UK Government borrowing goes UP

[trousers]

Speaking as someone who actually did an apprenticeship years and years ago, the irony about the new fashion for apprentices is that most schemes are only really sustainable with government financing - another example of the private sector sponging off the public. That is new - companies always ran and financed their own schemes. Now they know they can get some fad-driven government to pay for it, and so won't do it unless the taxpayer coughs up.

 

Totally agree.

 

I left school after 6th form and a certain bank paid for my subsequent training in the IT industry. An apprenticeship in all but name.

 

I think 'industry' (private or otherwise) should pay to 'further educate' the resources (aka people) they need to sustain their industries.

 

Neither the tax payer nor student should be paying (directly) for "further education" IMHO.

[View From The Top]

Totally agree.

 

I left school after 6th form and a certain bank paid for my subsequent training in the IT industry. An apprenticeship in all but name.

 

I think 'industry' (private or otherwise) should pay to 'further educate' the resources (aka people) they need to sustain their industries.

 

Neither the tax payer nor student should be paying (directly) for "further education" IMHO.

 

Apart from the large companies there is, in my experience working up here, little to no chance of an apprentice being taken on unless it's heavily subsidised.

 

JCB are so desperate to find the next generation of engineers and the like that they've set up their own academy.

 

http://www.jcbacademy.com/

[trousers]

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23973733-our-economy-is-much-rosier-than-it-looks.do

 

Our economy is much rosier than it looks

 

Jim O'Neill

28 Jul 2011

 

The announcement by the Office for National Statistics that real GDP growth was just 0.2 per cent in the second quarter, following essentially no apparent growth at all in the previous six months, is rather disturbing, at least on the surface. It is particularly so to those of us who generally see the post- global credit-crisis glass as half-full rather than half-empty. Within hours of the announcement, UK markets actually responded with "relief", with a slight sell-off in interest-rate futures and a modest rise in the pound.

 

There were probably two reasons for this. First, it wasn't as bad as some were fearing, especially following the interesting intervention from Vince Cable earlier in the week (he claimed that "Right-wing nutters" threatened to create a new financial meltdown). There is no immediate rationale for those arguing for some fresh monetary easing.

 

Second, and related to this, the ONS actually delivered a slightly positive surprise by suggesting that the headline 0.2 per cent rise was distorted by "special factors", probably including the weather and the royal wedding. Without these special factors it might have been as high as 0.7 per cent. Whether this is true or not, it makes it much less likely that the Bank of England could contemplate any special new measures.

 

Unless the underlying economy loses considerable momentum in the coming weeks, the third quarter of the fiscal year should be much better.

In my judgment, the UK economy is probably stronger than these figures suggest. It is also the case that the ONS is still systematically underestimating the country's economic performance. It would be my guess that actual GDP growth in the past two years is 1.5 to two per cent stronger than has been reported, and within 18 to 24 months from now data revisions will show this to have been the case. Not that this makes anyone feel better about life now, ranging from Chancellor George Osborne to those either unemployed or worried about losing their jobs.

 

There are two reasons why I think growth is not so weak. First, proven monthly indicators show an economy that recovered post-crisis much more strongly than the official GDP data of the past 12 months or so. The combined average of the monthly manufacturing, services and construction economic indicators have a very close historical relationship with eventual real GDP growth.

 

Second, and consistent with this, the employment picture has been nowhere near as dire as many expected, and still expect. While there are major challenges in the public sector, private-sector employment has been enjoying strong gains for much of the past 12 months. If the economy was as weak as the GDP numbers suggest, how can this be the case?

Edited 28 July, 2011 by trousers