EU law originally limited the right to free movement to those moving for the purposes of
work or self-employment. In the early 1990s, free movement rights were extended to other
categories: students, retired persons and economically self-sufficient persons. Since then, the
Court of Justice has emphasized that free movement is a fundamental right of EU citizens,
regardless of the reason why an individual decides to live in another Member State.
Consequently, in 2001, the European Commission proposed replacing the various laws covering
workers, students, etc. with a single Directive on the free movement rights of all EU
citizens.

The welfare system is now so hideously complicated that, as we see in this case, you end up taking thousands in tax from the lowest paid in order to give the money back as handouts from the state. Even some Labour ministers are questioning the logic of using Tax Credits as a government subsidy for employers who pay low wages.

I can see the argument for a minimum wage if that is what it is – but the present system where it is effectively a method not of helping the low paid or business but a way of protecting tax revenue is not really helping anyone.

As for your support for yet more government borrowing, well only a spokesman for the Labour Party could believe that the recipe for a crisis brought on by excess borrowing is yet more borrowing.

And when the borrowing and printing money doesn’t work what is plan ‘B’?

I don’t think we can ‘tax ourselves to prosperity’. I think we are, however, better off using the government means of borrowing to stimulate the economy and to preserve incomes as much as possible.

If companies can’t cope with the minimum wage (with the falling value of the £, it becomes more competitive anyway), it’s because their financial model is not working. The main factors there are not wages, but demand and the difficulty of getting credit.

We should concentrate on those.

But if you think that cutting wages so that the taxpayer has to further subsidise low-paying employers is a good idea, isn’t it _you_ who wants the taxpayer to pay for ‘prosperity’?

than again……

By lowering costs on the employer you make him more able to compete – your view that the UK can tax its way to prosperity is mistaken in IMHO.

I do agree that we need to see disposable incomes increase – perhaps restricting unskilled immigration which the government has used to keep pay low might be an idea? – after all even some in your own party think it time that happened.

From my reading of Chope’s statements, he is suggesting a race to the bottom. The ‘freedom’ to take a paycut is a fallacy – people only take a pay cut under duress. Those who can least afford to do that are the lower paid. Also, the lower end of the scale is the point at which we really need to see disposable incomes increase, rather than decrease, in order to stimulate the economy.

So you admit you are a fascist…interesting! Do you look good in black or is more a slimming thing?

But they seem to be strikingly like yours…….