Yes, but I would argue that it's more sophisticated than that. Firstly there is productivity: that workers receiving what they consider to be fair money for their labour, they are more likely to be productive (and the UK has woeful productivity rates which I would suggest may be linked to workers doing the bare minimum for their **** pay, which even Kerr admits costs us through state subsidisation - tax payers are literally subsidising employers paying **** wages. How about that?!)
And then, there is the capitalist (justified) offset that people with more money in their pocket spend more money on the products that their employers are selling.
Maybe this is why, as the research I have presented suggests, that despite all of the doom mongering that was predicted by Kerr's dad (or elder brother, or maybe even Kerr on the first ever Millers message board) in 1998, the introduction of the minimum wage had (to use a technical economics term) "**** all" negative economic impact.
If you feel that this event in 1998 in some way impacted on the price of this year's loaf, then I can't help ya Silly![]()




Reply With Quote