Sophie, you don't tell us how much money your 'man' makes, but I'm willing to stick my neck out and suggest that it's well into six figures, and considerably more than I've ever made as a freelancer. If I'm wrong you can correct me, but otherwise you'll forgive me if I withhold my sympathy. I'm getting just a little sick of people who hold down well-paid jobs in comfortable offices with paid holidays, fringe benefits and company perks telling me how terrible their lives are.

Yes, highly paid work is sometimes awful. That's why it's highly paid. If your 'man' wants to take an 80% pay cut and do something easy and rewarding instead, then good luck to him; otherwise he (and you) will just have to put up with the ghastly burden of earning his salary.

Well Sophie, love If KRuddy wins the election, your problems will all be over. There will be stuff all mining industry for your bloke to fly into, in the very near future.

You'll have him home all day every day, which will probably prove even harder to live with.

How do you think you'd manage on the dole?

Please note, readers, my husband does NOT (and never will) work in the mining industry. He is an electrician and solar installer as well as licensed builder and because there is no, or very little, work in regional areas he has to travel to where the work is. he doesn't earn 6 figures (I wish) and he doesn't have paid annual leave, super, maternity or paternity leave or any of the other government subsidies, because he works for himself as a sub contractor. There is a work shortage out there in the real world - that is the point!

You should have been clearer in your article Sophie, & we would have known.

Whose choice was it?

I too had 15 months of a 375 Km commute but it was my ladies choice. I was quite happy with the smaller income I was earning, but when I was head hunted, she wanted me to go. God I hated that drive into the city leaving home at 3.30Am.

I also hated living in a campervan all week. I could not know how long it would take to sell up, & therefore could not sign a lease for a unit, due to high exit fees if the sale came quickly.

At least it cured me of any fool idea that circumnavigating Oz in such a vehicle would be a fun retirement activity.

So yes Sophie, life can get hard at times, but fortunately in Oz, it is usually that way because of the choices we have made for ourselves. Perhaps we do still live in the lucky country.

Sophie,
As a subcontractor myself I understand what you're going through, I had three months with no work this year so far and though it's picked up a little bit I've been home at least two days in most weeks.
Hasbeen,
The dole, ha! My wife is also a subcontractor and between us we get a total of ZERO in financial aid from the state, we get the low income tax break but that's all. Know what the woman at Centrelink said to my wife? "Welfare really isn't for people like you", so even though we're classified as low income we can't claim education allowance or Family Tax benefits.

Jon J,
Contrary to the lies put about regarding the income of tradesmen the average yearly income is about $50,000, not "six figures".
Yes it's true Unionised workers get high wages but most of us are honest people and refuse to go along with the gangsters, bikies and sundry thugs who run the CFMEU and other trade unions. Furthermore as Sophie pints out, we get no benefits unless we budget for them ourselves, so I have no super,no life insurance or income protection, no equity in my home and as a family we've had a total of four days holiday together since my eldest was born in 1999, if you add in our two week honeymoon my wife and I have had 18 days holiday in 24 years together. There's a reason nobody wants to go into the trades, it's crap money, no benefits and if the economy is in a hole, as it is now, too bad Jack, nobody is going to help you.

Sophie

There are just not enough articles like this. There should be many more.

It's not only in tough economic times that fathers often have to be away from the family for long periods, but also in good times. The changing nature of work over the last 150 years has created the phenomenon of two parents alienated from each other and from their children - the principal breadwinner through prolonged absence, and the principal carer through exhausted, respite-less isolation.

In earlier times, families often lived and worked together as a unit - running a farm or a small business - usually in the same place as their ancestors did, and surrounded by extended family. Now, many couples raise their children within a rootless environment, often devoid of extended family support. As women are still overwhelmingly the principal child rearers, much of the stress and isolation of modern parenting falls on mothers.

While mothers are over-sentimentalised in our culture, they receive hardly any real support. If they are single, they are viewed as welfare bludgers and damaging to their children's psyches - especially their sons. If they are married, they are viewed as having nothing to complain about because they have a man to supposedly lean on.

John J.

As a long-term freelancer myself, I sympathise with all your points (even though they didn't necessarily apply to Sophie's situation).

Maybe we take heart from the fact that, with an almost certain LNP win at the federal election, it won't be long before virtually the entire Australian workforce will be freelancing.

Bring on Work Choices II!

Well Sophie I understand as I have seen this same problem with young
mothers trying to hold it all together and work as well.

A little history, the government was pressured to force the lending
organisations to lend on two incomes.
It was considered a victory by certain womens' groups.
As a friend, who was a bank loans officier, said to me;
"They will regret this, the builders will force up the price of houses
to meet the amount of money available."

Well, you have, borrow on two incomes you MUST have two incomes to pay it off !

Now a 19th century wharfies cottage in parts of Sydney is over 1 million dollars.

Will they never learn ?

Susie, we are not underpopulated.
What many forget when the rains come, is that we have to survive the worse drought.
We came a bit too close last time.
So obviously we cannot double our population.
So just how big is our safety margin ?

Do you know Susie-on-Line ?

