• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

spygirl

Macron - how long before wheels fall off

Recommended Posts

On ‎09‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 16:19, Bedrag Justesen said:

BBC News, ITV News, C4 News, in particular sent correspondents all the way to Tijuana to bring us pictures of crying mothers carrying babies to move downwind of opened tear gas canisters.

All fitting perfectly into their anti-Trump narrative.

EU paramilitary police thugs shoot out the eye of a young woman, and blow the hand off a man  in Paris.

Where is the MSM outrage ?

Found it !!!

SKY News reporter Hannah Peter-Thomas has managed to find a story about a black baby being 'ripped' from the arms of a black Mother by police in Brooklyn, New York.

That's in Trump's America.

Peter is outraged at the shocking brutality of the police as they manage to handle the situation without any harm to the baby or the Mother.

SKY News are rotating the footage heavily all night.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/11/nyregion/jazmine-headley-baby-video-nypd.html

Have to wonder what Hannah would say about the young woman in Paris losing an eye after being shot by a French police. 

Nothing probably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, maudit said:

In my first professional job I worked out that per hour I was getting less than my Sunday pay retail job. When you add in the student debt, loss of earnings, and house price inflation over that time I would probably have been better off not going to University. All the extra money graduates earn over a lifetime barely cover the hpi. . Should companies be paying graduates with the right skills more not less vs in the past to account for the student debt? I also thought that there could be a problem with having to compete for jobs with other EU people who had free or cheap University systems in that a British employee would need to earn more to have the same take home pay?

If the company's being run properly then they'll be paying the minimum that they need to pay to get the skills that they need. There's a lot more kids with degrees than there used to be, and shit loads of them get firsts. So there's no need to pay over the odds if all you need is a graduate. They're ten a penny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Byron said:

Just had a kitchen fitted.

The 'builder' is a cabinet maker, his skills are extraordinary.

Left school at 16.

Never out of employment.

University is hugely overrated and they need to be closed and replaced by Technical colleges to produce the artisans that we need, not waiters with degrees.

So, we give degrees in plumbing, electrician, gas fitter, motor fitter, you name it.

We tailor these degrees to the current needs of our society

No doubt the academics will be appalled-. Fuck them, they have led a generation into poverty with their snobbish lies.

One big company at which I worked had a fair number of young people who had dropped out of their degree, I had one on my team who had dropped out of Engineering year one at ?Hull. IIRC he was the only English person on the course.

Ironically we used to regard them as cleverer than the people who had completed their degrees and racked up the full student loan as they had wised up early on. 

Per an earlier suggestion putting a 2% NI levy on employees for hiring graduates will mean big companies putting a bar on hiring graduates unless the degree is required or they are an exceptional candidate; 2% extra may not matter for a few but multiply that across hundreds or thousands and that becomes a saving worth having.

Graduate unemployment would rocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

One big company at which I worked had a fair number of young people who had dropped out of their degree, I had one on my team who had dropped out of Engineering year one at ?Hull. IIRC he was the only English person on the course.

Ironically we used to regard them as cleverer than the people who had completed their degrees and racked up the full student loan as they had wised up early on. 

Per an earlier suggestion putting a 2% NI levy on employees for hiring graduates will mean big companies putting a bar on hiring graduates unless the degree is required or they are an exceptional candidate; 2% extra may not matter for a few but multiply that across hundreds or thousands and that becomes a saving worth having.

Graduate unemployment would rocket.

I'd be looking to get my degree rescinded to help my employment prospects.

xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SpectrumFX said:

If the company's being run properly then they'll be paying the minimum that they need to pay to get the skills that they need. There's a lot more kids with degrees than there used to be, and shit loads of them get firsts. So there's no need to pay over the odds if all you need is a graduate. They're ten a penny.

Well ... theres no such thing as 'a degree'

In my line of work, no company is aware of how much it costs to replace a skilled staff member (think degree, 5+ years experience).

