What do you feel when you see the homeless on the street?
I've finally remembered something I want to blog about at a time when I am actually near my computer and ready to blog. It's a miracle!
The bill abolishing youth wages is New Zealand was passed two days ago. It's not in it's original form because it couldn't get the political support but it's near enough. From April 2008 people under the age of 18 will get paid the same minimum wage as those over the age of 18 once they have worked in their job for 3 months or worked 200 hours, whichever comes first.
I love Labour. Don't get me wrong with what I am about to write. Labour is the party I support, the party I have always supported and will continue to support in all likelihood. I believe in what they stand for which is, in essence, equality. I don't think that those who earn lots of money already should be given tax breaks while the poor people, the one's who need the government's help, are left to suffer. I am happy to have a little less money in my pocket if it means someone who really needs it benefits from that. Sure, I know it doesn't always work like that. There are people on benefits who don't need to be (I know some of them) and people who take advantage of government assistance because they are too lazy to make an effort themselves. But I like to believe (and maybe it's a naive belief) that there are more people out there who really, truly, need that assistance than there are people who take advantage. If it was a choice between paying higher tax knowing that some people who deserve it get benefit and some people who don't deserve it also benefit or not paying higher tax and knowing that everyone who really needs it is missing out then I would choose the first option everytime. I will continue to support Labour until their policies do not match what I desire from a government (ie looking after the little guys) or until I am certain there is no-one left in this country who needs government assistance. Since I have no doubt that there will always be people who need a little help now and then, I guess I will be a Labour supporter forever unless their policies change significantly.
However, despite my staunch left-wing views, I do not agree with continually raising the minimum wage and I REALLY don't agree with abolishing youth rates. Why not? Because economically it doesn't make sense. It hurts middle income earners without giving any real benefit to low income earners and that just seems stupid to me. Sure, I can see how it works in theory but that isn't how it works in actuality. Everytime the minimum wage is increased so are the prices of products and services that rely on cheap labour. If you don't believe me then watch the prices of takeaways, movies and other entertainment for the 3-6 months surrounding the next minimum wage hike. They'll go up, I guarantee it.
I've been on a salary now for the past 3 or 4 minimum wage increases and my salary has not been raised by the same amount. So, minimum wage earners are getting closer to what I earn if I broke my salary down to a 40 hour a week wage. So yes, the gap between me, a middle income earner, and minimum wage earners is getting smaller. But minimum wage earners are not benefiting because prices of things they spend their money on are going up to match the increase in minimum wage and they have the same amount of money in their pocket. I'm certainly not benefiting, I'm suffering because I'm not earning any more money but prices are increasing so I have less money in my pocket. Increasing the minimum wage certainly looks good on paper and makes it look like the government are really working hard on improving the lives of low-income earners but really it's all fucking bullshit.
The abolishing of youth rates is also bullshit. Yes, some under 18 year olds will still get hired but there is no way they will be hired in the same numbers that they are now. If you had the choice between an over 18 year old, ie someone with a little life experience, who isn't at school so doesn't have to be rostered around that and who is just expected to be a bit more mature OR an under 18 year old, you're going to go for the over-18 year old nine times out of ten. In my experience (and it's actually quite a lot of experience since I've spent the last 6 years supervising a mix of 15-25ish year-olds) the over 18 year olds are the far better workers, the far more reliable workers and just the overall better choice. I'm not saying EVERY over 18 year old is better than EVERY under 18 year old because that's sure as hell not the case. But if you didn't know the people and were just having to go off a short interview then unless the over-18 year old really screws up their interview they are going to be picked because it's the safer bet and when it comes to hiring staff (in the type of industry kids can get jobs in anyway) you always want to take the safer option.
The kids love it right now because they don't understand that they are not the best choice for a job. Of course they think they are a good choice, I thought I was a good choice when I was that age. I now realise that I was an okay choice, a cheap choice, but not a great choice. With a few more years of life under my belt I certainly became a far more reliable person and this is the way it is with most people.
It sucks but it's life. The bill is a stupid idea and is, in the end, not going to help anyone. In fact, I think it will probably do a lot of harm to our youth since having a job is a pretty good way of maturing someone. It's a pity that often people can't see passed the dollar signs and actually look at the long-term effects. The young people this helps will be the future voters, that's what Labour are looking at. The kids themselves are too busy looking at the dollar signs to think it through. Hell, it's a great strategy really since it will come into effect long enough before the next election for a huge number of 17 year olds that are already employed to reap the benefits for a few months then turn 18 and vote for the government that gave them that chance. Eventually the kids will realise they've been gypped but by then it'll be far too late. share this: facebook
The bill abolishing youth wages is New Zealand was passed two days ago. It's not in it's original form because it couldn't get the political support but it's near enough. From April 2008 people under the age of 18 will get paid the same minimum wage as those over the age of 18 once they have worked in their job for 3 months or worked 200 hours, whichever comes first.
I love Labour. Don't get me wrong with what I am about to write. Labour is the party I support, the party I have always supported and will continue to support in all likelihood. I believe in what they stand for which is, in essence, equality. I don't think that those who earn lots of money already should be given tax breaks while the poor people, the one's who need the government's help, are left to suffer. I am happy to have a little less money in my pocket if it means someone who really needs it benefits from that. Sure, I know it doesn't always work like that. There are people on benefits who don't need to be (I know some of them) and people who take advantage of government assistance because they are too lazy to make an effort themselves. But I like to believe (and maybe it's a naive belief) that there are more people out there who really, truly, need that assistance than there are people who take advantage. If it was a choice between paying higher tax knowing that some people who deserve it get benefit and some people who don't deserve it also benefit or not paying higher tax and knowing that everyone who really needs it is missing out then I would choose the first option everytime. I will continue to support Labour until their policies do not match what I desire from a government (ie looking after the little guys) or until I am certain there is no-one left in this country who needs government assistance. Since I have no doubt that there will always be people who need a little help now and then, I guess I will be a Labour supporter forever unless their policies change significantly.
However, despite my staunch left-wing views, I do not agree with continually raising the minimum wage and I REALLY don't agree with abolishing youth rates. Why not? Because economically it doesn't make sense. It hurts middle income earners without giving any real benefit to low income earners and that just seems stupid to me. Sure, I can see how it works in theory but that isn't how it works in actuality. Everytime the minimum wage is increased so are the prices of products and services that rely on cheap labour. If you don't believe me then watch the prices of takeaways, movies and other entertainment for the 3-6 months surrounding the next minimum wage hike. They'll go up, I guarantee it.
I've been on a salary now for the past 3 or 4 minimum wage increases and my salary has not been raised by the same amount. So, minimum wage earners are getting closer to what I earn if I broke my salary down to a 40 hour a week wage. So yes, the gap between me, a middle income earner, and minimum wage earners is getting smaller. But minimum wage earners are not benefiting because prices of things they spend their money on are going up to match the increase in minimum wage and they have the same amount of money in their pocket. I'm certainly not benefiting, I'm suffering because I'm not earning any more money but prices are increasing so I have less money in my pocket. Increasing the minimum wage certainly looks good on paper and makes it look like the government are really working hard on improving the lives of low-income earners but really it's all fucking bullshit.
The abolishing of youth rates is also bullshit. Yes, some under 18 year olds will still get hired but there is no way they will be hired in the same numbers that they are now. If you had the choice between an over 18 year old, ie someone with a little life experience, who isn't at school so doesn't have to be rostered around that and who is just expected to be a bit more mature OR an under 18 year old, you're going to go for the over-18 year old nine times out of ten. In my experience (and it's actually quite a lot of experience since I've spent the last 6 years supervising a mix of 15-25ish year-olds) the over 18 year olds are the far better workers, the far more reliable workers and just the overall better choice. I'm not saying EVERY over 18 year old is better than EVERY under 18 year old because that's sure as hell not the case. But if you didn't know the people and were just having to go off a short interview then unless the over-18 year old really screws up their interview they are going to be picked because it's the safer bet and when it comes to hiring staff (in the type of industry kids can get jobs in anyway) you always want to take the safer option.
The kids love it right now because they don't understand that they are not the best choice for a job. Of course they think they are a good choice, I thought I was a good choice when I was that age. I now realise that I was an okay choice, a cheap choice, but not a great choice. With a few more years of life under my belt I certainly became a far more reliable person and this is the way it is with most people.
It sucks but it's life. The bill is a stupid idea and is, in the end, not going to help anyone. In fact, I think it will probably do a lot of harm to our youth since having a job is a pretty good way of maturing someone. It's a pity that often people can't see passed the dollar signs and actually look at the long-term effects. The young people this helps will be the future voters, that's what Labour are looking at. The kids themselves are too busy looking at the dollar signs to think it through. Hell, it's a great strategy really since it will come into effect long enough before the next election for a huge number of 17 year olds that are already employed to reap the benefits for a few months then turn 18 and vote for the government that gave them that chance. Eventually the kids will realise they've been gypped but by then it'll be far too late. share this: facebook
This entry was posted
on Thursday, September 06, 2007 at 10:25 PM.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment