Unemployment hits 12 year high, and higher than in the US

[Grin]

yep, there are issues with any system we choose. Personally, I would like to see bad employers named and shamed. By that I mean the individual managers, the board and the company should be listed if found "guilty" of such behaviour.

For repeat offenders, I would even go as far as naming the wives.

I hate filth like that who abuse their responsibilities.

I could see a way that it could work if a company said for example "we will give someone unemployed long term 6 months work experience then give someone else a go". But I guess as long as that is the agreement at the outset. The employers competitors might get a bit shitty about that though.

 

[Power Raid]

I could see a way that it could work if a company said for example "we will give someone unemployed long term 6 months work experience then give someone else a go". But I guess as long as that is the agreement at the outset. The employers competitors might get a bit shitty about that though.

Yep

There has to be time limits and reviews if extended

But as long as people have the right spirit, it is worth a try

 

[Grin]

Yep

There has to be time limits and reviews if extended

But as long as people have the right spirit, it is worth a try

On a slightly unrelated topic:
I knew a guy (this is going back 20 years) who was working in an unskilled job, who reckoned that it was fine for the rest of us to pine for low unemployment, but we don't have to work for the bottom 5%. He reckoned that they should be paid to remain unemployed, followed by some comment like "******* useless pricks".
Although I guess in those days unemployment was measured differently and there was a smaller percentage of relatively young people on pensions of various sorts.

 

[medusala]

Because, as I have already explained to you, employment is far more complex than the price of labour.

Google Ceteris Paribus.

 

[Grin]

Google Ceteris Paribus.

Has nothing to do with the REAL world.

Look, lets presume that the imaginary, ideological and simplistic economic world that you live in was the dominant philosophy and, God forbid, was actually implemented: Imagine the fallout. For example a single income family on say $700 per week has to compete with a 20 year old hungry unemployed person, not receiving any benefit, living in his car and prepared to work for $200 per week with no holidays, sick leave or weekend penalties. Not only would there be severe social ramifications for the family, but the bill to the tax payer increases as it now has to pay unemployment benefits to a worker with a family rather than a single 20 year old.

Unless, of course you feel that the family shouldn't get a benefit either. We could have an entirely unregulated labour market with 6 year old kids sent to work 12 hour days in mine shafts in extraordinarily unsafe and unhealthy conditions etc, just like we saw in early industrial England. I'm sure Gina would be very happy with that.

Would unemployment be reduced in this environment? Probably not. It would likely increase, given that, with lower wages, there would be less demand for goods and services.

Admittedly this is an extremely simple example, dumbed down for your benefit but, you see Meds, whilst an entirely unregulated market may suit your very simplistic ideologically driven world view, it is no more practical in the REAL world that communism. In fact, probably even far less so.

 

[Lester Burnham]

One factor not mentioned so far in this discussion is the amount of Australian jobs being moved overseas. Some of our biggest employers such as Telstra, NAB, ANZ, Westpac, Brambles, Perpetual, Qantas, Transfield, Target, QBE, Visy, Worley Parsons and Bancassurer Suncorp have shifted many thousands of jobs to India, Philippines and China. Not only can they pay someone peanuts in low tax jurisdictions, but also companies don't have to worry about workers' holiday entitlements, sick leave, health and safety issues, overtime rates, the number of hours they work, or superannuation entitlements. Most time the offshoring is hidden; an RFT is won by an onshore management consultancy such as Accenture, HP or IBM who then shift 90% of the jobs offshore.

Both our main parties support the 457 Visa system which protects Australian jobs by only allowing employers to temporarily bring genuinely skilled workers from overseas where they cannot find an appropriately skilled Australian. It seems incongruous that we have no restrictions on employers permanently offshoring Australian jobs. The real kicker is that staff are often asked to train workers brought over on 457 visas before being made redundant!

 

[Maggie5]

Perhaps we should pay the same as the intellectually disabled get paid to work in sheltered workshops. Hourly rate starts at $1.79 right up to $4.85 per hour.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2014/s4072086.htm

 

[Power Raid]

On a slightly unrelated topic:
I knew a guy (this is going back 20 years) who was working in an unskilled job, who reckoned that it was fine for the rest of us to pine for low unemployment, but we don't have to work for the bottom 5%. He reckoned that they should be paid to remain unemployed, followed by some comment like "******* useless pricks".
Although I guess in those days unemployment was measured differently and there was a smaller percentage of relatively young people on pensions of various sorts.

In some cases the cost of getting people in the workplace may cost more than they generate. but as we all know, not all things are best measured in $ as there is a social and mental health benefit by having all our people playing a role in our society.

I know this will horrify some but I would have "work" for the pension. Where work could include participating in a tai chi class, painting in a park etc. I simply hate how our society shuts our old people out by compulsory retirement ages etc.

 

[medusala]

Admittedly this is an extremely simple example, dumbed down for your benefit but, you see Meds, whilst an entirely unregulated market may suit your very simplistic ideologically driven world view, it is no more practical in the REAL world that communism. In fact, probably even far less so.

Usual nonsense. A number of countries survived just fine without a minimum wage. Australia would be fine without union right of entry, right to negotiate.

Only circa 15% of workers actually belong to a union. How do you think everyone else manages to survive? You don't seem to realise that in the REAL WORLD the vast majority of people get paid more than the min wage / award and that businesses have to compete for labour.

.

We could have an entirely unregulated labour market with 6 year old kids sent to work 12 hour days in mine shafts in extraordinarily unsafe and unhealthy conditions etc, just like we saw in early industrial England.

Now you are just embarrassing yourself and stooping to the depths of Maljazeera.

Which part of consenting adults cant you grasp? Or is that only ok for the gay lobby?

