My apologies Pericles, I didn't notice that the brandy had been poured. You can have mine...oh, I see you've already done so. Best make that one your last, old thing, I'm rather fond of the carpet.

Now, where were we? Oh yes,you spilt the brandy because of all that hand-waving you were doing about money. Of course it's important, but nothing to spill your snifter over, surely? Now, now, pull yourself together, the carpet can be clean..not the carpet? Of course, if I can help I will, but you'd best tell me everything.

Here's a napkin, dear fellow, that spittle dribbling from your shirt will leave a nasty stain and I'm sure your good wife will not be happy about you creating work for her. Oh, she has a job now? Well done her!Well then, you can surely afford to pay a laundress. Yes, they are expensive, aren't they, but it's only money and...really? All of it? Well, yes, of course she couldn't be expected to clean the house after working all day and of course the children must be supervised by someone and...four hours a day, you say? In a call centre? Excellent work that's the backbone of our economy! No cooking at all? Well yes, supervising the cleaner is important, of course, but even s...how far away? Oh dear, surely she can find someone closer to home to do the ironing? Not to her standards? No cutting corners for her, bravo! That's not all? How much, did you say? My word! Still, your children are the most important thing and you couldn't trust just anyone to watch them. She's obviously far too busy herself, so you should be pleased she insists on professional qualifications for the nanny. She's obviously embraced the efficiencies that our service economy makes possible. It's a great endorsement of our introduction of the Cleaning and Ironing Supplement, but we'll have to do something about the lack of properly certified Clothing Press Operators. I hope she's seen the cleaner's Certificate of Competency?

We're determined to rid the industry of that sort of riff-raff. We have to show them that cleaning is a highly skilled trade.Our first Bachelors of Arts(Cleaning and Polishing) will graduate at the end of the year and it's just in time. They'll all be slotted in at APS 6 to supervise the contractors we use at the House. They've been getting away without supervision for years!

Dear me, old chap, no need for that sort of thing. Here's a fresh snifter, it'll calm your...steady on, that's strong stuff! Now, what were you saying before you started crying? You have a well-established business, perhaps a larger overdra...closing down? No, of course, finish it, I shall order another case from the importer. Shall I pour? We don't want to add the tablecloth to the casualty list, the wife bought it because it's made of Australian cotton when we were in Greece last year taking advantage of the high dollar. Of course, it's made in China, but she cut that label off and tells everyone it's authentic. It was much cheaper than the locally made o..now, now, pull yourself together.

You were telling me that your firm is closing down? That's a shame, it's an Australian icon. It hasn't moved with the times though, to be honest. You're still trying to make things, for heaven's sake! Surely you realise Australians are simply unsuited to such work? One only has to peruse the indolent rabble loitering near any Centrelink office to see the evidence. They could have good clean part-time jobs like the people who work there if they had taken the trouble to get educated instead of lazing around factories and getting young girls pregnant.

Please don't do that to the sideboard, it's quite fragile.

The wife commissioned it while we were in Bali a couple of years ago. It's a custom design she had done by a fellow here, at no charge. She wasn't impressed with him, because she had to put off her appointment with the homoepath and he took up half the morning measuring up and asking silly questions.

Even with the cost of shipping she saved 10% on the gouging of that other fellow and although AQIS were most uncooperative, insisting on fumigating twice after some functionary with not enough to do found some tiny holes in one back leg where nobody will ever see them, she still had it on show in time to impress the inlaws with her economic nous at Christmas this year. The bowl is a local item which she got at a liquidation auction and it covers the crack in the top beautifully.
Perhaps she might have a chat to your good lady to give her some tips on saving money when she shops? Noone can beat her when it comes to keeping the cost of living down. She could make a career out of it.
I'm terribly sorry, old chap, but I have to call it a night. I'll have the driver take you home. I don't have to be at the House till 10. There's some trouble brewing with a few malcontents whining about a perfectly rational decision by their employer to shift manufacturing offshore. Why they can't move with the times like the lovely lasses I met at their new call centre, who understand that services are the future of this nation is beyond me. I had to rush my speech to them because their shift was changing. The four-hour working day is such a boon for employment. Perhaps I could recommend you to them? They're an Australian icon.

