Incoherent arguments used in Zoe Williams' article in the Guardian: What's holding Britain down isn't benefits. It's low pay http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/low-wages-not-benefits-holding-britain-down?CMP=twt_gu
Assuming we accept her argument that wages should be arbitrarily raised ("The minimum wage is not enough to live on") why on earth should collective bargaining stop at some equilibrium where income matches consumption?
Once the mechanism of collective bargaining starts to work what is to stop it exceeding the point where income matches consumption?
If wages are to be decided by unionised collective bargaining and not the market why can't all workers have the same salary as Zoe Williams? Or Ed Miliband? Or the noble Lord Prescott?
You can start to see how fuzzy this sort of economics is.
"The solutions to this will be large and manifold" sounds like the economics of Fred Scuttle and the Benny Hill team.
However there is a germ of truth in the piece.
Close off the import of cheap labour and the value of labour must rise. MUST rise. Even the most idle and unskilled potential workers will become valuable as labour becomes scarce.
That will be a real form of "collective" bargaining - in that the collective should be the entire labour force within the United Kingdom. The nation state can protect workers against global capital. All it needs is the courage to act.
Assuming we accept her argument that wages should be arbitrarily raised ("The minimum wage is not enough to live on") why on earth should collective bargaining stop at some equilibrium where income matches consumption?
Once the mechanism of collective bargaining starts to work what is to stop it exceeding the point where income matches consumption?
If wages are to be decided by unionised collective bargaining and not the market why can't all workers have the same salary as Zoe Williams? Or Ed Miliband? Or the noble Lord Prescott?
You can start to see how fuzzy this sort of economics is.
"The solutions to this will be large and manifold" sounds like the economics of Fred Scuttle and the Benny Hill team.
However there is a germ of truth in the piece.
Close off the import of cheap labour and the value of labour must rise. MUST rise. Even the most idle and unskilled potential workers will become valuable as labour becomes scarce.
That will be a real form of "collective" bargaining - in that the collective should be the entire labour force within the United Kingdom. The nation state can protect workers against global capital. All it needs is the courage to act.
No comments:
Post a Comment