Is the minimum wage worth working for anymore?

[danny128]

I don't doubt the figures - perhaps they are even higher in some parts of the country than in others. The .pdf talks about 'soaring childcare costs' and 'soaring transport costs.' Those two items have indeed risen, but you don't have to look far to find out why. - Soaring overhead costs.

 

When I was a child, childcare tended to be provided by grandparents - in those comparatively rare cases where there was only one parent or where both were at work.

 

When my son was a child (and both his parents worked) then we had to arrange childcare privately. Childcare providers were not licenced, nor were they inspected, nor did they have to have CRB or other checks. - They provided child care in their own homes and their overheads were probably somewhat lower than those of a (modern) daycare nursery.

 

My grandchildren attend such a nursery, which has a dedicated building (those don't come cheap!) plenty of CRB-cleared staff (who expect to be paid) and (no doubt) admin staff - who also expect to be paid.

 

If you want to scrap the requirement for CRBs, allow in-home unlicenced childcare then no doubt the costs would go down. - Of course, you would also put those people working in commercial childcare centres out of work. - And it seems that a significant number of people in the UK make a living from providing services/selling insurance to one another.

 

Transport costs have indeed soared, but then again, fuel prices have risen dramatically, some (not all) transport workers are paid handsomely and somebody has to pay.

 

The Rowntree foundation note that both childcare costs and transport costs have risen more rapidly than inflation ... Who would've thought that could happen? 'Inflation' seems to be some sort of mythical figure concocted by the government and used only when they're considering index-linked rises and comparing pay rises. - It has little to do with the increase in 'real world' prices.

 

 

 

Let's set minimum wage at £12 an hour. Those employers who aren't prepared to pay it can stop trading (and stop employing people.)

 

There are bound to be one or two who would say that direct labour costs are a significant part of their overheads; their businesses wouldn't stand the increased cost and they can't afford to continue to operate their businesses ... not in the UK, anyway. Let them go.

 

The services they no longer provide can be provided by somebody else (all those people who lose their jobs could become self-employed and pay themselves as much as they like.) Surely, all those self-employed people could 'fill the vacuum'?

 

 

 

If everybody paid their staff more - Let's say everybody doubled the pay of their staff - then the goods and services provided by those employers would cost more. All those people who had more money in their pockets would find that the things they bought cost more - or do you think they might import them from elsewhere?

 

Instead of having your cutlery made in Sheffield and your shoes made in Northampton, both cutlery and shoes would be made in China - where the workforce isn't paid as well.

 

 

 

And if your overheads are low (and direct labour costs are often a significant overhead) then you can price your product at a level which will allow it to compete with that of your competitors. If your overheads are high and force your prices higher than those of the (often foreign) competition, do you think your potential customers (in the UK) will choose your product or will they buy cheaper imports?

 

 

 

Where the 'barriers to entry' for a given trade or profession are high (and that could be because of length, complexity and /or cost of training - or occasionally because that trade or profession required rare skills) then the number of people who manage to join that profession will be low, the competition for jobs amongst those established in the profession is likely to be low, pay high and job security may well be rather higher than in many other trades or professions. The exception to that is where (as in the present economy) the number of jobs within certain professions is decreasing.

 

In that case, people are either going to be forced to re-train (time consuming and very expensive [ I've been there!]) or find a place (and it may be a place a very long way away) where there is a demand for people qualified in that profession.

 

Where the barriers to entry are very low, there are likely to be more applicants than jobs and the pay is likely to be low.

 

If you have more low-skilled applicants than there are low-skilled jobs, an increasing population and a decrease in the number of unskilled jobs, you've got a problem.

Well said.

 

How are we going to cOmplete against other country if they are working for a fraction of our minimum wage? The average man in uk are not very skill and no way be worth then 10 times wage of India/china

[chem1st]

Well said.

 

How are we going to cOmplete against other country if they are working for a fraction of our minimum wage? The average man in uk are not very skill and no way be worth then 10 times wage of India/china

 

It's about 4 times.

 

But we have a higher cost of living and effective taxes that can exceed 100%.

A Chinaman can work and be better off. He has incentive to work.

 

If we had tax free beer and a Chinese minimum wage, minimum wage workers could buy more beer per hour worked.

 

In the UK there is incentive for self sustainability but lack of access to land.

[danny128]

It's about 4 times.

 

But we have a higher cost of living and effective taxes that can exceed 100%.

A Chinaman can work and be better off. He has incentive to work.

 

If we had tax free beer and a Chinese minimum wage, minimum wage workers could buy more beer per hour worked.

 

In the UK there is incentive for self sustainability but lack of access to land.

 

Why should we have higher cost of living? stupid house prices? crazy housing benefit? too many people unemployed?

[Rupert_Baehr]

It's about 4 times.

 

But we have a higher cost of living and effective taxes that can exceed 100%.

A Chinaman can work and be better off. He has incentive to work.

 

What is that incentive? What does he get if he does not work? What are Chinese benefits like? - Are they more than people in the UK get?

 

If we had tax free beer and a Chinese minimum wage, minimum wage workers could buy more beer per hour worked.

