With unemployment sitting at a 10 year high at 6.4 percent you would think that the government would be concerned but its not. Of course the government resorts to the usual blame game.
That is blame the unemployed themselves. If you find yourself still unemployed despite your best efforts to find work you are a victim not a criminal. The argument the government uses is the the unemployed are lazy or too picky in the type of work they want, that is utter B*#L  S&*T !.

There are some who don't want to work but the majority do, no sane self respecting individual wants to stay on welfare for the rest of their lives. The problem is that the work that is available is almost always skilled or highly skilled and almost all the low skilled positions are reserved for the corrupt 457 industry. Its no coincidence that with the rise of 457 workers so to follows the rise in Australians being the right to employment. Society needs to change the language it uses when referring to job seekers. To be called unemployed is a deeply offensive term, it suggests some one who chooses not to work. Of course this suits the government fine after all job seekers are the most hated and vulnerable group in society. If you are denied the right to work you are regarded as a criminal and not the victim. And here is the crux, if you have exhausted every avenue to find work and you find your self beaten out to jobs by someone with a foreign passport you are actually a victim.

You are a victim of discrimination by the employer who is using the 457 as a weapon against you and you are a victim of societal prejudice by people who have never been in your situation. In July next year the government will implement changes that will force the unemployed to apply for 40 positions a month at the same time jobseekers will have to undertake 15 hours of voluntary work a week. On one hand job seekers will be expected to spend more time looking for work but at the same time they will be expected to spend 15 hours on top of that that with voluntary work.

The reason why this will ultimately fail just like Work For The Dole is because job seekers will begin to view looking for work as a chore rather than a challenge. They will look for ways to streamline the process by applying for any old job to fill the quota. The problem is of course that any old job these days is being filled by foreigners courtesy of "you guessed it" the 457.
If we had an industry that only allowed only Australians the right to work it would be called racist but the 457 is fine by the government and employers.

There was a time when high unemployment was a concern for governments back then it had a program called the Commonwealth Employment Service C.E.S. It sounds ground and compared with what passes for employment assistance these days, it was. When the coalition came to power in 1996 it was quickly disbanded. The fact that employment was falling at the time made the move seem less destructive than it actually was. The problem is that that there has never been an effective replacement. With the government choosing to out source employment services to the private sector the emphasis has changed from helping the unemployed to making money off them. In a nut shell there is no national employment service for job seekers to turn to, almost all the low skilled positions are automatically filled with 457 workers and the result is unemployment is rising.

Whats the governments solution ? To help job seekers through training programs ? NO !

To create employment be ending the 457 industry ? NO !

Their solution is to punish the victim by blaming them. Whats the governments mantra you might ask. "We can't help you until you help yourselves " Well thats fine in a world with out employer to applicant discrimination and the 457 industry but thats not the the world we are living in.We have been fed the lie of globalisation where someone from from overseas is entitled to work that should be reserved for Australians, where a company can outsource its workforce to a poorer country to please it share holders and we have a government that  not only allows but actually encourages both practices. Never mind the fact that these are two of the main causes of unemployment.

In short, jobseekers rather than being viewed as the victim in all this immorality are actually viewed as the criminals. It would be  like blaming the disabled for being disabled. Australia's rising unemployment is the result of the importation of cheap foreign workers, the export of low skilled position to those same countries and a heartless government that has chosen to privatise employment assistance. The sooner those with the privilege of a job "and it is a privilege these days not a right" see the real reason why unemployment is rising they might have some sympathy for the victims rather than the perpetrators. As unemployment continues to rise, people need to realise that its government policies that are largely to blame
for this. The government could legislate to stop Australian companies shipping jobs off shore, it could end the corrupt 457 scheme that sees 100,000 Australians with out a job and it could re introduce a national employment assistance scheme but it chooses to do nothing. Instead it blames the victim and makes the rest of society do the same. For these reason and many more the government's Newstart obligations will only lead
to a further growth in unemployment. 

We have nearly 800 000 unemployed and rising fast under LNP, we have 200 000 jobs available, Tony makes it open slather on 457s , no restrictions, as many as you like.

Go Team Australia, hmmmmmm

Gina gets cheap Filipino labor for her mines and Tony gets her patronage.

I cant see what the problem is  :D

fractalign wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:28am:

The problem is that the work that is available is almost always skilled or highly skilled and almost all the low skilled positions are reserved for the corrupt 457 industry

So there was no unemployment before 457 was introduced?  ::)


fractalign wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:28am:

There are some who don't want to work

Yes so what's wrong with a policy designed to get them off their arses?


fractalign wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:28am:

To be called unemployed is a deeply offensive term, it suggests some one who chooses not to work.

I guess you could call them 'public servants'. But that would offend them more  ;D

   

Tony Abbot is a foreigner himself. His true loyalty lies with the military industrial complex and big business and its share holders. He has no loyalty with the Australian people. He is the worst prime minister this country has ever had the Coalition are idiots for not realises that he is their worst enemy.

The sooner they dump him the better for the rest of us.

Unemployment can happen to anyone at any time.  Those that are working today, could be the ones that are unemployed tomorrow.      :(

Swagman wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:43am:

fractalign wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 9:28am: The problem is that the work that is available is almost always skilled or highly skilled and almost all the low skilled positions are reserved for the corrupt 457 industry So there was no unemployment before 457 was introduced?  ::) There has always been unemployment but only a fool would argue that the 457 has not worsened it. If there are 100,000 foreign workers in this country than there are 100,000 Australians being denied those positions. The problem is that that the minute you dare to question this racist policy you are labelled a racist, well I guess that makes me a racist. Its simple maths, no 457 and the unemployment drops 100,000. fractalign wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 9:28am: There are some who don't want to work Yes so what's wrong with a policy designed to get them off their arses? fractalign wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 9:28am: To be called unemployed is a deeply offensive term, it suggests some one who chooses not to work. I guess you could call them 'public servants'. But that would offend them more  ;D

wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:47am:

Unemployment can happen to anyone at any time.  Those that are working today, could be the ones that are unemployed tomorrow.      :(

Its for that reason alone that people should realise why this government is so toxic when it comes to labelling the unemployed as scum. The way this government is expending the 457 no one with a job should feel safe anymore.

fractalign wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:47am:

Tony Abbot is a foreigner himself. His true loyalty lies with the military industrial complex and big business and its share holders. He has no loyalty with the Australian people. He is the worst prime minister this country has ever had the Coalition are idiots for not realises that he is their worst enemy. The sooner they dump him the better for the rest of us.

