The new coalition government is concerned about all those people who receive benefits of various kinds every week when perhaps they are not really entitled to them.
We all know that sometimes things happen in our lives which results in our needing help to manage financially. Perhaps that is because we have lost our job and can no longer afford to support our family. Perhaps it is because we have become ill and unable to work until we are better. Maybe we are disabled and unable to work at all. There are lots of reasons and most of them are legitimate and the vast majority of claimants satisfy the rules to obtain the help they need.
However, there is apparently a group of people who have not worked for years and do nothing to find employment and as a result are a financial drain on society. I don’t wish to make judgements against anyone but I wonder if it is time that we become a little firmer on those who abuse the system and do not really try to find employment.
We have well over a million people legitimately receiving job seekers allowance. To receive that benefit each one has to be making an effort to find employment, and each fortnight they are required to show some evidence of their efforts if they wish to receive their jobseekers allowance.
I have to stress here that I am well aware of the issues about how difficult it is to get a job at the moment so I am not criticising anyone who is getting benefits.
Is it not about time that everyone who is unemployed, for whatever reason, should be required to contribute back in some small way.
For example, where I live there are miles of back alleys, strewn with rubbish, over grown with brambles and weeds and as a result a hazard to people who use them. Having spoken to the local council about this problem they told me that it was not their responsibility but that of the home owners on the estate. It appears that although these alleys are public rights of way, they are not the responsibility of the council to keep them safe and clear of rubbish.
A further issue is that on many of our estates and residential areas the level of graffiti seems to be on the increase again. This is an eyesore, devaluing the properties in the area, destroying community pride and needs addressing. Again local authorities do their best but because of limited funding there is only so much they can do.
Councils try and keep roads swept and grass areas cut but the quality of the finished work is never very good. My road is swept probably twice a year, I try and pick up litter off of the grassed areas but it soon reappears. The council would need an army of people to maintain these areas properly.
Pot holes are another issue! Condition of pavements yet another, and I could go on and on. There are probably hundreds of other areas and issues which do not get any real attention because funding is not available that could benefit from some help.
The point I am getting too is this.
Why not introduce regulations which requires all people claiming benefit, and who are able, to carry out (say) six hours of voluntary work for the local council on some of the issues described above. I’m sure that those who genuinely are unemployed would welcome the chance to contribute something back to society, to feel part of the community and enjoy the opportunity to work. Doing these tasks would improve our environment as they are not being done at the moment, and without anyone’s job being put at risk.
This may be extended to doing some voluntary work for local charities, play groups, schools or even commercial enterprises - as long as it does not take jobs away from others. A bonus might be that individuals are spotted as being good at what they are doing and might be a useful addition to the permanent workforce.
What do you think?
+
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
The War in Afghanistan – Is it Right?
Another four British soldiers have died as a result of our presence in Afghanistan, a total of 18 this month so far making a total since 2001 of 307. Once again this begs the question about the validity of us being involved in this so called terrorist war.
The argument proffered that we need to be there to eradicate the terrorists who are responsible for attacks against our people here in the UK is not as strong as it sounds.
The major reason why these groups of people are a threat to us - is that we are a threat to them!
Do they attack us because we threaten them?
If we pulled out and avoided any further conflict with these people - instead offering to meet and discuss with them what their grievances really are, perhaps the threat to us would be removed and we can help them resolve their issues with the rest of the world and their own people.
I know that everyone says that we cannot be pushed around by these people, we cannot and will not tolerate terrorism but perhaps we need to stop and think and way up the real costs of our actions.
When I was a child, I was always having my school cap taken and spent half my play time chasing after those who had taken it. This went on for months and became quite stressful. Eventually one of my teachers took me aside and said to me ‘Let them have it. Stop chasing them ... they will soon get fed up and go and irritate someone else!’
How true those words were. My cap was duly returned by one of the culprits and they quickly understood that I (and no one else) would pay them any attention to what they were doing. They eventually gave up.
Like all things in life there is a cost. So far there has been a huge financial cost to us being in Afghanistan, the loss of 307 lives, over 3,000 injured plus the huge amount of stress to both our soldiers and their families and friends. What is the maximum price we as a country are prepared to pay!
It would be easy to say that what we do is what we have to do. But there are hundreds of countries across the world that do not get involved and as a result are not really affected by these events. Of course it could be argued that if every country in the world put in say 1,000 troops then the problem could have been resolved years ago and the loss of life would be spread and long past.
But I suppose at the end of the day we are not called Great Britain for nothing! We have to get involved even if it is at a cost which we really cannot afford. I’m not against us trying to resolve the whole issue of terrorism and subjecting our people to threats, I just question the way we are going about it!
+
The argument proffered that we need to be there to eradicate the terrorists who are responsible for attacks against our people here in the UK is not as strong as it sounds.
The major reason why these groups of people are a threat to us - is that we are a threat to them!
Do they attack us because we threaten them?
If we pulled out and avoided any further conflict with these people - instead offering to meet and discuss with them what their grievances really are, perhaps the threat to us would be removed and we can help them resolve their issues with the rest of the world and their own people.
I know that everyone says that we cannot be pushed around by these people, we cannot and will not tolerate terrorism but perhaps we need to stop and think and way up the real costs of our actions.
When I was a child, I was always having my school cap taken and spent half my play time chasing after those who had taken it. This went on for months and became quite stressful. Eventually one of my teachers took me aside and said to me ‘Let them have it. Stop chasing them ... they will soon get fed up and go and irritate someone else!’
How true those words were. My cap was duly returned by one of the culprits and they quickly understood that I (and no one else) would pay them any attention to what they were doing. They eventually gave up.
Like all things in life there is a cost. So far there has been a huge financial cost to us being in Afghanistan, the loss of 307 lives, over 3,000 injured plus the huge amount of stress to both our soldiers and their families and friends. What is the maximum price we as a country are prepared to pay!
It would be easy to say that what we do is what we have to do. But there are hundreds of countries across the world that do not get involved and as a result are not really affected by these events. Of course it could be argued that if every country in the world put in say 1,000 troops then the problem could have been resolved years ago and the loss of life would be spread and long past.
But I suppose at the end of the day we are not called Great Britain for nothing! We have to get involved even if it is at a cost which we really cannot afford. I’m not against us trying to resolve the whole issue of terrorism and subjecting our people to threats, I just question the way we are going about it!
+
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Retiring at 66, 67 or even 70 plus?
Over the last few days we have been hearing a lot about the proposed changes to the retirement age. For men that is likely to start going up from 2016 to 66 and then progressively until the age of 70 or even later.
The issue I have is that the idea is fine, as it does save the taxpayer a huge amount of money, but only if there is sufficient jobs available.
Currently the National Office of Statistics reports that 28.86 million people are in work. If we assume that the average person works from the age of 20 to 65, a total of 45 years, then one extra year represents a lengthening of the average working life by 2.22%.
Not much you might say, but that represents over 600,000 extra jobs required each year for each year the pensionable age is increased.
We already have 2.47 million people unemployed with 1.48 million on unemployment benefit looking for work. The number of people unemployed for more than twelve months increased by 85,000 over the last quarter to reach 772,000, the highest figure since the three months to April 1997.
It is reported that during the three months up until May 2010 there was a total of 492,000 vacancies. That is 5.2 unemployed people per vacancy.
If we introduce a further 600,000 jobs required by raising the retirement age, what will that achieve short of increasing the number on unemployment benefit by a huge amount. Of course the current benefit paid to the unemployed (£64.30) is a lot less than that paid as pension (£95.25) ... so the tax payer will save money (£30.95), which is around £1 billion per year.
My other concern is that if people retire at 66, 67 or later then there will be a number of years when very few people will retire and vacate their jobs. These vacated jobs make way for others to be promoted, effectively shuffling everyone one up the employment ladder, perhaps allowing them to earn a little more money, and save a little more for their non state (and state) pension.
This shuffling effect goes right down through the ranks and ages, making space at the bottom for new people. Those new people are our young people finishing school and university.
If this happens the number of unemployed at the younger end of the market will rise dramatically. These are the people who really need to get work and earn themselves a good living, as they have their whole lives ahead of them.
The issue appears to simply be that if we create additional working years (approx 600,000 for each year the pension age is raised) we need to create additional jobs to absorb those years. We are already around 2.5 million jobs short so this is just making the problem worse.
Pumping money into the state system to cover unemployment is short sighted. Surely what we need to do is create more jobs, probably between 3 and 5 million over the next five to ten years.
How?
So much of our manufacturing and services have gone overseas because labour is much cheaper and everyone is interested in reducing costs to a minimum.
Increasing taxes on a sliding scale on the profits of businesses who import goods that we could make ourselves would help.
Introduce import taxes on all imported goods that could be made in the UK. That’s not on materials, services or products that we cannot make, but on those than we can.
Reduce the cost of production in the UK by cutting bureaucracy, cutting manufacturing costs, business rates and encouraging manufacturing all in areas again.
Using some of that money saved to encourage manufacturing in the UK. After all we are a leading nation when it comes to science and technology, once we were the worlds’ leading industrialised nation until we threw it all away in favour of the service industries such as banking! Sorry!
Surely it can’t be that hard to reduce the difference in cost between manufacturing here in the UK and that of some cheaper nation considering transportation and environmental costs, possible tax advantages and incentives to UK manufacturers.
The new government is full of ideas, but is it really looking at the long term affect of what it plans to do.
Based upon material from Office for National Statistics - Published on 16 June 2010 at 9:30 am
The issue I have is that the idea is fine, as it does save the taxpayer a huge amount of money, but only if there is sufficient jobs available.
Currently the National Office of Statistics reports that 28.86 million people are in work. If we assume that the average person works from the age of 20 to 65, a total of 45 years, then one extra year represents a lengthening of the average working life by 2.22%.
Not much you might say, but that represents over 600,000 extra jobs required each year for each year the pensionable age is increased.
We already have 2.47 million people unemployed with 1.48 million on unemployment benefit looking for work. The number of people unemployed for more than twelve months increased by 85,000 over the last quarter to reach 772,000, the highest figure since the three months to April 1997.
It is reported that during the three months up until May 2010 there was a total of 492,000 vacancies. That is 5.2 unemployed people per vacancy.
