I think this will strengthen Unions in the long term. However I can us having to refight fights we had decades ago.

The problem with the deranged ideology of Howard and co is their belief that somehow unions and unionists dropped to earth from outerspace 10 years ago just to bedevil them.

There seems to be a belief that they are alien creatures with strange ideas like wanting to work safely, to have decent wages, to have some job tenure and little things like that.

Things that have been fought for and won by unions over hundreds of years and things that Howard wants to wash away with a stroke of his vile pen.

John Howard shot himself in the foot - Bill Shorten has been spectacularly brilliant in one thing - he has shown all Australians who seem to have the same mad ideology as Howard that union bosses are human beings after all.

I agree the collapse/rescue will focus workers attention on the role of unions.

There could a different take on how that will be manifested though -

Mining in Tasmania has long been controversial particularly after the introduction of longer shift patterns and the flying in of workers under labout hire companies who, in some instances offer little allegiance to the local towns.

Some might think the unions were a bit weak to let that happen. Similarly if conditions are dangerous the unions - up to now - have been unable to offset the folly of Management

A miner died at Renison Bell on the West Coast of Tassie in 2002 - the safety of the shift patterns then was brought into that debate then and it looks like not much has changed. Any action by the unions now might be considered too little too late.

As for Bill Shorten I viewed his attendance at the mine with the same cynicism as I saw hte presence of "Kochy", the sunrise team and the other "headliners' from current affairs -

I mean what gravitas,authority or experties did either party, and I include Shorten in this, add to the occassion - None I would venture.

The attendance of both parties were exercises in headline grabbing.

Howards attack on the unions will back fire based on its very nature. The real test for the unions after what in a political sense is a free kick in the form of WorkChoices is whether or not they still have the capacity to run with the ball.

It seems almost impossible to stop Howard's train. The media appear in general to be brain dead to the destructive influence of his person, style and legislative changes, particularly the IR laws. Sadly and yet amazingly it has taken the mining event in Beaconsfield to arrest attention. But it will not last long. Our narcissism in this time in history knows no bounds, nor does workplace bullying. Narcissism never builds community, family or cohesion. It destroys it. Add prosperity to that mix and you have a time bomb. Andrews and Howard are not focussed on people, community or relationships in a way that a mining community can and does. The Howard Govt focus is materialistic productivity. Their individuality focus and personal prosperity spin is the right compost for the further growth of self-preoccupation and the destruction of community and real brother/sister support. It seems a disaster is about all that will re-build what we are losing - whether it's a mine cave-in or worse. Certainly the IR legislation is feeding the growth of our greed and workaholism when what is missing in the growing loneliness of our lives is real community that is not based on productivity or acheivement. Australia is becoming what Howard and his cronies have been all their lives.

I look forward to the day when The Rodent takes on the two most influential Unions left in the country - the National Farmers Federation and the Australian Medical Association.

I know they aren't industrial Unions but hey, neither were the students!

I think Shorten did very well indeed. Despite all the media goading, he refused to take the bait and switch to attack mode and freely gave credit to the mine Management wherever it was due.

To me, he was the voice of level-headed reason throughout and I hope he doesn't do anything now that may threaten this status.

Unfortunately, a significant number of conditions had already been "bargained away" by the Unions themselves before this latest assault on working conditions and this may need to be justified to many members before their full support returns.

Article 23(4) of the Human Rights Declaration states:

Article 23.
...
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

While the right to join a union is not in question, the right to join a union that can protect ones interest is, if the access of unions to workplace is curtailed. But perhaps common sense does not apply to legal documents.

Don't believe all the rhetoric about the unions being concerned about safety. Mining unions tried hard to block the introduction of workplace alcohol and drug testing. They didn't care if their members operated machinery under the influence. Scary.

When I first saw him, I wondered who Bill Shorten was, & why he was the spokesman for the rescue effort. He appeared to ge just pumping out hot air, for no good reason. Then I realised that he was just another politician, trying to cash in on the public interest in the effort.

One must wonder what would have happened in tassie if the AWU were not involved Howard could have done another cover up to protect his IR changes

Bill Shorten and before he arived back in Australia Paul Howes proved the AWU is still with you at work.
The snide anti union anti Shorten remarks are worthless much more exposure to the medea could come if those in control of the union wanted to release the information the familly of one miner was flown from Qld by the union and another from Newcastle at the unions cost .
And why not?unions help some every week and for most workers who are members unions are familly.
Those who know Bill Shorten are proud to do so and you can bet as always he was more than well come in Tassy.
I as a member of the AWU all my working life am proud of him, and rest asured John Howard is no sure bet in 2007 workchoices? a far worse thing than many know,yet!

I'm really ambivalent about the new I.R. laws. On the one hand, I think there will be some bad effects. However, on the other hand, I've seen my father, who used to be a very active member of the Socialist Left faction of the Labor Party, turn into one of the staunchest supporters of John Howard and the anti-union movement. The reason? Over a decade of being screwed by mindless unions and unfair dismissal tribunals, despite paying his workers well above the award and generally trying to be a "socialistic" boss (an oxymoron I know).

Perhaps if the pendulum has swung to the extreme right it's because there are plenty who had suffered under it being at the extreme left for too long. There are plenty of bosses who are good people, and plenty of them had been screwed for long enough until now, which is why there is actually broad support for Howard amongst the middle class. Why is it always about the poor little Aussie battlers and the unions, even when they are mean-spirited crooks who consider the boss "the enemy" ripe for taking down?

There's a lot of bs coming from Andrews and Howard, but there's always been an equal (if not greater) amount of bs coming from the other direction. They're all self-serving, and I trust Shorten about as much as I trust Andrews, which is to say, about as far as I could spit a rat.

If a union win’s better pay and conditions, who pays for it?

While many seem to think the funds just appear out of no where, they actually have to come from increased revenues.

The $1.00 pay rise cost the employer about a $1.50 and this with margins added translate to a $2.25 increase in the retail price required by the company to pay for the increase.

With a world price taker company, unless they can screw down production cost even more, the choice is to go offshore where this form of industrial blackmail is not as prevalent.

For a domestic business, they don’t have a real big problem as their competition have the same regulated cost structure, meaning they all just raise prices.
Inflation is the result.

The situation in many businesses today is that the “boss” earns less than many of his employees, with no guarantee on the sale of his product.
This is even before the return on capital is taken into account in extreme cases.

Maybe its about time the union movement went into business to show the present business community how to do it as they are so negative to the people that provide them the jobs they spend so much time complaining about.

It appears the proof is in our “terms of trade figures”

Even with a massive increase in our country’s income from exports, we have not been able to cover the increased purchasing of products from company’s that have opted to go offshore due to our massively high cost of production.

It's rather naive to believe Beazley would turn back the law on any issue, that is assuming he or Labor ever win at the Federal level.

Once such major changes are made the change back is usually impossible leave alone remembered at the subsequent election. Is there anyone here who actually thinks Beazley should be leader, or have a chance to win the next election? If the big B stays where he is we can expect Howard for life. Beazley has to go, now to give Australia a chance to try and claim back some of what we have lost already. Not the least being dignity.

Anyone still want the GST rolled back? I'm sure many hate it but we also know it's here and no government is going to get rid of it.

As to the plight of those three miners, haven't you all noticed? It's merely a reality show and used as such by the media on every level. Kochie getting a souvenir over which he swoons? Dear God what tripe, my stomach churned when Channel 7 used that litle event as the advert for their news shows. Announced as "What they said to Kochie in the ambulance". Give me a break!

The only real interest the media had was in how long they could keep running on the back of other people's lives.

The Union too was exactly the same. Why did Shorten have to spend all that time sitting on his backside while the other miners tried to save those trapped? Doesn't he have a real job? No, it's simply public appearances for Labor's next big hope, not for me though.

It's clear that Howard loved the show, he was in first with a Canberra reception offer and had a chat as soon as they started breathing fresh air. Beazley was totally absent as he lost the plot, again. He chose to try and use Beaconsfield as a platform for himself and as usual failed.

The tragedy at Beaconsfield wasn't a political event, it was another media body count with Naomi's make up trailer and all.

Unlike some who post here I am a trade unionist and in fact an oficial, much anti union comments are true.
Gee that was not hard, but it may yet hurt me, some have harmed the movement and are unfit to wash the floors of a union ofice.
But not all unions are in any way radical, Bill Shorten heads such a non radical union.
Had he not been there for these blokes I think the very same people who insult him here would again do so, for the opersite reason.
Unions have a place in the world that will be much stronger as they adopt the very changes men like Bill Shorten and his young lions like Paul Howe bring , the AWU traditionaly was and is not radical but with you at work is indeed its mantra Shorten is entering parlement next year Australia would be a better place if his seat saw a by election now we need him in the house.
And last spend those first five days with those two men in the dark and full of fear no one knew if they lived or not, if they make a quid out of it or even laught or cry in public let them.
Some posters are hard hearted and unjust.
I like most Australians shed more than one tear as the emerged unions are forever, the Howard goverment is not.

I submit that if any of us want to counter Howard's ploys to oppress workers, we have an excellent weapon at our disposal.

We can insist on zero net migration (whilst maintaining the same refugee intake as a proportion of this, until we have regained decent protection for labour here.)

REASONS FOR STRATEGY & HOW IT WILL HURT HOWARD'S GOVERNMENT

The Howard Government has greatly increased immigration to this country over the past three years, notably so-called 'skills immigration'. By depriving workers of their industrial rights and means to enforce these, the government has opened unrestrained competition by entrants with nothing to lose and everything to gain by competing against Australian workers. It was this very situation that the Australian constitution was set up to guard against in 1903.

The only way to combat this is to have strong labour protection laws in the country that receives immigrant labour. (For the international socialists who believe that nothing should fetter the movement of people, it might help to realise that Marx and Engels recognised the impossibility of defending labour if national labour protection did not exist.)

HOW IT WILL HURT HOWARD'S GOVERNMENT:

The Howard Government has increased skilled and other immigration (but not refugee or asylum seeker immigration) because the corporations want

a) just docile workers who have been trained at the expense of overseas governments, b) well-heeled new-comers to maintain demand for housing and high housing prices which benefit rich land-owners, mortgage providers, building materials producers and overseas investors.

So, what can we do, as unionists?

We can militate for a moratorium on immigration. - Let immigration be equal to emigration (maintaining current refugee intake)

UNTIL

We have regained the industrial law protection for workers' rights to
- collective bargaining
- protection for wages and conditions as negotiated by collective bargaining
- laws and State awards reinstated and administered by State Departments of Labour detailing basic conditions and wages drawn up and agreed to in industrial tribunals as they were a decade or more ago and had been for many many years.

Sheila Newman
smnaesp@alphalink.com.au

Kanga I find your post interesting however a bit wishfull, we the union movement and the ALP can do little from our side of the house.
Change nothing, from the NSW Labor right I commend the word solidarity to some.
While miners in Tasmania worked along side many from the rest of Australia to bring those blokes to the top others today dig holes under both movements.
Bill Shorten acted like we would want him to and from our side grubby remarks are made he was grandstanding.
Howard must love this grade of solidarity!,have no fear Labor and unions will rise helped by workchoices.
Planed to creat weath by creating poor this act is one day to be the start of a longterm Labor goverment
solidarity for workers united can never be defeated I promise you.

Belly,

What does solidarity mean? Have you seen solidarity from Unions towards those that kept paying over the last three decades?

What have unions done for most in that time? Many unions have been simply vehicles for creating future ALP members and the members get very little for their contributions. That's why membership fell through the floor and that's why Howard could just change the IR laws with basically just a whimper.

It's too late to cry solidarity today Belly, the war's over. We're just counting casualties now or hadn't you noticed.

Forget the past and look to the future. Rebuild the ALP, get rid of the deadwood and cut the ties to the union movement as they simply restrict the ALP's chances of appealing to more than they do.

I too detest the changes made Belly but reality tells me these changes will be enforced for another 18 months and then an election will determine any changes to what's been done. I see no chance for the ALP with Beazley clogging up the party at the top level.

I too detest Howard's government but I feel the same about Beattie's government and all the other Labor governments today that act exactly the same way as Howard does. They treat us with contempt. Why support that?

Answer the question about whether Beazley should lead now and till the next election, please.

Open your mind to the flaws in both sides and you will see that neither side is always right or always wrong. It's not black and white, we need grey.

Excellent article, Steven Miles.

kanga (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41358) is absolutely correct in regards to the issue of immigration.

Already, population increase, driven by immigration, has been the major factor in driving down living standards by raising the cost of housing to their current near stratospheric levels as has been openly acknowledged by property speculators.

Now, on top of that, immigration, in conjunction with the 'Work Choices' legislation, is being blatantly used to destroy the wages and conditions of Australian workers as recently occurred in Ballarat at the MaxiTrans metal factory (http://www.abc.net.au/southwestvic/stories/s1635000.htm). There, 37 Australian workers were sacked just over a year after that company stopped offering apprenticeships in favour of the importation of skilled workers from China.

