Beebop Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 Yeah but we cannot all work for the state... manufacturing is much cheaper in China because they can pay people peanuts to work 90 hours a week. Would completely agree with you, however how many average run of the mill people can take their chances/future stability with an manifacturing job ? for most people just getting a safer job with the government is the most secure option. Again, as mentioned, for the country to get out of the mess it needs manifacturing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beebop Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 On a slightly different note. How many people are suddenly better off in 2009 ?????? I fall into this category, for the last 10 years I have been living a hand to mouth exsistance, and my fortunes have suddenly changed...........and I now see documentarys on people, who live like I did for the last 10 years (ironically during the boom years) Is anyone else in this sitution ????? better off ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave650 Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 In theory very slightly, but there's still redundancy hanging over me so in reality not at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisTodd Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Obviously at the moment working in the public sector has got to be seen as more secure than working in the private sector. That possibly has always been the case. In the public sector you receive (generally) lower wages than in the private sector but you have greater job security. Clients we have with public sector contracts have been largely unaffected by the recession so far, but that isn't to say problems won't start to occur. The big difference to this recession when compared to the last two we have had is that it seems no area of the economy will not end up suffering in some way. But as others have said the only way things will improve is when the private sector picks up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave650 Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 Obviously at the moment working in the public sector has got to be seen as more secure than working in the private sector. That possibly has always been the case. In the public sector you receive (generally) lower wages than in the private sector but you have greater job security. Clients we have with public sector contracts have been largely unaffected by the recession so far, but that isn't to say problems won't start to occur. The big difference to this recession when compared to the last two we have had is that it seems no area of the economy will not end up suffering in some way. But as others have said the only way things will improve is when the private sector picks up. It's already started hitting the public sector; practically all my family work in educational institutions, bar me, and as mentioned redundancies have been announced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 There's been about 5 other threads on different aspects of it. (mostly started by foxy lady ) So why start another? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pidgeon Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Businesses were living hand to mouth, borrowing next months wages and running costs from the bank based on the value of orders. When the banks stopped lending, they had no money to pay wages or run the place, so they went under. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickwitch Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Many smaller firms are choosing voluntary bankruptcy as an easy way of clearing debt and then starting up again under very slightly different names. The current media overexposure is making this a very easy option for companies with lots of debt. However, this is unfair on other small companies who are in credit but find that they are not going to recieve the money owed because of this unscrupulous parctive by others. Another query.....if a bank has been helped out of it's crisis by having the government wipe it's debt..and then announces losses of £800m like RBS have recently...it's a fair assumption that after the government money landed some of it was directed into hefty payouts and pension arrangements for the fat cats. Has there been any regulation of how this money has been allocated once the banks receive it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonjon Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I have not been affected (yet) in fact things are going good, had a promotion and my job is in a safe sector as is my missus, due to reductions on alot of things we are a lot better off each month. I do how ever believe alot of this is down to the media blowing things out of proportion, personally I dont know anyone who has had to face redundancey yet. ________ Ferrari America history Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 ... Another query.....if a bank has been helped out of it's crisis by having the government wipe it's debt..and then announces losses of £800m like RBS have recently...it's a fair assumption that after the government money landed some of it was directed into hefty payouts and pension arrangements for the fat cats. Has there been any regulation of how this money has been allocated once the banks receive it? No. Which is why the Govt has tried to attach strings to the latest bailout to say that the money must be used for lending. The fact that no-one wants to borrow it and would probably be extremely unwise to, has escaped their minuscule minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.