Twenty four thousand posts, and nothing has changed.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Brexit
- Thread starter KingstonSeagull
- Start date
Twenty four thousand posts, and nothing has changed.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,923
Exactly.
Who or what do you blame then? The UK is at the bottom of wage growth with ****ing Greece. Germany, Poland, Hungary plus others are all increasing. The UK Is on a par with ****ing Greece. How the hell has the 6 biggest economy in the world got itself into such a state? I'll give you one reason, it's people like you who just accept it. Like a number of things I don't actually care what political colour you are but what I do care about is the fact you are doing **** all about it apart from acquiescing on a website. All the while there is plenty of cash sloshing around in the higher echelons you of all people should be kicking up a fuss and shouting from the roof tops about your wage stagnation. Not complaining and having a stiff upper lip is very lilly livered. Grow some balls.
D
Deleted member 22389
Guest
It's been like this for years, nothing to do with Brexit. What we going to do, take to the streets with silly placards saying Evil Tories, Save our NHS, Refugees Welcome, it wouldn't make a scrap of sodding difference. People need to realise the government is no longer going to help you, so you have to help yourself. Life could be a lot worse, there are more important things to worry about it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Megazone
On his last warning
Just before I read through the whole thread. Can anyone tell me if there's any link with Weetabix and Brexit?
I'm assuming they've changed the name so Weetabix can now sound more breakfasty with a name like Brexit, just like when Coco pops turned into Choco krispies.
Interesting if so. Looking forward to reading through the thread. Will be interested to see what all the fuss is about.
I'm assuming they've changed the name so Weetabix can now sound more breakfasty with a name like Brexit, just like when Coco pops turned into Choco krispies.
Interesting if so. Looking forward to reading through the thread. Will be interested to see what all the fuss is about.
What a depressing post. There's plenty you can do. But rolling over and accepting your lot isn't one of them.
nicko31
Well-known member
Yes and its that inequality that lend to many people looking for a scapegoat, in 2016 that scapegoat was Europe. Misguided by a right wing press with their own nationalistic agenda
Nothing is changing here fast, 2017 will see just higher prices, higher inflation and ultimately lower living standards for many.
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
Not sure if we are on the same page as to where the centre ground is positioned if you really think the current government are hard right. Bizarrely the most extreme political grouping in parliament at the moment are the Lib Dems which is saying something considering they sit alongside Corbyn's motley crew (and the SNP).
Lincoln Imp
Well-known member
- Feb 2, 2009
- 5,964
Well I suppose you understand what you're talking about.
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
Doing all they can to reverse/undermine the democratic will of the majority before it is enacted = extremism in my book.
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
An interesting report from the Low pay commission re wages.
The national living wage has delivered higher pay to about six million people since it was introduced in April, as the increase filtered through to many staff already earning more than the new legal minimum.
Analysis by the Low Pay Commission (LPC) showed that the introduction of George Osborne’s £7.20 an hour minimum rate for workers aged over 25 rippled up the pay scale as employers tried to protect wage differentials.
It meant that anyone paid up to £9 an hour, amounting to about a quarter of all workers aged over 25, received a boost above the national average of 3.1 per cent. The LPC also found that younger workers not eligible for the living wage received bigger pay rises as £7.20 increasingly became the basic wage at many companies.
The analysis by the LPC, which advises the government on minimum pay rates, also showed that there had been little evidence of the effect on jobs and staff perks that employers had warned about after Mr Osborne announced the measure in July last year when he was chancellor. He introduced the living wage in an attempt to compensate workers for welfare cuts that he was later forced to scrap. Economists hoped that higher wages would encourage companies to rely less on cheap labour and lift investment to fix the productivity problem.
The national living wage came in on April 1, giving a typical minimum wage worker on 26.2 hours a week a £590 annual pay rise after adjusting for inflation. The 10.8 per cent boost in the legal minimum from £6.50 an hour directly affected 1.6 million people and was “the joint largest ever increase”.
The commission said that there were “ripple effects further up the distribution” as employers made sure that better-paid staff continued to receive a premium over their juniors. The result was that another 3.4 million workers got pay rises of more than the average 3.1 per cent. Younger workers were swept up by the rises as well. The proportion of those aged below 25 paid at least £7.20 an hour jumped from 62 per cent to 69 per cent after April.
Most employers bore the cost of the increase by taking a hit to their profits and there was little evidence of the job losses and employee benefit cuts that had been threatened. The analysis said that there were some cases in which wage costs were offset by reductions in benefits and premium pay but the commission said that overall, “we find no significant change in the use or levels of shift premium pay and overtime pay in the aggregate data”.
Since April unemployment has fallen to its lowest level in 11 years, at 4.8 per cent. Some industries, such as hospitality, did recover some of the higher costs by raising prices and some companies said that they had squeezed wage differentials between staff.
Overall, though, up to half of all companies had to accept a bigger wage bill. “Absorbing the cost with the consequent lowering of profits was the most common response in surveys by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development and Federation of Small Businesses, with 17 and 30 per cent of respondents respectively reporting that approach,” the LPC said.
It was careful to say that it had not found absolute proof of a link between the increase in pay among the bottom quarter of workers and the living wage, but that it was hard to imagine any other cause.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...-rise-for-up-to-six-million-workers-2x8lp6vld
The national living wage has delivered higher pay to about six million people since it was introduced in April, as the increase filtered through to many staff already earning more than the new legal minimum.