I don't condemn the Chinese workers who are probably only doing what many of us would do, if in their shoes. However, what should have been the commonsense rule that charity should begin at home seems to have been lost on nearly all left wing activists for at least the last three decades. They have effectively advocated open door immigration and ignored the adverse consequences for the poorest people in this country as well as for this country's ecological carrying capacity.

Any group, such as Sustainable Population Australia (http://www.population.org.au), which has tried to point this out, has been falsely accused of racism and xenophobia.

As a consequence of this moral blackmail, the Labor movement has been effectively paralysed as John Howard has cynically ramped up migration to unprecedented levels of around 140,000 per year whilst many middle aged workers including even experienced IT workers are left on the scrap heap. The left groups, supposedly defenders of the working class, has nothing to say about this. (Try a search using either the terms 'MaxiTrans' or 'migration' on http://www.greenleft.org.au and see what comes up.)

This Government has shown no loyalty to the ordinary people of this country, and the same also appears to be the case with just about all of Australia's supposedly socialist groups.

IMPORTANT PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT.....





The Howard IR laws has gone to the high court. The most important legal case in 50-100yrs and a growing number of legal experts are worried if the laws are not stopped it will be the beginning of the States demise.



This government is destroying Australia on so many fronts. The most damaging and badly written IR legislation that was rushed through parliament by a puppet coalition senate. Save us High Court!



How can a so called legal expert like Kevin Andrews put his name on such a bill. At least one senator admitted to not reading the bill and I suspect most

senators didn't bother.



A government that illegally sells Telstra who turns a blind eye to corrupt payments by AWB not to mention the compulsory ID card. That is if you are not rich.



Then there lies on Iraq, GST and children overboard and what about forcing disabled to work.



Howard and Liberal voters, you made a bad choice with your last vote. This time don't fall for the interest rate rubbish (which they don't control) and baby bonus bribes or small tax cuts.



One day we will have a PM who doesn’t stab us in the back. Mr Howard, go and live in America. Oh that’s right your on holidays there right now

Sly your news is not news we know its in the high court however Howard holds the balance there too.
Robbyh? at no time in any post have I ever said other than the nice bloke , Australias best ever defence minister should lead us into the next election, he must go no other path exists for the non conservative voters of Australia.
Your anti union what have they done for me line is purely a joke, under Howards fair pay commision for 5 years you will find out.
Unions founded the ALP not the other way around.
Unions for wage earners are restricted but not unions for bosses like the national farmers federation ,just one of at least 20, they have direct influence and membership of goverment partys.
Yet anti unionists bleet at unions ties to Labor.
If your wish comes true, that Australian workers are cast adrift by Labor, and it will not.
The Labor vote will be less than a hastily formed centre left party other than the ALP.

Sly is spot on.

Let's not get fooled again in 2007.

Almost certainly, Labor will give us plenty more reasons to not to vote for them. Examples, so far, include support for the privatisation of the Snowy Hydro scheme, support for the private health care rebate, irresponsible populist opportunism in relation to tax cuts, support for the anti-democratic 'anti-terrorist' legislation etc, etc - but, at the moment, there is no other way forward except through the election of a Federal Labor government.

There is little prospect of having a Government composed of decent independents and minor parties in 2007. By all means give such candidates your first and second preferences, but make sure that, if they don't get elected, at least your vote will go to Labor in preference to Liberal.

The Murdoch and Packer media Empires and other powerful vested interests are firmly behind John Howard, so the task of removing him won't be easy, but with enough of us out there, who are committed to a decent future, it should be possible to convince the majority of our case (as Evo Morales did so well recently in Bolivia.)

If a future Federal Labor Government turns out to be no better than the previous Keating and Hawke governments, there is no reason for us to have to take it lying down this time.

If, instead, the electorate again endorses this objectionable Government after what it has done, the very future of democracy itself in this country will be very bleak.

I had more to say on this question on John Quiggin's web-site at http://johnquiggin.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/02/finally-the-organ-grinder/#comment-49283

It's all very well to talk about restricting the population or being protectionist of jobs here, but what do we do about an ageing population? Someone has to pay the tax to fund the services everyone demands. Likewise, people are going to want all their consumer goodies still. How is any of that going to happen if we have fewer people (as a percentage) of working age? Something in our culture and society has to give somewhere.

We do live in interesting times and with interesting people, can anyone oposed to Howard risk the vote they cast will end up going to him?
After the polls close its often my job to stay on behalf of the ALP and watch the count.
Some just do not understand the system, Labor first rest nothing is not a counted vote!
And very often atempts to be funny end a votes life before it is counted, but last election one smarty told me we needed balance in the house.
He voted Labor in the lower house, we had a 12% swing against us and lost the seat.
And National in the senate.
Now people tell me Hawk and Keiting betrayed the people?
The only non conservative goverment ever posible in Australia is Labor.
Independent? most times an independent sells the vote to the highest bidder.

shorbe,

You have touched on a number of issues.

Firstly, of course we should protect Australian jobs. How were we ever stupid enough to have allowed the offshoring of so much of our manufacturing sector to countries that pay their workers a fraction of the wages that they pay in this country?

Regarding, the 'aging population', what happens when those being imported, supposedly to look after today's aging population, retire? Are we going to have to further increase the population then so that they can be looked after? So do we then import more workers so that they, in turn, can then be looked after in retirement. So at what point do we stop growing our population?

This 'aging population' argument is so self-evidently stupid, that it calls into question the real motives of those promoting it. Many, no doubt, would be land speculators and property developers. As I mentioned earlier (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41429), they openly acknowledge and welcome the way immigration has caused the price of a commodity, necessary for any one of us to enjoy a dignified existence, that is secure shelter, to have rocketed to levels well beyond the means of many ordinary Australians.

As it is, much of Australia does not have enough water. Already, to supply the existing population of South East Queensland with water, Premier Beattie intends to dam the Mary River, itself outside of SEQ. This will destroy Queensland's most productive agricultural land, destroy the habitat of the endangered lung fish and harm fishing stock in Hervey Bay (see http://www.savethemaryriver.com).

One would have thought that given these sort of problems in Queensland and elsewhere, that intelligent politicians would be trying to discourage population growth. Instead, Peter Beattie wishes to cram an additional 1.1 million into South East Queensland by 2026, whilst the Federal Government is doing its part to help drive interstate migration by having increased our immigration levels to unprecedented levels.

It is time that stopping immigration, except for humanitarian reasons, became a serious political issue, and that the claptrap emanating from business lobbyists, neo-liberal economists, and most far left groups be disregarded.

I fully agree Daggett. Well said.

From your previous post:

“Let's not get fooled again in 2007.”

But who else is there to vote for, who is any better than Howard?

“…but, at the moment, there is no other way forward except through the election of a Federal Labor government.”

In their current form, we wouldn’t be moving forward very far at all. In fact, we would continue to move backwards just about as rapidly, as Labor is just another mob of manic pro-growth high-immigration anti-sustainability future-destroyers.

However, I would like to think that there is hope of convincing Labor of the mutual need for society and for them, to make a huge fundamental paradigm change to ‘sustainability first’. See my posts on this at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4423#40685 and http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4423#41382

From your post on John Quiggin’s site:

“In fact, the choice between Labor and Liberal is very important.”

Sorry, but I can’t see why.

“If Labor does end up becoming little better than a pale imitation of this current Government, we don’t have to take it lying down.”

Well, I think basically we would. What alternative would we have? You and I could scream blue murder, but it wouldn’t help very much, unless we had a very large section of the populace onside.

I think Labor has learnt alot in the last 10yrs and are finding there roots again. I dont care who you all vote for next year but just remember Howard and his puppet government is screwing us all, right now, today and Labor isn't. That includes all workers all the way to senior management because the pay cuts start at the bottom and slowly work there way up. I have spoken to senior management in a large corporation and they aggree.

There is also many good reasons why work choices is not good for small bussiness so don't kid yourselves. I plan on starting my own business some day and I am TOTALLY AGAINST WORK CHOICES.

I seldom speakout on issues but this is one I have studied in depth
and I am quite ashamed that an Australian Government could intenionly
hurt there own people. This work choices bill is very serious and I and many of yoy can only hope the High Court find the bill unconstitutional and that the Judges rule by the laws and morals of our forefathers.

Sly ,I like most Australians are doing a lot better under Howard than the Keating Govts.We need more talent in Labor to keep the Coalition on their toes.

Aussies aren't stupid and there is no way we are going to vote in the present no talent,visionless rabble at the next election.

Labor had better start fast tracking more talent like Bill Shortnan and catch up to the new entrepreneurial culture that has evolved,who want to be free of big Govt and regulation that suffocates the middle and working class.

Haveing a break, from my union activitys printing of about 30 pages times 40 copys of news for lunch rooms around my construction run, workers online actu page and others.
Today I am down a bit some truely beleave Labor doe,s not deserve to win?
That a vote for Howard and workchoices mk11 is ok?
A unionist till death I live each day the wrong the unfairness of workchoices the lie of its name a habbit our cabinet has used in runing Australia lieing!
Do you know how hard it has already hit workers?, lower paid, so low paid they have never been in unions, are now even worse of.
Unions ALL unions could increase membership by massive amounts! if they became brave enought to reduce fees for low paid workers.
Till we do we lessen our real reason for existing! protection of workers rights.
Some we ask to pay over $400 a year in union fees can not EVER! spend that on the kids at Christmas.
Waste my vote? turn on Labor? never have a chance to kill workchoices?
NEVER!

I became involved in the union movement during my factory days. The work was repetitous and physically demanding. We worked under a collective agreement that was always being tested by management who at times would attempt to sneak in some cost cutting measure that had the potential to rip off workers and undermine the snactity of the collective agreement. Thank god for the AIRC who ruled against the company four times. That's all gone now! I work in an office now, covered by a state award. It's when I move to my next job that I'll experience first hand the process of individually negotiated contracts. I fear that even my experience as a union delegate for three years won't be enough to sustain a fair negotiation process. Howard talks about democracy as (listen to him in relation to iraq) if it should be defended at all costs, yet in the same breath he TAKES the democratic rights of workers and throughs them down the drain. Howard only likes democracy if it's his democracy. Food for thought: When we think in terms of democracy we cannot afford to visualise the concept as a given. We must appreciate the fact that there are many different definitions and forms of such. Howard has just made us less democratic.

I became involved in the union movement during my factory days. The work was repetitous and physically demanding. We worked under a collective agreement that was always being tested by management who at times would attempt to sneak in some cost cutting measure that had the potential to rip off workers and undermine the sanctity of the collective agreement. Thank god for the AIRC who ruled against the company four times. That's all gone now! I work in an office now, covered by a state award. It's when I move to my next job that I'll experience first hand the process of individually negotiated contracts. I fear that even my experience as a union delegate for three years won't be enough to sustain a fair negotiation process. Howard talks about democracy as (listen to him in relation to iraq) if it should be defended at all costs, yet in the same breath he TAKES the democratic rights of workers and throughs them down the drain. Howard only likes democracy if it's his democracy. Food for thought: When we think in terms of democracy we cannot afford to visualise the concept as a given. We must appreciate the fact that there are many different definitions and forms of such. Howard has just made us less democratic.

To all of you who think the Labor Party and the unions can be revived, think again.

The unions and the Labor Party are incapable of defending the rights of workers because their role is to contain workers within the current economic system which subordinates every single thing to the drive for profit.

Let’s not kid ourselves. The unions have not protected conditions, let alone won any significant improvement in conditions in decades. The unions have not seriously fought the Work Choices legislation. Yes, they organized the protest marches. But they didn’t even call strikes. The marches ended in little concerts and most workers went back to work.

The unions’ solution was to vote Labor at the next election. Labor will not do anything – because they can’t. They can’t because they are just as beholden to big business as little Johnny’s party (as are the unions). The Labor Party began the process of cutting workers conditions with their “labor market deregulation” reforms in the 80s in “Accord” with the unions. The Labor party cannot be reformed or revived, nor can the unions.

It is the same the world over. It is time we started thinking seriously about what is going on in the world, and what we can do about it - outside of the traditional mechanisms which only channel dissent back into the same system that causes the problems.

You might be interested in checking out the following articles on unions (some of them are quite long).

http://www.wsws.org/articles/testdir/oct2004/auir-o23.shtml

http://www.wsws.org/exhibits/unions/unions.htm

http://www.wsws.org/workers/1998/apr1998/mua-a11.shtml

This trade unionist has an early start today tao, but its with a smile on my face thanks to you.
Unions knew any strike actions would feed Howards anti union fire and refrained from surender.
Do you truely see a way other than unions and the ALP to restore balance in Australia?
Can you not understand without trade unions the average minemum wage would be so very much less?
Heard of the ACTU? and how can anyone think wages currently paid are a gift from the boss?
Time and the ALP will remove Howard ,with the help of Australian voters.

