.... it's about jobs stupid

[ahinton]

If what ahinton says turns out to be true - and it could well be - then we will be back to the situation of a "real economy", in which raw materials are transformed into use values by the application of human labour, measured by the amount of socially necessary time put in, and realised by payment, in kind or in some new monetary form. If any form of machinery and all its technological adjuncts are still useable, this will make the job faster than if all have to resort to basic hand implements. The game will be: who will take charge of guarding any surplus product and how will this be determined and by whom? and who will ensure that whoever is put or self-elected in charge does not hoard said surplus, whether in product or monetary form, does not form an overlording class of likemindeds and like self-priviledgeds to play poker with the spoils of others' labour, while proclaiming themselves indispensable to "the creation of wealth", and does not surround themselves with an apparatus for self-perpetuation - as has always happened hitherto, whether in primitive agricultural, slave-owning, feudal, capitalist, or under so-called "socialist" or "communist" systems.

It may well not turn out to be true but, if it does, I'm by no means convinced that we'll thereby be "back" to any situation at all, let alone that which you describe. If there's no money to fund anything - materials, labour or anything else - then how will anything be guaranteed to be made to work, let alone for anyone's benefit? There will always be the speculators, of course and the worse the situation the more active they'll be, but i suspect that, if it all gets sufficiently parlous, even they'll end up having a hard time of it and, if that pertains, what price anything for the rest of us? "Surplus" product? In such circumstances, we'd be lucky to have any "product" at all; any economic activity of any kind will continue to be dogged bythe fact that everyone who indulges in it is as indebted to everyone else as are those who don't do so. As I've said - and I'll say it again - it may not come to this but, if it does, getting out of it, even slightly, might take centuries if it is at all possible.

[handsomefortune]

'the report' (on r4)

What will be the fate of the Government's Work Programme?

Billed as "the most ambitious programme of back to work support this country has ever seen", just three months since its launch in June serious questions have been raised about the scheme's viability.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b014ggh3

ipod only, by the looks.

[handsomefortune]

followed by 'in business' with peter day on r4

about morrisons' 'apprenticeships'.

"With big increases looming in the cost of going to university, the number of people choosing apprenticeships is rising fast. Peter Day finds what modern apprenticeship means to apprentices and the companies who employ them."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b014ggh5

[Serial_Apologist]

Had I been more practical, I would have done an apprenticeship in motor mechanics or electronics. If things keep going in the direction they are, and people have diminishing spending power, the role of the maintenance engineer/repair person will become increasingly valued. Hopefully standards will rise, and these occupations regarded less as "cowboy outfits". The country will come to resemble Cuba, with its patch 'n' mend ethos.

Perhaps out of all this will come products which are made to last instead of being produced on the (?) misnamed principle of "planned obsolescence".

[handsomefortune]

yes, (real) apprenticeships are a great idea, but i'm afraid car maintenance wasn't mentioned serial apologist.

the programme was about apprenticeships in retail ....in the main. as peter day commented, 'what? training in how to stack shelves'?

it was another example of private enterprise merger with education/training, in the past provided separately. both programmes (rightly) questioned the value of inhouse accreditation, training and support.

'in business' follows similar concerns and alarm bells about the same merger being unsuccessful regarding the recent 'developments' of private enterprise and employment of those receiving state benefits. in fact, it was about 'a4e' (that i posted links to upthread). i don't suppose 'a4e' imagined that their inhouse trainers would whistle blow, or quite as quickly. plus, it looks like torys don't want to give a4e any more money, and emma harris may have difficulty paying the mortgage on her collosal mansion and estate.

[handsomefortune]

from post #19 upthread -

emma's gaff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcrZP4FU9_w

apols - harrison - not 'harris' as posted.

[Serial_Apologist]

from post #19 upthread -

emma's gaff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcrZP4FU9_w

apols - harrison - not 'harris' as posted.

In my day, A was for orses.

Shelf stacking training seems somehow appropriate to a shelfish shociety.

Sorry, handsome - not trying to diss your posts!

[scottycelt]

yes, (real) apprenticeships are a great idea, but i'm afraid car maintenance wasn't mentioned serial apologist.

the programme was about apprenticeships in retail ....in the main. as peter day commented, 'what? training in how to stack shelves'?

Successful supermarket retailing is extremely demanding requiring both mental agility and almost sports-like physical fitness which is why managers (if not shop-floor staff) are generally young and mostly very well paid, though the hours are generally long.

British supermarkets are among the finest in the world, and not many trades and professions can boast that? Almost certainly we need them (supermarkets and shops) more than clapped-out BBC Radio Presenters.

Right, carry on ...

[Mahlerei]

Yes, scotty's right. My 19y/o son works for Waitrose and I'm impressed by the organisational/people skills he's picked up in the past 18 months. He works terribly long hours as well, and overtime when required. The JLP are good employers as well, offering a share in annual profits and a defined career path. It may not be a career for him, but right now - with so many of his friends unemployed - he could do a lot worse.

[handsomefortune]

> I'm impressed by the organisational/people skills he's picked up in the past 18 months. <

well obviously that's good news for your son mahlerei, as a positive start means an awful lot, especially in the longterm.

my own point is not about the importance of supermarkets, or employees, actually. it relates more to concerns about inhouse training, support, and accreditation, it (apparently) being substandard, and at the expense of the tax payer.

both 'in business' and 'the report' might be well worth a listen, if anyone is interested in a wider context.

'in business' also helps us understand how the current coalition feel able to boast of thousands of new uk 'apprenticeships', and what form these apprenticeships actually take in reality.

(i notice that 'the report' is actually available on iplayer afterall, it justn't wasn't at the point that i posted. it's well worth a listen imv, especially to the increasing number of parents with young temp/unemployed kids).

> Almost certainly we need them (supermarkets and shops) more than clapped-out BBC Radio Presenters.<

well scottycelt, i think that's a bit harsh on peter day frankly. i think he generally does a good job of representig the laymens', or beeb listeners' concerns, whilst often explaining increasingly complex uk and global business mergers.

so, personally i don't think your point, which might well amount to 'shooting the messenger' not to mention ageism, actually disqualifies peter day from being the 'in business' presenter. in fact i find 'in business' pretty lively listening, despite containing potentially heavy going content.

i suppose things could be a lot worse .... 'in business' could be bought to us by robert peston, whose presentation style is pretty inpenetrable.

personally, i hope that concerned parents listen to both progs, but 'the report' in particular. after which parents might possibly visit their kids at work training, especially in compulsory programmes like 'a4e'. therefore, i hope other listeners don't resort to merely 'shooting the messenger'.

[Serial_Apologist]

'in business' could be bought to us by robert peston, whose presentation style is pretty inpenetrable.

I would have described it more as im...........................pennnnnnnnnnnnnetrrrr rable, handsome.

This whole discussion about quality of training in industry, commerce, wherever.... Hmmm I'm just counting on the fingers of my multiskilled five hands how many jobs I've been, or nearly been fired from, purely due to the person mentoring me not having a clue how to explain the job!

[handsomefortune]

the difference in your employment scenario is that the costs didn't come out of the public purse, and no one person, or organisation profited from your albeit slipshod mentor/s serial apologist.

it really is quite something, to allegedly be even worse than the same services provided by a jc+.

aha thanks .... is it 'im' instead? either way, he sings a garbled tune, and his book 'who runs britain' is slightly hypocritical, of late especially. (imo much better off sticking with richard sennett, as there's not the same conflict of interest).

[handsomefortune]

> Right, carry on ... <

scottycelt, over to you.