FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Minimum Wage

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Now here's a thought if minimum wage was increased to a descent amount and we could all earn a good wage enough to live on would there be need for tax credits. And I know child places are free from when a child is 3 if they changed that for when a child turns 1. Mmmm just thinking. 1st year off for maternity leave. If only it was a perfect world.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

That would be a good idea, increase the minimum wage. Doubt that will happen though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ovefun2Couple
over a year ago

wakefield

not with the con-dems it wont

never forget it was a labour govt that brought min wage act in

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Economics has never been my strong point.So forgive me.

If the minimum wage is increased doesn't the price of everything else shift exponentially??

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *he_original_poloWoman
over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

You can only raise the mimimum wage so far before the jobs are put at risk.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

and it was the labour gov that messed everything up

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"and it was the labour gov that messed everything up"

Labourcaused the entire world economy to go into recession in 2008??

all on their own?

Shucks!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Will never happen, the government already dropped the amount you can earn to be eligable from £15000 to £13500 and didnt bother to inform anyone, and it wouldnt surprise me that they will scrap it all together to save money. and they wonder why people dont want to work, when your better off not working.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *exybabyMan
over a year ago

Canterbury....ish


"and it was the labour gov that messed everything up

Labourcaused the entire world economy to go into recession in 2008??

all on their own?

Shucks!"

Double shucks!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Economics has never been my strong point.So forgive me.

If the minimum wage is increased doesn't the price of everything else shift exponentially??"

Yes. If minimum wage is shifted, then the ceiling on wages for the entire economy also lifts.

This is called 'wage inflation'.

There is absolutely no advantage to having wage increases if there is not an increase in economic output. Min wage laws should exist in some fields where there is no possibility of competition, but that's not in most sectors. Really, it's like confusing a glass of milk for a cow to confuse wealth with money.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much "
takings is not what you need to be looking at its the profit margins

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Folks. Increasing the minimum wage is directly connected to higher unemployment.

The logic of the minimum wage is precisely the same as for the maximum wage at the other end of the scale. Should everyone be prohibited from making more than X pounds sterling per year?

Wages are ultimately set by supply and demand. If you want higher wages per hour, then do a more unusual job. That's how the division of labour process operates. Because cutting down on the supply of labour doesn't help you in the long run (contrary to what most people seem to think about immigration), it just shifts the problem elsewhere in the economy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much "

I was a bar manageress for 6 years and i loved it, new people took over and wanted me to be salaried but by law(then) they couldnt. I worked 13 hours a day, bottling up, chaning barrels, cleaning pipes and serving. We used to make a fortune in tips and we had a drinks book, everytime we got bought a drink we wrote it down then used to go in on our night off and have them. Best job i ever had

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"and it was the labour gov that messed everything up"

Well actually the largest problem was caused by home owners in the USA unable to pay their mortgages.... at the time the administration there was Republican (right wing)

Add to that the fact that the taxes are increasing under the current UK government whilst at the same time the borrowing each quarter is higher than the last Labour government ever borrowed, I think we just have to accept that the old preconceptions are all broken... anyone got some new ones?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much "

I know it sucks to be in a low paying job, since I'm 24 and have been in them since I was 15.

Getting higher wages isn't straightforward, the usual methods are more education (vocational or academic), working more to purchase capital (property/shares etc). I think the best way to do this, at whatever wage level you're at, is to save money and invest it in an index fund for as long as you can (easier than you'd think, but you need to read about it, since there are more than a few pitfalls, in particular going to a bank is a very bad idea).

I wish I had a killer app to sell to everyone for improving wages, only that I don't. I think, from previous discussions we've had, that you might need to de-stress over this issue. e.g. massages from a friend, relaxing baths etc. Because often stress prevents us seeing ways of getting ahead.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much

I know it sucks to be in a low paying job, since I'm 24 and have been in them since I was 15.

Getting higher wages isn't straightforward, the usual methods are more education (vocational or academic), working more to purchase capital (property/shares etc). I think the best way to do this, at whatever wage level you're at, is to save money and invest it in an index fund for as long as you can (easier than you'd think, but you need to read about it, since there are more than a few pitfalls, in particular going to a bank is a very bad idea).

I wish I had a killer app to sell to everyone for improving wages, only that I don't. I think, from previous discussions we've had, that you might need to de-stress over this issue. e.g. massages from a friend, relaxing baths etc. Because often stress prevents us seeing ways of getting ahead. "

Couldnt agree with you more on the property and shares. How many millionaires are sat with a million in the bank. Not many im sure. Speculate to accumalate.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much

I know it sucks to be in a low paying job, since I'm 24 and have been in them since I was 15.

Getting higher wages isn't straightforward, the usual methods are more education (vocational or academic), working more to purchase capital (property/shares etc). I think the best way to do this, at whatever wage level you're at, is to save money and invest it in an index fund for as long as you can (easier than you'd think, but you need to read about it, since there are more than a few pitfalls, in particular going to a bank is a very bad idea).

I wish I had a killer app to sell to everyone for improving wages, only that I don't. I think, from previous discussions we've had, that you might need to de-stress over this issue. e.g. massages from a friend, relaxing baths etc. Because often stress prevents us seeing ways of getting ahead.

Couldnt agree with you more on the property and shares. How many millionaires are sat with a million in the bank. Not many im sure. Speculate to accumalate. "

Yes, but I don't like speculation, since it doesn't work. I prefer the term investment. In my view you need to buy and hold a broad range of shares for a long time. Timing markets, well, I know as many people who've failed at that as who have succeeded. Better off being conservative, saving up money, buying shares (very cheap to do in the UK) of something like an ETF or index fund such as IWRD (thousands of corporations across the world in every sector and industry imaginable), reinvesting dividends etc.

In the long term, compound interest will be on your side. Also it's important to build up an emergency fund of 3-6 months living expenses in case you lose your job. That would give you a strategy net frankly most people don't have.

In any case, whether you agree or not on the details, the key is clearly ownership of property.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much

I know it sucks to be in a low paying job, since I'm 24 and have been in them since I was 15.

Getting higher wages isn't straightforward, the usual methods are more education (vocational or academic), working more to purchase capital (property/shares etc). I think the best way to do this, at whatever wage level you're at, is to save money and invest it in an index fund for as long as you can (easier than you'd think, but you need to read about it, since there are more than a few pitfalls, in particular going to a bank is a very bad idea).

I wish I had a killer app to sell to everyone for improving wages, only that I don't. I think, from previous discussions we've had, that you might need to de-stress over this issue. e.g. massages from a friend, relaxing baths etc. Because often stress prevents us seeing ways of getting ahead.

Couldnt agree with you more on the property and shares. How many millionaires are sat with a million in the bank. Not many im sure. Speculate to accumalate.

Yes, but I don't like speculation, since it doesn't work. I prefer the term investment. In my view you need to buy and hold a broad range of shares for a long time. Timing markets, well, I know as many people who've failed at that as who have succeeded. Better off being conservative, saving up money, buying shares (very cheap to do in the UK) of something like an ETF or index fund such as IWRD (thousands of corporations across the world in every sector and industry imaginable), reinvesting dividends etc.

In the long term, compound interest will be on your side. Also it's important to build up an emergency fund of 3-6 months living expenses in case you lose your job. That would give you a strategy net frankly most people don't have.

In any case, whether you agree or not on the details, the key is clearly ownership of property."

I dont know the ins and outs, but i know someone who owns quite a bit of property and rents it out. They also have quite alot invested in shares and they live of the dividends. They retired at 55 and lived of their income this way for quite some time

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"In any case, whether you agree or not on the details, the key is clearly ownership of property."

Property is the short to medium term investment that seldom fails, and you can even insure it!

Land is far more sensible but very low dividends make it only a very long term strategy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"and it was the labour gov that messed everything up"

everything?

suppose gordon brown subliminally convinced george osborne to sell off Northern Rock for half a mill than he was offered for it last year..

bad gordon..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"In any case, whether you agree or not on the details, the key is clearly ownership of property.

Property is the short to medium term investment that seldom fails, and you can even insure it!

Land is far more sensible but very low dividends make it only a very long term strategy."

Sorry, I'm guilty of not being specific.

By 'ownership of property' I'm talking about the general principal.

e.g. renting out house as a landlord (NOT capital gains! 1900 - 2000 house capital average gains in USA was a real 23%... Capital gains in house prices are a zero sum game)

e.g. owning a diversity of shares in many industries, parts of the world

e.g. capital investment in your own company to hire workers etc

That is what I meant by property.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

While you're there Jon Maynard what advice have you got for the people on low wages or benefits who are struggling to even have the spare cash to turn the lights on or eat this winter?

In fact the people who have no spare cash at all and are down the CAB trying to get help to deal with debts.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Not a bad idea but what about the self employed?

Some do get tax credits but no fixed wage

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I will put a table of asset class returns here in case anybody's interested.

Over 110 years, 1900 - 2010, the *average* *real* return on investments in:

shares: 5.0 (this would be 9% - 10% with inflation)

gilts: 1.2

Corporate bonds: ~2-3%

In the longer term e.g. longer than 10 years, shares win hands down as long as you weren't stupid enough to put everything on a single country, sector, industry or corporation. Otherwise bonds and gilts are fine 10 years.

An average 10% nominal return from shares is nothing to sniff at. For 3000.00 pounds, 25 years, you could buy an expensive house with the result. (350k roughly)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *acreadCouple
over a year ago

central scotland

What about a maximum wage as it seems the bankers, utility company heads etc just keep upping the wages AND bonuses yby huge percentages year on year and no government seems willing to stop them despite all the shouting.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *acreadCouple
over a year ago

central scotland

And absolutely nothing to do with performance

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"While you're there Jon Maynard what advice have you got for the people on low wages or benefits who are struggling to even have the spare cash to turn the lights on or eat this winter?

In fact the people who have no spare cash at all and are down the CAB trying to get help to deal with debts.

"

If you are in serious debt ('serious' in the sense you simply cannot pay it back, not in the sense of quantity), I suggest you talk to a bankruptcy lawyer.

Otherwise, pay off the higher interest debt first.

I'm aware debt sucks donkey balls. However investment is the opposite of debt, which is why I'm talking about it. I suggest if you've any money at all that's free, that you purchase a genuine book on investment practice/theory such as William Bernstein's 'four pillars of investment'. The goal of becoming wealthier, never going back into debt, that is a good motivator.

It's hard to get up in the morning when you've just got a stick whacking you, you have got to have a higher purpose as well, well do I know that.

The book costs 5.79 with post from amazon uk 2nd hand. If you don't have a fiver to spare, I suggest you save up for it. It's not a get rich scheme bullshit book. It tells you the legitimate way to become wealthy through the bond and stock markets. It's not rocket science, it just takes time and perseverance.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"And absolutely nothing to do with performance"

Yes, it's a problem. Basically, back in the day when indivdual investors owned the equity, they would slap such behavioru in an instant.

But today, most investors aren't people, but institutions. e.g. pension funds and sovereign wealth funds. Unfortunately they are rather abstracted from the actual businesses they invest in, and as a result they don't vote. i.e. zombie shareholders.

