BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 04:06 PM

I know I am not alone in this but when I left school computers (not that I knew what a computer was) were the size of a small room.

When I retired many years later I had spent much of the previous 25 years sitting in front of a computer, sitting on my desk, in order to conduct my role.

Strange isn't it that the machines that were supposed to sound the death knell of my employment prospects kept me in work for all those years.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 03:42 PM

But you completely ignore the opposing viewpoint that I posted because it does not fit in with your per-defined ideals?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 03:19 PM

Not my view Shaw. I merely echo what is thought to be a real possibility by those better informed to judge than either of us.


http://uk.businessinsider.com/job-losses-automation-pwc-bob-moritz-2017-4

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 11:07 AM

And today I hear that robots are replacing sex workers in brothels. More job losses...

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 11:05 AM

Who says I'm complacent? I'm saying that predictions in this context have a habit of not coming true, and I think that the world is far too complex and dynamic for your simplistic one to be worthy of consideration. And if you insist on using my surname I'll just call you Inane from now on.

So, from hereonin, you're Inane.


Er, "from hereonin?"

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 10:54 AM

The replacement jobs require a higher skill set.

Sometimes, but often the skill set is lower, or simply different.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 10:49 AM

Shaw there is no dispute that advances in technology replaces jobs. The replacement jobs require a higher skill set. This inevitably leaves some behind as a permanent reservoir of unemployed. So far the argument suggests other jobs are created to make up for those displaced.But today the rate of change is so fast that what was true in the past may not be true in the future. To assume the slack will automatically be taken up could turn out to be horribly wrong and there is no way to make an accurate prediction one way or the other. You may find in the future that your smug complacency is somewhat in error.

https://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21700758-will-smarter-machines-cause-mass-unemployment-automation-and-anxiety

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 10:47 AM

Yes, predictions.

We have always predicted new technology would wipe out jobs. It doesnt matter in that sense whether we are talking factory looms or computers. It is certainly true that jobs disappear (I sometimes point out how the photocopier did to copy clerk, and thence the rationale for teaching everyone Copperplate handwriting). But our experience is that manu jobs just change and many unheard of jobs appear - imagine explaining a web designer to a Victorian.

The unanswerable question is whether the total number of jobs afterwards is the same or greater than before. While there are certainly "downs" our experience is that the trend has always been up. Maybe not this time, who knows, but there's no real reason to think that our ability to spot the new jobs coming along is any better than that of our ancestors.

What we do know, though, is that life long education is a great way of dealing with the lack of these new skills. We can't do it just on people up to say 25 and convert everyone over say 35 into the unemployable as the demanded skills change. So Corbyn is absolutely right to link life long education with new technology in the UK's interest.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 10:45 AM

In fact they totally reject your supposition

Not my supposition. it is A study by economists at the consultancy Deloitte and far from being a supposition , the Study of census results in England and Wales since 1871 finds rise of machines has been a job creator rather than making working humans obsolete

Do you ever actually read anything or do you just keep arguing for the sake of it?

Steve - Sorry but you are behind the times as well. It is already well established that he is a total arse :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 10:29 AM

Ah, predictions, predictions. I seem to remember being told that we'd all be retired by 50 after a working life of two or three days a week and that life would be easy and filled with leisure. Instead, jobs today are more high-pressured than ever, you're watched and assessed all the time, you're expected to work countless extra hours for no extra pay, work-life balance has gone out of the window. So much for those predictions, eh? So you carry on making your apocalyptic predictions, Iains. I'll just sit here waiting for the day when it will finally be shown that you were just making a complete arse of yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 10:01 AM

Talking rubbish as usual gnome. And you link goes back to the 19th century. Don't believe we had computers or robotics then. The first desktop computer I used was 1974 (HP2100) The development since then has been phenomenal.



https://www.google.ie/search?q=job+losses+due+to+automation+uk&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gws_rd=cr&ei=uEFeWZ33A4rVgAbgi

The links above beg to disagree with you. In fact they totally reject your supposition.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 09:16 AM

I would argue that we are at the forefront of massive redundancies due to computerisation, automation and robotics.

Then you are around 35 years behind the times. People have been saying that since the PC was first introduced. The reverse is a lot nearer the truth.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Iains
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 09:09 AM

Corbyn is off in cuckoo land as per normal.
"Technological change need not herald 'era of mass unemployment'"

I would like to see the nuts and bolts of that explained. I would argue that we are at the forefront of massive redundancies due to computerisation, automation and robotics. Front desk banking is evaporating wholesale and automatic checkouts springing up everywhere. Many traditional white collar jobs are capable of being automated. Even segments of education are more efficiently followed online. All these changes are leading, or have led, to massive redundancies. What professions will utilise this brave new world, of a highly educated workforce that will seek positions in a steadily diminishing workplace?

The Luddites rioted because of lost employment. Seems to me around the corner looms a situation where the average Luddite would be regarded as a scruffy little choirboy compared to their modern day brethren.
Chavs on steroids springs to mind. Perhaps this is why the police is increasingly militarised.

