Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24
  1. #21
    -:Undertaker:-'s Avatar
    -:Undertaker:- is offline Habbox Hall of Fame Inductee
    Former Rare Values Manager
    HabboxForum Top Poster


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Jerez, the Kingdom of Spain
    Country
    Spain
    Posts
    30,176
    Tokens
    265
    Habbo
    -:overtaker:-

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexxxxx View Post
    7% growth a year, you're living in a dreamworld.

    but there is a lot to be said for this. we will never have unemployment levels close to 0% in today's world because there is a so-called 'natural' rate of unemployment in any given economy and any move to boost employment further than this rate can only lead to inflation. We need ALOT of government spending for university and college courses in various fields of high-tech industry and other capital investment by the government because frankly the private sector can't and won't take the risk in today's economic climate. We can't lower taxes, only freeze, because of our balooning public debt.
    7% growth would be achievable at some point given what I suggested and using that method. I admit, at the start the unemployment would rocket as the state would need to be halved in size just for us to get anywhere useful. The way to do it at the minute is lay off the state sector in sharp stages while reducing business taxes considerably along with decreasing other taxes or freezing them for the general public at large.

    In that way the debts would be repaid and when the debts were repaid the way to go about it would be severe tax cuts, meaning taxation only existed for vital services such as the NHS, police and roads. Of course Whitehall and the public sector would never support anything as radical as this because its complete free-marketism and would signal the end of the client state which has balooned under this government.

    Quote Originally Posted by alexxxxx View Post
    Dander, i'm sorry to agree with dan but what you say really doesn't make sense - In theory businesses will employ more people if they make more profit to grow their business, in order to make more profit. As long as there is incentive to grow - they generally try.
    Indeed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dander View Post
    I understand what you are saying, but that is why I said small / medium. Believe it or not, but the majority of them are happy at the size they are.
    They are happy yeah, but if the economic conditions are right then they will expand and a business which creates vast profits has the ability to expand and create jobs, whereas now we are stuck in the socialist cycle of the state taxing that money away which leaves business stagnant. In a way, its creating stagnation in the economy in the same way as the banks not lending also creates stagnations.

    The way to truly have an effective economy is small state and low taxation.


    And if you wanna buy me flowers
    Just go ahead now
    And if you like to talk for hours
    Just go ahead now


  2. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Middlesbrough, England
    Posts
    9,336
    Tokens
    10,837

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    I agree with Tash (again lol). It's all about the experience and youths are stuck in a vicious circle where they can't get experience because no-one will give them any. I do believe it's the Conservatives (I'm neutral, I don't support any party so please correct me if I'm wrong) that say they're going to bring in a 'National Service' kind of idea but within the community, I think that may be a good idea!

    Also, the unemployment rate is bound to be higher because of the recession. It'd be pretty illogical to expect it go down, after all. Then there are the disabled people who can't work, the lazy people who won't work and the really genuine people who want to find work but are stuck in a system that doesn't work for them (my dad's unemployed atm and I hope he's the latter :p).

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    487
    Tokens
    75

    Default

    A lot of it will also be housewives (possibly husbands) and people who are wealthy enough to not have to work too. Does the figure include students? Regardless unemployment is a problem, a lot of it is down to immigration, i.e. more coming in than going out, and the fact that minimum wage serves as a double edged sword where employers will illegally hire people who'll work for cash-in-hand wages below minimum. It's a sensitive subject that's somewhat of a taboo, but one that needs to be tackled.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,366
    Tokens
    325

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:- View Post
    7% growth would be achievable at some point given what I suggested and using that method. I admit, at the start the unemployment would rocket as the state would need to be halved in size just for us to get anywhere useful. The way to do it at the minute is lay off the state sector in sharp stages while reducing business taxes considerably along with decreasing other taxes or freezing them for the general public at large.
    Seeing as the UK has had average growth over the last 30years or so of 2.5%, 7% is really really really out of touch - even if we got 7% growth we would hit a wall of inflation and would require a stupid amount of immigration. 7% growth is what an emerging economy achieves where there is a lot of space for capacity growth.

    also this "newspaper" article is truly poor. it gives no clarification of this includes students 16-22 nor those disabled or retired early.
    Last edited by alexxxxx; 10-04-2010 at 11:05 PM.
    goodbye.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •