[icheerthebull]

Thanks for posting happy May Day to everyone for tomorow

[Faline]

Reminds me that i read somewhere recently that our government were on about trying to scrap minimum wage
Don't recall where i read it though.

[icheerthebull]

Originally Posted by Kelly ↗

Reminds me that i read somewhere recently that our government were on about trying to scrap minimum wage
Don't recall where i read it though.

The telegraph

The minimum wage for millions of people could have to be capped or frozen in future if it risks damaging jobs or the economy, the Government has said.

It has told the Low Pay Commission, which sets the minimum wage, that it must formally consider its impact on “employment and the economy”, before agreeing future increases.

The change, which will be written into the Commission’s new terms of reference, raises the prospect of the first ever across-the-board freeze or cut in the minimum wage for everyone if the economic uncertainty continues.

The national minimum wage is established in law and is traditionally announced in March every year by the Commission, after negotiations with employers, unions and the Government.

The rate increased from £6.08 to £6.19 for those aged over 21 last October, but the hourly rate employees aged 18 to 20 were frozen at £4.98.

A three-yearly review of the Commission disclosed that the Department for Business has been frustrated that not enough attention has been paid by the Commission to successive rises in the minimum wage on the economy.

The review was carried out by Department for Business which annually sets out what ministers want the Commission to consider when setting the annual minimum wage.

Previously, Commission has been in the past asked by ministers “to take account” of the impact on the wider economy. But the review uncovered evidence of “tension” between the department and the Commission over “strict adherence to the annual remit”.

It found that “the Government-endorsed goal to have ‘a minimum wage that helps as many low-paid workers as possible without any significant adverse impact on employment or the economy’, was not included explicitly in either the Act or remit”.

It said therefore that the Commission's new terms should include “the understood and accepted goal to raise the wages of the lowest paid without damaging employment or the economy”.

Ministers have repeatedly warned that the minimum wage was starting to have a “small adverse” impact on employment opportunities.

Employment minister Jo Swinson said in February: “The level of employment is now above its pre-recession peak, but the employment rate is below the pre-recession peak.

“This means that we believe that caution is required - particularly as the minimum wage rate is now at its highest ever level relative to average earnings for adults, and remains high for young people.”

Convenience stores have warned about the damaging effect of recent increases in the minimum wage. Research found that eight out of 10 small shops have had to lay off staff in the past year because of rising costs.

A similar proportion, according to the research by the Association of Convenience Stores, said the minimum wage should be frozen at its current level.

Last year a survey from off licences urged the Commission to freeze the minimum wage because they were struggling to cope with rising staff costs.

Last October, the Government hinted at the change when ministers said the case for a rise in the national minimum wage next year needed to be treated with “caution”, because of the “difficult” economic conditions.

Matthew Hancock, the business minister, said there is “evidence that in these tough economic times the minimum wage level may have an impact on the employment opportunities” of young people.

The news will alarm anti-poverty campaigners who have been urging the Government to adopt the higher “living wage”, which is estimated to be £7.45 this year.

Labour leader Ed Miliband is reported to be considering making the living wage, which is also set annually by campaigners, a key part of Labour’s 2015 election manifesto.

A Business, Innovation and Skills spokesman said: "The Government is committed to the minimum wage because of the protection it provides to low paid workers and the incentives to work it provides.

"It is important that we have a minimum wage that helps as many low paid workers as possible, while at the same time making sure that we do not damage their employment prospects by setting it too high."

[MrCorpse]

In Australia if you are unemployed they give you about $250 a week without working. I think minimum wage is about $16 an hour here but most jobs pay more than the $22 an hour mentioned in the article (and USD is virtually equal to AUD). America is a fucked place to live, still can't believe so many people over there get $300-$400 a week working full time hours! Crazy.

[rob666]

In Canada the minimum wage varies by the region. Where I live its a little over $10/hr, until a few years ago it was a lot lower..... The first job I had 15 years ago it was around $5/hr.

It was hilarious watching the service industry complain about the gradual hikes in minimum wage as if it was the end of the world. Even now there is a lobby that wants it lowered or eliminated.
What I'd like to see is the people who are against it live on it for a year...... If they think that a take home pay of about $330 a week is too much, then they are delusional.