Hmmmm. It seems that our little discussion has finally tipped you over the edge, Antiseptic. My apologies for being the catalyst for your distress.

You appear to have some sort of bee in your bonnet about women in the workforce, and how they are dragging down our economy. As I observed before, you probably have some very personal reasons for this stance, so I won't pry.

But one thing is for sure and certain: their participation has absolutely nothing to do with our overseas debt (sorry to bring this entertainment back onto the subject matter).

Our industrial base was never large enough to support internal investment on the scale that our country needed in order to dig up all those minerals that have made your life so comfortable, particularly in the past five years. Shuffling work between men and women does not make a skerrick of difference to this state of affairs. If this is beyond your ability to comprehend, that's fine. But descending into fatuous bluster in order to cover your embarrassment is kidding no-one.

Oh, and thanks for popping your head over the parapet, Arjay, and for your contribution. As incisive as ever, I notice.

>>Anticeptic, why do you bother engaging in discourse with Pericles? His aim is always distraction from the real issues.<<

It is of course a very good question. Not for the reason you suggest - it was after all Antiseptic who ran the discussion off the rails with his homespun diversion into gender warfare. But there is little point in voicing views when you are unfamiliar with the topic. Best to keep silent and have people suspect you might be ignorant, than open your mouth and confirm it.

Why didn't you just say you didn't understand? It would have saved so much time.

To correct you, I have no "bee in my bonnet about women in the workforce". Nor am I engaged in "gender warfare".

My point is simple and has been made previously. Men and women are different and they have strengths and weaknesses that tend to be complementary. The last 40 years have seen a great deal of social structural change based on the false idea that women can be just like men, as Goldman Sachs expressed in the report I quoted earlier:"new female entrants exhibiting equal productivity gains as male workers
would have the potential to boost the level of economic activity by over 20%". They acknowledge the difference, but wish it away.

That difference is the subject of my little allegorical monologue above. Men are driven to work for the benefit of women and children. Women are driven to work for the social display, expressed as nice furniture, a well-presented home, etc., unless they have no other support mechanism, in which case they work as little as they can manage to provide for themselves and their children. GS, in that same report, acknowledged that:"Reducing direct child subsidies for those outside of the workforce could be used to fund these initiatives
since these payments discourage female labour supply", but this was after suggestions to "incentivise" via subsidy.

We have been able to ignore the loss of male jobs because of the deregulation that allowed expansion of apparent (not real) wealth, while the industrial growth of China has been enabled by their exchanging a small portion of their industrial products for a large portion of our minerals, with the difference made up by that pseudo-wealth described above. The solution, we're told, is more women in work, yet we have around 30% of men who do not even bother looking, but are called "disabled".

I realise you're not very bright, but even you should be able to understand that.

It is very obvious, Antiseptic, that you are unable to join in the main discussion here, and therefore feel the need to provide a diversion.

>>Men are driven to work for the benefit of women and children. Women are driven to work for the social display<<

That is an assertion, of course, without a shred of evidence, and says a great deal about you and your personal circumstances. Quite why you continue to waffle on with the same made-up stuff like a lonely tramp at a bus stop, heaven knows. Still, if that particular gem has one benefit, it would be that it pales in the shadow of this flight of fancy:

>>We have been able to ignore the loss of male jobs because of the deregulation that allowed expansion of apparent (not real) wealth, while the industrial growth of China has been enabled by their exchanging a small portion of their industrial products for a large portion of our minerals, with the difference made up by that pseudo-wealth described above.<<

So many unsupported generalizations. So many talk-back irrelevancies. So little substance.

What deregulation are you referring to? I do hope you are not getting it confused with free trade, that would be most embarrassing. But you are probably used to that feeling by now. And what is that "pseudo-wealth" that you mention. How does it differ from real wealth? Does pseudo-wealth buy more than real wealth, or less? And if it is "described above" as you claim, it is awfully well hidden.

It is probably a very good thing that you don't get invited out to dinner. At least when you post here, it's only me who smiles politely at the blessed state of general ignorance that you so ably represent.