Northerners should be paid lower unemployment benefits and receive a less generous minimum wage than people in the south, according to a study.

 

The controversial report argues that Gordon Brown's "unfair and intrusive" tax and benefits are fuelling a "dole culture" in the north, while penalising more productive southerners who have to suffer higher living costs and house prices.

Using a raft of official labour market and price data, the Economic Research Council's study says Londoners should get a minimum wage of £6.90 an hour, compared with the current rate of £5.35.

 

By contrast, the minimum wage for workers in the north-east should be slashed by 57p an hour to just £4.78, the think tank's study claims. Substantial cuts should also be made to the minimum wage in Yorkshire (down to £4.95 an hour), Northern Ireland (£4.80) and Wales (£4.84), it suggests.

 

The report, by Prof David Smith at the University of Derby, also argues that having one national level of unemployment benefit removes the incentive to work in parts of the country where wages are lower.

 

Prof Smith, born and raised in Leeds, said: "If you are in London benefits are a very poor substitute for work. If you are in the north-east benefits are a very good substitute for work - so you tend to get far more people on benefits up there." "Britain's tax and benefits system has got more unfair over the past 10 years. The minimum wage for Londoners is effectively a joke - laughably low."

The paper calls for Britain to adopt a system similar to those in Switzerland and the United States, which allow local authorities to set benefits, the minimum wage and the salaries of public workers.

 

Perhaps Prof Smith would like to demonstrate how confident he is in his theory by spending six months in Newcastle on £191.20 per week (i.e. a 40-hour week at £4.78 per hour) without any additional benefits.

Since when's the minimum wage been generous? :o

 

I wouldn't mind if they lowered the dole though, it would help

Edited June 17, 200718 yr by blade699

Yes

 

The cost of living in the North is minimal compared with down in London, alcohol half the price and so on and just general cost of living minimal, in London employees are paid "London weighting" allowances etc so yes in theory benefits should be higher in the South but benefits are too generous atm anyways and act as a disincentive to work

What a load of c**p, another "right-wing think-tank" spouting a bunch of sh!tty-arsed BS, and a no doubt incredibly well-off Professor who certainly would baulk at the prospect of doing HIS job for £5.35 per hour, so he can just p!ss up a rope frankly... <_< <_< I agree that the minimum wage is a joke when you live in London, BUT, actually decreasing it for Northerners will NOT solve the general problem, because it will remain unchanged for those living in London and SE... If anything, it should be increased to take into account the higher living expenses for people living in London and SE, not decreased for people living in the North, where it should be unchanged.....

Yeah I would not cut the minimum wage, the minimum wage is an essential but in terms of unemployment benefit and income support I think the levels of payment need re-evaluating as for many it is seen as a way of life and a comfort zone whereas living permanantly on benefits that taxpayers are providing should not be an option when so many jobs are around so I think that unemployment benefits need to be cut to encourage people to go out to work or at least restricted to a fixed number of months

Does anyone actually earn the minimum wage in London anyway?! I can't imagine any half-decent company paying it!

Does anyone actually earn the minimum wage in London anyway?! I can't imagine any half-decent company paying it!

 

You're kidding right....? Most of the retail outlets and pubs in London, that's pretty much what they pay, I sh!t you not, big names like McDonalds, M&S, Wetherspoons, Burger King, etc... Some actually pay people (usually migrant workers because they know they wont complain to the proper authorities about abuse....) less than minimum wage, usually Cowboy Construction companies, they are NOTORIOUS for bending and downright breaking the rules... Seriously mate, a LOT of abuse goes on with the system, and not a whole lot is done about it, because first off, no one gives a monkeys about immigrants being shafted and secondly, it would totally kibosh the illusion of Nu Labor's "Economic Miracle".....

i think that nobody should get any state handouts unless theyve paid into it. that includes scummy chavettes who want babies at my expense as well as immigrants (the ones who come here for free handouts, not the ones who work)

i think that nobody should get any state handouts unless theyve paid into it.

 

That's a bit strong mate, that would end up including school/college leavers who are actively looking for employment.... They cant get on things like "New Deal" or whatever it's called these days until they've been unemployed for X amount of time.... I agree something has to be done about the scroungers, but let's not chuck the baby out with the bathwater here...

 

well school leavers shoud get a job seekers allowance but that should only last so long and any bint getting preggers is on her own.... take the kid away into care and make the bint work.

 

i dont see why i should fund their lifestyle, the welfare system is a safety net NOT a career choice.

It is a ridiculous assumption to think that every teenage girl that has a kid is like feckless chav scum and so on, its a stereotype like all muslims being terrorists.

 

One of our very own members had a kid at the age of 15 and loves that kid more than anything in the world and you could not ask for a more devoted mum and she is anything but a chav, not all teenage mums are chavs and it is a vile thought that she should have her child put into care just because of a stereotype and she is not on benefits either

 

I know many married mums of all ages who don't give a $h!t about their kids and young Shaun will be bought up by a loving devoted young mum which is a lot better than married parents who dont give a $h!t about their kids

Edited June 18, 200718 yr by Vic Vega

It is a ridiculous assumption to think that every teenage girl that has a kid is like feckless chav scum and so on, its a stereotype like all muslims being terrorists.

 

One of our very own members had a kid at the age of 15 and loves that kid more than anything in the world and you could not ask for a more devoted mum and she is anything but a chav, not all teenage mums are chavs and it is a vile thought that she should have her child put into care just because of a stereotype and she is not on benefits either

 

I know many married mums of all ages who don't give a $h!t about their kids and young Shaun will be bought up by a loving devoted young mum which is a lot better than married parents who dont give a $h!t about their kids

 

 

if you care to read what i put i did NOT say 'that every kid who gets preggers is a chavvy scum... i was refering SPECIFICALLY to those types and the example you cite certainly doesnt fall into that catagory! so stop playing the hero and address the issue.

You're kidding right....? Most of the retail outlets and pubs in London, that's pretty much what they pay, I sh!t you not, big names like McDonalds, M&S, Wetherspoons, Burger King, etc... Some actually pay people (usually migrant workers because they know they wont complain to the proper authorities about abuse....) less than minimum wage, usually Cowboy Construction companies, they are NOTORIOUS for bending and downright breaking the rules... Seriously mate, a LOT of abuse goes on with the system, and not a whole lot is done about it, because first off, no one gives a monkeys about immigrants being shafted and secondly, it would totally kibosh the illusion of Nu Labor's "Economic Miracle".....

I did say 'half-decent company'. I certainly wouldn't put McDonalds, BK or Wetherspoons in that category...

 

But I am still surprised at the level if it's all true... It doesn't surprise me that immigrant workers are paid as low as possible. They're likely to be more than willing for that amount and so company's pay them that. It may not be ethically right but I'm sure the majority of firms would do it if it means the shareholders get their pockets lined that little bit more!

Edited June 18, 200718 yr by RabbitFurCoat

It is a ridiculous assumption to think that every teenage girl that has a kid is like feckless chav scum and so on, its a stereotype like all muslims being terrorists.

 

One of our very own members had a kid at the age of 15 and loves that kid more than anything in the world and you could not ask for a more devoted mum and she is anything but a chav, not all teenage mums are chavs and it is a vile thought that she should have her child put into care just because of a stereotype and she is not on benefits either

 

I know many married mums of all ages who don't give a $h!t about their kids and young Shaun will be bought up by a loving devoted young mum which is a lot better than married parents who dont give a $h!t about their kids

 

To be fair to Rob, he did actually specifically refer to people who seem to make having kids a career choice rather than it be just a causal circumstance... I went to Uni with two women who had their kids young, both of them were really trying to make a go at doing something with their lives and getting a proper education was a significant step on that ladder for both of them, both now have decent jobs that they never would've had had they not been fortunate enough to have the initial support of the State... Hence my point about not throwing out the baby with the bathwater...

 

I also think we seriously have to look at what kind of society we are that makes people actually think that having loads of kids and living on the dole is the only thing to aspire to... Just what the hell is it that is sucking the ambition out of our younger generation.....? I think the answer goes much deeper than merely following the "Daily Mail" argument and saying it's because of the benefits safety net.... This is not a "black and white" issue at all... Not even close....

I did say 'half-decent company'. I certainly wouldn't put McDonalds, BK or Wetherspoons in that category...

 

But I am still surprised at the level if it's all true... It doesn't surprise me that immigrant workers are paid as low as possible. They're likely to be more than willing for that amount and so company's pay them that. It may not be ethically right but I'm sure the majority of firms would do it if it means the shareholders get their pockets lined that little bit more!

 

:lol: :lol:

 

Good point actually, you did say 'half decent company', I'll give you that brother....

 

The problem is, is that the migrant work-force is not unionised, I think much more effort should be made to unionise these workers so they DO know what their rights are, far too many unscrupulous employers are taking advantage of this fact, it's different in the public sector because the public sector tends to follow the rules and treats every employee equally regardless of where they come from, and there is ALWAYS a union rep or a worker's rep on hand to give advice.... Not so in the Private Sector, especially retail and the hotel industries.....

