Havent seen much real as opposed to pretendy enthusiasm from the plutocrats and friends on the idea of increasing wages point is something can always wrong deliberate or not to modifying the wage in favour of the Tory plutocrat paymasters
Well, I suspect that they wish Miliband had got in now. He was only going to make the minimum wage £8 by 2020. Mind he was still going to call it a minimum wage. Not a living wage.
That's like me calling my Colt a BMW. You can call it what you want. It's still a Colt.
If you can live on £9 in 2020 without some sort of government (or other) assistance, I'll eat Paddy Ashdown's hat!
Of course, it could be that the Tories will have come out of Eurtope and binned the human rights legislation, enabling them to make the working week 80 hours, in which case £9 an hour will work out just about as a living wage.
Excuse me but did I miss something? Where is the legislation to make it mandatory for employers to pay living wage? Without that any words coming out of GOs mouth is just hot air.
As I understand it they are changing the name of the minimum wage to the living wage (even though it is not) and it will be enforced, starting with a rise to £7,20 next year. It will make many people worse off, but hey....
Why go near your keyboard and type drivel. I assume you are aware that for a species to survive, it must procreate. Furthermore it must look after it's fellow kind, for its kind to continue. I would like to think, that we have evolved beyond the basic nead for survival and can care for others, sharing our space, knowledge and wealth, monetary or otherwise.
Not a fan of paying people to have kids but here is the rub, Governments are too good at entering into a contract with the population and then reneging on them. All children that are here right now should receive the money that the Government decide they were paying, any others after a set time, well that is another matter. The other thing is £9 living wage by 2020, how much will that be worth by then, I doubt that will be worth what the minimum wage is right now and that is a disgrace. It is about time we started paying the minimum wage to MP's then you would see it rise and rise.
I can certainly see the argument that if people want to have any children, they can do so, or not, dependent on their wealth. Thus the queen was able to have four children.
But as Jim points out, we need to either encourage people to have children, or to accept that we musty encourage people to come from abroad, otherwise, even with a socially responsible government we simply wont be able to afford education, health policing, etc.
Particularly in the days of gender equality, people are inclined to weigh up the expense of having kids, with the career opportunities and money that can be had by avoiding children.
So somewhat reluctantly, I can see that there is a need to subsidise the having to children and there always has been. (I'm not sure but I think it started after the 2nd war as part of the Welfare state, and again trying to build up the population.
Most successful countries do this; and many make childcare available with huge state subsidies. It seems to work for Scandinavia.
I agree with you Helena. It's ridiculous to set a minimum wage or living wage or whatever you decide to call it 5 years in advance. He has no idea what inflation will bring in that time.
If they desperately want to stop subsiding children, it might be a good idea to look at a rent policy that will stop rents being larger than the minimum wage in some areas.
Everyone with half a brain knew this was a con trick to punish the poor for being poor and not having a rich daddy who could buy them an education at any of the top 4 universities. We all know it's sick, we all know it's wrong, but sadly many voters down south keep falling for this crap. We also still subsidising the wages with the cut in corporation tax so basically the poor are paying to subsidise their own lack of support and the Tories and their pals continue to be better off.
I also think that it really doesn't matter how much we shout and talk about how shite this all is unless we elect real people with real values then nothing will ever change. Hopefully the SNP keep up their good start so we will know we did our bit but the rest of the UK has to stand up too and right now they show no sign of being willing to learn in enough numbers.
Yes well why not sterlise everyone then no one would have to pay for other peoples kids.........................mind after one generation the human race would be extinct .
tris
ReplyDeleteHavent seen much real as opposed to pretendy enthusiasm from the plutocrats and friends on the idea of increasing wages point is something can always wrong deliberate or not to modifying the wage in favour of the Tory plutocrat paymasters
Well, I suspect that they wish Miliband had got in now. He was only going to make the minimum wage £8 by 2020. Mind he was still going to call it a minimum wage. Not a living wage.
DeleteThat's like me calling my Colt a BMW. You can call it what you want. It's still a Colt.
If you can live on £9 in 2020 without some sort of government (or other) assistance, I'll eat Paddy Ashdown's hat!
Of course, it could be that the Tories will have come out of Eurtope and binned the human rights legislation, enabling them to make the working week 80 hours, in which case £9 an hour will work out just about as a living wage.
The smoke and mirrors, of the Tory Chancellor; or should that be Tory chancer?
ReplyDeleteThings go better with Coke... as they used to sing!
DeleteExcuse me but did I miss something? Where is the legislation to make it mandatory for employers to pay living wage? Without that any words coming out of GOs mouth is just hot air.
ReplyDeleteAs I understand it they are changing the name of the minimum wage to the living wage (even though it is not) and it will be enforced, starting with a rise to £7,20 next year. It will make many people worse off, but hey....
DeleteWhy have two children and then expect the taxpayers to subsidise them ?
ReplyDeleteWhy go near your keyboard and type drivel.
DeleteI assume you are aware that for a species to survive, it must procreate. Furthermore it must look after it's fellow kind, for its kind to continue.
I would like to think, that we have evolved beyond the basic nead for survival and can care for others, sharing our space, knowledge and wealth, monetary or otherwise.
Not a fan of paying people to have kids but here is the rub, Governments are too good at entering into a contract with the population and then reneging on them. All children that are here right now should receive the money that the Government decide they were paying, any others after a set time, well that is another matter. The other thing is £9 living wage by 2020, how much will that be worth by then, I doubt that will be worth what the minimum wage is right now and that is a disgrace. It is about time we started paying the minimum wage to MP's then you would see it rise and rise.
DeleteI can certainly see the argument that if people want to have any children, they can do so, or not, dependent on their wealth. Thus the queen was able to have four children.
DeleteBut as Jim points out, we need to either encourage people to have children, or to accept that we musty encourage people to come from abroad, otherwise, even with a socially responsible government we simply wont be able to afford education, health policing, etc.
Particularly in the days of gender equality, people are inclined to weigh up the expense of having kids, with the career opportunities and money that can be had by avoiding children.
So somewhat reluctantly, I can see that there is a need to subsidise the having to children and there always has been. (I'm not sure but I think it started after the 2nd war as part of the Welfare state, and again trying to build up the population.
Most successful countries do this; and many make childcare available with huge state subsidies. It seems to work for Scandinavia.
I agree with you Helena. It's ridiculous to set a minimum wage or living wage or whatever you decide to call it 5 years in advance. He has no idea what inflation will bring in that time.
If they desperately want to stop subsiding children, it might be a good idea to look at a rent policy that will stop rents being larger than the minimum wage in some areas.
Tris
ReplyDeleteEveryone with half a brain knew this was a con trick to punish the poor for being poor and not having a rich daddy who could buy them an education at any of the top 4 universities. We all know it's sick, we all know it's wrong, but sadly many voters down south keep falling for this crap. We also still subsidising the wages with the cut in corporation tax so basically the poor are paying to subsidise their own lack of support and the Tories and their pals continue to be better off.
I also think that it really doesn't matter how much we shout and talk about how shite this all is unless we elect real people with real values then nothing will ever change. Hopefully the SNP keep up their good start so we will know we did our bit but the rest of the UK has to stand up too and right now they show no sign of being willing to learn in enough numbers.
Bruce
Hmmm... couldnt get much more bleak, Bruce!
DeleteYes well why not sterlise everyone then no one would have to pay for other peoples
ReplyDeletekids.........................mind after one generation the human race would be extinct .
That's a good solution Niko. If we did that the millions of other species on Earth might have a chance of living.
Delete