General Election 8th June

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ople-developed-countries-seen-income-stagnate

Half a billion people in 25 of the west’s richest countries suffered from flat or falling pay packets in the decade covering the financial and economic crisis of 2008-09, according to a report highlighting the impact of the Great Recession on household incomes.

Research by the McKinsey Global Institute found that between 65% and 70% of people in 25 advanced countries saw no increase in their earnings between 2005 and 2014.

The report found there had been a dramatic increase in the number of households affected by flat or falling incomes and that today’s younger generation was at risk of ending up poorer than their parents. Only 2% of households, 10 million people, lived through the period from 1993 to 2005 – a time of strong growth and falling unemployment – without seeing their incomes rise.

The MGI said governments had mitigated the impact of the squeeze on incomes through tax cuts and welfare spending, but that even when these were taken into account 20-25% of households were no better off in 2014 than they were in 2005.

It noted that people who had seen no increase in their incomes tended to be pessimistic about the future both of themselves and their children, and were likely to be more negative about removing barriers to trade or migration.

“Our survey also found that those who were not advancing and not hopeful about the future were more likely than those who were advancing to support nationalist political parties such as France’s National Front or, in the United Kingdom, to support the move to leave the European Union.”

The research organisation said the deep slump and the weak recovery after the 2008 financial crisis were the main causes of the phenomenon, but that a decline in the number of people available for work, more part-time and temporary working, and a decline in the influence of trade unions had also played a part.

It warned that should the “slow growth” conditions of the past decade persist, up to 80% of income segments could face flat or falling incomes over the next decade. There was a possibility that increased automation would result in 30-40% of households seeing no advance in their incomes even if growth accelerated.

Richard Dobbs, a senior partner at McKinsey, said: “This new research from MGI shows the emergence of a corrosive phenomenon in advanced economies: households experiencing flat or falling incomes compared with people like them in the past.

“The financial crisis and slow recovery has been a key driver of this but we are also seeing fundamental shifts in the workplace. Over time, declining earning power for large swaths of the population could limit demand growth in economies, could increase the need for social spending and transfer payments, and raise social tensions. Our research finds that carefully targeted policy measures to boost productivity, GDP growth, and employment can make a significant difference.”

The study looked in depth at incomes in six developed countries – France, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, the UK and the US – and then scaled the findings up to include a further 19 nations for a total of 25 countries with a combined population of 800 million and accounting for half of global gross domestic product.

Of the six countries picked out, 97% of Italian households saw their incomes fall or remain stagnant in the decade ending in 2014. The comparable figures were 80% for the US, 70% for both the UK and the Netherlands, 63% for France and 20% for Sweden.

The MGI said government policy and labour market practices helped determine the ultimate extent of flat or falling incomes. “In Sweden, for example, where the government intervened to preserve jobs, market incomes fell or were flat for only 20%, while disposable income advanced for almost everyone. In the United States, government taxes and transfers turned a decline in market incomes for 81% of income segments into an increase in disposable income for nearly all households.”

 

We don't exist to serve mate. We should have the basics we need without fear of losing a piss poor job just to scrape by. We deserve free education, health-care, affordable housing and sky tv.

 

SNP conning the working man again...

 

.

 

I still fail to see how giving corporations record profits helps people get their wages back up? The only way to boost an economy is to give people money to spend (not free money, just fair wages).

It's not as if we have less money in the system than before, if anything the UK on its own has generated billions to hand over to the banks. None of that cash is trickling down.

I know you have a huge shoe-overhead to running your business but you may have to start paying a bit more in tax

 

If lower corporation tax means the state collects in more tax then I don't see why the state should raise taxes if it means less it gets less revenue.

I don't disagree that some folk get a rough deal in terms of wages but punishing every company for the failings of a few isn't fair.

 

Ok, then combine it with some employment laws, like an increased minimum wage or salary caps. I also don't think small businesses should be taxed anywhere near large ones.

 

Unfortunately, the SME's who are unable to switch their operations to another EU state are the ones who bear the brunt of CT increases.

 

Its not punishing companies. Its helping them. This will pay for education that benefits companies through better workforce. It will also benefit them with retraining older members of the labour market. They will also be paying less than in 2010. And with the loss of skilled migrants due to brexit its a no brainer.

 

Do you purposefully ignore the bits where less CT means higher tax take for the Government?

Or how lower CT has led to more foreign investment in UKPLC?

 

Ignore bits? I didn't read any of it

 

Am voting for them too. Fancy a fûck?

 

Tax can be changed at least once a year so the idea of never ending high CT is scaremongering

 

Okay but need to wait for my new suit

please log in to view this image

 

That's always a risk when you raise taxes that - you may incentivise businesses and individuals to find ways of avoiding paying. Labour's proposals are pretty modest though - a far cry from the Dennis Healey days of squeezing the rich til it hurt.

As an ordinary working bloke who pays basic rate income tax with virtually no risk of earning over the higher rate threshold, I'd still willingly pay an extra 5p in the £ to pay for some of the things in Labour's manifesto. But they don't want me to, so thanks for that Jezza me old allotment pottering jam making pal

Of course the best way to increase tax receipts is to stimulate the economy back to growth - put money in people's pockets, get them spending. And borrow to do it. Currently it's individuals who are in debt, just to pay the household bills - government should be willing to take on that debt to stimulate the economy. It's wrong that individuals are falling into debt because a combination of low wages and rocketting housing costs mean they often work long hours and still can't make ends meet.

Nationalising the Railways will save the govt millions btw. Abellio, the parent company of GTRailways, paid out £37 billion in dividends to it's investors last tax year - some of whom were the state owned German and Dutch Railways. That's one ****ing carve up needs sorting, a Labour idea whose time has come. Same withe Royal Mail, a nationalised success story for years, flogged off in an indecent hurry to Osbourne's pals in the City.

On the other hand, we're all ****ed anyway cos Brexit. The economy will be on it's arse for a decade. @brb better hope the market for Peak Freans holds up, the knob. I'd laugh my ****ing arse off if his factory moved to Albania.

 

First thing he'll do is turn the grounds of Buck House into allotments. I will help him plant his first row of runner beans. All are welcome.

After we've finished that we will renationalise the Railways, increase the minimum wage to £10ph, put more cozzers on the beat to round up psychotic drug dealing scum, put money into schools and hospitals, build affordable homes, and put Billy Bragg, Johnny Rotten and anyone still alive out The Clash, into the House of Lords.

 

I never quite understand why people entrust the State to spend THEIR money wisely?

Less tax you pay them, the less they squander on wars, bloated MP's expenses, generous final salary pensions for the civil service and the layers upon layers of Governmental hierarchy to snoop on your internet usage, rule that you can't build stuff in your own land or refuse to pass completion certificates as you don't have level access into your home for some guy in a wheelchair.

As a % I wonder how much tax you actually pay goes to stuff that you endorse.

 

.

 

So like I said you, Archers and the Toby's of this world expect a free ride....**** Ooooooo

Don't exist to serve what planet you on hahaha.... Mindy's Planet