Contract rates not obeying inflation

[Lance]

Pay rises (unlike taxes) are only for the super rich - you should know that by now!

Everyone else has been proping them up for years

how dop you choose who the 0.01% are?
Cos if you choose them at the end of the timeline then the results will be massively skewed towards those who have increased.
EG. All those at 0.02% at the start who make it to 0.01% at the end are guaranteed to be at least 100% growth.

If you choose the sample at the start then those who lost it all will be shown in the result


*HINT* it's going to be former isn't it as that make a nice graph for the politics of envy.

[Fraidycat]

Perm salaries haven't gone up either, was asked the other day if I was interested in a perm role, I asked what is the salary. £60k, which is lower than what I earned in my last perm role 13 years ago

60K is about average for perms.

Minimum wage is 20K a year now, so the ratio is 3:1, but after tax the ratio is only 2.5! (£1400 a month vs £3500 a month)

The minimum wage gets raised by almost as much as inflation every year, while IT pay stays almost stagnant.

I expect the after tax ratio will get to 2:1 quite soon.

[NotAllThere]

Seems that hardly any clients are matching inflation with the rate, rent is going up, food is going up, bills are going up, contract rates the same last seven years

Rent is going up. Bills are going up. Income isn't going up. For the clients.

[some guy some where]

how dop you choose who the 0.01% are?
Cos if you choose them at the end of the timeline then the results will be massively skewed towards those who have increased.
EG. All those at 0.02% at the start who make it to 0.01% at the end are guaranteed to be at least 100% growth.

If you choose the sample at the start then those who lost it all will be shown in the result


*HINT* it's going to be former isn't it as that make a nice graph for the politics of envy.

I dont know the merthlogy but im guessing they took the total uk pretax income for the year, split it by pecentile and the divide by total population. As more people drop out of the top 1% you see the concentration increase, thus increaing their share of the national income.

The percentage bubbles are bit sensationalist and fairly meaningless and dont really get the point over.

The more interesting point is that but that 15% of total uk pretax income in 2015 went to 1% of people vs 6% in 1980. Trickle down ain't working ?

This isnt about envy - its about concentration of wealth and income in a shrinking elite and the destruction of the middle classes. (Pension tax changes/Student loans/ir35/btl tax/caring for elderly relatives/child tax benefit/inheritance tax) the attack on middle class income and wealth has been relentless - none of these things impact the rich.

With the rampant inflation it will only get worse

[Lance]

I dont know the merthlogy but im guessing they took the total uk pretax income for the year, split it by pecentile and the divide by total population. As more people drop out of the top 1% you see the concentration increase, thus increaing their share of the national income.

The percentage bubbles are bit sensationalist and fairly meaningless and dont really get the point over.

The more interesting point is that but that 15% of total uk pretax income in 2015 went to 1% of people vs 6% in 1980. Trickle down ain't working ?

This isnt about envy - its about concentration of wealth and income in a shrinking elite and the destruction of the middle classes. (Pension tax changes/Student loans/ir35/btl tax/caring for elderly relatives/child tax benefit/inheritance tax) the attack on middle class income and wealth has been relentless - none of these things impact the rich.

With the rampant inflation it will only get worse

You've taken a graph you don't understand.
And are now trying to interpret it to say something it isn't saying. (this is a worrying trend as more and more people seem to think this is 'doing your own research', and results in great harm to public discourse IMO)

If you want some figures on income inequality (which is what I think you are after). You want to use the Gini co-efficient. That is pretty well regarded as a measure of income inequality that factors in more measures. Here are some facts on Gini in the UK over the last nearly 30 years.
Household income inequality, UK - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk)

I'm not saying "trickle-down" does work, or that it doesn't. It is though, an overly-simplistic soundbite that comes from 90 years ago. Trickle-down economics - Wikipedia

You are right to be concerned about your last 2 paragraphs. But use facts, with a solid evidence base, to back it up.




Oh. And there is a really simple cure for inflation. Slash VAT. It will take a year for that to impact the actual inflation figures, but as inflation is likely to come down on its own not long after (it's not 'rampant', it's a supply side shock caused by Russia, Covid and Brexit), that would be harmful meddling. We're going to have to ride this out as the only answers to the poverty increases are to throw more cash at the poor which is ultimately self-defeating.

I sleep at night reminding myself that more than half of the people who will feel the pain, voted for a thing (that shall not be mentioned) that is making it worse (so f*** 'em).

[hugebrain]

Seems that hardly any clients are matching inflation with the rate, rent is going up, food is going up, bills are going up, contract rates the same last seven years

i think it’s a lot worse than that. My rates haven’t increased since the year 2000.

The reason for that is because our various governments have hated us and done everything they can to destroy our lives.

Why do they hate us? People like the PCG arguing and whining all the time instead of just bribing them like all other lobby groups do. We only have ourselves to blame.

[lecyclist]

You've taken a graph you don't understand.
And are now trying to interpret it to say something it isn't saying. (this is a worrying trend as more and more people seem to think this is 'doing your own research', and results in great harm to public discourse IMO)

If you want some figures on income inequality (which is what I think you are after). You want to use the Gini co-efficient.

No. The Gini index measures net income rather than net worth, so the majority of a nation's wealth can still be concentrated in the hands of a small number of people even if income distribution is relatively equal.

What the decrease in the Gini coefficient for the UK is useful for (and what it is sensitive to), is showing the impoverishment of the middle classes.

Economics 101 - the top 1% who have large holdings of non-dividend paying stocks, for example, may have individual low incomes and simultaneously high net worth.

A better measure to play with is the Palma ratio. Go to https://data.oecd.org/inequality/income-inequality.htm and you can toggle on the main graph between Gini and Palma.

[eek]

i think it’s a lot worse than that. My rates haven’t increased since the year 2000.

The reason for that is because our various governments have hated us and done everything they can to destroy our lives.

Why do they hate us? People like the PCG arguing and whining all the time instead of just bribing them like all other lobby groups do. We only have ourselves to blame.

Utter Bollox

Offshoring has kept assignment rates low - beyond a certain point you need to be absolutely brilliant or its just cheaper to offshore both the project and all the managerial risk. The old phrase you won't be fired for buying IBM has been replaced with you won't have be fired outsourcing a project to the offshore company the directors approved of.

The Government has handled tax because there is £100bn of Employer NI that needs to be protected at all costs...

[Lance]

No. The Gini index measures net income rather than net worth, so the majority of a nation's wealth can still be concentrated in the hands of a small number of people even if income distribution is relatively equal.

What the decrease in the Gini coefficient for the UK is useful for (and what it is sensitive to), is showing the impoverishment of the middle classes.

Economics 101 - the top 1% who have large holdings of non-dividend paying stocks, for example, may have individual low incomes and simultaneously high net worth.

A better measure to play with is the Palma ratio. Go to https://data.oecd.org/inequality/income-inequality.htm and you can toggle on the main graph between Gini and Palma.

you are correct. Gini does measure income inequality not wealth inequality.
Which was exactly what I said...... and was exactly was was being discussed

[hugebrain]

Offshoring has kept assignment rates low - beyond a certain point you need to be absolutely brilliant or its just cheaper to offshore both the project and all the managerial risk. The old phrase you won't be fired for buying IBM has been replaced with you won't have be fired outsourcing a project to the offshore company the directors approved of.

The Government has handled tax because there is £100bn of Employer NI that needs to be protected at all costs...

I agree with the first part and encouraging offshoring is one of the main ways the government has tried to destroy us.

I agree less with the idea that paying money to foreigners who don’t pay NI somehow increases the tax base and means the public sector should award themselves massive pay rises. Perhaps you could elaborate a bit more on that?