t.u.s. comments : People should be free to work for whatever they think they are worth. If they don not think they can survive on the minimum wage, they either change their spending habits or they get a job where their labour is valued more.

You have mentioned this before in other posts, that people on minimum wages should be more cautious in their spending habits. I hear a sneer in the comments,and find them reprehensible. People on minimum wages already watch their spending. There is often little left over after paying for food, clothing, electricity,and other necesseties of life. Many low income earners, may dream of a better life,(and a plasma TV as previously mentioned) but a dream is all they can afford.
There are not the jobs out there to keep swapping and changing, no matter the statistics - (remember even working 2 hours a week shows up in statistics as being employed. The worker is not expecting to be molly coddled by their employer, they expect a fair days pay for a fair days work. As to a worker finding work to suit 'his worth' many workers are highly experienced in the workplace, but if all that is out there are jobs with minimum wages and poor conditions, many will have to accept whatever position they can get. If their labour is not 'valued' by many employers, they would be hard pressed to fulfill that scenario.

Will you sit their in your ivory tower and honestly look at families being evicted, children without warm clothing and decent nourishment, and seriously comment that they need to change their spending habits? We are talking basic wages and below basic living standards as a result. We are talking removal of penalty rates and overtime, often the fine line between basic comfort and abject poverty. Will you have a kind thought for the person serving you in the supermarket, that they may have been standing there for hours, and may not get any break in a 9 hour shift (casual employee) as their employer denied 'breaks' in their contracts?

Which planet are you transmitting from,SL ?

personally I think t.u.s. has a point, I think I'm worth $59 MILLION PER ANNUM. I will go and choose which job, I consider worthy of my talents, and if things don't work out, I will simply find another job, with the same remuneration, no problem, we don't need a minimum wage, as the same pay as the Leightons Holdings C.E.O. sounds ok to me, I will settle for that, and any of you greedy people who want more, should be ashamed of yourselves. If I can survive on this, I, for the life of me, can't see why the rest of you can't. Anyone would think that a $59 million remuneration, adds to overheads? When we know quite well it is only the minimum wage that does that.

Is no one going to respond to my original post? The issue beyond all this left and right exchange is the fundamental one, of how can Australia continue in a globalized world where major corporations have chosen and will continue to choose to operate in countries where labour is cheap, those of Asia particularly. Genuine sympathy for Australian workers has to go beyond demands that they get a fair go in the existing economic structures within Australia. The question of how Australia is to maintain its flourishing economy is too important to be ignored. It demands consideration of the fundamental motivation of those who have economic power. Why would they be considerate of the circumstances of Australian workers when there are Chinese, Bangladeshis and so on who will do the same work for very much less pay?
Australians - and the West generally might even need to care about the wage rates of workers in other countries to protect their own wages.

Sorry Tinkerbell - but getting by on a low wage is possible. My wife and I did so when she was not working and my wage was a little over $22,000 (less than 12 bucks an hour). We also had a young child and another one on the way, were renting a small unit and paying off a crappy old commodore. It can be done and there is nothing sneering about it.

Getting by in life is not about thinking happy thoughts and being able to fly Tink, it often takes a bit of sacrifice and a bit of hard work.

As for you Shocka, if someone thinks you have the necessary skills to increase a businesses profits by more than $59 million, they will employ you. If they think you are worth half that, they will too.

I definitely was scratching my head last night and this morning when none of the news reports said more than 19.5 million Australians didn't protest yesterday. although there were reports that 95 per cent of businesses were not affected one iota by the strike.

That is, most people don't give a rats, because they know nothing will change or they will be better off.

Of course, it is about time some individuality was brought into the workplace.

I didn't need a union official to negotiate my house loan and I didn't need one to propose to the missus when I decided she was the one. Both decisions are far more important on the road of life yet people make them every day without the need for third party interference.

t.u.s.

Tim wrote "The other critical concern is what will happen to the more than a million unemployed and underemployed Australians ..."

I did casual building and demolition work when I came to Australia, and was on the dole for four months in a building downturn. I then took a steady job which paid about the same as my unemployment benefit (couple with two young kids), for two reasons. First, I considered that welfare was a back-up, it was my responsibility to support my family if possible. Second, I knew that the best position from which to get a better job is that of employment, not unemployment. Many of the skills needed to maintain regular employment can only be obtained or demonstrated in employment. To the extent that proposed changes help unemployed people to get work (and I think they will), even at below the present minimum wage, that is the best option for their future well-being. (Re mention of skilling the unskilled, such programs generally have very poor outcomes. The best time for interventions for those in disadvantaged/dysfunctional families - the future unemployed - is early childhood.)

And we're not talking about competing with Bangladeshi wages - Australia's minimum wage as a percentage of average wages is by far the highest in the industrialised countries. Wages are ultimately determined by productivity, and low-wage countries have low productivity - our wages reflect higher productivity, and labour market changes in recent years and proposed aim at increasing productivity.

As for ALP rollbacks, I think that the IR changes will be a non-issue long before the next election. By the time the ALP is a contender - ? the 2010 election - rollback will be way off the agenda.

And, Aaron, the "recession-we-had-to-have" was actually the Keating-induced recession, the economy now is relatively recession-proof because of the increased flexibility from the Hawke-begun microeconomic reform process, including labour market reforms.