Starmer In Jobs Push.....right Oh!
News9 mins ago
Praise For Osborne Due?
39 Answers
The left on here love bashing him for not caring about the poorer people in this country, but surely this must be something close to their heart so I wonder why it has not been mentioned?
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Been a bit busy but heard it yesterday!
Yes - I think it was only last week that I was pointing out that the failure to raise the minimum wage was effectively a case of taxpayers subsidising some of our largest firms.
It's often forgotton that most benefit claimants are actually working people - often on minimum wage.
But before we get carried away it's worth remembering that it will take a lot of above inflation increases to get the minimum wage back to where it was compared to the cost of living before the banks trashed our economy.
Why should it get back to where it was when you and I have also suffered drops in our standard of living?
Because it's about disposable income
People on minimum wage have seen their income dip below zero disposable income.
Yes we are all having to make sacrifices but those should come from disposable income people shouldn't be chosing between heating and food
Yes - I think it was only last week that I was pointing out that the failure to raise the minimum wage was effectively a case of taxpayers subsidising some of our largest firms.
It's often forgotton that most benefit claimants are actually working people - often on minimum wage.
But before we get carried away it's worth remembering that it will take a lot of above inflation increases to get the minimum wage back to where it was compared to the cost of living before the banks trashed our economy.
Why should it get back to where it was when you and I have also suffered drops in our standard of living?
Because it's about disposable income
People on minimum wage have seen their income dip below zero disposable income.
Yes we are all having to make sacrifices but those should come from disposable income people shouldn't be chosing between heating and food
Yes AOG
I plainly remember these 'fears' when the minimum wage was first introduced.
The hospitality industry would be decimated as I recall - unemployment would skyrocket.
Of course nothing of the sort happened.
Business leaders aren't stupid - they'll fight tooth and nail to tell you how raising their costs will put up unemployment in reality the hit is often more of a hit to profits and dividends
That doesn't play so well in the press
I plainly remember these 'fears' when the minimum wage was first introduced.
The hospitality industry would be decimated as I recall - unemployment would skyrocket.
Of course nothing of the sort happened.
Business leaders aren't stupid - they'll fight tooth and nail to tell you how raising their costs will put up unemployment in reality the hit is often more of a hit to profits and dividends
That doesn't play so well in the press
jake-the-peg
/// Business leaders aren't stupid - they'll fight tooth and nail to tell you how raising their costs will put up unemployment in reality the hit is often more of a hit to profits and dividends ///
And don't you think that is a good an excuse as any, to cut some of their expenditure (workforce)?
But I am not necessarily taking about Big Business leaders here, but the increased costs to the smaller businesses, who already have to carry the burden of various other government legislation such as increased maternity leave etc..
/// Business leaders aren't stupid - they'll fight tooth and nail to tell you how raising their costs will put up unemployment in reality the hit is often more of a hit to profits and dividends ///
And don't you think that is a good an excuse as any, to cut some of their expenditure (workforce)?
But I am not necessarily taking about Big Business leaders here, but the increased costs to the smaller businesses, who already have to carry the burden of various other government legislation such as increased maternity leave etc..
FredPuli43
/// Is there an election in the offing? He has no power to raise the minimum wage; that is decided by an independent body.///
Where does it say that he does have the power to raise it? he is only recommending it to those that do.
*** He is recommending an increase to the Low Pay Commission, which advises the government on what the rate should be. ***
/// Is there an election in the offing? He has no power to raise the minimum wage; that is decided by an independent body.///
Where does it say that he does have the power to raise it? he is only recommending it to those that do.
*** He is recommending an increase to the Low Pay Commission, which advises the government on what the rate should be. ***
-- answer removed --
I think you'll find AOG small businesses are exempt from all sorts of employment legislation - Unfair dismissal for example - I think there was even an idea to exempt them from Health and Safety legislation at one point which sounds crazy!
