-
@baron-silas-greenback said in British Politics:
But when human inputs are included, which are inherently chaotic. Then things are not so simple, you have to take into account business culture, workplace morale, (due to lack of certain inputs)
Nail. Head.
The best managers appreciate that the people actually doing the work know what the real problems are, are best placed to improve things and give them the tools, space and support to do just that. Any worker on a Toyota production line can (and is encouraged to) stop the line if he sees something which isn't of the right quality.
None of this is new - mill owners like Arkwright and Owen worked this stuff out 200 years ago as they realised happy, well-paid staff with good working conditions generated way more profit than if they exploited their workforce.
-
@victor-meldrew said in British Politics:
@jc said in British Politics:
Increasing inputs will never increase productivity
I'm coming from a business perspective and am no economist. Unless I'm missing something, you wouldn't increase a country's productivity by cutting a country's education budget 50% on the basis that it reduces the the input cost to the economy?
Of course not. And nobody is suggesting that are they? I think the piece you are missing is that the productivity measure you used earlier isn’t measured like that. It’s an aggregate purchasing power parity measurement of value added to the nations GDP divided by the number of labour hours. It’s that simple. Nobody goes out to increase that statistic (which is all it is) by cutting education in any country I’m aware of. In fact I’m not aware of any nation that actively tries to increase it at all. They roll it out to say how cool the government is, or why we need to catch up to Germany. But it’s completely spurious. That’s my point. It’s a functionally meaningless stat used by politicians to justify policies.
Investing in peoples skills isn't actually increasing input costs - you are reducing them by adding value.
It depends how you’re measuring it. In the short term you are definitely reducing productivity because the training carries a cost too. You even wrote as much when you used the word “investing”. If you’re asking is it a good idea to educate your citizens, then obviously yes. But will it increase productivity? Who knows. Maybe. Why do you care? I don’t. I believe that you should let companies do what makes the most sense for their business and if they are any good that will mean training their staff, not exploiting them and being good corporate citizens.
If an unskilled worker earning £10 an hour produces 10 widgets an hour and only 8 are fit to be sold or passed onto the next stage of production, the input cost per widget is £1.25
Train the worker up and pay her £12/hour so she can produce 15 widgets per hour of which 14 can be sold/moved to the next stage of production and the input cost per widget is £0.85.
You may be right, but I think there’s a logical flaw in there. It is possible to train them to produce 14 out of 15 good widgets without increasing their pay. They will be less happy than if you pay them £10 per hour for sure. But are you connecting the increased quality to the training or the pay increase? And where’s your evidence? Did you try it both ways? Anyway all this may be true but it’s not economics
Too many firms think they are maximising their profit by reducing input costs when they are actually increasing their output or system costs. This is often hidden and bites back several years later - normally when the CEO has left with his fat performance cheque.
-
@jc said in British Politics:
Nobody goes out to increase that statistic (which is all it is) by cutting education in any country I’m aware of. In fact I’m not aware of any nation that actively tries to increase it at all.
Why not? You said previously that if you wanted to increase productivity investing in people is the thing you wouldn’t do". If education is anything, it's investing in people. And, as you said, "to increase productivity you have to increase outputs or lower inputs. Increasing inputs will never increase productivity."
It is possible to train them to produce 14 out of 15 good widgets without increasing their pay. They will be less happy than if you pay them £10 per hour for sure.
Perfectly possible not to share the fruits of the improved efficiency - provided you were happy to accept high attrition rates and associated costs, inflexible, unresponsive staff, low morale and potential customer backlash. Mike Ashley's is a bit of an expert on this, apparently
Anyway, enough. I'm supposed to be retired from this business crap
-
Why not?
Because businesses should be trying to improve their own business/labour force productivity etc, rather than worrying about a macroeconomic stat that doesn't mean what people think it does at a firm level ('takes British workers five days to produce what Germans do in four').
At a political level targeting an improvement in productivity stats would drive some interesting behaviour. You could increase education funding which could be good (but if done poorly, give people for free what they were already paying for with no increase in participation, as is happening now in NZ), or take the easy route by doing things like hiking the minimum wage (arguable whether it's a good or bad thing to do - but it will raise those productivity stats with little 'effort' if it's your goal - so they'd do it). Instead of taking on harder things like industry mix etc.
It's arguably the BMI of the business/economics world. Useful at a population health planning level, but individual results - and the actions they should take - vary significantly...
-
In yet another sign that Britain is screwed. A pro Trump rally is banned the day after the anti Trump rally goes ahead....
-
@baron-silas-greenback As usual the real news is in what isn’t said, that 100,000 people can march in London without incident or interference, but many of these same people can’t afford the same courtesy to people who disagree with them. No doubt the police have good reason to expect something to go off but that’s beside the point. The police’s job isn’t just to keep the peace, it’s to uphold the law. About time they did it.
-
@JC yeah, the self proclaimed "anti-facsists" sure do like engaging in a bit of fascism.
-
@baron-silas-greenback said in British Politics:
In yet another sign that Britain is screwed. A pro Trump rally is banned the day after the anti Trump rally goes ahead....
