Quote Originally Posted by Divine Intervention View Post
well thats the thing. why do people feel entitled to have some sort of decent living standard if they dont work hard enough? and decent standards shouldnt be available on benefits. survival should be available. thats about it. no spare money for things like TVs, xbox, gifts, holidays etc. nothing above survival. why should others pay for it?

salary is given based on contribution to the firm not on contribution to society. theres a profit motivation. cleaners produce 0 profit and are a cost centre hence aren't paid much (not to mention most of them are probably gov workers?). Bankers are profit makers (theoretically) for their firms and hence get paid more. Not that I support the banking industry in general....but salary should be based on how much fiscal benefit youre giving to your salary payer.

Besides, im sure if there were less people willing to take those poor *** cleaner salaries (ie no EU & rest of the world unqualified flood), theyd be higher due to a more constricted labour market and people would be more willing to take them up.
While it's technically true that cleaners don't produce profit, it's arguable that they save tons of money by removing issues that would cost even more to clean up. Take a hospital. Full time cleaner on minimum wage costs about 12k/year. However, if they weren't there, you'd get major problems with infections which would cost far more in both costs to clean up + compensation claims/fines. You can't measure value to society (or even a company) based on purely how much money someone makes directly. There are other factors in play.

As far as benefits are concerned, I'm increasingly convinced that the system is in effect a massive bribe to the "underclass" (chavs and such) since if you reduced them to subsistence level only, crime would skyrocket and rioting would replace jeremy kyle as the new form of entertainment.