|
|
Post by Zany on May 2, 2024 8:43:21 GMT
I think we need a completely new approach to living equality in the Western world. Either close our borders to foreign goods, either literally of by punitive tariffs. And force the public to pay the real cost of employing a British citizen instead of just the few in the service industry. Or look at where the money is going and adjust the taxation to reflect that. Look at the companies who make enormous profits, they are either selling 1, A limited product such as land or Oil or water 2, A government controlled products such as train transport 3, An imported product with low manufacturing costs. There's your list, that's where the money is, that's your target. Targeting leisure to get better pay to people is simply killing off the last local employers in the country. And now they are looking to automate. But before you do any of this, build enough houses so prices come down. That's the biggest thing you could do for the poor. Yes I know some pensioners with a comfortable living from their second home might have to adjust their living standards as rent prices fall, but no one complained when rent prices went through the roof. Also can someone please explain why the young adults with children to raise are almost solely responsible for getting inflation down? Why is interest on mortgages the only lever used to slow spending and lower inflation, why not taxation which could be much more evenly spread and might even work better as it doesn't just stop people with mortgages spending and also raises more money for the government at a time when it generally needs it. Instead of giving it to rich people who have money to lend, often from foreign countries. There, I'm happy now.  |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 2, 2024 9:16:23 GMT
Sorry missed that. And no an independent supermarket could not charge more, it wouldn't be long before competition came in. If they charged ridiculous amounts then yes you are right. If they have a store in an area, then they have a location advantage. Interestingly, the barrier to a competitor would be the price of land in that area |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on May 2, 2024 9:33:43 GMT
Deleted, eronous post
|
|
|
|
Post by equivocal on May 2, 2024 9:35:51 GMT
I'm not sure you've been careful enough when suggesting the government is picking on small businesses to feed the poor.
I am not attempting to argue against or in support of the structure of the economy, nor the pros and cons of automation. (In any event, I assumed you were referring to automating minimum wage jobs.) All I am arguing is that if the minimum wage does not cause a net loss of jobs, enterprises unable to trade profitably whilst paying two thirds of the median wage to their workers need to change their business models or step back to allow resources to be used more efficiently elsewhere.
Just to clarify, by 'trade profitably' I don't mean only over a particular period. There may be longer term issues where paying the minimum is an investment decision for future returns.
I don't think its as simple as 'does the minimum wage cause net loss of jobs. The net loss of jobs is due to two things. Firstly moving manufacturing to lower paid countries and then to automation of the jobs left here. Neither of those are caused by the minimum wage but they do cause the only jobs available to be in the lower paid sectors. Service, pubs, clubs, leisure. All of which are discretionary spend and all of which have limits on what people will pay. So a pub seeing its costs sky rocket to the point of near collapse is not able to also take the hit of another minimum wage rise. Customers simply wont just pay more. So the levelling out effect everyone expects from minimum pay rises is not happening because the industries it most effects were the ones who were tightest in the first place. And yes when a pub closes some minimum wage jobs go, alongside some non minimum wage jobs. And there is another aspect of the minimum wage. Try paying your cook £12.50 an hour when the table clearers are on £11.44. Fact is the minimum wage accelerates the gap. Your cook wants £15.00 your manager wants £22.00 an hour. Now your pubs wage bills are sky rocketing in an industry that barely scrapes by in the first place. And as I say, unlike an importer you don't get to claim back the VAT on your manufacturing costs as the labour needed to pull a pint with a cheery smile is not considered to be part of the manufacture of that pint. (no I don't run a pub)Surely, if a minimum wage change causes no net loss of jobs, then there must be sufficient demand for labour in the market for the available labour at the minimum and concomitant rates arising. Then using your example, the jobs lost in the pub that closes are absorbed in other parts of the market.
