David Cameron sets out EU reform goals

BobQ

CLAPTON wrote: »

I thought that protecting the free democratic choice of the people of the Falklands, was worth fighting for.
.

At the risk of digressing, I was referring to the fact that having cut defence in 1981 and signalled our disinterest in the FIs, Thatcher sent many of our brave military down there to save her bacon, after her misjudgements.

BobQ

Generali wrote: »

If the public sector is only increasing at 1% a year then the private sector is increasing even faster.

Why is it on the internet that people only earn the minimum wage, work in the public sector or are bankers? The median income is c. £27,000 a year. That's 84 hours a week at the minimum wage.

I think you live in a rarefied atmosphere these days!

As you can see from the above

We find that in April 2014:
One-in-five employees (21 per cent, or 5�5 million individuals) were low paid in Great Britain. There has been little change in this proportion over the past 20 years.
Extreme low pay affected just 2 per cent of employees – likely to be young people and apprentices as well as some possible minimum wage non-compliance – reflecting the fact that the threshold falls below the adult minimum wage.
More than one-in-five employees (22 per cent, or 5�7 million individuals) were paid less than the Living Wage� This is an increase from 20 per cent in 2013.
One-in-twenty employees (5 per cent, or 1�4 million individuals) were on the minimum wage. This proportion has been increasing steadily since the early 2000s.
Across all measures, those most likely to be low paid include women, the young, part-time and temporary employees, those in lower-skilled occupations, and those employed in the hospitality, retail and care sectors.
Although hourly earnings data is not available for the self-employed, and they are not included in our main analysis, approximations suggest that their exclusion underestimates the scale of low pay.

http://www.resolutionfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Low-Pay-Britain-2015.pdf

As you can see 26% of private sector firms pay hourly rates of less than 2/3 median wage.

CLAPTON

BobQ wrote: »

At the risk of digressing, I was referring to the fact that having cut defence in 1981 and signalled our disinterest in the FIs, Thatcher sent many of our brave military down there to save her bacon, after her misjudgements.

It's good you support more spending on our armed forces : something we clearly agree on.

We mustn't repeat the mistake of reducing our combat readiness.

BobQ

martinsurrey wrote: »

You have to follow a lot of EU law to be in the EU free trade area, If we leave Europe but want to stay in the free trade area (and I don't think anyone wants us to leave that), our bananas will still have to be straight, but we wont have a say when they decide what shade of orange our oranges have to be, we'll just have to abide by their decision.

We will also have to pay to be apart of the EEA, Norway pays without getting a say, and is subject to 21% of all EU law, including the free movement of people, which seems to be the one that a lot of anti EU care about.

I have never seen a banana that is not curved inside or outside of the EU.

But I do agree we need to make a clear decision that we want to be in or out. Jumping up and down on the sidelines is neither statesmanlike or necessary. We need to engage with the rest of EU and find solutions to our mutual problems.

I agree we could go our own way but if we do I think the UK will be the worse for it. It will probably lead to Sottish independence too, but ignoring this complication, we will see global business demonstrating just how global they can get. As we saw when the SNP forced the nation to contemplate their independence, many large firms signalled they would relocate outside Scotland. It will be 10 times worse if UK left the EU and Cameron realises it, hence his talk tough, ask little approach.

Generali

BobQ wrote: »

I think you live in a rarefied atmosphere these days!

As you can see from the above



http://www.resolutionfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Low-Pay-Britain-2015.pdf

As you can see 26% of private sector firms pay hourly rates of less than 2/3 median wage.

At the risk of stating the bleedin' obvious, half of people earn less than the median wage by definition.

BobQ

Generali wrote: »

When I was young and hung out with a lot of people who would now be described as 'disadvantaged' or 'vulnerable'. In addition I had a lot of friends that were in trades of one sort or another: chefs, chippies, sparkies etc.. They weren't minimum wage fodder and were very proud, rightly, of their achievements and abilities.

There really aren't that many checkout chicks in the UK. The majority of the workforce is semi-skilled and skilled and not earning nor wanting to earn the minimum wage. They're looking up not down and they're the people that decide elections. They voted Tory in England and SNP in Scotland.

I agree that the Tories won by getting the aspirational people to vote for them, but there are still a large and growing minority who are poorly paid in the UK as I posted above. Twenty years ago the attitude you describe was very prevalent. Today we have far too many people under 30 who see no future beyond low paid jobs.

Generali

BobQ wrote: »

I agree that the Tories won by getting the aspirational people to vote for them, but there are still a large and growing minority who are poorly paid in the UK as I posted above. Twenty years ago the attitude you describe was very prevalent. Today we have far too many people under 30 who see no future beyond low paid jobs.

Why is it growing? You said yourself that the proportion of low paid has stayed constant for decades.

Ultimately there is always going to be someone pushing a broom or pulling a pint for a living. That was me 20 years ago until I got off my !!!! and decided to make something of myself. There is nothing special about me: I went to my local comprehensive school, I didn't have any links to get a leg up the corporate ladder. I just did as well as I could and have made a fairly nice life for myself.

BobQ

Generali wrote: »

Why is it growing? You said yourself that the proportion of low paid has stayed constant for decades.

Ultimately there is always going to be someone pushing a broom or pulling a pint for a living. That was me 20 years ago until I got off my !!!! and decided to make something of myself. There is nothing special about me: I went to my local comprehensive school, I didn't have any links to get a leg up the corporate ladder. I just did as well as I could and have made a fairly nice life for myself.

Well as you pointed out there will always be 50% below the median so that will never change. What the report demonstrates is that those who find themselves earning well below the median (2/3rd, 1/2 whatever) show worrying trends in terms of the demographics and do not include the self employed who are also disproportionately affected.

If it does not bother you then so be it. As I posted earlier the problem is exacerbated by the austerity agenda, as even Cameron seems to think is concerning.

Do you think UK's poor productivity is helped or hindered by poverty we are apparently content to inflict?

Thrugelmir

BobQ wrote: »

Today we have far too many people under 30 who see no future beyond low paid jobs.

Service industries require low skill levels. Chicken and egg situation.

nowakee

The four year wait for work benefits are very easy to achieve. Give out a tax number (UTR or NI) immediately with birth, on the provisional birth certificate, like the "person number" in Scandinavian countries. Put any waiting period for in-work benefits on this (anything from zero to 16 years). No native will effected.

Any migrant gets it like they do now when they apply for the National Insurance number or Unique Tax Reference and will have to wait to receive in-work benefits.

===

Of course taking in-work benefits away from migrant would make it more difficult for people to work in those areas of the UK that are growing (e.g. London, Cambridge etc). It will therefore be very bad for support stuff and the service industry (hotels, restaurants, care-homes, etc) in expanding areas like London, who rely on migrant workers. But never mind, the UK economy will be destroyed by one Ukip supporter at a time...