to think gov's Youth Contract proves NMW too high

[takingbackmonday]

The gov is ploughing more money we dont have to 'tackle' youth unemployment by subsidising half of the minimum wage businesses pay new staff.

AIBU to consider this yet more proof that NMW should be either lowered or abolished. Business taxes should also be lowered. The economy's a mess. NMW is set to high.

Mine aren't research council funded either. As is customary, any private scholarships in our university are pegged to the research council rates, unless they are partial scholarships.

I'd like to know EXACTLY how much you're getting. Tax Free.

Thanks.

I think it's understandable that I have no desire to post the exact amount I'm getting on the internet. It's enough to live off, just, but just under RC amounts (out of London). My decision to live here which makes life somewhat harder.

Either way, I didn't start this to talk about my own situation. I wanted to see if anyone else agrees that the Youth Contract shows that more jobs are created when businesses don't have to pay NMW which proves it's bad for the economy. Willing to accept I'm wrong. I wanted a discussion not a fight.

You posted in AIBU and you didn't want a fight?

in theory its possible a lower NMW would create jobs. In Theory.

In practice, its more likely IMO in some sectors (I'm in retail, and my experience would hold to this) where possible they will just pay the lower amount and keep the same staff levels. I currently work for a small business (6 staff ex. boss) and I've worked for big brand companies and they would both do the same if they could get away with it ATM.

LOWER Minimum wage?! You obviously have parental support to pay your rent then, or grants or student loans. People NOT at Uni don't have those options to pay their RENT. Minimum wage doesn't even COVER the rent on a single room in a houseshare and your utilities in my town - much less food too. Most people I know on NMW here have to work two jobs just in order to EAT.

I agree with MrsTwinks - also a retail worker when I am in work. Wouldn't aid job creation, would just enable businesses to pay much LESS to the staff they have got.

A minimum wage salary is approximately £11,600. I'd love to see how many of the people calling for it to be cut have actually tried running a 2 child household on that sort of salary.

And there is a vast difference between being paid a much smaller amount when you are 16/17yo (The people this scheme is aimed at) and more than likely living at home with your parents having the majority of your food and utility bills covered, and being paid the same amount as an adult living in your own home and having to cover all the outgoings yourself! Which is, incidentally, why NMW is so much lower for 16/17yo's.

The problem is, a lot of the time, that the 16/17yo's that are NEETS have often been forced to leave their home for whatever reason, and the very low level of NMW for their age group means that if they WERE to work, they would be unable to cover their outgoings, whereas on IS/JSA, they can at least EAT.

how about looking at things from a human perspective? why should someone work for 40 hours a week and not be able to pay their rent or feed themselves? who will pick up the slack? have you heard about the London Living Wage, which would be set at about £7.50 to enable people to cover their expenses without getting state assistance?

businessmen and women go into business for themselves, not for the good of society, why should the government subsidise them with low taxes? why should workers subsidise them?

Do you propose also that childcare, food, rent, utillities and travel costs all be reduced in line also? If not then what would creating more lower paid jobs achieve other than making a massive proportion of people homeless?

yabu
you are not working that is why you are on less than the NMW
ffs it should be higher not lower.

It's too low. People can barely live on out.

Business makes too much - people at the top in business earn too much - this is not passed on to those lower down the pecking order.

Is this another one of those "I'm alright, Jack" threads?

There is a level of NMW which would cause unemployment. But I don't think we're at that level yet. My reason for this opinion is that in Australia the MW is a good deal higher than ours its £10/hour, and if you were earning it you'd be better off than most Brits yet they have lower unemployment than us.

Companies paying low wages are effectively subsidised by the government which tops them up with tax credits.

Current NMW for anyone over 25 is £6.09 an hour. And after your personal allowance, you get taxed at 20% on the rest of it. £10 an hour would be something that approaches a living wage. You have to realise that it is not just single teenagers that are paid NMW - it is a LOT of employees in a LOT of VITAL services. Person doing the cooking in the hospital? NMW. Person wheeling your hospital bed to the operating theatre? NMW. Person going to your Granny's house to help her to go to the toilet? NMW. Person removing your bin bags? NMW. Person selling you your food in the supermarket? NMW. All of these essential services and more pay NMW. If NMW was lowered, there wouldn't BE anyone to do these jobs, as if you can't afford to EAT, you are hardly likely to turn up to your job, are you?!

Hahahahahaha.

Totally agree, ninjasquirrel - Tax Credits are a business subsidy IMO.

Not always, laurie. There is a massive difference between Big Business and top bosses on million pound bonuses and the little guy struggling at the bottom who's remortgaged their house to try to fund growth and whose staff actually earn more than they do!

There's nothing wrong with trying to grow a business and hoping it will make money. You make money (hopefully) but you also risk everything. Surely there should be some reward for the level of risk you take? It has to have been worth it!

Most SMEs are never run by people making millions. Or even hundreds of thousands. They are normal people doing the best they can.

If they can't afford to employ people, that is a shame. People lose out on jobs and businesses lose out on the chance to grow, create more employment and contribute more to the economy.

SME business owners are not the enemy of the employed!

OP - are you by any chance looking to start your own business?

Do you not see the hypocrisy in you being subsidised to study libertarian economics?

Hec - Yes, SME business owners are not the 'enemy' of the employed - but NMW is there for a reason, it is not set high enough as it is. If the SME business owner can't afford to employ someone if they have to pay them what is effectively LESS than a living wage - then surely they haven't got the money to grow their business?

And, if the business owner has had to remortgage their home and pay themselves LESS than their employees on NMW, then they can't afford to run a business. I would also assume that anyone that is ABLE to run their business while paying themselves LESS than NMW is either NOT the main earner in their household (which a lot of their employees WILL BE), or they have family money behind them in order to survive on less than NMW. Because otherwise they would be unable to afford to pay their rent or mortgage, and would be bankrupt, homeless and starving hungry - and if they aren't, then there is some OTHER money there somewhere.

A lot of people earning NMW are the MAIN EARNER IN THEIR HOUSEHOLD!

Not many people that work FT for NMW are doing it for 'pin money', they are doing it to survive.

OP is blatantly never going to understand the need for NMW and how it helps to Mark out a civilised country that guarantees a minimum rather than allowing pure exploitation of it's working population. Abolishing NMW will benefit companies such as Tesco who are already raking in millions rather than allowing small businesses to flourish. It will allow exploitation of people rather than increasing opportunities. NMW is not brilliant but it is a start in being a truly civilised population.
OP chose their level of income most on NMW did not, therefore you have a luxury that marks you out and makes your understanding of the issue flawed.