![]() |
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Hezza, you're grasping. You really are. North Ayrshire is not going to implement a four day week for its schools. Nobody is asking for the idea to be unthought; I am simply pointing out that when you consider all of the evidence emerging from North Ayrshire Council, your conclusion that it is a 'potential ramaification' is not justified. Attempting to justify it with cod philosophy will convince nobody but those who were already convinced by your original comments on the matter. ;)
|
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Quote:
I am likewise equally critical of all political parties now, because they're all hopeless ;) We're a very long way outside of fundamental capitalism, fundamental capitalism would have allowed the banks to fail, not socialised their failure. Agreed regarding corporate welfare, just disagree about where the money should go. My opinion is that it should stay where it is so that people can spend it as they choose not be siphoned off in tax for the state to spend. That's a kind of corporate welfare too. |
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Quote:
so your experience is the same as mine then with minimal wage rises? |
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Quote:
Incidentally I've lived in London, the South, the Southern part of the Midlands and the West Midlands and my experience has been much the same in all of them. If this is another one of those cases where Leicester is some sort of anomaly compared with most of the rest of the UK so be it. I'm not talking about real wage increases that would take account of inflation incidentally. When I mentioned wage freezes I meant actual, not real. There is no reason why wages should go up by more than inflation unless unemployment is extremely low and labour market conditions allow it, which is something specific to certain occupations and skill sets. EDIT: I think a point has been illustrated though - describing a wage increase that merely keeps wages the same in real terms as 'minimal' as if people are entitled to a real terms wage increase every year regardless of the circumstances. |
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
I use that term because I believe official inflation figures to be below real inflation, the first reason for that is there is a 2nd inflation figure which is higher which includes housing costs, so wage increases are based on a inflation figure that excludes housing costs, the 2nd reason is the games played to shuffle goods around in the algorithm so things that go up a lot in price arent used so the official inflation appears lower.
|
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Quote:
Inflation is very, very, very bad. |
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Looks like it was even worse....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12577154 Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
No real surprise there - we'll see if this is repeated this quarter.
|
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Quote:
|
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Probably be hidden by deferred spending to be honest. Loads of people spending the money they couldn't over Christmas just before the VAT rise kicked in - remember it didn't kick in on the 1st of January.
|
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
what do you buy on a regular basis that has VAT on it? I know services do but I mean stuff from shops.
|
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Petrol, clothes, some foods and fruit juices etc.
|
Re: 'Shock' Contraction in the UK economy
Quote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13206430 Quote:
|
Re: [update] UK economy grows in Q1 2011
It's good news indeed. Shows how robust the UK economy's private sector is despite the mismanagement of it by Osborne and the other 'Liberal Conservatives'.
---------- Post added at 10:53 ---------- Previous post was at 10:26 ---------- Incidentally I say it is good news because there are many underlying positives. Not that these will be noticed by the kind of people who post things like: Quote:
|
Re: [update] UK economy grows in Q1 2011
But, according to those figures, the economy has stood still. Where is that statement incorrect?
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:20. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum