Labour's Employment Rights Bill

[Jacob]

Sadly, there have always been businesses around, especially in the Arts that are little more than " Vanity projects" And, of course, abuse of internships is, another way to go, to to avoid paying for staff,

Oh I dunno - this year's vanity project may turn into next years interesting contribution to society and might even be profitable. More the merrier - many things start that way and not just in the arts.
Also millions of people work for nothing already, not just home keepers and carers, also voluntary work and other ways of participating - societies, committees etc.
More the merrier - and Universal Basic Income would be an enormous boost to these essential services.

 

[Spectric]

do you have evidence to support that, or is it based on bias?

Our local MP's expenses for a year were over £250,000 ! It was not that long ago that they still used calf skin to write down new acts of parliament, dumping that alone saved £80,000 a year. So there will be other areas where savings can be made, but then also look at the NHS and other public services.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/da...ds-claim-180m-flights-hotels-and-photoshoots/

 

[niall Y]

Oh I dunno - this year's vanity project may turn into next years interesting contribution to society and might even be profitable. More the merrier - many things start that way and not just in the arts.
Also millions of people work for nothing already, not just home keepers and carers, also voluntary work and other ways of participating - societies, committees etc.
More the merrier - and Universal Basic Income would be an enormous boost to these essential services.

I see your point, but people in need of employment cannot work for free. Those that are financially secure can. Which is why the Arts was always over represented by those with private income. Mind you back in the 17th and 18th century this was also true of the Sciences.

 

[Jacob]

I see your point, but people in need of employment cannot work for free. Those that are financially secure can.

This is why we need UBI. It would liberate millions of people and ease their transition into other developments. It's crazy that it has never been implemented - OTOH NHS care could cost thousands but send the recipient back on to the street. What's the point in investing in their health without further back up? Investment in human capital is good value for the money.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

This is why we need UBI. It would liberate millions of people and ease their transition into other developments. It's crazy that it has never been implemented - OTOH NHS care could cost thousands but send the recipient back on to the street. What's the point in investing in their health without further back up? Investment in human capital is good value for the money.

What is the fundamentally differentiates Universal Basic Income from Universal Credit/welfare state.

Both exist (in theory) to ensure that the basic needs of all in society are met. Current system leaves some obvious gaps but UBI may simply shift the gaps, not fix them.

Or is it semantics -

• implicit in UBI is that all are contributing to society even if there is no money involved - carers, disabled, pensioners, etc
• implicit in "welfare" is that it is aid to those incapable of contributing financially to society - a very similar group.

Is the former perceived as a "right", the latter a "privilege".

 

[Jacob]

What is the fundamentally differentiates Universal Basic Income from Universal Credit/welfare state.

Both exist (in theory) to ensure that the basic needs of all in society are met. Current system leaves some obvious gaps but UBI may simply shift the gaps, not fix them.

Or is it semantics -

• implicit in UBI is that all are contributing to society even if there is no money involved - carers, disabled, pensioners, etc
• implicit in "welfare" is that it is aid to those incapable of contributing financially to society - a very similar group.

Is the former perceived as a "right", the latter a "privilege".

"Universal" means a net to catch all so nobody would be left out. It's simpler that way - no means testing and nobody falling by the wayside.
It could be recouped from high enough earners as taxable income.

 

[Blackswanwood]

It could be recouped from high enough earners as taxable income.

By the time all your ideas to spend higher earners income are added up there won’t be any higher earners (or people wanting to be them).

 

[Jacob]

By the time all your ideas to spend higher earners income are added up there won’t be any higher earners (or people wanting to be them).

No there's loads of dosh out there.
Amazing how many people leap to the defence of the mega rich and their ill gotten gains, rather than ordinary people in genuine need!

 

[Terry - Somerset]

No there's loads of dosh out there.
Amazing how many people leap to the defence of the mega rich and their ill gotten gains, rather than ordinary people in genuine need!

What defines mega rich - 2,3,4......20 times average income.

Why are their gains ill gotten - they may arise through hard work, exceptional talents etc etc.

Why are ordinary people in genuine need - the inadequate or unfortunate may be - but does this include the lazy, dissolute, drug dependant, dishonest etc etc.

 

[Blackswanwood]

Amazing how many people leap to the defence of the mega rich and their ill gotten gains, rather than ordinary people in genuine need!

It’s probably proportionate to the expression of your overly simplistic view that personal wealth equates to ill gotten gains.

I’m out of it so feel free to have the last comment.

 

[Rhossydd]

Our local MP's expenses for a year were over £250,000 !

You do understand that includes paying staff to deal with local issues and constituents, plus renting office space to do that work in.
Not to mention the costs of going back and forth to Westminster from Cumbria and accommodation whilst there ?

Maybe you should go over his accounts and see where the money actually goes.

 

[Scruples]

The winter fuel allowance was initiated by Blair in 1997. Reeves is simply taking away from most of us that which Labour gave 27 years ago. That public spending is stressed and needs to be trimmed is beyond debate.

