Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
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 Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In my experience of visiting countries with no minimum wage, everything is much cleaner and the service is better. Minimum wage is a typical Western liberal idea, nice in principle but nobody considers the real world impact. So the rest of us pay the price in poor service, filthy streets, tables and floors that never get cleaned and higher prices." which countries spring to mind ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A job of any kind merits a working wage imo. What's troubling is that our kids can pass through a modern education system for 12 years or more and are only fit for unskilled, low pay work." So you expect the education system to turn out an army of lawyers, doctors, engineers, etc. with no one lacking skills? Who in your world will be cleaning the floors, emptying the bins, waiting at tables, and all of the other unskilled jobs that need to be done? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A job of any kind merits a working wage imo. What's troubling is that our kids can pass through a modern education system for 12 years or more and are only fit for unskilled, low pay work. So you expect the education system to turn out an army of lawyers, doctors, engineers, etc. with no one lacking skills? Who in your world will be cleaning the floors, emptying the bins, waiting at tables, and all of the other unskilled jobs that need to be done?" Well yes I do. Skilled UK Doctors and Nurses in the NHS would be a good start. Yes there are low skill jobs, but many could be automated e.g. fruit & veg picking, warehousing, assembly. We lack investment in automation (although the government's latest initiatives are helpful). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A job of any kind merits a working wage imo. What's troubling is that our kids can pass through a modern education system for 12 years or more and are only fit for unskilled, low pay work. " Pssst, that's what state education is for. Think back, can you honestly recall a single lesson that taught you how to be sensible and budget with money? There's a reason for that.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Firstly, I could never understand why there is a different “minimum wage” for persons of different ages: if someone is “adult” at 18, why should 21-22 year-olds earn less, and 18 year-olds even less, than a 23 year-old? They’re doing the same work, and if someone starting work at 18 hasn’t bettered themselves within five years, he/she doesn’t deserve any more… Secondly, many (most?) people on minimum wage need benefit top-up, paid for from the public purse. Effectively, then, the tax-payer is subsiding employers who pay only a minimum wage!" Hence the case for raising the minimum wage to something reasonable, such as £15 per hour. No state topups needed then. Why should the taxpayers subsidise non-viable businesses who can't pay a decent wage? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Firstly, I could never understand why there is a different “minimum wage” for persons of different ages: if someone is “adult” at 18, why should 21-22 year-olds earn less, and 18 year-olds even less, than a 23 year-old? They’re doing the same work, and if someone starting work at 18 hasn’t bettered themselves within five years, he/she doesn’t deserve any more… Secondly, many (most?) people on minimum wage need benefit top-up, paid for from the public purse. Effectively, then, the tax-payer is subsiding employers who pay only a minimum wage! Hence the case for raising the minimum wage to something reasonable, such as £15 per hour. No state topups needed then. Why should the taxpayers subsidise non-viable businesses who can't pay a decent wage?" or worse still subsidize greedy employers who could afford to pay decent wages but would rather pocket the profits & keep their workers poor. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s been widely reported that the minimum wage will increase to £11.44 in April. That’s £1.02 increase. What are peoples thoughts on this? Will it just push more skilled people out of jobs and into jobs with less responsibility?" It annoys me that the living wage is done via an hourly rate. I don't get the living wage as unable to work full time - the response to that is tough shit (or kill yourself and other people if you do work more hours). Other than my experience - I support the living wage, just well jel  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In my experience of visiting countries with no minimum wage, everything is much cleaner and the service is better. Minimum wage is a typical Western liberal idea, nice in principle but nobody considers the real world impact. So the rest of us pay the price in poor service, filthy streets, tables and floors that never get cleaned and higher prices." Poor service cos there's a minimum wage?