Abbott so hates Australians he refused to become one, so when he 28 his mum stepped in and made him one.

Soon as his mum did this Abbott shot home to his beloved England till they could not tolerate him anymore, so back here he come to take it out on us for his mum making him Australian.

Swagman wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:43am:

fractalign wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 9:28am: The problem is that the work that is available is almost always skilled or highly skilled and almost all the low skilled positions are reserved for the corrupt 457 industry So there was no unemployment before 457 was introduced?  ::) fractalign wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 9:28am: There are some who don't want to work There are plenty of people who don't want to work and many of those already have jobs, as far as getting people motivated goes, it  might get them off their arses but it won't get them jobs if those positions are being reserved for foreigners. And here in lies the problem, it seems the focus of the government is not to get the unemployed into paid work but to keep them active with unpaid work and job seeking activities that amount to nothing in the long run. If they ended the 457 there would be 100'000 more Australians with jobs and the ones who refuse would no longer have an excuse. I am not at all convinced that the government wants the long term unemployed back into work, not when it has the 457 in place. fractalign wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 9:28am: To be called unemployed is a deeply offensive term, it suggests some one who chooses not to work. I guess you could call them 'public servants'. But that would offend them more  ;D

DaS Energy wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:04am:

fractalign wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 9:47am: Tony Abbot is a foreigner himself. His true loyalty lies with the military industrial complex and big business and its share holders. He has no loyalty with the Australian people. He is the worst prime minister this country has ever had the Coalition are idiots for not realises that he is their worst enemy. The sooner they dump him the better for the rest of us. Abbott so hates Australians he refused to become one, so when he 28 his mum stepped in and made him one. Soon as his mum did this Abbott shot home to his beloved England till they could not tolerate him anymore, so back here he come to take it out on us for his mum making him Australian.

Racist

wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:47am:

Unemployment can happen to anyone at any time.  Those that are working today, could be the ones that are unemployed tomorrow.      :(

And thats looking more likely as Abbott sends Aussie jobs overseas and imports 457 visa holders to fill whats left.

Unemployment is not a government responsiblity .
people are the owners of thier own labour and are free to sell this labour into a labour market.

People are the owners of their own personality and looks and are free to sell their personilty and looks into the dating market.

If you have a dud personailty and are a fatty with acne, you work on improving yourself so that you can aquire a date. you do not whinge to the government.

If you have unattractive features like laziness, poor literacy, poor numeracy or a bad attitude, you work on improving yourself so that you can aquire a job.
you do not whinge to the government.
free self improvement courses are available thru "work for the dole" and i'd suggest those in need of polishing their package partake with enthusiasm

fractalign wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:52am:

There has always been unemployment but only a fool would argue that the 457 has not worsened it. If there are 100,000 foreign workers in this country than there are 100,000 Australians being denied those positions. The problem is that that the minute you dare to question this racist policy you are labelled a racist, well I guess that makes me a racist. Its simple maths, no 457 and the unemployment drops 100,000

457 was introduced because there were jobs available and not enough takers.   

aquascoot wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:25am:

Unemployment is not a government responsiblity . people are the owners of thier own labour and are free to sell this labour into a labour market.

Employers aren't buying. Lackbrain idiots have so poisoned the well for the jobless that being "unemployed" carries more social stigma as being an "alcoholic". The only REAL difference between someone who is employed and someone who is unemployed is that the unemployed do not have jobs. Everything else is just a mythical stereotype with no basis in fact.


Quote:

People are the owners of their own personality and looks and are free to sell their personilty and looks into the dating market. If you have a dud personailty and are a fatty with acne, you work on improving yourself so that you can aquire a date. you do not whinge to the government.

Unemployed people have every right to complain about a lack of support from the government when the Prime Minister of that government is perpetuating the same lies and stereotypes that poison the well against the unemployed and so make it harder for the unemployed to find work. (Job snobs? Really?) The unemployed have a hard enough time of it as it is. The last thing the unemployed need is an uncaring government that shows them no respect.


Quote:

If you have unattractive features like laziness, poor literacy, poor numeracy or a bad attitude, you work on improving yourself so that you can aquire a job. you do not whinge to the government. free self improvement courses are available thru "work for the dole" and i'd suggest those in need of polishing their package partake with enthusiasm

Why do you keep parading your utter wilful ignorance? You very clearly know nothing about the topic, otherwise you wouldn't post such rubbish. Comparing unemployment to dating? REALLY? Do you go around dating by distributing resumes and application letters to everyone you meet?  ;D ;D

Quote:

Comparing unemployment to dating? REALLY? Do you go around dating by distributing resumes and application letters to everyone you meet?

I think you might have just given someone an idea for a new 'reality' TV show. ;D

fractalign wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:58am:

wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 9:47am: Unemployment can happen to anyone at any time.  Those that are working today, could be the ones that are unemployed tomorrow.      :( Its for that reason alone that people should realise why this government is so toxic when it comes to labelling the unemployed as scum. The way this government is expending the 457 no one with a job should feel safe anymore.

This is why everyone with a job should be concerned at the widespread abuse of the 457 visa. Some employers are sacking their entire workforce and replacing them with people on 457 visas. That could happen anywhere, anytime.

aquascoot wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:25am:

Unemployment is not a government responsiblity . people are the owners of thier own labour and are free to sell this labour into a labour market. People are the owners of their own personality and looks and are free to sell their personilty and looks into the dating market. If you have a dud personailty and are a fatty with acne, you work on improving yourself so that you can aquire a date. you do not whinge to the government. If you have unattractive features like laziness, poor literacy, poor numeracy or a bad attitude, you work on improving yourself so that you can aquire a job. you do not whinge to the government. free self improvement courses are available thru "work for the dole" and i'd suggest those in need of polishing their package partake with enthusiasm

You been reading light too much Honkie!

Fine sentiment - so you are openly advocating that people flog off their labour for $2 an hour if that's what Gina  the market demands?

Stop that - you'll go blind.

aquascoot wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 10:25am:

Unemployment is not a government responsiblity . people are the owners of thier own labour and are free to sell this labour into a labour market. People are the owners of their own personality and looks and are free to sell their personilty and looks into the dating market. If you have a dud personailty and are a fatty with acne, you work on improving yourself so that you can aquire a date. you do not whinge to the government. If you have unattractive features like laziness, poor literacy, poor numeracy or a bad attitude, you work on improving yourself so that you can aquire a job. you do not whinge to the government. free self improvement courses are available thru "work for the dole" and i'd suggest those in need of polishing their package partake with enthusiasm

It is, when it's as a direct result of their poor policies.

