Turn on thread page Beta

The minimum wage promotes more discrimination than it alleviates. watch

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Science99999)
    However, you need to consider other factors. You cannot simply correalte a relationship with MW with economic success. You haven't provided any evidence, just names of Scandinavian countries that are known boast a plethora of advantages in the quality of life and economic success.

    1) They provide a better education system
    2) The quality of life is much better primarily because of diet, levels of high taxation, which promote growth and development in infrastructure
    3) Their smaller populations such as Luxembourg, mean that the levels of income are statistically higher.
    4) The number of immigrants are signficantly lower
    5) Sweden isn't menitioned because they're beginning to see down turn

    6) India? China? African countries? Pakistan? Afghanistan? LEDCs? The majority of poorer countries, without economic stability, growing levels of poverty and levels of slavery all have no MW. Middle eastern countries thrive on indian slavery to construc ttheir hotels. Exploitation is rife in these corrupt and poor countries
    Yeah, because if they implemented a MW they'd simply serve to add to the droves of unemployed already extant in their economies. They have all those problems for a myriad of reasons and not having the MW is certainly not one of them. I mean seriously, why would not implementing a price control - which is all the MW is - make them poor?

    As to 2), do you think taxation in Britain is low compared to these countries? On what basis?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Axiomasher)
    When the Labour Party were on the verge of introducing the minimum wage in the UK there were, I remember, plenty of apparent 'experts', economic and otherwise, making it known that there would be a terrible recession as a result but it didn't really happen. Sometimes people let their ideological orientation lead them to conclusions that aren't evidenced in the complexities and nuances of economic reality.
    Yes, and sometimes people let their ideological orientation ignore factors, such as whether the MW is high enough to actually do any of that, or whether it's just a cosmetic sticker label below what the market will bear, e.g. during an economic boom, when economic activity as a whole is elevated.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Axiomasher)
    When the Labour Party were on the verge of introducing the minimum wage in the UK there were, I remember, plenty of apparent 'experts', economic and otherwise, making it known that there would be a terrible recession as a result but it didn't really happen. Sometimes people let their ideological orientation lead them to conclusions that aren't evidenced in the complexities and nuances of economic reality.
    Can't comment too much, not too educated on your example, but I can agree sure.

    However, there are different circumstances for everything, I can say that much. introducing the minimum wage is very different from making the minimum wage a living wage, especially in today's political climate.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TCA2b)
    Yeah, because if they implemented a MW they'd simply serve to add to the droves of unemployed already extant in their economies. They have all those problems for a myriad of reasons and not having the MW is certainly not one of them. I mean seriously, why would not implementing a price control - which is all the MW is - make them poor?

    As to 2), do you think taxation in Britain is low compared to these countries? On what basis?
    You named the Scandinavian countries with the highest rates of taxatio in the world, exceeding 40/50% on average.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HighOnGoofballs)
    Can't comment too much, not too educated on your example, but I can agree sure.

    However, there are different circumstances for everything, I can say that much. introducing the minimum wage is very different from making the minimum wage a living wage, especially in today's political climate.
    As I noted, politicians and particularly Treasury ministers are usually crafty enough to know to set the MW at a level where it can cause minimum disruption but still seem more than just a token. For it to have catastrophic consequences it would need to be set above market levels and also outside of boom conditions, where the market wage is temporarily elevated. If it causes no more than say 1 - 2% unemployment on aggregate, even that can be passed off as "business as usual" as far as politicians are concerned.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Science99999)
    You named the Scandinavian countries with the highest rates of taxatio in the world, exceeding 40/50% on average.
    No, I didn't name them, another poster did, however you're probably referencing nothing more than income taxes. Britain also has marginal tax rates that go into 40% and much higher depending on your earnings levels, nevermind all the OTHER taxes that one must pay in addition to that. Nonetheless, it's not really an argument that works in favour of the MW, if anything it means they have disposable income that is effectively lower and still get by without the MW.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HighOnGoofballs)
    To be honest, you made a baseless assumption, proceeded to call me a troll and my argument nonsense, telling me that it would never and when I fired back with irrefutable evidence, you claim 'i can't retain information'. I mean, in essence, I've proved your claim that the lack of a minimum wage would be a disaster, whole-heartedly, and utterly WRONG. You'd have to be knowingly ignorant to simply shrug that off and double down.

    To address the actual point of your comment, it doesn't matter whether these countries had minimum wages, to begin with, or not. You claimed it would be a disaster if minimum wage laws got repealed, and yet these countries are prospering. If they weren't, then I'd concede and you'd be right, but that's not what's happening. At all.
    How is a list of countries “irrefutable evidence” lmao. You’ve proved nothing, still not managed to reply to the benefit system supporting and helping those who can’t find work, the poverty that will be created by people working full time and not being paid enough to live, the way workers in China are treated (a country without minimum wage, who abuses workers).

    It does matter if they had minimum wage to begin with, because again, abolishing something is different to never having it. You’ve shown no proof or evidence that these countries are prospering because of not having minimum wage, and there are plenty of countries where not having minimum wage is resulting in the exploitation of it’s people.

    Science99999 made some excellent points in response to your list of countries who are allegedly successful because there’s no minimum wage (which I still think is bonkers if you care about people’s quality of life).

    (Original post by Science99999)
    However, you need to consider other factors. You cannot simply correalte a relationship with MW with economic success. You haven't provided any evidence, just names of Scandinavian countries that are known boast a plethora of advantages in the quality of life and economic success.

    1) They provide a better education system
    2) The quality of life is much better primarily because of diet, levels of high taxation, which promote growth and development in infrastructure
    3) Their smaller populations such as Luxembourg, mean that the levels of income are statistically higher.
    4) The number of immigrants are signficantly lower
    5) Sweden isn't menitioned because they're beginning to see down turn

    6) India? China? African countries? Pakistan? Afghanistan? LEDCs? The majority of poorer countries, without economic stability, growing levels of poverty and levels of slavery all have no MW. Middle eastern countries thrive on indian slavery to construc ttheir hotels. Exploitation is rife in these corrupt and poor countries
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Science99999)
    However, you need to consider other factors. You cannot simply correalte a relationship with MW with economic success. You haven't provided any evidence, just names of Scandinavian countries that are known boast a plethora of advantages in the quality of life and economic success.

    1) They provide a better education system
    2) The quality of life is much better primarily because of diet, levels of high taxation, which promote growth and development in infrastructure
    3) Their smaller populations such as Luxembourg, mean that the levels of income are statistically higher.
    4) The number of immigrants are signficantly lower
    5) Sweden isn't menitioned because they're beginning to see down turn

    6) India? China? African countries? Pakistan? Afghanistan? LEDCs? The majority of poorer countries, without economic stability, growing levels of poverty and levels of slavery all have no MW. Middle eastern countries thrive on indian slavery to construc ttheir hotels. Exploitation is rife in these corrupt and poor countries
    My comment was in response to someone who claimed that repealing the minimum wage would be disastrous. The most radical thing I said was that the abolishment of it, CONTRIBUTED to (not was responsible for) happiness and economic prosperity. My comment and examples used were simply there to highlight that societies can function well without a minimum wage, something that a commenter above didn't seem to believe.

    As for your comment, I agree with you. There are definitely other factors, obviously, that contribute towards the success of the countries I mentioned, but minimum wage is definitely one of those factors. Furthermore, I think it's important to note that a lot of the RICHEST countries don't have minimum wages.

    Also, as for the example you gave, sure those countries don't have minimum wages...but ill tell you what - they'd be a lot worse off it the government suddenly told employers they had to pay workers a minimum amount of cash.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cat_mac)
    How is a list of countries “irrefutable evidence” lmao. You’ve proved nothing, still not managed to reply to the benefit system supporting and helping those who can’t find work, the poverty that will be created by people working full time and not being paid enough to live, the way workers in China are treated (a country without minimum wage, who abuses workers).

    It does matter if they had minimum wage to begin with, because again, abolishing something is different to never having it. You’ve shown no proof or evidence that these countries are prospering because of not having minimum wage, and there are plenty of countries where not having minimum wage is resulting in the exploitation of it’s people.

    Science99999 made some excellent points in response to your list of countries who are allegedly successful because there’s no minimum wage (which I still think is bonkers if you care about people’s quality of life).

    Well it is irrefutable evidence in the context in which it was given. You claimed a minimum wage wouldn’t work. I gave you cases in which it has. Case closed. I don’t see why you’re having such trouble understanding this.

    Regarding China, I think a minimum wage should be put in place there. Labour is a market, but there is too high of a demand (high population) and too less of a supply (not enough jobs). So a minimum wage could be good.

    My case, is that here in the UK, it should be abolished.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    The minimum wage is something that my government created in the UK and overall it has been a occupational success.
    Meaning that it has been interpreted in many ways but the moral principle of the minimum wage is to create equality and for a sustainable income in the workplace which is what the conservative government are failing to enhance and are trying their best to destroy.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HighOnGoofballs)
    Well it is irrefutable evidence in the context in which it was given. You claimed a minimum wage wouldn’t work. I gave you cases in which it has. Case closed. I don’t see why you’re having such trouble understanding this.

    Regarding China, I think a minimum wage should be put in place there. Labour is a market, but there is too high of a demand (high population) and too less of a supply (not enough jobs). So a minimum wage could be good.

    My case, is that here in the UK, it should be abolished.
    If their countries were prospering because they abolished minimum wage, you’d have a point. As far as I can tell and as far as you’ve indicated, these countries never had a minimum wage to abolish. They also prosper for many other reasons, nothing you’ve shown indicates that their success has any relation to not having minimum wage.

