Farage Ltd and Similar Watch

[leedswolf]

Yes you could recruit them from Europe for example.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Tbf Arklo, for all me being childish and weakly satirising UKIP, it is a point worthy of discussing, I'll do it seriously at some point. Not now though as I'm off out in a bit.

 

[arklowolf]

Is it possible to identify people as young as 16 for careers that may be 7 or more years training away? How many companies would be willing to take that financial risk? Wouldn't they just recruit from abroad where people have already paid for majority of that education themselves?

I don't know. Isn't it a risk training someone in a subject that they 'fancy doing' or that they have been advised to do, in the hope that someone, somewhere, some day, might offer them a job in a related field, and have to retrain them anyway? Like my son for example, who studied electronics engineering, then went on to get a job in a Spar shop, followed by a factory, bolting bits of machinery together, followed by working as a Barman. Or my daughter who studied 'health promotion' and now works on reception in a hotel. Thankfully they are both working, but their 'further education' was a waste of time and money.

 

[arklowolf]

Tbf Arklo, for all me being childish and weakly satirising UKIP, it is a point worthy of discussing, I'll do it seriously at some point. Not now though as I'm off out in a bit.

Good man. I don't really think UKIP are the answer either if I'm truthful.

 

[visage]

I don't know. Isn't it a risk training someone in a subject that they 'fancy doing' or that they have been advised to do, in the hope that someone, somewhere, some day, might offer them a job in a related field, and have to retrain them anyway? Like my son for example, who studied electronics engineering, then went on to get a job in a Spar shop, followed by a factory, bolting bits of machinery together, followed by working as a Barman. Or my daughter who studied 'health promotion' and now works on reception in a hotel. Thankfully they are both working, but their 'further education' was a waste of time and money.

The difference is that a state funded education is shared out much more thinly.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

I don't know. Isn't it a risk training someone in a subject that they 'fancy doing' or that they have been advised to do, in the hope that someone, somewhere, some day, might offer them a job in a related field, and have to retrain them anyway? Like my son for example, who studied electronics engineering, then went on to get a job in a Spar shop, followed by a factory, bolting bits of machinery together, followed by working as a Barman. Or my daughter who studied 'health promotion' and now works on reception in a hotel. Thankfully they are both working, but their 'further education' was a waste of time and money.

They're paying for that education themselves though, in a round about way through taxes and what not, so that's their choice if they want to study something and then not use it for whatever reason.

How many kids at 16 genuinely know what they want to do? I certainly didn't. So what chance would they have convincing an employer that they were the right candidate to fund through a time consuming and costly education/training programme only to find that a couple of years on they don't really fancy it as first thought.

When i chose my A-levels i hadn't a clue what i wanted to do, when it came to choosing what to do at university i wasn't in a much better position, decided on a pretty vague course that suited an industry I found interesting, half arsed my way through it in nearly twice the planned time and ended up with a loosely related job. No employer would've paid me through that, not a chance on earth, if they'd paid for the course I did at uni i'd have no doubt been forced into a completely different job that the course had made me realise i didn't actually want.

 

[Premier Quality]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/12/support-labour-drops-tories-lead-guardian-icm-poll

UKIP doing well in the latest polls

Labour support falls to 31%, Conservatives rise one point to 33%, Lib Dems are up one on 13% and Ukip rises four to 15%

 

[visage]

15%? Bang on track for 0 MPs.

 

[machin05]

They're paying for that education themselves though, in a round about way through taxes and what not, so that's their choice if they want to study something and then not use it for whatever reason.

How many kids at 16 genuinely know what they want to do? I certainly didn't. So what chance would they have convincing an employer that they were the right candidate to fund through a time consuming and costly education/training programme only to find that a couple of years on they don't really fancy it as first thought.

When i chose my A-levels i hadn't a clue what i wanted to do, when it came to choosing what to do at university i wasn't in a much better position, decided on a pretty vague course that suited an industry I found interesting, half arsed my way through it in nearly twice the planned time and ended up with a loosely related job. No employer would've paid me through that, not a chance on earth, if they'd paid for the course I did at uni i'd have no doubt been forced into a completely different job that the course had made me realise i didn't actually want.