But feel free to continue to peddle your negative stereotypes.

Everything you Prog whiners have been saying here was happening under Labor and the GALP.

The current monthly figure is not a result of this governments policies.

The construction phase of the boom has ended and so many people will find themselves out of work adding to those already there.  Most of them were there during the last government.

You people have NO CREDIBILITY.

Grendel wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 2:06pm:

Everything you Prog whiners have been saying here was happening under Labor and the GALP. The current monthly figure is not a result of this governments policies. The construction phase of the boom has ended and so many people will find themselves out of work adding to those already there.  Most of them were there during the last government. You people have NO CREDIBILITY.

No there was a restriction on how many 457s a company could employ, Abbott and only Abbott made it a free for all, many as you can ship in, jobs for everyone, except your own citizens, they can work for their dole.

Its time wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 3:14pm:

Grendel wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 2:06pm: Everything you Prog whiners have been saying here was happening under Labor and the GALP. The current monthly figure is not a result of this governments policies. The construction phase of the boom has ended and so many people will find themselves out of work adding to those already there.  Most of them were there during the last government. You people have NO CREDIBILITY. No there was a restriction on how many 457s a company could employ, Abbott and only Abbott made it a free for all, many as you can ship in, jobs for everyone, except your own citizens, they can work for their dole.

Labor policy re 457s allowed Gina to employ people fro O/S...  or have you forgotten that?

oh and BTW just found out the ABS changed the criteria for unemployed... and it is this rather than any huge change in jobs that has caused the increase.

Personally having seen the changes now, I think they are screwing with reality yet again and should have left the criteria as it was. ::)

Unless of course they want to get really fair dinkum and include people who get only 1 or less hours work a week.  Or actually make the criteria actually reflect the real situation by changing it completely.

Grendel wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 2:06pm:

Everything you Prog whiners have been saying here was happening under Labor and the GALP. The current monthly figure is not a result of this governments policies. The construction phase of the boom has ended and so many people will find themselves out of work adding to those already there.  Most of them were there during the last government. You people have NO CREDIBILITY.

They've had nearly a year and they hold no responsibility for problems?

Hmmm - the construction phase - kinda give the truth to what I've been saying about this banana republicanism right there.  No solid value at all.

So - when am I going to hear from this government their plan for solid infrastructure and management that will see this country headed the right way?  Would make a nice change from their unemployed bashing and their Labor bashing over the past.

I've been offering stuff here for ages..... when is Tone going to take some up and offer me a finder's fee?

Grendel wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 3:32pm:

Its time wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 3:14pm: No there was a restriction on how many 457s a company could employ, Abbott and only Abbott made it a free for all, many as you can ship in, jobs for everyone, except your own citizens, they can work for their dole. Labor policy re 457s allowed Gina to employ people fro O/S...  or have you forgotten that?

Howard introduced 457 visas in 1996, or have you forgotten that?


Quote:

oh and BTW just found out the ABS changed the criteria for unemployed... and it is this rather than any huge change in jobs that has caused the increase. Personally having seen the changes now, I think they are screwing with reality yet again and should have left the criteria as it was. ::) Unless of course they want to get really fair dinkum and include people who get only 1 or less hours work a week.  Or actually make the criteria actually reflect the real situation by changing it completely.

A fair point (apart from the unnecessarily large font), though the details are in need of some examination.

A small jump due to reporting methods would be making the statistics closer to the actual numbers. The criteria for reporting is set artificially low and the true number of people looking for work - or more work - is a lot higher than the headline unemployment rate. I find the underemployment numbers to be a more useful measurement.

I think it would be best for the ABS to publish statistics using both criteria for at least 12 months to facilitate a comparison.

welcome to globalisation.

labour is a commodity, just like iron ore, wool and computer chips.

we expect free trade in commodities to increase prosperity , so labour is no different.

if gina can source labour at $2 an hour, good luck to her.  the labour protectionist fags all love the cheap trinkets on ebay made in china. they dont be giving a sh*t about local manufacturers.
they love the $1 milk courtesy of woolies cartel, they dont be giving a sh*t about farmers.
so deregulate the labour market and if aussies are smarter and work harder, they can earn more. otherwise, they are just racist cry babies wanting others to work for cheap wages but refusing to do so themselves.
doesnt matter if they accept it or not, they'll accept it when they have nothing to eat but dirt and the power gets cut off.
welcome to the jungle leftards

aquascoot wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 4:45pm:

welcome to globalisation. labour is a commodity, just like iron ore, wool and computer chips. we expect free trade in commodities to increase prosperity , so labour is no different. if gina can source labour at $2 an hour, good luck to her.  the labour protectionist fags all love the cheap trinkets on ebay made in china. they dont be giving a sh*t about local manufacturers. they love the $1 milk courtesy of woolies cartel, they dont be giving a sh*t about farmers. so deregulate the labour market and if aussies are smarter and work harder, they can earn more. otherwise, they are just racist cry babies wanting others to work for cheap wages but refusing to do so themselves. doesnt matter if they accept it or not, they'll accept it when they have nothing to eat but dirt and the power gets cut off. welcome to the jungle leftards

I hope YOU get "globalised" out of work or down to subsistence levels for your income. You deserve it.

aquascoot wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 4:45pm:

welcome to globalisation. labour is a commodity, just like iron ore, wool and computer chips. we expect free trade in commodities to increase prosperity , so labour is no different. if gina can source labour at $2 an hour, good luck to her.  the labour protectionist fags all love the cheap trinkets on ebay made in china. they dont be giving a sh*t about local manufacturers. they love the $1 milk courtesy of woolies cartel, they dont be giving a sh*t about farmers. so deregulate the labour market and if aussies are smarter and work harder, they can earn more. otherwise, they are just racist cry babies wanting others to work for cheap wages but refusing to do so themselves. doesnt matter if they accept it or not, they'll accept it when they have nothing to eat but dirt and the power gets cut off. welcome to the jungle leftards

I agree...and we should also get cheaper defence forces by offering out tenders and accepting the lowest bidder.
Countries like Vietnam and Cambodia could supply us with all the equipment and personnel that we need for a fraction of the cost of our present army, navy and airforce.

Bam wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 4:32pm:

Grendel wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 3:32pm: Its time wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 3:14pm: No there was a restriction on how many 457s a company could employ, Abbott and only Abbott made it a free for all, many as you can ship in, jobs for everyone, except your own citizens, they can work for their dole. Labor policy re 457s allowed Gina to employ people fro O/S...  or have you forgotten that? Howard introduced 457 visas in 1996, or have you forgotten that? Quote: oh and BTW just found out the ABS changed the criteria for unemployed... and it is this rather than any huge change in jobs that has caused the increase. Personally having seen the changes now, I think they are screwing with reality yet again and should have left the criteria as it was. ::) Unless of course they want to get really fair dinkum and include people who get only 1 or less hours work a week.  Or actually make the criteria actually reflect the real situation by changing it completely. A fair point (apart from the unnecessarily large font), Not unnecessary at all it is obvious some here ignore small font writing and skim over small font writing or are just biased and disingenuous... either way the larger font is justified... though the details are in need of some examination. A small jump due to reporting methods would be making the statistics closer to the actual numbers. The criteria for reporting is set artificially low and the true number of people looking for work - or more work - is a lot higher than the headline unemployment rate. I find the underemployment numbers to be a more useful measurement.  you mean the ones I have spoken about before and the casualisation of the workforce?  those ones. I think it would be best for the ABS to publish statistics using both criteria for at least 12 months to facilitate a comparison. Would have been simpler to just post I agree.... :)

Bam wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 5:01pm:

aquascoot wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 4:45pm: welcome to globalisation. labour is a commodity, just like iron ore, wool and computer chips. we expect free trade in commodities to increase prosperity , so labour is no different. if gina can source labour at $2 an hour, good luck to her.  the labour protectionist fags all love the cheap trinkets on ebay made in china. they dont be giving a sh*t about local manufacturers. they love the $1 milk courtesy of woolies cartel, they dont be giving a sh*t about farmers. so deregulate the labour market and if aussies are smarter and work harder, they can earn more. otherwise, they are just racist cry babies wanting others to work for cheap wages but refusing to do so themselves. doesnt matter if they accept it or not, they'll accept it when they have nothing to eat but dirt and the power gets cut off. welcome to the jungle leftards I hope YOU get "globalised" out of work or down to subsistence levels for your income. You deserve it.

I was... as were 799 of my workmates...it aint a fun experience.

Bam wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 5:01pm:

aquascoot wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 4:45pm: welcome to globalisation. labour is a commodity, just like iron ore, wool and computer chips. we expect free trade in commodities to increase prosperity , so labour is no different. if gina can source labour at $2 an hour, good luck to her.  the labour protectionist fags all love the cheap trinkets on ebay made in china. they dont be giving a sh*t about local manufacturers. they love the $1 milk courtesy of woolies cartel, they dont be giving a sh*t about farmers. so deregulate the labour market and if aussies are smarter and work harder, they can earn more. otherwise, they are just racist cry babies wanting others to work for cheap wages but refusing to do so themselves. doesnt matter if they accept it or not, they'll accept it when they have nothing to eat but dirt and the power gets cut off. welcome to the jungle leftards I hope YOU get "globalised" out of work or down to subsistence levels for your income. You deserve it.

aussie farmers are worlds most efficient.
if the geelong car workers were worlds most efficient, the plant would be expanding.
maybe they need to spend a month on a dairy farm and work 4 am to 8 pm 7 days a week, to see how its done

Some wonder why people join unions.  Go figure.      :(    

No jobs and no vision under Abbott Government
a jobs sign.
07 August, 2014 | Media Release Unemployment has hit a 12 year high while the Abbott Government has been focused on punishing Australians with its cruel budget measures instead of creating jobs.

The 6.4% unemployment rate is the highest since June 2002, said ACTU President Ged Kearney.

“The Abbott Government’s budget is not just a political failure, but an economic failure as well,” said Ms Kearney.

“Australia needs a plan for jobs, not a plan to slash the social safety net.”

There are now 789,000 unemployed Australians but only 146,100 available jobs, said Ms Kearney.

“Yet just last week the Abbott Government revealed its plans to make job seekers apply for 40 jobs a month – where are the jobs for them to apply for?

“No matter how many applications people send out, 789,000 people can’t fit into 146,000 vacancies.

Australians want a Government with a plan to address job creation and strengthen the economy – not a Government that is intent on punishing hardworking Australians and the most vulnerable in our community, said Ms Kearney.

“Instead the Abbott Government’s answer is to slash public sector jobs, cut $500 million out of the budget for skills and training and shut down investment in clean energy jobs.”

“The Government has refused to support industries in restructuring, such as automotive industry, causing tens of thousands of jobs to be lost.”

Instead of trying to make people pay more for medications and to visit the GP, Tony Abbott should be telling Australians how he is going to create jobs, said Ms Kearney.

“These shocking unemployment figures show just how sadly lacking the Government’s economic vision for Australia really is.”

wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 8:04pm:

Some wonder why people join unions.  Go figure.      :(

only numpties belive in unions
Norco (a co op of private farmers) have got contracts to sell 1/2 of the milk into china as baby formula and fresh product at $9 a litre.
will go from strength to strength.
non unionised, worlds best practice.

the geelong ford workers joined a union (compulsory).
sure they got all these lurks and perks that farmers would never ask for. they also got retrenched.

Hows the union life working out for them down in geelong.
When my farming mates in northern NSW have cashed up, we might come buy their homes. then we might boycott woolies and the auto workers can pay $9 a litre for milk

gotta love globalisation, as long as your not a union bludger that is ;)

adelcrow wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 5:06pm:

aquascoot wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 4:45pm: welcome to globalisation. labour is a commodity, just like iron ore, wool and computer chips. we expect free trade in commodities to increase prosperity , so labour is no different. if gina can source labour at $2 an hour, good luck to her.  the labour protectionist fags all love the cheap trinkets on ebay made in china. they dont be giving a sh*t about local manufacturers. they love the $1 milk courtesy of woolies cartel, they dont be giving a sh*t about farmers. so deregulate the labour market and if aussies are smarter and work harder, they can earn more. otherwise, they are just racist cry babies wanting others to work for cheap wages but refusing to do so themselves. doesnt matter if they accept it or not, they'll accept it when they have nothing to eat but dirt and the power gets cut off. welcome to the jungle leftards I agree...and we should also get cheaper defence forces by offering out tenders and accepting the lowest bidder. Countries like Vietnam and Cambodia could supply us with all the equipment and personnel that we need for a fraction of the cost of our present army, navy and airforce.

While we are at it we should out source all our political positions to overseas countries. Perhaps the 457 could be expanded to include politicians. Not happy with our pollies, the Australian people could bring in someone from Norway, Denmark or Germany to show us what a compassionate functioning  democracy should run like !

wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 8:04pm:

Some wonder why people join unions.  Go figure.      :(

They are as necessary now as they ever were, if not more so.