Analysis by the Low Pay Commission (LPC) showed that the introduction of George Osborne’s £7.20 an hour minimum rate for workers aged over 25 rippled up the pay scale as employers tried to protect wage differentials.
It meant that anyone paid up to £9 an hour, amounting to about a quarter of all workers aged over 25, received a boost above the national average of 3.1 per cent. The LPC also found that younger workers not eligible for the living wage received bigger pay rises as £7.20 increasingly became the basic wage at many companies.
The analysis by the LPC, which advises the government on minimum pay rates, also showed that there had been little evidence of the effect on jobs and staff perks that employers had warned about after Mr Osborne announced the measure in July last year when he was chancellor. He introduced the living wage in an attempt to compensate workers for welfare cuts that he was later forced to scrap. Economists hoped that higher wages would encourage companies to rely less on cheap labour and lift investment to fix the productivity problem.
The national living wage came in on April 1, giving a typical minimum wage worker on 26.2 hours a week a £590 annual pay rise after adjusting for inflation. The 10.8 per cent boost in the legal minimum from £6.50 an hour directly affected 1.6 million people and was “the joint largest ever increase”.
The commission said that there were “ripple effects further up the distribution” as employers made sure that better-paid staff continued to receive a premium over their juniors. The result was that another 3.4 million workers got pay rises of more than the average 3.1 per cent. Younger workers were swept up by the rises as well. The proportion of those aged below 25 paid at least £7.20 an hour jumped from 62 per cent to 69 per cent after April.
Most employers bore the cost of the increase by taking a hit to their profits and there was little evidence of the job losses and employee benefit cuts that had been threatened. The analysis said that there were some cases in which wage costs were offset by reductions in benefits and premium pay but the commission said that overall, “we find no significant change in the use or levels of shift premium pay and overtime pay in the aggregate data”.
Since April unemployment has fallen to its lowest level in 11 years, at 4.8 per cent. Some industries, such as hospitality, did recover some of the higher costs by raising prices and some companies said that they had squeezed wage differentials between staff.
Overall, though, up to half of all companies had to accept a bigger wage bill. “Absorbing the cost with the consequent lowering of profits was the most common response in surveys by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development and Federation of Small Businesses, with 17 and 30 per cent of respondents respectively reporting that approach,” the LPC said.
It was careful to say that it had not found absolute proof of a link between the increase in pay among the bottom quarter of workers and the living wage, but that it was hard to imagine any other cause.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...-rise-for-up-to-six-million-workers-2x8lp6vld
portslade seagull
Well-known member
Have to say HT, I do agree with you on this one.
Lincoln Imp
Well-known member
- Feb 2, 2009
- 5,964
Describing a call for the public to be consulted on the terms of negotiations as undemocratic extremism = nuttiness in mine.
larus
Well-known member
FFS, it's not complicated - really, it's not, but the REALITY doesn't suit your agenda. The 'statistic' (now, that's me being very generous) was determined by taking at STL/EURO exchange rate in 2007 (when it was 1.52). So, I wonder what other factors theychose to be selective on in producing that chart. If the rate was from then end of 2008 when it was 1.02 it would have been a very different picture.
Also, only a f*cking retard could possibly consider that chart to be factually correct. I may disagree with you, but I don't think you're that dumb to really believe that the UK has suffered the same level of hardship as Greece since 2007. If it had, there would be serious protests going on here and there aren't.
Precisely ....
I'm sorry but what the are you on about? What chart? And I equated wage stagnation to Greece but clearly stated the context of the U.K. having a far bigger economy....so where does your "same hardship" reply come from? You seem to be shoehorning some other argument to fit my post. Or are have just confused my post with someone else's?
The actual thrust of my post is a general apolitical statement of wage inequality, stagnation or even worse deflation.... which people from all political colours acknowledge. If you disagree and feel there is no inequality in the uk feel free to state why as I'd be interested to know why.
Wrong-Direction
Well-known member
- Mar 10, 2013
- 13,448
I've come to the conclusion the vast majority of human beings are f****** idiots.
Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-A310F using Tapatalk
GT49er
Well-known member
Thinking that describing it as 'a call for the public to be consulted on the terms of negotiations' somehow hides the fact that they want to overturn the democratic result of the referendum = political naivety at best, being in denial at worst.
With employment at historic record levels - I expect Britain's wage bill is relatively higher than at any time in it's past. We could try the continental way I suppose - pay higher wages to fewer people and **** the 20% of losers who are unemployed!
larus
Well-known member
There was a chart posted about 3-4 pages back based on wage growth and Greece was on the same level as the UK (-10.4% I believe). As (from memory) you had commented on that chart, I took your last post to be linked to that chart.
Irrespective, my point stands. No-one but a f*cking retard could seriously try to link the severe crisis in Greece and the hang-over effect from the Financial Crisis on the UK. By all means have a sensible debate, but if you want to espouse crap like that then you lose all credibility. FFS, there's youth unemployment of 50% in Greece, and all this is exacerbated by the fact that the EURO cannot work with Fiscal and Poliical integration which is not on the horizon for a long, long time. Yet you will still defend this whole monstrosity for some strange deluded reason.
Last edited: