Current Affairs The Labour Party

[hullefc]

@peteblue show me the evidence that McDonell's proposals will cost jobs?

 

[Number_25]

I ended up crashing at my computer.

Jesus Christ, I'm a mess.

 

[Number_25]

Impossible to ever change retirement age without it doing that for someone. I thought selfishness was a capitalist trait though?

Anyone who believes 65 is too low a retirement age has never done manual labour for a living.

 

[The binman chronicles]

@peteblue show me the evidence that McDonell's proposals will cost jobs?

There won't be evidence but it's very likely to involve cost cutting elsewhere as companies don't like just handing over x amount of profit a year. So they may take the line that you would get the shares instead of a % increase which isn't great as your base going up leads to more the next time and so on. They could well make savings in staff to cover this or cut down R&D or just move the company abroad so they don't have to be a part of it full stop.

To me it's just a headline grabber and a stealth tax to business that is under the cosh anyhow. Just a case of rob Peter to pay Paul. If Labour were that serious about jobs and pay they would be campaigning to stay in the EU, but as we know Jezza doesn't really want to do this it all seems artifical to me.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Anyone who believes 65 is too low a retirement age has never done manual labour for a living.

Depends on several factors doesn't it, there are plenty of people out there now over 65 and working. Generally people are fitter and healthier well into their 60's but that isn't much comfort to those that have health issues and/or are working in labour intensive jobs. Not sure if we will just see more people aged 65-67 switch to disability benefits when ideally they wanted to work all their lives and not have to claim or perhaps the government will allow these people to draw their pensions early as that would be a cost saving to them rather than paying disability benefits.

 

[Number_25]

Depends on several factors doesn't it, there are plenty of people out there now over 65 and working. Generally people are fitter and healthier well into their 60's but that isn't much comfort to those that have health issues and/or are working in labour intensive jobs. Not sure if we will just see more people aged 65-67 switch to disability benefits when ideally they wanted to work all their lives and not have to claim or perhaps the government will allow these people to draw their pensions early as that would be a cost saving to them rather than paying disability benefits.

I'm quite happy having people retire at 65.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Didn't need to change it. And what's all this mumbo jumbo about selfishness?

Of course we do. Life expectancy has risen enormously since the state pension was brought in. It needs to reflect that, but everyone is too selfish for it to be them that acts responsibly.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

We were comparing CEO’s and footballers. Would you like to compare footballers and care workers instead.....

Yes i would, Footballers should be taxed more, so more care workers can be paid for, and paid more.

Yes they are, especially when people are choosing expensive brands. Choice is a luxury. Choosing the new iphone over something much cheaper is a total luxury.

This is the kind of luxury working classes in the 70's, 80's & 90's didn't have. And how essential a smartphone really is is up for debate...people use it for nonsense, let's be honest. A home internet connection to be online, and a mobile phone to text & call, is all you really need even in this modern world.

Having the means to use the internet is not a luxury. Every generation says the same why stop at 70s 60s.....

 

[hullefc]

Of course we do. Life expectancy has risen enormously since the state pension was brought in. It needs to reflect that, but everyone is too selfish for it to be them that acts responsibly.

No we don't it's a political/economic choice on the part of government.. In 1945 when they were introducing it, they didn't have a clause that said 'if life expectancy increases increase the pension age'. Blair wanted o increase the pension age for 2030ish but the Tories/Lib dems brought it forward. £6 grand less in not only my pocket but hundreds of thousand people.

Mind, there are those that bellyache about their shares that may get taxed. A 20% tax on share selling would be a good idea.

 

[hullefc]

There won't be evidence but it's very likely to involve cost cutting elsewhere as companies don't like just handing over x amount of profit a year. So they may take the line that you would get the shares instead of a % increase which isn't great as your base going up leads to more the next time and so on. They could well make savings in staff to cover this or cut down R&D or just move the company abroad so they don't have to be a part of it full stop.

To me it's just a headline grabber and a stealth tax to business that is under the cosh anyhow. Just a case of rob Peter to pay Paul. If Labour were that serious about jobs and pay they would be campaigning to stay in the EU, but as we know Jezza doesn't really want to do this it all seems artifical to me.

There are millions and millions of workers like myself who only get a rise when the minimum wage goes up. They will gain from this. When the minimum wage was brought in there were the 'alarmists' claiming that it would close down businesses and lead to increased unemployment. Interesting that McDonell's £10 per hour living wage has not really upset business. But this share thing has. Bring on my £450 and the moaning CEO of my company moaning about it. The same CEO who brought in no extra pay for overtime, nothing, zilch the same rate for any hours over 39. But we do get £5 per hour more for working Christmas eve after 6, all Christmas day, boxing day until 12, New year's eve from 6 and all new years day. No days off in lieu. That's very generous of them.

 

[roydo]

There are millions and millions of workers like myself who only get a rise when the minimum wage goes up. They will gain from this. When the minimum wage was brought in there were the 'alarmists' claiming that it would close down businesses and lead to increased unemployment. Interesting that McDonell's £10 per hour living wage has not really upset business. But this share thing has. Bring on my £450 and the moaning CEO of my company moaning about it. The same CEO who brought in no extra pay for overtime, nothing, zilch the same rate for any hours over 39. But we do get £5 per hour more for working Christmas eve after 6, all Christmas day, boxing day until 12, New year's eve from 6 and all new years day. No days off in lieu. That's very generous of them.

You do realise that this mythical £450 wont be for ten years, and is 100% dependent on your company deciding to pay it anyrate?

Its utter pie in the sky cobblers, but as per, is lapped up.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

When it comes down to it, another Tory principle, 'shareholding democracy' is a lie. It's ok for the CEO's and executives to be given loads of shares, but as soon as the employee's get a whiff of this share holding democracy it suddenly bad for the business.

 

[hullefc]

Anyone who believes 65 is too low a retirement age has never done manual labour for a living.

When it's raised to 70 them firemen are going to have to be fit and healthy. Same with the police. Will train drivers have to take constant tests to make sure there up to the job? And if not they are sacked. Same with lorry drivers working 10 hour stretches.

It always was a mean spirited thing to do by Blair but even meaner for Osbourne to bring it forward. The retirement age should be lowered to 60 not increased.

 

[tsubaki]

When it's raised to 70 them firemen are going to have to be fit and healthy. Same with the police. Will train drivers have to take constant tests to make sure there up to the job? And if not they are sacked. Same with lorry drivers working 10 hour stretches.

It always was a mean spirited thing to do by Blair but even meaner for Osbourne to bring it forward. The retirement age should be lowered to 60 not increased.

What makes it worse in the case of firefighters and cops is that their length of service was increased, as were their contributions but the resulting pension is quite a bit less. Now they are astonished to find people are leaving.

 

[zzr45]

When it's raised to 70 them firemen are going to have to be fit and healthy. Same with the police. Will train drivers have to take constant tests to make sure there up to the job? And if not they are sacked. Same with lorry drivers working 10 hour stretches.

It always was a mean spirited thing to do by Blair but even meaner for Osbourne to bring it forward. The retirement age should be lowered to 60 not increased.

Except firefighters and police retire early. And train drivers and lorry drivers are already retested.

Bringing the retirement age down would be a huge mental health time bomb as well.