Tech change need not herald 'era of mass unemployment'

Typical Labour ploy. Good soundbite with no attempt to cost as someone else will pay or as good Celts perhaps the debt could be paid in the afterlife. Whatever!-They are distinctly divorced from reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 08:33 AM

Ah, the Daily Mail headline, word for word.


Now the BBC reports thw same speech starting with "The state should work with business to help the UK maximise the benefits of automation and other technological changes, Jeremy Corbyn has said.

"Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest".

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Jul 17 - 08:19 AM

"Jeremy Corbyn promises lifelong free education as he demands an overhaul of the economy to stop private firms using technology to destroy jobs"

In other words he's a Luddite - how progressive.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 11 Jun 17 - 09:02 AM

Ake, more great tap-dancing, but you STILL haven't answered the question. As per usual (always?).

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 11 Jun 17 - 04:40 AM

So that makes it OK then. 😂😂😂

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jun 17 - 04:11 AM

Greg, get a grip, don't you realise how the capitalist system works?
All the things you mention with the exception of "sexual predator" are built into that system, in fact they are necessary to keep the system performing.
As you know I am no supporter of said system, so don't think I am an apologist for it......just a realist.


As far as sexual predator is concerned, I seem to remember a certain Democratic hero called Clinton who could teach Donal John a lot about how to deal with young female staff.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Jun 17 - 12:43 PM

So as far as you are concerned, Trump- a confirmed serial liar, a sexual predator, a man who consistently stiffs his employees and contractors, who has declared multiple bankruptcies to escape paying his just debts, who ran a fake "university" & thus bilked millions of dollars from unsuspecting "students"- this to you is an "Honest" man?

Explains quite a lot, Ake, and makes you totally unfit to render any sort of judgement on Corbyn - or, for that matter, on anything else.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jun 17 - 09:56 AM

Well Greg neither are establishment politicians, so they have half a chance of being honest. :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Jun 17 - 09:44 AM

So, Ake - would you answer the question, or is all you can do tap dance?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 10 Jun 17 - 09:30 AM

Akenaton, why do you insist on calling DONALD John Trump Donal. Can his parents of Germanic and Scottish stock not choose their own name for their son.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jun 17 - 05:03 AM

Greg, what was the point of that intervention?

I made a point regarding the UK election and you start on about Donal John? It does seem that the President wants to get Americans back to work, encourage détente between East and West, cut down on illegal immigration and Islamic terrorism......I agree with these aims and would expect any UK government to pursue the same policies.

Your political establishment AND ours is pretty corrupt and I suppose you see any attempt to break that cabal as an attack on "democracy", when in fact it is the beginnings of proper democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Greg F.
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 06:08 PM

If Mr Corbyn cannot be honest

Is he more or less honest Than your hero Trump, Ake?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 05:37 PM

" a sound, costed manifesto."....you must be joking, it was the old political tactic of promising everything.

We are now in the position of having to seriously consider living within our means.   I thought better of Mr Corbyn.
"Electability" is meaningless unless the economy is functioning at an efficient level....at the moment we depend on cut price immigrant labour......not a socialist principle surely? Also zero hours contracts, lack of housing, public services grinding to a halt, NHS in meltdown. How do you cost all these problems, run a full scale nationalisation project and hand out freebies to all and sundry.
It is simply impossible.

If Mr Corbyn cannot be honest with the public he is no better than the Blairites who surround him.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 04:23 PM

Come on Raggy, heel boy, heel.

Do your pals have a stick that you can fetch?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 12:49 PM

No Teribus, I am in Ireland and I heard the rumour about KAOH proclivities whilst here.

No doubt about that.

Just a point though. I addressed a question to him, why do you feel you have to answer on his behalf. Could it be because you do not comprehend the written word ............ no surprise given your lack of education.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 12:20 PM

The Tory party is split asunder. That's why Cameron called a referendum and that's why May called this election. They were both trying to either placate or subdue their right wing. They both got it abysmally wrong, demonstrating that they have no vision, no judgement and couldn't run a pissup in a brewery. It also demonstrated that they were prepared to exploit the voters ruthlessly towards their own self-interest. That's archetypal Toryism for you. Open your eyes and stop bleating about Labour. The electorate have shown the Tories that it doesn't like negativity about the other side. All that came from Theresa May in this election. None of it from Corbyn, who ran a positive campaign based on a sound, costed manifesto.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 10:31 AM

She has earned disapproval.
Any party would consider changing leader after such a blunder.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 10:24 AM

You've seen nothing yet, Keith. The right-wing backbench Tory knives are being sharpened as we type. Keep your back to the wall at all times, Theresa!

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 10:22 AM

Your "winners" are in disarray

Labour has been in disarray and riven with internal disputes for some time.
Is it all smoothed over now?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 10:20 AM

No-one has blocked the referendum result. What are you on about? Would you like to see free speech curtailed, is that it?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 10:18 AM

Well let's see, shall we? Your "winners" are in disarray. They have a totally discredited leader who's not fit to enter the brexit negotiations and there's no-one to step into the breach. They have had to make a pact with a detestable bunch of bigots. Their hard-brexit plans are in shreds. Some "winners."

