Labour and minimum wage
Scroll to see replies
Original post by quentinhamilton
Do you agree with Labour for the upping of minimum wage? what are your opinions?
Yes, i think business can cope with £8 per hour given the tax cuts they've received. That being said the Tories would have it near £7.50 by 2019 anyway so there's not a massive difference.
I don't agree with this living wage stuff though. I support the minimum wage on the basis of what business can afford to pay, not what people need to survive (not least when some assessments of that number have included holidays).
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by ozzyoscy
Isn't that life? Maybe we should drop the minimum wage to £1 per hour. That would be relatively easy for business owners. Wouldn't that be nice?
Perhaps we should increase hours to 80 a week, so it's easier for businesses. And so on.
Perhaps we should increase hours to 80 a week, so it's easier for businesses. And so on.
The minimum wage is not a command for businesses to hire people at a certain rate, it's a ban on businesses hiring people at below that rate. The obvious problem here is that businesses can then just decline to hire people at all. The people most damaged by this are the least productive and competitive workers, not businesses.
If businesses can't afford to pay someone the basic living wage then they shouldn't be in business. Otherwise you might as well just scrap the minimum wage and allow businesses to pay people wages like £1/2 an hour.
But then again a policy like that would be stupid because the government would end up having to give benefits to these people just to ensure they had enough to survive. Which means higher taxes ergo everyone pays.
By allowing businesses to pay people less than what they need to live the government is essentially subsidising their profits with tax money. Of course you could say that it's better to have people in work rather than out of work but then this same argument was used by the Tories in the 90s when labour installed the minimum wage and guess what... Employment pretty much stayed level.
It turns out that by paying their employees a decent wage these employees then had more money to spend. Money to spend on these very businesses thus driving demand and allowing them to expand their businesses.
Let's not also forget that large companies are notorious for underpaying corporation tax (or getting away with paying as little as possible) meaning that by subsidising their profits with worker's tax credits we're actually taking money out of the economy rather than allowing it to recirculate when the wage workers spend their earnings.
If anything, allowing employers to undercharge workers is a false economy and the fact that people's wages have fallen in real terms over the last 5 years is quite likely a driving force behind our horrendously low productivity rates.
But then again a policy like that would be stupid because the government would end up having to give benefits to these people just to ensure they had enough to survive. Which means higher taxes ergo everyone pays.
By allowing businesses to pay people less than what they need to live the government is essentially subsidising their profits with tax money. Of course you could say that it's better to have people in work rather than out of work but then this same argument was used by the Tories in the 90s when labour installed the minimum wage and guess what... Employment pretty much stayed level.
It turns out that by paying their employees a decent wage these employees then had more money to spend. Money to spend on these very businesses thus driving demand and allowing them to expand their businesses.
Let's not also forget that large companies are notorious for underpaying corporation tax (or getting away with paying as little as possible) meaning that by subsidising their profits with worker's tax credits we're actually taking money out of the economy rather than allowing it to recirculate when the wage workers spend their earnings.
If anything, allowing employers to undercharge workers is a false economy and the fact that people's wages have fallen in real terms over the last 5 years is quite likely a driving force behind our horrendously low productivity rates.
Original post by Rakas21
Yes, i think business can cope with £8 per hour given the tax cuts they've received. That being said the Tories would have it near £7.50 by 2019 anyway so there's not a massive difference.
50p is a massive difference when you add it up. This is 50p every hour for every day, week, month and year you work there.
Original post by Observatory
The minimum wage is not a command for businesses to hire people at a certain rate, it's a ban on businesses hiring people at below that rate. The obvious problem here is that businesses can then just decline to hire people at all. The people most damaged by this are the least productive and competitive workers, not businesses.
Your ideal scenario, whether you meant to say it or not, is that businesses pay the lowest possible wage that gives them the biggest budget to hire the most people. The problem is that reduces the wage even more from what is acceptable, people would work for £5 per hour, but that doesn't mean they should be forced to or that's an acceptable wage.
I've never seen a company paying minimum wage who wasn't raking it in, nor flouting human rights and work laws, let alone laws against theft, false inprisonment. Right now, if a company is paying minimum wage, that's a red flag that they're a bad company to work for and don't care about their employees. Many companies are paying way, way above that for entry-level jobs, with vacancies to spare.
I think the conservatives ought to up the minimum wage to the living wage if i'm honest. If your cutting benefits you have to give people an incentive to work - carrot and stick approach. The money saved on welfare could be used to subsidies wages in small businesses that can't afford it.
Original post by Zachary T-H
I think the conservatives ought to up the minimum wage to the living wage if i'm honest. If your cutting benefits you have to give people an incentive to work - carrot and stick approach. The money saved on welfare could be used to subsidies wages in small businesses that can't afford it.
Why do that when not doing so can force people to work for less?
Slavery would help business. Lets do that.
Original post by ozzyoscy
Your ideal scenario, whether you meant to say it or not, is that businesses pay the lowest possible wage that gives them the biggest budget to hire the most people. The problem is that reduces the wage even more from what is acceptable, people would work for £5 per hour, but that doesn't mean they should be forced to or that's an acceptable wage.
I've never seen a company paying minimum wage who wasn't raking it in, nor flouting human rights and work laws, let alone laws against theft, false inprisonment. Right now, if a company is paying minimum wage, that's a red flag that they're a bad company to work for and don't care about their employees. Many companies are paying way, way above that for entry-level jobs, with vacancies to spare.
I've never seen a company paying minimum wage who wasn't raking it in, nor flouting human rights and work laws, let alone laws against theft, false inprisonment. Right now, if a company is paying minimum wage, that's a red flag that they're a bad company to work for and don't care about their employees. Many companies are paying way, way above that for entry-level jobs, with vacancies to spare.
You are imagining a business with a fixed budget and an equal pay for everyone, such that reducing the per person pay results in more total employees with everyone on a lower wage.
What really happens is that businesses' income and therefore wage budget increases with each employee, as each employee does something that produces income for the business. People are employed when the cost of employing them is lower than the income they provide to the business. If people are paid significantly less than the income they bring to the business, however, another business will try to hire them at a higher rate.
Lowering or abolishing the minimum wage would not affect people who are currently paid above the minimum wage. What it would do is making people who are currently not employable at a legal price employable.
I also do not agree that it is better to be unemployed and dependent on welfare than to be employed on a low wage, as you're implying.
Original post by looseseal
What possible reasoning could you ever have for that??
Is the work of someone younger than 23 somehow worth inherently less than that of someone over that age?
Is the work of someone younger than 23 somehow worth inherently less than that of someone over that age?
Currently the minimum for under 21s is £1.37 less than the £6.50 for 21s and above.
Obviously the work you do when you are 20 years old and 11 months is not as good as when you are a month older.
It would be nice to increase it and keep benefits the same, to encourage those on benefits to get a job instead as it will earn them more money, but then realistically will the economy handle laying that extra money? Especially with numpty miliband in charge of the economy, hello economy meltdown again!
Original post by rayquaza17
Currently the minimum for under 21s is £1.37 less than the £6.50 for 21s and above.
Obviously the work you do when you are 20 years old and 11 months is not as good as when you are a month older.
Obviously the work you do when you are 20 years old and 11 months is not as good as when you are a month older.
Ummmm the minimum wage is nowhere near that low for under 21s if they are in a full time job! It's low for apprentices but when I was in proper work at the age of 18 the minimum wage was £5 something
Original post by Physflop
Ummmm the minimum wage is nowhere near that low for under 21s if they are in a full time job! It's low for apprentices but when I was in proper work at the age of 18 the minimum wage was £5 something
£6.50-£1.37=£5.13?
Original post by rayquaza17
£6.50-£1.37=£5.13?
Hahahah apologies I mis read it, I thought you said the minimum wage was £1:37 for under 21s 😂😂
Original post by Physflop
Hahahah apologies I mis read it, I thought you said the minimum wage was £1:37 for under 21s
Haha that would be shocking!!!
To be honest though, it's not far off it for apprentices!
Original post by ozzyoscy
Why do that when not doing so can force people to work for less?
Because, either way, the government will have to pick up the tab if the people can't afford to live. Consumer spending would increase and the economy would strengthen which would be good for the nation as a whole. What is the point in having companies producing goods if people can't afford to consume them? Furthermore; happy, well paid employees are more productive.
I have a question for you, why do you think people should be forced to work for less? We make such a fuss in this country about buying fair trade and ethical products from other countries, shouldn't we want to try and do the same with businesses in our own country?
Edit: Before anybody calls me out for being a filthy lefty, I'm not, I'm conservative. I simply feel that there is an obvious course of action for improving the quality of life of the nation.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Zachary T-H
I have a question for you, why do you think people should be forced to work for less? We make such a fuss in this country about buying fair trade and ethical products from other countries, shouldn't we want to try and do the same with businesses in our own country?
I don't think people should be forced to work for less, I just know that's what most Conservatives would prefer.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Slavery would help business. Lets do that.
Definitely
Original post by Zachary T-H
I think the conservatives ought to up the minimum wage to the living wage if i'm honest. If your cutting benefits you have to give people an incentive to work - carrot and stick approach. The money saved on welfare could be used to subsidies wages in small businesses that can't afford it.
Original post by ozzyoscy
I don't think people should be forced to work for less, I just know that's what most Conservatives would prefer.
Not all conservatives, I am conservative- I realise that if you want to make money you've got to have enough potential customers, that means paying staff well!!
I agree with Labour's stance on raising the minimum wage.
Under this Conservative-led government, we've seen the longest fall in living standards since records began. We don't want a low-wage, low-productivity economy, and raising the minimum wage is one part of the puzzle when addressing inequality and the cost-of-living.
Given the current level of inflation (or, rather, the lack of it), Labour's policy would be a significant increase in real terms, although I believe that they should be raising it to £9 an hour.
Under this Conservative-led government, we've seen the longest fall in living standards since records began. We don't want a low-wage, low-productivity economy, and raising the minimum wage is one part of the puzzle when addressing inequality and the cost-of-living.
Given the current level of inflation (or, rather, the lack of it), Labour's policy would be a significant increase in real terms, although I believe that they should be raising it to £9 an hour.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Help needed: Economics A-level question
- A country produces at a new point within its production possibility curve when:
- Edexcel A Level Economics A Paper 3 (9ECO 03) - 5th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- New Job
- Job as a 17 year old
- [Official Thread] Chancellor Jeremy Hunt to deliver Autumn Statement on Wednesday
- saving £9250 a year on gap year?
- How can people live on minimum wage?
- is it illegal for a potential employer to train you for 12 hours and not be paid?
- Is a labourer a good career
- Matalan Hourly Rate
- Rishi Sunak pledges to remove benefits for people not taking jobs after 12 months
- Philosophy at university!!!
- Apprenticeship wage
- Postgrad Loan - Repaid from Minimum Wage
- NMW Rise from April 2023
- Am I being underpaid? Is this workplace abuse of overtime?
- How much should a student job pay?
- Nvq level 3 whilst working full time
- How is ARU as a university
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 hours ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 4 hours ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
