If in doubt, ignore rich people. Don't try to placate them, control them or even offer the gentlest of nudge. They'll circumvent, waste your time and tie you up in knots. So just ignore them and decide what's best for the majority.
But, on the odd occasion when that doesn't work, here are some helpful pointers.
Inflation or recession?
Easy -- rich people prefer recessions.
Inflation erodes the values of savings (which rich people have, do try to keep up).
Recession makes poor people unemployed and destroys a few businesses that rich people probably don't use.
Government spending
Just roads, thanks. (Maybe a few police but not too many.)
Rich people have got health-care, education and security. They're not top users of public transport. Libraries -- don't be silly.
But they do have to drive on the same roads as everyone else.
Benefits
Rich people, of course, are frequently utterly dependent on benefits.
Because many businesses pay their employees too little to live on. The state has to step in with benefits so that these employees can actually afford to take those jobs.
Are the employees really the recipients of the benefits? Or is it the company (and its owners) that stand to gain as a result?
Without companies having ready access to this state support, there might be proper competition in the job market. Companies that actually were economically viable would pay decent wages and employees would gravitate there. Companies that didn't pay enough wouldn't have staff and so would have to offer a better deal.
This will be a sticky one to unpick.
How did we get here, where deadbeat employers don't pay their staff enough to live on so that state has to make up the difference?
Could it be that (whisper it) the minimum wage is actually too low if it isn't enough to live on?
Isn't it extraordinary that the question even needs to be asked?
But it really needs reframing. The government is paying benefits to enable economically unviable companies to make a profit. The companies are benefit scroungers.
How about starting with a little shaming -- companies list number of employees and number dependent on in-work benefits.
Any company with more than, say, 10% of their employees requiring benefits is classified as a scrounger and gets to pay more business rates.
(Never going to happen.)
You're welcome
Further installments of this series will be along from time to time.
No comments:
Post a Comment