Time for a change of approach on welfare

[justicar5]

There it is everyone - our economic problems worldwide solved in a paragraph. Just raise the wages, and then there won't be any inflation from wages expansion, companies won't lay people off because the cost of their wages bill increases - nor will they outsource and send jobs overseas where wages are cheaper. No not at all, what will happen is that people will suddenly have loads more money to spend. prices will stay the same, probably even go down, and companies will be glad to pay higher wages, and will neither seek to pass those additional wages costs onto the consumer by raising prices - nor flee the jurisdiction entirely to a place with cheaper labor. In addition, international producers who have neither the tax burden nor the wages burden of the UK, will not undercut the Uk market and, in fact, inspired by this act of sheer generosity, will sell their products at exactly the same price so no one loses out.

In short - why hasn't anyone thought of this before? It has made redundant millions of pages setting out classical and neoclassical economic theorems.

Beginner pro-tip - buy Adam Smith and perhaps read 'The Wealth of Nations' or The Theory of Moral Sentiments before entering the debate again.

If you want the benefits bill to fall, income has to rise, how would you do this. Seriously you want tax cuts? Fine income has to rise, either increase wages or increase taxes to subsidise bad wages, your choice.

Being I'm not part of this, I'm looking for some education here.

So, in the UK, the government pays for peoples rent, in the private sector, as part of the dole?

yes, your local council asses whether you are paying 'reasonable rent' for a reasonable property (so a single person in a house share for instance) and based on income pay a percentage of the rent. You however have to pay any associated utility bills, and depending on the councils policies Council Tax, so you can end up on the dole with maybe £60-70 left to cover a month.

[Simon Cashmere]

If you want the benefits bill to fall, income has to rise, how would you do this. Seriously you want tax cuts? Fine income has to rise, either increase wages or increase taxes to subsidise bad wages, your choice.

The benefits bill is not because of low incomes, incomes in the UK now are higher than they have ever been in the UKs history. The benefits bill is high because of a culture of entitlement - where being on the giro or the disability is a viable career. Where people have a massive disincentive to work because benefits are so good compared to being an entry level employee -so people think - why bother - I get the same or better standard of living for free. Take the welfare gravy train away, and then people go to work.

The US got along fine without income tax until 1862, and then it became a permanent feature of the Federal landscape in 1913. The US had an army, a government, it had roads and railways. My suspicion is that tax rates are kept artificially high to keep the populace unable to have significant amounts of capital to invest, to keep them as wage slaves until they die. Because if they can get off the hamster wheel by amassing enough capital to invest, they are no longer 'taxpayers'. So therefore - you take all their spare capital as taxes and keep them right where they are for life and until death.

The reason why there is a massive benefits bill is because it has become a new career in the modern multiculti state. Anyone who says they are disabled, has a ready made income, and a place to live. They can then sit at home and play games on xbox all day, at taxpayer expense - go to the pub, play some pool. The benefits bill falls when you say to people, unless you are physically unable to work, you will work. And even if you are in a wheelchair you can answer a phone. And everyone works, whether you work for private enterprise or the state.

The modern welfare state has left the middle class trapped in a cycle where they are now used to having large amounts of their income stolen from them and redistributed through the tax code to people supposedly more deserving - people on the disability and giro. Regular people should be allowed to spend their own money the way they want, instead of having almost 50% of it ripped from them. The government should not get to choose the winners and losers through the tax code.

The huge bloated welfare bureaucracy needs to burn, I'd close lots of government departments - let them work in the private sector instead of their sheltered workshop of the civil service. And I would also bring in a civilian work corps, don't want to work for private enterprise? That's fine - you will be picked up by an army truck at 4.30am for a 5.00 am start - fixing potholes or picking up rubbish out of drains. Don't want to do that? Well pay your own bills and get a job in the private sector.

The companies are not the problem - none of them take nearly 50% of my money from me, it's probably more with VAT import duty and all the rest. The modern government has become a mafia don constantly seeking protection money to prop up its failing multiculti vision - lots of welfare, lots of immigrant, lots of tax - and then have the gall to blame private enterprise for this sorry situation. Private enterprise taxes me nothing at all, it is the modern western government that is the revenue addicted pirate. The western world got along fine without all the jobs for the boys Quangos, civil service departments and government bureaucracies that invent work for themselves at public expense. Close them all down, save the government and the people a fortune. Go back to living in capitalism and the free market instead of this horrible corrupted version of welfare socialism with unlimited unskilled immigration as a policy. No wonder people in Scotland want to leave the UK - what does the UK stand for any more except the culture of victimhood, entitlement and constantly looking for imaginary racists to burn in the public square.

[Denny Crane!]

Being I'm not part of this, I'm looking for some education here.

So, in the UK, the government pays for peoples rent, in the private sector, as part of the dole?

Yes but only a limited amount. For instance I have say £85 a month private rent bill the council would offer my £50 a week though would be happy to see me get a room mate, £50 is the maximum amount per week for a single male in a multi room dwelling.

Yes, it also pays people's mortgages as well. This is something that Gordon Brown's government brought in when the credit crunch hit. It is unsustainable.

Don't talk random without knowing anything mate. I do like majority of your posts but fact check. Benefits will in some circumstances pay interest on your mortgage but will not contribute at all to the majority which is repayment payments.

Unless they don't want the housing market to collapse, a great deal more homelessness, and cascade into another financial crisis.

Nothing to do with that at all.

There it is everyone - our economic problems worldwide solved in a paragraph. Just raise the wages, and then there won't be any inflation from wages expansion, companies won't lay people off because the cost of their wages bill increases - nor will they outsource and send jobs overseas where wages are cheaper. No not at all, what will happen is that people will suddenly have loads more money to spend. prices will stay the same, probably even go down, and companies will be glad to pay higher wages, and will neither seek to pass those additional wages costs onto the consumer by raising prices - nor flee the jurisdiction entirely to a place with cheaper labor. In addition, international producers who have neither the tax burden nor the wages burden of the UK, will not undercut the Uk market and, in fact, inspired by this act of sheer generosity, will sell their products at exactly the same price so no one loses out.

In short - why hasn't anyone thought of this before? It has made redundant millions of pages setting out classical and neoclassical economic theorems.

Beginner pro-tip - buy Adam Smith and perhaps read 'The Wealth of Nations' or The Theory of Moral Sentiments before entering the debate again.

He is a genius! Should work for the UK green party, they've got all the plans including a return to WW2 rationing!

[justicar5]

The reason why there is a massive benefits bill is because it has become a new career in the modern multiculti state. Anyone who says they are disabled, has a ready made income, and a place to live.

.

that is a lie. Not 'mistaken' or 'misinformed' a LIE.

The companies are not the problem - none of them take nearly 50% of my money from me, it's probably more with VAT import duty and all the rest. The modern government has become a mafia don constantly seeking protection money to prop up its failing multiculti vision - lots of welfare, lots of immigrant, lots of tax - and then have the gall to blame private enterprise for this sorry situation. Private enterprise taxes me nothing at all, it is the modern western government that is the revenue addicted pirate. The western world got along fine without all the jobs for the boys Quangos, civil service departments and government bureaucracies that invent work for themselves at public expense. Close them all down, save the government and the people a fortune. Go back to living in capitalism and the free market instead of this horrible corrupted version of welfare socialism with unlimited unskilled immigration as a policy. No wonder people in Scotland want to leave the UK - what does the UK stand for any more except the culture of victimhood, entitlement and constantly looking for imaginary racists to burn in the public square.

Scotland is more left wing than the rest of the UK Simon..so another lie.

Oh and the compoanies want to take us back to vicorian era, staff dying in their 20s after burning out would be perfect, an elite that lives past that, say 5-10% of the population, everyone else living on starvation wages and dying in their late teens early 20s, after working in work house conditons from the age of 8 or so..or being forced to let the board rape their children, for a meal or two

[Simon Cashmere]

that is a lie. Not 'mistaken' or 'misinformed' a LIE.

I know how the disability rort works here. People get a medical certificate from their doctor, they all know who to go to - i have anxiety disorder, I'm depressed - ok no problems, here's your council flat, here's your pension - which is more than the unemployed, and the great thing about disability is - you're not expected to look for work, you're disabled! All the crims use it as their walking around money, and, it has the added bonus that you automatically get Legal Aid when in a spot of bother with the old bill, and, you also have a ready made excuse for the courts to treat you leniently - mental problems. Many of the jihadi imams are on the benefits gravy train - the ones that get arrested for terror plots are invariably referred to as 'disabled pensioners' what disability? Still about causing trouble, not that disabled. Anjem Chaudry called the welfare the Jihad Seekers Allowance and is on video saying this.

There has been a tightening up of disability in the UK lately...after decades of rorting. I still think the rorting would go on, it certainly does in Australia. They even had people who were able to claim the cost of a car for a disabled child, and ADHD qualified. They were even buying people BMW 4WDs because they had a child with ADHD!

Your nonsense about the way employers will treat people is just some fantasy, it has no basis in fact. It has no basis in economics. But what does is - if we give everyone a pay rise, that just gets added onto the costs of consumers, then prices go up, you get inflation, and if high wages make the industry uneconomic, it closes down and moves off-shore. Detroit couldn't make cars with autoworkers getting such high wages, so it has largely closed. The way to cut welfare is to make welfare hard to qualify for or time limited. The reason its the great gravy train it is, because we live in an age of victimhood and entitlement, and society's to blame. I wasn't saying that Scotland is less inclined to claim welfare, it has huge welfare rolls. What I was saying was that this was a symptom of the UK losing its way. You might think Scotland is left-wing, but there are some pretty strong views about immigrants in Scotland. They might be better about benefits, they've have to be as so many are on them.

[mongrel]

I
Your nonsense about the way employers will treat people is just some fantasy, it has no basis in fact. It has no basis in economics. But what does is - if we give everyone a pay rise, that just gets added onto the costs of consumers, then prices go up, you get inflation, and if high wages make the industry uneconomic, it closes down and moves off-shore.

Nonsense. If people are paid unviable wages we taxpayers have to subsidise them. WE live in an era where multinationals especially suck the golden teat of the Treasury. If a business model can't exist without sponging off the state it shouldn't survive. I don't see why the public should pay a substantial part of the wages for private sector workers.

[Denny Crane!]

Nonsense. If people are paid unviable wages we taxpayers have to subsidise them. WE live in an era where multinationals especially suck the golden teat of the Treasury. If a business model can't exist without sponging off the state it shouldn't survive. I don't see why the public should pay a substantial part of the wages for private sector workers.

Because we subsidise them wages have been lower it could be said.

You know how I know that?

You said it.

[mongrel]

Because we subsidise them wages have been lower it could be said.

You know how I know that?

You said it.

I am old enough to remember when dole money wasn't handed over to landlords in wheelbarrows and pay was sufficient for most , if not all employees to live on, instead of being mostly stuffed down the CEO's trousers and spirited away in some tax haven. If we have to a fair amount of the wage bill for Walmart, Tesco and Starbucks, shall we not go the whole way and nationalise them?

[conon394]

Detroit couldn't make cars with autoworkers getting such high wages, so it has largely closed.

Or not... really that's the only thing you can take away from the issues Detroit had. Wages are often trivial in the overall picture of things(*) and given the US policy on Free Trade, The weakness of WTO, and the fact of Asian Neo Mercantilism and closed markets so competitors had safe markets denied to Detroit I think there is a bit more than wages at issue. Sure the US could race to bottom faster than China - eliminate OSHA, environmental rules, and building codes, and maybe start handing out crap PhDs like candy and sure you get a cheap car but necessarily a factory you want to work in or buy from.TH

The Iphone and Apple are perhaps the best example nowhere in the numbers no matter how you run them can you really say labor cost really are the critical to Apple's enormous profit - you could double the wage of every Foxcon employer and end all its underhanded treatment of labor and Apple would still make money.

http://www.epi.org/blog/apple-iphone...f-labor-costs/

http://recode.net/2014/09/23/teardow...-200-to-build/

"include the cost of labor associated with assembly as between $4 and $4.50 for each device."

Really ? vs...

"iPhone 6 models sell for between $649 and $849 without a contract. The iPhone 6 Plus models with the larger display sell for $749 and $949 without a contract."

Yep a decently treated unionized workforce would just kill Apple

[Phier]

The problem is the cars from the US, made by the "Big Three" sucked. I switched to Acura about 10 years ago, I've had one minor issue. My US cars tended to have recalls every 6 months, one of which could have killed me and came close. (Lost all ability to steer my Jeep Cherokee going 55MPH on a highway. Luckily it was very light traffic and I was in the far right lane. I had to slow down to about 15 MPH and the car stopped shaking and I was able to regain control. Had I been lane changing or even was at any part of the road but a straight away, I'd have been in a serious accident.)

Make crappy products, sell at the same or higher price, and well, fail.

Yep a decently treated unionized workforce would just kill Apple

Yea, have you worked a union job?

Unions are a far bigger burden on a business than salary alone. Currently they are literally bankrupting my state, but thats another issue on the political side.