Small businesses will be least affected by this. If you're employing 5 people and you end up having to pay each another pound an hour you'r looking at an additional £200 a week
If you think £200 a week is going to make the difference between you staying in business and going bust - then you're broke already - you just don't know it
Small businesses will be least affected by this. If you're employing 5 people and you end up having to pay each another pound an hour you'r looking at an additional £200 a week
If you think £200 a week is going to make the difference between you staying in business and going bust - then you're broke already - you just don't know it
“…it will take a lot of above inflation increases to get the minimum wage back to where it was compared to the cost of living before the banks trashed our economy”
Leaving aside precisely where the blame lies for trashing our economy, I think a few sums need doing before we accept such a rash argument.
In 2007 the minimum wage was set at £5.52. In 2013 it was £6.31. This represents an increase over those six troubled years of 14.3%. In that same period the RPI (the higher of the two inflation measures and the one that few, if any, workers on average income see their pay increase by) increased by 20.5%. Few workers on average salaries have seen their wages increase by 14% in the last six years (many have had no increases at all to speak of). For many it will be a while (if ever) before their income is restored to 2007 equivalent levels. However, to restore parity to the 2007 figure a minimum wage of £6.65 would be required. This is an increase of 5.3% on the current figure and way below what the Chancellor is suggesting. Hardly “a lot of above inflation increases”.
In fact those on minimum wage have fared rather well since its introduction in 1999. Since that the time the RPI has increased by 51% whilst the minimum wage has increased by more than 75%. Had the minimum wage merely kept pace with the RPI it would now be set at about £5.45 instead of £6.31. In 2007, before “the banks trashed our economy” it was in fact £5.52 but need only have been around £4.50 to have kept pace with the RPI.
Let‘s also not get too above ourselves with the benefits provided to the Exchequer by raising the minimum wage. When it went up by 12p in 2013 it was estimated that this would benefit the Treasury by around £180m - £15m per each penny increase. Assuming an increase to £7 would see the same pro-rata benefits this would mean that about £1bn would be raised/saved. Whilst not insignificant it is less than 10% of the sum spent on overseas aid.
Of course the situation is far from ideal. But much of the blame must be laid at the door of Gordon Brown and his ridiculous “Working Tax Credits”. This enabled employers to continue to offer low pay (even when jobs were aplenty) and also allowed workers whom it suited to work half a week whilst having the other half of their wages paid by the taxpayer.
Leaving aside precisely where the blame lies for trashing our economy, I think a few sums need doing before we accept such a rash argument.
In 2007 the minimum wage was set at £5.52. In 2013 it was £6.31. This represents an increase over those six troubled years of 14.3%. In that same period the RPI (the higher of the two inflation measures and the one that few, if any, workers on average income see their pay increase by) increased by 20.5%. Few workers on average salaries have seen their wages increase by 14% in the last six years (many have had no increases at all to speak of). For many it will be a while (if ever) before their income is restored to 2007 equivalent levels. However, to restore parity to the 2007 figure a minimum wage of £6.65 would be required. This is an increase of 5.3% on the current figure and way below what the Chancellor is suggesting. Hardly “a lot of above inflation increases”.
In fact those on minimum wage have fared rather well since its introduction in 1999. Since that the time the RPI has increased by 51% whilst the minimum wage has increased by more than 75%. Had the minimum wage merely kept pace with the RPI it would now be set at about £5.45 instead of £6.31. In 2007, before “the banks trashed our economy” it was in fact £5.52 but need only have been around £4.50 to have kept pace with the RPI.
Let‘s also not get too above ourselves with the benefits provided to the Exchequer by raising the minimum wage. When it went up by 12p in 2013 it was estimated that this would benefit the Treasury by around £180m - £15m per each penny increase. Assuming an increase to £7 would see the same pro-rata benefits this would mean that about £1bn would be raised/saved. Whilst not insignificant it is less than 10% of the sum spent on overseas aid.
Of course the situation is far from ideal. But much of the blame must be laid at the door of Gordon Brown and his ridiculous “Working Tax Credits”. This enabled employers to continue to offer low pay (even when jobs were aplenty) and also allowed workers whom it suited to work half a week whilst having the other half of their wages paid by the taxpayer.
Jake
\\\If you think £200 a week is going to make the difference between you staying in business and going bust - then you're broke already - you just don't know it\\\
mmmm! not sure that the small businesses would agree, as that is just under £1000 a month extra to find, which may be the difference between survival and going under.