I think I accept this may lead to a reduction in the supply of leisure activities potentially making those activities more expensive, but I struggle to see an economic argument for, say, an exemption for pubs from paying the minimum wage.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 2, 2024 12:36:09 GMT
I don't think its as simple as 'does the minimum wage cause net loss of jobs. The net loss of jobs is due to two things. Firstly moving manufacturing to lower paid countries and then to automation of the jobs left here. Neither of those are caused by the minimum wage but they do cause the only jobs available to be in the lower paid sectors. Service, pubs, clubs, leisure. All of which are discretionary spend and all of which have limits on what people will pay. So a pub seeing its costs sky rocket to the point of near collapse is not able to also take the hit of another minimum wage rise. Customers simply wont just pay more. So the levelling out effect everyone expects from minimum pay rises is not happening because the industries it most effects were the ones who were tightest in the first place. And yes when a pub closes some minimum wage jobs go, alongside some non minimum wage jobs. And there is another aspect of the minimum wage. Try paying your cook £12.50 an hour when the table clearers are on £11.44. Fact is the minimum wage accelerates the gap. Your cook wants £15.00 your manager wants £22.00 an hour. Now your pubs wage bills are sky rocketing in an industry that barely scrapes by in the first place. And as I say, unlike an importer you don't get to claim back the VAT on your manufacturing costs as the labour needed to pull a pint with a cheery smile is not considered to be part of the manufacture of that pint. (no I don't run a pub)Surely, if a minimum wage change causes no net loss of jobs, then there must be sufficient demand for labour in the market for the available labour at the minimum and concomitant rates arising. Then using your example, the jobs lost in the pub that closes are absorbed in other parts of the market.
I think I accept this may lead to a reduction in the supply of leisure activities potentially making those activities more expensive, but I struggle to see an economic argument for, say, an exemption for pubs from paying the minimum wage.
At the moment it doesn't. but it will, the only reason poor paid jobs have not been automated is because they are poor paid and its not worth the investment. That's what's happened to a lot of those jobs that were above minimum wage. My own company invested in more computerisation to reduce the work force when wages began climbing in 2023, We increased pay by about 14% to keep good staff and let some 28 staff out of around 150 go. For a while unemployment will remain low, but as these struggling companies pubs etc go under or adapt those jobs will also go. And there will be no getting them back. In the meantime less and less people work in the UK. Not wives happily at home with kids, but students who are now students until they are 18 like it or not. Evermore people taking early retirement as house values make them rich, an unbelievable number off long term sick through physical or mental health issues. A minimum income is a good idea, but the method of achieving it needs to change. |
|
|
|
Post by equivocal on May 2, 2024 14:05:45 GMT
Surely, if a minimum wage change causes no net loss of jobs, then there must be sufficient demand for labour in the market for the available labour at the minimum and concomitant rates arising. Then using your example, the jobs lost in the pub that closes are absorbed in other parts of the market.
I think I accept this may lead to a reduction in the supply of leisure activities potentially making those activities more expensive, but I struggle to see an economic argument for, say, an exemption for pubs from paying the minimum wage.
At the moment it doesn't. but it will, the only reason poor paid jobs have not been automated is because they are poor paid and its not worth the investment. That's what's happened to a lot of those jobs that were above minimum wage. My own company invested in more computerisation to reduce the work force when wages began climbing in 2023, We increased pay by about 14% to keep good staff and let some 28 staff out of around 150 go. For a while unemployment will remain low, but as these struggling companies pubs etc go under or adapt those jobs will also go. And there will be no getting them back. In the meantime less and less people work in the UK. Not wives happily at home with kids, but students who are now students until they are 18 like it or not. Evermore people taking early retirement as house values make them rich, an unbelievable number off long term sick through physical or mental health issues. A minimum income is a good idea, but the method of achieving it needs to change. I am really struggling to rationalize what you say. Apparently many better paid jobs have gone because of automation (I assume you maintain they have not been replaced by other better paid jobs) yet minimum wage is only around two thirds of the median and less than 60% of the average, only around 5% of the workforce are paid minimum wage, and the proportion in employment has increased since the minimum wage was introduced.
Perhaps the difference in our thinking is your ' --those jobs will also go. And there will be no getting them back' and my belief replacements will be created.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 2, 2024 15:22:05 GMT
At the moment it doesn't. but it will, the only reason poor paid jobs have not been automated is because they are poor paid and its not worth the investment. That's what's happened to a lot of those jobs that were above minimum wage. My own company invested in more computerisation to reduce the work force when wages began climbing in 2023, We increased pay by about 14% to keep good staff and let some 28 staff out of around 150 go. For a while unemployment will remain low, but as these struggling companies pubs etc go under or adapt those jobs will also go. And there will be no getting them back. In the meantime less and less people work in the UK. Not wives happily at home with kids, but students who are now students until they are 18 like it or not. Evermore people taking early retirement as house values make them rich, an unbelievable number off long term sick through physical or mental health issues. A minimum income is a good idea, but the method of achieving it needs to change. I am really struggling to rationalize what you say. Apparently many better paid jobs have gone because of automation (I assume you maintain they have not been replaced by other better paid jobs) yet minimum wage is only around two thirds of the median and less than 60% of the average, only around 5% of the workforce are paid minimum wage, and the proportion in employment has increased since the minimum wage was introduced.