    “My case, is that here in the UK, it should be abolished.” So when you bring up other countries it’s “irrefutable evidence” of your point, but when someone else does you shift focus back to the UK.

    There are countries in the world with and without minimum wage. If you have anything to show correlation between abolishing minimum wage and positive change in the country, i’m all ears.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cat_mac)
    If their countries were prospering because they abolished minimum wage, you’d have a point. As far as I can tell and as far as you’ve indicated, these countries never had a minimum wage to abolish. They also prosper for many other reasons, nothing you’ve shown indicates that their success has any relation to not having minimum wage.

    “My case, is that here in the UK, it should be abolished.” So when you bring up other countries it’s “irrefutable evidence” of your point, but when someone else does you shift focus back to the UK.

    There are countries in the world with and without minimum wage. If you have anything to show correlation between abolishing minimum wage and positive change in the country, i’m all ears.
    My replies to you, never stated once that abolishing a minimum would lead to exponential economic growth. The reason why I even used the example of those countries was simply to RESPOND TO YOU!!!! jesus. How many time do I have to say this? You claimed it couldn't work. I claimed it can, simply because it has not led to any negative consequences in the examples I gave. Simple as that. I've not even begun to make my case for why getting rid of a minimum wage would be economically prosperous.
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HighOnGoofballs)
    ...I think it's important to note that a lot of the RICHEST countries don't have minimum wages...
    There are two potential issues here. Firstly, each country will have a unique and no-doubt complex set of circumstances which contribute to its economic functioning so we can't simply compare them as if they are all more-or-less the same in terms of things like resources, historical manufacture, ease of trade, social and cultural norms and so on. Secondly, it's just as possible that the absence of a MW is the result of a country being, for whatever reasons, wealthy, rather than it being a cause of the wealth.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Axiomasher)
    There are two potential issues here. Firstly, each country will have a unique and no-doubt complex set of circumstances which contribute to its economic functioning so we can't simply compare them as if they are all more-or-less the same in terms of things like resources, historical manufacture, ease of trade, social and cultural norms and so on. Secondly, it's just as possible that the absence of a MW is the result of a country being, for whatever reasons, wealthy, rather than it being a cause of the wealth.
    I agree with the majority of what you said. But whether it's the former or later, they all have ridiculously high HDIs and the quality of life there is excellent so I think it makes little difference if the MR is a result or a cause; one thing IS clear, it not had the negative consequences that other commenters here think it would have.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HighOnGoofballs)
    My replies to you, never stated once that abolishing a minimum would lead to exponential economic growth. The reason why I even used the example of those countries was simply to RESPOND TO YOU!!!! jesus. How many time do I have to say this? You claimed it couldn't work. I claimed it can, simply because it has not led to any negative consequences in the examples I gave. Simple as that. I've not even begun to make my case for why getting rid of a minimum wage would be economically prosperous.
    Jeeeesus christ. I only commented on the thread because you said minimum wage was determined by skill, which it clearly isn’t. This only got to this point because your replies drew the conversation in a different direction. Maybe if you actually replied to my points instead of avoiding them and changing the subject it wouldn’t have got this whack.

    You said minimum wage laws increase discrimination and that minimum wage is by skill, not age. My initial problem was with that. Maybe this is a problem with how you relay your point but honestly I can’t be tossed with this anymore. You can’t run a race against someone who’s swimming.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HighOnGoofballs)
    All jobs, no matter what age, are given to someone by determining how good they are at performing them. Employers don't hire you because of your age, they hire you because of your skill. They pay you (the minimum wage) according to your age sure, but not hire you. And you need to be hired to be paid, surely we can agree on that !

    A 25-year-old, with no GCSE qualification, is going to have a tremendously difficult time at getting hired at Tescos for example. He cannot get hired, because, in the eyes of the Tesco Manager, he does not deserve to be paid the minimum wage because he's not skilled enough.

    According to you, if you're old enough, you get the job no question asked, which is not the case. You get hired because of your skill level. And you get paid, when you get hired.
    That's not really a relevant argument, since the demands of the job won't be any different just because the employer starts paying less for it. The same level of skill would still be required, and the same people would still be hired, they just wouldn't get paid as much.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beth_H)
    That's not really a relevant argument, since the demands of the job won't be any different just because the employer starts paying less for it. The same level of skill would still be required, and the same people would still be hired, they just wouldn't get paid as much.
    And what happens when employers decide to pay them less?

    1. People will leave
    2. The employees won't be as effective, leading to the company going bankrupt
    3. Employees will go on strike.
    4. Rival businesses will offer better rates, and the company will be forced to either raise wages or lose to its competition
    5. Company will get an awful reputation

    Among many other negative consequences. It would be corporate suicide for a company to pay its workes less than the minimum wage and it simply wouldn't happen.
 
 
 
Poll
Is the Big Bang theory correct?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.