Official Summer 2015 Budget Thread

[MarillionFan]

Who cares what happens in 7 years time? Just worry about getting elected in 2020.

How did you know I was running???

[WordIsBond]

Minimum wage should be living wage.

Why?

If someone has other income, and just wants a little extra on a part time job to supplement that, and so they don't bother to develop any skills, why should they make living wage? Why should they be paid as well as someone who needs to support themselves / a family, and so develops the skills to be able to make a living wage?

Making a "living wage" compulsory is horrible economics. But it plays well with an economically illiterate electorate. It also is inflationary, and inflation reduces the real value of government debt, so it's a double win for George.

And since it is inflationary, other salaries will go up, too, to make up for the increased cost of living, and then the "living wage" will have to go up as well. And round and round we go.

[Gumbo Robot]

At the risk of repeating myself...

Don't blame me, I voted UKIP

[d000hg]

best line your pocket.... or less likely to steal from you?

your distinction seems arbitrary at best.

Since tax isn't theft, your argument is spurious.

Minimum wage was a great idea. But some great ideas are best destroyed as embryos.

Minimum wage quickly became maximum wage for a whole stratum of the population who can never look forward to anything else.

Living wage is no different, just higher at this point in time.

I think the kind of employer who would see minimum wage as a way to avoid paying anything more is probably the kind of employer who was paying as little as they could get away with before NMW was introduced, i.e. less than NMW.

[Zero Liability]

This is what I said in the pub last night. All you're going to do is push jobs down to the under 25s. But with the education change where kids have to stay in education until they're 18 and have some basic qualifications, it means you'll have more younger highly educated shop workers and road sweepers who won't be able to get a job after 25 as they've been replaced. Meanwhile pensioners or those coming up for retirement who need to top up their income won't be hired and will be fooked because they couldn't build a decent pension.

Its going to solve youth unemployment though.

Indeed, which is why the bits surrounding apprenticeships made it in I think.

[expat]

There is fundamentally no reason why some cars should get hit with more road tax than others.

Unless you believe it is the role of government to encourage certain behaviours. Then, you have to decide which behaviours should be encouraged.

If it is beneficial to the economy to have a skilled and flexible workforce to aid industry in times of high demand, and have the workforce themselves be willing to absorb risk rather than demanding employment protection, then government might want to encourage it.

If contractors are a scourge on society and not helpful to industry, then it probably makes sense to have a punitive tax regime.

Since industry appears to like having contractors available, it probably makes sense to assume they are beneficial to the economy. If so, then having a tax regime that encourages people to take the risk of leaving employment protection is probably a good idea.

It is generally believed that encouraging certain behaviours and discouraging others is one of the roles of government (I am not saying that I believe that). Governments certainly have a tendency to believe that.

It is beneficial to have a skilled and flexible workforce and industry does like that, but there is no reason why that workforce should be contractors, especially since "flexible" includes "low-cost, biddable, and desperate for work". A large pool of employees of big vendors, on zero hours contracts, would fill the bill perfectly.

[AtW]

It is beneficial to have a skilled and flexible workforce and industry does like that, but there is no reason why that workforce should be contractors, especially since "flexible" includes "low-cost, biddable, and desperate for work". A large pool of employees of big vendors, on zero hours contracts, would fill the bill perfectly.

Flexible in this context is expendable.

HTH

[unixman]

Permanent employees will never be as flexible as contractors, thanks to UK law which makes is nearly impossible to sack someone.

Cheaper to hire a 70k contractor for your 6 months project (35k) than a 30k permy who will be on your books for 5 years (150k).

One of the greatest skills contractors offer is the ability to simply bu**er off when required.

[AtW]

Permanent employees will never be as flexible as contractors, thanks to UK law which makes is nearly impossible to sack someone.

That's rubbish.

It's only hard in public sector due to heavy unions influence.

[expat]

Permanent employees will never be as flexible as contractors, thanks to UK law which makes is nearly impossible to sack someone.

Cheaper to hire a 70k contractor for your 6 months project (35k) than a 30k permy who will be on your books for 5 years (150k).

One of the greatest skills contractors offer is the ability to simply bu**er off when required.

Like I said, zero hours contracts. Coming soon to an Accenture office near you.