The urgent need to reduce the cost of labour in Ireland.

Mancomb Seepgood

realitykeeper wrote: »

Low pay is more likely to facilitate home grown industry with export potential. Low pay makes environmental regeneration projects possible. So much good can come of low pay! Think about it, an Irish person expects more money than an African or Asian per hour worked which means the Irish are more reluctant to work. This will have negative consequences for Ireland.

Hang on.. higher pay acts as a disincentive to work?Are you sure you've thought this through?

Why on earth would people in this country want to reduce their pay and quality of life in search of low skilled manufacturing jobs from which it is quite possible that they will be displaced by new technology/robots in a matter of a few years?

realitykeeper

Phoebas wrote: »

So we can compete with the Netherlands?
If they are doing waste recycling for us, the its probably because they've invested in technology to do it, not because they are paying low wages.

Ireland borrows money to pay public sector workers high salaries. With that monkey on our backs, Ireland is not a feasible location to invest. This is why cheap labour must come back.

Water John

Sorry, the OP seems to have a mish mash of ideas, without any logic tying them together.
Lower wages for the rest of the pop, will affect public pay in some way?

realitykeeper

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

When you say 'labour' and social welfare, it brings to mind physical trades which which aren't exactly highly paid to begin with.

Are you proposing reducing all wages or just the wages of the already lowly paid?

Instead big starting by reducing wages of people on the breadline, how about we start by reducing the wages of those who can afford it?

Not all pay necessarily. For example, high tech multinationals and private sector generally can continue to pay current salaries. I am referring to state/semi state employees and low skilled workers many of whom are unemployed. Abolishing the minimum wage would encourage the growth of indigenous export industry and drive all salaries down to some extent which is fine as costs would fall.

realitykeeper

Jawgap wrote: »

We can't process waste in Ireland to recycle it because we don't have enough - it is an industry/activity that requires serious scale to be profitable,

This can`t do attitude is not profitable, nor can it be sold abroad unless your business is a trade union.

Jawgap

realitykeeper wrote: »

Part of the problem is that most of what we consume is made elsewhere, thereby limiting control of manufacturing/packaging. Otherwise, a valid point.

We've huge control over packaging, it's manufacturing and its fate - just look at the reams of EU legislation covering it.

Jawgap

realitykeeper wrote: »

This can`t do attitude is not profitable, nor can it be sold abroad unless your business is a trade union.

It's nothing to do with a "can't do" attitude, it's to do with the economic reality of recycling material and the price of it compared to new material.

realitykeeper

Donal55 wrote: »

Didn't the cost of Labour just fall off a cliff between 2008 and 2013?

No it just stepped down from the mesosphere to the stratosphere.

realitykeeper

Jawgap wrote: »

That's the reality.....it'll fall off another cliff when QE causes the world to end too

Very interesting chart. It is a bit like economic hyperventilation. Reblowing the bubble is not the solution. Pay must fall properlyto facilitate a real and sustainable recovery.

pablo128

realitykeeper wrote: »

No it just stepped down from the mesosphere to the stratosphere.

I'll tell you what. You'll never be short of work if you do it for nothing.

Out of interest, could you tell me how many euro per hour you would consider to be the minimum acceptable in Ireland if wages were to be lowered.

Jawgap

realitykeeper wrote: »

Very interesting chart. It is a bit like economic hyperventilation. Reblowing the bubble is not the solution. Pay must fall properlyto facilitate a real and sustainable recovery.

No, the interesting thing about the chart is that it demonstrates that your initial suggestion that labour costs had not fallen was incorrect.

Nice attempted deflection though

realitykeeper

Deleted User wrote: »

The cost of living needs to come down first and a quick way to do that would be to return the VAT rate to its 2011 rate of 21%. It would only be a 2 percent decrease I know, but it would be 2% on practically everything you buy.

I have no problem with the government cutting spending but pay must fall dramatically now if hyperinflation is to be forestalled.

Water John

OP is coming out with something new in every post. You are now foretelling Hyperinflation. Have seen no source anywhere point to this possibility.

Hyperinflation??? Laughable.