The law needs to be changed so that individual shareholders who are more active, can punish companies for doing stupid junk.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ot - CoupleCouple
over a year ago

Glasgow


"not with the con-dems it wont

never forget it was a labour govt that brought min wage act in "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouplefunukCouple
over a year ago

North Bristol

Great idea. Where's the extra money coming from?

*Her*

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If an emplyer has a certain amount of money availae to pay staff, then making them pay more to each person just means tehy will emply less peope, so who does this help?

Also, where is the money coming from for yet more free childcare?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much "

sorry to disagree, we own a pub with a healthy take, but tell you what, i would give it away and work here for minimum wage and be better off !!!

people have no idea of the overheads, to start with, my business rates are £40k a year !!! we pay alot more for gas, water & electric than domestic rates, there is not alot of profit in beer sales anymore, there is more profit in soft drinks.

then lets move on to food, you dont pay V.A.T. on food when you buy it in, as soon as you sell it you have to pay 20% V.A.T on it. and the list goes on.

although we own the business (freehouse) we rent the building, another £55k a year gone out in rent.

just had the january beer cost increase come through, 7% increase to us, and you cant raise the price by 7% to the customer!! and the brewers ALWAYS increase again just before the budget, then straight after the government increase the duty.

last year between january and the budget, we had a 6% rise in beer costs, 5% increase in V.A.T. then another 3% increase just before the budget.

thats a 14% rise in cost to us, the most we could put it up was by the 5% V.A.T. raise. so 9% we had to swallow, AGAIN.

this happens year after year, and yes, we would love to pay our staff more than nmw, we just cant afford it!!!

and we worked our wage out last year based on our profits against the hours WE put in .... it worked out at £2.07 per hour, and think how much money we invested in the business and the risk we took.... to earn less than part time staff.

sorry for the rant

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oantrimcpl2010Couple
over a year ago

Lisburn


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much

sorry to disagree, we own a pub with a healthy take, but tell you what, i would give it away and work here for minimum wage and be better off !!!

people have no idea of the overheads, to start with, my business rates are £40k a year !!! we pay alot more for gas, water & electric than domestic rates, there is not alot of profit in beer sales anymore, there is more profit in soft drinks.

then lets move on to food, you dont pay V.A.T. on food when you buy it in, as soon as you sell it you have to pay 20% V.A.T on it. and the list goes on.

although we own the business (freehouse) we rent the building, another £55k a year gone out in rent.

just had the january beer cost increase come through, 7% increase to us, and you cant raise the price by 7% to the customer!! and the brewers ALWAYS increase again just before the budget, then straight after the government increase the duty.

last year between january and the budget, we had a 6% rise in beer costs, 5% increase in V.A.T. then another 3% increase just before the budget.

thats a 14% rise in cost to us, the most we could put it up was by the 5% V.A.T. raise. so 9% we had to swallow, AGAIN.

this happens year after year, and yes, we would love to pay our staff more than nmw, we just cant afford it!!!

and we worked our wage out last year based on our profits against the hours WE put in .... it worked out at £2.07 per hour, and think how much money we invested in the business and the risk we took.... to earn less than part time staff.

sorry for the rant "

Thens there the depreciation, and wear and tear.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much

sorry to disagree, we own a pub with a healthy take, but tell you what, i would give it away and work here for minimum wage and be better off !!!

people have no idea of the overheads, to start with, my business rates are £40k a year !!! we pay alot more for gas, water & electric than domestic rates, there is not alot of profit in beer sales anymore, there is more profit in soft drinks.

then lets move on to food, you dont pay V.A.T. on food when you buy it in, as soon as you sell it you have to pay 20% V.A.T on it. and the list goes on.

although we own the business (freehouse) we rent the building, another £55k a year gone out in rent.

just had the january beer cost increase come through, 7% increase to us, and you cant raise the price by 7% to the customer!! and the brewers ALWAYS increase again just before the budget, then straight after the government increase the duty.

last year between january and the budget, we had a 6% rise in beer costs, 5% increase in V.A.T. then another 3% increase just before the budget.

thats a 14% rise in cost to us, the most we could put it up was by the 5% V.A.T. raise. so 9% we had to swallow, AGAIN.

this happens year after year, and yes, we would love to pay our staff more than nmw, we just cant afford it!!!

and we worked our wage out last year based on our profits against the hours WE put in .... it worked out at £2.07 per hour, and think how much money we invested in the business and the risk we took.... to earn less than part time staff.

sorry for the rant

Thens there the depreciation, and wear and tear."

didnt mention that and its a grade 2 listed building in a conservation area with a FULL repair & insure lease.

wtf are we still doing here

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oantrimcpl2010Couple
over a year ago

Lisburn

didnt mention that and its a grade 2 listed building in a conservation area with a FULL repair & insure lease.

wtf are we still doing here

You love what you are doing

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *teve261970Man
over a year ago

Gateshead


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much "

Yeah my friend worked in a city centre bar and the amount of money they take in there is unreal, for a bottle that costs £2.20 in my local I would have to pay £3.75 in the centre but this is the world we live in. xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"didnt mention that and its a grade 2 listed building in a conservation area with a FULL repair & insure lease.

wtf are we still doing here

You love what you are doing "

hmmmm ... can i get back to you on that

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much

Yeah my friend worked in a city centre bar and the amount of money they take in there is unreal, for a bottle that costs £2.20 in my local I would have to pay £3.75 in the centre but this is the world we live in. xx"

wish we could get away with £3.75 a bottle, we got a little old country pub so cant, the reason they get away with their prices in city centre pubs is just because they can.... alot of truth in a fool and his money are soon parted. and city pubs are full of young & stupid people prepared to pay the prices

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

oh well .... seems we killed that thread

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

My job come the 11th Jan is under threat.. Yes its a decent paid job but my salary is paid for by the govenment. I am looking at setting up my own coffee shop and to employ long term unemployed and ex offenders, However after doing my business plan and cost I can prob only pay them min wage.. Its sad but to someone that would be a chance to get back on the working ladder and a reference from moi... I am looking at other avenues to my business to associate with what I have been working my arse off doing for the past 10 years....