If we introduce a further 600,000 jobs required by raising the retirement age, what will that achieve short of increasing the number on unemployment benefit by a huge amount. Of course the current benefit paid to the unemployed (£64.30) is a lot less than that paid as pension (£95.25) ... so the tax payer will save money (£30.95), which is around £1 billion per year.
My other concern is that if people retire at 66, 67 or later then there will be a number of years when very few people will retire and vacate their jobs. These vacated jobs make way for others to be promoted, effectively shuffling everyone one up the employment ladder, perhaps allowing them to earn a little more money, and save a little more for their non state (and state) pension.
This shuffling effect goes right down through the ranks and ages, making space at the bottom for new people. Those new people are our young people finishing school and university.
If this happens the number of unemployed at the younger end of the market will rise dramatically. These are the people who really need to get work and earn themselves a good living, as they have their whole lives ahead of them.
The issue appears to simply be that if we create additional working years (approx 600,000 for each year the pension age is raised) we need to create additional jobs to absorb those years. We are already around 2.5 million jobs short so this is just making the problem worse.
Pumping money into the state system to cover unemployment is short sighted. Surely what we need to do is create more jobs, probably between 3 and 5 million over the next five to ten years.
How?
So much of our manufacturing and services have gone overseas because labour is much cheaper and everyone is interested in reducing costs to a minimum.
Increasing taxes on a sliding scale on the profits of businesses who import goods that we could make ourselves would help.
Introduce import taxes on all imported goods that could be made in the UK. That’s not on materials, services or products that we cannot make, but on those than we can.
Reduce the cost of production in the UK by cutting bureaucracy, cutting manufacturing costs, business rates and encouraging manufacturing all in areas again.
Using some of that money saved to encourage manufacturing in the UK. After all we are a leading nation when it comes to science and technology, once we were the worlds’ leading industrialised nation until we threw it all away in favour of the service industries such as banking! Sorry!
Surely it can’t be that hard to reduce the difference in cost between manufacturing here in the UK and that of some cheaper nation considering transportation and environmental costs, possible tax advantages and incentives to UK manufacturers.
The new government is full of ideas, but is it really looking at the long term affect of what it plans to do.
Based upon material from Office for National Statistics - Published on 16 June 2010 at 9:30 am
Monday, June 14, 2010
No! Not another Twitter, FaceBook or Google!
Who could have possible imagined that Twitter or FaceBook would ever end up as huge multi million pound businesses. But they did - along with worlds number one search engine Google.
But what is interesting about Twitter is that most people join it, and use it, but they don’t really understand what the advantages are or how to obtain them.
Do You?
These strange business models are hugely successful - earning massive incomes from advertising and sponsorship. Income level that most companies just dream about and high profit margins to boot!
When I think about Twitter or FaceBook (Yes, I am a member of both), I really don’t understand why so many people think being a member is a good idea. After all who really takes much notice of Tweets, or indeed what is being posted on FaceBook. Of course when you are an active member of either, you may act differently and get lots of value.
If we go back before Twitter and imagine the scene as the founders Evan Williams and Biz Stone sat around their kitchen table discussing what they were planning to do. They planned to allow people to collect connections with other people and then send those people short messages telling them what the sender was doing!
Now - really who is going to be interested in that? Well, over 50 million tweets are sent each day! So someone is interested. It will die out quickly …
Well four years have passed and it is still growing daily.
These sites are launched by their founders to provide a service to its members. But of course the real reason is the financial gain that the business makes as it grows. This is based upon billions of advertising images, each shown and paid for, either when displayed or when clicked upon. Those billions of images all add up and return huge revenues to the business.
Of course advertisers that use these facilities expect them to produce results in the form of sales of their products or services. If this is not forthcoming then they will stop using the service and eventually the platform will lose it profitability and cause a real headache to its owners. Advertisers only want people who are potential customers to see and click on their ads.
What will be next?
Well if we ask the question as to why people click on these ads and follow the links to purchase products we will find that some of it is purely impulsive, but the majority is because the ad relates closely to the content.
Advertising in conventional magazine has always worked really well. But a business that manufactures valves for oil leaks would be foolish to advertise in a teenage magazine! Likewise if you have an interest in diving and read a diving magazine each week, you are likely to find that there are a huge number of advertisements that are about diving!
How long will it be before someone comes up with a new online concept that allows individuals to only see advertisements on subjects or interests that they have elected? No spam! No emails! No wasted time?
Guess what … they have already!
+
But what is interesting about Twitter is that most people join it, and use it, but they don’t really understand what the advantages are or how to obtain them.
Do You?
These strange business models are hugely successful - earning massive incomes from advertising and sponsorship. Income level that most companies just dream about and high profit margins to boot!
When I think about Twitter or FaceBook (Yes, I am a member of both), I really don’t understand why so many people think being a member is a good idea. After all who really takes much notice of Tweets, or indeed what is being posted on FaceBook. Of course when you are an active member of either, you may act differently and get lots of value.
If we go back before Twitter and imagine the scene as the founders Evan Williams and Biz Stone sat around their kitchen table discussing what they were planning to do. They planned to allow people to collect connections with other people and then send those people short messages telling them what the sender was doing!
Now - really who is going to be interested in that? Well, over 50 million tweets are sent each day! So someone is interested. It will die out quickly …
Well four years have passed and it is still growing daily.
These sites are launched by their founders to provide a service to its members. But of course the real reason is the financial gain that the business makes as it grows. This is based upon billions of advertising images, each shown and paid for, either when displayed or when clicked upon. Those billions of images all add up and return huge revenues to the business.
Of course advertisers that use these facilities expect them to produce results in the form of sales of their products or services. If this is not forthcoming then they will stop using the service and eventually the platform will lose it profitability and cause a real headache to its owners. Advertisers only want people who are potential customers to see and click on their ads.
What will be next?
Well if we ask the question as to why people click on these ads and follow the links to purchase products we will find that some of it is purely impulsive, but the majority is because the ad relates closely to the content.
Advertising in conventional magazine has always worked really well. But a business that manufactures valves for oil leaks would be foolish to advertise in a teenage magazine! Likewise if you have an interest in diving and read a diving magazine each week, you are likely to find that there are a huge number of advertisements that are about diving!
How long will it be before someone comes up with a new online concept that allows individuals to only see advertisements on subjects or interests that they have elected? No spam! No emails! No wasted time?
Guess what … they have already!
+
Friday, June 11, 2010
Are We Killing Our Young Peoples Futures?
We have heard so much about the ‘ring-fencing’ of education during the recent election campaign here in the UK that I started to ask myself the question - Why? After all, all our children are getting an education at the moment and by ‘ring-fencing’ education surely all we are doing is allowing any waste to continue.
Questions really do need to be asked about how the education system works and if it could be done in a better way or indeed if it needs to be changed as a matter of urgency.
I’d like to look at a number of areas, but today I want to focus on just one. That is the issue of how many of our young people should go to university.
Before I start, I want to assure you that I have no desire to stop anyone from doing anything they want to do or stand in their way when planning their futures. Indeed freedom of choice is actually one of my arguments.
Our education system is designed to encourage as many young people to go to university as is possible (Government target of 50%). Yet we find graduates working in the local supermarket unable to find work and taking jobs that those who did not go to university should perhaps be filling.
Why can they not get a job doing what they have trained to do? Well perhaps the answer is simply that there are not enough of these specialist jobs, and those who obtain the best results get the best jobs. Those who perhaps should not have gone to university or obtained a degree at a lower level or in a more general subject area are likely to find it harder to find employment.
You may not agree with me, but let us suppose that all young people could go to university and obtain a first class honour degree … after all if we can improve our education system as many say we can, then that might be possible. If everyone has a degree, then what value is having a degree going to be? We could of course simply introduce a ‘super-degree’ so that those with the very best results stand out.
Although this concept is only fictional the truth is it is also impractical and would be fatal for our economy. The dreams that the last government created when they instigated plans for every child to have access to university with 50% achieving that dream seems fine on paper. The real problem is that it has set a precedent for the future. Today’s new parents now expect their children to go to university as a matter of course. Anything else is not acceptable. The focus is on achieving that dream of everyone having a degree, which then might be worthless.
Sadly, young people who do not do well at school often feel that they are second class citizens and that no one really cares about them! This is wrong, everyone is part of our society.
So what is wrong you may ask?
Who is going to build our homes, check our central heating system or repair our cars? These skilled jobs and many others are absolutely vital and need young people to be trained, perhaps using old fashioned apprenticeships, moving to work in these critical areas. Sadly young people see these types of skilled jobs as ‘second-class’ and strive to go to university. It is time to change that image and make apprenticeships as important as university education.
Whether we like it or not, we need highly skilled people, educated to the highest levels. We also need technically skilled people to do all those tasks that individuals cannot do. Finally we also need those semi-skilled and unskilled people who carry out the millions of low paid jobs in our retail, hotel and caring industries.
No! I’m not getting into a discussion about how much these essential workers get paid! Personally I think it is disgusting that carers and checkout operators get paid so badly.
Not everyone is bright enough to be a doctor or engineer – and we don’t need millions. Not everyone is clever enough to be a plumber or a motor mechanic – and we don’t need that many anyway. Not everyone is cut out to be a supermarket checkout operator or a home carer. But all these jobs are essential and important, and every human being should feel worthy of what they do.
I’ve worked as a company director, as a software developer, as a baker and even a fishmonger in a supermarket. I’m sure there are other things that I will do as well. Whatever the job I do – it does not make me a different person. I might earn £100 per hour in one job, and only £5.85 in another … but I am still the same person.
Crucially whatever job we do, someone has to do it, because it is essential. We, as a nation need to take the stigma out of education and recognise that we need people of all skills and abilities.
+
Questions really do need to be asked about how the education system works and if it could be done in a better way or indeed if it needs to be changed as a matter of urgency.
I’d like to look at a number of areas, but today I want to focus on just one. That is the issue of how many of our young people should go to university.
Before I start, I want to assure you that I have no desire to stop anyone from doing anything they want to do or stand in their way when planning their futures. Indeed freedom of choice is actually one of my arguments.
Our education system is designed to encourage as many young people to go to university as is possible (Government target of 50%). Yet we find graduates working in the local supermarket unable to find work and taking jobs that those who did not go to university should perhaps be filling.