 

[Grin]

Usual nonsense. A number of countries survived just fine without a minimum wage. Australia would be fine without union right of entry, right to negotiate.

Only circa 15% of workers actually belong to a union. How do you think everyone else manages to survive? You don't seem to realise that in the REAL WORLD the vast majority of people get paid more than the min wage / award and that businesses have to compete for labour.

.

Now you are just embarrassing yourself and stooping to the depths of Maljazeera.

Which part of consenting adults cant you grasp? Or is that only ok for the gay lobby?

I really don't understand the argument you're trying to make.
Have another beer

 

[medusala]

I really don't understand

 

[Grin]

 

[Power Raid]

These are the people that get a kick stealing from the poor

 

[Power Raid]

That's an interesting view. Could you please give me some insight into how you came to that conclusion?

if wealth is leveraged from others, who do you think ultimately pays?

 

[Power Raid]

So, stopping the removal of the minimum wage, is stealing from the poor? And also implies, that there is enjoyment found in doing so?

Is that what I said?

Have a think about how unions and their members punish the poor.

 

[Power Raid]

How about we don't clog up this thread with your usual dodging posts. And you just skip to saying you came to that understanding while jet skiing with Bill Gates?

To scared to admit you know and accept the people most effected by their behaviour are the poor.

But what I don't understand is why you would defend it?

 

[Power Raid]

Straight answer please. Who gets a kick stealing from the poor?

And if I was working on the minimum wage, and it was then scrapped, and suddenly I am earning $7 less per hour... for the exact same work. Who is "stealing"?

Again, just a straight answer, not your usual "how tall do you think a tree is?", crap.

why are you banging on about minimum wage? try and open your eyes to what you hold dear is actually hurting the poor:

when a CFMEU official demands a $5m kick back to allow construction of a building tin the cbd:
- this reduces the number of buildings that are built and the cost of construction is higher meaning rents increase and the existing rich property owners get richer because of barriers to entry reducing supply. These higher rents are passed on to shop keepers and passed on to the consumer including our most vulnerable people in our society.
- higher rents means high business costs, meaning less businesses can operate meaning less jobs. Less jobs doesn't effect the rich, rather it effects supply and demand resulting in lower wages and higher unemployment.
- it reduces the number of construction companies as not all can come up with the bribe or refuse to participate in criminal behaviour. As a result the rich dodgy construction companies (as melbourne is most famous for) just get richer as there is no competitive tension.
- the $5m is not shared with the poor or the union members, it is pocketed and shared amongst the rich

we can run a similar summary on our ports. do you want to have a go at it yourself first?

 

[Floor Pie]

Such a waste of time talking to you.

Ok, you've convinced me. It's the unions and the minimum wage that steals from the poor.

If only we never had unions! There would be no poor at all!

 

[Power Raid]

Such a waste of time talking to you.

Ok, you've convinced me. It's the unions and the minimum wage that steals from the poor.

If only we never had unions! There would be no poor at all!

lol

I personally like the minimum wage, so I am not sure what you are talking about. Care to explain?

My position on the minimum wage is some people are cut out of employment opportunities by the minimum wage. the solution to fixing this isn't cutting the wage. Rather, I would like to see the same money allocated to the dole being used to subsidise their wages as part of the work for the dole.

This of course needs limits and controls but I prefer to see people given the opportunity to gain employment.



What I am steadfast about is the corruption and frustration of our economy by union tactics and union officials illegal activities. These activities don't hurt the rich, as outlined above they hurt the poor. If you disagree, please feel free to explain?


or are you having a cry because you realise now how horrible unions are by stealing our most vulnerable people in society. if not, you should. picking and stealing from our most vulnerable people is shameful.

 

[pokerspiv]

If wages increases don't cause unemployment, well then lets just raise wages tomorrow by 20%

See how that works out.

Why stop at 20%?

Let's just make the minimum wage $100,000 a year, then nobody will be poor.

Why do you right wing wingnuts hate poor people? Only Gina Rinehart herself could argue against the $100,000 minimum wage. Monsters.

 

[pokerspiv]

Seriously though, why do you guys bother?

The theory of demand and supply has been well known and understood for over 300 years. If these leftist barrackers don't get it, they never will. No point trying to educate people who would rather remain ignorant.

 

[Grin]

No point trying to educate people who would rather remain ignorant.

There's no mistake that you prove that point.

 

[Juddism]

I had a fascinating talk with a business man in Athens 2 months ago, about whats right and whats wrong with Greece, the GFC and why it impacted on Greece so badly, unemployment etc. He was dumbfounded when I said our unemployment was on the rise and could soon hit 6% after 22 consecutive years of growth. Greece has 30% unemployment. Geez we live in a lucky country.

because you can retire on a state funded pension at 45, that's why Greece's economy is stuffed. work 25 years and retire.

 

[Grin]

The theory of demand and supply has been well known and understood for over 300 years.

What did wages have to do with increased unemployment in the US a few years ago and reducing unemployment this year?

(I'll accept that you're mindlessly regurgitating propaganda aimed at the very simple as an answer)

 

[pokerspiv]

What did wages have to do with increased unemployment in the US a few years ago and reducing unemployment this year?

(I'll accept that your mindlessly regurgitating propaganda aimed at the very simple as an answer)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_demand

Fall in demand due to price increase is known as a "contraction"
Fall in demand due to other factors is a "decrease".

Again, this sort of stuff is taught in year 11 economics. You have to be able to draw these graphs from memory to pass the subject.

The fact that you don't understand it doesn't make me a propagandist. It just makes you a blowhard with little idea of the subject you are discusssing, and zero willingness to learn. The "very simple" in this case is you, which is why I have used simple graphs aimed at educating 16 year olds.