Im not really aware of many companies being able to plan 5+ ahead, which is what youd need to do for that sort of optimal recruiting.

Even the biggest recruiters - and id probably class the big accountancy firms - are clueless about their skills profiles for the next 5+. The likes of KPMG just seem to blunder around, recruiting grads into a supposed high paying jobs, whilst their core business gets more and more undermined, and them trying to get higher margin with their laughable consulting.

Most companty of any scale appears to end up in one of two states:

- Full of people who are useless, clinging to org for safet, as the org loses more n more money - Id put a lot of public sector and the finsec that was in that.

- Found itself in a profitable state but very understaffed.

Neither state points to much in the way HR optimisation.

 

 

31 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

One big company at which I worked had a fair number of young people who had dropped out of their degree, I had one on my team who had dropped out of Engineering year one at ?Hull. IIRC he was the only English person on the course.

Ironically we used to regard them as cleverer than the people who had completed their degrees and racked up the full student loan as they had wised up early on. 

Per an earlier suggestion putting a 2% NI levy on employees for hiring graduates will mean big companies putting a bar on hiring graduates unless the degree is required or they are an exceptional candidate; 2% extra may not matter for a few but multiply that across hundreds or thousands and that becomes a saving worth having.

Graduate unemployment would rocket.

Even more?

Non vocational degrees are a busted flush.

Chatting to mid 20s and 17 yo, the message seems to have well and truely received.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SpectrumFX said:

If the company's being run properly then they'll be paying the minimum that they need to pay to get the skills that they need. There's a lot more kids with degrees than there used to be, and shit loads of them get firsts. So there's no need to pay over the odds if all you need is a graduate. They're ten a penny.

Simple answer - General Electric.

You'll struggle to find a more managed, 'better run' company than GE.

But as always ';better run' means loads of managers/HR/whatnot who ALWAYS blow the business up.

The better run business are not managed rather than are hedged and scaled up/down according to revenue  and margins.

I would guess that the compnaies that are operating a pay as little as they can get away with wuobd be the likes of Carillion, Interserve and Serco.

All blown up

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, spygirl said:

Simple answer - General Electric.

You'll struggle to find a more managed, 'better run' company than GE.

But as always ';better run' means loads of managers/HR/whatnot who ALWAYS blow the business up.

The better run business are not managed rather than are hedged and scaled up/down according to revenue  and margins.

I would guess that the compnaies that are operating a pay as little as they can get away with wuobd be the likes of Carillion, Interserve and Serco.

All blown up

 

 

I'm watching a slow motion train cash in one company I know well, that is making all the classic mistakes that GE made.  Focusing on hitting cost saving targets by sacking high paid staff, rather than working out what the critical skills for the company survival is and who has them.  Piling more and more on those that remain so the good performers leave and the unemployable hang on and fuck things up.  Micromanage things like train tickets, when in terms of overall budget it's immaterial.  Focusing on completion of  annual HR assessment processes as a sign of a 'good' employee', which diverts staff away from work that actually brings in income for the company.

 

I could write a book on this stuff - this is the third company I have seen it happen in up close, and I know how the story ends.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, wherebee said:

I'm watching a slow motion train cash in one company I know well, that is making all the classic mistakes that GE made.  Focusing on hitting cost saving targets by sacking high paid staff, rather than working out what the critical skills for the company survival is and who has them.  Piling more and more on those that remain so the good performers leave and the unemployable hang on and fuck things up.  Micromanage things like train tickets, when in terms of overall budget it's immaterial.  Focusing on completion of  annual HR assessment processes as a sign of a 'good' employee', which diverts staff away from work that actually brings in income for the company.

 

I could write a book on this stuff - this is the third company I have seen it happen in up close, and I know how the story ends.....

Its the agency problem.

You a have an org or company, owned by shareholders, someone else.

The company does something for money - make turbines, write software, whatever.

You have management team to operate the company.

Over time, the org fills up with OAM people - management, HR, etc. At the time, this may or have may not been the correct number for the business.

 

However .. times are hard, org does not make as much company.

Org employee numbers are right-sized for the revenue. 

However ... its always the workers that get canned, not the O+M bodies - Well, the sit in the same meetings, youd feel uncomfortable giving thse nice HR women a p45. Lets get rid of that expensive worker you never see as hes always at customer sites.....

Repeat over time. O+M becomes bloated to the actual workforce.

Savings must be made!

Delegate 50k manager to keep an eye on the stationary contract - we buy 100 notebooks at £4 each. He can get them half price - a saving of £200/year - only cost us 70K in employee cost though.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SpectrumFX said:

If the company's being run properly then they'll be paying the minimum that they need to pay to get the skills that they need. There's a lot more kids with degrees than there used to be, and shit loads of them get firsts. So there's no need to pay over the odds if all you need is a graduate. They're ten a penny. 

True for general work but in many STEM areas as a consequence of globalisation you have companies not offering enough money for locally trained people then complain they can't find anyone and ship in Indians with dubious qualifications. I was being underpaid vs market rate by my first place but got my revenge with 2 maternity leaves xD and then they doubled my pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

French Generals Accuse Macron of “Treason” Over UN Migration Pact

I'd heard of this a few days ago but couldn't find a confirmation until this by Paul Joseph Watson.

Macron in the medre?

Quote

Mister President,

You are about to sign the “Global Compact on Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration” on 10 and 11 December, which establishes a genuine right to migration. It may impose itself on our national legislation through pre-existing treaties or the principle of common responsibility set out in this pact.

It seems to us that the only sovereignty that will remain with France will consist in freely setting the way in which the objectives of the pact will have to be implemented. You can not give up this new part of the national sovereignty without a public debate whereas 80% of the French population considers that it is necessary to stop or regulate drastically the immigration. By deciding alone to sign this pact, you would add an additional reason for revolt to the anger of an already battered people. You would be guilty of a denial of democracy or treason against the nation.

In addition, the finances of our country are drained and our debt is growing. You can not take the risk of an expensive call for air migration without first showing that you will not have to resort to more taxes to meet the objectives of the pact. On the other hand, you must be able, in terms of security, to curb the consequences linked to the arrival of extra-European populations. Finally, you can not ignore that the very essence of politics is to ensure security on the outside and harmony within. However, this concord can be obtained only if it maintains a certain internal coherence of the society alone capable of allowing to want to do together, which becomes more and more problematic today.

In fact, the French state is late in coming to realize the impossibility of integrating too many people, in addition to totally different cultures, who have regrouped in the last forty years in areas that no longer submit to the laws of the Republic.

You can not decide alone to erase our civilizational landmarks and deprive us of our carnal homeland.

We therefore ask you to defer the signing of this pact and call by referendum the French to vote on this document. You are accountable to the French of your actions. Your election is not a blank.

We support the initiative of General MARTINEZ against the signature of this pact which must be adopted by the Member States of the UN at the Intergovernmental Conference of Marrakech.

 

General Antoine MARTINEZ

Charles MILLON – Former Minister of Defense

General Marc BERTUCCHI

General Philippe CHATENOUD

General André COUSTOU

General Roland DUBOIS

General Daniel GROSMAIRE

General Christian HOUDET

General Michel ISSAVERDENS

Admiral Patrick MARTIN

General Christian PIQUEMAL

General Daniel SCHAEFFER

General Didier TAUZIN

Colonel Jean Louis CHANAS

 

Edited by JackieO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JackieO said:

French Generals Accuse Macron of “Treason” Over UN Migration Pact

I'd heard of this a few days ago but couldn't find a confirmation until this by Paul Joseph Watson.

Macron in the medre?

 

Good on them. The 11th has passed, was it signed? Did we sign it?!

Just checked. We did sign, as did France but it's not legally binding so not sure what the point of signing is.

