Australian Politics Forum - Work Choices v2.0 may not be necessary

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: Work Choices v2.0 may not be necessary
Reply #30 - Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:43pm

Setanta wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 9:43pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 9:30pm:

Setanta wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:59pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 4:30pm:

King FriYAY II wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 3:54pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 3:08pm:

This sort of thing is going on all over the place.

This is the result of a conservative government. wage levels are being deliberately pushed down and is a secretive government supported push on wage levels. It is related to the failure of workchoices - working within the fair work system to achieve the same type of results.

This is not related to the economy or business requirements it is just conservative dogma in action. This lines up with the attack on penalty rates etc.

Wages need to come down. They have been going up in most cases because it is either pay up or put up with union pressure.

You'd need 1000 cans of CRC to clean the rust of you, fair dinkum.

More horseshit. Real wages growth has been pretty awful for most of the last decade. Declining with productivity. Funny about that.

But the declining productivity of whom? Not the workers. Funny how the real underachievers never take a hit.

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2013/03/24/1226604/547823-130325-b-uren.jpg

There are no "whoms" in productivity stats. Growing labour productivity is not a reflection on workers working harder. It has more to do with the uptake of technology. In this regard, both workers and business are adding to the equation.

Add capital and labour together and you end up with multifactor. The decline is obviously in the capital component. The downward slope is what causes wages growth to stall and then fall with respect to inflation. That is what is happening now.

In short, the ratio of capital to labour has been in decline for a long time. Poor government policy from both sides hasn't helped. Too much capital tied up in unproductive asset classes.

We told that wages should only rise with productivity. Labour productivity is rising, something else is falling behind and it's not labour. The labour has no control over anything more than his job, someone is falling down on the job and it's not those asked told to bear the brunt.

You say it has more to do with the uptake of tech, wouldn't that be classed as capital?

Productivity is not how you describe. Productivity is a measure of output produced per unit of input. In labour terms, the output per unit of human capital can be improved with technology.

As an example, consider the farmer about to plough a field with an ox and moldboard. It may take him a week. Give him a tractor and he can plough 7 fields in a week. This is a labour productivity increase because output per unit of labour has increased 7 times.

Capital productivity is the measure of output achieved per unit of capital. It involves almost everything like buildings ,rent, transport, infrastructure blah blah blah. And including the tractor as a fixed asset.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

Setanta

Gold Member

Offline

\/ Peace man!

Posts: 16625
Northern NSW
Gender: male

Re: Work Choices v2.0 may not be necessary
Reply #31 - Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:52pm

crocodile wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:43pm:

Productivity is not how you describe. Productivity is a measure of output produced per unit of input. In labour terms, the output per unit of human capital can be improved with technology.

As an example, consider the farmer about to plough a field with an ox and moldboard. It may take him a week. Give him a tractor and he can plough 7 fields in a week. This is a labour productivity increase because output per unit of labour has increased 7 times.

Capital productivity is the measure of output achieved per unit of capital. It involves almost everything like buildings ,rent, transport, infrastructure blah blah blah. And including the tractor as a fixed asset.

Fair enough. How is labours productivity measured to increase pay with their productivity? How do you get a measure of that beyond output per unit of labour?

Back to top

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: Work Choices v2.0 may not be necessary
Reply #32 - Sep 12^th, 2014 at 12:25am

Setanta wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:52pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:43pm:

Productivity is not how you describe. Productivity is a measure of output produced per unit of input. In labour terms, the output per unit of human capital can be improved with technology.

As an example, consider the farmer about to plough a field with an ox and moldboard. It may take him a week. Give him a tractor and he can plough 7 fields in a week. This is a labour productivity increase because output per unit of labour has increased 7 times.

Capital productivity is the measure of output achieved per unit of capital. It involves almost everything like buildings ,rent, transport, infrastructure blah blah blah. And including the tractor as a fixed asset.

Fair enough. How is labours productivity measured to increase pay with their productivity? How do you get a measure of that beyond output per unit of labour?

If you can plough 7 fields a week instead of 1 you earn more money.
7 fields per week of labour vs 1

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

Setanta

Gold Member

Offline

\/ Peace man!

Posts: 16625
Northern NSW
Gender: male

Re: Work Choices v2.0 may not be necessary
Reply #33 - Sep 12^th, 2014 at 12:31am

crocodile wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 12:25am:

Setanta wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:52pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:43pm:

Productivity is not how you describe. Productivity is a measure of output produced per unit of input. In labour terms, the output per unit of human capital can be improved with technology.

As an example, consider the farmer about to plough a field with an ox and moldboard. It may take him a week. Give him a tractor and he can plough 7 fields in a week. This is a labour productivity increase because output per unit of labour has increased 7 times.

Capital productivity is the measure of output achieved per unit of capital. It involves almost everything like buildings ,rent, transport, infrastructure blah blah blah. And including the tractor as a fixed asset.

Fair enough. How is labours productivity measured to increase pay with their productivity? How do you get a measure of that beyond output per unit of labour?

If you can plough 7 fields a week instead of 1 you earn more money.
7 fields per week of labour vs 1

I thought that was tech(capital). How do you differentiate?

Back to top

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male

Re: Work Choices v2.0 may not be necessary
Reply #34 - Sep 12^th, 2014 at 4:22pm

Setanta wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 12:31am:

crocodile wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 12:25am:

Setanta wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:52pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:43pm:

Productivity is not how you describe. Productivity is a measure of output produced per unit of input. In labour terms, the output per unit of human capital can be improved with technology.

As an example, consider the farmer about to plough a field with an ox and moldboard. It may take him a week. Give him a tractor and he can plough 7 fields in a week. This is a labour productivity increase because output per unit of labour has increased 7 times.

Capital productivity is the measure of output achieved per unit of capital. It involves almost everything like buildings ,rent, transport, infrastructure blah blah blah. And including the tractor as a fixed asset.

Fair enough. How is labours productivity measured to increase pay with their productivity? How do you get a measure of that beyond output per unit of labour?

If you can plough 7 fields a week instead of 1 you earn more money.
7 fields per week of labour vs 1

I thought that was tech(capital). How do you differentiate?

If the use of a human is required it goes in the labour side of inputs. Whether or not it involves the use of capital is not relevant. The time the labour is used is a quantifiable measurement as is the amount of capital. What matters to productivity is the amount of production relative to the inputs, both labour and capital. Technology allows labour inputs to produce more. Just like the tractor.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged