Labour Leadership election

[surge]

Fine, but can you answer whether changing it's name affects the amount people receive?

What is the living wage campaign that this government has tried to rob of public support? It's a campaign for people to be paid enough to cover the basic cost of living.

[Feedback]

Do you think a 16 year old living at home with their parents have the same cost of living as a married man with 2 kids? Does the living wage allow for these factors or is it an average?

Why do you pay any attention whatsoever to what politicians say or do? They are all lying toads with nefarious intentions.

[Vimana.]

It seems quite obvious to anyone with common sense and an ounce of humanity - that renaming 'minimum wage' to 'living wage' (bar a few pence adjustment, and most of that 'in 5 years time' - yeah right) is designed to conjure up some kind of 'national perception'.
A perception that it really is a living wage, as opposed the borderline poverty sounding term: 'minimum wage'.

'Living Wage seems to suggest a fixed amount per week / month.
An amount that can be 'lived upon' .

A 40 hr week on that kind of money would be hard enough to live on, but a zero hour contract on a 'Living wage' hourly rate is not a wage. Nor barely 'living'.

[Feedback]

can you answer the question that I have asked - does changing the name of the wage from living wage back to minimum wage mean that the £7.20 received by the recipient is somehow different?

let me put it another way, would it have been better for those on minimum wage for the government to have left it at 6.90 (or whatever it was) and kept its name as minimum wage or to raise it to 7.20 and call it the living wage? what is the important thing here, raising wages or scoring political points because it is the Tory party who introduce it?

[archibald leitch]

can you answer the question that I have asked - does changing the name of the wage from living wage back to minimum wage mean that the £7.20 received by the recipient is somehow different?

What was wrong with keeping the term minimum wage and increasing it every year as it always has done since its introduction? Surely even you can see changing it to the name of something better that already ecists is cynical and decietful.

[Cardiff Irish]

Anyway Archie and Lt. Kojack before you go off on one of your tangents this article brings new light on the original subject
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/ed -miliband-urged-to-stand-for-labour-leadership-2015072310038 7

[Vimana.]

can you answer the question that I have asked - does changing the name of the wage from living wage back to minimum wage mean that the £7.20 received by the recipient is somehow different?

let me put it another way, would it have been better for those on minimum wage for the government to have left it at 6.90 (or whatever it was) and kept its name as minimum wage or to raise it to 7.20 and call it the living wage? what is the important thing here, raising wages or scoring political points because it is the Tory party who introduce it?

I think there is a name (or two) for that too.

[Feedback]

can you answer the question that I have asked - does changing the name of the wage from living wage back to minimum wage mean that the £7.20 received by the recipient is somehow different?

let me put it another way, would it have been better for those on minimum wage for the government to have left it at 6.90 (or whatever it was) and kept its name as minimum wage or to raise it to 7.20 and call it the living wage? what is the important thing here, raising wages or scoring political points because it is the Tory party who introduce it?

I suppose it depends on whether you think you're better than everyone else and only the uber intelligent such as yourself can see through the ruse.

[Vimana.]

Christ on a bike ..

[Feedback]

can you answer the question that I have asked - does changing the name of the wage from living wage back to minimum wage mean that the £7.20 received by the recipient is somehow different?

let me put it another way, would it have been better for those on minimum wage for the government to have left it at 6.90 (or whatever it was) and kept its name as minimum wage or to raise it to 7.20 and call it the living wage? what is the important thing here, raising wages or scoring political points because it is the Tory party who introduce it?

What was wrong with keeping the term minimum wage and increasing it every year as it always has done since its introduction? Surely even you can see changing it to the name of something better that already ecists is cynical and decietful.

can you explain to me why you are so happy to use the misnomer 'bedroom tax' when it is no such thing and is, according to the rationale outlined by you and Archie, designed to obfuscate? why is the 'bedroom tax' ok in your eyes but 'living wage' not?

[Feedback]

Christ on a bike ..

we can only assume Archie didn't fall for it and as an egalitarian Archie must also assume no one else fell for it, so you have to ask, if no one fell for it, why bother mentioning it?

[Feedback]

Vimana

incidentally, which moves have I applauded by the Tory party?

welfare cuts - too much imho
fox hunting - string them up
euro referendum - best in than out so why bother
public sector pay at 1% - we can probably afford more now
union legislation allowing agency workers - criminal. misses the point of strikes altogether.

perhaps you can explain what major policies of the Tories that you think I support? I'm all ears...

[archibald leitch]

Christ on a bike ..

If you can give a logical explanation, i am willing to listen, but from where i sit it stinks to high hell of a trick to try and convince people that you have done something you most defintely have not done.

[Feedback]

I didn't fall for anything Archie. I looked at the substance rather than the style. To me it was more important that the lowest wage legally allowable was rising and not the fact the government were calling it something that you'd find offensive.

I've tried to understand why you've gone on so much about this and I'm still at a loss. I would have thought it good that wages for the lowest earners were rising, but seemingly you have to find fault in a policy because of the way it is labelled.

In answer to your question, I've not given it much thought if I'm honest. I would have thought that those workers this policy affects would be happy their base pay is rising to 7.20 per hour and really couldn't care less what the government was calling this new lowest legal wage.

you think it stinks because you have to find fault with Tory policy no matter what. It must really grind your gears that the Tories have done this.

Since I've answered your question, could you answer mine that I've asked 4 times now.

does calling this the 'living wage' instead of the 'minimum wage' mean that the £7.20/hour paid is somehow different? I'd have thought that £7.20 is £7.20, no matter what it is called. Maybe I am wrong and if it is different depending on what it is called and perhaps you can explain why it is different

[Vimana.]

does calling this the 'living wage' instead of the 'minimum wage' mean that the £7.20/hour paid is somehow different?

And it also assumes that employers will give these workers enough hours a week (at "living" wage rate) to earn enough to manage to avoid poverty.

[archibald leitch]

I didn't fall for anything Archie. I looked at the substance rather than the style. To me it was more important that the lowest wage legally allowable was rising and not the fact the government were calling it something that you'd find offensive.

My position taken on the polices of ANY political party is based on the individual policy. To claim otherwise is lazy and desperate. If you can counter my arguments with reasoned logic, fine, but mudslinging is not going to move us on anywhere.

[Feedback]

You've still not answered the question. If someone receives 7.20 and it's called the minimum wage are they better or worse off than someone who receives 7.20 but it's called the living wage?

At no point have I said anything about the trials and tribulations about those earnings the 7.20. What I've said is the name of the wage has no bearing on the amount received. Unless of ours you think calling it a minimum wage means the 7.20 has more spending power than if it was called the living wage. Perhaps you can actually answer than skirt the question for a fifth time.

[Feedback]

Archie

I feel you miss the point I am making. I am asking does calling it a living wage instead of minimum wage change anything at all when the recipient collects their 7.20? I don't think it does whereas the noise you are making indicates you think it does.

You appear to be more concerned with style over substance. It's no drama.

[archibald leitch]

Archie

You are obviously trolling now so i will leave you to it.

[Feedback]

Archie

I feel you miss the point I am making. I am asking does calling it a living wage instead of minimum wage change anything at all when the recipient collects their 7.20? I don't think it does whereas the noise you are making indicates you think it does.

it is not trolling archie and no one is saying 7.20 is 7.85. I am asking how changing the name of your 7.20 affects the amount you receive. The answer is it doesn't and you know it. It doesn't matter if it's called lowest wage, minimum wage, living wage or anything else. In all cases the amount received is 7.20

[Vimana.]

Archie

I feel you miss the point I am making. I am asking does calling it a living wage instead of minimum wage change anything at all when the recipient collects their 7.20? I don't think it does whereas the noise you are making indicates you think it does.

You appear to be more concerned with style over substance. It's no drama.

£7.20 is less than £7.85. I would have thought as an accountant you would have been able to grasp that. Clearly not.

You are obviously trolling now so i will leave you to it.

No drama, as you say.

[archibald leitch]

it is not trolling archie and no one is saying 7.20 is 7.85. I am asking how changing the name of your 7.20 affects the amount you receive. The answer is it doesn't and you know it. It doesn't matter if it's called lowest wage, minimum wage, living wage or anything else. In all cases the amount received is 7.20

Gideon is saying that the living wage is £7.20. It is not, the living wage is £7.85. Which bit of that do you not get?

[Feedback]

it is not trolling archie and no one is saying 7.20 is 7.85. I am asking how changing the name of your 7.20 affects the amount you receive. The answer is it doesn't and you know it. It doesn't matter if it's called lowest wage, minimum wage, living wage or anything else. In all cases the amount received is 7.20

Gideon is saying that the living wage is £7.20. It is not, the living wage is £7.85. Which bit of that do you not get?

3. The point im discussing is what different does it make calling it living wage or minimum wage.in either case it's still 7.20

[Feedback]

Archie

I feel you miss the point I am making. I am asking does calling it a living wage instead of minimum wage change anything at all when the recipient collects their 7.20? I don't think it does whereas the noise you are making indicates you think it does.

You appear to be more concerned with style over substance. It's no drama.

£7.20 is less than £7.85. I would have thought as an accountant you would have been able to grasp that. Clearly not.

You are obviously trolling now so i will leave you to it.

it is not trolling archie and no one is saying 7.20 is 7.85. I am asking how changing the name of your 7.20 affects the amount you receive. The answer is it doesn't and you know it. It doesn't matter if it's called lowest wage, minimum wage, living wage or anything else. In all cases the amount received is 7.20

I'm asking you how changing the name of the new lowest legally amount payable affects the recipients? After all, it is they who are the important people here.

[archibald leitch]

it is not trolling archie and no one is saying 7.20 is 7.85. I am asking how changing the name of your 7.20 affects the amount you receive. The answer is it doesn't and you know it. It doesn't matter if it's called lowest wage, minimum wage, living wage or anything else. In all cases the amount received is 7.20

Gideon is saying that the living wage is £7.20. It is not, the living wage is £7.85. Which bit of that do you not get?

1. I understand the point you make. I'm not discussing that.

Now, there is my position set out very clearly. If you have any questions, just read the above, cos it is all there for you to see. If you disagree with it, fine, but that is my position. If you don't understand it, I can't help you, cos I cannot make it any clearer and I really cannot be arsed to go around and around in circles with you yet again..