Bolitics The New Condem Government

[drat01]

If incomes were not so low for so many people, taxes would not be an issue. Low pay is the problem.

Wasn't the minimum wage introduced to eradicate low pay?

no it was there to ensure there was a degree of fairness. Dont forget the tory party did not want it and predicted wrongly that many businesses would go bust because of it.

The issue now is that many companies use it as the norm rather than what it should have been, ie a minimum. Ironically i read a report last couple of days about the many many company directors who are non doms to avoid taxes here in the uk. I suppose minimum wage or even god forbid a living wage would concern them

[thetrees]

 

 

If incomes were not so low for so many people, taxes would not be an issue. Low pay is the problem.

Wasn't the minimum wage introduced to eradicate low pay?

no it was there to ensure there was a degree of fairness. Dont forget the tory party did not want it and predicted wrongly that many businesses would go bust because of it.

The issue now is that many companies use it as the norm rather than what it should have been, ie a minimum. Ironically i read a report last couple of days about the many many company directors who are non doms to avoid taxes here in the uk. I suppose minimum wage or even god forbid a living wage would concern them

 

 

Ah ha.

There's me, fingered as a Tory on here, and probably a baby eating one at that, and that was my observation then and has been consistent ever since.

Minimum wage - great idea, introduced with the best intentions, but it is now the wage, which is perhaps not so good.

[bickster]

So the 2.5% drop meant that the £1000 telly was now £975, but you can't afford the telly any way.

£978.72 to be precise

[Kingfisher]

If incomes were not so low for so many people, taxes would not be an issue. Low pay is the problem.

Wasn't the minimum wage introduced to eradicate low pay?

no it was there to ensure there was a degree of fairness. Dont forget the tory party did not want it and predicted wrongly that many businesses would go bust because of it.

The issue now is that many companies use it as the norm rather than what it should have been, ie a minimum. Ironically i read a report last couple of days about the many many company directors who are non doms to avoid taxes here in the uk. I suppose minimum wage or even god forbid a living wage would concern them

Ah ha.

There's me, fingered as a Tory on here, and probably a baby eating one at that, and that was my observation then and has been consistent ever since.

Minimum wage - great idea, introduced with the best intentions, but it is now the wage, which is perhaps not so good.

What would you do, scrap it?

I like linking it to an independently calculated living wage. Or just do what the Green Party propose and make the lowest wage 60% of the average net income. A minimum wage of around £7.80 would raise a huge number of people out of in work poverty and save the government a huge amount on in work benefits.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Living wage & maximum wage.

[blandy]

What would you do, scrap it?

I like linking it to an independently calculated living wage. Or just do what the Green Party propose and make the lowest wage 60% of the average net income. A minimum wage of around £7.80 would raise a huge number of people out of in work poverty and save the government a huge amount on in work benefits.

There's a lot I like about the Greens, but that idea is bonkers. Small local shops and businesses would be goosed and have to lay people off. The papershops, tyre fitters, coffee shops and florists and greengrocers and bookshops and fishmongers and so on. There would have to be simultaneous massive other changes to render it not totally counter-productive. 

[Risso]

That's great logic by the Greens!

 

Two people in the economy, one earning £50, the other earning £10.  The mean salary is £30, so the second person gets a pay rise up to £18.  The average salary is now £34, so they should now get a payrise up to £20.40!  Except that's now raised the average salary as well, so they need another pay rise....... It's almost Osborne-esque in its stupidity.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

I've come to the conclusion that the majority are idiots and can not be trusted to elect decent politiicians. Therefore I will start a petition to make it mandatory that all final decisions on prime ministers etc are made by me.

[bickster]

That's great logic by the Greens!

 

Two people in the economy, one earning £50, the other earning £10.  The mean salary is £30, so the second person gets a pay rise up to £18.  The average salary is now £34, so they should now get a payrise up to £20.40!  Except that's now raised the average salary as well, so they need another pay rise....... It's almost Osborne-esque in its stupidity.

What the Green Party idea would currently mean:-

Mean weekly income in UK is around £500 a week therefore £300 a week for 60%

£300 divided by 37.5 (hours worked in a week) = £8 an hour

minimum wage is currently already £6.31

The living wage foundation says it should be £8-80 in London and £7-65 outside

Somethings wrong in this country, somethings broken if the min wage is that far off what it costs to live a decent existence

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

 

An interesting look at how UKIP is splitting the left

[Kingfisher]

That's great logic by the Greens!

Two people in the economy, one earning £50, the other earning £10. The mean salary is £30, so the second person gets a pay rise up to £18. The average salary is now £34, so they should now get a payrise up to £20.40! Except that's now raised the average salary as well, so they need another pay rise....... It's almost Osborne-esque in its stupidity.

What the Green Party idea would currently mean:-

Mean weekly income in UK is around £500 a week therefore £300 a week for 60%

£300 divided by 37.5 (hours worked in a week) = £8 an hour

minimum wage is currently already £6.31

The living wage foundation says it should be £8-80 in London and £7-65 outside

Somethings wrong in this country, somethings broken if the min wage is that far off what it costs to live a decent existence

Now my maths is absolutely abysmal. But when we talk about UK average wage, what is meant is the most often occurring wage or modal value (I think, straining to remember GCSE maths). Average wage is not the highest plus the lowest divided by the population.

Yes there is something very wrong if people are on a wage so much lower than it should be possible to exist on. It's even more obscene if say ASDA or Tesco are paying it whilst profiting to the tune of billions of pounds a year.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Kingfisher

[Kingfisher]

What would you do, scrap it?

I like linking it to an independently calculated living wage. Or just do what the Green Party propose and make the lowest wage 60% of the average net income. A minimum wage of around £7.80 would raise a huge number of people out of in work poverty and save the government a huge amount on in work benefits.

There's a lot I like about the Greens, but that idea is bonkers. Small local shops and businesses would be goosed and have to lay people off. The papershops, tyre fitters, coffee shops and florists and greengrocers and bookshops and fishmongers and so on. There would have to be simultaneous massive other changes to render it not totally counter-productive.

Indeed. A more just taxation system so that Starbucks pay up and John the butcher pays less rates on his business. Edited May 16, 2014 by Kingfisher

[blandy]

 

 

That's great logic by the Greens!

Two people in the economy, one earning £50, the other earning £10. The mean salary is £30, so the second person gets a pay rise up to £18. The average salary is now £34, so they should now get a payrise up to £20.40! Except that's now raised the average salary as well, so they need another pay rise....... It's almost Osborne-esque in its stupidity.

What the Green Party idea would currently mean:-

Mean weekly income in UK is around £500 a week therefore £300 a week for 60%

£300 divided by 37.5 (hours worked in a week) = £8 an hour

minimum wage is currently already £6.31

The living wage foundation says it should be £8-80 in London and £7-65 outside

Somethings wrong in this country, somethings broken if the min wage is that far off what it costs to live a decent existence

Now my maths is absolutely abysmal. But when we talk about UK average wage, what is meant is the most often occurring wage or modal value (I think, straining to remember GCSE maths). Average wage is not the highest plus the lowest divided by the population.

Yes there is something very wrong if people are on a wage so much lower than it should be possible to exist on. It's even more obscene if say ASDA or Tesco are paying it whilst profiting to the tune of billions of pounds a year.

 

It's not your maths, but the average is the sum total of all the wages earnt, divided by the number of people earning. That's different to the most often occurring wage.

The average is skewed upwards by a few (relatively) people earning a ton of money. Like the average wage at a football club will be high, because the players earn gaziliions more than the cleaners. The 50 million quid total wage bill at Villa this season, divided by 500 employees equates to an average wage of 100K. In reality it's 40 players and staff earning 45 million, and the other 60 people earning 5 million. That's the problem with the thing, when you do the same exercise for a country.

 

I'm far more in favour of something which says the top earners in a co. can only earn a set multiple maximum of the lowest paid. Directors getting 5 million, or 8 million a year, as happens, and then staff earning the minimum wage is ridiculous.

[Risso]

 

 

I'm far more in favour of something which says the top earners in a co. can only earn a set multiple maximum of the lowest paid. Directors getting 5 million, or 8 million a year, as happens, and then staff earning the minimum wage is ridiculous.

 

 

That's just as bonkers as the Green suggestion to be fair. 

[Kingfisher]

I loath to post anything about UKIP, they get enough publicity. However this is worth a watch as Farage gets a bit of a grilling.

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/5336322?&ir=UK

[Kingfisher]

That's great logic by the Greens!

Two people in the economy, one earning £50, the other earning £10. The mean salary is £30, so the second person gets a pay rise up to £18. The average salary is now £34, so they should now get a payrise up to £20.40! Except that's now raised the average salary as well, so they need another pay rise....... It's almost Osborne-esque in its stupidity.

What the Green Party idea would currently mean:-

Mean weekly income in UK is around £500 a week therefore £300 a week for 60%

£300 divided by 37.5 (hours worked in a week) = £8 an hour

minimum wage is currently already £6.31

The living wage foundation says it should be £8-80 in London and £7-65 outside

Somethings wrong in this country, somethings broken if the min wage is that far off what it costs to live a decent existence

Now my maths is absolutely abysmal. But when we talk about UK average wage, what is meant is the most often occurring wage or modal value (I think, straining to remember GCSE maths). Average wage is not the highest plus the lowest divided by the population.

Yes there is something very wrong if people are on a wage so much lower than it should be possible to exist on. It's even more obscene if say ASDA or Tesco are paying it whilst profiting to the tune of billions of pounds a year.

It's not your maths, but the average is the sum total of all the wages earnt, divided by the number of people earning. That's different to the most often occurring wage.

The average is skewed upwards by a few (relatively) people earning a ton of money. Like the average wage at a football club will be high, because the players earn gaziliions more than the cleaners. The 50 million quid total wage bill at Villa this season, divided by 500 employees equates to an average wage of 100K. In reality it's 40 players and staff earning 45 million, and the other 60 people earning 5 million. That's the problem with the thing, when you do the same exercise for a country.

I'm far more in favour of something which says the top earners in a co. can only earn a set multiple maximum of the lowest paid. Directors getting 5 million, or 8 million a year, as happens, and then staff earning the minimum wage is ridiculous.

I'd like to see a minimum wage based on the living wage calculation.

[villaajax]

Anyone else catch that massive scandal rocking the Labour Party? Axelrod put out a tweet and he missed one of the Ls in Milliband! (which he has since corrected). The Tories seem to be taking it as a victory...

[Awol]

I loath to post anything about UKIP, they get enough publicity. However this is worth a watch as Farage gets a bit of a grilling.

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/5336322?&ir=UK

Another failed hatchet job on UKIP. They'll win the euro elections comfortably if the polling is correct and the establishment (left and right) is bricking it.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Yes, it's great when bigoted arseholes like UKIP get to represent the UK in Europe. It's great that they can form coalitions with other bigoted arseholes, and the rise of bigoted arseholes can carry on relatively unchecked because people are too bloody stupid to realise that said bigoted arseholes don't give a toss about them, their family or their working conditions, they only want power, money, and to send people who don't look like them 'back home'.

 

It disgusts me and it should disgust any reasonable minded individual

Edited May 16, 2014 by CarewsEyebrowDesigner

[blandy]

 

 

 

I'm far more in favour of something which says the top earners in a co. can only earn a set multiple maximum of the lowest paid. Directors getting 5 million, or 8 million a year, as happens, and then staff earning the minimum wage is ridiculous.

 

 

That's just as bonkers as the Green suggestion to be fair. 

 

Each to their own, though it's something that a few places do already, voluntarily. Doesn't seem to harm them, quite the opposite. John Lewis do a thing where there's something like a 70 times multiple between the highest they will pay and (either, I'm not sure) the lowest full time wage, or the average full time wage, there. And when they pay bonuses, which they nearly always do, there's more of a uniformity across all levels of the structure, rather than millions in shares and so on for the big cheeses and a hunder pounds or so to the pond life at the bottom of the food chain.

 

it beats my how someone in a bank or chain can ever be worth multi millions plus similar bonuses each year. No one brings that much value - it's just been something that has happened over the last 30 years or so. It's like mutually assured financial destruction, favouring people in the boardroom over everyone else.