roaminblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 2,991
Re: Labour's Minimum Wage Promise
Cost push economics, which has its critics as I'm sure you know.
One one side nmw is the ultimate demand side stimulus (and is what I've seen complained about on here lots of times). It can create stimulus by putting it in the hands of the people.Rather than qe which many believe goes to buffer the banks retained earnings.
On the other it's inflationary, causing the additional cost to be passed on to the consumer. This has been seen, albeit on a temporary basis, however can be countered by suggesting the economics of the workforce are not inelastic, or that equilibrium supply can't be met through work force contraction
To me, it could boil simply down to the way a model of equilibrium acts when demand increases. Particularly when you take into account economies of scale. Does the additional burden of the extra unit cause the same cost pressure as the first?
Interesting stuff. No right or wrong answer, as you will know. But probably a vote winner
Chancy Termites said:So having pursued 14 years of house price inflation through an excess of credit and money printing, Labour are now saying "look, nobody can afford to live here any more! Let's increase inflation then borrow and print more money for people to pay their rents/ mortgages with,"
"Oh and by the way, let's sign up to an overarching global free trade deal because obviously increasing our costs in the UK relative to the rest of the world won't have any effect on our international competitiveness."
Stupid, thick twats are never happy unless they're destroying the economy.
Cost push economics, which has its critics as I'm sure you know.
One one side nmw is the ultimate demand side stimulus (and is what I've seen complained about on here lots of times). It can create stimulus by putting it in the hands of the people.Rather than qe which many believe goes to buffer the banks retained earnings.
On the other it's inflationary, causing the additional cost to be passed on to the consumer. This has been seen, albeit on a temporary basis, however can be countered by suggesting the economics of the workforce are not inelastic, or that equilibrium supply can't be met through work force contraction
To me, it could boil simply down to the way a model of equilibrium acts when demand increases. Particularly when you take into account economies of scale. Does the additional burden of the extra unit cause the same cost pressure as the first?
Interesting stuff. No right or wrong answer, as you will know. But probably a vote winner