Spain OMG!

[DodgyAgent]

Why? Do you buy the idea that it would lead to more jobs? Who told you that, employers who want to pay lower wages? MRDA: well, they would say that, wouldn't they?

Scrapping the minimum wage puts no more people in work, it just makes less income for the working poor and more profit for the employers. If there is any kind of welfare state it then supports the poor, so the net result is employers becoming richer at taxpayers' expense.

Why do you think it would be acceptable to employ someone and pay them less than a living wage?

I just wonder sometimes about these minimum wage zealots who think they are awfully clever in spotting "exploitation" by cruel employers that do not pay a minimum wage. What is the alternative then? Are these people saying that because they will not be paid the minimum wage that they should not work? . If I could hire people at £3.00 an hour to do research work (ie getting names of candidates to place) then I would.
I would also expect that if I continued to pay them this rate they would soon hop off to honest John recruitment for more money.
Are you saying that they should either be paid the minimum wage or not work at all?
It is the old "what's in it for him?" mentality of the parochial small minded curtain twitching villager that seems to prevail over these arguments that has the effect of making companies withdraw from such schemes.

[eek]

The fact is if something is cheaper (labour in this case) it will be demanded more. If something is more expensive it will be demanded less. Bar a few exceptions that don't apply here. You can throw anecdotal references around all you want but it doesn't change this basic principle.

Minimum wage legislation is not actually the problem most of the time. The real issue is rarely employing people its employing them legally in such a way that you can get shot of them if you have to.

And that is the problem with most EU countries. You don't want to employ more staff because you can't get rid when the times get tough (unlike the US and to a slightly lesser extent here).

[DodgyAgent]

Minimum wage legislation is not actually the problem most of the time. The real issue is rarely employing people its employing them legally in such a way that you can get shot of them if you have to.

And that is the problem with most EU countries. You don't want to employ more staff because you can't get rid when the times get tough (unlike the US and to a slightly lesser extent here).

Quite

[d000hg]

The fact is if something is cheaper (labour in this case) it will be demanded more. If something is more expensive it will be demanded less.

No because there's also a well-tested principle that cost is frequently seen as equating/linked to value/quality.

[Robinho]

No because there's also a well-tested principle that cost is frequently seen as equating/linked to value/quality.

We're not talking about different products though, we're talking about the same product.

[DodgyAgent]

No because there's also a well-tested principle that cost is frequently seen as equating/linked to value/quality.

So people like to think.

This principle applies to IT. There are lots of IT contractors who blather on about quality and criticise offshore companies for their failure to deliver "quality" when actually all that is required is something that basically works when it needs to.

[Robinho]

Minimum wage legislation is not actually the problem most of the time. The real issue is rarely employing people its employing them legally in such a way that you can get shot of them if you have to.

And that is the problem with most EU countries. You don't want to employ more staff because you can't get rid when the times get tough (unlike the US and to a slightly lesser extent here).

That's part of it too.

We shouldn't complain about stupid employment laws though otherwise there's be no contractors.

[Ignis Fatuus]

The fact is if something is cheaper (labour in this case) it will be demanded more. If something is more expensive it will be demanded less. Bar a few exceptions that don't apply here. You can throw anecdotal references around all you want but it doesn't change this basic principle.

The question is whether labour, at the bottom of the wage scale, is in fact one of those cases that does not respond to price. If all (or most of) those potential employers already get all the labour they need at a price they can afford, they won't take on any more just because it gets cheaper.

You can argue that the demand does respond to price, and that making labour cheaper will create jobs. Go ahead, argue that. But so far you haven't argued it, you have just stated it as a "fact".

Leaving me to compare it to table salt: if you could buy table salt at 5p per tonne, how much more would you buy?

[gingerjedi]

400 Euros a month with no bills to pay? Better off than working in the UK for the average family.

FTFY

[Robinho]

The question is whether labour, at the bottom of the wage scale, is in fact one of those cases that does not respond to price. If all (or most of) those potential employers already get all the labour they need at a price they can afford, they won't take on any more just because it gets cheaper.

You can argue that the demand does respond to price, and that making labour cheaper will create jobs. Go ahead, argue that. But so far you haven't argued it, you have just stated it as a "fact".

Leaving me to compare it to table salt: if you could buy table salt at 5p per tonne, how much more would you buy?

If nobody needed any more employees, what's the point in the minimum wage?