Exactly. There'd be far more school leavers on the scrap heap under that system having not been able to chose their correct 'path for life' at 16.

 

[arklowolf]

I didn't know you could choose a path to life. When I left school you applied for the best available jobs that you were able (academically) to apply for and would give you a career. I knew sod all about printing, but the job I took was an apprenticeship (guaranteeing four years employment and further education), was near where I lived and paid reasonably well. All I ever really wanted to do was be a footballer.
I've never heard of people willingly 'throwing themselves on the scrapheap'. Bit of a luxury that.

 

[Johnny75]

So what happens if 6 months into said apprenticeship the guy or girl leaves, that's 6 months education wasted, 6 months time wasted and 6 months money wasted. And what happens to that person who's left (for whatever reason) are they consigned to getting another apprenticeship in a subject field they may not like?

To add to this what about those who are academically gifted, how do they get on with life, let alone those that want to do something different after they've completed their apprenticeship. You haven't factored in travel or freedom of choice or social mobility.

It all sounds like communism with money to me and that's a horrible thought.

 

[andyc225]

I don't know. Isn't it a risk training someone in a subject that they 'fancy doing' or that they have been advised to do, in the hope that someone, somewhere, some day, might offer them a job in a related field, and have to retrain them anyway? Like my son for example, who studied electronics engineering, then went on to get a job in a Spar shop, followed by a factory, bolting bits of machinery together, followed by working as a Barman. Or my daughter who studied 'health promotion' and now works on reception in a hotel. Thankfully they are both working, but their 'further education' was a waste of time and money.

I was the same. When I was 16 I had no idea what I wanted to do for a living. At the school I went to they didn't really do anything to help you to find careers that might be suitable for the skills and character you have. I took IT for a year at college and didn't enjoy the course at all; the teaching wasn't great (if the lecturer even bothered to turn up) and I didn't make many friends because I didn't have much in common with anyone else in the class. When I was looking through a different college's brochure for courses I spotted a joint finance, economics and accounting course that was offering a 1 week trial period. I went along, found that I got into it very quickly and it all snowballed from there. My first job wasn't really a proper job - I was delivering leaflets for a Chinese restaurant. I worked behind a bar for a few months as well.

On the subject of UKIP, they're not the answer overall but they're closer to the answer than anyone else at this moment in time. I want to see Britain leave the EU and scrap thousands of unnecessary laws. I'm in favour of a flat rate of tax for all, a points-based immigration system for all comers, cuts to state benefits and would like to see banking regulations created in recent years to appease the people who have scapegoated Britain's biggest industry for all of the country's problems scrapped. On the other hand I support the idea of HS2, gay marriage and the abolition of religious privilege in society through disestablishment and so on. If a party that brought all of those values together existed I'd vote for them. As it stands, I probably won't bother.

 

[visage]

I'm in favour of a flat rate of tax for all

Tax cuts for the rich, tax rises for the poor? Nice.

 

[andyc225]

Tax cuts for the rich, tax rises for the poor? Nice.

I never said anything about tax rises for the poor. I'd be in favour of everyone paying the basic rate of tax. Higher rates of taxation encourage tax avoidance and capital flight. There's no evidence that increasing the rate of tax increases the overall amount of revenue collected when those factors are taken into account. As it stands I'd rather see all taxpayers paying 20% here than paying to a foreign jurisdiction to reduce bills.

 

[visage]

Flat taxes, by definition, cut taxes for the rich, since they'll always be lower than the 40% marginal rate. That money has to come from somewhere....

 

[Johnny75]

I never said anything about tax rises for the poor. I'd be in favour of everyone paying the basic rate of tax. Higher rates of taxation encourage tax avoidance and capital flight. There's no evidence that increasing the rate of tax increases the overall amount of revenue collected when those factors are taken into account. As it stands I'd rather see all taxpayers paying 20% here than paying to a foreign jurisdiction to reduce bills.

I used to think like that until I was rightly informed that the cost of living would go through the roof and the gap between rich and poor would accelerate beyond all known speeds.

As for your banking ideas hahahahahahahaha................no honest they really weren't to blame and never have been for any of their corrupt or illicit schemes throughout the entirety of human history. Thieving cunts who deserve fuck all (with the exception of Vis who for some reason is a socialist in a banking system).

 

[visage]

I'm fighting the system from the inside, innit.

 

[arklowolf]

So what happens if 6 months into said apprenticeship the guy or girl leaves, that's 6 months education wasted, 6 months time wasted and 6 months money wasted. And what happens to that person who's left (for whatever reason) are they consigned to getting another apprenticeship in a subject field they may not like?

They go without money. They don't have to get an apprenticeship, they can get a totally unskilled job if they want to.

To add to this what about those who are academically gifted, how do they get on with life, let alone those that want to do something different after they've completed their apprenticeship. You haven't factored in travel or freedom of choice or social mobility.

They academically gifted would be hand picked by businesses/organisations who require academically gifted people, that would suit the organisations and the person themselves.

It all sounds like communism with money to me and that's a horrible thought.

I don't like the idea of Communism or any other 'ism' for that matter. I like the idea of people from whatever class and background being given the opportunity to make the best of their lives, contributing their taxes to help those that are unable to help themselves, whilst at the same time improving the nations wealth.
But don't worry, it won't ever happen. We'll just keep muddling along, politicians and the rulers will keep feathering their own nests and clinging onto power by promising people the earth, borrowing and taxing to get the money in to fund it. Propping up the banks whilst destroying whole generations. And people will keep swallowing their lies.

 

[andyc225]

Flat taxes, by definition, cut taxes for the rich, since they'll always be lower than the 40% marginal rate. That money has to come from somewhere....

Since all taxation revenue goes into a central pot, any income lost through direct taxation will be recouped through increased economic activity and particularly from higher or additional rate taxpayers. People who have more money in their pockets are likely to either spend or save it, thus producing tax revenue one way or another.

I used to think like that until I was rightly informed that the cost of living would go through the roof and the gap between rich and poor would accelerate beyond all known speeds.

As for your banking ideas hahahahahahahaha................no honest they really weren't to blame and never have been for any of their corrupt or illicit schemes throughout the entirety of human history. Thieving cunts who deserve fuck all (with the exception of Vis who for some reason is a socialist in a banking system).

There will always be a "gap" between the rich and the poor. It's not idealistic thinking or Robin Hoodism that'll change that, it's education. Can you honestly tell me what's wrong with the idea of scrapping needless regulation and red tape for the biggest producers of tax revenue in this country? Oh... people who work at hedge funds and investment banks take bonuses, right?

 

[Johnny75]

There will always be a "gap" between the rich and the poor.

Yes but increasing the gap and thus raising the standard of living way beyond the Pareto principle will alienate people further and cause widespread social unrest. The rich 5% will have more wealth than the entire country combined and giving a small amount of people that amount of power and no check on them will not end well see; Russia, Lenin and Stalin.

It's not idealistic thinking or Robin Hoodism that'll change that, it's education. Can you honestly tell me what's wrong with the idea of scrapping needless regulation and red tape for the biggest producers of tax revenue in this country? Oh... people who work at hedge funds and investment banks take bonuses, right?

Education and opportunity are the only two things that can change it not just education. As for the second part, did you have your eyes closed for the last 2 recessions, PPI and endowment miss-selling, the sub prime exploitation and the setting up of banks off shore to avoid tax. The very notion that the banking industry is the biggest tax generator is all wrong for the balance of any country and in particular making one where NOTHING useful or new is generated. The banking industry also drain Britain's brightest minds into jobs where money is the overriding factor and perpetuates a greed culture which is at best unhealthy. I don't believe anybody has mentioned bonuses other than you.

Oh and give these thieving cunts an inch and they'll steal, lie and shred their way to a bigger bank balance.