Why can they not get a job doing what they have trained to do? Well perhaps the answer is simply that there are not enough of these specialist jobs, and those who obtain the best results get the best jobs. Those who perhaps should not have gone to university or obtained a degree at a lower level or in a more general subject area are likely to find it harder to find employment.
You may not agree with me, but let us suppose that all young people could go to university and obtain a first class honour degree … after all if we can improve our education system as many say we can, then that might be possible. If everyone has a degree, then what value is having a degree going to be? We could of course simply introduce a ‘super-degree’ so that those with the very best results stand out.
Although this concept is only fictional the truth is it is also impractical and would be fatal for our economy. The dreams that the last government created when they instigated plans for every child to have access to university with 50% achieving that dream seems fine on paper. The real problem is that it has set a precedent for the future. Today’s new parents now expect their children to go to university as a matter of course. Anything else is not acceptable. The focus is on achieving that dream of everyone having a degree, which then might be worthless.
Sadly, young people who do not do well at school often feel that they are second class citizens and that no one really cares about them! This is wrong, everyone is part of our society.
So what is wrong you may ask?
Who is going to build our homes, check our central heating system or repair our cars? These skilled jobs and many others are absolutely vital and need young people to be trained, perhaps using old fashioned apprenticeships, moving to work in these critical areas. Sadly young people see these types of skilled jobs as ‘second-class’ and strive to go to university. It is time to change that image and make apprenticeships as important as university education.
Whether we like it or not, we need highly skilled people, educated to the highest levels. We also need technically skilled people to do all those tasks that individuals cannot do. Finally we also need those semi-skilled and unskilled people who carry out the millions of low paid jobs in our retail, hotel and caring industries.
No! I’m not getting into a discussion about how much these essential workers get paid! Personally I think it is disgusting that carers and checkout operators get paid so badly.
Not everyone is bright enough to be a doctor or engineer – and we don’t need millions. Not everyone is clever enough to be a plumber or a motor mechanic – and we don’t need that many anyway. Not everyone is cut out to be a supermarket checkout operator or a home carer. But all these jobs are essential and important, and every human being should feel worthy of what they do.
I’ve worked as a company director, as a software developer, as a baker and even a fishmonger in a supermarket. I’m sure there are other things that I will do as well. Whatever the job I do – it does not make me a different person. I might earn £100 per hour in one job, and only £5.85 in another … but I am still the same person.
Crucially whatever job we do, someone has to do it, because it is essential. We, as a nation need to take the stigma out of education and recognise that we need people of all skills and abilities.
+
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Getting Work at 60 Plus – Depressing or What?
My current job as a Data Manager (Maternity Cover) at the well known independent King Edward VI School in Southampton finishes at the end of this term in early July. In preparation for that event I have been searching for a new position.
Now I know that times are tough and that jobs are difficult to get whatever your age, but that is not really my concern. I want to work and even the government is trying to encourage people to work past 65 so that the huge cost of providing state pensions is reduced. I for one have no problem with that idea, after all … if I can continue working at something that I enjoy and at the same time continue to bring an income into the home, then why not?
Of course, if I had a nice fat private pension then I could stop working and enjoy myself even more. Sadly that is not so in my case and many others are also discovering that their pensions are not quite as ‘fat’ as they had hoped!
Yes, I will have a small pension plus the state pension at 65, but that amounts to barely enough to exist on. What is worse … I will have much more time on my hands with a lot less money to spend on filling those hours.
Now please do not shout at me, I’m not blaming anyone other than myself. My point is that I really do want to keep on working … but there is just nothing available and where there is, there are plenty of younger and more paper qualified people than me. Many advertised jobs I could do easily - but they demand a degree or some other qualification, a number of years experience, are only part time or pay unfair low wages.
Experience seems not to count for much anymore.
I have a wealth of business experience, business development, IT and people skills. I’ve even run my own businesses, some with a good level of success and others … well not so good perhaps!
Once upon a time I was top of my profession as a software developer. Today that technology has long gone and the new technologies are very complex and almost exclusively done by the younger generation who received quality teaching and guidance in their chosen areas. I learnt my skills by reading the software manufacture’s manuals … there were no training courses as software development was so very new back then.
The point is this - as my life moved forward my work became more generalised. I moved from being a software developer to being a manager, then to being a company director. The roles became much wider and less specialised, the earnings rose exponentially as the responsibilities increased. This is a quite normal pattern of things for people who have been working during the last 30 to 40 years or so.
Of course if you do these things within some large corporate business then you are likely to end up nearer the top with a great income and an amazing pension plan. But, if like so many of us you do this yourself, running a small business, struggling from one month to the next then it is often very different. Yes we have our freedom; we have the right to make our own decisions but often we operate within our own limited knowledge and make the wrong decisions as a result.
Today’s young people are much more likely to be professionally trained and keep working with the skill sets they were trained in and continued to develop over the years. Companies are bigger, structures much stronger and individual careers planned and developed to a much higher degree.
I’m not scared of taking any job that I can do, even if it only pays the minimum wage, but what does that do to my self esteem. What happened to all those dreams of success … those desires that we all secretly have, to own that special car and country home, or having our own business and financial independence.
As we get older we also have the issues of declining health, the added restrictions that age brings, the powerlessness to carry out heavy work, failing eye sight and hearing and the general decline of our bodies.