The mayor of London personally clears the use of that huge Trump baby balloon in the name of freedom of speech but won't allow a pro-Trump rally. This can't continue. Regardless of your political views that is farked up and goes against everything our societies are supposed to be based on.
It should also be noted that the only people likely to cause problems at the pro-Trump rally are the counter protesters. So they get their own massive rally with mayor approved blimp and their own threats of violence mean that the rally from the other side is cancelled. Again, that's totally fucked up.
-
There have been pro trump rallies allowed in London over the weekend. The one aiming to take place outside the US embassy was banned.
-
@rancid-schnitzel Sadiq Khan and his supporters are so thin-skinned and naive when responding to Trump it's become embarrassing, He's happy to attack Trump but doesn't seem to have the smarts to realise he's playing Trump's game. He then reacts like a child when Trump calls him out on London's violent crime levels.
I'm increasingly thinking there's one thing loonier than Trump - grandstanding anti-Trump politicians and protesters
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in British Politics:
It should also be noted that the only people likely to cause problems at the pro-Trump rally are the counter protesters. So they get their own massive rally with mayor approved blimp and their own threats of violence mean that the rally from the other side is cancelled. Again, that's totally fucked up.
Agree with the second part but not the first.
Trouble makers exist on both sides, there was trouble caused by the rally that went ahead after they met up with free Tommy supporters.
I’m really pissed off with London at the moment. The football World Cup run was glorious but behind that is just constant negativity of May, Trump, Khan, EU, Boris etc.
The two sides on all of the above are just so far apart, nobody can find a middle ground.
I’d love a leader like Trump to just say SHUT THE FUCK UP, this is happening, this way.
Although I suspect the brits may not really fall in line to thst style of leadership!!
-
@majorrage said in British Politics:
Although I suspect the brits may not really fall in line to thst style of leadership!!
Well Thatcher was popular for a good few elections...
-
@victor-meldrew said in British Politics:
@majorrage said in British Politics:
Although I suspect the brits may not really fall in line to thst style of leadership!!
Well Thatcher was popular for a good few elections...
Best point you’ve ever made on TSF
-
@majorrage said in British Politics:
@rancid-schnitzel said in British Politics:
It should also be noted that the only people likely to cause problems at the pro-Trump rally are the counter protesters. So they get their own massive rally with mayor approved blimp and their own threats of violence mean that the rally from the other side is cancelled. Again, that's totally fucked up.
Agree with the second part but not the first.
Trouble makers exist on both sides, there was trouble caused by the rally that went ahead after they met up with free Tommy supporters.
I’m really pissed off with London at the moment. The football World Cup run was glorious but behind that is just constant negativity of May, Trump, Khan, EU, Boris etc.
The two sides on all of the above are just so far apart, nobody can find a middle ground.
I’d love a leader like Trump to just say SHUT THE FUCK UP, this is happening, this way.
Although I suspect the brits may not really fall in line to thst style of leadership!!
Have to strongly disagree with that. In fact based on events the past year I'm not sure how you can make that claim. Yes there are dickheads on both sides, but do you seriously think that a pro-Trump rally was going to cause trouble? If it went to shit that would be 100% on the so called antifacists fighting to ensure that your views are exactly the same as theirs.
-
@victor-meldrew said in British Politics:
@rancid-schnitzel Sadiq Khan and his supporters are so thin-skinned and naive when responding to Trump it's become embarrassing, He's happy to attack Trump but doesn't seem to have the smarts to realise he's playing Trump's game. He then reacts like a child when Trump calls him out on London's violent crime levels.
I'm increasingly thinking there's one thing loonier than Trump - grandstanding anti-Trump politicians and protesters
Yeah, that anti-Trump rally was next level weird. It seems to me a lot of these people were already mentally unstable, and the over-the-top rhetoric from media and politicians about Trump has driven them over the edge.
Stuff like this is pretty concerning behaviour:
-
This post is deleted!
-
@rancid-schnitzel no I think a massive percentage of protestors have no interest in trouble.
But a small amount do. Regardless of what they are protesting against. Thus, I’m not just going to immediately blame anti trump people for trouble at a pro trump rally.
Same view on vice versa too.
-
So you agreed with Trump after Charlottesville then?
-
@majorrage said in British Politics:
@rancid-schnitzel no I think a massive percentage of protestors have no interest in trouble.
But a small amount do. Regardless of what they are protesting against. Thus, I’m not just going to immediately blame anti trump people for trouble at a pro trump rally.
Same view on vice versa too.
C'mon MR, the vast majority of incidents are started by the antifa type people. Just look at the bullshit that occurs every G8 or G20 meeting. Or look at the idiocy that occurs when evil Hitler incarnate Milo shows up at a college. Sure there are dickheads on all sides but the anti-Trump people are far more likely to raise holy hell than vice versa.
-
@baron-silas-greenback said in British Politics:
So you agreed with Trump after Charlottesville then?
Colossal bow to draw.
British Politics