 

Northerners should be paid lower unemployment benefits and receive a less generous minimum wage than people in the south, according to a study.

 

The controversial report argues that Gordon Brown's "unfair and intrusive" tax and benefits are fuelling a "dole culture" in the north, while penalising more productive southerners who have to suffer higher living costs and house prices.

Using a raft of official labour market and price data, the Economic Research Council's study says Londoners should get a minimum wage of £6.90 an hour, compared with the current rate of £5.35.

 

By contrast, the minimum wage for workers in the north-east should be slashed by 57p an hour to just £4.78, the think tank's study claims. Substantial cuts should also be made to the minimum wage in Yorkshire (down to £4.95 an hour), Northern Ireland (£4.80) and Wales (£4.84), it suggests.

 

The report, by Prof David Smith at the University of Derby, also argues that having one national level of unemployment benefit removes the incentive to work in parts of the country where wages are lower.

 

Prof Smith, born and raised in Leeds, said: "If you are in London benefits are a very poor substitute for work. If you are in the north-east benefits are a very good substitute for work - so you tend to get far more people on benefits up there." "Britain's tax and benefits system has got more unfair over the past 10 years. The minimum wage for Londoners is effectively a joke - laughably low."

The paper calls for Britain to adopt a system similar to those in Switzerland and the United States, which allow local authorities to set benefits, the minimum wage and the salaries of public workers.

 

 

...and will tax payers in the north pay less tax? less NI? ..... or will we subsidise the higher benefits down south??

 

I do feel that the work ethic has been well and truely lost!

 

and the culture of "free money" reigns

 

@ Craig - forgive me if I don't see dearer alcohol as a reason for increasing benefits down south ;)

 

("free money" is term used by my son as he gleefully read about EMA ....... until he discovered the stigma of having a mother with a job!!! ....... don't get me started!!!)

if you care to read what i put i did NOT say 'that every kid who gets preggers is a chavvy scum... i was refering SPECIFICALLY to those types and the example you cite certainly doesnt fall into that catagory! so stop playing the hero and address the issue.

 

You missed my point entirely Rob, yes I used someone from here as an example but only to expose your suggestion that the ones you are referring to are bad mothers, why should ANYONE have their kids taken away from them unless they are physically or sexually abusing that kid ? many single teenage mothers give their kids 1000 times the love that many middle class professional married women do. Yes your post did not exactly refer to the example I gave of a member from here but it is not up to you to play god mate and say people should have their kids put up for adoption when in many if not most cases the kid is getting looked after better than ABC1 kids

Well there's a reason why everything is so much cheaper in the north.. because it's a $h!thole compared to the south having lived in both sides. :lol:

 

On a serious note though, for every point in this thread I say the same everyone should be equal whatever the circumstances. Southern and northerners should be paid the same unemployment benifit as there are other things that people need the money for and despite people not complaining it's about time something was done about migrant workers being paid less but of course that won't happen as everyone higher up cares about how much they can pocket for themselves rather than having a happy workforce or even making sure what they're doing is legal. <_<

Well,

I see it like this. There are a lot of people in the UK who

think that the Dole 'pays' too much money. It is about £46.85

a Week, for 18 to 24 Year olds, & £59.15 for the 25 & overs.

 

A Tory MP - Matthew Parrish - once tried to manage on Dole Money

for 1 Week, & he was astonished at how little it was, & how he could

simply not get by on it. His cash ran out before the Week ended. He

had to try to borrow off other people.

 

I think that anyone who thinks that Dole Money is too high - or even

adequate - should be forced to try to live on it for 3 Months. so, they can

stop being so holier than thou, & 'I'm All Right Jack'.

 

I also think that anyone who expects others to live on the Minimum Wage,

& for it to be reduced in parts of the UK, should be paid the Minimum Wage

- that they expect others to live on - for 3 Months, at their Jobs - be they an

MP, a Professor, a Doctor, or a Judge - make them live on what they call

for others to live on - for 12 Weeks.

 

We will see how smug they are after that. It's amazing in this World,

how many people expect others to do things that they would not be

prepared to do themselves - like get next to no Dole, or no Dole at all,

or Low Wages. It is called being smug - and hypocritical. It is easy to

look down on poorer peope, if you do not have to live like them....

 

I would never want anyone to do something that I would be too weak to do

myself. It is clearly wrong to expect others to have little money, when you

would not be able to get by on that money yourself.....

Edited June 19, 200718 yr by zeus555