It's NOT the economy, stupid!
02 December 2008
There can be little doubt that the main topic on most people’s minds is job security in this reportedly rocky economic climate.
Jobs are now being lost, the biggest chunk last week was at Jaguar Land Rover. I am not belittling any job, but as the scope of EPD’s newsletter is the electronics industry then it is hopefully justifiable to point out that these jobs were agency staff and unlikely to affect the core electronics resource of the company.
On the other hand I received a press release on Monday announcing that Renishaw, the Dublin-based industrial instrument manufacturer is bolstering its R&D department with 60 new high tech jobs.
There is bad news out there and good news as well depending on where you are looking, and while the road may be rocky for the automotive sector then those in medical, defence and others are currently relatively untroubled. But I return to my comments from last week (Spend, spend, spend – but do it wisely) when I expressed my doubts over the value of cutting VAT as a device for stimulating the economy. I think that these doubts have since been reaffirmed from many quarters over the last week and I received many responses to my column essentially expressing the same thoughts. However, I also came up with an alternative plan to invest directly in job security, but put in the qualifier "The downside? Well it is probably that I don’t understand the complexities and intricacies of how central finances work, and that as a consequence my plan is deeply flawed from its very inception.”
To this point I had a response from Nick Cook, a Technology Analyst / Electronics Engineer:
“I for one think you're spot on and you probably do understand, in fact talking in the office this morning most engineers probably agree with you. I personally believe the reason you think that you "don’t understand the complexities and intricacies of how central finances work" is because many of these complexities are totally unnecessary and are there to try and baffle the public in order to justify the salaries of economists and bankers. If it was up to me I would have bypassed the bankers and given the money directly to those who can actually do something useful with it, and that includes the money they've already given to the banks.
The older I get the more I think that the root of the problem is our education system which I believe would be better described as a teaching or learning system. Education to me is about giving people skills to understand the world around them, not just packing their heads with facts and figures so they can pass exams. I have a theory that those of us who are lucky enough to have had an education that has given, or possibly posses naturally, the skill of understanding in general terms so that they can generally work things out for themselves, go on to become scientists and engineers. Economists and politicians on the other hand are generally those who believe what they are taught - if they are told something is complicated they assume it is!”
I’m inclined to think that Nick’s theory is probably a bit harsh – there must be politicians capable of independent thought and there must be engineers who possess at least some political skills – but I can see where he is coming from. I suspect his theory is based on some disdain towards politicians, which I think is both healthy and justifiable.
Any comments on this column or anything else in the newsletter are gratefully received. Just send an email to me at the address below.
Contact Details and Archive...
Most Viewed Articles...
Banner error!System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
at IMLGroup.Control_Banner.CreateChildControls()