I'm still very new to this "economics" stuff - maybe we'll get some more intelligent comments if Tomsk happens by - but it's not clear to me how this makes sense. Obviously, I have dog in this fight (or rather, there are a lot of my friends who do), but one would think that if the Tories are working on the principle that tax cuts for the rich are stimulative (and to think just two days ago I was saying Cameron had more in common with Obama than Mitt Romney), then surely the same would apply to keeping wages comparatively high in economically depressed areas?
I mean, to an inexpert mind like mine, it's almost as though Tory fiscal policy is thinly-veiled ideological bullshit untethered entirely from reality.
Like I said, though, I could be wrong on the impact, economically. I mean, culturally, it's an obvious clusterfuck. It's strange how often the Conservative response to life being shit for some people is to try and make life shitter for others. "Some people in the North are actually as well off as those in the South East, and we're going to do something about that" doesn't particularly sound very "Big Society" to me, unless of course one uses the actual definition of that term, which is "sort out your own problems, I have to make sure my mates can by more bigger yachts".
In short, Cameron and his pet vampire (the only one known to transmute blood into oil) continue to be pure, pudgy evil. I just can't be sure yet that the numbers don't add up.