The lowest paid have made the largest gains in income, despite what you've been
told by the usual lying propagandists who would have you believe that "John Key's mates are raking in all the gains".

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/85207111/lowestincome-people-had-biggest-annual-payrise-data-shows

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On 2016-10-11, JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> wrote:

The lowest paid have made the largest gains in income, despite what you've

been told by the usual lying propagandists who would have you believe that "John Key's mates are raking in all the gains".

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/85207111/lowestincome-people-had-biggest-annual-payrise-data-shows

Quote from the article

Infometrics economist Gareth Kiernan said the increase could have been
driven by the minimum wage increase or the fact that people were working
more hours.

It is statements like this that leave wondering if they are better off.
After all, taking the 5% talked about in the article. 5% of 40 is 2 hours
extra per week. Not hard to do if one does not clock off.

Also a % of a small amount is smaller than the same % of a larg(er) amount
and the lager amount folks do not really need the money as they have some buffer against the living from pay day to pay day.

One could also arge that the "large" pay increase to the low paid only shows that they got their by the Governments policies and now the limit has been reached.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 17:34:29 UTC+13, Gordon wrote:

On 2016-10-11, JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> wrote:

The lowest paid have made the largest gains in income, despite what you've

been told by the usual lying propagandists who would have you believe that "John Key's mates are raking in all the gains".

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/85207111/lowestincome-people-had-biggest-annual-payrise-data-shows

Quote from the article

Infometrics economist Gareth Kiernan said the increase could have been
driven by the minimum wage increase or the fact that people were working
more hours.

It is statements like this that leave wondering if they are better off.
After all, taking the 5% talked about in the article. 5% of 40 is 2 hours extra per week. Not hard to do if one does not clock off.

Also a % of a small amount is smaller than the same % of a larg(er) amount

Wow thanks for pointing out the obvious!

and the lager amount folks do not really need the money as they have some buffer against the living from pay day to pay day.

Whether the higher paid "need" it is utterly irrelevant and it is not up to you
or I to determine their "need".

One could also arge that the "large" pay increase to the low paid only shows that they got their by the Governments policies and now the limit has been reached.

One could indeed argue such a thing, if one was desperate enough to grasp at such a straw.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)