taxman Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 George Osborne says that "unemployment is never a price worth paying" thus overturning the mantra of the Thatcher era that it was a price worth paying for low inflation. Of course the definition of "full employment" is open to debate with some commentators regarding 5-6% unemployed as being "full employment" whilst William Beveridge, the man who inspired Britain's post-war welfare state, said full employment meant a figure of under 3%. Good Old Tories! The party of Full Employment! Well I never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruprecht1st Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Why does this aspiration offend you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Did you reply to the wrong thread, Rup? It's something to be celebrated. A change from the Tory's old position on unemployment, which was quite offensive. Rising unemployment and the recession have been the price that we have had to pay to get inflation down. That price is well worth paying. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199091/cmhansrd/1991-05-16/Orals-1.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Did you reply to the wrong thread, Rup? It's something to be celebrated. A change from the Tory's old position on unemployment, which was quite offensive. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199091/cmhansrd/1991-05-16/Orals-1.html Back then with inflation going double digit it was acceptable. We'd seen the problems caused by stagflation in the late 1970's and we didn't want to go back to that. 6% or 3% full employment? Not sure which is better TBH - you need *some* flexibility in the labour market and with a more mobile workforce these days I suspect that means we will have a little more than Bevan thought was a good idea. Define unemployment though - if someone leaves one job has a weeks holiday and then starts a new job then technically they are unemployed for that week but is it really useful to include them in the figures? They are not in the same situation as someone who gets made redundant of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Did you reply to the wrong thread, Rup? It's something to be celebrated. A change from the Tory's old position on unemployment, which was quite offensive. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199091/cmhansrd/1991-05-16/Orals-1.html Not to mention the favoured blood sport of some tories - pursue policies which force up level of unemployemnt, then blame the victim fo their predicament. A bit like kicking away the crutches from someone with their legs amputated , while telling them to 'stand on their own two feet' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruprecht1st Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Did you reply to the wrong thread, Rup? It's something to be celebrated. A change from the Tory's old position on unemployment, which was quite offensive. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199091/cmhansrd/1991-05-16/Orals-1.html Sorry, I thought we were talking about today and George Osborne. Not "news" from over 20 years ago. ---------- Post added 31-03-2014 at 12:05 ---------- Not to mention the favoured blood sport of some tories - pursue policies which force up level of unemployemnt, then blame the victim fo their predicament. A bit like kicking away the crutches from someone with their legs amputated , while telling them to 'stand on their own two feet' Or like telling us year after year that "the days of boom and bust are over", then presiding over the biggest "bust "ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivanava Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 George Osborne says that "unemployment is never a price worth paying" thus overturning the mantra of the Thatcher era that it was a price worth paying for low inflation. Of course the definition of "full employment" is open to debate with some commentators regarding 5-6% unemployed as being "full employment" whilst William Beveridge, the man who inspired Britain's post-war welfare state, said full employment meant a figure of under 3%. Good Old Tories! The party of Full Employment! Well I never. That's some task, there are 26.42 million unemployed people in the EU and they can all come here to fill any vacancies created. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 so they're gonna ditch their usual summer parliament recess, and get some work done? oh, thought not lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Sorry, I thought we were talking about today and George Osborne. Not "news" from over 20 years ago. We're applauding today's apparent u-turn on a long standing Tory policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted March 31, 2014 Share Posted March 31, 2014 Does any take VAT Man and The Boy Blunder seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.