Bats":bcz1na85 said:It's not "more cash in the economy", it's the same amount of cash, just coming to people as a wage packet rather than an in-work dole packet. Purchasing power is the same so a wage-price spiral doesn't apply here, even if you accept that particular economic theory as true.
Society doesn't have to pay anything. Maybe if we stopped paying absurd housing benefits and mental tax credits employers would pay more, or if they don't the market could find lower cost solutions. It wasn't so long ago Glasgow was full of 'single ends'- a room and a kitchen for just those situations.Bats":auug1kfi said:If a worker costs, say, £20k a year, and the employer only pays £10k, that's another £10k that society has to pay in stuff like housing benefits and working tax credits and stuff.
jonnugget69":1kzz772k said:[
It will apply because companies need to have a certain level of profitability to remain solvent. And the economy needs them to do well. For every Apple and Google there are a multitude of SMEs Creating only small profit, or none at all. Even a large multi-national would be considered to be doing ok at 6/7% profit - so the extra cost will be borne by the consumer in the long run. Which might be Ok, because we can have an income tax cut from the savings we have just generated for taxpayer. But as I pointed out the ensuing price rises will be disproportionately worse for the poor, especially those unemployed.
Mike Muz 67":1mk1cxc8 said:Anyway, back on track, has anyone seen that donkey?
Bats":1w4l0oe3 said:Anyway, now. The magic thing is about wage/dole-price spirals is that if one happens and you refuse to increase the money supply, what you're actually doing is draining rich people's bank accounts at the speed of sound and rapidly narrowing the gap between rich and poor. No tears lost there.