I hope that my buisness can get off the ground!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Now here's a thought if minimum wage was increased to a descent amount and we could all earn a good wage enough to live on would there be need for tax credits. And I know child places are free from when a child is 3 if they changed that for when a child turns 1. Mmmm just thinking. 1st year off for maternity leave. If only it was a perfect world."

In a way they did this when they increased the tax thresholds under pressure from the Libdems. This was well overdue and very welcome.

It should never have been allowed to erode to such a low threshhold before though and in my opinion thresholds ought to be increased annually in line with inflation but I doubt that they will.

Crumbs.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon


"Now here's a thought if minimum wage was increased to a descent amount and we could all earn a good wage enough to live on would there be need for tax credits. And I know child places are free from when a child is 3 if they changed that for when a child turns 1. Mmmm just thinking. 1st year off for maternity leave. If only it was a perfect world.

In a way they did this when they increased the tax thresholds under pressure from the Libdems. This was well overdue and very welcome.

It should never have been allowed to erode to such a low threshhold before though and in my opinion thresholds ought to be increased annually in line with inflation but I doubt that they will.

Crumbs."

I know that they work out benefits from either retail something or other or inflation something or other.. I remember hearing it half asleep in benefit training last week.. They did to do the same with min wage... put it up a set amount every year. Sorry if they do that already... I can't quite remember...x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"More than minimum wage at the pub would be nice especially when you got some idea of what the takings are plus its not the best place to work but I need the extra money too much

sorry to disagree, we own a pub with a healthy take, but tell you what, i would give it away and work here for minimum wage and be better off !!!

people have no idea of the overheads, to start with, my business rates are £40k a year !!! we pay alot more for gas, water & electric than domestic rates, there is not alot of profit in beer sales anymore, there is more profit in soft drinks.

then lets move on to food, you dont pay V.A.T. on food when you buy it in, as soon as you sell it you have to pay 20% V.A.T on it. and the list goes on.

although we own the business (freehouse) we rent the building, another £55k a year gone out in rent.

just had the january beer cost increase come through, 7% increase to us, and you cant raise the price by 7% to the customer!! and the brewers ALWAYS increase again just before the budget, then straight after the government increase the duty.

last year between january and the budget, we had a 6% rise in beer costs, 5% increase in V.A.T. then another 3% increase just before the budget.

thats a 14% rise in cost to us, the most we could put it up was by the 5% V.A.T. raise. so 9% we had to swallow, AGAIN.

this happens year after year, and yes, we would love to pay our staff more than nmw, we just cant afford it!!!

and we worked our wage out last year based on our profits against the hours WE put in .... it worked out at £2.07 per hour, and think how much money we invested in the business and the risk we took.... to earn less than part time staff.

sorry for the rant "

It's alright, it's a fact of life that many employers barely have their heads above water. It applies to the smaller supermarkets and grocery shops as well. It's not just employees that are hurting.

In particular, there is a long term secular downward trend in the amount of alcohol people are consuming. Today, most profits come from food/soft drinks like you were saying.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I will put a table of asset class returns here in case anybody's interested.

Over 110 years, 1900 - 2010, the *average* *real* return on investments in:

shares: 5.0 (this would be 9% - 10% with inflation)

gilts: 1.2

Corporate bonds: ~2-3%

In the longer term e.g. longer than 10 years, shares win hands down as long as you weren't stupid enough to put everything on a single country, sector, industry or corporation. Otherwise bonds and gilts are fine 10 years.

An average 10% nominal return from shares is nothing to sniff at. For 3000.00 pounds, 25 years, you could buy an expensive house with the result. (350k roughly)"

I'm not sure how any of this is relevant to people trying to live on a minimum wage with little or no disposable income. It's difficult enough for medium wage owners to even consider an investment portfolio. The majority are living to their means in these testing times.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

sorry to disagree, we own a pub with a healthy take, but tell you what, i would give it away and work here for minimum wage and be better off !!!

people have no idea of the overheads, to start with, my business rates are £40k a year !!! we pay alot more for gas, water & electric than domestic rates, there is not alot of profit in beer sales anymore, there is more profit in soft drinks.

then lets move on to food, you dont pay V.A.T. on food when you buy it in, as soon as you sell it you have to pay 20% V.A.T on it. and the list goes on.

although we own the business (freehouse) we rent the building, another £55k a year gone out in rent.

just had the january beer cost increase come through, 7% increase to us, and you cant raise the price by 7% to the customer!! and the brewers ALWAYS increase again just before the budget, then straight after the government increase the duty.

last year between january and the budget, we had a 6% rise in beer costs, 5% increase in V.A.T. then another 3% increase just before the budget.

thats a 14% rise in cost to us, the most we could put it up was by the 5% V.A.T. raise. so 9% we had to swallow, AGAIN.

this happens year after year, and yes, we would love to pay our staff more than nmw, we just cant afford it!!!

and we worked our wage out last year based on our profits against the hours WE put in .... it worked out at £2.07 per hour, and think how much money we invested in the business and the risk we took.... to earn less than part time staff.

sorry for the rant "

That is an excellent post in so many ways.

It hopefully gives some people a 'snapshot' of what it's like to run a small business in the current climate.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *waymanMan
over a year ago

newcastle


"Economics has never been my strong point.So forgive me.

If the minimum wage is increased doesn't the price of everything else shift exponentially??

Yes. If minimum wage is shifted, then the ceiling on wages for the entire economy also lifts.

This is called 'wage inflation'.

There is absolutely no advantage to having wage increases if there is not an increase in economic output. Min wage laws should exist in some fields where there is no possibility of competition, but that's not in most sectors. Really, it's like confusing a glass of milk for a cow to confuse wealth with money."

Actually that's a spectacular over simplification.

Consider the situation now. Family A gets 80% of its income from a minimum wage job, and 20% from tax credits.

The state raises the minimum wage to 100% of family A's income, and abolishes tax credits, reducing the total tax take as a result. Economic impact? Zero. There would be no inflation.

The notion that increasing the minimum wage must cause inflation is the kind of Chicago school fuckwittery that got us into this mess, and which will keep us there since Osborne hasn't a clue.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *waymanMan
over a year ago

newcastle


"I will put a table of asset class returns here in case anybody's interested.

Over 110 years, 1900 - 2010, the *average* *real* return on investments in:

shares: 5.0 (this would be 9% - 10% with inflation)

gilts: 1.2

Corporate bonds: ~2-3%

In the longer term e.g. longer than 10 years, shares win hands down as long as you weren't stupid enough to put everything on a single country, sector, industry or corporation. Otherwise bonds and gilts are fine 10 years.

An average 10% nominal return from shares is nothing to sniff at. For 3000.00 pounds, 25 years, you could buy an expensive house with the result. (350k roughly)"

Help me out here.

If your table is showing the real rates of return why would you need to adjust again for inflation?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire


"My job come the 11th Jan is under threat.. Yes its a decent paid job but my salary is paid for by the govenment. I am looking at setting up my own coffee shop and to employ long term unemployed and ex offenders, However after doing my business plan and cost I can prob only pay them min wage.. Its sad but to someone that would be a chance to get back on the working ladder and a reference from moi... I am looking at other avenues to my business to associate with what I have been working my arse off doing for the past 10 years....

I hope that my buisness can get off the ground!! "

There are already people that do this, i know one guy went on to become a qualified chef by being given a chance

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"My job come the 11th Jan is under threat.. Yes its a decent paid job but my salary is paid for by the govenment. I am looking at setting up my own coffee shop and to employ long term unemployed and ex offenders, However after doing my business plan and cost I can prob only pay them min wage.. Its sad but to someone that would be a chance to get back on the working ladder and a reference from moi... I am looking at other avenues to my business to associate with what I have been working my arse off doing for the past 10 years....

I hope that my buisness can get off the ground!! "

good luck with your venture xx

also, dont know if you know this, but the type of people you are hoping to employ, you will get incentives from the government/job centre for employing them. it all helps

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Economics has never been my strong point.So forgive me.

If the minimum wage is increased doesn't the price of everything else shift exponentially??

Yes. If minimum wage is shifted, then the ceiling on wages for the entire economy also lifts.

This is called 'wage inflation'.

There is absolutely no advantage to having wage increases if there is not an increase in economic output. Min wage laws should exist in some fields where there is no possibility of competition, but that's not in most sectors. Really, it's like confusing a glass of milk for a cow to confuse wealth with money.

Actually that's a spectacular over simplification.

Consider the situation now. Family A gets 80% of its income from a minimum wage job, and 20% from tax credits.

The state raises the minimum wage to 100% of family A's income, and abolishes tax credits, reducing the total tax take as a result. Economic impact? Zero. There would be no inflation.

The notion that increasing the minimum wage must cause inflation is the kind of Chicago school fuckwittery that got us into this mess, and which will keep us there since Osborne hasn't a clue."

Of course there would be no inflation if you raised the min wage and abolished tax credits in your example.

It's ironic I'm being accused of over simplification when you are using a straw-man example like that.

Obviously, if everything remains the same, e.g. taxes/value et al, *except* the minimum wage is raised, *then* you have wage inflation. That was my point.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I will put a table of asset class returns here in case anybody's interested.

Over 110 years, 1900 - 2010, the *average* *real* return on investments in:

shares: 5.0 (this would be 9% - 10% with inflation)

gilts: 1.2

Corporate bonds: ~2-3%

In the longer term e.g. longer than 10 years, shares win hands down as long as you weren't stupid enough to put everything on a single country, sector, industry or corporation. Otherwise bonds and gilts are fine 10 years.

An average 10% nominal return from shares is nothing to sniff at. For 3000.00 pounds, 25 years, you could buy an expensive house with the result. (350k roughly)

I'm not sure how any of this is relevant to people trying to live on a minimum wage with little or no disposable income. It's difficult enough for medium wage owners to even consider an investment portfolio. The majority are living to their means in these testing times. "

It's highly relevant, because it's a way out. Savings and investment are good habit that will protect you in the hard times. As Tesco says every little helps.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Economics has never been my strong point.So forgive me.

If the minimum wage is increased doesn't the price of everything else shift exponentially??

Yes. If minimum wage is shifted, then the ceiling on wages for the entire economy also lifts.

This is called 'wage inflation'.

There is absolutely no advantage to having wage increases if there is not an increase in economic output. Min wage laws should exist in some fields where there is no possibility of competition, but that's not in most sectors. Really, it's like confusing a glass of milk for a cow to confuse wealth with money.

Actually that's a spectacular over simplification.