A lot of people forget (or ignore) that the company belongs to the boss (or bosses, including shareholders), not the workers. Full stop. Enough of this pseudo Marxist crap about workers having a say in the business. If, and when their houses get grabbed by the bank when the business goes under, and if and when they spend sixteen hour days working in or stressing over the future of the company, we might have a different matter on our hands. If employees don't like it, they can go elsewhere or start their own businesses. Oh yeah, that's right, if workers get a better offer, they do go elsewhere. There's no unfair leaving law to compensate a boss left high and dry. There's no law that punishes incompetency or irresponsibility that costs a business its clients and sends it under. Where's the compensation for the boss? That's right, he's just a rich prick who deserves nothing because he's trying to screw everybody.

If workers really want to bind their bosses with rules, then perhaps they should have some put back on them. Oh, wait, then some charge of indentured servitude or slavery would be levelled, and let's remember, only the boss is allowed to be indentured or bound by rules in this country.

All the whingers (especially the union officials) should go and start a small business and then we'd see how long their love for the little Aussie battler lasted.

All the whingers (especially the union officials) should go and start a small business and then we'd see how long their love for the little Aussie battler lasted.

Posted by shorbe, Tuesday, 16 May 2006 8:25:38 AM

My thoughts as well shorbe.

I have never seen a mob of wingers like most of the people posting here.
No matter what happens, it will never be enough for them.
It all stems from an “understanding called the Australian settlement”
This understanding was that the urban areas would get their lifestyle “enhanced” so as to attract more immigrants. It has been successful, but now they want to stop more people coming in, but keep the enhancement for their lifestyle.

As a country we have overspent more than $400,000,000,000 the last 30 odd years.
What a legacy to leave our kids when energy supplies are becoming more expensive. The wingers on this site have had the price of wages regulated up with the increasing cost of oil over the last 35 years, meaning it costs the same amount of their income to buy it today as 35 years ago.

I also think it about time the union movement took over some business and showed the present business managers how pathetic they are, as that is what they are implying all the time.

The comments so far have been all statements with no information on the effect of their statements.

I ask; how we are going to pay for everything that has been demanded on this thread?

Tao you are wrong, is that you Barnaby?

I don't think you understand that these IR laws may end up
leading to the end of state governments.

The Liberal party has lost the plot and now are fully controled
by offshore interests. Wake up to yourself

Dunart, The environment is the biggest threat to mankind and I am active in changing that.

Howard and the Liberals are the biggest threat to this countries way of life including you people. Two totally different issues.. you
have no idea so go and whing somewhere else. Oh and you wanted effects of the IR laws, lets start with large jump in crime within
5 years. Go away.......

Arjay (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41533), when you write "Aussies aren't stupid ...", what you seem to be saying is that you hope that most Australians will be prove to be as callous and mean-spirited as you appear to be.

You hope that and once again, at the 2007 elections, they will turn their backs on those who have been treated so despicably by this Government - the middle aged professionals, thrown on the scrap heap and denied retraining as the Government imports 140,000 per year to take their places, the young people in Ballarat denied apprenticeships because this Government has made it so easy for companies like MaxiTrans to import cheaper skilled labour from China (see http://www.abc.net.au/southwestvic/stories/s1635000.htm), a friend of mine recently forced to move from Newcastle to Brisbane because government cutbacks had forced the University to retrench 20% of its staff, the low skilled workers, as described in Wynhausen's "Dirt Cheap", who will have their already abysmal working conditions eroded even further because of this Government's 'Work Choices' 'reforms', the disabled who will now be forced to go out to look for work in competition with the existing unemployed, Australians no longer receiving dental care because of the axing of the federal dental care program, etc, etc, etc.

You aim to trump these, and many other objections, held by decent, compassionate and forward-looking Australians, to the record of this Government with the claim that "most Australians are doing a lot better". However the statistical basis of this is questionable. Inflation figures haven't, for years, included housing cost increases as just one of many omitted factors which increase the cost of living, so Howard's claim that real wages have increased by 14% since he came to power is almost certainly wrong for average wage-earners, and even more so for the lowest paid. A more objective measure of our quality of life would show that it has gone backwards. I have dealt with this at : http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=3737#12173

To the extent that some Australians do enjoy increased prosperity, it is due to the export of greenhouse-inducing non-renewable minerals at the expense of future generations.

When logic is so obvious,as is contained in the views put forward by Shorbe,and which i applaud there really is no case for argument. Some commentators, freak at the thought of the new IR laws eventually undermining state govts, i wish. Does anyone question the practical need for this unecessary beurocracy? We have state Premiers, ministers,mirroring those of Westminster,and in some cases receiving more salary,perks than the latter,performing tasks that could be undertaken by Aldermen or Councillors representing their own local electorats and forming commitees to handle the state infrastructure maintenance, by-laws etc; Issues like health, major projects that have national effect should be left to the National (or Federal govt).

True to form sly, attack the person and never debate the questions raised.

I am well aware of the environmental problems this country has.
I am also well aware that the land managers have to pay several times world market prices for the necessary “costs” associated with investing back in the” land care area”

It appears you are not, as all you want to do is increase costs to business by regulation, making it even more difficult for land managers to invest in” land care”

As an importer, I am well aware where the costs are, and they start the moment goods reach the ports of Australia.
In fact, my experience is that for a product below $100 retail in Australia, the factory door price is often below 5% of the retail price.
Thats to grease your palm to try and stop your pathetic whinging.
I am not whinging, but stating facts “sly”.
Prove my facts wrong instead of attacking ME.

Just for the record, that’s called “debating” something you don’t seem to be aware of.

Well do not put me in the we want to share in the profits box.
And I did in fact both own a small busness[paid well over award].
And know a boss must make money on his investment, however debate the issue workchoices is evil, it clearly controls wages while profits run free.
Just as clearly todays news had the begining of the end for workchoices.
Bill Shorten will lead Labor soon, that alone will insure workchoices is to die.
Those in the ALP who wish to delay Kims exite need to understand they gamble, with working Australias future, its the last race at Randwick and you must not place our future on the clerk of the couse
Unions are in no way different fron AIG and 20 other bosses groups.

Belly and Sly,

I think you misunderstand me. I am definitely not a Howard/Liberal supporter.

What I am saying is that the unions and the Labor party are unable to defend workers interests because their bread is buttered on the other side, and they know it. All the unions and the Labor Party care about is defending their own position within the capitalist system, and in doing so they foster the illusion among workers that the system can be reformed or softened or improved.

Why are workers’ conditions all over the world going backwards while CEO’s paypackets, stock options, golden handshakes etc. skyhigh? Because it is the logic of the capitalist system – lower costs of production, higher profits. The CEO’s that can engineer staff cuts, wage cuts and reduced conditions are paid handsomely for it.

The unions and Labor work hand in hand with them. I note Belly that you failed to respond to my comments about the Labor Party and the unions dismantling of the labour regulations under the “Accord” which has led workers directly to the position they are in today. What is your position on this?

You make the comment that the Unions knew that strike action would feed Howard’s anti union fire and so didn’t call strikes. What other weapon do workers have but withholding their labour? – and you shut down their only weapon because you were scared of Howard.

Your comments about Bill Shorten being the saviour of the Labor Party, and being the sole hope of turning back Work Choices are either very naïve, or deliberately disingenuous. Do you really think Bill Shorten could single handedly save the talentless Labour Party? Do you really think the Labor Party will repeal Work Choices? (don’t forget they started workplace deregulation).

The answer to our problems is not to look to the Labor Party, but beyond them. Workers need to recognize that the unions and Labor are part of the system that exploits them. Workers need to organize themselves independently of their exploiters. Otherwise it will be more of the same.

Bob Hawks acord was at a time when he was the most highly rated prime minist in Australia.
While workers lost it proved workers understood unions had a part to play with Labor in Australias well being.
Hawk and Keiting remain Labor heros, Bill Shorten is not a single answer to Labors woes.
However reality is unionists/workers are not a brand name product of the ALP, they do not all vote Labor.
The new conservtives our party manufactored in the last three elections must be won back, no class unitey will bring them home.
Bill Shorten can, do you think Kim can? can it be that reasonable people, understanding surely Labors lost and needed votes belong to Howard think Gillard could.
Reality is no hidden majority lays beneath the rug waiting for a more responsive to workers need policys awaits us.
Elections have to be won by Labor, Bill Shorten within weeks of takeing the leadership would have some oposed to him today trying to forget they ever thought like that.
Watch the British Labor party decay and decline after they push Blair out.

Belly - "While workers lost it proved workers understood unions had a part to play with Labor in Australias well being."

I could really rest my case here Belly. As I said, all unions and the ALP care about is defending their position within the capitalist system - and you have just proven it.

When politicians talk about Australia's "national interest" or well being as you put it, they are talking about the interests of the financial elite (the bosses), and their right to extract more and more profit from the hard work of workers. As you said in an earlier post, bosses have the right to profit from their investment.

The fact is Belly, that the unions and the ALP have made workers pay for "Australia's" prosperity by telling them that we're all in it together and we have to take some pain now to make it better. When will the pain stop? When we have no rights at all - like now?

The only way for the majority of people to be better off is to get rid of capitalism. Unions are a dead end.

tao: Yeah, yeah, get rid of capitalism. Wake up and move into the twenty first century.

If Australians didn't waste so much money via consumer debt they'd actually be doing pretty well. Certainly I'd like to compare them to Venezuela in five years' time if that country continues down its anti-capitalist road. How many more times will people flog a dead horse? Anyone who is anyone in the world, from China to Finland, has realised that capitalism is the way to go. Does anyone but handful of crackpots actually believe in this pseudo or outright Marxist nonsense?

The trouble with the anti-capitalist approach is there's no way to actually objectively measure it. When it inevitably fails, it's always the fault of other capitalist countries trying to bring it down, or there were too many problems left by the previous capitalist system, etc., etc. The anti-capitalist brigade will never accept that reality doesn't bear out their nonsensical visions, not because capitalism is somehow the problem, but because anti-capitalism is the entire problem.

Tao, you have some very good points.

Unfortunatly the on way forward is to get rid of Howard and put in a
Labor Government. I do agree with you but I say again Howard and the Business Council of Australia are trying to destroy the fair go.
They are even forcing disabled to work(welfare to work bill)

Labour has not screwed us for ten years and they deserve a second chance. I think Bill Shorten might have his heart in the right place, time will tell.

shorbe(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41757),

It seems that neo-liberal free market extremists such as yourself want to have their cake and eat it too. Your type tell us on the one hand, that 'capitalism' the best possible economic system, but on the other hand we have to accept sub-standard working conditions, loss of public holidays, weekends and meal breaks, poverty, homelessness, crime, pollution, environmental destruction, global warming etc, etc in order to keep it functioning.

Whether or not the answer is 'socialism' we deserve much better than the abysmal standards of mis-government that we have endured in this country for at least the last three decades.

tao, (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452##41754) if 'unions are a dead end', then why should anyone be concerned with John Howard's efforts to make them effectively illegal?

Also, just how to you plan to 'get rid of capitalism'?

Are we all to join your organisation(http://www.wsws.org) of all of the dozens of organisations now in existence claiming to be socialist, and from now on, give to it all of our spare time and money and our souls?

I would guess that your organisation has been in existence for at least fifty years and, in that time, in common with just about every other 'socialist' organisation, has had made no measurable impact in advancing the cause of socialism. So, why should we expect any better over the next fifty years?

I find myself largely in agreement with Belly(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41750), Sly(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41767) and 'Country Unionist'(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41592).

It's critical for the future of democracy that John Howard's Government be removed as soon as possible. What sort of 'democracy' can allow a Government to introduce such far reaching legislation as the IR 'reforms' without it having ever having been put to the electorate, either at election time or as part of a referendum.

It is a constant cause of dismay to me that many on the left (http://johnquiggin.com/index.php/archives/2006/05/02/finally-the-organ-grinder/#comments) have failed to grasp that the choice between Labor and the Liberal Party is important, however dimly we regard Beazley and other Labor politicians, and we are now paying the terrible price.

daggett: The free market doesn't necessarily imply the things you assign to it. What it does is assign power to individuals to make their own choices (for better or worse). The problem is that often people won't, or don't want to, take responsibility for themselves. That's their own fault and nobody else's. If people don't want the things you mentioned then it's up to them to make decisions and personal actions that prevent such things from happening. People take the softest/cheapest/easiest option though, which may indeed lead to the things you mention, but that doesn't mean such things are the only possible outcomes. That having been said, I have no problem with some of the negative outcomes you mention.

People keep talking about the loss of rights of workers, but at the end of the day, the company does not belong to the workers, and democracy should have no role to play over how a person runs his or her life or business. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner; it's two morons outvoting a genius; it's tyranny of the masses; plain and simple, it's just another form of tyranny. Most of all, it's a contradiction -- either people are capable of running their own lives (libertarianism, anarchy) or they're not (totalitarianism). You can't have it both ways and say the government should protect people from themselves and each other on economic issues, but not on social issues (eg. that it has no right to bring in draconian measures such as an ID card or legislate against various "sins").

