Playing Politics With English Jobs!

[threegee]

England shafted once again by our politicos!

All the economic indications are that the Clyde shipyards are unviable, and BAE had obviously already decided that. But... blatantly obvious behind-the-scenes political interference dictates that 500 years of shipbuilding at Portsmouth has to end to buy the Scottish Independence Referendum!

If Scotland thinks it can do better without us then let them get on with it; it would be a great day for the rest of the UK if greedy Salmond were to get his stupid way. He doesn't want UK military bases, so why should he have the industrial benefits of UK defence? If he wants his hands on those declining oil revenues, then how about paying the UK taxpayer back the billions they sunk into the rescue of Scottish banks?

Shame on you Tory, LD and Labour schemers - you don't deserve a single vote between the lot of you!

[Symptoms]

Clearly, neither yard is really viable since the dramatic shrinking of the deep-water Royal Navy fleet and their need to build/replace tackle; there's probably enough work for one yard, maybe for the next decade, once they start building those new Type 42 destroyers. Then what happens? The only new stuff needed by HM Gov might be Coast Guard/Fishery Protection cutters ... hardly a threatening deep-water fleet.

So how to choose which yard is for the chop? Yep, GGG, redblobman Cameroooon is playing the Jockovote card - crude, blatant politics! They even have the nerve to deny any linkage with the Jockovote question. I've always said that everybody in the UK should have a vote on the Jocko question - I would guess loads of English folks would want to chuck the Jockos out.

Very nearly all politicians are corrupt and are broadly the same in the shyster stakes so there's little to choose between them whatever party they belong to. Russell Brand wrote an interesting article about politicians in the Guardian yesterday; GGG, it really is worth reading. Put aside any preconceived ideas you may have about the guy and take 5 minutes to read it here:

http://www.theguardi...ystem-newsnight

Edited November 7, 2013 by Symptoms

[Adam Hogg]

Another Industry going to dust thanks to the Tories, If they had not been privatized thousands of jobs would have still been in the Newcastle, Gateshead, Teeside, and now Portsmouth along with many others.

Politics Should never come before jobs look over the last 20 years Politics before Jobs: British Coal, British Steel, British Leyland, British Rail, Vickers, Alcan all victims of privatization, Lack of investment, Green Taxes and now Referendums.

[mercuryg]

With respect, Adam, a lot of the problem in many of those industries lay in areas other than 'the Tories'. Cost is always a factor, and ships are built far more cheaply elsewhere than they are here. I'm no expert in military hardware, but have an extensive knowledge of the motor industry; what killed British Leyland was, for want of a better word, crap products in the face of better quality from overseas. We simply continued churning out poorly built, unreliable cars with out of date mechanicals at too high a price, while our overseas rivals upped the ante and we failed to react.

[threegee]

Another Industry going to dust thanks to the Tories, If they had not been privatized thousands of jobs would have still been in the Newcastle, Gateshead, Teeside, and now Portsmouth along with many others.

Politics Should never come before jobs look over the last 20 years Politics before Jobs: British Coal, British Steel, British Leyland, British Rail, Vickers, Alcan all victims of privatization, Lack of investment, Green Taxes and now Referendums.

I wonder what government oversaw the demise of our shipbuilding industry in the North East, the final chapter of which played out in 2006? Can you blame Labour for this? Of course not, it was entirely down to market forces.

If Nationalisation is the solution to all our problems then please name one single industry that grew during the period it was nationalised? Just one?

All the industries you mention grew through private enterprise, providing more and more jobs, then shrank during the period they were nationalised. The reason is easy to understand: they became bloated; had second-rate civil servants running them; weren't properly financially accountable to the stake holders (the taxpayer), so just kept on putting their hands out for more taxpayer money to build an even bigger empire, producing goods eventually no-one (not even other state industries) wanted to buy. Labour eventually got the message but the Soviets and Chinese probably beat them to it. It's no coincidence that the steady rise in Russian and Chinese economic power dates exactly from their embracing market forces rather than trying vainly to pretend that the state knows best.

