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.

We just need more housing. We are playing a game of musical chairs, with more and more people chasing fewer and fewer properties and so the cost of renting and buying is rising accordingly. A few issues:

Taxes on but to let landlords have been rising which are being directly passed on to tenants.

Rental agents are talking up the market and are able to do so due to the scarcity of property.

Property developers build the properties which make them the most profit rather than the properties which are needed most in the location they are needed most.

A property developer can recover all of the VAT incurred on construction of new properties and none of the VAT incurred on renovating old properties into new residences. VAT should be recoverable on refurbs to allow old shops etc on high streets to be changed into residential properties.

Stamp duty stops people moving house and living in properties which most meet their needs.

My biggest bill by far each month is housing. If I have to head into retirement, with a reduced income and still have to make rent payments I will really have a shitty retirement. This is why a paid off home in retirement is a thing I aspire to.

Maybe I'm being naive but I thought Carers do a lot of similar work to nurses (short of delivering certain medicines). Apologies if that's completely wrong!

A property developer can recover all of the VAT incurred on construction of new properties and none of the VAT incurred on renovating old properties into new residences. VAT should be recoverable on refurbs to allow old shops etc on high streets to be changed into residential properties.

Agree with this. It is crazy that it is often cheaper to knock down historic buildings rather than do them up because of VAT. Old shops often were residential properties (at least on upper floors). Though it would have to be about bringing neglected empty properties back into use rather than just turning nice flats into fancy upmarket ones.

The thing is with the difference between TA/HCA and qualified roles is that if the difference wasn’t significant people wouldn’t do the qualified roles.
If a full time TA was only paid 5k less than a teacher I would take that 5k pay cut any day of the week.
The stress and workload of teaching wouldn’t be worth it anymore.

That is true, and a challenging dilemma.

But whilst good teachers are hard to find, and LSA's are easy to recruit (at the school where I am a governor we get 50+ applicants for 1 post, of whom at least 10 would be good at the role), TA wages will stay comparatively low.

How many TAs are parents? It is very difficult for parents to find jobs that fit in with school hours and holidays and TA posts are one of the few roles that do that. If you don’t have family who can help, holiday childcare for several children is astronomical and easily wipes out wages earned for most people (and then some).

We visited Cuba

We were told that everyone receives the same pay

That doctors are trained for free & exported to other countries

TAs do not lesson plan

TAs do not have full responsibility

Not true. Though doctors there apparently just got a huge pay rise with salaries doubling to 17000 Cuban pesos per month (equivalent to $56 at street exchange rates). Those working in the tourism industry earn a lot more. Inflation was officially 30% last year and fuel prices are set to double from next month.

This really.

I want to earn more so I am figuring out what path to take in order to get a higher salary. The answer is not sticking your head in the sand and hoping that the minimum wage gets increased again.

I did lesson planning and I had full responsibility for the groups I taught. My role has changed but I am not employed as a teacher. I still plan my lessons and have sole responsibility for my groups. Unfortunately with schools being underfunded, many now employ ‘instructors’ instead of teachers. They have almost he same responsibilities as teachers, but are paid significantly less.

Because most profits go to a very few super rich individuals, talking billionaires here.

This.
And also massive wealth inequality. If house prices were drop or even slow down, the wealthy would snap them up as ‘investment’ properties. Scarcity then drives prices up again.

’talking billions’ is merely the scale of the enterprise and says nothing about how reasonable the level of profit is. Billions profit could be exploitative or it could be a wafer thin margin that could evaporate overnight causing the business to close and tens of thousands to be put out of work. Equally a small business owner could exploit workers to generate a profit of a few tens of thousands.

How to address the issue of accumulation of enormous wealth by a few individuals is another issue. These individuals are very mobile and can take their wealth, along with their business, jobs, and taxes, out of the country at the drop of a hate. You might say ‘well let them go, good riddance’ but the thousands of steel workers/car manufacturers/etc who lose their jobs as a result might not be so happy.

@BananaAppleOrange
It's simply untrue that if we tax billionaires heavily then uk jobs will go, this is just something that people invested in the status quo of huge wealth inequality would have you believe.

These individuals hoard wealth and are disproportionately destroying the planet and causing climate change.

But uk jobs do go. Like Dyson moving its HQ to Singapore.

I agree it is bad to have so much wealth concentrated in a few, though whether that destroys the planet more I am not sure. Yes as individuals they have a disproportionate impact but as most of their wealth is ‘stored’ and not available for use, it is not causing climate change in the way it would be if it was distributed to millions of individuals who could now afford overseas holidays, a car, or just more heating and better food. People should be able to afford adequate heating and food and climate change should not be an argument to deprive them of this.

Well obviously individual companies will always move location both in and out of the UK.

Just as new companies and jobs will spring up. Costa and Starbucks pay little tax who cost small cafes pay much more. Getting rid of the huge corporations with unfair tax advantages allow ordinary people to start up a cafe. Ditto Amazon and book shops. And the same for all companies that pay virtually no tax in the UK.

Overall numbers and quality of jobs, pay levels and income disparity is really what's being discussed here surely?
And we shouldn't have to live with an unfair tax playing field that makes it so hard for individuals to set up businesses and compete with big business.

Costa and Starbucks pay little tax who cost small cafes pay much more. Getting rid of the huge corporations with unfair tax advantages allow ordinary people to start up a cafe.

Except the majority of Costa and Starbucks stores are franchises, so they are small businesses.

The service sector clearly has a finite limit within the UK. And certainly the likes of Amazon have very successfully managed to avoid tax that we need to find a way to require them to pay. But other sectors, like manufacturing and innovation (eg Dyson, cars) do need to be encouraged to stay within the UK as they do create new jobs.

@BananaAppleOrange

Except the majority of Costa and Starbucks stores are franchises, so they are small businesses.

SShhh! Don't let the facts get in the way! Same with McDonalds, Burger King and KFC. They are franchises owned by locals who employ locals. They pay VAT, employers NIC etc.

Even Amazon - most sellers are small private UK businesses who just use it as a platform like Ebay, via the "fulfilled by Amazon" system where stocks are held on Amazon warehouses, packed and delivered by Amazon staff, but the sale is actually mostly from small UK small businesses. Again, VAT paid on the goods, employers NIC paid for the staff involved, income/corporation tax paid by the small business who was the actual seller.

If people expect to have a say and influence in politics etc., we really do need to find ways of educating/informing them, rather than let them believe whatever crap they read on Twatter.

@Princessfluffy

Costa and Starbucks pay little tax who cost small cafes pay much more. Getting rid of the huge corporations with unfair tax advantages allow ordinary people to start up a cafe.

I'd personally rather have the likes of Starbucks or McDonalds who actually comply with UK tax and employment law, rather than dodgy kebab shops who are basically tax evading money laundering places, "employing" illegals forced to live in qualor above the shop with very dodgy food hygiene practices.

Anyway, it's not just whether tax is paid or not. Often legitimate smaller businesses fail because they don't have the same marketing clout, don't have long consistent opening hours, don't offer the products that customers are looking for at that moment, etc.

One independent small cafe may not be VAT registered so HMRC don't get any VAT. They may have only 1 or 2 part time staff, so HMRC don't get any employers NIC. Whereas a chain franchise will be VAT registered and will be employing more staff working longer, so at least some will be paying employers NIC. It's really not just about income tax/corporation tax on profits. Indirect taxes are just as important and very very hard for a big chain to avoid/evade - it's far easier for smaller independents to evade tax and ignore employment/hygiene laws.