Minimum wage as opposed to Living wage. Shouldn't they be the same?

[PeteMorris]

Even those that got a raise when it came in?

 

All it was designed to do in the first place if you remember was to stop 'sweat-shop' labour where people were paid appaling wages with miserable conditions. Not be a benchmark for what companies could 'get away with'.

[truman]

All it was designed to do in the first place if you remember was to stop 'sweat-shop' labour where people were paid appaling wages with miserable conditions. Not be a benchmark for what companies could 'get away with'.

 

I was replying to you saying "all it's done is repress everyone's wages"

[PeteMorris]

I was replying to you saying "all it's done is repress everyone's wages"

 

No I said the effect it's had, has been to surpress wages...Not what the intention was!

[andygardener]

No I said the effect it's had, has been to surpress wages...Not what the intention was!

 

I'm not convinced it has surpressed wages, what it certainly has done is priced some low skilled people out of a job.

[Dingus]

Eh? .........

 

So when exactly do you work?

[Dingus]

I'm not convinced it has surpressed wages, what it certainly has done is priced some low skilled people out of a job.

 

All it was designed to do in the first place if you remember was to stop 'sweat-shop' labour where people were paid appaling wages with miserable conditions. Not be a benchmark for what companies could 'get away with'.

 

Folks still work in sweat shops. It's just that they now do it abroad. The clothes that you once bought from S R Gent now come from Sri Lanka at half the cost.

[PeteMorris]

So when exactly do you work?

 

What relevance is that?

[PeteMorris]

I'm not convinced it has surpressed wages, what it certainly has done is priced some low skilled people out of a job.

 

Of course it's surpressed wages!...and yes it has priced low skilled people out of a job. But that was never the intention. It's kinda backfired somewhat.

 

When I was younger, the tables were turned somewhat. People were headhunted in even medium skilled jobs, and everone wanted to get into the company that paid best. Now it's take it or leave it, we can get dozens of people to work for peanuts.

[PeteMorris]

Folks still work in sweat shops. It's just that they now do it abroad. The clothes that you once bought from S R Gent now come from Sri Lanka at half the cost.

 

So is that an approval of the UK sweatshop economy as was?

[L00b]

Of course it's surpressed wages!...and yes it has priced low skilled people out of a job. But that was never the intention. It's kinda backfired somewhat.

Don't forget the macro-economical context: when it was introduced, there was a booming economy.

 

Low skilled people were not priced out of a job then, the intention was that they could partake in the boom through it (which worked, arguably).

 

Different kettle of fish after 4 years of economical crisis, where jobs are scarce enough that higher-and-higher skilled people chase ever-less skilled jobs ('pushing' less skilled people down the pecking order).

 

It's exactly what happened in France when they introduced the minimum wage (years and years before the UK), because the job situation there has been consistently bad for over 20 years!