Why isn't work paid better?

[malificent7]

People who work hardshould be able to afford a better life for themselves. So many work in stressful jobs and also have stressors outside of work too like poor housing, expensive food and childcare etc. Please explain to a simpleton why jobs aren't being paid in line with inflation...espwcially public services.

Wages are utterly terrible in this country. It never recovered from the 2007/8 crisis. But you wouldn't know that from all the threads bashing OPs on £30k or whatever for their massive wealth.

I don’t - I was making a point a rise in NMW is based onto the consumer

No it’s not - but you only have to
read MN to see that many think it should.

But when a couple on reasonable jobs (nurse, teacher etc) cannot afford to buy a house the UK economy is broken.

Why do we have to buy a house? It is much more common in Europe to rent for life.

In Geneva there is a minimum wage of CHF 24.32 - that's £21.48.

That does make lots of service industry prices very high, things like eating out are very expensive. But the Swiss have a higher standard of living overall because they have a high productivity economy that can pay even higher salaries, so that its people can afford high prices for services provided by people on a high minimum wage.

Britain can't become a richer country by increasing the minimum wage, but if it becomes a richer country it can afford a higher minimum wage to make sure everyone shares in the increase in wealth.

I’ve been to Switzerland - it’s insanely expensive.

So as I’ve said - the cost is passed on to the consumer.

Yeah of course. Point being, that if Britain were a richer country the customers would be able to afford higher prices.

In lots of European countries there are strict rent controls that mean renting is cheaper than it is here as a proportion of wages. Also in some places rents are capped and do not rise as long as you remain there.

In the UK we are at the mercy of crappy private landlords who charge the earth, no rent caps, they don't maintain properties and the changes and rights you have as a tenant are limited.

And then they move abroad, so rather than getting some tax from them, plus I come tax from their employees, we get nothing.
I think Google moved to Ireland for this reason (may be another company), due to lower taxes.

The introduced rent controls and more tenants rights in Scotland and the price of rents increase more than England and the supply slumped. I doubt landlords maintained the properties either. Plus investors pulled out of turning/upgrading derelict city centre properties into flats.

@BananaAppleOrange however in Europe, renting works better and rents are lower.

So whatever they did in Scotland clearly was not gone about in the right way if that was the effect? I guess they need to rethink how they implement.

Or.... radical idea - build more affordable houses, and more council houses, and prevent council stock from being bought, prevent multi property landlords (in the UK for example, American corporations are buying up our rental properties!!! disgusting).

You are comparing apples and pears. In Europe most of the rental properties are owned by the state or by private companies. You are a company, you own the block of flats and rent it out for a steady interest. It’s an investment that appeals to a wide range of investors. In the UK buy to let private rental is much more common, with those renting know that it is common to get evicted at short notice when eg the landlord wants to sell up etc. Rental is a much less secure way of living in the UK. People rightly don’t want it, they want the security of ownership, especially if they are thinking of having children.

Another point is why shouldn’t young people get to phone a property? My partner and I are both on big money in finance. Top 2% of household earnings. We live in the same house as the people next door where the husband was a plasterer and the wife did not work. Two couples, 40 year age difference. It doesn’t bother me - the house if great - but it just illustrates that the inter generational wealth inequality is vast. Truly vast.

Why shouldn’t young people who have done everything ‘right’ in life not have a lifestyle remotely as good as those of previous generations. You can sit back and say that not everything in life is fair, but that doesn’t stop younger workers feeling aggrieved. It would be long before they start kicking back.

Good riddance I say, if they are going to do that. They screw over small businesses. However, they wouldn't pull out entirely. They still make money from customers here and even with paying tax it wouldn't be worth their while to remove their business from the UK.

The ONLY place rent controls have worked properly was in Austria and that’s because it was coupled with an explosion in state investment in social housing. Council houses flooded the market.

In Scotland, all rent controls did were to lead to landlords selling up and rents riding exponentially. Rent controls work when properly implemented. Proper implementation never happens. Rent controls never work.

You are a company, you own the block of flats and rent it out for a steady interest. It’s an investment that appeals to a wide range of investors. In the UK buy to let private rental is much more common

Most landlords own properties through companies - it is more tax efficient. I am not clear how you think ‘private rental’ is different.

I’m talking about pension trusts owning properties, not btl landlords who have incorporated to save tax!

So large corporation good and small business bad now?

Untrue. I have friends in Germany (for example) who have amazing low rent and have done for decades. Capped to when they moved in. Secure tenancies. Able to redecorate to their taste. Beautiful properties.

"Rent controls work when properly implemented. Proper implementation never happens. Rent controls never work."

Then implement them properly FGS. It's not rocket science.

Have they moved much in that time?

I think the unaffordability of housing is a big part of the problem.

Who would you rather rent a property from? A company that is looking for a permanent investment income, employs permanent professional staff, lets you lease for multiple years, redecorate etc, or a retired couple who own this property as perhaps the parent who owned it died, who might sell up at any point, who only give you a 6 month contract, who try to fix any defects themselves and who won’t let you redecorate? The big company provides a far less precarious rental situation for me. Every time.

This will be owned by an investment company or be social housing. This is exactly what we need, and the BTL landlord s such as we have in the UK don’t provide.

So landlords can only rent if they have a minimum number of properties? A young couple moving for work in negative equity and unable to sell should not be allowed to rent? Is the company allowed to seek a return of 10% or would that be considered extortionate?

Frankly, British people are lazy and employers prefer to employ hard-working immigrants, who will work for a lowish wage because wages in their countries are much lower than here. If British people want a higher minimum wage, they need to change their attitude to work.