Consider the situation now. Family A gets 80% of its income from a minimum wage job, and 20% from tax credits.

The state raises the minimum wage to 100% of family A's income, and abolishes tax credits, reducing the total tax take as a result. Economic impact? Zero. There would be no inflation.

The notion that increasing the minimum wage must cause inflation is the kind of Chicago school fuckwittery that got us into this mess, and which will keep us there since Osborne hasn't a clue.

Of course there would be no inflation if you raised the min wage and abolished tax credits in your example.

It's ironic I'm being accused of over simplification when you are using a straw-man example like that.

Obviously, if everything remains the same, e.g. taxes/value et al, *except* the minimum wage is raised, *then* you have wage inflation. That was my point.

"

Just a thought, but this is raising the minimum wage at the expense of the employer. Ok some may be able to afford it but this could be the downfall of many small struggling firms and their employees could end up on the dole.

No effect? hmmmmmmmmmmm think on ....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

thats not how capitalism works though

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

Just a thought, but this is raising the minimum wage at the expense of the employer. Ok some may be able to afford it but this could be the downfall of many small struggling firms and their employees could end up on the dole.

No effect? hmmmmmmmmmmm think on ...."

Excatly, you think you're helping people by raising the min wage, except that you're probably screwing them and 100% definitely you're screwing them in the long term.

I'm not saying it should exist in certain situations (where there's no competition), but generally the minimum wage is an economic illusion that gives the impression the government has direct control over supply and demand of labour. Which it does not.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Just a thought, but this is raising the minimum wage at the expense of the employer. Ok some may be able to afford it but this could be the downfall of many small struggling firms and their employees could end up on the dole.

No effect? hmmmmmmmmmmm think on ....

+1

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *waymanMan
over a year ago

newcastle


"Economics has never been my strong point.So forgive me.

If the minimum wage is increased doesn't the price of everything else shift exponentially??

Yes. If minimum wage is shifted, then the ceiling on wages for the entire economy also lifts.

This is called 'wage inflation'.

There is absolutely no advantage to having wage increases if there is not an increase in economic output. Min wage laws should exist in some fields where there is no possibility of competition, but that's not in most sectors. Really, it's like confusing a glass of milk for a cow to confuse wealth with money.

Actually that's a spectacular over simplification.

Consider the situation now. Family A gets 80% of its income from a minimum wage job, and 20% from tax credits.

The state raises the minimum wage to 100% of family A's income, and abolishes tax credits, reducing the total tax take as a result. Economic impact? Zero. There would be no inflation.

The notion that increasing the minimum wage must cause inflation is the kind of Chicago school fuckwittery that got us into this mess, and which will keep us there since Osborne hasn't a clue.

Of course there would be no inflation if you raised the min wage and abolished tax credits in your example.

It's ironic I'm being accused of over simplification when you are using a straw-man example like that.

Obviously, if everything remains the same, e.g. taxes/value et al, *except* the minimum wage is raised, *then* you have wage inflation. That was my point.

"

In what way is it a straw man example? Do you want to explain what you think a straw man example is?

Your example depends on everything else remaining the same - mine posits changes that could make the change neutral. So why is your example any better than mine?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *waymanMan
over a year ago

newcastle


"Just a thought, but this is raising the minimum wage at the expense of the employer. Ok some may be able to afford it but this could be the downfall of many small struggling firms and their employees could end up on the dole.

No effect? hmmmmmmmmmmm think on ....

+1"

I have.

If tax take falls as tax credit is abolished, more money is put into the economy, and, via minimum wage changes, transferred to the people most likely to spend it.

Companies already have a falling tax burden as a result of corporation tax changes over the next four years.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *waymanMan
over a year ago

newcastle


"I will put a table of asset class returns here in case anybody's interested.

Over 110 years, 1900 - 2010, the *average* *real* return on investments in:

shares: 5.0 (this would be 9% - 10% with inflation)

gilts: 1.2

Corporate bonds: ~2-3%

In the longer term e.g. longer than 10 years, shares win hands down as long as you weren't stupid enough to put everything on a single country, sector, industry or corporation. Otherwise bonds and gilts are fine 10 years.

An average 10% nominal return from shares is nothing to sniff at. For 3000.00 pounds, 25 years, you could buy an expensive house with the result. (350k roughly)

I'm not sure how any of this is relevant to people trying to live on a minimum wage with little or no disposable income. It's difficult enough for medium wage owners to even consider an investment portfolio. The majority are living to their means in these testing times.

It's highly relevant, because it's a way out. Savings and investment are good habit that will protect you in the hard times. As Tesco says every little helps. "

You still haven't answered the question about why you seem to want to adjust for inflation twice....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Economics has never been my strong point.So forgive me.

If the minimum wage is increased doesn't the price of everything else shift exponentially??

Yes. If minimum wage is shifted, then the ceiling on wages for the entire economy also lifts.

This is called 'wage inflation'.

There is absolutely no advantage to having wage increases if there is not an increase in economic output. Min wage laws should exist in some fields where there is no possibility of competition, but that's not in most sectors. Really, it's like confusing a glass of milk for a cow to confuse wealth with money.

Actually that's a spectacular over simplification.

Consider the situation now. Family A gets 80% of its income from a minimum wage job, and 20% from tax credits.

The state raises the minimum wage to 100% of family A's income, and abolishes tax credits, reducing the total tax take as a result. Economic impact? Zero. There would be no inflation.

The notion that increasing the minimum wage must cause inflation is the kind of Chicago school fuckwittery that got us into this mess, and which will keep us there since Osborne hasn't a clue.

Of course there would be no inflation if you raised the min wage and abolished tax credits in your example.

It's ironic I'm being accused of over simplification when you are using a straw-man example like that.

Obviously, if everything remains the same, e.g. taxes/value et al, *except* the minimum wage is raised, *then* you have wage inflation. That was my point.

In what way is it a straw man example? Do you want to explain what you think a straw man example is?

Your example depends on everything else remaining the same - mine posits changes that could make the change neutral. So why is your example any better than mine? "

It's certainly a strawman argument, when you're arguing about a point that isn't directly related to wage inflation.

Yes, my example assumes everything else stays the same. Why shouldn't it? Otherwise I couldn't ruddy isolate the thing I wanted to discuss could I now? Reductionism is a key element of science! Otherwise we couldn't explain the causality of *anything*.

Now, if you want to say that in real life it's more complex, then I agree with that. Sure thing. But we *are* talking about the simple textbook case here.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I will put a table of asset class returns here in case anybody's interested.

Over 110 years, 1900 - 2010, the *average* *real* return on investments in:

shares: 5.0 (this would be 9% - 10% with inflation)

gilts: 1.2

Corporate bonds: ~2-3%

In the longer term e.g. longer than 10 years, shares win hands down as long as you weren't stupid enough to put everything on a single country, sector, industry or corporation. Otherwise bonds and gilts are fine 10 years.

An average 10% nominal return from shares is nothing to sniff at. For 3000.00 pounds, 25 years, you could buy an expensive house with the result. (350k roughly)

I'm not sure how any of this is relevant to people trying to live on a minimum wage with little or no disposable income. It's difficult enough for medium wage owners to even consider an investment portfolio. The majority are living to their means in these testing times.

It's highly relevant, because it's a way out. Savings and investment are good habit that will protect you in the hard times. As Tesco says every little helps.

You still haven't answered the question about why you seem to want to adjust for inflation twice...."

If you want real, you have real. If you want nominal, then add the number to the real yourself instead of being so bloody minded. It doesn't particular matter what metric you use FFS. Jesus, talk about missing the point.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just a thought, but this is raising the minimum wage at the expense of the employer. Ok some may be able to afford it but this could be the downfall of many small struggling firms and their employees could end up on the dole.

No effect? hmmmmmmmmmmm think on ....

+1

I have.

If tax take falls as tax credit is abolished, more money is put into the economy, and, via minimum wage changes, transferred to the people most likely to spend it.

Companies already have a falling tax burden as a result of corporation tax changes over the next four years."

I can't believe you're serious.

If you reduce tax, the division of labour increases and more wealth is created. Econ 101. There are some caveats, such as you can't reduce it to zero, there is an laffer curve etc, but it's fundamentally correct.

That has literally NOTHING to do with the minimum wage.

These are two ENTIRELY SEPARATE THINGS.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I will put a table of asset class returns here in case anybody's interested.

Over 110 years, 1900 - 2010, the *average* *real* return on investments in:

shares: 5.0 (this would be 9% - 10% with inflation)

gilts: 1.2

Corporate bonds: ~2-3%

In the longer term e.g. longer than 10 years, shares win hands down as long as you weren't stupid enough to put everything on a single country, sector, industry or corporation. Otherwise bonds and gilts are fine 10 years.

An average 10% nominal return from shares is nothing to sniff at. For 3000.00 pounds, 25 years, you could buy an expensive house with the result. (350k roughly)

I'm not sure how any of this is relevant to people trying to live on a minimum wage with little or no disposable income. It's difficult enough for medium wage owners to even consider an investment portfolio. The majority are living to their means in these testing times.

It's highly relevant, because it's a way out. Savings and investment are good habit that will protect you in the hard times. As Tesco says every little helps. "

Highly relevant for people with little or no disposable income! Are you living in the real world?

I mean no disrespect but you come across as someone who has read a few text books and is trying to apply theory where real life practical applications and solutions are the order of the day.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *waymanMan
over a year ago

newcastle


"Economics has never been my strong point.So forgive me.

If the minimum wage is increased doesn't the price of everything else shift exponentially??

Yes. If minimum wage is shifted, then the ceiling on wages for the entire economy also lifts.

This is called 'wage inflation'.

There is absolutely no advantage to having wage increases if there is not an increase in economic output. Min wage laws should exist in some fields where there is no possibility of competition, but that's not in most sectors. Really, it's like confusing a glass of milk for a cow to confuse wealth with money.

Actually that's a spectacular over simplification.

Consider the situation now. Family A gets 80% of its income from a minimum wage job, and 20% from tax credits.

The state raises the minimum wage to 100% of family A's income, and abolishes tax credits, reducing the total tax take as a result. Economic impact? Zero. There would be no inflation.

The notion that increasing the minimum wage must cause inflation is the kind of Chicago school fuckwittery that got us into this mess, and which will keep us there since Osborne hasn't a clue.

Of course there would be no inflation if you raised the min wage and abolished tax credits in your example.

It's ironic I'm being accused of over simplification when you are using a straw-man example like that.

Obviously, if everything remains the same, e.g. taxes/value et al, *except* the minimum wage is raised, *then* you have wage inflation. That was my point.

In what way is it a straw man example? Do you want to explain what you think a straw man example is?

Your example depends on everything else remaining the same - mine posits changes that could make the change neutral. So why is your example any better than mine?

It's certainly a strawman argument, when you're arguing about a point that isn't directly related to wage inflation.

Yes, my example assumes everything else stays the same. Why shouldn't it? Otherwise I couldn't ruddy isolate the thing I wanted to discuss could I now? Reductionism is a key element of science! Otherwise we couldn't explain the causality of *anything*.

