that the incentive wasn't there and that I didn't enjoy it. My mind is just wired differently to someone who enjoys learning languages. Sorry. Working hard, on something that gives you little satisfaction or enjoyment, when it's useful, but not essential and - where as I mentioned above- no one else speaks it making it a lonely pursuit as well as hard to maintain is not "character building" or "hard work is it's own reward" it's masochism.


Point 4

Why? Why don't I apply my energies to some other skill set that I enjoy more, rather than trawling through language after language until I find "the one" (not that this is my dating technique)
 
Somehow we've gone from trying to get Quackers to post anything credible or consistent regarding UKIP'S policies, proposals, candidates, etc. to Peck of Arabia's amorous failures…
 
@JR: The French's for the kissing… the Greek?
 
Well, it appears the EU have just handed Rochester to UKIP.

UK told to pay £1.7bn extra to EU

The UK has been told it must pay an extra £1.7bn (2.1bn euros) towards the European Union's budget because the economy has performed better than expected in recent years.

The payment follows new calculations by the EU, which determines how much each member state should contribute based on gross national incomes.

It would add about a fifth to the UK's annual net contribution of £8.6bn.

Whilst I am, in general, in favour of the EU this has recalled my eurosceptic youth. Given the large rebate France is getting it seems rather like de Gaulle's usage of the CAP to direct EEC money into gallic pockets.

I haven't found a full list of which nations are getting demands/rebates but I know France and Germany are getting rebates and the Netherlands and Greece have also received demands and that combination is surely going to raise hell in Greece.

It may well be the product of an automatic process but the timing stinks, the redistribution does not make the French and Germans look good and it's likely to provide a significant boost for eurosceptic and far right parties in those states being told to cough up.
 
Well, when Cameron goes to renegotiate the EU freedom of movement, chances are that he can negotiate away (or at the least) reduce this repayment instead. That would look slightly encouraging for him.
 
I could really do without all this huffing and puffing from Cameron.
 
Well, so could I, but short of a Labour government next year, we're stuck with him, aren't we?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom