OneGuyFromBarlick

Bruff wrote:Indeed, there’s quite a bit of research that shows folk would rather work less hours and get paid less than work more hours and get paid more...

This is similar to people like myself who gave up working for an employer and accepted a lower income and preferred to have the greater freedom that came with self-employment. But I've seen a lot of people try this and then find it's not for them. There are various reasons why they choose to return to the former job but one of them is to earn a higher salary. So I think the `work less, get paid less' option is seen as acceptable to some people but by no means all of them.

Tiz, I think the key lies in expectations and life style. Once I had shed family responsibilities if I was short of money my mind went to what expenditure I could cut out, not how I could earn more money. Classic example is ditching the car. How many people are 'short of money' but have a car they don't actually need sitting in the street draining their account?

Taking that theme a bit further. In the days before the introduction of the Factory System, the biggest problem that putting out masters had to deal with was that their workers in the cottages were addicted to what was known as Saint Monday. Lots of research has been done into this and in the absence of advertising stoking any artificial demand, once workers had accumulated enough money for subsistence and occasional feasts like marriages they tended to take leisure. They would rather be in the garden than working at the loom. I can't help thinking that in many ways we are the most manipulated society ever. Whisper it not, but old dinosaurs like me who are virtually impervious to advertising are better off than we have ever been in our lives and must be the hardest to govern.
I often think that this sort of thinking is at the back of the dreaded austerity. 'If they stopped going to the pub, watching TV and having holidays they could manage quite well on less'.
You can tell can't you that normal politics has been paralysed by the Referendum.... I even got to thinking yesterday along the lines I was taught at the very old fashioned grammar school I went to. They taught us about 'Reductio ad Absurdum'. (LINK) In an idle moment yesterday I wondered to myself about the present referendum, if it's a good way to make such and earth-shaking decision as whether we should stay in the EU why isn't it applied more widely? Why don't we have them on the Monarchy, the Honours System or whether we should have a Bill of Rights and a written constitution? I think we can all work out the answer, it would be an absurd way to govern a society. Which raises the question why are we having this one? This is why I don't believe that any of the people (mainly Tories) are coming clean about the real agenda. It's who controls the Tory Party and what direction are they going to take us. I'm afraid the answer is the good old days of the 19th century and laisser faire governance. Sometimes I'm glad I'm old. God will give me an alternative escape route soon!

Politics is on hold......

I've thrown this one in the 'Politics Corner' for those who are interested in the Euro currency. A new book by Joseph Stiglitz, not in the libraries just yet, on the ongoing viability of the Euro. The preamble for the book is shown below. Should be worth reading.

The euro: how a common currency threatens the future of Europe
Stiglitz, Joseph E
Solidarity and prosperity fostered by economic integration: this principle has underpinned the European project from the start, and the establishment of a common currency was supposed to be its most audacious and tangible achievement. Since 2008, however, the European Union has ricocheted between stagnation and crisis. The inability of the eurozone to match the recovery in the USA and UK has exposed its governing structures, institutions and policies as dysfunctional and called into question the viability of a common currency shared by such different economies as Germany and Greece. Designed to bring the European Union closer together, the euro has actually done the opposite: after nearly a decade without growth, unity has been replaced with dissent and enlargements with prospective exits. Joseph Stiglitz argues that Europe's stagnation and bleak outlook are a direct result of the fundamental flaws inherent in the euro project - economic integration outpacing political integration with a structure that promotes divergence rather than convergence. Money relentlessly leaves the weaker member states and goes to the strong, with debt accumulating in a few ill-favoured countries. The question then is: Can the euro be saved? Laying bare the European Central Bank's misguided inflation-only mandate and explaining why austerity has condemned Europe to unending stagnation, Stiglitz outlines the fundamental reforms necessary to the structure of the eurozone and the policies imposed on the member countries suffering the most. But the same lack of sufficient political solidarity that led to the creation of a flawed euro twenty years ago suggests that these reforms are unlikely to be adopted. Hoping to avoid the huge costs associated with current policies, Stiglitz proposes two other alternatives: a well-managed end to the common currency; or a bold, new system dubbed 'the flexible euro.' This important book, by one of the world's leading economists, addresses the euro-crisis on a bigger intellectual scale than any predecessor

Book. English.
Published Allen Lane, 2016

Thanks for the heads up P. I shall get it as soon as it is published on the 16th August....
I like Stiglitz, he talks common sense and from the extract I'd say he was hitting all my personal buttons!
Only a fortnight to go before the bloodbath...... Then we shall have politics up to our eyeballs!

Not much political news about but I like THIS. I think Jeremy is taking the mickey out of Cameron and the jibes about his dress. The thing that strikes me is how well he scrubs up and looks better than the podgy Cameron with his moon face..... Or is this just an old Red getting personal.....

Read THIS and then reflect on the quality of a mind that equates this with the qualifications necessary to be a President of the United States. We think things are rotten in the upper echelons here but this is tragic. Go back and read FDR's acceptance speech "we have nothing to fear but fear itself' then contrast and compare..... When Trump attacked immigration he asked "what the hell is going on". Indeed, how the hell did America and up with a man like this as a candidate.....
UK politics is suspended until further notice......

What strikes me at the moment in the debate on the Cameron Catastrophe is the way the exit faction are plugging the fact that the mythical saving from Brexit will be used by the Chancellor for everything from saving the health service and reducing VAT on fuel to continuing or even increasing farm subsidies.
In contrast Ossie today will make a speech warning of the possible need for a punitive budget after Brexit.
The bottom line is that nobody knows with any certainty what will happen. I would suggest that relying on the present Chancellor to return 100% of any saving to the general budget is an extremely weak reed. Underlying all this is the fact that our 'economic miracle' is a very fragile concept and one thing is certain, Brexit will have profound effects on both the economy of Europe and the markets. This in turn will affect the UK and anyone who thinks this will be a short-lived effect is living in a fool's paradise.
Give a bit of thought to Naomi Klein and her book on Shock Doctrine. Experience teaches us that in any crisis, there is always someone in the wings waiting to take advantage of it and any money that is syphoned out in that process will certainly not go direct into the funding of society.....
Roll on a week on Friday!

I heard someone also make the comment that the Brexit faction are not a political party so are not actually in power. Any claims that they are making will not automatically occur unless of course it's by magic. As I see it, either way the vote will be divisive. I can't see them all cuddling back up after the event, how many more hidden agendas will there be? It's dangerous territory with shades of fascism raising it's head again.

It's a good point and we should also note that the referendum is not like an election where we are choosing between several options; the referendum has only two options and they are not really comparable - it's not like choosing between being in Union A or Union B. Perhaps a decision of this type should be decided using a system like `Step forward all those who want to leave the EU. We only leave if more than 50% of you step forward." In other words, any who don't vote will be counted as preferring the status quo, whether they have indicated so or not.

I like that concept Tiz but of course it will never happen!
One thing that has struck me is the silence of William Hague, or have I missed something? One of the more impressive Tories I always thought.....

We heard some sound comments from him earlier in the campaign but nothing recently as far as I know. A search brought this up as probably the latest from him: Hague

That sounds like a sensible line of reasoning, much as I would have expected.
Yesterday's assassination in Birstall is too fresh to comment on but my blood runs cold...... I am particularly disturbed by suggestions that there is a political element.

There is no political news beyond the fact that the exchanges between the two camps are getting more bad tempered. Noticeable that they are almost all Tories.....

Labour are too busy with their own problems.

Reading some essays by Michael Foot, old Labour MP, who quoted Aneurin (Nye) Bevan that it was normal for the left wing of the party to support the right wing when they were leading the field but if ever the left took charge then there was hell on all the time from the right wing. It looks like sixty years later nothing has changed.

Nice observation P. I've always suspected that the right of the party object to the power the unions had and still have, particularly in the NEC. Many forget the original genesis of the party. It was important then and is now.
Tiz, I am not too sure that that is the reason. Labour has been very busy sorting out the internal organisation of the party as they move slowly away from the regrettable 'modernisation' (ie. Move to the right) of the Blair years when the party was in some ways more reactionary and regressive than the Tories.
THIS Guardian report on Clare Short's opinions about Chilcot and the 'anti-Semitism' enquiry in the Labour Party is worth reading.
Roll on Thursday!

In the absence of politics in the UK....
See THIS for a CNN report of the Democrats protesting in the Republican controlled House of Representatives against the rejection of amendments to US gun laws following the Orlando shootings. This very rare but Speaker Ryan has evidently decided that using his powers to clear the house and restore order would exacerbate what is evidently a very popular protest, well supported by the public. Protest V Political Process. I get the notion that we may see more of this in the future as political systems world wide seem to ignore the popular will.
Post Referendum angst in UK?