These frustrations are not made any easier when we are also hounded by the inability to find work that we are able to do; we would enjoy doing and that pays a reasonable wage.
+
Now I know that times are tough and that jobs are difficult to get whatever your age, but that is not really my concern. I want to work and even the government is trying to encourage people to work past 65 so that the huge cost of providing state pensions is reduced. I for one have no problem with that idea, after all … if I can continue working at something that I enjoy and at the same time continue to bring an income into the home, then why not?
Of course, if I had a nice fat private pension then I could stop working and enjoy myself even more. Sadly that is not so in my case and many others are also discovering that their pensions are not quite as ‘fat’ as they had hoped!
Yes, I will have a small pension plus the state pension at 65, but that amounts to barely enough to exist on. What is worse … I will have much more time on my hands with a lot less money to spend on filling those hours.
Now please do not shout at me, I’m not blaming anyone other than myself. My point is that I really do want to keep on working … but there is just nothing available and where there is, there are plenty of younger and more paper qualified people than me. Many advertised jobs I could do easily - but they demand a degree or some other qualification, a number of years experience, are only part time or pay unfair low wages.
Experience seems not to count for much anymore.
I have a wealth of business experience, business development, IT and people skills. I’ve even run my own businesses, some with a good level of success and others … well not so good perhaps!
Once upon a time I was top of my profession as a software developer. Today that technology has long gone and the new technologies are very complex and almost exclusively done by the younger generation who received quality teaching and guidance in their chosen areas. I learnt my skills by reading the software manufacture’s manuals … there were no training courses as software development was so very new back then.
The point is this - as my life moved forward my work became more generalised. I moved from being a software developer to being a manager, then to being a company director. The roles became much wider and less specialised, the earnings rose exponentially as the responsibilities increased. This is a quite normal pattern of things for people who have been working during the last 30 to 40 years or so.
Of course if you do these things within some large corporate business then you are likely to end up nearer the top with a great income and an amazing pension plan. But, if like so many of us you do this yourself, running a small business, struggling from one month to the next then it is often very different. Yes we have our freedom; we have the right to make our own decisions but often we operate within our own limited knowledge and make the wrong decisions as a result.
Today’s young people are much more likely to be professionally trained and keep working with the skill sets they were trained in and continued to develop over the years. Companies are bigger, structures much stronger and individual careers planned and developed to a much higher degree.
I’m not scared of taking any job that I can do, even if it only pays the minimum wage, but what does that do to my self esteem. What happened to all those dreams of success … those desires that we all secretly have, to own that special car and country home, or having our own business and financial independence.
As we get older we also have the issues of declining health, the added restrictions that age brings, the powerlessness to carry out heavy work, failing eye sight and hearing and the general decline of our bodies.
These frustrations are not made any easier when we are also hounded by the inability to find work that we are able to do; we would enjoy doing and that pays a reasonable wage.
+
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
Cutting that Deficit
Yesterday we heard the new coalition government talking about the huge monumental debt problems that the country is experiencing and likely to do so for the next decade or so.
Cut! Cut! Cut!
This seems to be what is being said. For whatever reason, it appears that we have, as a country, overspent and over provided during the last decade to such an extent that we now have to pay the price of that action. A price that is going to hurt!
It reminds me of what so many of us have experienced over the years, that horrible credit card debt that most of us have incurred at some stage. Yes, we can be foolish and go on a shopping spree and load our cards with ever increasing debt attracting huge interest rates each month. But I’m not really talking about those purchases but about those that we have HAD to make because of circumstance beyond our control.
• Losing our job and having a family to feed.
• The washing machine breaks down and those clothes need to be washes.
• A relative dies and a funeral needs to be paid for.
• You, your wife and children really do need that holiday!
Yes we all have relied on our credit card when things have got tough. It is easier to take out the card rather than hand over the cash – and anyway we can pay it off over a period of time, can’t we?
But I wonder how many of us watch that balance getting bigger and bigger. Then we have to pay off the minimum amount each month which is getting bigger as well, leaving us with even less cash to play with. I’m sure most of us understand this cycle.
The problem is that the situation tends to get worse and worse, and we ignore it for as long as we can. Eventually we are faced with the problem of how to resolve the debt crisis and get back to some more normal footing. We set up a plan to pay back a larger amount each month. The interest keeps on getting added! The amount of free cash keeps getting lower!
Whether we like it or not, eventually we have to cut back everywhere until the debt becomes more manageable. No holidays. No new car. No shopping sprees. No night’s out. No expensive Christmas gifts. Everything we spend, even the weekly shopping has to be trimmed and reduced.
Yes it hurts, but once it is done and the debt has gone, we suddenly find that it was all worth it, and that we have much more freedom to do as we please. We are not paying interest anymore so we have more money to spend on ourselves. We have also learnt a big lesson!
The national debt the UK has is exactly the same. We got here by irrational spending for whatever reason. Politicians make promised to get elected then have to keep them if they want to get elected next time. Whatever the reason, it has happened!
The system is such that no one appears to be controlling what is spent. That is a different issue which hopefully will be dealt with by the current government.
So, like the credit card problems we have faced, the country needs to do the same. It is all very well to say that education and the NHS should be ‘ring-fenced’ but why? We have over spent in all these areas as well. Yes I know that education could perhaps do with more money … I could do with a new car! I can’t afford it, nor can the country.
Our national debt of over £800,000,000,000 (800 billion) attracts interest at something over £65,000,000,000 (65 billion) every year and that is going to rise year upon year if we do not do something about it. We can run our education system for that!
No! If we need to cut government spending by 10% (say) to bring the situation under control then every area, irrespective of where, should have its budget cut by 10%. Yes this is going to be hard, and there are probably some valid cases where this cannot be sustained. More people will become unemployed, benefits costs will rise and the current benefits for the unemployed are simply not high enough to live on.
A compromise will be required. Just like our credit card debt, something will have to go and others remain essential. Currently all children of school age have a place and receive a reasonable education … why spend more? We introduced targets and league tables in our schools. What is the matter with them? They cost a fortune in time and money to record and report, when the money should be spent on educating our young people.
Currently the NHS carried out thousands of operations that are not deemed essential … why can’t the patient contribute or better still wait? Again the target driven strategy of today and the paperwork in creates is just beyond belief. We need to cut it out, and focus on providing real health service just as most doctors and nurses want to do!
We live in a society that is ring fenced with things such as ‘Health & Safety’. Now I am not suggesting that we should do away with it, but it has got out of control. We as individuals need to start taking responsibility for what we do. If you think things are bad here … just spend a few days in Mumbai.
Perhaps higher taxes are the answer. I don’t support the argument that anyone who earns less than £10,000 should not pay any tax. We all live here, we should all contribute something, however little we earn. I think it is better to do that so we all understand the needs of the country. If necessary give those lower paid more financial support, but they should all contribute.
I could go on and on but I’m running out of passion and desire to change it!
Let’s get out of this situation, however hard it may be and vow never to go back here again. We are all responsible for our country and we should all take that responsibility seriously.
+
Cut! Cut! Cut!
This seems to be what is being said. For whatever reason, it appears that we have, as a country, overspent and over provided during the last decade to such an extent that we now have to pay the price of that action. A price that is going to hurt!
It reminds me of what so many of us have experienced over the years, that horrible credit card debt that most of us have incurred at some stage. Yes, we can be foolish and go on a shopping spree and load our cards with ever increasing debt attracting huge interest rates each month. But I’m not really talking about those purchases but about those that we have HAD to make because of circumstance beyond our control.
• Losing our job and having a family to feed.
• The washing machine breaks down and those clothes need to be washes.
• A relative dies and a funeral needs to be paid for.
• You, your wife and children really do need that holiday!
Yes we all have relied on our credit card when things have got tough. It is easier to take out the card rather than hand over the cash – and anyway we can pay it off over a period of time, can’t we?
But I wonder how many of us watch that balance getting bigger and bigger. Then we have to pay off the minimum amount each month which is getting bigger as well, leaving us with even less cash to play with. I’m sure most of us understand this cycle.
The problem is that the situation tends to get worse and worse, and we ignore it for as long as we can. Eventually we are faced with the problem of how to resolve the debt crisis and get back to some more normal footing. We set up a plan to pay back a larger amount each month. The interest keeps on getting added! The amount of free cash keeps getting lower!
Whether we like it or not, eventually we have to cut back everywhere until the debt becomes more manageable. No holidays. No new car. No shopping sprees. No night’s out. No expensive Christmas gifts. Everything we spend, even the weekly shopping has to be trimmed and reduced.
Yes it hurts, but once it is done and the debt has gone, we suddenly find that it was all worth it, and that we have much more freedom to do as we please. We are not paying interest anymore so we have more money to spend on ourselves. We have also learnt a big lesson!
The national debt the UK has is exactly the same. We got here by irrational spending for whatever reason. Politicians make promised to get elected then have to keep them if they want to get elected next time. Whatever the reason, it has happened!
The system is such that no one appears to be controlling what is spent. That is a different issue which hopefully will be dealt with by the current government.
So, like the credit card problems we have faced, the country needs to do the same. It is all very well to say that education and the NHS should be ‘ring-fenced’ but why? We have over spent in all these areas as well. Yes I know that education could perhaps do with more money … I could do with a new car! I can’t afford it, nor can the country.
Our national debt of over £800,000,000,000 (800 billion) attracts interest at something over £65,000,000,000 (65 billion) every year and that is going to rise year upon year if we do not do something about it. We can run our education system for that!
No! If we need to cut government spending by 10% (say) to bring the situation under control then every area, irrespective of where, should have its budget cut by 10%. Yes this is going to be hard, and there are probably some valid cases where this cannot be sustained. More people will become unemployed, benefits costs will rise and the current benefits for the unemployed are simply not high enough to live on.
A compromise will be required. Just like our credit card debt, something will have to go and others remain essential. Currently all children of school age have a place and receive a reasonable education … why spend more? We introduced targets and league tables in our schools. What is the matter with them? They cost a fortune in time and money to record and report, when the money should be spent on educating our young people.
Currently the NHS carried out thousands of operations that are not deemed essential … why can’t the patient contribute or better still wait? Again the target driven strategy of today and the paperwork in creates is just beyond belief. We need to cut it out, and focus on providing real health service just as most doctors and nurses want to do!