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A job of any kind merits a working wage imo. What's troubling is that our kids can pass through a modern education system for 12 years or more and are only fit for unskilled, low pay work. So you expect the education system to turn out an army of lawyers, doctors, engineers, etc. with no one lacking skills? Who in your world will be cleaning the floors, emptying the bins, waiting at tables, and all of the other unskilled jobs that need to be done?" You perceive the poster talks of only one end the spectrum while you ask about the other end. Real life isn't like that. Even with the best education, some people won't be skilled/knowledgeable/or intelligent enough to take on high brow careers (they can become politicians instead  ) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why should the taxpayers subsidise non-viable businesses who can't pay a decent wage?" Indeed. Corporate "Welfare" is a immense distortion of free-market economics. . Big company X will often say, "We plan a new manufacturing centre in XYZ. We will employ 2000 workers. But we need incentives and tax breaks to make this happen." Cue government subsidies. Except it's actually tax-payers money. . What you end up with is a business that wasn't viable enough to stand on its own two feet, being propped up with tax-payer subsidies, employing a fair amount on minimum wage. And somehow that a "good economic strategy?" . Personally, I'd say it's a Ponzi Scheme, designed to funnel cash from the tax-payer to those at the top. . As for market distortion, it also prevents another competitor competing equitably without the subsidies, and thus "distorts" the market. . One giant "House of Cards". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s been widely reported that the minimum wage will increase to £11.44 in April. That’s £1.02 increase. What are peoples thoughts on this? Will it just push more skilled people out of jobs and into jobs with less responsibility?" I suppose there could be some that are getting just above the new minimum wage but with more stressful work thinking they may as well quit and take a more basic job for virtually the same money but personally don't think it will be many. What does the rate need to be that means the worker goes above the threshold for in work benefits for the average amount of hours per week or month? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why should the taxpayers subsidise non-viable businesses who can't pay a decent wage? Indeed. Corporate "Welfare" is a immense distortion of free-market economics. . Big company X will often say, "We plan a new manufacturing centre in XYZ. We will employ 2000 workers. But we need incentives and tax breaks to make this happen." Cue government subsidies. Except it's actually tax-payers money. . What you end up with is a business that wasn't viable enough to stand on its own two feet, being propped up with tax-payer subsidies, employing a fair amount on minimum wage. And somehow that a "good economic strategy?" . Personally, I'd say it's a Ponzi Scheme, designed to funnel cash from the tax-payer to those at the top" It's often done to build or retain certain skills in the country/a region. For example, it might be strategically important for a country's security to have the capability to manufacture steel. An international steel company might then be offered incentives to build and run a steel company, which appears to be the government basically giving money away to foreign billionaires. The government might want to increase skilled manufacturing demand in a certain region, so it offers subsidies to companies to set up business for the next ten years. The rationale could be to improve prospects for engineering graduates in that region. You can argue the politics of it, but it's a tool in the government's arsenal that is easy to mistake. An alternative to these might be nationalised industry, which comes with its own drawbacks (and advantages). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In my experience of visiting countries with no minimum wage, everything is much cleaner and the service is better. Minimum wage is a typical Western liberal idea, nice in principle but nobody considers the real world impact. So the rest of us pay the price in poor service, filthy streets, tables and floors that never get cleaned and higher prices." Ever been to Switzerland? Very clean, with a high minimum wage. Singapore (known for cleanliness)? Funny you mention cleanliness: There is no minimum wage in Singapore, except for workers in the cleaning and security guard industries. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was discussing this yesterday. A friend works in retail and there is a mangers location advertised. For the stress and pressure it’s not worth the difference between minimum wage " A manager's location? I assume that's a typo but in any case a first line manager's position can lead further up the ladder and so is absolutely worth it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was discussing this yesterday. A friend works in retail and there is a mangers location advertised. For the stress and pressure it’s not worth the difference between minimum wage A manager's location? I assume that's a typo but in any case a first line manager's position can lead further up the ladder and so is absolutely worth it" Aldi pay well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was discussing this yesterday. A friend works in retail and there is a mangers location advertised. For the stress and pressure it’s not worth the difference between minimum wage A manager's location? I assume that's a typo but in any case a first line manager's position can lead further up the ladder and so is absolutely worth it" So rarther then getting a rate that makes the extra stress and responsibility worth it they should be happy with eroded differentials because one day it may or may not lead to another promotion?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was discussing this yesterday. A friend works in retail and there is a mangers location advertised. For the stress and pressure it’s not worth the difference between minimum wage A manager's location? I assume that's a typo but in any case a first line manager's position can lead further up the ladder and so is absolutely worth it Aldi pay well. " They did pay well. Not any more. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was discussing this yesterday. A friend works in retail and there is a mangers location advertised. For the stress and pressure it’s not worth the difference between minimum wage A manager's location? I assume that's a typo but in any case a first line manager's position can lead further up the ladder and so is absolutely worth it Aldi pay well. They did pay well. Not any more." Unless they have cut manager's pay, they pay well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was discussing this yesterday. A friend works in retail and there is a mangers location advertised. For the stress and pressure it’s not worth the difference between minimum wage A manager's location? I assume that's a typo but in any case a first line manager's position can lead further up the ladder and so is absolutely worth it So rarther then getting a rate that makes the extra stress and responsibility worth it they should be happy with eroded differentials because one day it may or may not lead to another promotion??" Yes I get what you saying but work life ballance. And stress the pay gap is narrowing on all jobs. Supervisers don't get that much more I think one place round hear its 70p/h to be a supervisor. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was discussing this yesterday. A friend works in retail and there is a mangers location advertised. For the stress and pressure it’s not worth the difference between minimum wage A manager's location? I assume that's a typo but in any case a first line manager's position can lead further up the ladder and so is absolutely worth it" It was me at to say manners position. It’s 32k and it’s in charge of 10 staff in a retail business with a month target of £70k. It’s a very stressful position as 6 have attempted to do it and left within the past 14 months | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In my experience of visiting countries with no minimum wage, everything is much cleaner and the service is better. Minimum wage is a typical Western liberal idea, nice in principle but nobody considers the real world impact. So the rest of us pay the price in poor service, filthy streets, tables and floors that never get cleaned and higher prices." To help out here I list the countries with no minimum wage. They are Denmark, Finland, Italy, La Reunion, Norway, South Sudan, Sweden, Zimbabwe, Singapore, Iceland, Brunei, Djibouti, Somalia, Tonga, Tuvalu, North Korea. Which do you consider to be cleaner with good service? Have you been to the USA? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I was discussing this yesterday. A friend works in retail and there is a mangers location advertised. For the stress and pressure it’s not worth the difference between minimum wage A manager's location? I assume that's a typo but in any case a first line manager's position can lead further up the ladder and so is absolutely worth it Aldi pay well. They did pay well. Not any more. Unless they have cut manager's pay, they pay well." Managers yes, I was referring t9 the hourly paid team. Aldi and Lidle where both well know for paying well above minimum wage. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Does minimum wage give you more income than JSA? I very much doubt it and there's the problem...cue jtn " Pretty sure it will do | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Job seekers allowance it 84 and a bit quid a quick Google search. " But you also might get PIP housing benefit, free school meals, Etc so you would need to be an expert to calculate it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Job seekers allowance it 84 and a bit quid a quick Google search. But you also might get PIP housing benefit, free school meals, Etc so you would need to be an expert to calculate it." PIP is irrelevant as it's not means tested. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Job seekers allowance it 84 and a bit quid a quick Google search. But you also might get PIP housing benefit, free school meals, Etc so you would need to be an expert to calculate it." You also might get a fine for having to many bedrooms, the computations are endless.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s been widely reported that the minimum wage will increase to £11.44 in April. That’s £1.02 increase. What are peoples thoughts on this? " It's not really an increase of £1.02 though, is it? Anyone working full time of at least 36 hours per week is already above the threshold for paying income tax. So, for those people, they will only receive an extra 80p per hour in their pockets. And the government will receive another 20p per hour through the income tax scheme, per working person in the UK. That's an awful lot more money flowing into government. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s been widely reported that the minimum wage will increase to £11.44 in April. That’s £1.02 increase. What are peoples thoughts on this? It's not really an increase of £1.02 though, is it? Anyone working full time of at least 36 hours per week is already above the threshold for paying income tax. So, for those people, they will only receive an extra 80p per hour in their pockets. And the government will receive another 20p per hour through the income tax scheme, per working person in the UK. That's an awful lot more money flowing into government." NI 13% on top of that lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Firstly, I could never understand why there is a different “minimum wage” for persons of different ages: if someone is “adult” at 18, why should 21-22 year-olds earn less, and 18 year-olds even less, than a 23 year-old? They’re doing the same work, and if someone starting work at 18 hasn’t bettered themselves within five years, he/she doesn’t deserve any more… Secondly, many (most?) people on minimum wage need benefit top-up, paid for from the public purse. Effectively, then, the tax-payer is subsiding employers who pay only a minimum wage! Hence the case for raising the minimum wage to something reasonable, such as £15 per hour. No state topups needed then. Why should the taxpayers subsidise non-viable businesses who can't pay a decent wage?" These non viable business would then have to either put their prices up or cut costs (usually laying staff off) to afford the £15 an hour wage that you suggest. Would you be happy with that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Would you be happy with that? " Absolutely. If the business idea cannot stand on its own two feet without tax-payer funded "life-support", then it's not a viable or sound business idea. Said business is not living within its means. It's a shit idea and the execution of it shifts risk elsewhere. It's a scam, essentially. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s been widely reported that the minimum wage will increase to £11.44 in April. That’s £1.02 increase. What are peoples thoughts on this? It's not really an increase of £1.02 though, is it? Anyone working full time of at least 36 hours per week is already above the threshold for paying income tax. So, for those people, they will only receive an extra 80p per hour in their pockets. And the government will receive another 20p per hour through the income tax scheme, per working person in the UK. That's an awful lot more money flowing into government. NI 13% on top of that lol" 12% 5.85% if you are a married woman which is completely ridiculous based on modern living These taxes also apply to all wage increases so not really a relevant argument for or against minimum wage. *almost* none of us see 100% of our wage rise | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s been widely reported that the minimum wage will increase to £11.44 in April. That’s £1.02 increase. What are peoples thoughts on this? It's not really an increase of £1.02 though, is it? Anyone working full time of at least 36 hours per week is already above the threshold for paying income tax. So, for those people, they will only receive an extra 80p per hour in their pockets. And the government will receive another 20p per hour through the income tax scheme, per working person in the UK. That's an awful lot more money flowing into government. NI 13% on top of that lol 12% 5.85% if you are a married woman which is completely ridiculous based on modern living These taxes also apply to all wage increases so not really a relevant argument for or against minimum wage. *almost* none of us see 100% of our wage rise " quick google suggests that 5.85 stopped in 1977. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s been widely reported that the minimum wage will increase to £11.44 in April. That’s £1.02 increase. What are peoples thoughts on this? It's not really an increase of £1.02 though, is it? Anyone working full time of at least 36 hours per week is already above the threshold for paying income tax. So, for those people, they will only receive an extra 80p per hour in their pockets. And the government will receive another 20p per hour through the income tax scheme, per working person in the UK. That's an awful lot more money flowing into government. NI 13% on top of that lol 12% 5.85% if you are a married woman which is completely ridiculous based on modern living These taxes also apply to all wage increases so not really a relevant argument for or against minimum wage. *almost* none of us see 100% of our wage rise quick google suggests that 5.85 stopped in 1977. " The .gov website shows code B and I as live now. A bit more digging and I found that you can’t register for it after 1977 but some are still on it. Which i guess is fair enough. 6% tax break to encourage people to get married seemed archaic | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s been widely reported that the minimum wage will increase to £11.44 in April. That’s £1.02 increase. What are peoples thoughts on this? It's not really an increase of £1.02 though, is it? Anyone working full time of at least 36 hours per week is already above the threshold for paying income tax. So, for those people, they will only receive an extra 80p per hour in their pockets. And the government will receive another 20p per hour through the income tax scheme, per working person in the UK. That's an awful lot more money flowing into government. NI 13% on top of that lol 12% 5.85% if you are a married woman which is completely ridiculous based on modern living These taxes also apply to all wage increases so not really a relevant argument for or against minimum wage. *almost* none of us see 100% of our wage rise quick google suggests that 5.85 stopped in 1977. The .gov website shows code B and I as live now. A bit more digging and I found that you can’t register for it after 1977 but some are still on it. Which i guess is fair enough. 