Perhaps the difference in our thinking is your ' --those jobs will also go. And there will be no getting them back' and my belief replacements will be created.
Hmm. I'm thinking that the median wage has fallen and that the average wage just reflect both ends of a big gap. How this relates to the minimum wage I'm not sure. But yes you're making me re-think. Are you saying there are as many good jobs as there ever were and all the worry is for nothing. If most jobs pay more than minimum wage and unemployment is so low and its hard to attract staff, makes me wonder why we need a minimum wage. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on May 2, 2024 15:40:48 GMT
Zany, I know you have skin in this game but honestly my view would be 1) it doesn’t feel unreasonable to require employers to pay people £11.44 to clean Loos or man a catering outlet for an hour. 2) yes we need to build more homes as long as those new homes are not in the field opposite my home blocking my rather attractive view. Not sure how you break that cycle. 3) base rate at 5.25% is still pretty low in historical terms. Yes it needs to come down a point or two but I can’t see it coming down to the abnormal virtually nil rates we have seen recently. 1, Its not what the market can bare. But don't worry, soon your local takeaway will have a robot arm will serve you. Careful what you wish for.  One other effect its having is companies offering this type of work to ever younger people, thus putting those would be £11.44 out of work entirely Oh and BTW no one has a specific cleaner anymore. 2, The planning office steer building towards areas where people will complain. Its all part of the conspiracy to keep prices high. 3, 5.25% of your £80,000 home back in our day. 5.25% of a £250,000 home is an entirely different matter. Its not the interest rate its the price of homes in the first place (Same goes for renting.) Unless you are in a government protected home. For the absence of doubt, the bottom part of this post wasn’t me but appears to be Zany trying to come to terms with his new powers as a moderator. Oooh get him!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 2, 2024 15:48:32 GMT
Zany
Tut tut tut
It's something i did a few times on the old forum - it's easy to do accidentally if you have mod powers
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 2, 2024 18:20:42 GMT
Zany, I know you have skin in this game but honestly my view would be 1) it doesn’t feel unreasonable to require employers to pay people £11.44 to clean Loos or man a catering outlet for an hour. 2) yes we need to build more homes as long as those new homes are not in the field opposite my home blocking my rather attractive view. Not sure how you break that cycle. 3) base rate at 5.25% is still pretty low in historical terms. Yes it needs to come down a point or two but I can’t see it coming down to the abnormal virtually nil rates we have seen recently. 1, Its not what the market can bare. But don't worry, soon your local takeaway will have a robot arm will serve you. Careful what you wish for. One other effect its having is companies offering this type of work to ever younger people, thus putting those would be £11.44 out of work entirely Oh and BTW no one has a specific cleaner anymore. 2, The planning office steer building towards areas where people will complain. Its all part of the conspiracy to keep prices high. 3, 5.25% of your £80,000 home back in our day. 5.25% of a £250,000 home is an entirely different matter. Its not the interest rate its the price of homes in the first place (Same goes for renting.) Unless you are in a government protected home. For the absence of doubt, the bottom part of this post wasn’t me but appears to be Zany trying to come to terms with his new powers as a moderator. Oooh get him!!! I'm not a mod. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 2, 2024 18:24:07 GMT
Zany Tut tut tut It's something i did a few times on the old forum - it's easy to do accidentally if you have mod powers  |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 2, 2024 18:27:19 GMT
Beware of the edit button (it's right next to the quote button) |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 2, 2024 18:30:25 GMT
Beware of the edit button (it's right next to the quote button) Ahh yes. Now I see. Can you delete the error please |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 2, 2024 18:36:27 GMT
Beware of the edit button (it's right next to the quote button) Ahh yes. Now I see. Can you delete the error please This is a post demarcation between two lefties - how am I supposed to tell where in the post madness one ends and madness two takes over? You are a mod btw |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 2, 2024 18:47:58 GMT
Ahh yes. Now I see. Can you delete the error please This is a post demarcation between two lefties - how am I supposed to tell where in the post madness one ends and madness two takes over? You are a mod btw Ooherr when was I promoted. Do I get a pay rise? |
|
