Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Chris - our posts crossed.
The support of big business AND small/medium businesses is to get more people employed and earning more. That is where it all starts....
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
a progressive reduction of benefits barry?
how much can you cut from jobseekers allowance of 67 quid a week.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
How do you work that out Barry ? If the extra wage bill is paid for by the Government to those businesses, instead of to the unemployed, it won't be costing them more, nor the Government either, so why would it lead to higher unemployment ? Why would they contract when there'll be more people to buy their goods and products - surely they'd be expanding as they're selling more ?
Chris, I'm not talking about all benefits stopping, just the unemployment related ones;
people would then be working and taking home more money than if they were on just £5.75 an hour, or whatever it is.
People's confidence would return as they are working.
Business confidence would return as they are selling more
Unemployment figures would go down as more people are working
But obviously I'm still missing something.
Roger
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Howard - it is not as simple as that as you well know. Plenty of people on State Benefits smoke, drink and can still afford Sky for example. I do not know how exactly but they manage and when someone can do these things on State benefits then benefits are too high.
Roger - that is effectively what tax credits do and they are a over complex expensive inefficient way to do things. We have to face facts, governments need to do less and spend less and allow the markets to work efficiently for the benefit of people who are on low incomes. A more efficient market for them also includes an end to immigration as well which keeps wages down. Getting rid of the minimum wage will also help.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Roger is right, we need a minimum wage of £10 an hour, and the State could contribute to some of it, directly or indirectly.
Presently, an unemployed person on benefits receives from the State £270 13 times a year, and about the same again for housing benefits: that's over £500 13 times a year.
In London, where rent is higher, housing benefits are also a lot higher, so the figure paid by the State on benefits to the unemployed is astronomical.
This would all be saved by giving work to the unemployed Brits! It would allow for a £10 an hour minimum wage, and, as Roger points out, people would have more money to shop with, thus enhancing the economy.
But this could only work if the law changes, and British jobs go to unemployed Brits, otherwise it's just pointless.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
That was my thinking Alexander; we have far too many Brits on benefits, who are happy to stay on benefits; get them back to work by paying them more than what they'd get than by staying on benefit and the economy would grow without any extra cost to the State.
Roger
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Roger, we're probably one important step towards that goal, the euforia over Dave's historic NO in Brussels is all over Britain. It can only get better not worse. If we don't leave the EU, in Europe they'll ask us to.
Once we can make our own laws the economy will stride ahead, people will want to work and be part of a free Nation.