6% tax break to encourage people to get married seemed archaic " never knew it still applied to some. Every day is a school day ! Deserved of you've managed almost 50 years of marriage  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Would you be happy with that? Absolutely. If the business idea cannot stand on its own two feet without tax-payer funded "life-support", then it's not a viable or sound business idea. Said business is not living within its means. It's a shit idea and the execution of it shifts risk elsewhere. It's a scam, essentially." Exactly | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It seems to me that as minimum wage goes up so does the cost of goods and services. So the people on minimum wage feel no actual effect. But the workers above minimum wage but not on a high wage (which is most of us) suffer because cost of living goes up but not income." Pretty much. Let's suppose 25% of the population on nat min wage gain a few extra quid in their pay packets. That's several million with extra cash sloshing about and ripe for the picking. . If you are fortunate enough to be a national provider with little or limited competition, raising your prices just enough to swallow that increase in their pay packets, but not too high to sink them, means they stand still (but are not worse off), whilst you hoover up the extra cash. . True, some of those above nat. min wage might feel a slight squeeze, but if the folks further down the socio-economic ladder can scrape by, the folks above shouldn't feel it too hard (plus they are on higher wages anyway, but to be fair that's not your problem). . Capitalism is an incredibly efficient way of siphoning off other people's money to a select few. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It seems to me that as minimum wage goes up so does the cost of goods and services. So the people on minimum wage feel no actual effect. But the workers above minimum wage but not on a high wage (which is most of us) suffer because cost of living goes up but not income. Pretty much. Let's suppose 25% of the population on nat min wage gain a few extra quid in their pay packets. That's several million with extra cash sloshing about and ripe for the picking. . If you are fortunate enough to be a national provider with little or limited competition, raising your prices just enough to swallow that increase in their pay packets, but not too high to sink them, means they stand still (but are not worse off), whilst you hoover up the extra cash. . True, some of those above nat. min wage might feel a slight squeeze, but if the folks further down the socio-economic ladder can scrape by, the folks above shouldn't feel it too hard (plus they are on higher wages anyway, but to be fair that's not your problem). . Capitalism is an incredibly efficient way of siphoning off other people's money to a select few." I'm trying to work that thru. Companies have also see their expenses go up by exactlly the same amount as they are hoovering. So overall nothings happened with the money. But the poorer can buy a bit more and the rest a bit less ? What have I missed ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Companies have also see their expenses go up by exactlly the same amount as they are hoovering. So overall nothings happened with the money. But the poorer can buy a bit more and the rest a bit less ? What have I missed ?" No it doesn't quite add up like that. If your on minimum wage you see zero difference. You get more money by a % but the cost of stuff goes up the same % If your on an average wage all you can therefore afford less because you don't get a pay rise when min wage goes up but the price of goods also goes up. If your on a high wage you can afford the same but it will cost you more of your money. If you are the company you are taking in more profit. You are only paying your minimum wage staff a pittance more money. However you are charging every single customer a pittance more on each purchase and with only a proportion of them being on min wage that means higher revenue. People on higher wages buy more stuff as well so it's good for the business and bad for the people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Companies have also see their expenses go up by exactlly the same amount as they are hoovering. So overall nothings happened with the money. But the poorer can buy a bit more and the rest a bit less ? What have I missed ? No it doesn't quite add up like that. If your on minimum wage you see zero difference. You get more money by a % but the cost of stuff goes up the same % If your on an average wage all you can therefore afford less because you don't get a pay rise when min wage goes up but the price of goods also goes up. If your on a high wage you can afford the same but it will cost you more of your money. If you are the company you are taking in more profit. You are only paying your minimum wage staff a pittance more money. However you are charging every single customer a pittance more on each purchase and with only a proportion of them being on min wage that means higher revenue. People on higher wages buy more stuff as well so it's good for the business and bad for the people." I think you must be applying different elasticity to different people here. And that the non minimum wage workers are spending more than they did (so saving less or more debt ?) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
".I think you must be applying different elasticity to different people here. And that the non minimum wage workers are spending more than they did (so saving less or more debt ?)" I don't think I am but I'm a little confused by what your trying to say tbh I'm saying if you earn Min wage (Y) that goes up x% and the cost of everything you buy goes up x% you have no effective change If you earn more than Y and have no pay rise but the cost of everything you buy goes up x% you can buy less with your money so are worse off. Depending how much More than Y you earn this may or may not affect how much you can buy. As a business everything goes up x% too, regardless of who buys it so more money gets taken. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Companies have also see their expenses go up by exactlly the same amount as they are hoovering. So overall nothings happened with the money. But the poorer can buy a bit more and the rest a bit less ? What have I missed ? No it doesn't quite add up like that. If your on minimum wage you see zero difference. You get more money by a % but the cost of stuff goes up the same % If your on an average wage all you can therefore afford less because you don't get a pay rise when min wage goes up but the price of goods also goes up. If your on a high wage you can afford the same but it will cost you more of your money. If you are the company you are taking in more profit. You are only paying your minimum wage staff a pittance more money. However you are charging every single customer a pittance more on each purchase and with only a proportion of them being on min wage that means higher revenue. People on higher wages buy more stuff as well so it's good for the business and bad for the people." The various kinds of minimum and living wage are going up by between 9 and 20%. Inflation is what about 5%? So they are going to be relatively better off. Sure they aren’t going to be buying a private jet but relatively they will be better off. As a business if you have your staff costs go up whether minimum wage or otherwise you are inevitably going to have to increase your prices to cover the increased costs, to maintain any kind of profitability. The financial position of the people buying your goods is irrelevant, save as you say that richer people will tend to buy bigger or better or more stuff. But if your prices increase too much to cover your costs and your customers’ wages haven’t, or they simply won’t pay the higher prices and go somewhere cheaper, then they may buy less of your stuff. And you may have to lay off some of the minimum wage staff who you can no longer afford to pay as you are selling less stuff. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
".I think you must be applying different elasticity to different people here. And that the non minimum wage workers are spending more than they did (so saving less or more debt ?) I don't think I am but I'm a little confused by what your trying to say tbh I'm saying if you earn Min wage (Y) that goes up x% and the cost of everything you buy goes up x% you have no effective change If you earn more than Y and have no pay rise but the cost of everything you buy goes up x% you can buy less with your money so are worse off. Depending how much More than Y you earn this may or may not affect how much you can buy. As a business everything goes up x% too, regardless of who buys it so more money gets taken." MW earners are buying the same amount of stuff, NMW are buying less stuff (but paying more for what they are buying so spending exactly the same as before). The only extra money in tej system is the extra MW. But the companies are the ones paying MW so it cancels out. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The only extra money in tej system is the extra MW. But the companies are the ones paying MW so it cancels out. " Your just looking for a reaction aren't you Have fun | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The only extra money in tej system is the extra MW. But the companies are the ones paying MW so it cancels out. Your just looking for a reaction aren't you Have fun" I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. But hey ho. Take care  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A job of any kind merits a working wage imo. What's troubling is that our kids can pass through a modern education system for 12 years or more and are only fit for unskilled, low pay work. " Their choice, plenty come out well educated and with unlimited potential | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Firstly, I could never understand why there is a different “minimum wage” for persons of different ages: if someone is “adult” at 18, why should 21-22 year-olds earn less, and 18 year-olds even less, than a 23 year-old? They’re doing the same work, and if someone starting work at 18 hasn’t bettered themselves within five years, he/she doesn’t deserve any more… Secondly, many (most?) people on minimum wage need benefit top-up, paid for from the public purse. Effectively, then, the tax-payer is subsiding employers who pay only a minimum wage! Hence the case for raising the minimum wage to something reasonable, such as £15 per hour. No state topups needed then. Why should the taxpayers subsidise non-viable businesses who can't pay a decent wage?" So what then happens to someone how is skilled on £15 per hour. should they get £25 per hour. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s been widely reported that the minimum wage will increase to £11.44 in April. That’s £1.02 increase. What are peoples thoughts on this? Will it just push more skilled people out of jobs and into jobs with less responsibility? It annoys me that the living wage is done via an hourly rate. I don't get the living wage as unable to work full time - the response to that is tough shit (or kill yourself and other people if you do work more hours). Other than my experience - I support the living wage, just well jel "So are you saying minimum wage should be a salary say £25k no matter of how meany hours you work. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Min wage with training and further education would suit the new worker, "Was asked befor Christmas but Y train by a 17 year old. Electricians start there traning on £13.38 and once qualified after 5 years of traning go up to £18.40 He went on to say he would not want the extra responsibility for £10k a year When I started on £ 27.50 a week after the first year you pay doubled a good incentive to study and pass exams. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
