Inflation falls further.

Milliband will have to find a new sound bite soon. This 'cost of living crisis' myth won't wash much longer.

So people are not suffering? People are not struggling? People hsve suddenly found that they really can make ends meet?

Must try harder, little troll.

and how much worse is it, genuinely, than it was under Labour? (serious question)

Have a read of thishttp://ftalphaville.ft.com/2013/02/20/1393672/the-real-rate-of-british-inflation/rl

What they are arguing is that inflation on essentials is much worse than the headline rate and also that as wage inflation has consistently been lower than this "real" rate of inflation we all feel poorer regrdless of what the inflation rate is suposed to be.

It certainly mirrors my perception of what things in the weekly shop cost. I am no statistician but for example I am sure if some dramatic drop in the cost of petrol means the headline rate drops anyone who doesn't drive will stick two fingers up at any rejoicing at the new low rate they themselves are not enjoying.

Tablet computers are also in the basket of goods used to compile the official headline inflation rate. We buy one of those on a weekly basis don't we!

Worse though for the overall picture is that wages have not kept pace with prices even if you ignore the essentials index. So that alone will make people feel worse off especially as they get naff all on interests on savings.

One thing missing from the essential index and (I think, though I could be wrong) the headline rate is rent. Add in the effect of loss of child benefit for some and the reduction in other benefits and you get the picture.

Here in Chester if the council have their way I will from Sept 2015 face a £1200 a year charge for transport of my Austisic son to school.

That will make my personal inflation rate much higher than other people with the same income won't it.

Well this graph was obviously a yearly one and you chose to quote the 2011 figures and stated it was the 2010 figure. Your apology is beginning to look a bit weaselly. You ability to read graphs is matched by your ability to see invisible shocked members of the public on CCTV film!





You have a short memory. Was this your pre-warning of this tactic? Pass the salt I need a big pinch again.



Not so - you made a big point that the GDP PPP had fallen since the coalition came to office. So what it changes is the exact opposite of what you claimed. Obviously not of great concern to you. Is this what you keep referring to as "Guff"

Was it? Obviously? Not the graph I looked at. It didn't show a yearly figure. It was apparently wrongly labelled. But I've accepted that point already. As I said it makes little difference to the overall picture for most people, especially if you start looking at regional variances.



You can bluster and misdirect all you want, you've been shown up on the Mitchell thread through trying to change the whole point of the debate, the same way you have here. No doubt there will be further attempted misdirection and bluster in your next post. Though quite how salt and using the word "FACT" in capital letters made it into the debate I really don't know.

The horrible George Osborne who is generally a horrible man who likes to attack the poor and most vulnerable in society has said today he wants an above inflation rise to the minimum wage.

Cost of Living Crisis Myth.....

Laudable ...
but small increases in a small amount of money is a very small amount of money.

Edit:
This is a proposed increase to seven pounds from six pounds thirty one pence.
That will be somewhere near the 11% pay rise the MPs are going to get.

So the MPs can claim low paid workers are getting the SAME pay rise.
lol

Just as I predicted before xmas, and just as I predicted before xmas in the same speech he also kicked a live shell in Vince Cables trench saying that he personally thought there should be an above inflation increase to the minimum wage but of course it wasn't up to the chancellor to suggest that, it was the business secretary who should push it through, he also slipped in a couple of references to "the great recession" and on one of those mentioned that it was Labours "great recession", he's lining up his soundbites early.

Just a little over twelve months from now they will all be clearing their desks ready for the rush back to the constituency's, Osbourne has twelve months to dangle some carrots, get his catchphrases correct, polish up the propaganda, expect a lot more of the same starting right now.

Personally I think they will convince enough people to get a second term on their own.

It is such a myth Osborne has had to suggest he'd like to see a rise in the minimum wage. He is not setting the agenda he is reacting too it.

It is also not up to him anyway. The level is set by the low pay commission set up by Labour deliberately to remove the decision from politicians so they couldn't give it a nice rise just before a general election.

In other words however much it goes up by won't be down to what Osborne says he thinks it should be.

However much it goes up by this will be before, if re-elected, he cuts £12bn from the social secuity budget which will land on the same working poor who are paid the minimum wage as he has ring fenced just about everyone else in receipt of money from the social security budget from the cuts (such as pensioners).

Anyone who falls for this is thick.

Also of note is the day before Osborne came out with this he, his party and the Lib Dems voted against a Labour motion to ensure the enforcement of the minimum wage, restore its value and encourage (not force) employers to work towards the living wage. That was defeated by a majority of 70.

A government amendment, in the name of the Prime Minister, noted that the minimum wage has increased each year since 2010. It was approved by a majority of 70.

In other words one day there is no need to increase it to restore its value and the day after a 10% rise is in order.

Clearly, Osborne is a hypocrite.

Excellent, so the reason that people are earning below living wage and therefore struggling to make ends meet is down to the Labour party. That's up there with the abolition of the 10p tax rate. Vote Labour, screw the poor.

I think it's disgusting they want to put the lowest paid workers up to £11,000 per annum.
I've managed quite comfortably on last years £3,500 jobseekers allowance.
I mean, really, what will they spend all their extra on?

He's a man who changes his mind as often as the wind changes. Only last week he spoke out against rises.

Are there any elections coming up?

You obviously have trouble with English. In particular just what the word "minimum" means. I'll give you a clue. The word minimum in this context means the least allowable wage. It doesn't set a limit or a maximum.

Hence your comment above is pretty moronic and not anywhere near as clever as you thought it was when you posted it.