Is there any wonder some of our young don’t want to work.

[MrSmith]

Not to ignore the rest of your post, but what is the source of clean energy in the UK we'll use to make these panels?

 

And whilst you've identified that we can get cheap labour from the unemployed, given the massive investment required to actually get the plants up and running, how do you think this saves the tax payer money?

 

Solar and wind backed up by nucliar then gas as alast resort.

 

With all the other measures it would save substantial amounts on the welfare system and public sector, fewer jobs would require foreign labour resulting in a lower population. More people working and fewer people doing nothing.

[MrSmith]

MrSmith is not correct re: raw materials. He couldn't be more wrong in the present economic circumstances.

 

We can't always buy at the same price. We have a weak pound and that increases the costs of imports for manufacturers in this country. As for solar cell manufacture the technology and materials required are similar to that for computers. Rare earth minerals are needed and China has almost total control of the supply. As well as the cost of setting up the plants to produce what are akin to micro-electronics the cost of importing the raw materials would be prohibitive. Even if the cost base could be driven down by making people work for peanuts then China could always just push up the price of, or restrict the supply of, the raw components and just kill any fledgling competitive industry here that way.

 

Cameron said only last week he was a supporter of globalisation. He doesn't want us competing and trying to make things the Chinese can already make for themselves anyway, at levels of technical maturity way beyond us. He wants us to sell products we still have an advantage at making.

 

Finally, just say we could manufacture solar panels, that we could compete with China doing that and that we could get people working on it for benefits then who is going to get the profits? Private industry?

 

 

Of all Sharp's solar module manufacturing plants around the world, one of the most technically advanced is right here in the UK.

 

Sharp Solar PV Panels are Made In Britain and carry a 25 year performance guarantee.

 

The raw material of most solar cells today is crystalline silicon. Luckily, silicon is one of the most widely available elements in the form of sand.

[Sidecut]

Read the thread its already been answered.

No It hasn't because anyone turning down a job without good reason loses their JSA etc.

[Sidecut]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSmith

Foreign worker come here apparently to do jobs that the unemployed won’t do, if the unemployed had no choice but to do them there would be no reason for the foreign worker to come here.

So why weren't those jobs placed at the Jobcentre? You don't think it has something to do with "Whole family must work for the basic minimum wage between all of them" do you?

[Sidecut]

Of all Sharp's solar module manufacturing plants around the world, one of the most technically advanced is right here in the UK.

 

Sharp Solar PV Panels are Made In Britain and carry a 25 year performance guarantee.

So why aren't they being pushed by the government on all new builds if they're that good?

[I1L2T3]

Of all Sharp's solar module manufacturing plants around the world, one of the most technically advanced is right here in the UK.

 

Sharp Solar PV Panels are Made In Britain and carry a 25 year performance guarantee.

 

So the government send benefits claimants to Sharp to work for the benefits the government is paying. Sharp gets to make more profits. Does Sharp get to keep the profit? I must say I don't think that is a very moral use of taxpayer money.

 

Let's say it is going well and Sharp has many people on benefits working for them. If Sharp is making good profits then what incentive does Sharp have to create jobs. Sharp has an incentive to keep people on benefits, working for it for free and generating profits at taxpayer expense.

 

Let's say that more solar cell manufacturers want to start up. What incentive have they got to create jobs? They might demand, quite reasonably, that as Sharp is getting free labour then they should too. Perhaps also they could argue that the high margins enjoyed by Sharp because of its free labour are effectively a barrier to entry into the industry

 

Let's imagine the super-cheap panels made by enforced British Labour start to threaten the viability of the solar industry within other countries in the EU free market. They might claim that Britain is applying a kind of protectionist policy to the British solar industry and gaining unfair advantage as a result.

 

There are so many scenarios that make this a non-starter. If you were arguing that Sharp should offer high quality short-term work placements with the realistic prospect of paid employment at the end then I would more than likely 100% agree with you.

[MrSmith]

So the government send benefits claimants to Sharp to work for the benefits the government is paying. Sharp gets to make more profits. Does Sharp get to keep the profit? I must say I don't think that is a very moral use of taxpayer money.

 

Let's say it is going well and Sharp has many people on benefits working for them. If Sharp is making good profits then what incentive does Sharp have to create jobs. Sharp has an incentive to keep people on benefits, working for it for free and generating profits at taxpayer expense.

 

Let's say that more solar cell manufacturers want to start up. What incentive have they got to create jobs? They might demand, quite reasonably, that as Sharp is getting free labour then they should too. Perhaps also they could argue that the high margins enjoyed by Sharp because of its free labour are effectively a barrier to entry into the industry

 

Let's imagine the super-cheap panels made by enforced British Labour start to threaten the viability of the solar industry within other countries in the EU free market. They might claim that Britain is applying a kind of protectionist policy to the British solar industry and gaining unfair advantage as a result.

 

There are so many scenarios that make this a non-starter. If you were arguing that Sharp should offer high quality short-term work placements with the realistic prospect of paid employment at the end then I would more than likely 100% agree with you.

 

Who said anything about sending anyone to sharp, I posted that because you claimed we couldn't make the panels here, apparently because we don’t have the raw material which is made from sand, which I’m pretty sure we have plenty of.

 

And I haven’t said anything about forced labour or exporting the panel.

 

There is little to be gained by coming up with your own scenario, attributing it to me and then claiming it’s anon starter.

[MrSmith]

No It hasn't because anyone turning down a job without good reason loses their JSA etc.

 

Not that this as anything to do with the post I replied too, but since when the does the benefits office send a job seeker to a job and then take their benefits off them if they refuse to do it.

[I1L2T3]

Who said anything about sending anyone to sharp, I posted that because you claimed we couldn't make the panels here, apparently because we don’t have the raw material which is made from sand, which I’m pretty sure we have plenty of.

 

And I haven’t said anything about forced labour or exporting the panel.

 

It was a nice try bringing Sharp into it. You'll know of course that the volume of production is actually tiny compared to what China is producing anyway. And I never said we couldn't make the panels here, just that the economics of doing so was questionable. Some brave souls will try of course. They always do.

 

So, forget the solar industry then. And if you can make a panel out of sand alone then best of luck to you.

 

So, who will your benefits claimants be toiling for? What jobs will they be doing? And who will buy the things they make?

[MrSmith]

So why weren't those jobs placed at the Jobcentre? You don't think it has something to do with "Whole family must work for the basic minimum wage between all of them" do you?

 

Apparently they are and British worker won't do them, hence the reason we have high immigration.