 

From:China Minimum Wage Update "The Chinese minimum wage varies from 5.2 CNY to 14 CNY (That's the rate in Beijing.) 1 Chinese Yuan Renminbi = 10p." (Exchange rates from Xe.com.)

 

So the minimum wage in China varies from 52p an hour to £1.40 an hour. How many people could live and work in London for £1.40 an hour?

 

In the UK there is incentive for self sustainability but lack of access to land.

 

And land is cheap in China, is it? Everybody has as much land as they want, do they?

" Recently, soaring costs in China’s traditional manufacturing clusters, including land prices, tightening environmental regulations, and wage overheads, have been posing challenges for manufacturers..."

 

The developed world cannot compete with emerging economies on price. It can, however, compete on quality (particularly in high-technology products and services.)

 

Cheap beer in China?

 

"local beers... sell for as little as 1.87 yuan for a 330-milliliter bottle ... Budweiser... costs about 6.13 yuan. - A Chinese worker on minimum wage would have to work for 1 hour and11 minutes to by a bottle (not a pint) of Buttwiper!

 

So a pint of local beer would cost approximately 32p. A Chinese worker on minimum wage would have to work for 38 minutes to pay for that pint.

 

The minimum wage in the UK is £6.08 per hour. From another thread on this Forum, you can buy a pint of beer in (some) pubs in Sheffield for £1.50.

 

So a Brit could buy 4 pints for 1 hour's wages and a Chinaman could buy 1½ pints.

 

Tell me again: Who has cheap beer?

[danny128]

What is that incentive? What does he get if he does not work? What are Chinese benefits like? - Are they more than people in the UK get?

 

 

 

From:China Minimum Wage Update "The Chinese minimum wage varies from 5.2 CNY to 14 CNY (That's the rate in Beijing.) 1 Chinese Yuan Renminbi = 10p." (Exchange rates from Xe.com.)

 

So the minimum wage in China varies from 52p an hour to £1.40 an hour. How many people could live and work in London for £1.40 an hour?

 

 

 

And land is cheap in China, is it? Everybody has as much land as they want, do they?

" Recently, soaring costs in China’s traditional manufacturing clusters, including land prices, tightening environmental regulations, and wage overheads, have been posing challenges for manufacturers..."

 

The developed world cannot compete with emerging economies on price. It can, however, compete on quality (particularly in high-technology products and services.)

 

Cheap beer in China?

 

"local beers... sell for as little as 1.87 yuan for a 330-milliliter bottle ... Budweiser... costs about 6.13 yuan. - A Chinese worker on minimum wage would have to work for 1 hour and11 minutes to by a bottle (not a pint) of Buttwiper!

 

So a pint of local beer would cost approximately 32p. A Chinese worker on minimum wage would have to work for 38 minutes to pay for that pint.

 

The minimum wage in the UK is £6.08 per hour. From another thread on this Forum, you can buy a pint of beer in (some) pubs in Sheffield for £1.50.

 

So a Brit could buy 4 pints for 1 hour's wages and a Chinaman could buy 1½ pints.

 

Tell me again: Who has cheap beer?

you are wasting your time trying to get such a simple thing into those dumb muffins

[chem1st]

Why should we have higher cost of living? stupid house prices? crazy housing benefit? too many people unemployed?

 

Unemployment isn't much of a factor, it's production and the sharing of (and the resulting work).

 

Houseprices in this country are insane but it is due to land prices, particularly land with planning permission. Build costs aren't really that much.

 

Land monopoly...

[danny128]

its all fake, just check how many people are on housing benefits, its the goverment using tax payers money to keep house prices up, dont you think we have enough and to built a few hundred thousand house?

[tinfoilhat]

Unemployment isn't much of a factor, it's production and the sharing of (and the resulting work).

 

Houseprices in this country are insane but it is due to land prices, particularly land with planning permission. Build costs aren't really that much.

 

Land monopoly...

 

Just a thought, once you've given everyone land to work and build houses - I'm assuming you want an increase in population yet and make the populace farmers circa 1500, how are you going to do for water ? There is massive, unsustainable water abstraction now ? What about environmental impacts ?

[danot]

There's also a small thing called "self respect."

 

What is there to respect when your wages only provide a standard of living equivalent to the standard of living provided by the state for free?

 

May as well let higher earners keep you and respect them.

[truman]

I agree, but at what point does self respect tip over into stupidity?

 

If minimum wage is not a viable amount to live on, (I'm not talking about luxuries, but basic needs,) then you owe it to yourself to take the option that is, possibly benefits.

 

It's not that benefits are too much, but that minimum wage is too little. It needs to rise by a considerable sum. A simple wage for full time work should by definition be enough to live on without state subsidies. If it isn't then there's something wrong.

 

And before someone says that they manage just fine on minimum wage / benefits, can I remind them that everyone's circumstances are different, and we are all starting from a different place.

 

As a discussion point what about differentials..? Should someone who has taken the time and trouble to get qualifications be awarded a payrise to keep them ahead of the minimum wage...? For example if the minimum wage is raised to £9 as suggested above what about people who earn that now due to extra qualifications etc..if they don't get a raise then it kind of nullifies their effort doesn't it? Or arwe we looking at higher wages for all..?