On 05/02/2018 13:13, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 12:10:29 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 05/02/2018 11:58, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 05 Feb 2018 11:35:07 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 05/02/2018 10:53, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
[quoted text muted]

Many children would take up the offer. The idea of making say £5 per
hour,
even at a piece rate would attract many.

What consumers will pay the resultant end price ?

I assuming you are referring to the hourly rate?

No. I am referring to the fact that increased costs in the supply chain
have to be passed on to the consumer.


Are you suggesting that £5 per hour is more than immigrants get paid?

Wouldn't that be illegal?

I am saying that if you have been paying workers x/y, and decided to
increase that to 2x/y then - all else being equal - the end price will
need to increase to reflect that.

Are you now saying the children will be paid twice the immigrants wage?

So the question is, are consumers willing to pay that extra ? Or rather,
are consumers happy paying that extra. Because prices are already rising.

You still haven't explained where this 'extra' comes from.

If demand is reduced through an increased cost to the consumer the
consumer might buy something else instead. The landowner might also take
a hit if the yield from his land has reduced.

While the consumer always pays, the actual price is down to supply and
demand.