Making the poor better off

[tinfoilhat]

i dont think so...we need to change what is happening within our own country

 

Let's have an election!

[El Cid]

You seem to be angling toward the goal of relative poverty elimination. Your father would likely have had few of the luxuries we enjoy today. Property prices are an issue, but in most regards the working poor enjoy a far higher standard of living than 50 years ago.

 

A world of relative poverty elimination would mean we all had equal pay, not something I see as the future.

At some point my father had a motor bike n side car, not a Ford Ka, but a good standard of living, for those times.

 

We have been trying to trickle down the wealth, to the poor for 50+ years, do you still believe in the rich getting richer, and it helping the poor?

 

A study in 2014, of the pay of directors of FTSE 100 firms showed that the rise was driven by a 44% increase in long-term incentive share awards and a 12% boost in bonuses.

Why do the rich get large pay rises, when the FTSE 100 rise was probably down to QE, not the bosses working 24/7

 

I dont want to give the poor money, I want people to earn a fair days pay for a fair days work; the poor work hard, but the rich get better rewarded, whether they work hard or not.

 

---------- Post added 06-09-2015 at 01:57 ----------

 

 

You understand that all attempts at implementing a Marxist society have ended in despotic ruin surely.

 

 

I should really read more, how long did that take?

 

I understand that capitalism is failing, half a million people are moving from one country to another, I guess there there hasnt been a world war yet; but a war between ISIS and the West isnt far off.

 

I guess in a capitalist society, we judge its success by how much money the rich have?

[Vague_Boy]

I understand that capitalism is failing, half a million people are moving from one country to another,

 

Surely that's a non sequitur? If you're referring to the Syrian refugee crisis, that was caused by the Syrian Civil War. This was initiated by crackdowns by the ruling Ba'ath Party, a "Neo-Ba'athist" organization with the belief that "Socialism is the true goal of Arab unity... Arab unity is the obligatory basis for constructing a socialist society." [LINK]

 

I know the chippier members of the forum blame capitalism for pretty much everything, including male pattern baldness, our failure to win the Eurovision and the bad weather over the bank holiday. It ain't perfect but at least you're not having to flee the country because of an attempt at "constructing a socialist society".

[unbeliever]

A world of relative poverty elimination would mean we all had equal pay, not something I see as the future.

At some point my father had a motor bike n side car, not a Ford Ka, but a good standard of living, for those times.

 

We have been trying to trickle down the wealth, to the poor for 50+ years, do you still believe in the rich getting richer, and it helping the poor?

 

A study in 2014, of the pay of directors of FTSE 100 firms showed that the rise was driven by a 44% increase in long-term incentive share awards and a 12% boost in bonuses.

Why do the rich get large pay rises, when the FTSE 100 rise was probably down to QE, not the bosses working 24/7

 

I dont want to give the poor money, I want people to earn a fair days pay for a fair days work; the poor work hard, but the rich get better rewarded, whether they work hard or not.

 

---------- Post added 06-09-2015 at 01:57 ----------

 

 

I should really read more, how long did that take?

 

I understand that capitalism is failing, half a million people are moving from one country to another, I guess there there hasnt been a world war yet; but a war between ISIS and the West isnt far off.

 

I guess in a capitalist society, we judge its success by how much money the rich have?

 

Training.

There's plenty available.

Some is free, there are also loans available on very good terms. Edx and Coursera (and to some extent the OU) are decent places to start. The free online courses don't come with proper certificates, but you still learn and they can help you figure out where your aptitude is. If you take it up properly part time, you can get the same fees loans that 18 year old undergraduates get on the same terms to study with the OU and end up with a degree.

 

Unskilled labour is no longer as valuable as it was 50 years ago. That's not capitalism, it's technological progress.

If you want more money, you have to make yourself more useful. It's that simple.

Edited September 6, 2015 by unbeliever

[TJC1]

Increased value to our tribe equals increased wealth and prosperity...unbeliever is right when he says 'make yourself more useful'. It's the way forward.

 

The poor wait for their place at the table and are left with crumbs, while the rich go out and take it.

 

It's not fair...but there it is. Nobody says life should be fair.

 

---------- Post added 06-09-2015 at 08:40 ----------

 

I can understand most people wanting to eradicate absolute poverty, to have people starving in a modern world is a disgrace, but as the destitute in Africa have shown, handouts that keep them just above destitution doesn't solve the problem, it just keeps them alive.

 

The problem is work. There need to be enough jobs that pay well enough for people to live without the need for tax credits or other kinds of top ups. At the moment, many people who can't get these jobs, (there is an awful lot of competition,) often try self-employment, but even the most basic set up, costs money that someone on £70 a week can't afford. These days there are all sorts of hurdles that cost money that the poorest can't afford, such as equipment, licences, insurances, etc even for something as basic as a window cleaning round, or a burger van.