We live in a society that is ring fenced with things such as ‘Health & Safety’. Now I am not suggesting that we should do away with it, but it has got out of control. We as individuals need to start taking responsibility for what we do. If you think things are bad here … just spend a few days in Mumbai.
Perhaps higher taxes are the answer. I don’t support the argument that anyone who earns less than £10,000 should not pay any tax. We all live here, we should all contribute something, however little we earn. I think it is better to do that so we all understand the needs of the country. If necessary give those lower paid more financial support, but they should all contribute.
I could go on and on but I’m running out of passion and desire to change it!
Let’s get out of this situation, however hard it may be and vow never to go back here again. We are all responsible for our country and we should all take that responsibility seriously.
+
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
Employing 18 to 25 year olds - Is it fair?
The previous Government decided that there were to many young people unemployed and as a result they would introduce a scheme to effectively guarantee 18 to 25 year olds who had been out of work for 12 months a job.
The scheme provides upto £6,500 per person given a job. That is equivalent of just over £3 per hour for a full time worker. If you owned a supermarket paying £6 per hour, would you be tempted to take on some of these young people and save £3 per hour in employment cost? With wages being one of the highest costs to a supermarket, will we see profits double for £3 billion to £6 billion? :)
My concern is that if any government scheme or indeed any other initiative that is introduced that subsidises the cost of employing someone (whatever their age) results in employers taking on people from that age group.
Great you might say, that is the objective!
Sadly the fact is simply this … there is a limited amount of work to be done, and therefore a limited number of people are required to carry out that work. If an employer can get someone to meet some of their employment costs they will do so … replacing someone else who they cannot get help with, with someone who they can.
If there is say, 25 million jobs and 30 million people wanting to work, then however you look at it, 5 million won’t be working. What worries me is if 170,000 jobs are going to go to younger people, does that mean that 170,000 older people will lose theirs?
New initiatives should focus on CREATING NEW jobs. Perhaps one approach would be to restrict the amount of goods that are imported, and get back into manufacturing again. Long term being a provider of essentially ’service’ jobs just will not work.
+
The scheme provides upto £6,500 per person given a job. That is equivalent of just over £3 per hour for a full time worker. If you owned a supermarket paying £6 per hour, would you be tempted to take on some of these young people and save £3 per hour in employment cost? With wages being one of the highest costs to a supermarket, will we see profits double for £3 billion to £6 billion? :)
My concern is that if any government scheme or indeed any other initiative that is introduced that subsidises the cost of employing someone (whatever their age) results in employers taking on people from that age group.
Great you might say, that is the objective!
Sadly the fact is simply this … there is a limited amount of work to be done, and therefore a limited number of people are required to carry out that work. If an employer can get someone to meet some of their employment costs they will do so … replacing someone else who they cannot get help with, with someone who they can.
If there is say, 25 million jobs and 30 million people wanting to work, then however you look at it, 5 million won’t be working. What worries me is if 170,000 jobs are going to go to younger people, does that mean that 170,000 older people will lose theirs?
New initiatives should focus on CREATING NEW jobs. Perhaps one approach would be to restrict the amount of goods that are imported, and get back into manufacturing again. Long term being a provider of essentially ’service’ jobs just will not work.
+
Monday, June 07, 2010
Get 3 Free Issues of Mike Filsaime's Newsletter
Hey guys,
It's true!
You can get 3 FREE copies of Mike Filsaime's MDC Monthly.
Mike Filsaime's Newsletter Click Here
Mike Filsaime is using a new way to spread the word.
He is not asking for any tell a friend of even an OPT-IN
He is experimenting with a new type of Social Viral Marketing that appears to get him backlinks to his site just for sharing the word.
Mike Filsaime's Newsletter Click Here
This seems to be the truest form of Viral marketing I have seen yet. It uses social media and blogs to get the "news" out about something rather than
Tell-A-Friends etc.
But the main thing I want to share with you is that you can get 3 Kick-Butt copies of his latest newsletter and you don't have to pay $89.00 to get it.
Just click the link below and it is yours Free!
Mike Filsaime's Newsletter Click Here
P.S. - Even if you THINK you are not interested in his newsletters (Which are pretty good from what I see) I suggest you give it a shot for 2 reasons. 1- You may be surprised at the quality. And 2- Wait until you see how he is trying this new viral marketing.
It's true!
You can get 3 FREE copies of Mike Filsaime's MDC Monthly.
Mike Filsaime's Newsletter Click Here
Mike Filsaime is using a new way to spread the word.
He is not asking for any tell a friend of even an OPT-IN
He is experimenting with a new type of Social Viral Marketing that appears to get him backlinks to his site just for sharing the word.
Mike Filsaime's Newsletter Click Here
This seems to be the truest form of Viral marketing I have seen yet. It uses social media and blogs to get the "news" out about something rather than
Tell-A-Friends etc.
But the main thing I want to share with you is that you can get 3 Kick-Butt copies of his latest newsletter and you don't have to pay $89.00 to get it.
Just click the link below and it is yours Free!
Mike Filsaime's Newsletter Click Here
P.S. - Even if you THINK you are not interested in his newsletters (Which are pretty good from what I see) I suggest you give it a shot for 2 reasons. 1- You may be surprised at the quality. And 2- Wait until you see how he is trying this new viral marketing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)