You put his comment in the context of him voting Brexit.
REFERENDUM RESULTS AND DISCUSSION THREAD
- Thread starter Paddingtonwolf
- Start date
You put his comment in the context of him voting Brexit.
The problem with that is that if I earn 20k and my boss offers me extra work with an associated rise to 25k then I still take home only 30k. My marginal tax rate becomes 100%...
That's correct. Companies pay a minimum wage of £8 per hour and this is topped up to £30K (about 15K) and you get a base income for life (again figures open to debate). You get it whether you work or not but in the process welfare disappears. No dole, no housing benefit, no state pensions etc.
In that case the rise would be to 35K not 25K.
Why would people take jobs?
For example - police officers. Dangerous job, and not one I would like personally. How would they recruit? Starting salary is between £19-22k. So lets take £20k as figure, and then they get topped upto £30k. Alternatively, they can do nothing and get £30k. Where is the incentive to work? Salaries would have to go through the roof.
For example - police officers. Dangerous job, and not one I would like personally. How would they recruit? Starting salary is between £19-22k. So lets take £20k as figure, and then they get topped upto £30k. Alternatively, they can do nothing and get £30k. Where is the incentive to work? Salaries would have to go through the roof.
So the basic income is in addition to any other income, regardless of the level of that income?
Parkins left foot
'Quirk's Gay Game Winner'
- Joined
- May 11, 2012
- Messages
- 20,569
- Reaction score
- 422
£30K would be too high a figure -can't see that it would work properly at over min (or living) wage for a standard 40 week
You are guaranteed an income of £30K. You are now going to say that every company will only pay minimum wage aren't you?
Johnny75
Virtual Cock
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 36,291
- Reaction score
- 12,473
That's the bit I can't wrap my head around. Why would people work? There is just no incentive to do a full time job. I think Cyber's argument about all paid work is added on to the UI but wouldn't that just enable companies to put prices up and we would essentially be in the same boat in 10 years?
Or if you paid everybody £30K to do a full time job that is effectively a form of communism so where is the incentive to work a low skilled job as opposed to a high skilled job?
I can see the argument for automation taking people's jobs and UI being applicable then and maybe TSB is correct and we only do a job for several days of the week and they are more fulfilling. Nice dream.
The incentive would be the type of work. I'm not entirely sure people would down tools but again that's open to debate. Maybe my figure of £30K is too high or do you pay the unemployed a reduced minimum income? Again open to debate.
Off the top of my head a single person would need about £30K to house themselves and pay for a reasonable standard of living. Raise it to £50K for couples. The minimum wage stands at about £15K if you work full time.
The £30k figure is way too high.
I work in hospitality. Waitresses and Bar Staff that work for us probably earn between £5-8 ph depending on their role, age, experience etc... If they could get £30k for doing nothing, or £30k for working 40 hours per week, what will they choose? So to hire bar staff and waitresses, companies would need to be offering £40-45k a year minimum. Imagine the price of a pint if that happened?
No, im going to repeat my original point.
I earn 20k from my employer. The government adds 10k. I earn 30k total.
I get a 5k pay rise from my employer.
I now earn 25k. The government adds 5k. I earn 30k total.
So my 5k pay rise has been entirely swallowed up by the consequential 5k reduction in my government paid income. Hence a 100% marginal tax rate. Plus why would my employer bother to shell out more money if its not going to make their employeer better off?
Deutsch Wolf
Sponsored by Amazon Prime. DM me for discounts...
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 109,713
- Reaction score
- 36,544
You're not introducing UI so everyone can sit at home doing nothing forever. You do it so people aren't left in total destitution and/or chasing completely unsuitable employment just to keep the gas on for the next month.
No one has ever suggested it should be at the level of around £30k. Maybe not even a third of that.
No one has ever suggested it should be at the level of around £30k. Maybe not even a third of that.
That's what's happening now - although scaled down. Economic migration is necessary to fill the gaps. Why would that change? The price of a pint is still open to market forces/competition.
If you earn £30K you are taxed on £30K so no change there. A pay rise from £30,000 to £33,500 is worth more than a pay rise from £33,500 to £35,000. If you have somebody who cleans toilets and another who is a junior manager (attracts a salary of £30K) do you feel it wrong they earn the same salary?
But you need £30K if you don't get welfare payments. You couldn't survive on a third of that without welfare.
Deutsch Wolf
Sponsored by Amazon Prime. DM me for discounts...
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 109,713
- Reaction score
- 36,544
You don't need £30k, please don't be absurd.
The average wage is only about £25k, you can't claim in work benefits when you earn way below that (maybe £13k? I haven't checked) and JSA claimants get less than £4k a year.
Any rise would be applied above the minimum figure of £30K You are taxed on £35K instead of £30K. Somebody who is doing a low skilled job is hardly going to get a pay rise above £30K.
