Employers can't 'afford' to pay a living wage?

Russe11

ILW wrote: »

Nothing wrong with the big house etc as long as you have earned it.
For many the route to a big house is to stay on the dole or a low wage job and breed though.

Thats right, I feel so much for many of my hard working frinds my age, they struggle on joint or single incomes, either renting or living at the family home still, when they look at their peers though that have created young families, they have much more than they are able to earn.

marybelle01

ILW wrote: »

I people can relearn that they have to live within their means then the country will be a whole lot more prosperous.

I utterly agree, everyone should live within their means. That way banks will collapse since nobody will be borrowing money from them. That'll get them back for the recession

Googlewhacker

Russe11 wrote: »

so you believe income should relate to indivual circumstances rather than the value of their labour?

If I go to work next week and work for a local company part time I could get about £130 income, where as a single parent can go and work the same hours and their income equivalent is over £600. Of course on £130 i'd qualify for some housing benefit etc, but not to the same level.

The fastest way to increase your income in this country is to breed. It only take 9 months to get the qualification for higher earnings.

Would it not be better to set the labour rates based upon what the individual is worth, do away with benefits to working families and give tax breaks to those who wish to create a family.

As for saying the upping the min wage would put load of people unemployed, the tax credits that upped incomes and ment families could borrow more based on income(yes I do know people who have benefits listed as income for their income multiplier) not a far worse distortion.

No, what I am saying is if this benefit culture hadn't occured then people would have been living of the money they have earnt and within their means and not doing as you say and breeding to earn money.

Itismehonest

Russe11 wrote: »

Thats right, I feel so much for many of my hard working frinds my age, they struggle on joint or single incomes, either renting or living at the family home still, when they look at their peers though that have created young families, they have much more than they are able to earn.

This is, sadly, true.

Maybe we should return to the days when Child Benefit was for the first child only? Not going to be popular with all those currently receiving CB but it may stop children being used as income - not that I'm suggesting that most people do that ...... but we all know of cases where it happens.

Russe11

Googlewhacker wrote: »

No, what I am saying is if this benefit culture hadn't occured then people would have been living of the money they have earnt and within their means and not doing as you say and breeding to earn money.

I can't say its a benefit culture, if I had kids i'd look at what would give me the highest income/to time spent away from the family ratio... benefits would come out the most times.

I don't think we will see benefit levels reduced much, wage inflation should start to kick in over the next year or two, but with many benefit rates linked to inflation/protected then its not really going to have much affect.

They have only touched the surface in the spending cuts and its already caused upsets, anyone who understands how the monetary system works will know that cuts will not have the desired effect as without borrowing and debts there would be no money as it is today.

Notmyrealname

fedster wrote: »

Minimum wage is not an adequate wage far from it, what is an adequate wage well i guess there is no set figure it varies from person to person depending on their own personal circumstances.

I could live quite happily on NMW but then again I'm not up to my eyeballs in debt and you can still rent a decent flat around here for under £400.

gibson123

Russe11 wrote: »

And why do you think that is?, because it supports private business and polictical parties are privately funded.

Eh where do you think the money comes from in the first place?, businesses pay taxes and employer NI, without private business creating the wealth to produce the taxes in the first place there would be no money to pay for any benefits. We need to get behind businesses, especially those that are doing the best they can to keep employees employed in what is now a double dip recession, or we will all be out of jobs.

Russe11

gibson123 wrote: »

Eh where do you think the money comes from in the first place?, businesses pay taxes and employer NI, without private business creating the wealth to produce the taxes in the first place there would be no money to pay for any benefits. We need to get behind businesses, especially those that are doing the best they can to keep employees employed in what is now a double dip recession, or we will all be out of jobs.

thats right all the money over the last 15 years has come from productive businesses, do you seriously believe that?

Most of the money created(representation fo debt) has come from land values increases and state borrowing, not productive industry.

If it had come from business via taxation we would not have the current economic mess.

If there are businesses that do not rely on support directly or indirectly(like those who do not have employees that get income from the state) the tax is actually on being productive enterprises then that can only be a good thing. Saying that some where along the line, the flow of money will be stimulated.

Not forgetting that income from working taxation does not even cover the welfare bill in this country.

antrobus

whitegoods_engineer wrote: »

....

If an employer can't afford to pay a living wage to his staff, he is either taking too much for himself, or not charging enough for his goods and services.

.....

Well that's one problem solved. We'll just force employers to charge more for their goods and services so they can all afford to pay their staff a living wage.

Oh, hang on a minute....if employers all start charging more for their goods and services, won't that mean that everything costs more, and everyone will need an even higher living wage so they can afford these higher prices? Um err.. I'll get back to you on that one....

Russe11

antrobus wrote: »

Well that's one problem solved. We'll just force employers to charge more for their goods and services so they can all afford to pay their staff a living wage.

Oh, hang on a minute....if employers all start charging more for their goods and services, won't that mean that everything costs more, and everyone will need an even higher living wage so they can afford these higher prices? Um err.. I'll get back to you on that one....

The costs of goods and services have increased, when this happens the business owners get richer the workers get poorer with out wage inflation.