[Gaidin]

Or not... really that's the only thing you can take away from the issues Detroit had. Wages are often trivial in the overall picture of things(*) and given the US policy on Free Trade, The weakness of WTO, and the fact of Asian Neo Mercantilism and closed markets so competitors had safe markets denied to Detroit I think there is a bit more than wages at issue. Sure the US could race to bottom faster than China - eliminate OSHA, environmental rules, and building codes, and maybe start handing out crap PhDs like candy and sure you get a cheap car but necessarily a factory you want to work in or buy from.TH

The Iphone and Apple are perhaps the best example nowhere in the numbers no matter how you run them can you really say labor cost really are the critical to Apple's enormous profit - you could double the wage of every Foxcon employer and end all its underhanded treatment of labor and Apple would still make money.

http://www.epi.org/blog/apple-iphone...f-labor-costs/

http://recode.net/2014/09/23/teardow...-200-to-build/

"include the cost of labor associated with assembly as between $4 and $4.50 for each device."

Really ? vs...

"iPhone 6 models sell for between $649 and $849 without a contract. The iPhone 6 Plus models with the larger display sell for $749 and $949 without a contract."

Yep a decently treated unionized workforce would just kill Apple

Apple's a downright crappy comparison because if you ask any electrical engineer it's not the labor or the electronics or the shipping that gets you. It's the packaging.

[Denny Crane!]

I am old enough to remember when dole money wasn't handed over to landlords in wheelbarrows and pay was sufficient for most , if not all employees to live on, instead of being mostly stuffed down the CEO's trousers and spirited away in some tax haven. If we have to a fair amount of the wage bill for Walmart, Tesco and Starbucks, shall we not go the whole way and nationalise them?

A maximum of £400 a month means those are some tiny wheelbarrows.

[conon394]

Really Phier another personal data point you know n-1 with n = 1 equals 0.

Like I could say hey my 15 year old Ford F-250 has close to 300,000 miles on and it still (with regular maintenance) does everything it was ever superposed to do.

Really US cars have recalls every 6 months - source and level of recall please and of Toyota never does right?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/cars/2...82e_story.html

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/dat...-in-us-recalls

[Aside and hey is that not Honda leading Ford in recalls Acura owner?]

and hey look in Japan too... for Toyota

http://online.wsj.com/articles/toyot...pan-1402468095

Maybe just maybe scale causes issues - maybe but lets just stick with BS right.

I would assert most recalls are minor but show me some data that major one are statistically more significant in the Big Three in North America vs World Wide based on all manufacturing location with a comparable reporting system and legal process. And than perhapse you can list all the vehicals you have owned - time and number of recalls and compare it to see if there is any stastical significance in your argument.

[Gaidin]

I would assert most recalls are minor but show me some data that major one are statistically more significant in the Big Three in NOrth America vs World Wide based on all manufacturing location with a comparable reporting system and legal process.

Two words: General Motors.

If you need any more data than that you haven't been paying attention and there's no hope for you.

[conon394]

Apple's a downright crappy comparison because if you ask any electrical engineer it's not the labor or the electronics or the shipping that gets you. It's the packaging.

Maybe but I was looking for extreme point labor cost do not make Apple super profitable

[Gaidin]

Maybe but I was looking for extreme point labor cost do not make Apple super profitable

So then be a debater and come up with a legitimate comparison, and leave the part of the electrical engineering world that packaging(oh and research, let's not forget research) drives cost through the roof out of it.

[mongrel]

A maximum of £400 a month means those are some tiny wheelbarrows.

I beleive Britain has more than one landlord. Around £16bn is the real figure (for 2011) . It is the second largest spend after pensions. Make that a series of huge wheelbarrows, heading the way of Foxtons or similar.

So then be a debater and come up with a legitimate comparison, and leave the part of the electrical engineering world that packaging(oh and research, let's not forget research) drives cost through the roof out of it.

It can make the argument simpler and more relevant. If a business requires government subsidy* to remain profitable, and by profitable we mean banking 10s 100s or bns of £s of profits into Luxemburg or Jersey , how can it be viable?

* taxpayers subsidising poor wages with benefits.

[Denny Crane!]

I beleive Britain has more than one landlord. Around £16bn is the real figure (for 2011) . It is the second largest spend after pensions. Make that a series of huge wheelbarrows, heading the way of Foxtons or similar.

So? The amount per individual flat is very low. That means no one property is getting a barrel load of cash from the government so I don't see the problem.

Or is it possible we should be building more properties, as I originally said.

[Gaidin]

So? The amount per individual flat is very low. That means no one property is getting a barrel load of cash from the government so I don't see the problem.

Or is it possible we should be building more properties, as I originally said.

I think you guys are now talking on two different trains of logic. He's talking per landlord. Per flat is a totally different calculation and gets to a different number altogether and makes a totally different point.

[Denny Crane!]

I thought he was talking about the size of the housing bill. He was rather explicit about that I thought. But without more houses being built its a redundant point.