Donal55

realitykeeper wrote: »

I have no problem with the government cutting spending but pay must fall dramatically now if hyperinflation is to be forestalled.

You really haven't a clue.

realitykeeper

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I doubt it. It smacks of 'other people should accept lower pay'. I'll be surprised if 'other people' aren't poorer people.

It is more a case of wanting to prevent a nightmarish future.

Jawgap

realitykeeper wrote: »

It is more a case of wanting to prevent a nightmarish future.

.....and locking everyone into a downward wage spiral is what? Nirvana?

noodler

realitykeeper wrote: »

In that chicken & egg scenario, cost of labour must fall first.

Whilst obviously we can't let cost of labour get out of whack with other competitors, your entire opening post is based on very subjective interpretations of barely relevant events.

realitykeeper

Mr.Micro wrote: »

My apologies, nothing, other than these people took the time and effort to stuff the boxes, effectively ruining the whole recycle effort and overall costs of the scheme. The companies then have to make up these extra costs and perhaps could push it on their employees to take less wages.

It does go to show that these people have no problem handling waste. They are the people who would be ideal for waste sorting by hand in a low pay economy.

realitykeeper

Yourself isit wrote: »

It's much lower here than most countries in Europe.

Ireland has a large debt and a trade deficit. Comparing apples with oranges is not cogent.

Water John

TMK, its individual householders are who have taken to putting the wrong waste into recycling.

This thread is bewildering.

realitykeeper

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

If we want to cut the cost of living and labour then the obvious issue to tackle is the cost of housing.

The government should CPO tracts of land and offer incentives to get low cost housing built.

The government deliberately re inflated the property market so that NAMA might make a "profit." Leprechaun economics is alive and well.

Jawgap

realitykeeper wrote: »

Ireland has a large debt and a trade deficit. Comparing apples with oranges is not cogent.

Again, the absolute level of debt is unimportant - it's whether it's manageable and it's emininetly manageable. Is there any evidence we're not managing our debt? Especially as a good chunk (about 30%) of it is actually held as a cash reserve?

Jawgap

realitykeeper wrote: »

The government deliberately re inflated the property market so that NAMA might make a "profit." Leprechaun economics is alive and well.

How? Explain please.

Water John

The recovery in property prices actually was very beneficial to all the banks that the Govn't own.

My house is now just about the value of its replacement cost. So it's not over inflated, but has recovered from an artificial low value.

realitykeeper

pablo128 wrote: »

I'll tell you what. You'll never be short of work if you do it for nothing.

Out of interest, could you tell me how many euro per hour you would consider to be the minimum acceptable in Ireland if wages were to be lowered.

The figure is immaterial. What matters is what it can buy.

Donal55

...and then the urgent need to reduce the cost of labour actually only applies to PS and SW recipients according to Reality.

What a roundabout way of a thread to having a PS/Dole rant.

Allinall

realitykeeper wrote: »

The government deliberately re inflated the property market so that NAMA might make a "profit." Leprechaun economics is alive and well.

No they didn't .

tabby aspreme

realitykeeper wrote: »

The figure is immaterial. What matters is what it can buy.

If everyone took a 50% pay cut in the morning , how long would it take for the cost of living to drop by 50% , so people could manage on there reduced wages, and what would happen in the meantime

Wanderer78

tabby aspreme wrote: »

If everyone took a 50% pay cut in the morning , how long would it take for the cost of living to drop by 50% , so people could manage on there reduced wages, and what would happen in the meantime

maybe a 50% increase in the need for grave diggers!:D

Yourself isit

realitykeeper wrote: »

The figure is immaterial. What matters is what it can buy.

Yeh and the less you earn the less you can buy.

I think your philosophy might have worked in the pre euro age with currency depreciation. But not now.

Yourself isit

tabby aspreme wrote: »

If everyone took a 50% pay cut in the morning , how long would it take for the cost of living to drop by 50% , so people could manage on there reduced wages, and what would happen in the meantime

Nothing imported would drop in price.

Yourself isit

realitykeeper wrote: »

I have no problem with the government cutting spending but pay must fall dramatically now if hyperinflation is to be forestalled.

Hyperinflation? It was 0.3% last year.

tabby aspreme

Yourself isit wrote: »

Nothing imported would drop in price.

I'm aware of that, but I would like the op to answer the question,

Allinall

realitykeeper wrote: »

I have no problem with the government cutting spending but pay must fall dramatically now if hyperinflation is to be forestalled.

What makes you think hyperinflation is imminent?

The ECB have a tight hold on interest rates, which are directly related to inflation.

Your posts make no sense.

El_Duderino 09

realitykeeper wrote:

I am referring to state/semi state employees and low skilled workers many of whom are unemployed.

I've always suspected it's the poorest people who are being paid too much bloody money. Maybe the OP wants everyone else to take a pay cut too... Let's read on and see

realitykeeper wrote:

Not all pay necessarily. For example, high tech multinationals and private sector generally can continue to pay current salaries.

Not everyone should take a pay cut then? Just the public sector?

I can't imagine which sector the OP works in... Maybe the 'private sector generally'?

I wonder if the OP wants to cut wages of everyone in the private sector or just the lowest patd in the private sector. Let's read on...

realitykeeper wrote:

Abolishing the minimum wage would encourage the growth of indigenous export industry and drive all salaries down to some extent which is fine as costs would fall.

Minimum wage folk are probably the problem.

Thinly veiled 'other people should be happy to accept lower pay' thread.

To help hurry the thread along, the OP should take a pay cut, but only after everyone else takes one first.

jimmycrackcorm

K.Flyer wrote:

Been done before with not very good results, lots of council houses with no amenities equals a recipe for disaster.

I wasn't even referring to council houses. I was principally talking about ordinary workers being extorted through sky high prices simply because of a lack of supply pushing up prices.

Social housing would get a benefit by being cheaper for councils to acquire if the supply was in place.

Owryan

Water John wrote: »

OP is coming out with something new in every post. You are now foretelling Hyperinflation. Have seen no source anywhere point to this possibility.

Hyperinflation??? Laughable.

If you look at his post history, he has been predicting that the end of capitalism/ global crash/recession/economic meltdown/hyperinflation will occur this year, for the past few years.

Apparently the only way to save ourselves is to cut pay to nothing, this will force businesses to drop their prices, builders to sell homes cheaper and turn us into a major production driven economy. Not sure the reasoning behind any of that makes sense but it sounds good.

El_Duderino 09

Owryan wrote:

Apparently the only way to save ourselves is to cut pay to nothing,

Oh no. Taking the OP at their word, they want the public sector to reduce pay while private sector employee's pay stays the same - except minimum wage private employees.

That means everyone except well paid private employees should take a pay cut. That's very different from everyone taking a pay cut.

OP, if public sector and minimum wage people should take a pay cut, but not everyone else, how deep should the pay cut be for those affected?

realitykeeper

Yourself isit wrote: »

Nothing imported would drop in price.

... which is why Ireland would begin to manufacture and become more export orientated. At present, Ireland is still running a fiscal deficit. If indigenous export orientated manufacturing became the main employment source, Ireland would have a fiscal surplus.

realitykeeper

Yourself isit wrote: »

Hyperinflation? It was 0.3% last year.

The calm before the storm.

Timberrrrrrrr

realitykeeper wrote: »

The calm before the storm.

The storm you have (wrongly) predicted for how many years now? :rolleyes:

realitykeeper

Allinall wrote: »

What makes you think hyperinflation is imminent?

The ECB have a tight hold on interest rates, which are directly related to inflation.

Your posts make no sense.

The ECB sets artificial interest rates. Real interest rates however are a naturally occurring phenomenon and the longer they are hidden by the imposition of artificial rates the greater the imbalance. Think of it as an earthquake waiting to happen. I believe the BIS refer to this as an "interest rate snap back".

If this happen later this year as I suspect, the consequences for the world economy will be frightening.

Allinall

realitykeeper wrote: »

The ECB sets artificial interest rates. Real interest rates however are a naturally occurring phenomenon and the longer they are hidden by the imposition of artificial rates the greater the imbalance. Think of it as an earthquake waiting to happen. I believe the BIS refer to this as an "interest rate snap back".