[rob666]

Originally Posted by MrCorpse ↗

In Australia if you are unemployed they give you about $250 a week without working. I think minimum wage is about $16 an hour here but most jobs pay more than the $22 an hour mentioned in the article (and USD is virtually equal to AUD). America is a fucked place to live, still can't believe so many people over there get $300-$400 a week working full time hours! Crazy.

The top 1% have 95% of all the wealth.... The numbers are very similar in Canada.
And yet there's all this talk about Obama turing everything into a communist state?

[pbaj12]

Originally Posted by MrCorpse ↗

In Australia if you are unemployed they give you about $250 a week without working. I think minimum wage is about $16 an hour here but most jobs pay more than the $22 an hour mentioned in the article (and USD is virtually equal to AUD). America is a fucked place to live, still can't believe so many people over there get $300-$400 a week working full time hours! Crazy.

Are expenses the same, less or more?

I don't mind making $1.00 an hour if I can buy a full meal, drive 30 miles and put a few cents away for a rainy day.


I typed this a while ago and don't remember the sources. Anyway it compares how many minimum wage hours you had to work to buy something.

Minimum Wage:
1955 (first year of min wage): $0.75/hour
1960: $1/hour
1970: $1.60/hour
1980: $3.10/hour
1990: $3.80/hour
2000: $5.15/hour
2011: $7.25/hour

Education - cost of 1 year public university/how many hours for 4 year degree:
1950: $300 (1,600 hours)
1960: $600 (2,400 hours)
1970: $1,207 (3,020 hours)
1980: $2,550 (3,290 hours)
1990: $5,243 (5,519 hours)
2000: $8,653 (6,721 hours)
2011: $11,034 (7,292 hours)

Housing - median pricing:
1950: $8,450 (11,267 hours)
1960: $12,700 (12,700 hours)
1970: $23,600 (14,750 hours)
1980: $68,714 (22,166 hours)
1990: $123,000 (32,368 hours)
2000: $169,000 (32,816 hours)
2011: $240,100 (33,117 hours)

10 Gallons of gas:
1950: $1.80 (2.4 hours)
1960: $2.50 (2.5 hours)
1970: $3.60 (2.25 hours)
1980: $11.90 (3.84 hours)
1990: $13.40 (3.53 hours)
2000: $15.10 (2.93 hours)
2011 $35.20 (4.86 hours)

Car:
1950: $1,510 (2,013 hours)
1960: $2,600 (2,600 hours)
1970: $3,900 (2,438 hours)
1980: $7,210 (2,326 hours)
1990: $16,000 (4,211 hours)
2000: $20,355 (3,952 hours)
2011: $32,000 (4,414 hours)

[Impotent Rage]

Originally Posted by MrCorpse ↗

In Australia if you are unemployed they give you about $250 a week without working. I think minimum wage is about $16 an hour here but most jobs pay more than the $22 an hour mentioned in the article (and USD is virtually equal to AUD). America is a fucked place to live, still can't believe so many people over there get $300-$400 a week working full time hours! Crazy.

The situation in the UK is somewhere in between US and Australia.

If you're out of work in the UK, you get £71.70 (~112 USD) for Job Seeker's Allowance and people always complain about how little it is but they also qualify to have their rent and council tax paid amongst other benefits.

If you consider that after tax, min wage workers in the UK get £217.06 a week and a low end rent would be £600 pcm with average council tax of £1200 a year, that leaves millions of minimum wage workers in the UK with around £55.50 (~86.50 USD) a week - remember, they would have got £71.70 for NOT working.

The figures I've stated above are a sort of worst case scenario for the average Joe who finds himself out of work. It's not even a typical claim from what I've seen....

I personally know and encounter loads of people locally who do so much better than the above. Most of them are on disability which attracts even higher allowances and no pressure to find a job. Their disabilities tend to be mild mental health issues, such as generalised anxiety. Benefits are even higher for those with kids.

Some of them, I have no idea what they claim for, it could be chronic dandruff for all I know but they enjoy a much better standard of living than I do and I earn slightly more than the average UK wage and I own my modest property so I have no rent or mortgage.

I stated a low rent of £600 in the above example but housing benefit has been known to provide over over £7000 a month!!!

I know a few who keep pleading poverty and seeking employment but they're constantly deluding themselves because they get a job and quickly realise that they're so much worse off.

Recently the UK introduced a 26k per annum benefits cap. That means if you're on benefits, you can still receive the equivalent to £34,511.70 (53,762.40 USD) pre-tax wage for NOT WORKING!!! There has been massive opposition to the cap, citing that it would create poverty, despite minimum wage @ 40 hours per week earning only £11,287.18!

I'm absolutely sickened by all these "disabled" people who can't stop breeding and living beyond their means.

From what I've seen, most of the disability claims in my locality are fraudulent such as one half of a couple claiming as a single person when the other works or creative designation of relatives as paid carers. They get great deals on cars too, with their benefits paying a reduced rate lease, free car tax and parking permits.

I also know a few chronic alcoholics, they historically got extra money for that particular "illness" although I'm not sure if they still do.

I was listening to the radio two days ago when IDS; the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions was talking about how they're moving to a system to pay all benefits in a single monthly payment. People were phoning in saying he's going to KILL alcoholics because they'll spend all their money in one go! They were calling in to say that "impoverished" people won't be capable of managing their funds on a monthly basis! Un-fucking-believable!!!

I know, a lot of people will be like TL;DR. I just felt the need to vent a little!

[icheerthebull]

dont take offence, I struggled at times when I was on minimum wage, I understand what you are saying. However none of that is the fault of people who are on benifits see below (unfortunatly it does not include bonuses)


whats more the amount of benifit fraud pales in comparison to the amount of unclaimed benifits

Welfare payouts totalling £20 billion a year are going unclaimed by members of the public - almost 12 times the amount lost through fraud.

The £20bn compares to DWP figures showing that just £1.2bn was lost to benefit fraud from October 2009 and September 2010 affecting the six income-related benefits - income support, employment support allowance, pension credit, housing benefit, council tax benefit and jobseekers' allowance.

The department estimates that between £6.9bn and £12.7bn went unclaimed over the same period, representing a take-up of between 75 and 85 per cent.

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/i...ew/full/111764
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17139088

the sick, vulnerable and unemployed are not the exploiters. Its the politicians and bosses who are exploiting the hard working men and women around the world but using the greatest WMDs (weapons of mass distraction) they have at their disposal - the media, they have managed to convince people to focus on the unemployed, immigrants, sick ect "rich people paying rich people to tell the middle class to blame the poor"

A CEO, a boss and a worker are waiting for their cake to arrive. When it does the CEO cuts himself 3/4 of the cake and turns to a manager and says 'I'd watch out for that worker if I were you, I think he might want some of your cake'

Due to the financial crisis (caused by the rich) hospitals are being forced to close, do the bankers get the blaim? hell no! its the fault of foreigners! its the fault of people with addiction problems! its the fault of the disabled! stop them using our hospitals! dont talk to me about the rich and their tax avoidance! rable rable rable

[Impotent Rage]

Originally Posted by icheerthebull ↗

dont take offence, I struggled at times when I was on minimum wage, I understand what you are saying. However none of that is the fault of people who are on benifits see below (unfortunatly it does not include bonuses)

I had seen that table before, there's clearly a lot more wrong with remuneration than min wages and benefits. I have struggled on minimum wage for years, barely able to feed myself properly and falling into a cycle of debt just to keep my car on the road and my home appliances in order.

I empathise completely with genuine benefit claimants but unfortunately, as I see it, I hardly know any (I can think of 2)! I can easily think of at least 20 people I know who are either fraudulent or completely undeserving. I should clarify that by "undeserving" I'm referring to people such as alcoholics, drug abusers, persistent criminal behaviour, unfit parents or questionably "disabled".

I have NEVER been on benefits in my life but I have a brother who has never worked due to serious disability. I understand all too well that there are people who we should rightly be supporting.

I can't for the life of me understand why our country supports the people that it does though. I have pushed supermarket trolleys and scrubbed toilets during my working life, yet I know people who claim they can't work due to anxiety or behavioural problems but they can drink, drive, walk, run, smoke, procreate and talk the hind leg off a donkey. Are we to believe that they couldn't mop a floor?