David,
you may not see any need or validity in my last rather vulgar post, but it might be more beneficial to demonstrate the flaws in reasoning, rather than just express your disdain for it.

"Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin"

Do you know these words ? I think you might. They are Aramaic and from them we have gained the saying "The writing is on the wall"

They occurred in 539 just as King Belshazar of Babylon, had induldged himself in an orgy of self glorification and human pride before a 1000 of his nobles.

The words mean, "It has been counted and counted, weighed and divided."

We have a society, as reflected by many posts and the author of the article himself, of self interested, self indulgent, self glorifying indivuals, who see most others who think differently as the 'enemy of my rights'

On the Babylonian theme, there is another relevance. During that feast, the king brought out all the previously plundered temple vessels from Jerusalem. Background was that King Hezekiah had welcomed the Babylonian envoy and shown him all the treasures. The prophet Isaiah then told him as follows:

"Hear the word of the LORD Almighty: 6 The time will surely come when everything in your palace, and all that your fathers have stored up until this day, will be carried off to Babylon. Nothing will be left, says the LORD.

There are many parallels to our situation today. We educate foreigners, we show them all we have, what we know, and the time will come, when they 'take all we have'. Funny thing about human nature, it seldom changes.

So, I made specific assertions regarding trends and attitudes among us. Take issue with them and show me that we are not in fact Blind,Dumb, or stupid..and that

...the writing is not on the wall

Umm swilkie I think Your thinking a bit to radically what you have predicted is unobtainable even by a society where profits are the only concern. What U have proposed is basically slavery, John Howards workchoices are aimed not to reduce employees rights or decrease their wages but to lessen the risk of employers employing new staff, this in turn will enable further employment and allow for increases in wages. Workchoices also guarantee that no wages will decrease or nobody will lose benefits. How can u judge the changes on the basis of actu promotions, the only judgement can be based upon the legislation which is passed.

Anyway why would JOhn HOward introduce these laws if they would worsen his public image?

Because he is soon to retire and dosn't especially care... He is in the lovely position of soon to be recieving a golden handshake, his children are all well-educated and established in secure jobs, and despite his claims to understand the "average person", he dosn't really 'get' that there are people out there who would be ripped off by employers who are trying to get the most out of people for the least amount of money. He dosn't really see that there are kids who leave school at sixteen, or that people at 45 who suddenly find themselves redundant can be considered to be 'scrapheaped', and that there are many people who do not have the English language skills to even really know what they are signing away.

Just because 'a job' is better than 'no job', that does not mean we should go back to 1900s sweatshops. And just because crappy conditions exist elsewhere, does not mean we should put up with them. We should be trying to raise everyone's standards, not lower outrs.

Hello Bubsodian,
I'm merely extrapolating the direction we've been heading for the past 10yrs, with the added effect of 'workchoice (sic)'. I haven't taken into account government evolution of policy in response to public opinion, as it has not altered anything up until now (regarding this matter). It may.
If you honestly believe that 'workchoice (sic)' is a good thing for Australia please explain in detail how? You may wish to remove your rose coloured glasses beforehand.

LAURIE
I'd like to address 2 points in your post.

1/ "He doesn't care" (Howard)... I don't think thats entirely correct, but I think he expresses his care through his own ideological blinkers, which are apparently not the same as yours. (and in many cases not like mine either)

2/ You said "We should be trying to raise living standards not reduce them", and you amplified this with your comment about sweat shops etc.

While I agree with your sentiments, I'm skeptical about the viability of continually raising living standards when we have to compete in the same market place as those around us (say Indonesia) where the Monthly wage is around USD$115/month I believe.

If we have some niche product where we have few competitors, which may be because we have a raw or intellectual material advantage over others, then, with increased efficiency and productivity, there is indeed scope for improving our incomes at employer and employee levels. But in companies run by boards and shareholders, there would be more resistance to ANY increase in costs, or reductions in profits. .

But, to be honest, scope for raising living standards is definitely not something that can be applied across the board. It will depend on a variety of factors, including industry sector, competition (current and on the horizon), relationship with customers, quality etc.

If you work now in the commodities industry, you probably have a good chance at medium term better living standard/income, but if you are in the manufacturing sector, forget it totally. The only direction margins are going in manufacturing which is not protected by world wide patents or tarrifs is 'squeeeezed'. For those sectors where there is no protection, its not a matter of 'if' but 'when' they are displaced by some Chinese supplier.

Most large corporations are shedding costly "high living standard" Australian workers from their 'back office' and customer relations, even sales departments and replacing them with Asians in Bangalore (software and call centres) or Manila etc.

So its not 'just' manufacturing that's in jeapordy.

Hey I wear no rose colored glasses or do I? But anyway Workchoices is aimed at removing previous restrictions upon employers and enabling employers and employees to reach agreement. It also allows competition within the workplace as workers will strive to show improved productivity to increase their own personal wage. As we know increased productivity leads to economic growth, and with strong economic growth over the past decade living standards can only increase. Workchoices or the current IR reform should promote this growth.

To address the issue of radicalism of the reform, it is in fact not radical enough some believe. These reforms were due long ago and infact more was needed to free the workplace of regulations which have constricted Australias industry.

Anyway the liberals so far have managed the economy in a plausible stable way maintaining strong economic growth over the past decade, If this reform where to change that record the would not make the decision.