dixon76710

Actually with "35% of UK adults are low-skilled, against 13% in the US", that would be a difference in characteristics, not a similiarity.

"low"??? You still havent named these "other economies" that support your characterization of the US economy as one with a "low skills equilibrium"with "more focus on low/unskilled labour". Dont you at least have some irrelevant economic theory or obscure economic study to BS your way through?

John1234

Your correct mostly.
However, the decrease in prices was directly and only related to the illegals.
At a time when it should have increased.
And the recession will not allow us to recover.
General Contractors and homeowners got a taste of those low prices and they don't want to let go.

While this was going on, the State passed harsh regulations against small business.
Requiring all private sub contractors with sole proprietorships to Incorporate.

And Material prices that we pay out of our end have almost doubled.

We also drive the work trucks that use more gas and we are effected more by the rise in gas prices than the homeowners that want these low prices.

We're being squeezed from all ends.

aegyptos

I think I would take a look at forming low cost crews of my own to do the work and spend my time finding jobs for them and collecting on work performed.

aegyptos

Not very similar, are they? I think scucca continues to used cooked stats to blackguard the USA for political reasons. We are dim-witted tools in the hands of evil capitalists. We are too fat and happy to see the light of his "market socialism". One suspects that if his brand of socialist got into power, somehow, we wouldn't continue fat or happy for very long.

Scucca

As an example, try Table 9

There is no morality attack involved. Dim witted tools though? Interesting use of vocab

__________________

aegyptos

There's a problem right off the bat. On page 2 your source asserts that Britain had a relatively high rate of productivity in the late-nineteenth century. That assertion is factually incorrect. British productivity lagged both Imperial Germany and the United States from the early 1880s going forward. Based as this study is on false assumptions, one doubts the utility of proceeding.

Scucca

You'd have a point if it said "highest" productivity and forgot to provide the figures. It has not. Try to make serious comment

__________________

aegyptos

Relatively high to what then? Spain or Zanzibar? Even you should know that there were three economic players from 1870 going forward, the UK, the US and Germany. No one else counts for anything. So my point was well made and your retort is assinine as is this flawed paper. Do you have anything else that might support your position? Anything? No?

You are untutored. I suggest you read Audit of War by Corelli Barnett and Germany 1866-1945 by Gordon Craig. They are both English historians, one tory, one labourite, (sorry, neither is a marxist) but you can't automatically assume a pro-American or pro-German bias.

Scucca

Your attempt is desperate in its failure. The authors make a perfectly sound comment. To try and use it to deny the statistical comparison (particularly as its a British piece and therefore focused on the British poor performance) is humdrum in its inanity

I'm not interested in such tactics.

__________________

aegyptos

Relatively high to what then? Quit dodging and answer the question if you can.