Captain... Posted 15 January 2013 Posted 15 January 2013 There is already a huge number of low paid workers on benefits. It isn't just the unemployed that claim. With fuel bills and groceries rising daily a lot of people are very close to the breadline. I'm not blaming anyone it's the way things are. Exactly, they would be paid less so claim more in benefits to compensate, so still have a similar income, and have a job, rather than no job and the full burden on the tax payers.
Captain... Posted 15 January 2013 Posted 15 January 2013 "Think it's harsh to blame Steve Jobs for the downfall of cd's/music. At the end of the day, he is a business man (was a very good one at that) with all these ideas, that worked, and are now massive. Apple are the best company in the World, in my opinion." I didn't blame him, I said you could blame him for the main part. I wouldn't say they are the best but he has put Apple near the top of the market. The fact that you are only leasing the music and apps you "buy" is in fact bloody genius. You can't sell anything on to someone else when you are fed up with it, where as, if you got fed up with a CD/DVD you could bang it on Ebay or trade it in somewhere and make a little money back or swap it for another. You're not going to be able to do that in a few years when the majority of games, films and music are downloads only. "That's what I thought. High street shops cannot compete with on-line retailers. On-line companies don't have a closing time, only have to pay bills for their warehouse and people don't have to move from their bed to purchase stuff. The only key advantage that high street shops have is that you can buy something, get in there and then." A very good point Fox92, so long as you can't download it i.e. DVD's games, CD's. Power tools, clothes etc you could as long as A, the shop was open and B you didn't mind paying a pound or two more (unless the shop did a price match with on-line prices) I can actually see in the future, on-line shops like Amazon opening up warehouses like B n Q size, where you can drive up and collect your goods no matter what time of day or night it is. You order on-line and it would be ready for collection in 60 minutes should you choose. And Captain Shrapnel. Would you work for £5.0 and hour... I doubt it, even if you did get a top up with Tax credits. This is where the country is going up the wall and we could end up like Ireland, Spain or Greece before to long, but that is a completely different topic. Worked for £2.01 when I was younger, so yeah I would rather work for £5 an hour than have no job. As for amazon they already have delivery boxes dotted around various cities, you can get stuff delivered there and pick them up whenever you want so no need to wait around for a delivery, not sure if you can super express delivery there within a few hours, but it wouldn't surprise me.
Rincewind Posted 15 January 2013 Posted 15 January 2013 If they are claiming more benefits, surely the tax payer is paying more? They would be exempt from tax.
Captain... Posted 15 January 2013 Posted 15 January 2013 If they are claiming more benefits, surely the tax payer is paying more? They would be exempt from tax. If the alternative is no job then the taxpayer pays for everything for them, if they are on £5 an hour the taxpayer is only supplementing their wages not paying them.
Rincewind Posted 15 January 2013 Posted 15 January 2013 Benefits comes out of a pot put aside for people on low wages. Taxes go towards roads hospital;s and other essentiaqls. More people will be better off with no job as many with a job cannot manage now.
Captain... Posted 15 January 2013 Posted 15 January 2013 Benefits comes out of a pot put aside for people on low wages. Taxes go towards roads hospital;s and other essentiaqls. Honey comes from bees and dogs can't look up.
foz.foz Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 Captain Shrapnel..... "Worked for £2.01 when I was younger, so yeah I would rather work for £5 an hour than have no job." I worked for less than 80 pence/Hour when I first started work. I was also living at home with me mum and dad so most of it was disposable income. Now a days I have a mortgage, bills to pay. I'd be lucky If I go out once or twice a month (including games) so for £5.00 an hour..... yeah right like that's going to happen.
Rincewind Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 I was going to reply but I'll leave it. Just deleted some. I've only had cola tonight, what have others been drinking?
foz.foz Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 PG Tips.. ;)edit for spelling.. its fooking late..
Rocket-Ron Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 An interesting piece on working in one of the warehouses used for the likes of amazon etc. Bit of a long read but well worth it. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-free-online-shipping-warehouses-labor Can't imagine the amount of fuss this would cause if it was in China or India.
Rincewind Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 They have to make a huge profit to be charged the tax they don't pay.
Captain... Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 Captain Shrapnel..... "Worked for £2.01 when I was younger, so yeah I would rather work for £5 an hour than have no job." I worked for less than 80 pence/Hour when I first started work. I was also living at home with me mum and dad so most of it was disposable income. Now a days I have a mortgage, bills to pay. I'd be lucky If I go out once or twice a month (including games) so for £5.00 an hour..... yeah right like that's going to happen. Do you currently work for minimum wage? Would you rather take a pay cut or lose your job?
Rincewind Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 An interesting piece on working in one of the warehouses used for the likes of amazon etc. Bit of a long read but well worth it. http://www.motherjon...arehouses-labor Can't imagine the amount of fuss this would cause if it was in China or India. An interesting piece on working in one of the warehouses used for the likes of amazon etc. Bit of a long read but well worth it. http://www.motherjon...arehouses-labor Can't imagine the amount of fuss this would cause if it was in China or India. Just read the first page. Sounds like George Orwell's 1984. To be fair if the lower paid of our society such as nurses. care workers , fast food chain workers, cleaners, nursery teachers, warehouse workers and labourers do not accept a cut in wages it would mean the higher paid such as celebrities, footballers bank executives and MP's might have the loopholes for not paying as much tax taken away from them and that would be unfair.
MooseBreath Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 If you want to help businesses reduce their costs by reducing their wage bill by reducing the minimum wage and then topping it up with tax money, you would achieve the same with much less hassle by reducing the businesses tax bill. Personally I don't like the idea of building economic policies around artificially helping poorly performing businesses to survive. I think we should let things play out and let the victims die. Only then can we return to real growth.
Babylon Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 I see some high street retailers have diversified to survive... You can now get "Hoes & Blunts" on Grandby Street.
Captain... Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 If you want to help businesses reduce their costs by reducing their wage bill by reducing the minimum wage and then topping it up with tax money, you would achieve the same with much less hassle by reducing the businesses tax bill. Personally I don't like the idea of building economic policies around artificially helping poorly performing businesses to survive. I think we should let things play out and let the victims die. Only then can we return to real growth. A fair point, something mentioned last night on Newsnight, is that crisis doesn't effect the high end and the low end only the middle, regardless of performance, but that is by the by. It is not just about helping the business it is about ensuring jobs, and I think there would be more jobs at the moment if the minimum wage was reduced, maybe I'm wrong, but one of the advantages Amazon has is no shop staff, so HMV have a competitive disadvantage, which is something the government should be getting involved in, ensuring fair competition, and creating jobs. Better to have someone on a low wage topped up with benefits than no wage and on full benefits. Further to that reducing minimum wage will reduce costs for all high street shops, pretty sure most employ minimum wage sales staff, and thus in theory reduce the prices on the high street. One alternative is for HMV to invest in self service checkout machines or CD vending machines to reduce costs, but that will still mean people being laid off. Regarding Business tax, one option would be to compete with the likes of Switzerland, by adopting a similar tax policy, in a world of global companies having inequal tax across the globe will always result in companies funnelling their tax through the cheapest but this would need a complete overhaul of UK tax to ensure we don't end up losing out.
MooseBreath Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 One of the advantages Amazon has is no shop staff, so HMV have a competitive disadvantage, which is something the government should be getting involved in, ensuring fair competition, and creating jobs. I disagree. Fair competition doesn't mean making sure nobody loses, it means allowing the best to win. If your theory was applied during the industrial revolution we'd be decades behind where we are now.
The Doctor Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 Easier to survive on a reduced minimum wage than on benefits. Well, that depends by how much you reduce it, but it's also besides the point - the point remains that with the cost of the essentials (water bills, food etc.) going up, the minimum wage is harder and harder to live on, reducing the minimum wage would do damage to a lot of families. Reducing it to save a failing business is absurd, the only direction the minimum wage should be going, given the circumstances, is up.
Rincewind Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 I assume the ones calling for a reduction in the minimum wage are not on minimum wage. To reduce it would mean more hardship for a lot of families. There is already many struggling with rising fuel bills. It would mean more evictions and more homeless. The minimum wage was brought in to stop the exploitation of workers. Companies are already using the high employment to pay as little as they can or agenciews to cut down on the rights of workers such as health plans and holidays.
Captain... Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 Well, that depends by how much you reduce it, but it's also besides the point - the point remains that with the cost of the essentials (water bills, food etc.) going up, the minimum wage is harder and harder to live on, reducing the minimum wage would do damage to a lot of families. Reducing it to save a failing business is absurd, the only direction the minimum wage should be going, given the circumstances, is up. I'm not calling for it to save HMV, I am calling for it to help save the high street and jobs, one of the reasons prices for commodities is going up is because costs are going up, reducing costs means prices can be reduced and can be more competitive. As I said in my original post reduce it from £6.19 to £5. It will also create jobs, for every 5 people that have a reduced minimum wage there is room in the budget to employ one more person. Still nobody has answered my very simple question, if given the choice would you take a wage decrease or lose your job?
Captain... Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 I disagree. Fair competition doesn't mean making sure nobody loses, it means allowing the best to win. If your theory was applied during the industrial revolution we'd be decades behind where we are now. But surely you can't agree with government enforced wage structures crippling businesses, to be honest I don't know if that is the case with HMV, I would imagine it has more to do with Amazon's dodgy tax practices, and digital music, but the general trend is high street stores can't compete with on-line companies, and the main difference is staffing levels and rental of retail space, assuming no dodgy tax fiddles. I have already said that rents need to drop, but there is not one cause it is a mixture of many causes and solutions, including improving the shopping experience and all need to be looked at and addressed and one of them should be minimum wage.
MooseBreath Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 Reducing tax for businesses would still be a lot easier. If you wanted to weight the advantage in favour of companies who provide jobs it would be simple enough to come up with a formula for a tax reduction based on the number of jobs created.
James. Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 Reducing the minimum wage won't save the High Street, innovation will. The same sort of innovation that Amazon showed by building a world class online shopping experience. The High Street needs to respond by providing a service that online shops can't, something HMV failed completely to do.
Babylon Posted 16 January 2013 Posted 16 January 2013 Blockbuster have gone into administration... hardly a shock with places like Lovefilm, netflix, sky boxoffice, itunes etc taking a huge slice. I'm sure this has been on the horizon for a long time, they must have seen it coming and should have diversified to save their ass.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.