Most of the clowns here and elsewhere who are bagging unions are fools
who, regardless of the hypocrisy of it all, still take the benefits that unions
gained for them.

Remember the old 'No ticket, no work' days?

Should be brought back, but with an emphasis on 'No ticket, no benefits'.

fractalign wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 9:47am:

Tony Abbot is a foreigner himself. His true loyalty lies with the military industrial complex and big business and its share holders. He has no loyalty with the Australian people. He is the worst prime minister this country has ever had the Coalition are idiots for not realises that he is their worst enemy. The sooner they dump him the better for the rest of us.

Agree with that!

fractalign wrote on Aug 10^th, 2014 at 11:49pm:

adelcrow wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 5:06pm: aquascoot wrote on Aug 10th, 2014 at 4:45pm: welcome to globalisation. labour is a commodity, just like iron ore, wool and computer chips. we expect free trade in commodities to increase prosperity , so labour is no different. if gina can source labour at $2 an hour, good luck to her.  the labour protectionist fags all love the cheap trinkets on ebay made in china. they dont be giving a sh*t about local manufacturers. they love the $1 milk courtesy of woolies cartel, they dont be giving a sh*t about farmers. so deregulate the labour market and if aussies are smarter and work harder, they can earn more. otherwise, they are just racist cry babies wanting others to work for cheap wages but refusing to do so themselves. doesnt matter if they accept it or not, they'll accept it when they have nothing to eat but dirt and the power gets cut off. welcome to the jungle leftards I agree...and we should also get cheaper defence forces by offering out tenders and accepting the lowest bidder. Countries like Vietnam and Cambodia could supply us with all the equipment and personnel that we need for a fraction of the cost of our present army, navy and airforce. While we are at it we should out source all our political positions to overseas countries. Perhaps the 457 could be expanded to include politicians. Not happy with our pollies, the Australian people could bring in someone from Norway, Denmark or Germany to show us what a compassionate functioning  democracy should run like !

personally, i'd bring in someone from Beijing, seoul or taipai to show us what 7.5 % economic growth is like.
they would, of course, be here to support the movers, shakers and innovators (ie, the lifters). they would be here to ignore the leaners, ;)

To the conservatives high unemployment is not a bad thing, sure they took credit for the coincidental low unemployment during the Howard term but that was not really what they wanted.

To the conservatives a huge pool of unemployed can be used to drive the lowest wages down further with competition for low paying work which is done by the people they don't like and don't care about.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 7:24am:

To the conservatives high unemployment is not a bad thing, sure they took credit for the coincidental low unemployment during the Howard term but that was not really what they wanted. To the conservatives a huge pool of unemployed can be used to drive the lowest wages down further with competition for low paying work which is done by the people they don't like and don't care about.

No , I would disagree with that.
lots of people, innovative and starting new small businesses (and that's where the future employment is) creates lots of demand in the economy, lots of spenders and buyers,'
The only business that would like high unemployment would be EB games, foxtel and blockbuster video.

Also, people are the business, especially in small business. if you have good people and your competitors have staff that are "slackers", then their business is doomed.
this is the big problem for the unemployed and why I keep telling them that talking doom and gloom like crook or greenswin is death to your employment prospects. its why I keep telling them that getting a job (a good job) is like getting a good date.
you have to put in effort.
it isn't going to just happen and having a negative attitude is something an employer or a customer can pick up on immediately. the slacker has a certain 'stench of failure" about him.
he needs an attitude change before his employment prospects will be going anywhere. and hating on the bosses and employers is plain ridiculous. its like being the worlds biggest misogynist and then going to a singles bar.

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 7:44am:

Dnarever wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 7:24am: To the conservatives high unemployment is not a bad thing, sure they took credit for the coincidental low unemployment during the Howard term but that was not really what they wanted. To the conservatives a huge pool of unemployed can be used to drive the lowest wages down further with competition for low paying work which is done by the people they don't like and don't care about. No , I would disagree with that. lots of people, innovative and starting new small businesses (and that's where the future employment is) creates lots of demand in the economy, lots of spenders and buyers,' The only business that would like high unemployment would be EB games, foxtel and blockbuster video. Also, people are the business, especially in small business. if you have good people and your competitors have staff that are "slackers", then their business is doomed. this is the big problem for the unemployed and why I keep telling them that talking doom and gloom like crook or greenswin is death to your employment prospects. its why I keep telling them that getting a job (a good job) is like getting a good date. you have to put in effort. it isn't going to just happen and having a negative attitude is something an employer or a customer can pick up on immediately. the slacker has a certain 'stench of failure" about him. he needs an attitude change before his employment prospects will be going anywhere. and hating on the bosses and employers is plain ridiculous. its like being the worlds biggest misogynist and then going to a singles bar.

No , I would disagree with that.

Well there's a surprise.

Actually this was the policy the liberals implemented when Howard was treasurer and they explained what they were trying to do.

It was meant to cure stagflation by driving wages down. It not only didn't work it made the problem worse. One of the reason that Howard is widely considered to be Australia's worst ever treasurer.

But Yes the Liberals have deliberately done this in the past, they implemented policy meant to increase unemployment to achieve a general wage reduction to assist employers. The theory that a large pool of unemployed means a pool of cheap labour is attractive to conservatives.

Yet some still wonder why people join union.  Go figure.   ::)      

wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 7:55am:

Yet some still wonder why people join union.  Go figure.   ::)

At last something we agree on crook.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 7:49am:

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 7:44am: Dnarever wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 7:24am: To the conservatives high unemployment is not a bad thing, sure they took credit for the coincidental low unemployment during the Howard term but that was not really what they wanted. To the conservatives a huge pool of unemployed can be used to drive the lowest wages down further with competition for low paying work which is done by the people they don't like and don't care about. No , I would disagree with that. lots of people, innovative and starting new small businesses (and that's where the future employment is) creates lots of demand in the economy, lots of spenders and buyers,' The only business that would like high unemployment would be EB games, foxtel and blockbuster video. Also, people are the business, especially in small business. if you have good people and your competitors have staff that are "slackers", then their business is doomed. this is the big problem for the unemployed and why I keep telling them that talking doom and gloom like crook or greenswin is death to your employment prospects. its why I keep telling them that getting a job (a good job) is like getting a good date. you have to put in effort. it isn't going to just happen and having a negative attitude is something an employer or a customer can pick up on immediately. the slacker has a certain 'stench of failure" about him. he needs an attitude change before his employment prospects will be going anywhere. and hating on the bosses and employers is plain ridiculous. its like being the worlds biggest misogynist and then going to a singles bar. No , I would disagree with that. Well there's a surprise. Actually this was the policy the liberals implemented when Howard was treasurer and they explained what they were trying to do. It was meant to cure stagflation by driving wages down. It not only didn't work it made the problem worse. One of the reason that Howard is widely considered to be Australia's worst ever treasurer. But Yes the Liberals have deliberately done this in the past, they implemented policy meant to increase unemployment to achieve a general wage reduction to assist employers. The theory that a large pool of unemployed means a pool of cheap labour is attractive to conservatives.

