Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 385 posts

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#201

Post by yawaworht1978 »

What are these jobs? Human health and hospitality?

Then they go on and list fruit pickers? And retail stores hiring staff for the Xmas onset?

Are they kidding? These are temporary jobs, probably not previously posted as done underhanded, but now there's no fruit pickers for cheap and they seek more official channels.

And drivers, yes obviously drivers to deliver the aforementioned goods.

Covid, Brexit, good luck finding the fruit pickers.

This is not an economic recovery, this is harvest and Xmas time, nothing fundamental has changed.

As for the housing prices, indeed, as you would say in England, in "the north" , you get double the house for half the price, and even better quality. It's not London though, and there's not too many jobs.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#202

Post by Scoundreller »

long_time_gone wrote: post #116
NiceWayToDoIT wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Second part is not that simple in global economy if you have Chinese cheap labor as direct competitors especially in the food industry where margins for farmers are already too low. I would recommend Jeremy Clarkson - "Clarkson's Farm" first year of operation on a 300 acres farm made a yearly profit of £144 :)

==first year of operation on a 300 acres farm made a yearly profit of £144== Profit in Year 1 is better than most of the startups I read about on HN.

And probably saved a fortune in property tax, and got any appreciation.

A/B test and balance sheet will show that it was very profitable.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#203

Post by moreira »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #179
moreira wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh the house prices. I’ve gone from looking at £250+K houses and thinking I’ll never be able to afford one on my own to “I’m buying a house in the next 12 months”. £5K deposit (not even joking), a 3 year mortgage (which will end up costing about the same as my rent down south) and I’ll be set. I looked at Durham as well, and when it comes to buying, if I spot a good one there, that’s where I’ll go for sure. The town…

It's only a problem when you need to change job (this is why I haven't done this).

Even if your next job requires you to move somewhere else, you’ll still have had 12-24 months (or however long) of cheap living, and you get to save all that money.

For me at least, between rent, bills, and not having access to the same expensive habits as in a big city (Uber Eats and ease of going out), means that this year I stand to save about £20K compared to the previous year. Even if it was just rent+council tax I’d still be saving about £10K.

That makes a huge difference, especially when the move itself was only about £2K (moving company and a few other bits). Even if I had to move again next year I’d still be coming out ahead.

Obviously it’s not for everyone but the savings are too big to dismiss something like this, in my opinion.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#204

Post by ItsMonkk »

imtringued wrote: post #151
nly wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Boris Johnson (the British Prime Minister) sold his London family home in 2019 for £3.75M after having rented it out for £2000/week (just under 4x the national average income) while living in his Government provided accommodation in his role as Foreign Secretary (2016-2018).[0] - Property prices have shot up 10% during the pandemic, bolstered in part by the Government cutting stamp duty on sales. - A few days ago t…

>- Property prices have shot up 10% during the pandemic, bolstered in part by the Government cutting stamp duty on sales. Something that is hard to understand is how taxes influence the price of homes and land. People have a fixed budget. The rule of thumb is that they will spend at most 30% of their income on housing. Popular cities usually have an inrush of educated people getting high paying jobs. The existing res…

Exactly.

If property taxes were raised to 100% annually of the cost of the home, the price of the house would instantly drop to somewhere near the annual rent cost. "Buying" the house would end up being close to a security deposit. It goes without saying though, that 100% annually is not a good number. It would disincentivize building, which is something we really need right now.

The right number is a Land Value Tax such that the cost of the property equals the cost of the building. So if you have two properties, one in downtown SF, and one in the middle of Montana, and each are the exact same house, but the Montana house sells for $200k and the SF house sells for $1M, really it's the land in SF selling for $800k. So that SF market price should move to $200k. To do so we need to tax the property at increasing rates(per sqft of land) until they match. When we tax enough, the new price will reach its improvement value.

In the short term this will have devastating effects on the Net Worth of individuals who took out loans or otherwise bet their income on owning a home, so I advocate for a one time tax break(that for exceptional cases like the elderly would be transferable for straight cash upon sale of the property) equivalent to the drop in market value of the home. So in the SF case, they would get a $800k tax credit.

Once this system is in place being a NIMBY will no longer be a profitable stance, and will instead cost that area money in taxes. As it will no longer be a perverse incentive, the population will mostly switch to becoming YIMBY's, and advocate for better Zoning rules and to ease up on silly restrictions. The tax money can be spent on high value improvements to the area that will boost everyone's quality of life, and if none are found, can be simply given back equally to all.

Once this system in place and the tax credits have been used up, we can even go further and get rid of income taxes, sales taxes, corporate taxes, and capital gains taxes. The value of the land tax will be enough to replace all of them. All from a tax that because land is at a fixed supply, is completely non-distortionary and results in no dead weight loss.

Housing can either be an investment or affordable long-term, it can not be both.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#206

Post by api »

ghaff wrote: post #186
api wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They won't in major cities which are all basically real estate cartels, which is why I am bearish on major cities as anything other than office parks for rich people and young professionals without families. Most other things like art, actual innovation, and child rearing are going to migrate to medium sized cities, towns, and the countryside for basic economic reasons. It's already slowly happening.

> It's already slowly happening. You're basically describing the norm in the US from post-WWII until about 20 years ago. Many large cities that many think of as desirable elite cities today (with real estate prices to match) were losing population into the 1990s. The attractiveness of living in downtowns to mostly college educated young people is mostly a fairly recent phenomenon and there's no guarantees it won't re…

I already see it reversing among everyone but those in high income industries. I'm seeing a ton of artists settling in small towns these days. The cost of living is low, allowing you to live on things like Patreon and Etsy and make your art.

This kind of radical decentralization is something the original boosters of the Internet in the 90s predicted, but then the great urbanism wave of 2000-2020 happened. But... remember that we tend to over-estimate the effect of technology in the short term and under-estimate it in the long term. The true decentralizing effect of the Internet might just not have been felt yet.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#207

Post by tonyedgecombe »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #179
moreira wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh the house prices. I’ve gone from looking at £250+K houses and thinking I’ll never be able to afford one on my own to “I’m buying a house in the next 12 months”. £5K deposit (not even joking), a 3 year mortgage (which will end up costing about the same as my rent down south) and I’ll be set. I looked at Durham as well, and when it comes to buying, if I spot a good one there, that’s where I’ll go for sure. The town…

It's only a problem when you need to change job (this is why I haven't done this).

Or your flexible employer changes its mind on working from home.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#208

Post by [deleted] »

neilwilson wrote: post #130

There are 1.034 million vacancies and 3.277 million people without work that want it. There isn't a shortage of labour. There is a shortage of decent pay and conditions. Firms are going to have to get over their cheap labour obsession or close and leave the market to those firms that can.

[deleted]

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#209

Post by bryanrasmussen »

nly wrote: post #153
bb123 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is housing available within commuting distance - I bought a 2 bedroom flat walking distance from a station with a 35 minute link to Kings Cross for under 200k. People seem to think they have some sort of God-given right to live in central London. If you want to buy a property you may need to make some sacrifices in that department. Yes the town I live in is pretty shite, and I have to train to work or to see fr…

Define 'commutable distance', because to me that means 30-40 minutes door to door. Hitchin is 33 minutes to Kings Cross on Thameslink and I could definitely do my commute from Hitchin station in ~50 minutes, which is roughly 10 minutes more than it takes me from Zone 3, door to door, now. If you look around on RightMove, 2 bed flats going near Hitchin station (Purwell) are ~£335K and a 20 minute walk away, so my comm…

>I think anyone earning in the top 2% should be able to do this, yes. After all, central London contains 2.3% of the UK population. If they're all at the top then by definition it should be possible.

Ok but if you're barely in the top 2% that would sound like you'd afford the worst in London - is it the worst you're going for or are you expecting to be the quality of what you'd get other places?

Obviously I don't know if you're barely or not, just since you said top 2% and not top 1% it might be you are just at the edge.

Post reply on HN