2017 GE 1

[adios 717]

18 minutes ago, Kid Dynamite said:

 

In 12months you're not going to notice the difference.

 

That seems to be precisely the opposite of inflation.

 

And I don't disagree we need to raise wages almost across the board.

[adios 717]

14 minutes ago, Renton said:

Raising minimum wage that much at once would be problematic imo. O sympathise with GQ's point, it will mean hospital porters getting paid as much as people in hospital with much more responsibility, for instance. Can't see how it won't stoke inflation as well. 

And I sound like a right Tory here I appreciate, but a lot of small companies are going to have to cut hours or reduce staff to take the hit. Can imagine restaurants and hotels having to significantly increase costs. 

 

Minimum wage should go up by at least inflation every year though. And the 1% cap on public sector pay is coming up to a decade soon. Needs to end. 

 

Aye, I want an increase (the bigger the better).  But it needs to be done right with a hefty tax on the super-wealthy and tax breaks for small businesses to allow for the increase.

 

Will never happen though, so Might have to take what we can get. 

[Alex 31003]

14 hours ago, adios said:

For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard. And when he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard. And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace, And said unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way. Again he went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise. And about the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle? They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard; and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive. So when evening was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first. And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny. But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny. And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house, Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day. But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny? Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good? So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen...

GZA/Genius?

[ewerk 27028]

14 hours ago, adios said:

That seems to be precisely the opposite of inflation.

 

And I don't disagree we need to raise wages almost across the board.

 

It's all relative though isn't it? If everyone gets a two quid rise then is anyone better off? The ones who will be worse off are those on benefits.

[ewerk 27028]

15 hours ago, Christmas Tree said:

 

The issue a lot of people have (not just because of 2007), is that they don't trust Labour on running the economy.

 

personally I think this is one of the best Labour offerings in years, but because they've chucked so much in the pot / and are struggling to cost it, it leaves people thinking it's pie in the sky.

 

understandable to a degree what they've done given how far behind in the polls they were. However I think if they'd had a more polished first team and had got the sums right, the country would have gone for it.

 

 

 

 

 

Tories 2010: 'We will eliminate the defecit by 2015'

 

2015 UK defecit: £69bn

 

But of course it's Labour who can't do their sums.

[Rayvin 4981]

25 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

It's all relative though isn't it? If everyone gets a two quid rise then is anyone better off? The ones who will be worse off are those on benefits.

 

If everyone gets a two quid rise, the business owners are worse off. At least temporarily, anyway (before pricing adjusts itself to reflect the new levels of wealth present through society).

 

The real purpose of minimum wage, I think, is to protect workers in an environment where we have more capacity than demand. If we pegged CEO salaries against staff incomes, we'd actually be able to address actual inequality to a degree. Raising minimum wage sounds good but achieves little.

 

That said, every time it goes up in our company we have to pay a good number of other people more as well, in order to keep up pay bandings and employee motivation to excel. Once you get to executive level though, the difference becomes irrelevant - the pay is so much higher that it doesn't really even matter.

Edited May 17, 2017 by Rayvin

[ewerk 27028]

Yeah so when you take inflation into account the normal people in work aren't that much better off but it's those out of work who end up worse off.

 

To increase the minimum wage to £10 an hour in 2020 would mean a 69% increase in just ten years. That's quite a rise during a decade of slow economic growth.

[Rayvin 4981]

2 minutes ago, ewerk said:

Yeah so when you take inflation into account the normal people in work aren't that much better off but it's those out of work who end up worse off.

 

To increase the minimum wage to £10 an hour in 2020 would mean a 69% increase in just ten years. That's quite a rise during a decade of slow economic growth.

 

The only positive impact on the people on benefits would be to encourage those few who are just idle to actually find a job, so yes, I'd agree otherwise.

 

One thing with raising it quickly though - you're saying it's gone up 69%. That would beat inflation comfortably, and would mean that actually, in the short to medium term, it has made people better off.

[ewerk 27028]

Unless it fueled inflation over the next five years and forced interest rates up and fucked the whole thing up.

 

But I agree with you on the disabled, mostly just lazy, aye.

[Rayvin 4981]

Just now, ewerk said:

Unless it fueled inflation over the next five years and forced interest rates up and fucked the whole thing up.

 

But I agree with you on the disabled, mostly just lazy, aye.

 

 You do love to twist my words.

 

It could distort inflation considerably, yes. Presumably the BOE would be able to regulate this to a degree though? And if it went up 69% we'd be in real trouble.

[NJS 4026]

For me the minimum wage should support the idea that anyone who works for a living can at least expect to survive and have a decent standard of living. Of course you can argue about what decent means but I think having a place to live and enough to clothe and feed themselves with a bit left over isn't too much to ask. 

 

Of course that should be the starting point for people within an organisation with suitable progress available. 

[ewerk 27028]

1 minute ago, Rayvin said:

 

 You do love to twist my words.

 

It could distort inflation considerably, yes. Presumably the BOE would be able to regulate this to a degree though? And if it went up 69% we'd be in real trouble.

 

That's where interest rates come into it. As someone with a mortgage I'd prefer they remain at their current levels.

[ewerk 27028]

1 minute ago, NJS said:

For me the minimum wage should support the idea that anyone who works for a living can at least expect to survive and have a decent standard of living. Of course you can argue about what decent means but I think having a place to live and enough to clothe and feed themselves with a bit left over isn't too much to ask. 

 

At what level is what achievable? It'll obviously differ depending on whether you're single/co-habiting, having kids or not, what area of the country you live in etc.

[NJS 4026]

3 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

At what level is what achievable? It'll obviously differ depending on whether you're single/co-habiting, having kids or not, what area of the country you live in etc.

Well that's where demand and the market comes into it. 

 

I just hate the idea of without it, people out bidding each other in a race to the bottom and leaving themselves virtually like slaves. 

[ewerk 27028]

I don't think there's any danger of it being repealed. The Tories have used their increases in MW as cover for removing in work benefits.

[Meenzer 14166]

Fails to land the ending, but still quite cute

 

 

[Rayvin 4981]

Somewhat wishful thinking but agreed, that's special

[Dr Gloom 20232]

3 hours ago, ewerk said:

 

 

 

 

Tories 2010: 'We will eliminate the defecit by 2015'

 

2015 UK defecit: £69bn

 

But of course it's Labour who can't do their sums.

 

the only reason the great unwashed buy this line that the tories are somehow always brilliant at running the economy, despite all the evidence to suggest otherwise, is because the general impression is they're all posh and wealthy, so they must know what they're doing with the public finances. 

[Rayvin 4981]

1 minute ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

the only reason the great unwashed buy this line that the tories are somehow always brilliant at running the economy, despite all the evidence to suggest otherwise, is because the general impression is they're all posh and wealthy, so they must know what they're doing with the public finances. 

 

Well, that and the fact that the financial crisis happened on Labour's watch (not that they were responsible for it). The Tories would have never been elected without it though, so it's hard to imagine a scenario where they're in charge for such a melt down. Or it would have been, until Brexit.

Edited May 17, 2017 by Rayvin

[Park Life 71]

'Last one to leave turn out the lights'. /The Sun Election day 1992 Kinnock.

Edited May 17, 2017 by Park Life

[adios 717]

5 hours ago, ewerk said:

 

It's all relative though isn't it? If everyone gets a two quid rise then is anyone better off? The ones who will be worse off are those on benefits.

 

 

Aye, I totally agree.  Benefits would obviously need to rise in tandem.

 

I think I said above it needs to be done right, with tax breaks on small businesses funded by taxing the super-rich (lolz).

 

And as you said above, pegging is awesome.

 

 

Edited May 17, 2017 by adios

[ewerk 27028]

Oi that was Rayvin who admitted to that particular fetish. My arsehole is strictly a no go area. Well apart from a cheeky finger/cucumber/cock.

Edited May 17, 2017 by ewerk

[Rayvin 4981]

...it was? I have absolutely no memory of this

[ewerk 27028]

You mentioned something about pegging. I glanced over it. Adios seems to have taken more of an interest in your shared pastime. 

[adios 717]

Guilty as charged.