Workchoices may not be popular but it is a road down which we will be going.
The globalisation of nearly all markets for "stuff" MUST include a realisation that "wages for labour" is part of that "stuff"

when Ken Knight won the Harvard business award for his thesis on NIKE being a "global roamer". that NIKE would move its factory to korea and when cheaper wages became available in Vietnam, would move there and when cheaper wages became availbale in Indonesia , would move there.....the die has been cast my friend,

Hansen wanted to put up barriers, barriers and tarrifs that were shredded by union heavy weight Bob Hawke.

aussies can bury their head in the sand and think they deserve $ 40 a hour to manufacture the same item that an Asian will do for $5.
They can think they deserve $30 an hour to work in a call centre when an Asian will do it for $5.

But they are pissing into the wind.
workchoices and flexibility of the labor market is inevitable.

the powers of globalisation of the labour market aren't going to stop for crook or yourself, no matter how much you bury your head in the sand.

the unions will make this problem much worse.
learn from our sectors which can compete globally

farming
health
finance and insurance
private universities

hardly a union in site.

the union is dead and workchoices is coming.
Bob Hawke and John Button made it so (and good on them)

Well aquascoot, the thing is I don't think we do agree.   :( 

Workchoices.    :o    :o    :o    :o    :o    :o

wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 8:39am:

Well aquascoot, the thing is I don't think we do agree.   :(

Crook, looks like its you and a few pommie shop stewards Versus me, wall street, every multinational on earth, the US congress , the politburo of china, Russia and every Asian tiger economy.

I think we are going to win.

Workchoices , call it what you like,
everything you buy now has a deregulated price (except bread and rice in venezuala)
your labour and the rate you sell it for will be deregulated out from underneath you (actually it already has)

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 9:30am:

wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 8:39am: Well aquascoot, the thing is I don't think we do agree.   :(  Crook, looks like its you and a few pommie shop stewards Versus me, wall street, every multinational on earth, the US congress , the politburo of china, Russia and every Asian tiger economy. I think we are going to win. Workchoices , call it what you like, everything you buy now has a deregulated price (except bread and rice in venezuala) your labour and the rate you sell it for will be deregulated out from underneath you (actually it already has)

And something you can never, ever figure out - it will affect YOU as well.

Do you really think that the workers will cop a 50% or greater drop in their income just so the bosses can grow even fatter on the labour of the workers? Or do you think the pay of CEOs will come down as well? CEO pay needs to be cut by 95% to take it back to the same proportion of workers' pay that it had in the 1960's. It is inevitable. If the workers are part of a global market, the CEOs are also a part of the global market.

Nobody will cop a 50% drop in their income if they have a mortgage to service. If pay dropped by that amount, it WILL create a depression in Australia as money is taken out of the economy, with mortgage defaults around the country.

It's why I keep speaking out against all the factors that cause house prices to be unnecessarily high - negative gearing, capital gains concessions, lax enforcement of foreign investment rules, everything. We need to take the pressure off house prices and get them stable. Germany has stable house prices (no increase for 20 years) and it has the strongest economy in Europe, a strong manufacturing base and a culture of hard work and savings. Germans do a lot of things right. Maybe we should start emulating them more.

Bam wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 9:47am:

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 9:30am: wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 8:39am: Well aquascoot, the thing is I don't think we do agree.   :(  Crook, looks like its you and a few pommie shop stewards Versus me, wall street, every multinational on earth, the US congress , the politburo of china, Russia and every Asian tiger economy. I think we are going to win. Workchoices , call it what you like, everything you buy now has a deregulated price (except bread and rice in venezuala) your labour and the rate you sell it for will be deregulated out from underneath you (actually it already has) And something you can never, ever figure out - it will affect YOU as well. Do you really think that the workers will cop a 50% or greater drop in their income just so the bosses can grow even fatter on the labour of the workers? Or do you think the pay of CEOs will come down as well? CEO pay needs to be cut by 95% to take it back to the same proportion of workers' pay that it had in the 1960's. It is inevitable. If the workers are part of a global market, the CEOs are also a part of the global market. Nobody will cop a 50% drop in their income if they have a mortgage to service. If pay dropped by that amount, it WILL create a depression in Australia as money is taken out of the economy, with mortgage defaults around the country. It's why I keep speaking out against all the factors that cause house prices to be unnecessarily high - negative gearing, capital gains concessions, lax enforcement of foreign investment rules, everything. We need to take the pressure off house prices and get them stable. Germany has stable house prices (no increase for 20 years) and it has the strongest economy in Europe, a strong manufacturing base and a culture of hard work and savings. Germans do a lot of things right. Maybe we should start emulating them more.

We are, but in all the bad old ways, unfortunately. Not the good, modern, forward-thinking ways.

Bam wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 9:47am:

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 9:30am: wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 8:39am: Well aquascoot, the thing is I don't think we do agree.   :(  Crook, looks like its you and a few pommie shop stewards Versus me, wall street, every multinational on earth, the US congress , the politburo of china, Russia and every Asian tiger economy. I think we are going to win. Workchoices , call it what you like, everything you buy now has a deregulated price (except bread and rice in venezuala) your labour and the rate you sell it for will be deregulated out from underneath you (actually it already has) And something you can never, ever figure out - it will affect YOU as well. Do you really think that the workers will cop a 50% or greater drop in their income just so the bosses can grow even fatter on the labour of the workers? Or do you think the pay of CEOs will come down as well? CEO pay needs to be cut by 95% to take it back to the same proportion of workers' pay that it had in the 1960's. It is inevitable. If the workers are part of a global market, the CEOs are also a part of the global market. Nobody will cop a 50% drop in their income if they have a mortgage to service. If pay dropped by that amount, it WILL create a depression in Australia as money is taken out of the economy, with mortgage defaults around the country. It's why I keep speaking out against all the factors that cause house prices to be unnecessarily high - negative gearing, capital gains concessions, lax enforcement of foreign investment rules, everything. We need to take the pressure off house prices and get them stable. Germany has stable house prices (no increase for 20 years) and it has the strongest economy in Europe, a strong manufacturing base and a culture of hard work and savings. Germans do a lot of things right. Maybe we should start emulating them more.

