UK Digital Industry Job Growth Falls To Lowest in Decade (yahoo.com) 38
Job growth in the UK's digital industry hit its lowest in a decade, prompting the incoming Labour government to pledge to revive the sector as it seeks to stimulate growth. From a report: The number of jobs in the sector grew by just 0.3% last year -- the lowest since a decline of 0.1% in 2013, according to Office for National Statistics data released on Thursday. Wider employment across the whole UK economy grew more than twice as fast, the data showed. The figures may stoke concerns of a stagnation in the UK tech sector, as employment and earnings stalled in the sector. Digital sector employees -- including programmers and tech consultants -- saw their hourly pay rise by just over 1% between 2022 and 2023, equating to a pay fall in real terms, the data showed. Nevertheless, the UK's new Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, Peter Kyle, promised to revitalize the sector.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
tl;dr
Still too many brown people
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
tl;dr
Still too many brown people
Maybe some day you should take the time to read.
And it's you who calls them (and thinks of them) as "brown people".
Re: (Score:2)
I read the comment as mocking the parent comment by Seven Spirals as just being a lot of words blaming everything on immigration.
Re: (Score:2)
I read the comment as mocking the parent comment by Seven Spirals as just being a lot of words blaming everything on immigration.
Sure. It's revealing though. The parent comment didn't say anything about "brown people"; that's this guy's thinking.
Leftists are so busy accusing everyone else of being racists they don't realize that that's how they think. They are obsessed with race.
Re: (Score:3)
The UK was the first country to develop a global deep water navy which created great trading wealth which in turn made London incredibly wealthy.
The Americans (New York specifically) took that crown after WWII, but UK still had Europe, but now with Brexit they have lost Europe and London's financial power has greatly withered.
The Asians have replaced UK in global trade.
The UK have no significant natural resources to exploit.
Poorly controlled immigration is causing social friction and radical Islamification
Re: (Score:2)
I'm fairly ignorant of Brexit but, as best I can tell, what folks really wanted was to control immigration. The folks convinced
Re:Well, we all know their solution... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
We've had more immigration since Brexit so that didn't work. Bigotry never works. Free movement of EU citizens was great because they were also very free to move back home whereas people who move to the UK from the other side of the planet are more likely to stay forever. Even worse for the bigots, the skin colour of the people from far flung places is generally not white.
Brexit didn't just end free movement for citizens, it ended free movement for jobs.
IT is overwhelmingly done in English, so where better than a country that speaks good English as a first language to base your business. The UK was a resource for Europeans to use domestically, a gateway for America to get access to the entirety of Europe and a convenient way for the rest of Europe to access other markets, particularly Asia and the Middle East.
Brexit forced an end to this, the jobs started going to Amst
Re: (Score:2)
Even worse for the bigots, the skin colour of the people from far flung places is generally not white.
Personally, I live in a very diverse area of the US. The reason is that the US refugee program resettles a lot of folks in my town. The US is a melting pot and we were more or less built on an immigrant friendly model. However, it seems clear to me that some countries which may have smaller populations, smaller landmasses, and much more cultural history might not want a lot of immigration. Do they not have a right to determine the ethnic and cultural character of their country? I'm not sure why, as soon as
Re:Well, we all know their solution... (Score:5, Interesting)
After the 2008 financial crash, unlike many other countries the UK decided to have massive cuts to public spending instead of stimulus. We called it "austerity", and it ruined many lives and wrecked public services. The whole country declined sharply. It was ideologically driven, basically an attempt to shrink the state so that private companies could charge people for stuff that they used to get from the government.
Meanwhile the far right was doing what the far right always does - blaming immigrants for everything wrong with the country. It had reached fever pitch by the time the 2016 Brexit Referendum happened, but it wasn't just xenophobia that lead to that catastrophic decision. For decades the UK press had been blaming the EU for anything and everything, almost all of it entirely made up. And the lies were impossible to debunk, people were so convinced of them and so unwilling to accept that they had been conned so easily.
The textbook example is "bendy bananas". Newspapers raged about insane EU rules on the curvature of bananas that could be legally sold in the UK... Except that the rules were British, we had had them for decades, and the EU adopted them because they had become a de-facto standard anyway. They were to make sure that bananas were not under or over ripe.
So people voted to leave, and then the far right tried to make it the worst possible form of brexit, the so-called "hard" brexit. Cut us off from the EU single market, close the borders. Of course mere weeks before we had been promised that nobody was suggesting we would leave the EU single market, but all those lies were quickly forgotten once they realized they had a chance to really wreck the country.
The ultimate goal was to turn the UK into something like Singapore just off the coast of the EU. Cheap labour, lax rules, financial free-for-all. What we ended up with wasn't that bad, but still cost us 4% of GDP permanently, and took away opportunities from millions.
And immigration shot up. Of course it did, we needed labour and fee-paying foreign students to prop up our failing economy. The new Labour government wants to build 1.5 million homes, but the labour to do it just isn't there.
This is managed decline. The UK will eventually break up. It's always been a poor country with a lot of rich people, but two decades of austerity has ground down what little there was to begin with into dust.
Re: (Score:1)
Meanwhile the far right was doing what the far right always does - blaming immigrants for everything wrong with the country.
Seems strange that they would have control over the government, increase the overall rate of migration/immigration, yet still blame immigrants. Did nobody notice that their policies were completely inconsistent with their rhetoric?
Of course mere weeks before we had been promised that nobody was suggesting we would leave the EU single market
What happened then? Why did they end up leaving the single market? Did the EU get butthurt and initiate that from their end ?
And immigration shot up.
Stats say you're right. You'd think that the Tories would have realized this is the one thing they actually had to deliver on. It appears that their constit
Re: (Score:3)
Seems strange that they would have control over the government, increase the overall rate of migration/immigration, yet still blame immigrants.
The far right was UKIP, not the Tory government.
Why did they end up leaving the single market? Did the EU get butthurt and initiate that from their end ?
They lied. The official Vote Leave campaign laid out what brexit would look like. Stay in the single market, negotiate a deal before triggering article 50 etc. All bollocks, all ignored.
You'd think that the Tories would have realized this is the one thing they actually had to deliver on.
Their donors told them they needed immigrants, so they allowed it to happen. They tried to blame asylum seekers, but they are a small fraction of the total. That combined with them impleading.
Well, the polling seems to indicate that the wipeout of the Tories and the rise in the Reform party is wholly due to their failure to take immigration seriously.
Not entirely, they also buggered up the economy and many other things. But yes, the UK
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
"After the 2008 financial crash, unlike many other countries the UK decided to have massive cuts to public spending instead of stimulus."
There were no cuts in public spending, let alone massive ones. Public spending increased, in real terms, just at a slightly lower rate than Gordon Brown.
Re:Well, we all know their solution... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
The UK has natural resources. We have oil and gas, but squandered most of it.
What remains is wind. We have incredible wind resources, at least 20x as much as we need for our own energy needs. Of course a lot of it is in Scottish waters, and Scotland will probably leave the UK sooner or later.
We are going to lose out to Ireland if we don't get a move on. The Irish briefly went fully wind powered a while back, and they haven't really even started with offshore wind yet. The long term plan is to dedicate more
Re: (Score:3)
The UK was the first country to develop a global deep water navy which created great trading wealth which in turn made London incredibly wealthy.
What made them wealthy was colonialism. They were stealing the wealth of foreign nations and trading it. Without all of the abuses of colonialism (primarily slavery) they would have had nothing to trade.
All in all, we are seeing the continual slow decline of a once great power.
Good. The UK never deserved so much global influence. It was all gained at gunpoint. Give us all your valuable resources for nothing or we will bombard you with cannon fire.
Re: (Score:1)
Without all of the abuses of colonialism (primarily slavery) they would have had nothing to trade.
except for jellied eels, jacobs crackers, steak and kidney pie, marmite, morris minors and turnips - yeah, nothing to trade
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The insane thing is that you argued as it wasn't, to the degree that it was somehow sanctioned.
When did I ever say that uncontrolled immigration wasn't illegal in the UK? I am saying it's the reason your electorate is pissed (being illegal isn't the same as being halted through direct action) and you'll keep churning through parties until you get Nigel/Reform in there to fix things for you. I'm also saying that you might never have had Brexit if you could stop virtue signaling for one second and do something about the uncontrolled immigration. Now the only way left is the hard way and it's going to t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
which indicated that it was about legal immigration being increased for political reasons
No, that's just how you wrongly interpreted it. Uncontrolled migration may be legal or illegal. That's not relevant. Making something illegal doesn't control it. It just makes it a technical-crime. Actually enforcing immigration standards probably means they wouldn't have people hopping aboard rickety boats or hiding under 18-wheelers. When a country creates an adequate number of proper visas, nobody bothers risking their life to sneak in rather than simply fill out a form. That is, of course, unless they a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not great (Score:2)
Less companies? (Score:2)
The number of London Stock Exchange (LSE) listed companies is down 33% from 3000+ in 2015 to under 2000 in 2023.
Correlated with less programming jobs? Less big employers to work for, less need for common back-office software work?
https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Companies like hiring people that are productive from day 1, not 6 months later.
I prefer to see companies invest in traineeships and apprenticeships though, shows long term commitment, rather than chasing the bottom line all the time.