How does the UK stop cutting off it's nose to spite it's face

[pete75]

The government have all the means at their disposal to control low wages just as they have with rents and always have had with immigration, but they choose not to use them.
Once you allow the market to decide and diminish the power of the unions this is what you get.

Exactly. That's why we have low wages.

[thirdcrank]

It isn’t as if the UK genuinely leaves things to the market: the latter is very biased towards the rich by regressive taxation. The market is fixed to the disadvantage of the many.

Trade unions, in the UK at least, were formed as part of the market economy ie to get the best price for labour; hence the Combination Acts to try to put a stop to that. Beyond the pressure to achieve welfare benefits for their own members, TUs didn't necessarily directly achieve improvements for what the Victorians saw as the undeserving poor.

The TUs have been increasingly marginalised anyway, which is why even staff associations now appear militant.

[reohn2]

Worth a listen:- https://youtu.be/PvbP4rOf1vs

[Ben@Forest]

The TUs have been increasingly marginalised anyway, which is why even staff associations now appear militant.

Union reps have their own hobby horses which can be of little practical interest to the membership. My wife has come across reps who have been more interested in animal rights (vivisection) and Palestine. These may or may not be noble causes, but hey have little to do with day-to-day nursing.

[reohn2]

The TUs have been increasingly marginalised anyway, which is why even staff associations now appear militant.

Union reps have their own hobby horses which can be of little practical interest to the membership. My wife has come across reps who have been more interested in animal rights (vivisection) and Palestine. These may or may not be noble causes, but hey have little to do with day-to-day nursing.

I'd say the vast majority TU reps,if not all,take on the job for the good of it's members.
Human and animal rights may well be of importance to them too but not their main centre of concern within their role,it certainly goes for any TU reps I've known and I've known a few over the years.

[reohn2]

In case anyone has forgotten:- https://youtu.be/2u9gXdi-2uk

[reohn2]

Some very good points made in this video:- https://youtu.be/302--iBAKiw

[PhilD28]

In case anyone has forgotten:- https://youtu.be/2u9gXdi-2uk

Straight from the farmers mouths, but how many who voted to leave will watch it and if they do how many will realise what they have done.

[Psamathe]

A good one, mainly focusing on environmental aspects (and I think a lot of truth in it):

Costa Rica has spent the last 20 years restoring forests, doubling the amount of carbon-capturing woodland across the nation. During that time, the UK has snotted down its chin a bit and left some smudge marks on the walls.

Costa Rica carefully considered the unsustainable pathways of short-term financial gain from industrial-scale destruction of ecosystems and successfully inverted conventional economic ideologies. Meanwhile, the UK ate lots of sweeties, was sick on the cat, and wanted more shiny things.

Individuals and groups in Costa Rica have been economically rewarded for enacting a national policy of valuing, protecting and encouraging the growth of natural habitats. The UK wants everybody to see how many fingers it can stick up its bottom.

Costa Rica has provided a model for countries around the world to learn from and follow in order that humans don't destroy the only place in the cosmos they can thrive, thereby destroying themselves. The UK is pulling the wings off bees and still wets the bed.

Ian

[reohn2]

In case anyone has forgotten:- https://youtu.be/2u9gXdi-2uk

Straight from the farmers mouths, but how many who voted to leave will watch it and if they do how many will realise what they have done.

It's anyone's guess,but the facts are there for all to see.
Trouble is there's too many people suffering from the Brexit cult and don't want to see,those people suffer from the worst kind of blindness!

[pete75]

Keen Brexit voter interviewed before it came into effect


Same guy interviewed after it was implemented.

[Jdsk]

Interesting collaboration appearing in Wales:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... nment-deal

“The agreement included moves to establish rent controls; the extension of free school meals to all primary school pupils; childcare for all two-year-olds; creation of a National Care Service; limits on second-home ownership; a replacement for council tax; the creation of a publicly owned construction company and an energy company; changes to the Senedd’s size and electoral system, including a statutory guarantee of gender balance; and measures to promote the Welsh language.”

Jonathan

[Ben@Forest]

A good one, mainly focusing on environmental aspects (and I think a lot of truth in it):

Costa Rica has spent the last 20 years restoring forests, doubling the amount of carbon-capturing woodland across the nation. During that time, the UK has snotted down its chin a bit and left some smudge marks on the walls.

Costa Rica carefully considered the unsustainable pathways of short-term financial gain from industrial-scale destruction of ecosystems and successfully inverted conventional economic ideologies. Meanwhile, the UK ate lots of sweeties, was sick on the cat, and wanted more shiny things.

Individuals and groups in Costa Rica have been economically rewarded for enacting a national policy of valuing, protecting and encouraging the growth of natural habitats. The UK wants everybody to see how many fingers it can stick up its bottom.

Costa Rica has provided a model for countries around the world to learn from and follow in order that humans don't destroy the only place in the cosmos they can thrive, thereby destroying themselves. The UK is pulling the wings off bees and still wets the bed.

Well that is laughably untrue, but whatever you want to believe, and I guess you believe anything if you read something called Newsbiscuit. From Wikipedia, probably the world's most accessible news source:

Deforestation in Costa Rica has a serious impact on the environment and therefore may directly or indirectly contribute to flooding, desertification, sedimentation in rivers, loss of wildlife diversity, and the obvious sheer loss of timber. Since the end of World War II, approximately 80% of the forests of Costa Rica have disappeared. Approximately 20,000 acres (8,100 ha) of land are deforested annually; in the 1990s the country had one of the worst deforestation rates in Central America.

As the population grew, the people of Costa Rica cut down the forests to provide for pastureland for cattle ranching to produce beef for the world market to raise revenue. Since the 1950s, approximately 60% of Costa Rica has been cleared to make room for cattle ranching.

The UK has lamentably low woodland cover it's true, but this was caused largely by Mesolithic and Neolithic man. Indeed in his book 'The History of the Countryside' Oliver Rackham wrote:

It can no longer be maintained, as used to be supposed even 20 years ago, that Roman Britain was a frontier province, with boundless wild woods surrounding occasional precarious clearings on the best land. On the contrary, even in supposedly backward counties such as Essex, villa abutted on villa for mile after mile, and most of the gaps were filled by small towns and the lands of British farmsteads.

In fact we have re-forested the British Isles since 1918. From around 5% woodland cover we're up to around 13%. Of course much of this (especially in Scotland) cannot be regarded as mimicking native forest, but it's still a damn sight better than forestry policy in Costa Rica.

[Psamathe]

A good one, mainly focusing on environmental aspects (and I think a lot of truth in it):

Costa Rica has spent the last 20 years restoring forests, doubling the amount of carbon-capturing woodland across the nation. During that time, the UK has snotted down its chin a bit and left some smudge marks on the walls.

Costa Rica carefully considered the unsustainable pathways of short-term financial gain from industrial-scale destruction of ecosystems and successfully inverted conventional economic ideologies. Meanwhile, the UK ate lots of sweeties, was sick on the cat, and wanted more shiny things.

Individuals and groups in Costa Rica have been economically rewarded for enacting a national policy of valuing, protecting and encouraging the growth of natural habitats. The UK wants everybody to see how many fingers it can stick up its bottom.

Costa Rica has provided a model for countries around the world to learn from and follow in order that humans don't destroy the only place in the cosmos they can thrive, thereby destroying themselves. The UK is pulling the wings off bees and still wets the bed.

Well that is laughably untrue, but whatever you want to believe, and I guess you believe anything if you read something called Newsbiscuit. From Wikipedia, probably the world's most accessible news source:

Deforestation in Costa Rica has a serious impact on the environment and therefore may directly or indirectly contribute to flooding, desertification, sedimentation in rivers, loss of wildlife diversity, and the obvious sheer loss of timber. Since the end of World War II, approximately 80% of the forests of Costa Rica have disappeared. Approximately 20,000 acres (8,100 ha) of land are deforested annually; in the 1990s the country had one of the worst deforestation rates in Central America.

As the population grew, the people of Costa Rica cut down the forests to provide for pastureland for cattle ranching to produce beef for the world market to raise revenue. Since the 1950s, approximately 60% of Costa Rica has been cleared to make room for cattle ranching.

The UK has lamentably low woodland cover it's true, but this was caused largely by Mesolithic and Neolithic man. Indeed in his book 'The History of the Countryside' Oliver Rackham wrote:

It can no longer be maintained, as used to be supposed even 20 years ago, that Roman Britain was a frontier province, with boundless wild woods surrounding occasional precarious clearings on the best land. On the contrary, even in supposedly backward counties such as Essex, villa abutted on villa for mile after mile, and most of the gaps were filled by small towns and the lands of British farmsteads.

In fact we have re-forested the British Isles since 1918. From around 5% woodland cover we're up to around 13%. Of course much of this (especially in Scotland) cannot be regarded as mimicking native forest, but it's still a damn sight better than forestry policy in Costa Rica.

It's a spoof, a bit of humour. Newsbiscuit is not something you believe (or even take seriously). Oh dear.

(ps, I am aware of the situation in Costa Rica having travelled there fairly extensively (independent travel through countryside and National Parks).

Ian

[Ben@Forest]

A good one, mainly focusing on environmental aspects (and I think a lot of truth in it):

Well that is laughably untrue, but whatever you want to believe, and I guess you believe anything if you read something called Newsbiscuit. From Wikipedia, probably the world's most accessible news source:

Deforestation in Costa Rica has a serious impact on the environment and therefore may directly or indirectly contribute to flooding, desertification, sedimentation in rivers, loss of wildlife diversity, and the obvious sheer loss of timber. Since the end of World War II, approximately 80% of the forests of Costa Rica have disappeared. Approximately 20,000 acres (8,100 ha) of land are deforested annually; in the 1990s the country had one of the worst deforestation rates in Central America.

As the population grew, the people of Costa Rica cut down the forests to provide for pastureland for cattle ranching to produce beef for the world market to raise revenue. Since the 1950s, approximately 60% of Costa Rica has been cleared to make room for cattle ranching.

The UK has lamentably low woodland cover it's true, but this was caused largely by Mesolithic and Neolithic man. Indeed in his book 'The History of the Countryside' Oliver Rackham wrote:

It can no longer be maintained, as used to be supposed even 20 years ago, that Roman Britain was a frontier province, with boundless wild woods surrounding occasional precarious clearings on the best land. On the contrary, even in supposedly backward counties such as Essex, villa abutted on villa for mile after mile, and most of the gaps were filled by small towns and the lands of British farmsteads.

In fact we have re-forested the British Isles since 1918. From around 5% woodland cover we're up to around 13%. Of course much of this (especially in Scotland) cannot be regarded as mimicking native forest, but it's still a damn sight better than forestry policy in Costa Rica.

It's a spoof, a bit of humour. Newsbiscuit is not something you believe (or even take seriously). Oh dear.

(ps, I am aware of the situation in Costa Rica having travelled there fairly extensively (independent travel through countryside and National Parks).

So why write 'and I think a lot of truth in it'? What you mean it may or may not be funny - but it's not vaguely true.....