I'm sure the Occupy Wall Street people have already fixed this one ;) ;) ;) ;)

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 8:37am:

Dnarever wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 7:49am: aquascoot wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 7:44am: Dnarever wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 7:24am: To the conservatives high unemployment is not a bad thing, sure they took credit for the coincidental low unemployment during the Howard term but that was not really what they wanted. To the conservatives a huge pool of unemployed can be used to drive the lowest wages down further with competition for low paying work which is done by the people they don't like and don't care about. No , I would disagree with that. lots of people, innovative and starting new small businesses (and that's where the future employment is) creates lots of demand in the economy, lots of spenders and buyers,' The only business that would like high unemployment would be EB games, foxtel and blockbuster video. Also, people are the business, especially in small business. if you have good people and your competitors have staff that are "slackers", then their business is doomed. this is the big problem for the unemployed and why I keep telling them that talking doom and gloom like crook or greenswin is death to your employment prospects. its why I keep telling them that getting a job (a good job) is like getting a good date. you have to put in effort. it isn't going to just happen and having a negative attitude is something an employer or a customer can pick up on immediately. the slacker has a certain 'stench of failure" about him. he needs an attitude change before his employment prospects will be going anywhere. and hating on the bosses and employers is plain ridiculous. its like being the worlds biggest misogynist and then going to a singles bar. No , I would disagree with that. Well there's a surprise. Actually this was the policy the liberals implemented when Howard was treasurer and they explained what they were trying to do. It was meant to cure stagflation by driving wages down. It not only didn't work it made the problem worse. One of the reason that Howard is widely considered to be Australia's worst ever treasurer. But Yes the Liberals have deliberately done this in the past, they implemented policy meant to increase unemployment to achieve a general wage reduction to assist employers. The theory that a large pool of unemployed means a pool of cheap labour is attractive to conservatives. Workchoices may not be popular but it is a road down which we will be going. The globalisation of nearly all markets for "stuff" MUST include a realisation that "wages for labour" is part of that "stuff" when Ken Knight won the Harvard business award for his thesis on NIKE being a "global roamer". that NIKE would move its factory to korea and when cheaper wages became available in Vietnam, would move there and when cheaper wages became availbale in Indonesia , would move there.....the die has been cast my friend, Hansen wanted to put up barriers, barriers and tarrifs that were shredded by union heavy weight Bob Hawke. aussies can bury their head in the sand and think they deserve $ 40 a hour to manufacture the same item that an Asian will do for $5. They can think they deserve $30 an hour to work in a call centre when an Asian will do it for $5. But they are pissing into the wind. workchoices and flexibility of the labor market is inevitable. the powers of globalisation of the labour market aren't going to stop for crook or yourself, no matter how much you bury your head in the sand. the unions will make this problem much worse. learn from our sectors which can compete globally farming health finance and insurance private universities hardly a union in site. the union is dead and workchoices is coming. Bob Hawke and John Button made it so (and good on them)

See Ford, Holden, Toyota, Alcoa;

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 8:37am:

Workchoices may not be popular but it is a road down which we will be going. The globalisation of nearly all markets for "stuff" MUST include a realisation that "wages for labour" is part of that "stuff" when Ken Knight won the Harvard business award for his thesis on NIKE being a "global roamer". that NIKE would move its factory to korea and when cheaper wages became available in Vietnam, would move there and when cheaper wages became availbale in Indonesia , would move there.....the die has been cast my friend, Hansen wanted to put up barriers, barriers and tarrifs that were shredded by union heavy weight Bob Hawke. aussies can bury their head in the sand and think they deserve $ 40 a hour to manufacture the same item that an Asian will do for $5. They can think they deserve $30 an hour to work in a call centre when an Asian will do it for $5. But they are pissing into the wind. workchoices and flexibility of the labor market is inevitable. the powers of globalisation of the labour market aren't going to stop for crook or yourself, no matter how much you bury your head in the sand. the unions will make this problem much worse. learn from our sectors which can compete globally farming health finance and insurance private universities hardly a union in site. the union is dead and workchoices is coming. Bob Hawke and John Button made it so (and good on them)

Workchoices may not be popular but it is a road down which we will be going.
The globalisation of nearly all markets for "stuff" MUST include a realisation that "wages for labour" is part of that "stuff"

All the same people are happy to exclude Management Labour from the same equations. Claims that upper management wages are a result of competition are BS right up to CEO level.

Instead of paying $5Million + Bonuses + Share options you could get an Indian fellow to do the job just as well for $110K with the only bonus being that he gets to keep his job if he performs.

In You Nike example - Mark Parker earned $15.5 Million in 2013.

Did someone say Workchoices is coming?.  All unions stand by for industrial action.     :(

wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 10:14am:

All unions stand by

... and do nothing.

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 7:44am:

The only business that would like high unemployment would be EB games, foxtel and blockbuster video.

Your implication that the unemployed are lazy is highly offensive (and I'm sure you do it on purpose). This sort of well-poisoning fkwittery is not helpful.


Quote:

this is the big problem for the unemployed and why I keep telling them that talking doom and gloom like crook or greenswin is death to your employment prospects. its why I keep telling them that getting a job (a good job) is like getting a good date. you have to put in effort.

Here is your patronising attitude coming out again. You haven't got a clue. Do you really think the unemployed aren't looking for work? Do you really think someone who's applied for 1,000 jobs isn't trying?

I doubt you've applied for 1,000 jobs in your frigging LIFE. Yet there's at least 100,000 unemployed people in this country, right now, who have cracked that milestone since they last held a steady job. That is 100,000,000 unsuccessful job applications. Is there something wrong with what they are doing? Not usually. The only real problem is the inconvenient gap in the resume and the attitude among employers who think it fit to reject applicants with gaps in their work history. An unemployed person hasn't a chance in the current job market. Not because they are not trying, but because the rest of society has unfairly stigmatised the unemployed by perpetuating myths and stereotypes that have not been current for 40 years.


Quote:

it isn't going to just happen and having a negative attitude is something an employer or a customer can pick up on immediately. the slacker has a certain 'stench of failure" about him.

If you've applied for 1,000 jobs and not got one of them, you would not be optimistic either.


Quote:

he needs an attitude change before his employment prospects will be going anywhere.

Yes, an attitude change is needed - but not for the unemployed person. The attitude chance that is desperately needed is among the employers who will not hire anyone with gaps in their employment history, and the idiots in society as a whole who make life hard for the unemployed by stigmatising unemployment.

