If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Hmm, when was the min. wage introduced, and what has happened to unemployment since then?
Er... yes it is.
The taxes paid by us all, whether income tax or VAT, belongs to us. We should therefore have a say in how it is used. Kermit has a problem with how it is being used.
He isn't suggesting that people on benefits shouldn't be allowed to buy "luxury" items, more that they shouldn't be able to afford them.
And he's got a point. The benefits system should be about the Govt/Society offering people enough funds to allow them to survive whilst looking for employment, it shouldn't give people the opportunity to see benefit as an alternative to wages.
Unemployment fell under the last Tory government; there was no minimum wage then!
the fact that uemployment has fallen to 'record lows' under New Labour is not wholly related to the introduction of a minimum wage. The economy simply has been strong since New Labour came to power in 1997.
I didn't say that the fall was related to the minimum wage.
The point is that the fall has continued inspite of the minimum wage, thus disproving the economists (and your) statement. Had the minimum wage had such a dramatic impact as they seemed to believe then unemployment would have risen, would it not?
OK, he pays VAT, but he doesn't pay PAYE on any earnings.
But the point is, he's making so many assumptions based on his own views of what people who live on council estates are like. He doesn't know that all the people with Sky dishes are on benefits. He doesn't know anything about them, he just makes very patronising comments about what they should spend their money on. Frankly its none of his business.
So the minimum wage was set at a careful and prudent level.
But the fact remains that a minimum wage set at TOO HIGH a level can create unemployment.
As I said before, unemployment has fallen because the economy has been growing steadily.
When the minimum wage was introduced bosses warned of economic meltdown and mass unemployment. These gloomy predictions weren't based on any analysis of the impact it would have- rather, it was a desperate attempt to keep paying slave wages out of pure greed.
Every proposed increase however small is met with the same gloomy predictions by the same greedy pigs who earn 6 and 7 figure salaries yet don't want to part with any of the massive profits their companies make to provide workers with a decent salary.
The minimum wage should be at least £6.50 an hour (though I believe there's room for an extra quid there) and should not mean that a single job has to go as a result.
And you don't know if someone is unemployed just by the area they live in. I live on a council estate and the majority of people work hard, long hours in menial typs of jobs.
If you are a student, lots of taxes goes towards subsiding yout education.
As regards to students paying tax, you pay tax the same as everybody else. However, most students only work part time and make less than the required 4.5Kper year needed before you are taxed.
It is about time there was a decent minimum wage for people aged 21 and under, your needs don't suddenly change when you turn 22.
Maybe they contributed 'their money' when he was aged 0-16 at school. The Duke of westminster should presumably have a controlling interest in all our lives as he probably pays a lot more tax than most and more than key workers in the economy.
Govts decide benefit entitlement, it's discussed in committees with input from NGO's etc. Fortunately we don't decide our neighbours' benefits as people we don't like wouldn't get anything
The whole POINT of the dole is to tide people over until they are able to find work- it is not SUPPOSED to pay for luxuries, it is not SUPPOSED to be anything other than enough to keep going with enough clothes, food, warmth and shelter until you can get back to work.
I don't have an issue with what people on the dole spend their money on, I have an issue with people on the dole being able to spare £12 a week to afford to pay for Sky television when I cannot. I wouldn't expect to now as I am not working but when I was working 25 hours a week I could still not afford the spare money to pay for Sky television, even though I was paying tax and National Insurance.
If people can afford an expensive luxury item whilst claiming unemployment benefit then the level of unemployment benefit is set too high.
Oh, and I was making no assumptions about "council estaters"- the two council estates near me have unemployment at levels comfortably over 60%, yet there are considerably more than 40% of the homes with Sky television dishes attached.
I quite agree- if a company cannot afford to pay a decent wage for a decent day's work then that company does not deserve to be in business.
The only problem with high minimum wages is, of course, the issue of inflation- if everyone suddenly earned ten times more, say, then a loaf of bread would cost ten times more too.
At the end the day, its none of your business what people spend their money on.
I never actually said it was.
I pointed out that if they can afford expensive luxury items then the dole level is too high.
but it is not, a few MPs have tried it and failed even after a week. Black economy work is inevitable
Surely class is more of a divider?
Let's run by the maths.
Unemployment is at 60%. That means 40% are not on the dole- I don't count tax credits as the dole. Sky take-up appears to be significantly more than 40%, therefore unemployed people are taking Sky. Understand that?
What I've said wouldn't invalidate comments about 'immigrants taking our jobs' which I think is happening and may be a factor in a lot of brits going belly-up and opting for a life on benefits rather than competing with low-wage, younger and keener new arrivals. May 1st has already happened in that e. Europeans are here and doing jobs all over all London
Society is divided by colour in ways but hey, that's another thread, I think
But they're not "taking our jobs". Its weird, you have a class perspective when it suits you, but still believe all that racist shit.
Oh well, typical BNP agenda I'm afraid. You do realise that the leaders of the BNP actually don't give a fuck about the working class?
I think most people can afford £13.50/month.
On the dole ?
Sky TV is a luxury some working people cant afford. People on the dole get Housing Benefit, Council Tax Benefit etc etc.
Some people who work and may be just a couple of pounds over the threshold dont get this help, so why should people on the dole.
Remember sky is a luxury and if people on the dole can afford 13.50 then sorry but they are getting too much money.
(im not forgetting to put my pound sign but this new keyboard has # for the pound sign)
Er, no, I just identified Big business + Nulabour as the principal villains though ppl come here as likely Benefit tourists are blameworthy too, you might deny they exist
I don't mind at all, wouldn't be relevant to this thread though