Bazz

‘A little history, the government was pressured to force the lending
organisations to lend on two incomes.
It was considered a victory by certain womens' groups.’

A little history ... In 1971, the US switched from a bullion-backed to a credit-based global currency. Whereas bullion kept debt under control, a credit-based system could be expanded ad infinitum. Since then, credit across the Western world has gone through the roof, leading to runaway growth, especially in real estate, but NOT backed up by increases in real productivity or higher wages.

THIS is why a 19th century worker’s cottage in parts of Sydney is now worth over a million and why young and not so young couples right across the country are struggling with crippling mortgages/rents and expanding household debt.

But, by all means, blame it on feminism.

Jay, Killarney, who was it that forced you into subcontracting, rather than a PAYE wage earner?

I can only assume you chose that approach as offering some advantage. If you have chosen the wrong method of earning a living, change it.

If you have chosen a dying profession, change it quickly. Many have been up bling alleys, & had to retreat & start again.

Some of us find our trust misplaced. I spent 8 years salvaging a bankrupt company, only to find it sold, & me out of work once it was sound.

I took this as an opportunity & at 58 I started a little business doing something I had wanted to, but never actually done. Looking back I am so grateful. I really enjoyed my next 8 years.

Life can still be pretty good, if you grab it, & shake it hard enough.

Thank you, Hasbeen, for reminding me to face up to the well-worn right-wing mantra that I alone am responsible for the choices I make. That lets society off the hook. No doubt we'll be hearing this Howard-era mantra ad nauseum after the next election.

Never let it be said that freelancers might have no real choice in being freelancers. Of course, their 'choice' has nothing whatever to do with the fact that many industries and professions now increasingly rely on casual/contract labour and that permanent jobs are becoming scarcer than a left-wing journalist at a Murdoch tabloid - and this will get much worse after the free-markets zealots regain control of the country again.

I'm glad that you were able to start a new business at age 58. This does not mean that ALL people aged 58 have the ability, know-how, financial means or opportunity to become born-again entrepreneurs late in life.

The local Truckies driving the mining trucks in Nth Qld are 3 grand a week.

Killany, it does not matter what goes on in he financial world if you
want to borrow money for a house you have to earn a certain fraction
of the loan each year.
The price of houses is geared to two incomes.

If you borrow on two incomes, you need two incomes to repay.
That is all there is to it.
It matters not a damn what happens to interest rates etc the houses rise
or lower to fit the money available.

So you feel like a single mum Sophie? I'm not sure where we could find you a compliant one of those, on such short notice.
All levity aside, there is a problem here.
The Irish have a saying, when poverty comes in the door, love flies out the window.
When Howard told us we had never ever had it so good, he was referring to the hollow equity in our homes.
However he overlooked replacement costs and the huge record personal debt levels that supported that change.
And or, the sacrifices needed to save up the deposit, then manage the mortgage.
And the accompanying increase in rates, insurance etc, and the ever increasing gridlocked commute. Before the Howard era, we needed four years worth of average incomes to buy our homes; now its more than seven.
Trying to manage a small business as a couple can destroy a marriage!
When the focus is on paying the bills, and trying to collect from slow payers, the pressures can be enormous, along with the inevitable destructive blame shifting and sacrifice?
Perhaps the answer lies in selling up and moving on, to much more lucrative paid work, or even a fly in fly out job?
If you are going to spend so much time apart, you might as well be adequately rewarded for it!?
Rhrosty

My problem with FIFO is that it unbalances everything from family life to wages to social disruption & the winner as the biggest losers are the small communities being overrun by the money-hungry who have absolutely no concern about the communities.
In the end when families are broken & broke we, the taxpayers are forking out again & again.
The overall loser in the end is the country.

Bazz

‘It matters not a damn what happens to interest rates etc the houses rise
or lower to fit the money available.’

House prices rise and fall according to the availability of credit and level of demand. The so-called global economic reforms of the 70s and 80s were all geared to deregulating the controls that kept credit – and thus commodity and real estate prices – in check. Added to that, the Keating government’s negative gearing legislation sent already overpriced Australian housing into the stratosphere by artificially inflating the level of demand. We are still living with the consequences of this.

Double incomes may have been one contributing factor to the rise in house prices. However, the rise of the double-income and one-and-a-half income family also coincided with a corresponding rise in divorce rates after the Family Law reforms of the mid-70s. With a divorce rate of almost 1 in 2 marriages, for every double income family able to afford an expensive house, there were up to two single income families only able to afford a cheap house.

All the surrounding conditions make no difference.

The price in any market rises to meet the available money.

One income families rent, two income families buy houses.

I read Sophie Love's "FIFO and the GFC from the family perspective" (30 August 2013), but could not work out what it was proposing to do about the social problems described. It seemed to be saying that the benefits of the mining boom had been unevenly distributed, but suggests no remedy. Perhaps the author is arguing for a larger super-profits tax on mining. It also suggested that working on a remote mine causes hardship for the rest of the family. Perhaps the author wants to force families to live in remote mining camps, or ban those with families from working at mines, or to close the mines down. The only suggestion offered seems to be better government budgeting.