Edited by Gloommonger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Gloommonger said:

Good on them. The 11th has passed, was it signed? Did we sign it?!

Just checked. We did sign, as did France but it's not legally binding so not sure what the point of signing is.

Neither am I. But I am confident that it will become painfully apparent at some point in the future when it's too late to do anything about it. These people are our enemies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, JackieO said:

French Generals Accuse Macron of “Treason” Over UN Migration Pact

I'd heard of this a few days ago but couldn't find a confirmation until this by Paul Joseph Watson.

Macron in the medre?

 

 

9 minutes ago, One percent said:

Bugger. Thought it might be that the french had wheeled out a guillotine.  

Patience mon ami!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Gloommonger said:

Good on them. The 11th has passed, was it signed? Did we sign it?!

Just checked. We did sign, as did France but it's not legally binding so not sure what the point of signing is.

It'll be integrated into our own laws, just like everything else that comes from the UN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://quodverum.com/2018/12/344/france-understanding-the-gilets-jaunes-uprising.html

The vast majority haven't been told the truth about life for ordinary citizens, in France. As a result, they don’t understand the significance of the violent ‘gilets jaunes’ protests across the country. Having lived in France for years, REX explains why these are the most important protests in France since 1968 - and likely a beacon for citizens all across Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ashestoashes said:

https://quodverum.com/2018/12/344/france-understanding-the-gilets-jaunes-uprising.html

The vast majority haven't been told the truth about life for ordinary citizens, in France. As a result, they don’t understand the significance of the violent ‘gilets jaunes’ protests across the country. Having lived in France for years, REX explains why these are the most important protests in France since 1968 - and likely a beacon for citizens all across Europe.

Interesting snippet at the bottom from British MEP Janice Atkinson, the UN pact would lead to Europe being flooded with 59 million new migrants within the next 6 years.

Warning that the plan would lead to European countries having their “culture and identity crushed,” Atkinson also pointed out that the pact could lead to hate speech laws that make it illegal to use the term “illegal migrants,” replacing it instead with “irregular migrants”.

“It will be illegal not to use their prescribed language,” warned Atkinson, adding that European citizens could “say goodbye to your democracy and your way of life” if the pact is implemented.

I think this will lead to the destruction of the welfare state as we know it, a compulsory insurance based system and enforced 'financial' migration or dirt-poverty for those that cannot support themselves.

Edited by Chewing Grass
Welfare State

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Chewing Grass said:

Interesting snippet at the bottom from British MEP Janice Atkinson, the UN pact would lead to Europe being flooded with 59 million new migrants within the next 6 years.

Warning that the plan would lead to European countries having their “culture and identity crushed,” Atkinson also pointed out that the pact could lead to hate speech laws that make it illegal to use the term “illegal migrants,” replacing it instead with “irregular migrants”.

“It will be illegal not to use their prescribed language,” warned Atkinson, adding that European citizens could “say goodbye to your democracy and your way of life” if the pact is implemented.

I think this will lead to the destruction of the welfare state as we know it, a compulsory insurance based system and enforced 'financial' migration or dirt-poverty for those that cannot support themselves.

59 million is about a 12% increase in the immigrant population per EU country or about 8% increase per European country if split equally. 

The Uk current immigrant population is supposedly about 14%, so it would probably be double that number if her suggestions came to pass. 

 

Edit it to add: I wonder if these things are planned to stagger over census years, so the figures aren't fully observed for the best part of a further decade?

Edited by The Generation Game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By Dave Bloke
      One of the ideas being floated around at the moment to tackle the Gilets Jaunes crisis is an immediate hike in the NMW - say 20 to 30% but from TOS I remember the argument that it is a bit of a zero sum game and all this does is push up costs but with the added issue that NMW jobs would begin to pay something close to what I earn as a Senior SW developer, so why would I continue to take responsibility for what I do and not seek an easier NMW job.
      Any thoughts
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.