Have you ever run a small business?
\\\If you think £200 a week is going to make the difference between you staying in business and going bust - then you're broke already - you just don't know it\\\
mmmm! not sure that the small businesses would agree, as that is just under £1000 a month extra to find, which may be the difference between survival and going under.
Have you ever run a small business?
Yup NJ just completely ignored my post referring to disposable income and made the predictable comparison to average earnings being erroded
Yep we're all in this together lets split the bill evenly then I'll drive off in my Bently while you get the Bus!
But you're the one who orders all the booze and fillet steak at a group night out and suggests splitting the bill evenly!
It's imperative that we consider not average earnings but disposable income in such calculations.
And calling arguments that consider people's ability to pay 'rash' convinces no one
Yep we're all in this together lets split the bill evenly then I'll drive off in my Bently while you get the Bus!
But you're the one who orders all the booze and fillet steak at a group night out and suggests splitting the bill evenly!
It's imperative that we consider not average earnings but disposable income in such calculations.
And calling arguments that consider people's ability to pay 'rash' convinces no one
Have you sqad?
Sqad - businesses have variable costs and if your margins are that tight then you're simply not profitable.
The people most vulnerable to this are not small businesses but very large ones employing many thousands of workers all at low wages with small profits from each all amounting to significant profits at the centre.
And Yes I have worked for one of them
Such organisations generally have plenty of scope for passing costs on to customers and do so regularly as they deal with changing exchange rates, fuel costs and other variable costs
Sqad - businesses have variable costs and if your margins are that tight then you're simply not profitable.
The people most vulnerable to this are not small businesses but very large ones employing many thousands of workers all at low wages with small profits from each all amounting to significant profits at the centre.
And Yes I have worked for one of them
Such organisations generally have plenty of scope for passing costs on to customers and do so regularly as they deal with changing exchange rates, fuel costs and other variable costs
Yes Jake.......I have.
1) Travel Agency
2) Boutique.
\\\Sqad - businesses have variable costs and if your margins are that tight then you're simply not profitable. \\\
Of course businesses have variable costs, but many small businesses including the ones that i have described above carry on for years, where after the staff, costs and partners are paid......there is NOTHING left.
An extra £1,000 a month would be critical.
Passing costs on to the customer?....you will be lucky.
1) Travel Agency
2) Boutique.
\\\Sqad - businesses have variable costs and if your margins are that tight then you're simply not profitable. \\\
Of course businesses have variable costs, but many small businesses including the ones that i have described above carry on for years, where after the staff, costs and partners are paid......there is NOTHING left.
An extra £1,000 a month would be critical.
Passing costs on to the customer?....you will be lucky.
If you run a small business in this country, paying £7 an hour minimum to your staff is not your main concern now or in the future. Business rates, rents, insurances, the cost of complying with various regulations, and other overheads, are.
AOG, never mind the condition, what do you think the message was? It was that the next Labour government would raise the minimum wage; this was how it was being , and meant to be,widely understood. There was no point in saying it otherwise was there? He is hardly going to say "We can't ever do anything about it, but, if we could ,we would". Politicians belief in messages, not reality.
AOG, never mind the condition, what do you think the message was? It was that the next Labour government would raise the minimum wage; this was how it was being , and meant to be,widely understood. There was no point in saying it otherwise was there? He is hardly going to say "We can't ever do anything about it, but, if we could ,we would". Politicians belief in messages, not reality.
Fred
\\\\If you run a small business in this country, paying £7 an hour minimum to your staff is not your main concern now or in the future. Business rates, rents, insurances, the cost of complying with various regulations, and other overheads, are. \\\\\
Maybe.......but add another £1000/month to your staff......then it would be your "main concern,"
\\\\If you run a small business in this country, paying £7 an hour minimum to your staff is not your main concern now or in the future. Business rates, rents, insurances, the cost of complying with various regulations, and other overheads, are. \\\\\
Maybe.......but add another £1000/month to your staff......then it would be your "main concern,"
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles11 mins ago
Time For A Limit On Angry Posts
ChatterBank11 mins ago
News23 mins ago
News25 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles33 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.