If this happen later this year as I suspect, the consequences for the world economy will be frightening.

But it won't happen, because as you readily accept, the ECB sets the rates.

Arthur Daley

There has already been massive asset price inflation (thanks to qe in my opinion) in everything from house prices to stock prices to fine art and classic cars prices.

Govt. likes us to think sure it's grand the price of bread or milk is stable or falling and official inflation is flat. But their ramping of housing costs for first time buyers and renters is an evil. It became a necessary evil thanks to fianna fails governance and property ramping 1997 to 2009. The hand was forced, the die was cast.

But asking workers for pay cuts and saving twopence halpenny shopping in aldi and lidl will only go so far towards making inroads to the biggest cost in most peoples lives: ramped property prices.

realitykeeper

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Not everyone should take a pay cut then? Just the public sector?

I can't imagine which sector the OP works in... Maybe the 'private sector generally'?

There also would be natural downward pressure on above average private sector salaries as the cost of living falls. However, can`t imagine a law that says you cannot pay your employee more than X amount.

realitykeeper

tabby aspreme wrote: »

If everyone took a 50% pay cut in the morning , how long would it take for the cost of living to drop by 50% , so people could manage on there reduced wages, and what would happen in the meantime

If everyone took a 50% pay cut, the growth in employment and the demand for employees would be so rapid, pay would begin to rise again to meet the falling prices. The real difficulty would be people committed to high mortgage payments. They should have been more savvy. Anyway, by evicting them, the houses would be sold cheaply to people who are presently renting.

El_Duderino 09

realitykeeper wrote:

There also would be natural downward pressure on above average private sector salaries as the cost of living falls. However, can`t imagine a law that says you cannot pay your employee more than X amount.

Natural downward pressure, eventually. Like I said, the OP should take a pay cut but only after everyone else takes one first.

You can't imagine a maximum wage, so what about the maximum ratio of highest to lowest paid. We're talking radical changes here, so how about we slash the minimum wage and you get a pay ratio of maximum 5 times of the least paid person in your company - naturally that wouldn't work because this thread was about cutting other people's wages, not the OP's.

realitykeeper

Allinall wrote: »

But it won't happen, because as you readily accept, the ECB sets the rates.

Yes but if confidence is lost in the fiat currencies by say, the rest of the world, then the digits sent to them in return for stuff will need many more zeros added on to every order. The ECB will be forced to raise interest rates to take account of reality.

realitykeeper

Arthur Daley wrote: »

There has already been massive asset price inflation (thanks to qe in my opinion) in everything from house prices to stock prices to fine art and classic cars prices.

Govt. likes us to think sure it's grand the price of bread or milk is stable or falling and official inflation is flat. But their ramping of housing costs for first time buyers and renters is an evil. It became a necessary evil thanks to fianna fails governance and property ramping 1997 to 2009. The hand was forced, the die was cast.

The madness of the Bertie Ahern era is undeniable. But, later in 2008 the banks should have been let fail. Or to quote Ms Merkel "let everyone clean up their own s**t" The taxpayer should not have been prevailed upon.

Owryan

realitykeeper wrote: »

If everyone took a 50% pay cut, the growth in employment and the demand for employees would be so rapid, pay would begin to rise again to meet the falling prices. The real difficulty would be people committed to high mortgage payments. They should have been more savvy. Anyway, by evicting them, the houses would be sold cheaply to people who are presently renting.

Why would employment rise if everyone took a paycut? Then the quandary of how rising wages would mean lower prices, is it not usually the opposite?

But what really shows the ironic nature or your name, you want to force people that have expensive mortgages, no messing around by seeing if they can afford them, into homelessness. Just so people who are renting can buy cheap homes.

So where do these newly evicted go? Why would their homes be sold cheaply if there are expensive mortgages attached to them? Why would I continue to work for half pay when prices haven't been cut? How will businesses be forced to cut prices? People have savings, so this will impact on prices. Will peoples savings be confiscated?