The state is a voracious consumer, and just about everything it feeds on is produced or was built by private effort. It exists because others make profits - you know, that dirty word that trade unionists spit before uttering. Profit is good because it means you are doing something well. If you can't make a profit that means that it's probably not worth doing because you are going about it in the wrong way. It also signals to others that here's real demand that you too could be meeting, and so promotes competition, even better was of doing things, and lower prices.

The Market is the sum total of the people who buy whatever you have to offer think about what you offer. The Market is not how anyone feels things should or must be, it's how things are in the real world; it's people voting with their own money, not someone else's money! Even nationalised industries pretend to address market forces, and aspire to make a profit. But, they rarely do so because it's so much easier to promise jam tomorrow, and put your hand out for another large wodge of someone else's profit! There has to be what the economists call "moral hazard" for people to get off their backsides; lack of moral hazard is why nationalised industries (and other socialist ideas) always fail.

[Adam Hogg]

I wonder what government oversaw the demise of our shipbuilding industry in the North East, the final chapter of which played out in 2006? Can you blame Labour for this? Of course not, it was entirely down to market forces.

If Nationalisation is the solution to all our problems then please name one single industry that grew during the period it was nationalised? Just one?

All the industries you mention grew through private enterprise, providing more and more jobs, then shrank during the period they were nationalised.

The problem with Swan Hunter in 2006 was they had poor management, resulting in delays and cost overruns: http://en.wikipedia....yme_Bay_(L3007)

Then the MOD removed Swan Hunter from any future Royal Navy project meaning swan hunter stopped building ships and lost jobs.

Also depends on what you class as growth of industry (more Jobs or more money) if jobs none only because of more advanced technology however most operated at profit until the 80's when places steelworks, mines, etc. where flooded with new unneeded equipment and deemed unprofitable.

One last thing though what Industry has grew though private enterprise since the privatization's of the 80's and 90's?

[mercuryg]

"One last thing though what Industry has grew though private enterprise since the privatization's of the 80's and 90's?"

That's really a moot point (and Adam, 'what industry has grew'? Shame on you young man!) as the world of commerce and industry has changed immeasurably in the past twenty, even ten, years. The Digital Age is driving the markets these days, perhaps more so than you may realise. What the markets needed in the 80's and 90's is considerably different to that required today (and this is, in my opinion, why the proposed HS2 is a white elephant of the highest proportions). While one can contend that UK industry was destroyed by 'the Tories' (and no, I'm not a defender of Thatcherism, I veer very much towards the left) it really pays to dig beneath the veneer and have a closer look; you summed it up, Adam, with this line about Swan Hunter - "The problem with Swan Hunter in 2006 was they had poor management, resulting in delays and cost overruns: Then the MOD removed Swan Hunter from any future Royal Navy project meaning swan hunter stopped building ships and lost jobs." Put yourself in the position of the bean counters at the MOD, or any other customer of an industry affected by poor management, delays and cost over-runs: I'm afraid sympathy doesn't come into it - economics does.

[threegee]

The problem with Swan Hunter in 2006 was they had poor management, resulting in delays and cost overruns: http://en.wikipedia....yme_Bay_(L3007)

Then the MOD removed Swan Hunter from any future Royal Navy project meaning swan hunter stopped building ships and lost jobs.

Also depends on what you class as growth of industry (more Jobs or more money) if jobs none only because of more advanced technology however most operated at profit until the 80's when places steelworks, mines, etc. where flooded with new unneeded equipment and deemed unprofitable.

One last thing though what Industry has grew though private enterprise since the privatization's of the 80's and 90's?

To the contrary Swan's had rather good management - they underbid to get the contract in the full knowledge that the men from the ministry were clueless and the company could milk the contract for years. This they did in the full knowledge that there was no more profitable commercial work available, and that the best they could make of the situation was to keep things ticking over (and the core workforce employed) until something turned up, or market conditions changed.

I was talking about North east shipbuilding in general, not just on the Tyne, and not just in recent history. We've even priced ourselves out of ship-breaking these days!

Loads of industries are growing and the UK is up there with the best, if not leading the pack. I've put little bits of my pension in quite a few (full list available on request ). Just one would be http://www.iqep.com/ which - amongst other things - now has by far the most efficient photovoltaic cells in the world. I've backed them with probably far more than I can afford to for a decade now. Pity they are based in Wales and not the NE!

Ah, "flooded with new unneeded equipment and deemed unprofitable". Isn't that what state planning does; invests in all the wrong things at all the wrong times, because it's the politically correct thing to do and buys votes? Politicians are like generals: always fighting the last war (with someone else's money).

[Adam Hogg]

Well looks like the Tories are trying to win votes with miners now after playing politics with their jobs in the 80's and 90's:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...litics-24954274

If you watch the video he avoids the question:

"Won't people working here think its a bit of cheek for a chancellor, a conservative chancellor to come to a mine, when many miners blame your party for pit closures?"

[threegee]

The person who played politics with their jobs was communist, Arthur Scargill; the Tory government never picked a fight with the mining unions he came looking for one. Indeed he wanted to overthrow a democratically elected government. If that's not playing politics I don't know what is!

Anyway what it's about is the results of their polling which says that public concern about energy prices is uppermost of people's minds. Labour too of course, with Miliband's offer to spend other people's money on "freezing" energy bills for 20 months. A relief that anyone with half a brain knows will be clawed back with interest, and which will only stifle much needed investment in new capacity and reduce competition.

The real villain on energy prices is the green levies, which Miliband's own crop of dippy tree-huggers fully support, and so won't speak against. Blaming greedy energy companies is just a smokescreen; he knows as well as anybody that it's market forces (helped along by daft politics).

[mercuryg]

"The real villain on energy prices is the green levies"

 

Nail on the head, 3G.

[Adam Hogg]

Vote Blue, Go Green.

 

Wonder who said that?

 

 

Blaming greedy energy companies is just a smokescreen.

But they are greedy, global Gas prices have not went up this year yet gas bill have? That was from a energy provider not me.

[threegee]

Vote Blue, Go Green.

 

Wonder who said that?

 

 

But they are greedy, global Gas prices have not went up this year yet gas bill have? That was from a energy provider not me.

 

If Miliband or Balls had a scrap of evidence of overcharges they'd produce it.  They don't because they can't!  It's far easier to use the usual "politics of envy" ploy that Labour always uses - you know, tax cuts for millionaires and all that crap - than tell the truth and put up a reasoned argument.  In fact the regulator is doing his job, and although more real competition is needed, the market is reasonably fair to customers considering the degree of political meddling.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/9878281/Ofgem-boss-warns-of-higher-energy-prices-in-supply-roller-coaster.html

 

19 Feb 2013

..he [the regulator] argues that the reforms to the electricity supply will take too long to avert price rises. "About 10pc of our current generation stock goes next month as coal and oil fired power stations close earlier than expected to meet environmental targets,”

 

If Labour hadn't messed on for so long changing its mind on nuclear and back again to suit various factions in the party we'd have some relief coming up over the next few years.  Now it's going to take a whole ten years to get some decent nuclear capacity.  Granted the coalition could have been a lot quicker, but by the time they got elected suppliers were hard to find and they were over a barrel on pricing.  Only 6.5 out of 10 for the Con/Lab actions so far though.

 

You can't simply say that spot prices this year have only gone up < 2% because suppliers hedge often by negotiating years in advance, and contracts end. There are many other factors in getting energy to your door too; networking and infrastructure costs represent quite a large proportion of them.  If there were distribution failures then politicians would be screaming "underinvestment".  What we have though is very tight supply due to lack of proper energy policy over the last decade or more. It's often necessary to take/make expensive supplies just to keep the wheels turning. More capacity will come but it will take time, though if Miliband has his daft way in capping prices this will only have the opposite effect long-term.  Less capacity will inevitably be built and we'll be back in Labour's la-la world where people work without any incentive, yet his vote-buying give away will be still be recovered after the cap ends.

 

One thing we will readily agree about is that coal fired stations should not have been shut down when they were. And there you get back to the green lunacy, which is the reason for most of the current pain.