Now, if you want to say that in real life it's more complex, then I agree with that. Sure thing. But we *are* talking about the simple textbook case here."

God save us from people who have a simple economic textbook.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *waymanMan
over a year ago

newcastle


"Just a thought, but this is raising the minimum wage at the expense of the employer. Ok some may be able to afford it but this could be the downfall of many small struggling firms and their employees could end up on the dole.

No effect? hmmmmmmmmmmm think on ....

+1

I have.

If tax take falls as tax credit is abolished, more money is put into the economy, and, via minimum wage changes, transferred to the people most likely to spend it.

Companies already have a falling tax burden as a result of corporation tax changes over the next four years.

I can't believe you're serious.

If you reduce tax, the division of labour increases and more wealth is created. Econ 101. There are some caveats, such as you can't reduce it to zero, there is an laffer curve etc, but it's fundamentally correct.

That has literally NOTHING to do with the minimum wage.

These are two ENTIRELY SEPARATE THINGS.

"

I'm really impressed by capitals.

The Laffer Curve is a nonsense. It doesn't make sense. Who say so? Nobel Prize winning economists like Paul Krugman and Joe Stiglitz. Do I believe them over you? Yes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I will put a table of asset class returns here in case anybody's interested.

Over 110 years, 1900 - 2010, the *average* *real* return on investments in:

shares: 5.0 (this would be 9% - 10% with inflation)

gilts: 1.2

Corporate bonds: ~2-3%

In the longer term e.g. longer than 10 years, shares win hands down as long as you weren't stupid enough to put everything on a single country, sector, industry or corporation. Otherwise bonds and gilts are fine 10 years.

An average 10% nominal return from shares is nothing to sniff at. For 3000.00 pounds, 25 years, you could buy an expensive house with the result. (350k roughly)

I'm not sure how any of this is relevant to people trying to live on a minimum wage with little or no disposable income. It's difficult enough for medium wage owners to even consider an investment portfolio. The majority are living to their means in these testing times.

It's highly relevant, because it's a way out. Savings and investment are good habit that will protect you in the hard times. As Tesco says every little helps.

Highly relevant for people with little or no disposable income! Are you living in the real world?

I mean no disrespect but you come across as someone who has read a few text books and is trying to apply theory where real life practical applications and solutions are the order of the day. "

I come from a poor background, as close to poverty as you can get in the West. I never had money until I went out and got it myself.

I worked for every single inch of education I got, scrubbing floors, toilets and windows on new build construction sites since I was out of primary, so don't talk to me about 'theory' and 'practice'.

In fact, my entire university education was paid for by my earnings in the stock market. Almost 27,000 pounds worth.

The biggest danger to your wealth and health is apathy, being stuck into your box until... until whatever is supposed to happen happens. Well that's just bullshit.

I am sick to goddamn death of this socialist middle class bullshit about how only the wealthy are capitalists and the working class are retards to attempt emulation of how they got that way. That's great. That really is. Really f**king scientific. Yeah. Bit of a chicken and the egg problem there wouldn't you say.

The main constraints on your fortunes is hard work and being able to think laterally about the stuff that matters. You can start with a small nest egg or a large one. What matters, is that you start.

Only two types of people are capable of taking major risks relative to their financial location in society.

1. The already wealthy, because they have capital to lose.

2. The poor. Because they have nothing to lose except Time, which they have plenty of.

The rest of the population is content to be in its cocoon of bourgeoisie certainties about stuff of which they have no actual idea. The savings rates and investing ratios for the middles class relative to their income are completely goddamn dismal. That's because they're the consumer class, they're betas busily ensuring the shag rug matches the colour of the curtains and other such important things in life.

Enough of this. I'm not arguing anymore. I got nothing to prove to you guys.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sadly the Minimum wage needs to remain so (at a Minimum).

Otherwise our economy would fail, but that said Management wages needs to be lopped off a bit also.

Another fact people fail to look into is how in just over 10 years our population has grown by 10 million (mainly migrants and immigrants) which hampers the economy also.

It is not a straight forward issue to solve by just raising the Minimum wage.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *waymanMan
over a year ago

newcastle


"I will put a table of asset class returns here in case anybody's interested.

Over 110 years, 1900 - 2010, the *average* *real* return on investments in:

shares: 5.0 (this would be 9% - 10% with inflation)

gilts: 1.2

Corporate bonds: ~2-3%

In the longer term e.g. longer than 10 years, shares win hands down as long as you weren't stupid enough to put everything on a single country, sector, industry or corporation. Otherwise bonds and gilts are fine 10 years.

An average 10% nominal return from shares is nothing to sniff at. For 3000.00 pounds, 25 years, you could buy an expensive house with the result. (350k roughly)

I'm not sure how any of this is relevant to people trying to live on a minimum wage with little or no disposable income. It's difficult enough for medium wage owners to even consider an investment portfolio. The majority are living to their means in these testing times.

It's highly relevant, because it's a way out. Savings and investment are good habit that will protect you in the hard times. As Tesco says every little helps.

You still haven't answered the question about why you seem to want to adjust for inflation twice....

If you want real, you have real. If you want nominal, then add the number to the real yourself instead of being so bloody minded. It doesn't particular matter what metric you use FFS. Jesus, talk about missing the point."

I didn't understand why you wanted to reintroduce inflation when you'd adjusted it out by using 'real' increases. It sounded remarksbly like a sales pitch rather than an economic text, especially since there have been years in my lifetime when a 10% nominal return would leave you up to 15% points behind RPI.

Do your calculated rates of return include dealing and advice costs?

I do like it when you swear though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top