Terje, a few points:

Yes, there is a market for jobs out there. However, it needs to be highlighted that the current unemployment figures are based (by the ABS/Government) on an employed person being where they have a minimum of 2 x 4 hour shifts per week. Given this, where part-time employment is the desired standard for the current government, the employee’s commodity (labour/service) can not be considered competitive enough to retain a bargaining position suitable for a family income.

If you lived on a below minimum wage and still had a full stomach and a warm bed, then I do not think that you really experienced true financial difficulty. As Trinity implies and I can verify from experience (a house with one full time income supporting 5 people) true poverty means no/very poor food, nights where the electricity is off, no funds for small ‘luxuries’ (i.e. TV, treats for the kids, a holiday to anywhere) and the re-use of hand-me-down clothes from relatives. Even then I don’t think we were truly poor as all the kids still got fed, clothed, bathed and educated.

Finally, sure the removal of minimum wages creates jobs – cheap, non-negotiable jobs where the employer will take those willing to work for what they wish to pay. There are not enough full time jobs to provide a family-sustainable income. Most parents will be working 2 jobs and never see their kids, let alone each other. How this will be good for the greater society I do not know.

If this is the world the majority want, to in the short term provide for themselves, fine. But the majority must then also accept the responsibility for creating a world in which their children may also be the ones who are later exploited by the wealthy. No matter how wealthy you are now, once lost, in this new world of free-market regime there is little hope to regain it. It’s a one-way trip for the losers in the race to the top.

QUOTE:However, it needs to be highlighted that the current unemployment figures are based (by the ABS/Government) on an employed person being where they have a minimum of 2 x 4 hour shifts per week.

TERJE: Yes real unemployment is probably higher than the headline rate. Even more reason to liberate the labour market from the existing shackles.

QUOTE: If you lived on a below minimum wage and still had a full stomach and a warm bed, then I do not think that you really experienced true financial difficulty.

TERJE: I would agree. I lived well below the minimum wage and was never uncomfortable. I had to walk a lot of places but that was not a bad thing. Even today I still wear second hand clothes. At this minute I happen to be wearing a shirt that cost me $5.50 at the local second hand shop. Not because I can't afford to buy new but second hand is cheaper and the quality is great.

QUOTE: Finally, sure the removal of minimum wages creates jobs – cheap, non-negotiable jobs where the employer will take those willing to work for what they wish to pay. There are not enough full time jobs to provide a family-sustainable income. Most parents will be working 2 jobs and never see their kids, let alone each other. How this will be good for the greater society I do not know.

TERJE: You would prefer that these parents were without a job? Job creation policies should be a priority. Lowering the minimum wage should be one of the components of that.

QUOTE: If this is the world the majority want, to in the short term provide for themselves, fine.

TERJE: Of course people want to provide for themselves in the short term. If you don't survive the short term then there is no long term. Your assertion that people who lose wealth can never regain it represents a rather impoverished outlook.

In addition to IR reform we should be working to elliminate income taxes so that people keep the wages they earn.