Would you care to give some kinds of examples of the kinds of business and industries that will create new jobs (not displace existing jobs) by offering wages below the current minimum wage level?
See this is the thing about economics and the future,
nobody knows. And as inconvenient as that is, absolutely nothing can be done about it. I know that there are plenty of politicians and socialists in general that believe that they can influence what is invested where and what the outcome will be. But they are all very wrong.
Hayek summed it up perfectly in this quote: "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."
Unemployment is the result of a price mismatch between supply of and demand for jobs. I think I made a pretty good analogy in an earlier post. It doesn't matter what jobs will be created, the important thing is to balance supply and demand of work. The law of supply and demand is ubiquitous in economics, just like gravity in the world of physics.
I'll repeat the question - maybe instead of repeating the tired old mantras of the defunct PDs, you could give some kinds of examples of the kinds of business and industries that will create new jobs (not displace existing jobs) by offering wages below the current minimum wage level?
Please don't compare the comments that oppose your views to the PDs. Under the PDs government grew hugely, minimum wage went up massively, welfare entitlements went up, regulations increased across the board. All these things are the exact opposite of free market and classical liberal economics.
So we're going to reduce wages of existing staff, and use that to pay a few extra staff. No increase in GNP there - just spreading the jam a little bit thinner, which will largely benefit the owners of the business.
Here's another lesson in basic economics for you. Increased profits means increased capital available for reinvestment, which results in increased employment. Increased profits also means increased competition from other "greedy" capitalists who want a piece of the pie, which means increased employment. Increased competition drives down prices, which increases demand further.
Complainer said:
Or else it will mean more profits for business owners which are not reinvested, or else it will mean more profits for business owners which are moved or reinvested offshore.
And another little economic reality check that may not suit you. When profits start rising investment starts to flow in
not out. When investment flows in an economy improves. The reason investment and capital is not flowing into Ireland is because investors do not see profits. When they do see profits their greed radar will focus on Ireland again.
Complainer said:
But you're also ignoring the other side of the coin - lowered wages means less spending, which means less retail jobs and less tax income.
And this completely ignores what actually happens. Let's say that wages are reduced and more jobs created resulting in the same amount of total wages. First of all this would not lower spending but keep it level. But for arguments sake let's say that spending did go down resulting in a lower revenue to retail businesses. Because now there are less people on welfare the rate of taxation can be lowered so the net effect on the economy is zero.