As a leave vote begins to look more likely but with a very close margin, the full enormity of the mistake that was made in calling the referendum starts to become clearer. On the present evidence we are looking at an immediate economic shock worse than 2008 or Black Wednesday in 1992 in the next few hours. Ossie's 'economic miracle' is going to face the ultimate test. UK stocks have fallen 6% already this morning. In political terms this is a disaster. Then there are the purely political consequences.
All I can see at the moment is the triumphant faces of Boris and Gove presiding over a political blood bath. The Cameron Catastrophe..... What happens if the rosy picture of UK post Brexit isn't as rosy as the Brexiteers predicted? We are in interesting times.....

Leave now have enough votes to claim victory with a 4% lead on a 72% turnout, 48% don't want this and 25% cant be bothered to vote. Statistics aren't that good really for such a huge decision. Interesting times indeed.

So Cameron's going, who's actually in charge (Of UK) now? What happend to the UK bill of rights (that should have come before referendum so we had some kind of road map of where we might, consitutionally, be going). Problem is England like the tories, but there is not a clever, able, leader of PM quality among the conservatives to
choose from. Corbyn might be worth gambling on calling no confidence on Govt in next couple of weeks , but any Gen Election is still going to have the EU (as the EU is presently constituated) problem confusing real votes on UK future. In all honesty something around 50:50 has been the UK split on many things , taken across England at least, maybe at heart 'Middle England' is more reactionary than we might like, with extremist views scattered around the edges of the doughnut of political consensus.

BBC, 9.20, 27 June 2016 Labour appointments
`Jeremy Corbyn unveils new top team after resignations'
According to the BBC the new appointments include:
Shadow foreign secretary - Emily Thornberry
Shadow health secretary - Diane Abbott
Shadow education secretary - Pat Glass
Shadow transport secretary - Andy McDonald
Shadow defence secretary - Clive Lewis
Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury - Rebecca Long-Bailey
Shadow international development secretary - Kate Osamor
Shadow environment food and rural affairs secretary - Rachel Maskell
Shadow voter engagement and youth affairs - Cat Smith
Shadow Northern Ireland secretary - Dave Anderson

During the current unpleasantness one thing that strikes me is that despite the shortcomings of the system, I have always believed that there are some good men and women in there. If I'm right, where are they now? What are they doing? Or have I been mistaken, are they all self serving (insert your own epithet)?
God, isn't it a mess!!
A thought.... what sort of reception will Cameron get today in what could be his last trip to a meeting of the EU in Brussels? Will it be a nice day out?
THIS is worth a read. Well done Dennis.... Jeremy Corbyn has committed the ultimate sin of not joining in with the lies and over optimistic forecasts that characterized the Referendum 'debate', instead he told the truth and said exactly what he thought. This is no way to 'succeed' in modern politics.
My mind goes back to the War Coalition of 1940 when politicians of all parties rejected party politics, cooperated with sworn enemies and found a way to work together. To the extent that after the war even Churchill was fulsome in his praise of Bevin and Bevan. That's what is needed in the labour party now, not selfish self destruction.

Given that by 6pm tomorrow things might have changed, but was is it about Corbyn that makes his approach unpopular with his party (Parliamentary , Working Members and Council Leaders) ? Maybe it is the difference between a campaign based individual - used to running pressure group from within to one of doing whatever a leader is supposed to do in getting support lined up for the future , maybe its his idea of the future Labour shape does not match that of many of the existing Lab MPs, or maybe its his delivery of that Vision is not 'strong' enough. There are reports that polls show a Corbyn led Labour party would only get 75 seats in a new parliament, presumably the lefter thoughts of Corbyn do not resonate enough with the English public at constituancy level - I've said before the electorate in Middle England appear more reactionary than one would like, and local Labour Activitists not clued up enough to get votes in at a sufficent level -that building of local party should have been Corbyn's initial top priority. But 75 seats seems too low. At Westminster SNP get Scotland everytime at present, but the main inner cities should go Labour (assuming the Lib Dem comback is too muted , too late ), and other areas depends if UKIP put up candidates. It may be that no Labour leader could dent the propensity to support Conservative candidates elsewhere, the thought that the ordinary working person should/would naturally support Labour has always been false, many think that personally they are better off without a (left) Labour in charge. Of course if Brown/Darling had run things properly and nationalised the banks and underlying assets the ConDem coalition may have been avoided. A National Government, no chance, but in case no one in England has noticed, the referendum result has changed the big
picture , big time. Not necessarily a good place to be poor, disabled, in social housing (need), an immigrant of working background, in need of a state school. About the best one can do is to manuipulate the situation to ones own advantage.

Question - should the established Church have sought bigger credible voice in the matters of recent past ?