Anyhow, if people don't like where they work, they can go elsewhere or start their own businesses and compete with their own former bosses. Any business that drives its own workers away through not being attractive enough to them will soon go out of business, both through a lack of workers and a lack of customers as word gets around.

Graeme, I haven't been here for a while but it seems the redesign has not stopped this site becoming increasingly a union whinge fest.

As for Bill Shorten in Tassie - less than 20 per cent of the mine workers are actually unionists, much like the rest of the country.

Out of date and irrelevant.

t.u.s

sly – Labor have not screwed us for 10 years (which is debatable) because they haven’t been in power for 10 years. Giving them a second chance will just open the door for them to betray you again.

dagget – the sort of democracy that allows such far reaching legislation is our (so-called) democracy – or in Marxist terminology - bourgeois democracy.

The inevitable logic of capitalist “democracy” is that capital will constantly seek out lower costs of production i.e. lower wages, lower working conditions, lower taxation, lax environmental laws. In order to compete, nation states must make the investment environment attractive to those with the capital to invest, otherwise it will move elsewhere – China, India etc. That is why the Government must introduce such laws, and that is why Labor will not repeal them. There is no way to stop it within the current economic framework – which is why the unions and the ALP are dead ends.

The choice between Labor and the Liberals is not important because they are virtually the same party. The ruling classes just want you to believe you have a choice. (just consider the marvellously Orwellian term “work choices”)

How long have unions and the Labor party been in existence? What progress are they making? Shouldn’t they have solved it all by now? How are they any better than socialists? You seem like a thoughtful person dagget, perhaps you should seriously study www.wsws.org, you might find it enlightening.

shorbe wrote(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41789) : "That's their own fault and nobody else's. If people don't want the things you mentioned then it's up to them to make decisions ... that prevent such things from happening. ... That having been said, I have no problem with some of the negative outcomes you mention."

I had no doubt that you were the kind of person who would not be troubled in the least that people are having teeth pulled out as a result of the axing the Commonwealth dental care program in 1996. The only form of dental care available to hundreds of thousands of Australians is tooth extraction. A friend on a disability pension due to brain damage, a bi-polar condition and eplipsy had all his teeth extracted without his consent by one of the dentists working in the public health system to whom he is forced to turn for treatment.

On the one hand Costello proclaims record budget surpluses whilst, on the other, millions of Australians are deprived because of cut-backs to Government services and employment opportunities.

It is rubbish that those who are well off have worked the hardest, whilst all those suffering hardship are doing so because they have chosen to be lazy.

Very little economic activity in Australia today is based on wealth creation. Most concerns the transfer of the wealth out of the pockets of one group of Australians into the pockets of another.

In 2001 I reluctantly sat in on a negotiation with a real estate agent for the purchase of an investment townhouse. The agent told us of how, because of the negative gearing tax laws, for every three properties bought by a property speculator, one was paid for by his/her tenants.

So, whilst one group of Australians enjoy record unearned profits, others are forced to work at second jobs or overtime in order to pay the costs of shelter which used to be easily affordable to ordinary Australians a generation ago.

This is one of many examples of the real causes of inequality and the deprivation that so many Australians are now facing.

Hi, I have studied work choices closely and if the High Court does not overturn these laws it will be the beginning of the dimise of all states.

Wages will fall and crime will increase and I'm very worried. This Government has lied to us and I feel like the Business Council of Australia is running this country.

After reading the Posting, ‘Miners Put The spotlight On Unions,’ briefly, yesterday, it must have stayed in the back of my mind when I chose from my local library, “The Coalminers of Queensland.” An narrative history of the Queensland Colliery Employees Union, by Pete Thomas. Volume 1:Creating the Traditions. First published in 1986 by the Queensland Colliery Employees Union.

Having been born a & raised in the West Moreton District, I was never far from a Coal Mine. Went to school with the Coal-face miners sons & daughters, as well as mine management's children. I was the poor-dirt-farmer’s daughter, who had eggs & milk for breakfast, as that is what the farm produced. Never knew the meaning of ‘The Union,’ until my first job, as junior office girl in department store. But this never gave me the understanding of what the word “Union,” ment, especially to those working in the mining industry.

I do not know how many of my class mates went without ‘egg & milk,’ for breakfast, Now two of my sons work in the mining industry, one underground, one in open cut mining, I see the real need for the workers to be united in their ‘Work Place Safety,’ capacity & be able to give their children Egg & milk for breakfast.

Come on surely its clear Labor is far better for middle Australia than Howard?
Unions again blacked as control freaks trying to run the country is madness.
This week in my union life, tour reginal area service and recruit, sell last of raffle tickets for dead workers family, quite a crime that.
Attend night meeting of reginal Labour council as guest of CFMEU local and very good oficial.
Listen to report of first day of workchoices sacking of all staff at rich mans playground.
All offered contracts and return next day ,execpt a 30 year veteran, he is gone, 30 years of non unionism in fact anti unionism who is trying to help? us evil unionists.
Tour continues finding an 18 year old working on pick and shovel for $7 an hour both unions combined try to help again non unionist.
Adult male aproaches union,me is working for $4 an hour less than the EBA his firm have?
evil unions? do you mean BCA? AIG? FAMERS FEDERATION?
Unions are here to stay this heavy load will stengthen us.

Buried Alive Dropkick Murphys lyrics
Artist: Dropkick Murphys
Album: Blackout
Year: 2003
Title: Buried Alive Print
Correct

Nothing they could do but sit down there with the black coal all around them, and the water rose so quick and cold, an unlikely place to drown.

Nine in the mine, trapped down below- down, down, down in the ground
and this'll be the day I didn't kiss my wife goodbye, take care of my family I'm buried alive

They held their heads up high as they struggled hard to breath
and asked the Lord to open his arms for the nine souls he'd receive

Nine in the mine...

They latched themselves together so in death they might be found
and prayed there for miracle some 24 stories down.

ENDS OF QUOTE

Some Americans know the dangers that workers go through to feed their families.

Some Australians know what families go through because of powerful people who don't care less about their families. Those people are Union folk and Howard's mob are bent on destroying them.

The song above is fast and good old fashioned clannish-like punk music. Bagpipes the lot. Although to do with US coal mine disaster is still relevant. Great stuff.

My old Uncle was a coal miner and a proud Union man. Every time a Liberals/Nationals belittle the Unions (just listen to the disrespectful nonsense they spew out in parliament at times) they slander a lot of great Australians. (KNOCKING OFF TUME)

Elida, labourers on mining sites earn more than my middle-aged professional husband, and they get a lot more time off.
it's not just the working class that have to 'feed their families', nor is it just the working class who are tyrannised by the demands of work.
self-employed people work almost literally 24 hours in the day, no overtime or sick leave for them!
i was really left wing until we went into business for ourselves.
all the armchair experts really don't know how difficult small business is.

Arm chair people do not know? self interest, if you find a horse called that back it it runs the hardest.
Workers have not way to sell a job no way to work for future gain other than by hard work, they may well contribute to your *small busness* more than you do.
Do not ever devalue that fact workers are not the enemy.
Now let me tell you this storey writen on returning from a union tour and finding my flag torn and burnt.
Its a quote from a letter I wrote to the press.
Life has many lessons if we care to learn from our mistakes.
Workchoices concerns me it in time will be proved a needless mistake divisive and unfair.
I fly the southern cross flag on my home, it reminds me of that cross above my head and the young kid 7 years of age who watched miners tied under a tree in the heat at eureka stockade, he formed my trade union.
Its the workers flag Australias rebel flag, not diversive not anything other than that,those who damaged my flag are wrong but will they learn from it?
Workers united are still Australians nothing less

In regards to daggart's post 13th May, Local workers sacked and Chinese guest workers stay, when there was a down turn in the industry. The employer 'sponsors' the guest worker, guarantees him/her work for next two years. After two years the guest worker may apply for citizenship, qualify for unemployment benefit etc. Something that an Australian worker already qualifys for the right to apply for Centerlink benefits. If the employer has no work for the guest worker, he still has to pay, or keep the guest worker fed & housed until such a time the employer can find alternate work for the guest worker, or re-enstate him/her to be gainfully employed in the establishment he/she originally started.

floatinglili(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#42045) and others who talk of the hard life of people running small business:

When I grew up in the 60's and 70's, it was possible for ordinary people to run their own businesses, and do their own book-keeping in a few hours, without having to work late into the night or on weekends, or to effectively employ an accountant as a business partner.

I know a number of people who used to run small businesses who have simply given up as a result of John Howard's GST (remember the new tax that was going to, once and for all, simplify our taxation system?)

If, after nearly three decades of neo-liberal economic, so-called 'reform', it is necessary for self-employed people to work 'literally 24 hours in the day', can't you see that the economists, who claim that we are enjoying unparalleled prosperity, are not giving us the full picture?

The idiots who are running this country are making everyone work harder and harder for a quality of life that is, in fact, declining (as I have described here: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=3737#12173).

Thanks, ELIDA, for that information. In a way, it is good that the legislation gives those workers that small amount of protection, but we should first insist that all unemployed Australians are offered work at decent rates of pay and with decent conditions before any employer is allowed to recruit from overseas.

Hello Floatinglili, Your husband is welcome to go and work in the mines they are screaming for workers. I dont think people like you understand what is at stake here. It does not matter if your a labourer a retail assistant or a senior manager your wages over time will fall, it starts at the bottom and works it way up.

You talk about small business and yet you fail to mention all the red tape and greif Howard has caused you. I have no doubt I will open my own business one day. Lets not forget you chose to open a business and the benefits could be great.

Am I right to say your a Howard voter? Because most are selfish people who only care about interest rates and have few morals.
Or if not just are ignorant.

Maybe if you had less red tape you would have more time to actually know what is going on with this Government. Good luck

Small busness is not evil I ran one for a time and paid 40% over award, costs in fact broke me, but every one execpt me got every cent owed.
Unions exist only for rights of workers who always and even now often work for that other type of small busness owners, the bad bosses.
I ask every pro union pro ALP person to remember activism built unions and the party and it can save both.
Those not prepared to work to remove workchoices have no right to draw workers wages or ALP wages.
The breifest of web surfing will find much information to put on your lunch room tables why wait for others to do it?

Some comments from a person who has been both a unionist and business owner.

In North America I worked construction where workers worked below capacity to lengthen jobs.

I got great union won wages and conditions on a very hard site. The companies could well afford the pay but wouldn’t have if not for unions.

Scheduled as a restaurant worker, I slogged half an hour through snow to be told to go home again. So, no work or pay that day.

I have seen unreasonable demands by some Australian unions causing ruination of businesses.

As an Australian employer, I had disloyalty, theft and an unappreciation of paying $5 an hour over award.

I now work casual for $5 an hour less than I used to pay my employees. It would be much less but for unions. We’ve been told to up productivity or lose our jobs offshore. Don’t like it? - leave.

I am now a union delegate.

There has always been abuse on both sides but now employers are far too strong. Some unions went too far but employers used the whip hand before that. It’s happening again. Unions are important to check this.

Many people don’t realise what Australia has just lost. When I returned in adulthood I was flabbergasted by this fantastic country, running well with a high standard of living, little poverty and few social ills. This has changed dramatically.

We don’t need Howard’s dog eat dog laws here which are as bad for small business as workers. Everything’s in favour of big business gobbling up small. Anyone bought fruit, vegetables, meat, pharmaceuticals, newspaper, deli products in a supermarket lately or paying too much to use their bank, by any chance? Howard’s laws are bringing this on.

Two suggestions – First, Australians use their dollars effectively and work together, patronising small business over big business and small business giving workers decent pay. Second, if you don’t like the way unions and political parties are run, join a union and/or a political party and change things. And that’s my 45 cents worth.

Daggett (sorry for misspelling your name earlier) – I have now read some of your numerous postings elsewhere and obviously you spend a lot of time reading and posting about economic issues.

You say in a previous post – “Are we all to join your organisation(http://www.wsws.org) of all of the dozens of organisations now in existence claiming to be socialist, and from now on, give to it all of our spare time and money and our souls?” I have some comments:

If you accept what I said in my previous post about the inevitable logic (and anti-democratic consequences) of capitalism and the dead end of the ALP, then the question that must be answered is – What is the solution? The solution is to reorganize the economy and society on the basis of social need, not profit – that is what socialism is, and is what you seem to want (from your posts).

The next question is – How do we do that? The only section of society that can do that is the working class. The working class produce every man-made thing, and service, in the world – i.e. all of the wealth – and the majority of it is taken by capitalists. The working class have to be made of aware of this, and of the collective power they have at their disposal to take it back. The international working class must be unified and made conscious – that is what (true) socialists do.

So while you belittle the work that socialists do, I suggest that it is far more productive than your futile attempts to convince the likes of Col Rouge of the error of their ways. Col Rouge is part of the bourgeoisie, or – more specifically, he would like to be, and is more likely to be “petty” bourgeoisie. And “petty” seems to describe him pretty well. The man may be multiply qualified in finance but patently lacks genuinely human qualities. His arrogance is sickening, and his big-noting very revealing (and unattractive) – he is not as happy/secure as he claims to be.

