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

361–370 of 385 posts

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#361

Post by ZeroGravitas »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #266
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wage rises without solving the housing issue is only going to raise house prices further. There's a bunch of potential solutions, but no-one directly benefits from them in the short term. Any attempt to fix it will be met with sob stories about old ladies in multi-million dollar homes being "forced out of their homes". So we'll all just sit and watch as things slowly spin out of control.

Old ladies in multi-million dollar homes is largely a myth. Sure, there are some of them. But it's absurd to think this is anywhere near the majority. Short Term rentals make up These are just excuses. These aren't real problems. The real problem is artificially low interest rates, artificial scarcity caused by NIMBYism, low downpayments (backed by Fannie & Freddie), tax breaks for home owners but not for renters, hi…

Just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting the old ladies were at fault. I was suggesting that the people who would suffer the immediate negatives and/or thrive on drama and/or need to sabotage all government intervention would use that as a propagands point to stop any regulations.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#362

Post by ls-lah_33 »

s0rce wrote: post #252
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #69

When a few companies or industries can’t find enough labor, the solution is simple: Raise wages to attract a larger percentage of the labor pool. When every company and industry is struggling to hire, raising wages is still necessary but it no longer fixes the bigger problem. Those higher wages aren’t producing more labor, they’re just convincing employees with jobs to switch to other jobs. Switching jobs creates a v…

Many companies don't have sufficient margins to raise wages. Hopefully this isn't confused as me endorsing subpar wages, simply that those business can't be sustained or will just endlessly be looking for someone willing to work for cheap because hiring someone for more will actually cost them money. They may be better of turning away some customers vs. hiring someone for a higher wage to support more demand.

> Many companies don't have sufficient margins to raise wages.

Not too sure how you came to that conclusion. Profit margins for many companies in the UK seem to have actually gone up [1]. You probably assume that companies are subject to perfect competition. That might be true for small businesses but is not really the case for large firms [2]. Some large firms practically are the market and can get away with employing few people for low wages. It's similar to a monopoly that is incentivised to sell few goods at high prices.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-antitrust-idUSKBN...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#363

Post by blitzar »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #142
nly wrote: post #44

Housing is anything from a third to 50% of the average UK earners take home income. Median house price to median income ratios are at historically high levels[0], and rents are now also rising[1] Either wages need to rise or house prices need to fall. [0] If you look at somewhere mundane like Essex the median 'affordability ratio', as measured by the Office of National Statistics ( https://tinyurl.com/x5jatcx8 ), was…

Wage rises without solving the housing issue is only going to raise house prices further. There's a bunch of potential solutions, but no-one directly benefits from them in the short term. Any attempt to fix it will be met with sob stories about old ladies in multi-million dollar homes being "forced out of their homes". So we'll all just sit and watch as things slowly spin out of control.

> solving the housing issue

What is this mythical 'housing issue' we hear so much about. A housing shortage? I dont see that, if you want a house, you walk into one of the estate agents, they are every second shop on the high street, and you give them money and they give you a house.

'But I want a 12 bedroom house on Park Lane with a 50 foot garden for 100k.' Yes there are issues there.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#364

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

mmarq wrote: post #338
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I don't agree. If the supply of labour increases without any consequent increase in demand, then one would expect to see the price of labour reduce, right? That's what econ 101 would say, right? You're the one making the claim that it doesn't. If such a claim is self evident, then you should be able to produce some kind of reasoning as to why it is so, no?

> Sorry, I don't agree. If the supply of labour increases without any consequent increase in demand, then one would expect to see the price of labour reduce, right? Which is only true if the foreigner in question teleports themself to their country of origin whenever they are not working. Even if they got all their food delivered from Poorland, there would be an increased demand for deliveries. > That's what econ 101…

Great, so you have empirical evidence. Can you please share some links with me?

I'm open to being convinced of this rather strong claim, but I'd prefer not to take it on faith.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#365

Post by blitzar »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #209
nly wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 kno…

>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 ...

If they are all in the top, then you are in the bottom 11% of londoners.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#366

Post by luckylion »

effingwewt wrote: post #349
luckylion wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in Germany, but it's a similar amount (+ rent, internet, utilities, health insurance etc). He has the basics like a cell phone, flat screen and playstation and seems to be content with it.

There will always be people willing to accept the bare minimum. That doesn't have anything to do with the fact that those who do work are still in poverty, with no way out. Also many have never had a single vacation in their lives. Some just needed the break. e-spells

Oh definitely, you can be working and still be poor, but that's a separate issue. I was pointing out that the number of people on unemployment benefits isn't the number of those seeking work, so there's no problem having 3m people vs 1m open jobs that don't get filled. It's an inconvenient truth to many, but it's still the truth.

Getting them back to work would be a great improvement. But I don't think we can make low-skill jobs magically double in value, so there's probably no way, and we'll keep an underclass who are effectively getting UBI and don't contribute.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#367

Post by nly »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #207
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Bingo. In the UK contracts almost always state your contracted place of work as , and WFH is a privilege not a right.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#368

Post by lenkite »

nly wrote: post #44

Housing is anything from a third to 50% of the average UK earners take home income. Median house price to median income ratios are at historically high levels[0], and rents are now also rising[1] Either wages need to rise or house prices need to fall. [0] If you look at somewhere mundane like Essex the median 'affordability ratio', as measured by the Office of National Statistics ( https://tinyurl.com/x5jatcx8 ), was…

As long as thousands of ultra-rich foreign landowners buy land, but don't reside in the UK, house prices are unlikely to fall.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#369

Post by heurisko »

nicoburns wrote: post #106
heurisko wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why they are surprised to receive not many applicants locally, as you can't support yourself in the UK on seasonal work. The growing prosperity of other countries, may also mean you can't rely on the difference in purchasing power to attract seasonal workers from other countries. Which leaves either investing in machinery, or perhaps marketing your job as an "experience" to those who aren't relying on th…

Or paying more

This doesn't get around the problem, however, unless they pay seasonal workers their expenses for a year.

Re: Job vacancies surge past one million in new record

#370

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

conductr wrote: post #347
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from the middle man at the grocery store who makes pre-made salads and sandwiches and soups, so that you don't have to? People want to buy "nice" houses. But too many houses for sale need a lot of work done for them still. Enter flippers to make the market. The average person does not want to buy a house and renovate it for a year while living in it so that they can save $30k. Most people don't…

I feel like your stance is coming from a place of theory, like you're pointing out econ 101 and theory of supply and demand. From that perspective, you're correct. Flippers are filling a need/void in the market. I get all of that. What's out of whack is the flippers profit and how much market penetration they have and how they are not actually improving properties. Sure they look nice, but behind the walls they actua…

> Flippers are filling a need/void in the market. I get all of that. What's out of whack is the flippers profit and how much market penetration they have and how they are not actually improving properties. Sure they look nice, but behind the walls they actually screwed a lot up in the process of making it "nice."

How is this different than Mercedes and BMW vs Honda and Toyota?

It's not like people are only allowed to pay more for things that you think are actually worth more.

People regularly spend lots of money on what many people consider waste. Why shouldn't they be allowed to do it on housing? New construction is just as rife with this problem, I think.

Houses are built with a ridiculous set of boxes that need to be checked by buyers. They are not built to be actual livable houses. They're built to be sold.

Post reply on HN