Boom Boom Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5iP0BV2vqb2tE6PgFf_CWa4fFle-g Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 They need to double it !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bendy Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 They need to double it !! why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lulu Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 why? Because £7.85 an hour equates to a pre tax salary of ~ £15K could you live in London on that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pie-eater Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 You need 40k per year as a single to live well in London. Or be on benefits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interestrateripoff Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 Wow only 85p higher than what Sheffield Council voted for. God the gap between north and south must have narrowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deflation Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 Because £7.85 an hour equates to a pre tax salary of ~ £15K could you live in London on that? Absolutely.. if I'd inherited somewhere to live. Seems that's the only way anybody not rich will own anything in London. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authoritarian Posted June 10, 2010 Share Posted June 10, 2010 (edited) Great, that means housing spivs get to jack their rental prices. Lets just make the system loads more efficient and transfer half my money straight to my owner landlord at source, it'll save me the hassle of walking over to the cash machine. Edited June 10, 2010 by Chef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 Great, that means housing spivs get to jack their rental prices. Lets just make the system loads more efficient and transfer half my money straight to my owner landlord at source, it'll save me the hassle of walking over to the cash machine. No landlords get nothing out of this , people living in London on that money don't rent they live at home with parent's , or they are the second wage earner in the household. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 Move. I did Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aa3 Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 Absolutely.. if I'd inherited somewhere to live. Seems that's the only way anybody not rich will own anything in London. That is the future in all honesty in these highly desireable cities. If you are not rich and did not inherit you will never get in. Ironically the more exclusive they become.. the more people want to move there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jones87 Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 Great, that means housing spivs get to jack their rental prices. Lets just make the system loads more efficient and transfer half my money straight to my owner landlord at source, it'll save me the hassle of walking over to the cash machine. Reminds me about a piece I read about New York cabbies who lease their cabs from cab companies. Fares go up, lease per shift goes up = no difference in income for driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Relaxation Suite Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 They need to double it !! You cannot imagine the damage done to small businesses if they had to double their payroll. But then considering half of Londoners work for the state why not make it £30 an hour - they can just print it after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 You cannot imagine the damage done to small businesses if they had to double their payroll. But then considering half of Londoners work for the state why not make it £30 an hour - they can just print it after all. No half of Londoners don't work for the state , what makes you come out with an irrelavant statement like that ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Relaxation Suite Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 No half of Londoners don't work for the state , what makes you come out with an irrelavant statement like that ? It's 75% of Northen Ireland, isn't it? So what is London? I know it happens to be one of the lowest but when three quarters of people in Ulster are working for Whitehall London could still be quite high. And commenting on public sector is hardly irrelevant because whatever the percentage of PS workers in London, it is the taxpayer who must pay for their wages, including those on minimum. Have you anything constructive to say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 It's 75% of Northen Ireland, isn't it? So what is London? I know it happens to be one of the lowest but when three quarters of people in Ulster are working for Whitehall London could still be quite high. And commenting on public sector is hardly irrelevant because whatever the percentage of PS workers in London, it is the taxpayer who must pay for their wages, including those on minimum. Have you anything constructive to say? Yes very constructive , you just proved my point :- You said half of London worked for the state I said that was a totally irrelevant statement because it is wrong. You then asked me how many it was ? Proved my point that it was an irrelevant statement because you just made it up and when I made my remark you have addmitted that you do not have a clue . Also what has Norhen Ireland got to do with It ? Commenting on public sector is not irrelevant but making up amounts that work in certain part's of the country is. Thankyou Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northwest Smith Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 London has about 21% public sector employment , i'm not sure £15,307.50 Gross/ £12,486.38 Net is enough to live in London though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_austrian Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 Very generous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 London has about 21% public sector employment , i'm not sure £15,307.50 Gross/ £12,486.38 Net is enough to live in London though. Yep you could have a nice house in Chelsea, or Mayfair, Notting Hill , Belgravia, Regent's Park , anywhere in those nice expensive London enclaves. No sorry not a nice house a nice cardborad box ,or park bench. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJAR Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 for effectively £1000 per month take home you could live in london. You would have to share with someone else, use a bike and watch your spending, but it would be doable (I know it would be), but then minimum wage is hardly meant to be luxury is it? Plus most people earning minimum wage are not supporting others nor are they living on their own. What is happening to those that can't get a job on £7.85 per hour I wonder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
athom Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 You cannot imagine the damage done to small businesses if they had to double their payroll. You'll find Miko is a little unrealistic, sort of stubborn in a BA cabin crew way. Like bar staff on the titanic demanding a wage increase as the ship goes down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 You'll find Miko is a little unrealistic, sort of stubborn in a BA cabin crew way. Like bar staff on the titanic demanding a wage increase as the ship goes down. I find that you are very pickey with which post's you answer and those that you don't. Still waiting for you to answer my replies to you the other night , but not holding my breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
athom Posted June 12, 2010 Share Posted June 12, 2010 I find that you are very pickey with which post's you answer and those that you don't. true Still waiting for you to answer my replies to you the other night , but not holding my breath. ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.