Your attitude is definitely in need of adjustment, with your unwarranted slurs against the unemployed, your offensive patronisation and your general ignorance. I'm sure you do it on purpose because nobody who is sane would keep repeating the same lies and filth after being proven wrong.

MumboJumbo wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 10:26am:

wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 10:14am:   All unions stand by ... and do nothing.

No,not not at all, and all out effort will be put into what bastards the bosses are for closing down the factory, and don't forget to pay your Union dues!

Dnarever wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 10:13am:

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 8:37am: Workchoices may not be popular but it is a road down which we will be going. The globalisation of nearly all markets for "stuff" MUST include a realisation that "wages for labour" is part of that "stuff" when Ken Knight won the Harvard business award for his thesis on NIKE being a "global roamer". that NIKE would move its factory to korea and when cheaper wages became available in Vietnam, would move there and when cheaper wages became availbale in Indonesia , would move there.....the die has been cast my friend, Hansen wanted to put up barriers, barriers and tarrifs that were shredded by union heavy weight Bob Hawke. aussies can bury their head in the sand and think they deserve $ 40 a hour to manufacture the same item that an Asian will do for $5. They can think they deserve $30 an hour to work in a call centre when an Asian will do it for $5. But they are pissing into the wind. workchoices and flexibility of the labor market is inevitable. the powers of globalisation of the labour market aren't going to stop for crook or yourself, no matter how much you bury your head in the sand. the unions will make this problem much worse. learn from our sectors which can compete globally farming health finance and insurance private universities hardly a union in site. the union is dead and workchoices is coming. Bob Hawke and John Button made it so (and good on them) Workchoices may not be popular but it is a road down which we will be going. The globalisation of nearly all markets for "stuff" MUST include a realisation that "wages for labour" is part of that "stuff" All the same people are happy to exclude Management Labour from the same equations. Claims that upper management wages are a result of competition are BS right up to CEO level. Instead of paying $5Million + Bonuses + Share options you could get an Indian fellow to do the job just as well for $110K with the only bonus being that he gets to keep his job if he performs. In You Nike example - Mark Parker earned $15.5 Million in 2013.

I have no problem with this.i would welcome Asian  business people running our enterprises at 10% of the salary. small business does most of the employing and small business finds that big business is the enemy (an enemy assisted by government I might add, which does nothing to prevent duopolies and which is beholden to big business through its donations).
Small business creates 70 % of new jobs.
liberals are beholden to big business and labour are beholden to big unions.

both big business and big unions are the natural enemy of the small business person.
therefore, taking this to the logical extension, both labor and liberals are the enemy.

the clever Asian small business person recognises this and works 'beneath the radar'
he pays cash, he avoids tax, he tries to be "unnoticed" by government. he has adapted to the new paradym.
Less government, less regulation (apart from the ACCC ) are all good for employment and for the economy.
But, no , unions are not the answer. sorry crook ;)

MumboJumbo wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 10:26am:

wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 10:14am:   All unions stand by ... and do nothing.

If we do nothing now it will inevitably lead to war later.  You cannot appease the internationalist piracy convenors by offering a small piece of your sovereignty each time they demand.

WHEN - not if - the global economy collapses, there well be wars and wars and rumours of wars to re-establish the simple basis of civilised society - the genuine opportunity to simply have enough to get by on.

Fight now when it's peaceful using peaceful means - or fight later when it's a war that will make Hunger Games pale into insignificance.

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 12:22pm:

MumboJumbo wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 10:26am: wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 10:14am:   All unions stand by ... and do nothing. If we do nothing now it will inevitably lead to war later.  You cannot appease the internationalist piracy convenors by offering a small piece of your sovereignty each time they demand. WHEN - not if - the global economy collapses, there well be wars and wars and rumours of wars to re-establish the simple basis of civilised society - the genuine opportunity to simply have enough to get by on. Fight now when it's peaceful using peaceful means - or fight later when it's a war that will make Hunger Games pale into insignificance.

or train hard like me so you would be good at the hunger games

---

Don't hog all the attention.... is that a pig jihadist?

Unions can and should play an important role in the workplace.

They never would have formed in the first place if they were not necessary.

Bam wrote on Aug 11^th, 2014 at 10:32am:

aquascoot wrote on Aug 11th, 2014 at 7:44am: The only business that would like high unemployment would be EB games, foxtel and blockbuster video. Your implication that the unemployed are lazy is highly offensive (and I'm sure you do it on purpose). This sort of well-poisoning fkwittery is not helpful. Quote: this is the big problem for the unemployed and why I keep telling them that talking doom and gloom like crook or greenswin is death to your employment prospects. its why I keep telling them that getting a job (a good job) is like getting a good date. you have to put in effort. Here is your patronising attitude coming out again. You haven't got a clue. Do you really think the unemployed aren't looking for work? Do you really think someone who's applied for 1,000 jobs isn't trying? I doubt you've applied for 1,000 jobs in your frigging LIFE. Yet there's at least 100,000 unemployed people in this country, right now, who have cracked that milestone since they last held a steady job. That is 100,000,000 unsuccessful job applications. Is there something wrong with what they are doing? Not usually. The only real problem is the inconvenient gap in the resume and the attitude among employers who think it fit to reject applicants with gaps in their work history. An unemployed person hasn't a chance in the current job market. Not because they are not trying, but because the rest of society has unfairly stigmatised the unemployed by perpetuating myths and stereotypes that have not been current for 40 years. [quote]it isn't going to just happen and having a negative attitude is something an employer or a customer can pick up on immediately. the slacker has a certain 'stench of failure" about him.

If you've applied for 1,000 jobs and not got one of them, you would not be optimistic either.


Quote:

he needs an attitude change before his employment prospects will be going anywhere.

Yes, an attitude change is needed - but not for the unemployed person. The attitude chance that is desperately needed is among the employers who will not hire anyone with gaps in their employment history, and the idiots in society as a whole who make life hard for the unemployed by stigmatising unemployment.

Your attitude is definitely in need of adjustment, with your unwarranted slurs against the unemployed, your offensive patronisation and your general ignorance. I'm sure you do it on purpose because nobody who is sane would keep repeating the same lies and filth after being proven wrong.
[/quote]

Once again, Bam, well said, and I wholeheartedly concur.

Sadly, I fear it was a waste of bandwidth.  >:( :(

http://www.clker.com/cliparts/5/b/5/6/1264247144596627768clapping_hands.jpg.svg.med.png