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 10:15 AM

The people who have destabilised the country are the "remoaners" who refused point blank to accept the democratic decision of the electorate of the United Kingdom to leave the European Union.

Brexit is still on track and after last night the Conservatives now find themselves allied with the DUP the larger of the two political parties in Northern Ireland who campaigned for Brexit with the caveat that they do not want to see a "hard border" separate Northern Ireland from the Republic of Ireland. Now then Shaw if they can't tell you what is required then nobody can and the subject of the "Irish border" is one of the first subjects up for discussion according to the EU.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 10:00 AM

The Tories "won," did they, Keith? Well they are in a far worse position than they were two days ago. They are hobbled. And, twice in a year, via stupid decisions to go to the country in their own interests and no-one else's, they have dumped on this country.

I agree with all that, and have already acknowledged that Corbyn ran a better campaign with a better manifesto.

The winner of an election is the one with the most seats, and usually the biggest vote share.
The Tories had both. They won.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 08:30 AM

Theresa May is guilty of making severe misjudgements and has destabilised this country. There are big decisions ahead calling for good judgement and she has shown a massive deficiency in that regard. That's what this vote reflects. What you are doing is DEflecting.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 07:45 AM

Don't think anybody "won", which when all said and done is rather unique as far as elections go. The fact still remains that the Conservatives have the largest number of seats in the House of Commons and it will be Theresa May who will be asked to form a government - NOT Jeremy Corbyn.

I dare say that a deal will be cobbled together with the DUP to keep the cart on the track and because SF do not sit in the Commons means that the results in Northern Ireland work to the Conservatives advantage.

Nicola Sturgeon was the leader who looked shell shocked, from 56 seats she lost 21 of them - 12 of those to Tories. Two massive scalps taken with Angus Robertson and Alex Salmond. When they get back to the day job the SNP will have to put their Indyref2 on the back burner and get down to doing what they get paid for and should have been doing since 2007 - governing Scotland.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 06:27 AM

The Tories "won," did they, Keith? Well they are in a far worse position than they were two days ago. They are hobbled. And, twice in a year, via stupid decisions to go to the country in their own interests and no-one else's, they have dumped on this country. You call that "winning?"

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: DMcG
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 04:18 AM

Numerically but not politically, Keith. There is already talk of calling another election. That"s not a win. The Tories are so weakened they will have to have their own little coalition of chaos. That is not a win.

The media threw everything they had at Corbyn including thirteen pages of charges he loves terrorists and he emerged stronger because enough people realised how vacuous it was. They have used up their entire ammunition and will have nothing for next time. That is a win.

But enjoy having the highest number of seats. They are occupied by a divided and vengeful party.

Make the most of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 04:14 AM

I did not mention anything about the Tories winning or losing. Did you not read my post?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 04:07 AM

No.
Corbyn has achieved a swing towards Labour, largely by a 10 billion bribe to middle class students.
May has achieved a swing away from the Tories through ineptitude.
The Tories still won.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 03:37 AM

I have a message

To those who have spent months trying to destroy Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party

To those who support the smear tactics of the gutter press

To those who believe that Nigel Farage is a man of integrity where Jeremy Corbyn is not

To those who want Scottish independence but voted Tory

It is a simple message and, I must admit, it is not my own. It may be trite and childish but the temptation is too great.

You lose

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Jun 17 - 02:11 AM

Gnome, little lap-dog Raggy's intervention cannot even stay on script. Perhaps that is because he isn't exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer:

"I've heard that rumour about KAOH here in Ireland"

I take it that by referring to KAOH he means Keith A of Hertford then of course he is lying - You weren't f**kin' stupid enough to specifically name him specifically in your original post where you "introduced" your "rumour".

If Raggy doesn't get what I am on about perhaps you could explain it to him.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 03:22 PM

I'm sure I called Teribus Keith's attack dog some months back. Can't be arsed to find it so I am sure we will be told I am lying but it makes me wonder just who is capable of original thought

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 02:39 PM

Raggytash - 08 Jun 17 - 11:13 AM

Ah the faithful little lap-dog comes trotting along wagging his tail.

What's the matter Raggy are you totally incapable of independent thought?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 01:15 PM

Did you know that shares in Premier Foods, owners of the Bird's Custard brand, went up from 40p to 41.5p around midday today? Funny that. Wonder if the are expecting a boost in sales?

:D tG

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 11:50 AM

Hmm

I am in Ireland at present. That is truth.

I first heard the rumour here. That is truth.

I first heard the rumour on a website. That is truth.

So professor which bit am I lying about as you claim.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 11:44 AM

You remind us that you are a liar too Rag.

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 11:13 AM

I've heard that rumour about KAOH here in Ireland, it must be quite widespread and seeing as it's been published on the internet can I presume it is true?

Subject: RE: BS: Uk Labour Party discussion II
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jun 17 - 11:08 AM

Ah Shaw so I now know of two rumours that have no substance, and nothing alters the fact that you are still a proven liar.

Nothing "smoke and mirrors" about what the press have been saying about Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott - I see that you and the Gnome are keeping well away from that topic.