Discussion

Temat przeniesiony do archwium
1. Minimal rate of 12pln will harm the economy. Discuss.
Seeing as no one has an opinion on this, then I will express mine and see what happens.

Paying the minimum hourly rate harms the economy. An employer only has a certain amount of money which he can distribute among his staff. If he has to pay each person more, then he has to dispose of a person so that his figures agree at the end. Eventually, this means that the remaining staff have to cover that post and they feel put on and decide to leave one by one - the business folds. Or the employer retains all his staff and the customers have to pay more for his products. Customers cannot afford the price and go somewhere cheaper and he does not see the required amount. The business folds.
These are basic economics. No way on earth will the employer cut into his own profit to pay his staff. This is why having a minimum hourly rate is bad for the economy.
But we have had it like that ever since ,someone has to be overpaid only just because someone has to be under-paid. Economy has got any better since we have got ' global market" . Not the best ever way to turn IMHO
Raising the minimum wage has a negative impact on economy. Plain and simple.
it's pretty turbulent ..profits are going down
My point was this:
If I have 5 employees and pay everyone 100 then it costs me 500. I only have 500 to pay everyone, so if I have to pay 150 each, that means that I can only employ 3 people and 2 will be out of work. Those 2 will be a drain on society as have to have some benefits (or they become ill - as many do in Poland). This assumes that the price of my goods stays the same. If I continue to pay 100 then 5 people have a job, if I pay 150 then only 3 people have a job. It is better to have a job that pays less then not to have a job at all.
that's what we got ..simple as that :)
Once we had a group dismissals and at least about a half of stuff has been fired off ,but we didn't get any extra money because of that- without a doubt, it was done deliberately not to pay workers extra benefits because they extended it to some time- It's just called as care about jobs . :( I bet no one else could mastermind it unless those so -called money -pinchers .
edytowany przez Robbertoxx: 24 cze 2016
half of stuff has been fired off może chciałeś ująć: half of the staff has been fired
Yes, it is . " at least half of the staff has been dismissed "
Sometimes I cannot resist thinking they've done the right thing leaving EU ..to flipside this, they were visibly fed up with all those Brussel 's widespread bureaucracy and quite rightly so - tends to be a wake-up call sent out for others . And we won't wait for too long to see it collapse unless they make a turnaround . If not, so -called ' paradise partraited by EU' is set to disatser sooner than later is for all I can say ( not only myself putting lines ) .
edytowany przez Robbertoxx: 27 cze 2016
Many people everywhere make decision which seem/appear to others to be wrong - but they have their own reasons for doing it. Nobody on this earth ever wants to make a decision that they think will ultimately harm them. Bottom line is that people always think of the benefits which a particular decision will bring.
1. There are girls/women who wish they never ever married their partner and men who would cut off their right arm not to be married to the woman they chose. (It seemed a good idea at the time)
2. As someone once said: 'the world belongs to the brave'.
3. When it comes to the British people, they have never liked someone else telling them what to do. Remember they ruled the Empire for many years. Before the Referendum everyone else (leaders of other countries) were 'advising' the British people which way they expected them to vote. That ever works. It would have been better to say - please leave the EU, and then everyone would vote to stay. Simple as that.
Cytat:
When it comes to the British people, they have never liked someone else telling them what to do. Remember they ruled the Empire for many years

Perhaps there 's something in it. They'd ruled a powerful empire through ages ,so it comes naturally a foreign advisers would not be much welcomed - Apart from the above ,EU has failed to level with common citizens and I suspect that might have been among the reasons they said "no"
edytowany przez Robbertoxx: 28 cze 2016
Temat przeniesiony do archwium