"Fredxxx" wrote in message
news
On 17/11/2017 11:58, Fredxxx wrote:
On 17/11/2017 11:42, bm wrote:
"tim..." wrote in message
news

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:
1) Benefits on offer to the "wont work" are far too generous if an
unemployed person can say "I wouldn't get out of bed for 7.50 an
hour"
and/or "I rather spend the time at home with my girlfriend". We need
to
systematically reduce benefits for the fit and healthy the longer
they
are on benefits.

I'd love to see the likes of you live on 7.50 an hour. But it will be
the
usual 'don't do as I do, but do as I say'.

1200 per month, perhaps 1000 after taxes

3-400 on a room in a shared house

6-700 for other expenses

seems perfectly adequate to me

When starting out in your career that's what you have to do

and yes it IS what I did

7.50? You don't know you're born.
I started on 2s 6d per hr.

How many loaves of bread would that have bought?

In 1914 this article suggest it was the equivalent of 1p.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/n...ys-Lloyds.html

It looks as if 2s 6d was quite a bit.

Um someone in a job on 2s 6d per week in 1914 would be 120 now

are you suggesting that is the case?

tim