(tbc)

(continued from above)

I agree with you that there are many groups claiming to be socialist, most of whom are merely middle class radical protest groups, and many of whom are positively disastrous for the working class. You (or anyone) should of course be discerning about the groups you associate with, or get information from, or give your time and money to.

While I am not a member of the wsws.org’s party (Socialist Equality Party in Australia), I may one day join. I have found the news and analysis on their site extremely informative, honest, and enlightening. I recommend it to anyone who is interested in real news. And I believe Daggett, you are.

An article on the IR laws can be found here: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/nov2005/inre-n15.shtml

Articles on the 2004 Australian Election can be found here: http://www.wsws.org/sections/category/news/au-2004.shtml

Sly, I understand your worries about the IR laws, but whether or not the High Court overturns them, they (or similar laws) will be introduced by hook or by crook in other ways – probably by the ALP. Remember how the ALP brought in the troops during the pilot strike?

Belly, I note you have picked up on the new buzz-word for Labor – middle Australia. Just tell me, do the Unions and Labor support capitalism? If so, they support the right of capitalists to exploit workers.

pattipatpat, nice of you to join us. I can tell you are a
wise person, as are most in this forum. I just hope that Howard
voters realize the sorry state he is leaving this country in and that they vote for anyone but him.

Tao wade through my miss spelling and try to understand me better.
I came from the very left, was so active dureing Whitlams years the goverment spys wrote and told me I was on the list.
My frend I was wrong, you are wrong, NEVER not ever will middle Australia, there I go again insisting the majority of Australians matter, will suport or vote for any kind of socialism NEVER.
Nore should they, a better way exists take away the need for effort and no progress will ever be made try Tony Blairs way it is Australian Labors future.
Wealfare alone is no answer, tell me of a realistic answer to John Howards removal, the conservatives removal that doe,s not include a middle of the road labor goverment.
Realistic now tao.
The thought that a trade unionist, ME, could be other than left of centre is of interest, that hopefully is the best we can ever hope for from those who elect goverments just left of centre

Shorten the Savior ("I've got more TV exposure than Eddie Everywhere!") should leave the union. The way he struggled with mining terminology when interviewed shows he hasn't got much idea about what the members actually do. Mining unions always oppose safety initiatives such as workplace alcohol and drug testing. Aviation unions are doing that today as well. So much for union concern for safety.

Statistics of the top 10 incomes by postcodes (see link) show miners doing very well (e.g Dysart, Roxby Downs, Gove, Blackwater). More than $100,000 a year for driving a truck is nice, and the Howard government just slashed their top tax rate.

http://www.ato.gov.au/taxprofessionals/content.asp?doc=/content/70906.htm&page=7&H7

Belly – “Nore should they, a better way exists take away the need for effort and no progress will ever be made try Tony Blairs way it is Australian Labors future.”

What is Tony Blair’s way? Lying to the British people about WMDs in Iraq and taking them into an illegal “pre-emptive” (i..e. aggressive) war? Presiding over an accelerated transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich (even more so than under Thatcher)? Running down public health, education etc.? He sounds very similar to our esteemed (conservative) leader and his best friend W.

Consider the fact that during the Reaganite/Thatcherite era, the Labor party here was carrying out pretty much the same Reaganite/Thatcherite "reform".

It would appear that Labor is essentially no different to the conservatives.

In any event, Labor seems to be on the nose in Britain, having just lost over 300 seats in local elections. Where do the British people go now? Back to the Tories?

What exactly do you mean by “take away the need for effort and no progress will ever be made”? Are you suggesting that the only way workers will make an effort to work is if they are staring down the barrel of starvation and homelessness, or that they wouldn’t work under a socialist system? If so, you sound just like the right wing attacking lazy unproductive workers.

Socialism is not welfare. Under socialism, all of the products of all of the “effort” of workers would belong to everyone, not just a minority of capitalists to dole out as they see fit, and all basic needs would easily be met. There would be no need for welfare.

As I have previously posted, the inevitable logic of capitalism is that nation states must compete to create ever more attractive investment environments for capitalists – lower wages, lower working conditions, lower taxes etc. Do you accept this statement? If not, why not? If so, how will unions and the ALP be able to stop the destruction of working conditions while increasing the profitability of investment in Australia?

I look forward to your considered response.

floatinglili: I suspect your experiences are actually relatively common. Unfortunately, many on the left can't get past the politics of envy, and the "if you're not with us you're against us" rhetoric. ie. if you're not a worker you're a bastard, or at least ripe for taking down. Small business owners are capitalists, but they're hardly the bogeyman.

daggett: Thanks for the vilification based upon complete assumptions. I doubt you and I will see eye to eye on much and I doubt you'll actually stop frothing at the mouth for long enough for us to find out anyway.

tao: Have you ever met anyone who thought the world was flat? How did you respond? I'm kind of scratching my head about what to write to you right now.

Siltstone, I have no doubt you could get a job at the mines if you
wanted. You go and drive a truck and earn 100k and stop your crying.
You seem to be a jealous person and I guess just another selfish Howard voter.

shorbe, I agree that it it is unlikely that you and I will ever see eye to eye, but please don't hold back from explaining to other contributors to this forum, where you think I am wrong. (see http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41991).

tao, sorry not to have responded sooner. I have read and considered your contributions as well as the articles you have referred me to on the World Socialist Web Site. I still believe that your views are flawed but I will have to explain in greater detail, some other time.

Shorbe, believing that dog-eat-dog capitalism is the highest and most intelligent form of organisation of human beings and the economy, and that we can’t (and won’t) do any better, is akin to believing that the world is flat.

Keep scratching.

Thread is about unions but tao get realistic please.
From what void will you find enought voters to bring your goverment to life?
Why has Australia had this firmly in control conservative goverment?
Can it be the non conservative tree needs trimming? that dead wood branchs sprout only to lead no place and weaken the tree?
Your dream world will NEVER exist, a new Labor goverment in Australia will.
Workers? I never intended to say workers need constant movement but some very real bludgers with no intent to do anything other than colect wealfare would benefit by earning it in REAL jobs, not work for the dole.
That would be good for them and good for Australia.
Workers united will never be defeated even by the internal wood worm.

tao,
i believe your ideas have merit but the idea of a socialist australia seems an uphill battle that will never be won in our lifetime. i have been to several protests where socialist groups attended and read some literature but i don't claim to be at all familiar with all the ideas put forward. however, i do note the numbers are small and there is advocacy of uprisings and anarchy. while i don't disagree that some anarchy could go a long way in this country, i can easily see it will never happen, has never happened. australia used to be much more socialist leaning than it is now and as i said before, the only way i can see to change things is to join parties and unions which have voices. enough left leaning voices within a party can change things dramatically. now, i don't know about peter garrett but he seems to have kept his ideals relatively intact.

daggett: I'm no fan of Howard and the Liberal Party because they are politicians who want to tell me how to run my life.

The problem I have is that what I would like will never happen. I would like a completely privatised world where corporations didn't run the show and society was more community based -- I have no problem with private, voluntary philanthropy. However, that would require human beings to actually take responsibility for themselves and not defer to someone else, but the human race is basically full of it. Many don't want someone else (government, corporations, whomever) telling them how to run their lives, yet when asked, "well, if you don't like big corporations, why do you shop at a supermarket instead of supporting a local, small business (or better yet, grow your own)?" they then start grumbling about it being too expensive or too much hassle or something of the sort.

I don't know what to say about the whole thing. Maybe I'll just have to exist on the margins. I want some land in the country and to be fairly self-sufficient for food, energy, water, etc. and homeschool my children when I have them. I'm fully aware that regardless of my actions, the nonsense will continue around me, especially whilst we have cities. Of course, I get to have my cake and eat it too in a sense, such as enjoying medical technology developed in urban states.

tao: I don't believe dog eat dog capitalism is a political or economic endpoint. However, to deny man's competitive nature and free will is a very big oversight. I think the idea of class war and workers owning production is so antiquated because it totally denies 1) voluntary transactions between individuals that may be suitable and beneficial to both, 2) that not all labour is physical, ie. that there's intellectual and organisational labour too, 3) not all forms of labour are equal (eg. I'd hardly put most people in the same basket as Isaac Newton). The sort of anti-entrepreneurial ideas you spout have been tried and failed miserably.

Shorbe:

If you don’t believe dog-eat-dog capitalism is a political or economic endpoint, then what will be? Warm and fuzzy capitalism?

What do you mean by voluntary transactions?

What type of labourer is more essential to the well being of our society, garbage collectors or advertising executives? The hospital cleaner or the accountant? The school teacher, or the star football player? The aged care nurse, or the CEO? The volunteer fire fighter, or the lawyer who won’t give you his expertise for less than $300/hr? Have you ever thought about the fact that intellectual “labour” can only done when basic material needs are met? Who meets those basic needs, and are they any less valuable and essential to the functioning of society than the “entrepreneurs”. Why should “intellectual” or “organizational” labourers be better off materially than other types of labourers, when those others are the ones that enable them to do their intellectual labour?

All entrepreneurial means is making profit. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you appear to imbue the word with all sorts of positive useful meanings such as creativity, initiative and innovation, and assume that the only reason people will engage in such activity is to make profit. Do you think creative geniuses are primarily motivated by profit? Do you think that people only do useful things when profit is involved? I suggest you don’t judge others by your own standards.

Capitalism is often a hindrance to creativity and innovation. Consider the drugs that aren’t researched and produced cheaply because they aren’t profitable enough for pharmaceutical companies. Or patents for fuel efficient cars that have been bought up by oil companies to ensure they don’t get developed and cut into their profits. Or the reluctance by governments to invest in green energy research in order to protect corporate coal interests. “Entrepreneurship” often involves lying, cheating, and taking advantage of people – consider James Hardie – taking the company offshore to avoid liabilities - very entrepreneurial, the AWB Board – they got their profits and million dollar salaries– very entrepreneurial.

Perhaps you should reconsider the ideas you “spout”.

Tao, you are spot on with your last post, corporations are damaging mankind. Quick change of subject how many trees has mankind chopped down? This is the main cause of global warming,etc. I will in the future plant a large scale tree farm, thats what im talkin about.
The human race is in big trouble and the people need real leaders.

This is very deep stuff. Now back to unions, there must be a place for unions in society and work choices ruins that and the workplace in general.

Tao, I would bet you are not a Howard voter however most do not
confess they are or were. Howard voters in this forum show yourself
and explain why.

Belly,

Instead of giving us incomprehensible analogies and convenient Union slogans, please give us some real answers.

How do the unions and the ALP propose to protect workers conditions at the same time as maintaining and increasing investment incentive in Australia?

It is a serious question. Why should we trust you when you can't even answer a direct question?

If you don't know the answer, go and ask your Union bosses. I'll be interested to see what they say.

We all must remember that unions are your fellow workers not the
officials working for the union. When will people wake up to
that. Still waiting to hear from Howard Voters.

Morning all;

• The Howard voters were told to go away sly, so if no-one reply's to this site, don’t be surprised.
• A lot of sly-belly aching goes on with the posts to this thread, but very little information other than statements from the left.

Corporations, like any person or business’s, only respond to demand from the general population. No demand, no business will consume energy or materials to produce!
• If you want high returns on your super, that involves high profits.
• If you want higher wages for higher wealth consumption, that involves business controlling their cost’s. This means 2nd rate environmental management.
• Mankind, that’s you and me, cause trees to be chopped down to grow food and fibre, most of which is discarded before it’s used in the western world. (Read an article that 40% of food taken home from a super market in Australia was never eaten, and with the over weight problem, some more should never have been bought. The food was produced to satisfy demand from “you and me”
• Most of the trees chopped down in west Australia are for new freeways and oversized housing.
• People in Australia are huge consumers of energy, that’s the cause of global warming. After all energy costs in Australia are in line with regulated wages growth, mean that we have not go the message that energy is bad to consume, and it’s non-renewable and on the decline.
• Why not argue for a decline in the consumption of energy as well as other non-essential demand. Planting tress means that productive agriculture land is taken out of production. This puts more pressure on the remaining productive land.

Quote:
What type of laborer is more essential to the well being of our society, garbage collectors or advertising executives? The hospital cleaner or the accountant? The school teacher or the star football player? The aged care nurse or the CEO? The volunteer fire fighter or the lawyer who won’t give you his expertise for less than $300/hr? Have you ever thought about the fact that intellectual “labour” can only done when basic material needs are met? Who meets those basic needs, and are they any less valuable and essential to the functioning of society than the “entrepreneurs”. Why should “intellectual” or “organizational” laborers be better off materially than other types of laborers, when those others are the ones that enable them to do their intellectual labour?

• .well I would rather a well paid food producing land manager than any of the above. All the above I can do, or don’t need, (like the football star, if I don’t go and finically support his income, he will not exist).

Business manages their affairs to maximize their profit.
Union are doing similar, managing other people affairs to maximize their profits.

So what’s the real difference?
One working within the supply/demand situation, subject to the laws of the land.
The other is blackmailing people to hand over wealth that the market would not have to do if it had not been interfered with.

