The amount, and range of perspectives concerning the contentious issue of the minimum wage is astounding. From Chris Rock's comedic take on the matter,"minimum wage is another way of saying the boss would pay you less if he could,", to the plethora of arguments used by the various schools of economic and social research which argue for and against its viability, it is surprising that an issue which we now take for granted in the UK could generate so much dissension.

The idea that the that the minimum wage was just created to make sure that workers were not too "overly exploited" by their employers is widespread. A survey asking young people what the minimum wage meant to them revealed answers such as, ‘the minimum wage was established to ensure that everybody had enough money’, or that it was’ imperative due to the nature of the capitalist paradigm to have a legal restraint to ensure that the disparity in wages did not become ridiculous.’

However, it is plain to see that even since the introduction of the minimum wage the idealistic claim of “everyone having enough money” is still a dream. Statistics indicating the rising level of UK consumer debt, which presently standing at £1.158 trillion only serves to reinforce this.

As for my more educated friend, whose assertion about the establishment of the minimum wage included the formidable word “paradigm”, his explanation of the minimum wage being a useful device to curtail the massive disparities in wages that often occur in a capitalist economy still doesn't hold water. Huge disparities continue to exist. Highly paid professionals such as lawyers or financial sector employees often still earn multiples of the earnings of minimum wage employees. The claim that the minimum wage helps close the yawning chasm that exists between its earners and the professional or financial sectors, is simply untenable.

In the UK, the state more or less resembles a nanny; with nearly half of our population being indirectly dependant on the government for financial support, either in the form of employment, benefits, or a range of other schemes such as the Student Loan Scheme. Thus it is the state which provided an explanation of why the minimum wage was introduced.

A government website is devoted to establishing the current level of the minimum wage and provides essentially bureaucratic information on how to obtain it. This delightful snippet of New Labour rhetoric explanation for the introduction of the minimum wage was this delightful snippet of New Labour rhetoric ,”The national minimum wage is an important cornerstone of Government strategy aimed at providing employees with decent minimum standards and fairness in the workplace,” is provided as an explanation for the introduction of the minimum wage.

This snippet, lacking as it is, in detailed information, provides an insight into the ‘beggars cant be choosers’ motivation for the establishment of the minimum wage. As is often the case with the comparison of Government rhetoric to actual reality, discrepancies soon become clear. The prompts the question: has the minimum wage has actually provided employees with decent minimum standards and fairness in the workplace and also in a socio-economic context worked for a fairer society?

Analysis of the minimum wage in Britain one reveals it's relative superiority to other countries forms of the minimum wage. Or to take a more cynical perspective, the problems it creates in Britain must be multiplied; which is not altogether such an outrageous allegation when the relative superiority of England’s economic and social infrastructure is noted.

However this statement of relative superiority when correlated against America and most of the developed world can be explained by our welfare infrastructure. This has remained largely intact despite Thatcher's, and indeed Blair's, yet when pitted against the hyper developed welfare infrastructures of Denmark and Sweden, loses credibility.

The minimum wage makes economically un-competitive in the manufacturing of many products, thus causing precipitating layoffs due to our relatively expensive labour costs (Dyson being a prime example of this, but we can't knock em as they make beautiful hoovers). Whilst it presumably raises wages for millions of working class families, we must ask whether the true function of the Minimum Wage is to placate the working classes, or to reduce economical inequality.

Evidence such as the rising levels in wage disparities between manual and the financial sectors, coupled with claims that the Minimum Wage is an effort to legitimize low wages would negate the Government's official intention to achieve fairness in the workplace for employees . However in analyzing increased economic inequality the global context must be again considered as it seems that Britain can not be sustained by the manufacturing industry alone, but more and more by the financial services industry as proportional GDP figures gleefully show. As the latest statistics indicate that 72.6 % of Britain’s 2006 GDP was produced by the financial services industry , it is beginning to show that the UK no longer “makes” , “forges” or “(generic term for manufacturing production)” its way onto the global market anymore.

Is it possible or necessary to blame the minimum wage, or indeed Globalisation for this? Well certainly schools of thought can be found to support each angle, but as this is not the time for recriminations, the salient point that emerges from this literal “hot-pot” of ideas is that despite the shortcomings of the minimum wage, the emphasis on the financial services by our leaders as our niche for participating in the global economy would push the minimum wage into irrelevance.

However, if the classical economic laws of supply and demand kick in and due to a ridiculous excessive increase in the supply of financial sector workers which will presumably force the demand for these workers to fall, due to a glut of supply. This will probably result in either unemployment or the minimum wage to become relevant again. But that won't happen, will it. Hopefully not.