- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,856
- Reactions
- 24,908
I agree with the tax point, the way to increase wages is with a tax cut, that needs to be passed on.If you want to depress the economy, then depress the consumer spending that makes up 60% of the economy.
Sure you want to avoid wage inflation, but people on low wages are doing it tough because of rising costs especially power, insurance and other charges. Small business has had a tax cut, so it's time to pass some of that on to their employees.
There's nothing complex about it - you only have to look at history.
The balance had been right for the best part of 30 years. During that time we went from 10% unemployment - high inflation - high Govt debt to 4% unemployment - low inflation and no Govt debt in 2007... all with penalty rates intact. It was only after the Coaltion unbalanced the IR laws that businesses started believing they could operate with a permanent regime of low wage growth and confiscated employee benefits.
Look how well that worked out. We have the reserve bank stating that low wage growth is holding back the economy which can only be fixed with a minimum 3% payrise per annum.
Businesses and Govts are only offering half that amount. If a business becomes non viable as a result of winding back the IR laws to just two years ago then you really have to ask yourself just viable it was in the first place.
Equally, I don't think we can attribute our current economic failures to IR laws either.I think there's major global factors at play which help explain why everything went so well in Australia for those 30 years. Huge expansion in household & corporate debt, a once in 100-year mining boom and consistently falling interest rates meant that cash poured into the economy (CHINA!!). That party ended in 2008. I don't think you can attribute much of that period of success to IR laws.
If shops are going to close because of penalty rates they must be non viable anyway.
It's time to move away from this Cambodian style of employment. If shops close on Sunday they'll merely trade on another day and more employees will get their family time back.
All up - I think it's worth it. We work to live - not live to work.
On the other side of the coin I remember a post from another member saying young jobseekers are finding work at firms such as McDonalds because they are motivated to do so.Going back a day or so to one of your older posts PZ99.
Here is something in the 'West Australian', that highlights exactly what you are saying about work to live, as opposed to live to work.
https://thewest.com.au/news/social/...young-people-from-getting-jobs-ng-b881135532z
I was talking with a mate of mine the other day, who I did my apprenticeship with, he now works for the council. He was saying the best workers, on the junk collection, are foreign.
You are right, I think they have run out of ideas, on how to get people to work.On the other side of the coin I remember a post from another member saying young jobseekers are finding work at firms such as McDonalds because they are motivated to do so.
That article highlights the very problem I've been alluding to: Somehow it's become the responsibility of those who are already doing the hard yards to cop further sacrifices to make it easier for work to come to the front door of demotivated unemployed who don't want to work.
If someone has developed a sense of entitlement - no amount of wage stifling is going to help them and it certainly won't help any other worker.
Going back a day or so to one of your older posts PZ99.
Here is something in the 'West Australian', that highlights exactly what you are saying about work to live, as opposed to live to work.
https://thewest.com.au/news/social/...young-people-from-getting-jobs-ng-b881135532z
I was talking with a mate of mine the other day, who I did my apprenticeship with, he now works for the council. He was saying the best workers, on the junk collection, are foreign.
Yeah I saw the NRMA article - utter garbage and not practical in this country with its vast distances between major cities. And adding a carbon tax to your power bill isn't exactly going to spark an electric car revolution.He and Chris Bowen just need a top hat and twirly moustache.
Under a Labor government, tough times ahead for Nanna:
Denied her tax refund - because she's old and an easy target.
Regulated out of her Corolla to go to the shops in - as only a $30k electric Prius will be ideologically acceptable now, which she can't afford to buy. Shame on the NRMA for heartlessly caving in to this nonsense.
He and Chris Bowen just need a top hat and twirly moustache.
Under a Labor government, tough times ahead for Nanna:
Denied her tax refund - because she's old and an easy target.
Regulated out of her Corolla to go to the shops in - as only a $30k electric Prius will be ideologically acceptable now, which she can't afford to buy. Shame on the NRMA for heartlessly caving in to this nonsense.
Interesting take on Labor's cancer plans.
https://thewest.com.au/opinion/paul...ill-for-shortens-cancer-policy-ng-b881163102z
It sounds like another rort just waiting to happen. IMO
Still valid points and makes sense, if I put a list of left leaning radio and tv broadcasters here, Joe would need more web space.Paul Murray
Radio broadcaster
Description
Paul Murray is a conservative radio and TV broadcaster based in Sydney, Australia. He was the former regular Mornings presenter on 2UE show "A Sydney Morning". He also hosts Paul Murray Live on Sky News Australia which airs Sunday to Thursday at 9pm AEST. and Saturday Edition. Wikipedia
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?