A real reason why “Howard voters” are not posting here, would be that they are to busy working on keeping many people that are posting here in a very high paid job, creating wealth for this country.
How many of you are self employed, and employ other people?
Even more importantly, how many are self emplyed in the export sector?

My thoughts for the day.

tao: I don't know what (if any) society's endpoint will be. Hopefully, I'd say simply capitalism. Strictly, there's no free market because there's state intervention.

However, we can still see how narrow your definition of capitalism is. Capitalism is billions of interactions, some related to others, some not, not some over-arching system. You seem to insist on defining capitalism as one person (or corporation) exploiting another. However, capitalism is also as simple as one person mowing another's lawn for a haircut. To answer a later question, the profit doesn't have to be monetary.

If capitalism turns out to be immoral then it's because particular interactions are immoral, not because interactions are, by their very nature, immoral. This is why your views will never be accepted: your notion of exploitation is, like original sin, anti-human.

I would explain the straightforward "voluntary transaction", but I suspect you'd find a sinister ulterior motive by one or more of the parties involved.

As to your question of what type of labourer is more essential to the well being of society, I think it's a bogus question. These things are decided by individuals or groups of individuals to have different weights at different times. What's incredibly important to me right now might not be to someone else, and vice versa. To try to ascribe greater importance to the material is to ignore the fact that whether we like it or not, people are often willing to go without what you might consider basic in order for the more sublime (eg. music and art, their team winning a grand final, etc.). This is precisely why your simplistic, one size fits all, anti-individualistic dogma had to be thrust upon the people of eastern and central Europe and held there forcibly, yet was so gleefully abandoned once given the chance.

I'm not going to argue that all entrepreneurship has good outcomes because people don't always do good things. However, without the profit motive, perhaps most people wouldn't create or be productive, and most people are involved in capitalist transactions with either neutral or benign intentions.

Tao you have my sympathy, I lived the childlike dream you are liveing quite some time ago.
Once more I am one of 16 hungrey kids of a low paid railway worker, who has worked with his hands from sub teenage years, and you insult me with union oficials are not workers?
My members trust me, no better praise can come to a true unionist/worker.
Your socialist dream ignores the simple truth workers on incomes half and less the national average have in many cases NEVER voted other than conservative!
Thanks for your anti Labor jibs!for such as you drive more away from the only party that can ever help workers the ALP.
Reality is bury your head if you wish, but socialism is dead.
20 years from now we will if we look back see a stronger maybe smaller union movement, and as a result of a long term Labor goverment a better life for lower paid Australians.
But much rough ground and hard times lies between that time and now.
No insult intended but your views unrealistic as they are only contibute to problems of the true poor.
Have you eaten spuds and pumkin for tea and the skins for breakfast? do you know hunger? I do.

Actually Shorbe, mowing a lawn for a haircut is called “barter” and they can be privately “traded” in any economic system. You can’t save up a haircut or a lawn-mow. Capital is stored labour in the form of money. You accuse me of having a narrow definition of capitalism yet you try to reduce it down to a friendly little chat over the back fence to obscure the argument.

I agree with you that capitalism is an ad hoc “system” for want of a better word but the overall effect (simplistically due to word limitations) is this: A small minority of people own the vast majority of the productive land, the tools or means by which human beings produce what they need to sustain themselves, and previously stored labour (capital). They use the state apparatus (politicians (both sides), police, legal system, military, bureaucracy, media, unions), which you so detest, to keep it by force and obfuscation. The rest (the majority) are forced to sell their labour (physical or intellectual), or face starvation. The two groups are called “classes”. So the majority have to expend their labour to produce goods (including food) for the lowest price, which are then sold back to them for the highest price, and the minority pockets the difference. The minority also fight among themselves for resources and markets which is the cause of war – and use the majority as cannon fodder.

You introduced your belief in the inequality different types of labour as a premise to your argument, yet consider my refutation of that premise a bogus question.

Just exactly which individuals decide that hospital cleaning has less “weight” than “intellectual labour” and therefore deserves less remuneration? I doubt it’s the cleaners – mmmm – maybe it’s the “intellectual labourers” (the minority) who have so much time to come up with such convoluted explanations and euphemisms because they don’t have to clean the toilet. I suppose you think tomorrow the cleaners and the “intellectual labourers” are going to “decide” that the intellectual labourers can work for a cleaner’s wage and vice versa. Voluntarily! Ha!

tbc

Tao, A week or so ago i sad is that you Barnaby and said go away.

I am sorry, I wrote the wrong name that message is for my mate

Dunart Joyce. Go back and read Dunarts post, He jumped into this
forum like a smart-arse and that message is now for Dunart.
Dunart thinks he is a entrepreneur but he's not because he dosn't
have the ethics and compassion needed. I am totally for unions
they are needed for balance in society whether you belong to them or
not. However i am very much entrepreneurial with the ethics dunart
will/may never have. Tao, be cool. That is what we are meant to
be discussing here which is directly connected to work choices
and its effects on society. The work choices bill was rushed and so
badly written it will be a legal nightmare for all. No other
western country has such anti-union legislation, and for good reason.

Have a Good day.

How do you know how much compassion I have “sly?”

Your name says it all.

Unfortunate many businesses have been run offshore by people like you.

They have been welcomed with open arms into the new countries, and we then buy the product back, creating our national trade deficit.

You say you are entrepreneurial, so we will see a large socially aware business on the Australian business scene. I will look forward to it and be the first to congratulate you.
This will be because you will have achieved what many have not, maintained the same “selling price”, and not avoided any of your company tax obligations as well as keeping favor with belly by paying 40% over award.

This will all have to be achieved while decreasing the personal ecological footprint on the world’s resources as we have passed “peak oil” and we will see the demise of personally available oil in our life time.

How about some debate “sly” instead of arrogant personal put-downs against people you don’t want to have anything in common with, with your extremely closed mind?

Have you ever stopped and thought why, after 100 years of increasing socisilasm in this country, we have achieved a greater division of income between rich and poor?

I have, and with the modeling as part of the research to work out why it has happened and what we need to do to stop it.
Yes it is possible, and we don’t need more draconian laws to do that.

I would love to see change to return the gap between top earner and bottom income earner in a company from 100 to “10 to one” as it was 50 plus years ago.

At the moment we will continue down the same path, no matter what you say or do, leading to economic problems for this country.
Yes, the crime rate will increase as the wealth gap increases; with people like you telling the less well of (due to present policy’s) that they are “entitled” to someone else’s wealth.

That we do agree on.

Dunart, If your so decent why did your first post say most people
here are whingers. Thats a real smart way to start your debate.

tao: I said barter was one of many forms it took. Money, gold, whatever, is just a convenience. You're so hung up on a small number of people owning or controlling things that it seems to exclude the possibility that some people may actually be happy with the arrangements, and that some people may not be, so they do other things. If I don't like a particular business (eg. how a hospital does its cleaning), most of the time I can take my business elsewhere (although not in the case of government funded, controlled or regulated services). People grow their own food, or make their own other objects, or they trade them with their neighbours or they form co-operatives. Some people pretty well exist right off the radar in the black market. A lot of the time this has nothing to do with anything you're talking about.

I'm not saying people can have their cake and eat it too, but it's possible to exist in a world much different to what you talk about. The point is that most people are too lazy to do so. Put up or shut up I say. Most people don't want to sell up and move to the country and try to be self-sufficient, whilst living a pre-20th century lifestyle, or else live in some sort of communal arrangement. Some people do so only in degree. That's fine. That's up to them since it doesn't affect me (except when they want the government to take my money to fund them).

There are plenty of lifestyle choices over which I disagree with the "mainstream" but my vision of utopia doesn't involve me telling them how to live their lives. I'll mind my business and they'll mind theirs. Frankly, I don't see much difference between what you espouse and that of any other political or religious zealot who wants to tell everyone how he or she must be shown (forcefully if necessary) the errors of his or her ways. I don't want to make people perfect, I just want to live my life.

Shorbe,

As much as you’d like for us all to hole ourselves up somewhere and leave each other alone, it is pretty unrealistic and denies reality. How many acres of land would be required for you to be “self-sufficient”? There are 6 billion people on the planet, do you think they could all just tootle off and settle their little hobby farm – without buying it from one of the few who already owns it (with money)?

Not to mention the fact that most people in the world don’t have anything to “sell up” in order to put up or shut up – except of course, their labour. Most people in the world don’t have sufficient food, shelter or medical care.

And I see you’ve diverted the argument (introduced by you) about the inequality of labour – to your “market” reality - “choice”.

You say that some people may actually be happy with the arrangements – yes, the ones who own it all. I seriously doubt that most people would “voluntarily” go without basic food, clothing, shelter or medical care on a sustained basis. What dream world do you live in? Oh that’s right, the one that justifies your belief system.

You think that people require the profit motive to do anything, but that “unintellectual labourers” should do their work for a pittance – so you can make a profit. You want “reward” for your “entrepreneurial” effort don’t you Shorbe? But everyone else who wants their reward, or just food on the table, for their equally essential (if not more essential) contribution is just a “whinger” or engages in the “politics of envy” and they should just “shut up”. And you have the audacity to say my ideas are anti-human.

For someone who doesn’t want to tell people how to live, you sure do a fair bit of it.

You seem jaded Shorbe, and have a low opinion of human beings. As I said, don’t judge others by your own standards.

Belly – just answer the question.

tao: Obviously we're not going to agree on much at all and we're going to run around in circles.

Never the less, it must really irk you that your belief system has been rejected categorically and mine hasn't. The people of eastern Europe couldn't wait to get rid of Marxism and embrace capitalism quickly enough, and millions in the third would can't wait to get into "The Great Satan" and pursue capitalism themselves with fervour. Deluded or not, they've put ideas such as yours where they firmly belong -- in the trash can of history. You keep believing that your ideas will ever be seen as viable anywhere by anyone but, ironically, a bunch of intellectuals though.

Dunart,

You talk about supply and demand, yet capitalists can’t stand it when the shoe is on the other foot. The current and future “skills shortage”, which is nothing but a shortage of the “supply” of labour, strikes fear into the hearts of capitalists because there will be a “wages blowout”. You’d think capitalists being so in love with supply/demand would be happy to pay the higher “price” of labour, but no, that would cut into their profits. So what do they do? They try to “interfere” with the supply side of the labour market by bringing in foreign labour. And they “blackmail” workers by threatening to move their capital elsewhere.

I don’t know what you mean by “increasing socialism” but we do not live in a socialist system. The widening gap between rich and poor has occurred in a capitalist system, and is a result of the objective process of that system. And it is not just happening here, it is happening in all industrialized countries – and in reality everywhere in the world. Over 50 years ago, socialist ideas were much more predominant than they are now, which is how workers were able to gain improvements in their working conditions. Capitalists gave a little rather than have the workers overthrow them. Those conditions are now being eroded.

You talk about people thinking they are “entitled” to someone else’s wealth. Yet workers create all of the wealth in the world with their labour – there is no other way to do it - and capitalists think they are “entitled” to appropriate it. I refer you back to my earlier comments about the inequality of labour and wonder if you really don’t need anyone to collect your garbage, clean the hospital, teach your children, care for your elderly mother. Business managers can’t do anything without people to manage or products made by others. I particularly refer you to my comments to Shorbe in my last post about reward for effort.

I think you are kidding yourself Dunart.

My post answering taos question got deleated.
The thread is about unions and the death of one miner the rescue of two more.
It should also be about workchoices ,the most unfair law ever passed in Australia in my lifetime.
Non conservative voteing Australians are not helped by radical thinking that overlooks the need for daily action to highlight the dreadfull workchoices act.
And the truth is the ALP alone in goverment can undo this dreadfull crime against all who work in Australia.

Dunart, Tao knows what he's talking about, unlike yourself.

Unions bring some sort of balance to all workers whether they belong
to a union or not. You tell me who is going to keep big business honest if not for the unions? Answer is no one.

Unions are far from perfect and have made many mistakes, however
they are needed more now than ever before. Thats the fact.

Belly: I suggest you re-post your answer. I’m beginning to think you are being evasive.

Sly: tao is a she. And no, unions are not the answer. Refer to my earlier posts. I will try to elaborate later.

Shorbe: Marxists (the real ones) warned years ago that the Stalinist Soviet Union would return to capitalist property relations due to objective economic conditions. Stalinism is not Marxism, or socialism. I will try to elaborate later but you might want to read this article http://www.marxists.org/archive/cannon/works/1953/socialistamer.htm (What a Socialist America Will Look Like) it was written in the 1950s and is therefore dated, is bit of a departure from theoretical Marxism and a bit utopian but you will probably find that there are many similarities with your own ideal – I actually cried when I read it. A caveat is that the struggle for socialism is not a bed of roses and no-one knows how society will be organized because it will be up to the people to decide for themselves. I’m sure you’ll pooh-pooh me and not even read it, but I really think you should know what you are rejecting outright.

You are right that the people of Eastern Europe have rejected Stalinism for the “freedom” and “democracy”. of capitalism. I don’t think it is true however that all of the people are pursuing capitalism with fervour. Again, the people who have most benefited from the break-up of the Soviet Union are an elite group. There are now 33 (reported) billionaires in Russia according to Forbes rich list while conditions for the majority are worsening - http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/apr2006/russ-a03.shtml. I don’t think they got what they were hoping for.

to be continued

continued from above

And just take a look at what is happening in Latin America – a rejection of capitalism by the people. However, their problem is that while the people they are voting for are socialist sounding, their economic systems (and their leaders) are not really socialist.

Your own description of wanting to get out of the rat-race is also an expression of your rejection of the system we live in. Don’t you think we all think that way? Consider the increasing number of “sea-changers”. The problem is, most of us don’t have the choice, and we really can’t just escape from it any way.

You seem to think we all “choose” the system we are living in, when in reality we are born into it, have to make our way in it, are indoctrinated into its ideology, and are not offered any alternative – of course we think it’s the best. Abused children still love their parents and believe that their family is the way life is. Just because we exist in it, doesn’t mean we have chosen it.

I'm hoping and working for something better,

Got to go for a while,

tao

Tao, I did not say unions were the answer. I sad they are needed for balance especially for big business. Big difference darling.

Tao here is my answer to why you and I are never going to agree, and why I remain proud to disagree.
My life as a unionist who beleives in workers rights has seen blokes climb a crane and fling pockets full of stones at police below, then cry out police had thrown the stones!
While below a fellow made the very first fire bomb I had ever seen and pelted it at the police van!
Never would I do that! and my members would not remain my members if I did, of that I am proud.
I with every fibre of my being beleave only via a Labor goverment can workers get fairness back into the workplace.
And every thing I have ever learnt tells me some very foolish people on the extreme left are prepared to harass the ALP rather than face the fact the views they hold are not suported by any number other than a minority.
My income is less than you think, and like every job I ever had fully earnt!
The secret to life is loveing what you do for a liveing and then working hard.
The ALP runs no shadow conservative plan, we are the only altenative goverment.

Now again an answer to tao,s question, first do you read others posts? do you understand I once stood on the ground you now do? as a socialist?
And that it failed me? en,slaved and murdered workers and free thinkers?
Both the ALP and the union movement, the only two groups who ever helped non conservative Australia, have to impress enought voters to gain power.
Power comes only from the most voters trusting you, workers rights never had a defender that did not come from these two groups.
Yet only 25% of Australians are unionists.
I am quite prepared to seperate ,at some time in the future my union membership from my ALP membership.
All who work should feel free to join a union, workplace justice is conservative property too, Howard may not think so, but hungry workers do.
Both parts unions and ALP know the new reforms of Howards workchoices must be so good an end to future goverments need to reform IR can be asured.
Its my view, you know I would have no idea of party policys, that a national system insuring basic rights of leave overtime , a long list not to be broken by anyone would be the safety net and union or private contracts be the choice, union rights of entry in place unchalanged .
Your views are face it just that ,no chance exists that socialism will ever come, comunism is dead, the endless insults to the union movement and Labor leave this question.
Who else cares for the down trooden? who built social wealfare?
Again if 25% of workers are unionists, and 1% in socialist partys from what place would you win votes?
or are you thinking of guns as a way to power?

tao: If you can claim that a sort of corporate feudalism or outright slavery is the inevitability of capitalism, then I can claim that Stalinism is the inevitability of Marxism. Ultimately, I think where Marxism fails is that it doesn't want to accept that not all people have the same vision of utopia. Personally, I don't understand why people are into fashion in music, clothing, etc. They probably don't understand why I'm not. I don't think the two are necessarily able to be reconciled. As such, people either have to live with that or one has to try to dominate the other and obliterate it rather than live with such an affront. The problem with any idealistic system is that ultimately, it believes it has access to "the truth" and all competing systems just need to "be shown the light". As such, ultimately, all prescribe some form of involuntary rehab at some point. If you look at the recent history, and expatriate artistic community -- Milan Kundera would be a good place to start -- of central and eastern Europe, you would see this to be the case. How do the saviours respond when those they are trying to save don't want to be saved or when not everyone shares the same world view?

I read that article you suggested, but I couldn't help thinking of the book "The Dispossessed" by Ursula LeGuin. In short, the protagonist grows up in a utopian anarchistic/collectivistic society that has fled to the moon of its homeworld, a world populated by regimes that represent for example, capitalist America and the Soviet Union. He travels to this other world for scientific contact and doesn't particularly like it, yet he also sees the creeping statism emerging in his own society, even if it's through subtle social pressures, and how one of his friends who is intrinsically different, suffers for it. Ultimately, he realises (perhaps as most scientists, artists, etc. do) that in a way, he has to be apolitical and simply live for his love of science and his partner despite any system. I don't know if LeGuin was trying to say that all utopian societies are doomed to failure (Nietzsche said all revolutions were doomed to fail) and that ultimately, we have to just find the joy regardless of what the rest of humanity is doing, but that's what I took from that and where I'm heading with things.

As to Latin America, I can't say much about them because I don't know a lot about them. However, if history is anything to go by, in ten years' time, we'll see them swing to some crazy right wing governments.

As for Russia, well, I think they're actually quite different from what used to be classed as Middle Europe (based on my short life and travels there), and I think there's something (perhaps borne out of geography/climate, history, religion and the lack of a Reformation and Age of Enlightenment) deep down in their cultural psyche that is actually quite masochistic. I think on a collective level, they're not happy unless they're suffering. I don't hold out much hope for them.

tao,

The fundamental point I was making(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#41771), which applies to just about every purportedly left-wing organisation I can think of is that either:

(1) for the last 50 years of the existence of your organisation, the conditions that would have enabled the growth of the socialist movement did not exist, in which case your members were labouring under a cruel illusion, or

(2) your organisation failed to take advantage of the conditions that did exist.

If you believe (1), then all of the members of your organisation were labouring under a cruel illusion. If, instead, you believe (2), then, you should be able to point to where your organisation made the mistakes which caused it to be even less influential today than it was 50 years ago. In my experience not one left wing organisation in existence is capable of undertaking this necessary critical self-evaluation, and so none are likely, over the next 50 years move our society any closer to socialism than they have over the last 50 years.

I read the article on the 2004 elections at http://www.wsws.org/sections/category/news/au-2004.shtml and did not feel enlightened any further as a result.

The main reason that Labor lost was that Australia's ruling elites did not trust Latham to do their bidding. Accordingly, the Murdoch and Packer media went all out to mislead the Australian people into voting against Labor. In this they were helped by others including 'Labor' Premiers Bracks and Carr and misguided Greens and leftists who refused to acknowledge that anything significant was at stake in the choice between Latham and Howard.

Tao wrote(http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4452#42590): "... workers create all of the wealth in the world with their labour ...".

The only people in the world who create all their wealth with their own labour are hunter gatherers and some third world farmers who do not use artificial fertilisers. Nearly everyone else in the world is engaged in the unsustainable destruction of our natural capital, in particular our fossil fuel reserves, which were created over tens of millions of years but nearly half consumed in just over two hundred short years.

Daggett,

Good to see you back. Good post.

You have touched on a number of important issues which I can’t hope to answer fully a) because of the word and post limitations and b) because I don’t begin to pretend I know all the answers – as I said, I am not a member of the party. Having said that:

You are correct that any political party should be capable of critical self-evaluation. While the complex task of self-examination by the party and its members, and its role in history, is difficult to illustrate in this format, the wsws has many articles on its history here: http://www.wsws.org/sections/category/history/h-icfi.shtml.

Some that might interest you are:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/dec2003/icfi-d23.shtml - a quote: “In reviewing this past 50 years we are in a position to draw certain conclusions and lessons. To the short-sighted observer, or to someone who is impatient with the protracted struggle to construct the revolutionary party, the history of the Fourth International constitutes a series of confusing splits and conflicts. Of course to the pragmatist, eager for immediate “success”, these conflicts have no interest or significance. But for those who are concerned with finding the way forward they are of the most decisive importance.
The history of the Fourth International, and above all the history of the struggle waged by the International Committee over the past 50 years, constitutes a great testing out of opposed political perspectives.”

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/dec2003/pets-d06.shtml
http://www.wsws.org/polemics/1995/oct1995/mandel1.shtml

Some on socialism and 20th Century history (These may interest you too Shorbe):

http://www.wsws.org/exhibits/trotsky/trlect.htm
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jan2000/glei-j18.shtml - a quote: "Seen in this way, the twentieth century will be regarded as the first heroic attempt by working people to conquer state power and take their fate into their own hands. This attempt failed, but it contains a wealth of political experiences, which must be made conscious and mastered by broad social layers, forming the basis for a new attempt."

Some articles explaining their differences with other parties:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/oct2000/lett-o30.shtml
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/may2001/soca-m24.shtml

These articles are of course published pieces and do not show the internal self-examination, but you can’t say they are not serious about it.

cont...

continued
Moving on to the rest of your post:

I agree with what you said about the methods employed by the ruling elites against the ALP (except that I disagree with your idea that it is the main reason for their loss). However, what that illustrates is that Labor must make themselves more acceptable to the ruling elite. They must therefore be able to show the ruling class that they can contain workers and reduce working conditions and wages to maximize profits. The fact that Labor premiers undermined Latham and federal Labor illustrates the fact that they were concerned that Latham’s populist policies undermined their own pro-business agenda.

Latham himself has since come out and told us all how completely bankrupt the ALP is. The factional fighting within the ALP, and its obvious electoral impotence, is an illustration of the almost complete decay of a party which used to have as its social base the workers of this country, but which is now far removed from that base in its policies and its make-up. Any talk of going back to “grass roots” is futile because the party has been in the employ of big business for so long that it doesn’t even know what it’s “grass roots” is. And the interests of the grass-roots are irreconcilable with the interests of big business. You talk about critical self-evaluation. The ALP should take as its starting point the impossibility of protecting or improving workers conditions while simultaneously ensuring business maintains or increases profits. I suggest it will never do so, yet you think we should still vote for them.

I said that workers create all of “the” wealth in the world, not all of “their” wealth. By wealth I mean (simplistically) that people take raw materials and transform them into something useful with their labour. The waste of raw materials and resources and destruction of the environment is inevitable under the chaotic capitalist system. More on this later, I’m running out of words.

Tao and dagget, would you agree that unions are needed especially
in relation to big bussiness to maintain any type of balance?
And lets remember unions are the workers not the officials.

Tao any room for truth? Latham earnt the harmfull quotes ,surely you understand? only after his loss?
After he did not talk even to his close frends in the party or answer the phone to them?
As a true Labor /union supporter, one who never insults or turns on them I ask that you explain to me after Lathams train wreck election can it be you realy think Australia may have one day elected him?
He was rejected forever.
Do not please say you think voters are only right when they vote as you want!
Get back to the thread not the fanasy land of lost in space Wil Robinson never to be politics.
Unions sent to control workers?!
Workers united will never be defeated.

I'm actually not convinced that big business' interests and the interests of the average person don't converge nicely. Okay, maybe they've been brainwashed, which is a definite possibility (if not certainty), but the average person, I think, really doesn't want anything more than a big new TV to watch the latest episode of Big Puttana 06 or the footy.

I used to be under the mistaken belief that once people got over the task of putting food on the table (which is the case for the majority of people in the west), they would then start to use their free time and wealth to educate or improve themselves, or to experience or contribute to the arts. We have two very non-commercial television stations in this country, and aside from the World Cup, who actually watches them? We have libraries full of books, yet who reads them? We have the internet, yet who actually uses it for anything other than porn or message board flaming? Each year, hundreds, if not thousands, of small, quirky movies come out at arthouse cinemas in this country, yet who goes to watch them? I tend to think if the system is screwed then maybe it's just a reflection on people, or maybe it's not and people genuinely are happy with it.

I think some people here are projecting their own interests in politics and the world around them onto the average person. People really don't care. More to the point, they don't want to care.

Shorbe,

In answer to your questions – I do, I do, I do, I do.

I agree that there appears to be a very low level of consciousness at present, however look at the turnout all over the world at the demonstrations prior to the Iraq war – millions. And more recently the marches against Workchoices, the demonstrations in Paris, the demonstrations against immigration laws in the US, against the war, there are demonstrations in Germany all the time – which is a reason for Schroder unconstitutionally engineering early elections to enable more cuts to social conditions, recently in the UK. Just because our media doesn’t show us doesn’t mean its not happening. And just because it appears to be about separate issues, it is all really about the same thing - and all of that anger doesn't just go away.

Capitalism requires for its existence a docile, unthinking, compliant population and, for the most part, that is what it produces. There is really little difference between the escapism of popular culture than the escapism you hope to engage in. One day the real world is likely to crash in on them and they will have to think about it. Some already do.

