Cyclone Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 TBH I suspect that it will end up costing more than £30/month. It starts in the public sector and puts pressure on the private sector to do likewise. In the meantime businesses start passing on their increased costs and pretty soon the pond shops are charging £2. I'd be very surprised if it did as that would be a massive % increase. Something like 20%. You were talking about council tax though, not a general increase in inflation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isabelle Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 I would be worried that introducing a compulsory 'living wage' would push living costs up, then we will be just as badly off. Large companies like supermarkets will be looking to claw back the money from somewhere, so food prices may go up, amongst other things. I earn less than the living wage, but I am unable to claim any benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isabelle Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Hi truman, sorry about the message being shown twice,it's because the original one didn't show up at first, but if it's a minimum living amount then everyone should get it,or do you not give the unemployed enough to live on. I don't think unemployed people should be given the same amount of money as someone who works full time and actually earns their money. Otherwise there would be no incentive to work, and even more people would choose not to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted November 6, 2012 Author Share Posted November 6, 2012 I would be worried that introducing a compulsory 'living wage' would push living costs up, then we will be just as badly off. Large companies like supermarkets will be looking to claw back the money from somewhere, so food prices may go up, amongst other things. I earn less than the living wage, but I am unable to claim any benefits. So you're happy to earn a struggling wage, as opposed to a living wage? I read somewhere in one of the links posted earlier this morning that when the minimum wage was introduced, it had no noticeable effect on vacancies, or the cost of living. People should be paid enough to 'live' on. Not what big corporations can get away with paying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 So you're happy to earn a struggling wage, as opposed to a living wage? I read somewhere in one of the links posted earlier this morning that when the minimum wage was introduced, it had no noticeable effect on vacancies, or the cost of living. People should be paid enough to 'live' on. Not what big corporations can get away with paying. The market dictates how much people are paid though. If it really isn't enough to live on, then people wouldn't be able to live, the supply side of the equation would shrink and the cost of employing people at that level would rise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Glypta Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 So you're happy to earn a struggling wage, as opposed to a living wage? I read somewhere in one of the links posted earlier this morning that when the minimum wage was introduced, it had no noticeable effect on vacancies, or the cost of living. People should be paid enough to 'live' on. Not what big corporations can get away with paying. Did you notice that Ford closed down its last UK vehicle manufacturing plant last month and transferred production to Rumania where wage rates are about 75% lower than in the UK? Do you think companies like Ford would be more likely to retain production in the UK if they were forced into another spiral of wage rises? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted November 6, 2012 Author Share Posted November 6, 2012 Did you notice that Ford closed down its last UK vehicle manufacturing plant last month and transferred production to Rumania where wage rates are about 75% lower than in the UK? Do you think companies like Ford would be more likely to retain production in the UK if they were forced into another spiral of wage rises? So you're all for pittance wages then?...That's what you appear to be infering. Simple solution to the problem there (long term I know). Don't buy a Ford vehicle made in Rumania. I always used to have a Dyson Vaccum cleaner, but since they shifted production to Malasia or wherever it was, I won't touch their products with a bargepole! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 How does a full time member of staff cost more than 2 part time members of staff? pensions, holiday pay, redundancy, not being able to stop their hours with no warning. More rights equals more cost to the employer in unskilled work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 So you're all for pittance wages then?...That's what you appear to be infering. Simple solution to the problem there (long term I know). Don't buy a Ford vehicle made in Rumania. I always used to have a Dyson Vaccum cleaner, but since they shifted production to Malasia or wherever it was, I won't touch their products with a bargepole! It's not that cut and dried. Even if ford dropped wages to minimum wage, romanian wages (and no doubt other costs) still would have been cheaper. And minimum wage/living wage really only affects full time workers. The student doing a bit of bar work just for beer money probably doesn't need more than minimum wage. A main breadwinner definately will. It's all relative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isabelle Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 So you're happy to earn a struggling wage, as opposed to a living wage? I read somewhere in one of the links posted earlier this morning that when the minimum wage was introduced, it had no noticeable effect on vacancies, or the cost of living. People should be paid enough to 'live' on. Not what big corporations can get away with paying. I'm not happy, but if everything else goes up too, theres not much point in increasing my wages. The difference has to be absorbed somewhere, after all. I work for a smallish private company, so any changes would take a long time to filter down (if it actually happens). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.