Rjan:
Winseer:
Stop pretending that we lose all our worker’s rights if we leave the EU.If your attitudes are representative of the Tories, then workers have everything to fear from re-electing the Tories to leave the EU.
You post nothing but pages of tirades against the “workshy” because they refuse to work under sweatshop conditions for a pittance, yet presumably as a Tory you’d also be explaining to us that the very reason the pay is low, and must remain low, is because there is already a surfeit of workers able and willing to do those roles, so there isn’t a need for any additional workers of that sort (if there was, then pay would increase). Even among our own number - if less drivers took 50+ hour weeks for <£10ph jobs - we might see some driving-up of wages… As it stands though, wages can only rise on agency - the kind of employment that “nervous full timers” or “non-gamblers” - avoid. Don’t confuse “being workshy” with “turning down low paid jobs”. I don’t think there’s ANYONE among us who’d “choose to be on the dole outright” rather than take a low-paid full time job.
It’s one thing expecting a man to do a fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay. If you want him to labour casually on a farm then you’ve got to be prepared to pay him generously - it’s always been the case that men employed in heavy outdoor labour are paid relatively well for it, and casual workers have to be paid more in hourly terms than someone with a steady wage and job security.
It’s another thing entirely to be demanding he work for a pittance then complaining that he refuses. That’s why workers pay for social security, so that they don’t face bosses who demand they slave or die, and they don’t face ruinous competition from those whose heads will otherwise be underwater. Same reason why they pay into strike funds and moderate their financial obligations, so that they aren’t bent over the barrel when they have to strike or are locked out.
And that’s why the Tories keep importing more migrants and they keep attacking social security, because they want your wages, the wages of the man who works, down.
That’s the purpose of remaining in the EU. “To drive down wages, thus helping big businesses, with red tape making the overheads of being a small business - harder to compete with the big boys” It is fair to say that Tory Remainers are exactly the kind of Tory you’ve described there.
What excuse do we give to Labour and Libdem Remainers then? - They would appear to be in favour of those same Tory notions about “Workers” and “Business” - would they not?
Swinson thinks that ZHC workers should be paid a 20% premium. We already ARE aren’t we?
Labour think that ZHC workers should be put on the dole… There’s no way that firms will offer people full time contracts UNLESS they are really CRAPPY ones, of the type that the workshy might be forced to take under the regime I had in mind, that you’ve resoundingly rejected… Thus, I argue that “abolishing ZHC” is one step TOWARDS the “Workhouse Sweatshop” that you and I both seem to be thinking of here…?It’s one thing to demand that every man does his bit and works to the extent that he can. But workers don’t control their employment. Bosses do. And even the bosses are subject to economic conditions that aren’t entirely under their control. If nobody is to be unemployed against their will, then you have to maintain manning levels and ensure that the available work is shared out equally, and that means exercising self-control over overtime. If you’re not doing that, then you have to accept that many will be unemployed against their will and then have to be carried.
I have nothing against any Labour drive to give everyone in this country a job. What we WON’T get however - is a right to a well-paid job, nor the right to “sit on the dole” out of laziness, rather than physical disability.
It wasn’t the Conservatives who flooded this country with cheap labour from abroad.
If it hadn’t been for Blair’s “open doors” policy in that regard, then we would also have workshy types being rather more compelled to take up farming jobs for instance, by this point.
Thus Labour are the cause of low wages, and Labour are the thing preventing the workshy being forced into jobs, whilst the Consevatives get slagged off for “austerity” which came from Labour’s overspending in the FIRST place.
It was the EU meanwhile who dictated to Osbourne (whom I never liked btw) that “you cannot cut benefits for the workshy - unless you cut benefits evenly, which includes for the disabled”. Like the complete idiot that Osbourne is though - he then does just that - to get showered with derision “because he’s cut benefits for the disabled”…
Once we leave the EU, any future government - will be free to double benefits for the disabled, and remove benefits from the workshy - as they see fit.
Call this a “Tory Hard Brexit” if you like, but it is hardly going to drive wages DOWN any further - is it? If anything, those workshy forced into work - might become a better presence on the shop floor to build better union power there eh? There’s enough workshy people working already in non-medical roles at the NHS for example… THEY seem to have “plenty of rights” that other workers in similar-earning sectors get eh?
All this critique at the Tories for “bringing back Victorian Values” - when Imperialists like myself would LOVE to see that!
We were masters of the world in Victorian times. ANYONE could rise up under their own efforts - to be someone.
Empires and Nations - are not built on the backs of the “needy” - they are built DESPITE the prescence of the Needy, and modern Leftists would argue that it is the “Nation” that is the problem - rather than the “Needy” whom even Christ said “will always be with us”.
BYE BYE ANNA.
)