With their massive majority the Labour government can do whatever it wants. One can interpret the proposals currently emerging re WFA as:

• a political choice - those worst impacted are least likely to vote Labour
• a moral choice - those who can best afford the consequences pay

There is no right answer - merely one which best fits individual political ideology.

I agree. As a pensioner, I saw what was coming and, for the next 4 years, we will see changes that will inevitably lead to the end of Labour's term...once more.

Once, we all get over the shock of the pandemic and the blame game, the electorate will see the light...again, and we will get back to some sort of normality.

In the meantime, losing the winter fuel payment isn't an issue for me. Changing the pension rules, however, is going to hurt a lot of people less well-off than me and could be the start of the reversal of support for the current government.

It's true, Labour had a good majority but 4 years is long enough for them to revert to type and screw up.

 

[Doris]

Sadly, there have always been businesses around, especially in the Arts that are little more than " Vanity projects" And, of course, abuse of internships is, another way to go, to to avoid paying for staff,

Oh I dunno - this year's vanity project may turn into next years interesting contribution to society and might even be profitable. More the merrier - many things start that way and not just in the arts.
Also millions of people work for nothing already, not just home keepers and carers, also voluntary work and other ways of participating - societies, committees etc.

I've worked in the voluntary sector previously to this job, the community or charitable causes aspect is what brings some retired people in for something to do or work because their heart is in whatever cause it is they are working for, younger people mostly use it as a foothold to getting a real job or as something else to add on their CV.

The gallery I was working for are trying to work it as an incentive with a lower commission rate for artists. There are hardly any sales there and it'll backfire very quickly to those who are working there for that reason. To be employed gives an incentive to actually show up and work and get something back

I should add that I resigned yesterday and the owners response was indifference.

I see your point, but people in need of employment cannot work for free. Those that are financially secure can. Which is why the Arts was always over represented by those with private income.

There are still professional artists out there who rely on their artwork as an income but they have to flog themselves to death just to make a minimum wage. They have to travel the country to either teach give talks or demos etc. They do it because they are passionate about it but I know many who have a second job in order to sustain their families etc.

Framers seem to take a huge cut out of artist's profits who are selling paintings as well as commission fees from galleries too, so there is very little left for the artist after these outgoings and that's IF the work sells at all.

The financially secure artists (usually retired from their jobs) can afford these costs and brush them off far more easily than those who are not.

I've actually decided to quit selling my artwork because this whole world has left a bad taste in my mouth. I don't paint so have framers fees to pay but still after that 40-50% commission rate is taken away (to feed the owners vanity) then you sort of wonder why you are doing it at all?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I agree. As a pensioner, I saw what was coming and, for the next 4 years, we will see changes that will inevitably lead to the end of Labour's term...once more.

Once, we all get over the shock of the pandemic and the blame game, the electorate will see the light...again, and we will get back to some sort of normality.

In the meantime, losing the winter fuel payment isn't an issue for me. Changing the pension rules, however, is going to hurt a lot of people less well-off than me and could be the start of the reversal of support for the current government.

It's true, Labour had a good majority but 4 years is long enough for them to revert to type and screw up.

Four years is long enough for them to revert to type and screw up? Four weeks, and they're well on the way.

 

[Jacob]

...,,..

I've actually decided to quit selling my artwork because this whole world has left a bad taste in my mouth. I don't paint so have framers fees to pay but still after that 40-50% commission rate is taken away (to feed the owners vanity) then you sort of wonder why you are doing it at all?

Can't you by-pass the dealers and do your own promotions? Plenty of people do - website, appearances at shows etc. Post something up here?
Van Gogh also wondered why he was doing it at all! He only sold one painting in his lifetime.

PS I see you do have a website - "under construction"! Get it moving? Best of luck!

 

[J-G]

He only sold one painting in his lifetime.

So wrong! He was primarily an art dealer selling hundreds of works by many artists.

Of his own work, in his lifetime, he apparently sold only one piece.

 

[Keith Cocker]

So wrong!

Of his own work, in his lifetime, he apparently sold only one piece.

I think that’s what Jacob said isn’t it?

 

[Jacob]

....

Of his own work, in his lifetime, he apparently sold only one piece.

That's what I meant - obviously.

 

[J-G]

I think that’s what Jacob said isn’t it?

NO - that's the point I'm making. He specifically did not state that it was one of his own works - and NO it wasn't/isn't 'obvious' - It's a regular mis-quote.

Once I see the tabard & push-stick I normally skip the post but I just happened to see the van Gogh reference.

 

[Jacob]

NO - that's the point I'm making. He specifically did not state that it was one of his own works - and NO it wasn't/isn't 'obvious' - It's a regular mis-quote.

It was obvious what I was trying to say, right or wrong.
https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2022/09/23/what-were-the-first-12-van-gogh-paintings-ever-sold
Are you saying he only sold one picture in his lifetime which was not his own work, in spite of being a dealer? I think you are a little confused.

Once I see the tabard & push-stick I normally skip the post but I just happened to see the van Gogh reference.

No worries - you wouldn't be missed!