Taxpayer support

[RonJeremy]

If you are having trouble attracting workers to make you money, then why not offer better salaries? How much above min wage do you pay?

 

I don't have any trouble attracting workers. Attracting the right ones is time consuming and a little frustrating to say the least. I have various rates for different jobs, the vast majority of which pay well above min wage.

 

Pay peanuts...

 

---------- Post added 14-10-2015 at 21:34 ----------

 

I don't suppose Cassity or 1lt2l3l would like to answer my retorts? Nah didn't think so.

Edited October 14, 2015 by RonJeremy

[999tigger]

But if you have trouble getting them to work extra hours, then maybe its because you arent offering enough money?

 

Maybe its not the amount of money that they get from benefits its the inflexibility of the system to deal with change. u.e they will have to reclaim everything and go through the wait of being reprocessed by HMRC and the local authority, which can be a wait of months before anything is sorted out. If thats the case then I dont blame them.

 

Tax credits are being cut anyway and the slack is meant to be taken up by increasing the min wage.

 

Its funny you wont talk about tax avoidance because its two sides of the same coin. More tax in from people who should be paying would mean less tax needed to be raised from everyone else.

 

The basis of your argument is all very annecdotal and at the centre of it you are using the Daily Mail and Channel 5's Benefit Street or whatever its called. People with 12 children are few and far between. She has a poor attitude, but thats down to her and it seems wrong to tar all people on benefits by using her as an example.

 

As i said earlier tax credits are going to be limited to 2 children. Cant say I disagree with that.

 

If you wnat to talk examples then come out with some decent research rather than just annecdotal. What Cyclone said about the example you provided being a small problem compared to tax avoidance is true. You just need to compare the amount not collected from tax avoidance b the amount used in tax credits for people with large familes. The vast majority of families with dependent children have 2 or fewer.

[ricgem2002]

You're actually blaming employers?

Your post is seriously convoluted to get to that position.

It's the employee that decides how much they want to work when they take a job on.

I offer jobs to people to do work I want doing. Some jobs are part time, some full time, some ZHCs. People choose which job they want.

Anyway, hopefully these subsidised jobs will stop now that the government is trying to balance the books and even trying to run a surplus.

The tories are no longer hampered by the libs, and we can see what happens.

 

of course im blaming employers since it benefits them to have a workforce topped up with taxpayers money to subsidies their company. you yourself admit you employ people on part time/zhc contracts times that by 1000s of employers using these contracts and you have a load of people having to claim in work benefits. open your eyes ron and start blaming the gov and employers for being hand in hand in this scam

[999tigger]

Thats the whole point of why the government is reducing tax credits, so they dont act as a subsidy. It works both ways becayse an employee can take a job they otherwise couldnt and the employer benefits from being able to offer a lower salary .

[RonJeremy]

of course im blaming employers since it benefits them to have a workforce topped up with taxpayers money to subsidies their company. you yourself admit you employ people on part time/zhc contracts times that by 1000s of employers using these contracts and you have a load of people having to claim in work benefits. open your eyes ron and start blaming the gov and employers for being hand in hand in this scam

 

I employ people who want to be on ZHCs. I employ people who want to be part time. I employ people who want to be full time. Each job suits me, first and foremost, I'm not a charity (although I feel like it sometimes) and it suits the employee too - or they wouldn't take it.

I've had employees who work for me, earning 26k pa told by a benefits advisor, to pack in work because they would be better off. It is absolutely mental.

My employees tend to hang around for some reason - perhaps it's cause I pay well, perhaps it's some other reason.

 

I'm sorry, as an employer, do you think I should be forcing someone on a part time contract, to work a 40 hr week against their will? How would I do this? Your supposition is mental.

 

---------- Post added 14-10-2015 at 22:19 ----------

 

This scam as you call it, brought in by the Labour lot, you think is a plot by Labour and businesses to scam everyone else? You're seriously paranoid? or just anti business?

Anyway, the Tories are doing something about it - with objections from the nutty leftie brigade. The sooner the better.

[999tigger]

You cant pay that well otherwise you wouldnt have members of staff refusing work because its not worth it? You wnat it both ways Ron. the fact they are getting on work benefits means its subsidising you.

 

An annecdotal tale is merely that, give us some hard data if you wnat to be taken seriously. not just the Daily Mail. Yax credits are meant to make you better off in work than any permutatuion that doesnt involve working.

[sandy18]

But if you have trouble getting them to work extra hours, then maybe its because you arent offering enough money?

 

Maybe its not the amount of money that they get from benefits its the inflexibility of the system to deal with change. u.e they will have to reclaim everything and go through the wait of being reprocessed by HMRC and the local authority, which can be a wait of months before anything is sorted out. If thats the case then I dont blame them.

 

Tax credits are being cut anyway and the slack is meant to be taken up by increasing the min wage.

 

Its funny you wont talk about tax avoidance because its two sides of the same coin. More tax in from people who should be paying would mean less tax needed to be raised from everyone else.

 

The basis of your argument is all very annecdotal and at the centre of it you are using the Daily Mail and Channel 5's Benefit Street or whatever its called. People with 12 children are few and far between. She has a poor attitude, but thats down to her and it seems wrong to tar all people on benefits by using her as an example.

 

As i said earlier tax credits are going to be limited to 2 children. Cant say I disagree with that.

 

If you wnat to talk examples then come out with some decent research rather than just annecdotal. What Cyclone said about the example you provided being a small problem compared to tax avoidance is true. You just need to compare the amount not collected from tax avoidance b the amount used in tax credits for people with large familes. The vast majority of families with dependent children have 2 or fewer.

 

Tax credits are being cut and the slack will be taken up by increases in the min wage and working more hours.

 

More people working more hours, reduced benefits, less waste and fraud in the public sector, will mean lower tax's for everyone.

[RonJeremy]

You cant pay that well otherwise you wouldnt have members of staff refusing work because its not worth it? You wnat it both ways Ron. the fact they are getting on work benefits means its subsidising you.

 

An annecdotal tale is merely that, give us some hard data if you wnat to be taken seriously. not just the Daily Mail. Yax credits are meant to make you better off in work than any permutatuion that doesnt involve working.

 

I cant give you hard data of my employees. But it's true. Take it or leave it.

My view of statistics, government or not, is the same as Disraeli's view of statistics. I use my own experience of life. My own observations. I keep my eyes open.

 

I pay comparatively well. My employees tend to stay with me. As my businesses expand, I ask if some want to expand their hours, and I take on new workers. Some expand their hours, others say they will lose benefits.

 

There are plenty of people who stay on the sick a their career. It is a huge problem, especially in Sheffield. I also feel very sorry for them, living a useless, valueless depressing life at home all day with no responsibility, relying on their "entitlements".

[999tigger]

err thats what I said, so dont see the point of your post.

[sandy18]

You cant pay that well otherwise you wouldnt have members of staff refusing work because its not worth it? You wnat it both ways Ron. the fact they are getting on work benefits means its subsidising you.

 

An annecdotal tale is merely that, give us some hard data if you wnat to be taken seriously. not just the Daily Mail. Yax credits are meant to make you better off in work than any permutatuion that doesnt involve working.

 

Don't blame employers for taking advantage of a system created by government , blame the government for creating the system. The rise in part time work, zero hours contracts, in work benefits, and low pay are the consequence of government policies over the past few decades.