 

Grants that used to be available are now almost impossible to get, in spite of what you might hear. They have nearly all been replaced by loans which charge interest and aren't available to people with a poor credit score.

If it doesn't work out, you can't just walk away, as there are debts involved which grow.

 

The other problem is the cost of decent training for a decent job. The last time I looked, a bricklaying course was over £800, which might not seem like much to some, but is a fortune when you have nothing, and of course a job isn't guaranteed at the end of it.

 

Personally, I think the way to get people out of poverty is to work on these areas; invest in people and training, and extend it to people over 25+

 

Widening adult education. Thats one area I agree with you on.

 

---------- Post added 06-09-2015 at 08:45 ----------

 

Is this thread the biggest wind up yet. Let's get rid of the fat cats, let's create work, let's cut the differentials on income I wonder how many jobs will be created when we cut the incentive to create jobs why is there so much jealousy aimed at people who create wealth? Anna B talks about poverty and people starving in Africa, in the last census in Nigeria the population was 140 million,

If it continues increasing at the current rate it will be 1 billion within a century,

Which is obviously unsustainable, Zimbabwe used to be called the bread basket of Africa now it's the basket case. As for poverty in this country that's a myth that's been created by the extreme left, we've got a welfare state that doesn't allow anyone to starve, a lot of the people said to be living in "extreme poverty"

Are simply not prioritising their spending.

 

We are lucky to have so many freedoms in uk. Chance to go out to work, freedoms of movement and social mobility.

I agree, the welfare state was never setup to be a catch all to be abused. I'd rather it was dismantled and made fit for purpose.

 

---------- Post added 06-09-2015 at 08:53 ----------

 

 

Although I am a republican myself, you can't really make England a republic without a major change in public opinion. Or by imposing a dictatorship.

 

I said it was a long shot. The queen got traction with the 2012 jubilee which followed William and Kates wedding , double boost, puts the debate to bed really.

My only hope is the new generation, William etc take on a modern approach.

[El Cid]

Increased value to our tribe equals increased wealth and prosperity...unbeliever is right when he says 'make yourself more useful'. It's the way forward.

 

The poor wait for their place at the table and are left with crumbs, while the rich go out and take it.

 

The living wage of £9 per hour from George Osborne will increase poor peoples pay without any more 'usefulness'.

Those at the top are not any more 'use' but they are getting richer. We have a jobs market, where by the whole world is on offer, bring down the wages; this applies to those at the top too, but the rich are increasing their fortune just because of how the jobs market is run.

[unbeliever]

The living wage of £9 per hour from George Osborne will increase poor peoples pay without any more 'usefulness'.

Those at the top are not any more 'use' but they are getting richer. We have a jobs market, where by the whole world is on offer, bring down the wages; this applies to those at the top too, but the rich are increasing their fortune just because of how the jobs market is run.

 

I'm sorry, they may not be morally worthy, but they are a great deal more use.

If they weren't, the free market would not pay them so much. Their skill are difficult to replace and there is great competition between companies to make use of their skills which is why they command such high salaries.

 

All the Chancellor has done is modify the way in which the UK's wealth redistribution is organised. Rather than taxing people and handing the money to the low paid in the form of tax credits, he's forcing higher pay at source.

We'll have to see what effect it has on the jobs market, but one thing is for certain: If you aren't skilled or otherwise useful enough to be worth employing at £9/hour, you won't get any work. Some employers may choose require higher productivity and simply lay off people who can't keep up. Others may institute training themselves to make their employees more productive.

I advise anybody who is not currently earning at that level, to train up so that they are before the £9 living wage kicks in or they're likely to be pushed to work uncomfortably hard, or out of work entirely.

Edited September 6, 2015 by unbeliever

[banjodeano]

I'm sorry, they may not be morally worthy, but they are a great deal more use.

If they weren't, the free market would not pay them so much. Their skill are difficult to replace and there is great competition between companies to make use of their skills which is why they command such high salaries.

Would that also include the bankers?

[unbeliever]

Would that also include the bankers?

 

Most of them, yes.

The situation in the banks which have had state intervention by Gordon Brown is skewed, but that won't last. Osbourne has already started selling off the state owned shares.

[TJC1]

The living wage of £9 per hour from George Osborne will increase poor peoples pay without any more 'usefulness'.

Those at the top are not any more 'use' but they are getting richer. We have a jobs market, where by the whole world is on offer, bring down the wages; this applies to those at the top too, but the rich are increasing their fortune just because of how the jobs market is run.

 

How does a living wage increase value or increase output? Im not with you here?

 

---------- Post added 06-09-2015 at 13:48 ----------

 

Bankers are only worth millions because of the value they have to banks. Within that sector its extremely competitive to recruit the best people.