Perhaps you project your own not caring onto others.

shorbe do not fall into the wrong view that only you or I or anyone have views that are right.
Its a trap that leads away from truth, my sponsorship of and dreams for a better more responsive ALP are not for personal interest, I want better goverment as an outcome.
But some who want things that can never muster voters in double figures to follow them ,live in worlds that will never exist.Yet again we drift from the thread but unions for workers are in no way different than the many unions for bosses, execpt one is free to act in the interests of its members and one is not.
Freedom is a wonderfull thing we are in Australia free to form lines shoulder to shoulder on election day and each vote differently but at the end of the count not want to harm the winning person.
Yet for how long? Workchoices is unfair! its about distruction not reform.
I without question say reform was needed, but this is a shamefull thing John Howard has bought to Australia, if we needed to control wages but not prices to keep our country tradeing the bottom will one day fall out of world trade.
As the rich get richer and the poor get poorer who buys the goods?
In time this act will strengthen unions by divideing Australia.

tao: I don't know that the demonstrations necessarily change anything. I lived in London during the lead up to the Iraq War and there was certainly a real feeling that marching would achieve something. I went on that march that had about a million people, but ultimately, it didn't do anything. At the time, the British people had real alternatives to Blair, yet they chose, and continue to choose, to do nothing about the situation. The American government has been blatantly ignoring the Constitution for a very long time now, yet people, in the main, aren't about to have a revolution there either. Ultimately, most people aren't driven by idealism in their politics or we'd see something different in this country too.

Having said that, I don't think it's bad at all that we in certain parts of the English speaking world aren't revolutionary minded, especially in this country. As bad as you make things out to be, we haven't had the periodic blood-letting in this country (or Canada, New Zealand or even Britain to a large extent) that seems to be de rigueur for most other parts of the world. Australia has never produced the garden variety nutter native to the rest of the world (and England hasn't produced anyone really crazy since Cromwell), and I think a large part of that is because people are pretty complacent and have a fairly laid back attitude towards politics. The last thing we need is someone waving a coloured flag in this country for some "cause".

Belly: I'm not entirely sure what you were getting at in the beginning of your last response. I don't want to misinterpret you. Please qualify.

The Howard Government is doing a lot off damage in many areas, end of story. I only talk facts, black and white. Alot of crap is written in this forum when at the end of the day the facts are this current Australian Government is destroying this country and must go.

I'm not talking about ALP, Bill Shorten, ACTU or what ever other dribble you are all fighting over. Who amongst you agree the Howard Coalition government must go? without attacking any other parties.

shorbe your last few posts have shown me you may want another path but you do understand others views.
Sly without reservation surely its clear my views are Howard must go? that anti union posts are anti worker and anti Labor ones never come from me!
Information of actual suport for the MUA cash time and total are put down by tao constantly.
My path to fairness for non conservatives and Australia is via the ALP.
HAS ANYONE a beleif it can EVER come from socialism?
Tao has but surely an unrealistic expectation?
Review the whole thread every post, mine included and no question can be unanswered surely?
Voters yes they alone will make the choice Howard further damages Australia or Labor starts to undo the damage.
It will depend on how many of the new 3 times conservative voters we can win back to Labor, that is reality, watch the advice given by radicals who refuse to understand that fact, it betrays those who need to undo workchoices and so much more.

Sly it is not reasonable to discuss the need for a particular government to go in isolation from what the alternatives are. Your desire for a blanket answer regarding the failings of the coalition whilst ignoring the failings of the alternatives might make you feel good but does not produce real answers.

Those who are looking to fix up the ALP are trying to ensure that when the current federal government eventually go's what they put in it's place will be of some value. Maybe it is time to have a read of "Animal Farm" (or re-read it if you have forgotten the message).

I've seen how Beatty treats workers in Queensland and I'm not sure wether to be more concerned about the federal governments IR laws or those IR laws in the hands of a Labor Government. At least with a non Labor government the unions speak up when workers are getting done over, my experience has been that they are much quieter when it is a Labor government doing the deed.

R0bert

Shorbe,

That’s entirely my point, demonstrations, “democracy”, unions, will not change anything because capitalists are in control and governments are their lackeys, opposition parties are equally their lackeys and exist so that when we think something needs to be changed we’ve conveniently got some party of a different colour to vote for. But really, unless they oppose the profit system, they are all the same. Absolutely nothing would have stopped the Iraq war except overthrowing capitalism.

All I am saying about the demonstrations is that there is a lot of dissatisfaction with what is going on, and because capitalism and “democracy” is in an advanced state of decay, it is only going to get worse. Capitalism can’t afford to give concessions to workers any more, hence WorkChoices. In addition, they are legislating away our democratic rights – look at the sedition laws, and anti-terror laws which allow you to be locked up for two weeks without anyone knowing where you are (which the ALP supported), the new ID card. The US has basically trashed the principle of habeas corpus, and the Geneva Convention and our government supports them. They are preparing for the inevitable backlash that will come from the people against the worsening conditions under the cover of “the war on terror”.

Where do you think capitalist democracies come from Shorbe? Revolutions, or the threat thereof, which are driven by progress and development in the means of production which must break out of the earlier political and economic systems, not crazy nutters. (This is very simplistic and probably not quite theoretically exact). Production is now completely global and highly socialized, and capital is highly mobile and cannot be contained within nation states.

Daggett, how are you going with all that reading? I forgot that I actually had a lot of trouble when I first started reading the site, and I was really peeved that they “attacked” (really just thoroughly analysed and criticized) every other party. But I gradually came to understand what their political line was. Now, whenever I want real news with background analysis, I read their site.

Bring on the ALP, Howard and the coalition can look you in the eye and say with a straight face the earth is flat. Go back 15 to 20 years and no one liked Howard because they could see straight though him. Next time you have that vote in front of you, vote 1 labor or geens , democrates, independent. I would rather a sensible 15yo run this country than the current Libs and Nats.

Dear Interest rate voters, your vote is the reason for this current mob of Cowards. Howard does not control interest rates.

Work Choices is going to cost 500 million+ to implement, A real leader would of spent that on renewable energy and childcare, etc.

Sly some who taunt you and I and my union and its leader are not Labor voters.
Each will say the votes they cast may end up with Labor but its not always true.
The thread however is about unions, and the handfull of Australians who want a social utopia are in too small a group of numbers to have any impact.
As a union oficial I want to say not all workers care about unions or Labor, many vote conservative and very few vote extremist left.
Workchoices must be fought and in my view Labor must be prepared to get true honest reform on the table long before this election.
Extremist left? well further left than the greens is what I mean, now that is left!
Bill Shorten? the insults come from the fact Bill knows Hawke and Keitings path is about right for Australia ,and given the fact voters only vote for such partys he understands hunting voters away is unwise.
Yet unmade history will confirm Shorten to be a great servant of the ALP.
Yes I wear my heart on my sleeve but workchoices demands a new goverment and a fair go at work .
Last am I wrong in hopeing that Labor goverment will be reformist? inovative? and put policys in place that match the Hawke Keiting ones?

Belly I don't care about left or right. I believe in write and wrong.

Howard, with the Libs and Nats are doing serious wrongs and must be
dismissed from office. Some people including mabey you don't understand or forget that individual workers are the unions not the paid officals. It does not matter the name of the union you belong
just be glad they exist.

There are many other serious issues with this government including,
Snowy hydro selloff, medicare selloff and skills, etc etc
Most people need to know the facts, not about each union.

I don't think many High court Judges would ruin their place in history supporting such a badly written legal document.
Take a stand on IR, Support the rally/march on June 28 200

Sly while I admire your heated posts and the diection they take you wander from reality far too often.
Of course I UNDERSTAND UNIONS ARE THE MEMBERS! mate its my mantra, unions are for the members not some who ride for free some oficials are unfit to be floor sweepers in the building in ANY UNION.
Workchoices is unfair, it divids Australia into classes and creats povity!
Yet are you aware some who work do not fight against it? only 25% of workers are unionists.
Please mate!no offence but please read and understand others posts ,do not turn on your fellow travellers!
24/7 I live to see workchoices beat, Howard beat, and sorry but its my view from deep within my heart only a centerist ALP goverment will do it.
And only a centerist ALP can be elected!
The sadest fact is people who want a perfect world in the image they expect show no respect for the fact we can not please every one.
Labor must take on board wishes and dreams do not win elections, my aim is for a better party that gives us a far better goverment.
I respect you but lay of the lectures please my vote belongs in the same place as yours ,my heart in the same bin, my hopes in the best leader we can get as soon as possible.

Here is my last post in this thread, a unionist till death my only aim has been to defend unions, all unions.
Workchoices will not go away, even if by some strange chance the ALP won ofice and control of the upper house in the election.
Labor will need to craft true reform for IR, and my NSW Labor right faction of the union/Labor movement will remain both a target for insults, and the only team that can lead Labor to goverment.
And nothing less is execptable to me, however its time for the trade union movement to recraft its self, I think I did that years ago.
I beleave service is step one get closer to your members not just your delegates.
New ways of helping and uniteing are out there if you look.
And given only 25%are unionists we must stop driveing potentual members away with our factional warfare.
Labor and the union movement must not let fear stop us becomeing more responsive to the voters/ members wants and wishs.
Both rely on numbers to exist.
So to all those who share my views workchoices is a nightmare that must be defeated ,have no fear unions will strengthen and fight for an evolving future they will be part of , dispite Howard and some who white ant ,seeking impossible outcomes for a movement just fighting to survive.
And we will both survive and grow headed for goverment the ALP will set new laws in place unionists will then use that place to grow and evolve in ,after all following our members is no danger.
regards while I will continue to read the thread I will leave the go no place debate.

Belly I do agree with you. I fight hard and I believe the High Court
will find work choices unconstitutional. Cheers comrade

They will not.

They still place unfair costs on business, especially export businesses

Any way, a labour govt can pay the benefits you guys want from general revenue, thus all sharing in the cost.

You can always start your own business and revert to employment practices that you desire as we still have the freedom to do that.
But maybe I hear the echo of costs beat me. (This is short for, “I could not get other people to pay for my beliefs”)

Cheers comrades

Dunart, they will not what. Are you talking about the high court ruling? Do you support the Work Choices bill?

Yes I am talking about a high court ruling

Yes I do support the work choices IR regulations.
Reason is that why I should pay for other people to have benefits that I myself don’t enjoy. I think you could be up for a case of discrimination here when you are demanding that people like myself, (well I used to) pay for a benefit that I don’t receive.

You have the choice of;
• emigrating to a socialist country to get these benefits
• Starting a business so that your self and your workers can get these benefits as they are not banned under our law, you just have a choice.

Dunart, you are confused. Your lack of morals and general understanding of Work Choices is sad. 80-90% of people are against
Work Choices and we all will laugh in your face when the High Court over rules this bill.

Howard looks after Big Business corporations only and all he does is frustrate small businesses. Dunart, unless you are the CEO of Woolworths you are a fool. Even multi millionaire's like me don't want to screw workers because it will be a chain reation and people
will have even less money to spend with small business.

Dunart, grow up and look at the big picture and stop voting for your liying mate Howard. HaHa

One last visit, a post NSW ALPconference visit yes I dumped on Kim BEAZLEY here often, it is however my reason to return.
Kim charged the stage yet again and my memory took me back to seeing him at the edge of conference with just the press around him just before we wrecked on Lathams rock.
Kim always in my posts a good bloke, gave a speach reminding me he intends to lead for ALL AUSTRALIANS.
He defined the difference between pre workchoices AWAs and the murderous post workchoices AWAs.
Without reserve I am for Kim Beazley, with pride I got to my feet to call with MIDDLE AUSTRALIA Beazley Beazley Beazley.
And unions will on behalf of ALL WHO WORK play our part in restoreing a fair go at work via Kim.

Yes back again, we must debate the fate of Australian workers and unions openly.
The pride and the pure joy of the mines events even the sadness of the loss fades away but workchoices remains.
Why am I sitting here? its just one hour from my first visit today and unions are not alowed on site untill meal times!
Yesterday it rained and my first vistit was 185 klm away, as I drove past a job I watched new contractors labour hire workers working in the rain, without wet weather gear.
The same blokes who traded an existing near$25 an hour casual rate for $17.15 all in no overtime.
Injurys are growing daily, a worker who received an electric shock admited! mate the lead was laying on the wet deck all week, no one thought to move it!
Mate without you blokes they/ we donnt care as much about safety!
Shame John Howard!

Belly, good to hear from you again. I cheated by having an e-mail sent to me when someone adds a comment. Working in the rain may result it something like my son has got called ‘Spontaneous Pneumothorax,’ which is explained at

http://www.uscuh.com/CWS/ADAM/Surgery/Pneumothorax_1.html

A complaint that divers can get. He worked in the rain a few weeks ago & got so cold that he complained that he could not warm up. Do not think he is in a union. Do they have one for worker with Contractors for Mowing & Landscaping. His brother who works for one of the biggest Mining Companies in Australia, said, of his brother, who is single, “he does not look after himself, has he a decent water proof coat?” The weather can come in unrepentantly wet & cold, even here in Queensland. If the workers went home to get their coats, Howard, more likely would Sue them for leaving the job site!