No, Yabby, my 'hatred of Howard' is not clouding my judgement. If you had read my article "Dictatorial Conduct" at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6261 you would know that I am prepared to give even John Howard credit where it is due.

---

Yabby, in regard to the issue of sustainability, how much longer are we expected to tolerate governments who refuse to take the urgently necessary measures to prevent environmental apocalypse?

John Howard has misused his years in office in order to sabotage and delay necessary efforts to combat global warming. Notoriously, this man gloated upon his return from the London Kyoto Protocol conference of 1997 that his job was only to look after Australia's best interests, as if climate change can possibly be stopped by each country only pursuing its own selfish interests. Even now he is promoting accelerating levels of exports of Australian fossil fuels, which are fueling the approaching calamity.

If Rudd fails to dramatically improve upon this dismal record, then it is surely our prerogative, in a democracy, to find other political leaders who are equal to the task.

---

Rhian, I had no luck trying to look at those stats on the ABS site. (Did anyone else have any luck?) If it is true that those stats show that actual average working hours have actually fallen, and not increased in Australia in recent years, that flies in the face of much other evidence to the contrary.

However, even if we accept that there has been a decline, this may still does not answer a number of concerns, including some which I have already raised and which you have ignored. These are:

1. That many are working longer hours than they would wish whilst others are working fewer hours than they need to,

2. that due to casualisation, the overall hours worked have been broken down into increasingly smaller periods, of the for more than one employer, necessitating more time and expense wasted preparing for work and commuting to and from work, and

3. that the intensity of work during actual work periods has increased.

James Sinnamon (author)

Your posts are spot on Haygirl. Totally agree!

Daggett, at some point you have to separate as to how much of
what you feel is a feelgood exercise to make yourself feel better
and how much will actually make a real difference to our global
future.

I have a number of friends who peddle to work, to save that 800mls
of fuel and fuss over every lightbulb. Meantime China cranks up
another powerstation a week, world population increases by another
80 million a year. They might feel better about their contribution,
but basically they are kidding themselves in the real world.

Its these global issues that need addressing, in the big scheme
of things, what Australia does, hardly matters. Sadly, that
includes you :(

I certainly don't want a leader who only addresses the feelgood factors.
I want one who addresses the global issues. How many
of these leaders address the fact that many women keep popping out
babies like rabbits, as they don't have access to family planning?

None that I am aware of. Its a given that the world population will
rise to 10 billion, its not even discussed.

Kyoto was all about the feelgood factor. It did not address the fundamental issues.

As to working hours, people are far more free now to make choices.
Some want to work more, some less. Only a flexible economy with
flexible laws can achieve that.

As to "smaller periods of work", what it comes down to is efficiency.
Only productivity will raise living standards, that means cutting
out waste. Having people stand around at workplaces doing nothing
in particular, is an enormous waste, which costs us all. Best that
they work when there is work, do something else somewhere else,
when required, which is about flexibility. That flexibility is
a win-win for everyone.

Regarding the intensity of work. Last I read, plenty of employees
spend something like 20% of their worktime fooling around on the
internet. Seems to me that that would include quite a few
OLO posters :)

Daggett
As I indicated, to open the data cube and see the detailed info you need to install SuperTable, which is free on the ABS website. A summary is also available in Table 11 of the 6291.0.55.003 labour force release which is and excel spreadsheet, which you should be able to open without SuperTable, but it includes only the “all employees” category, not full-timers, and is quarterly, whereas I used monthly figures (it shows the same declining trend, though).
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@archive.nsf/log?openagent&6291012.xls&6291.0.55.003&Time Series Spreadsheet&C913C339BAFF7F01CA2572F9001D5781&0&May 2007&14.06.2007&Latest

The evidence suggests that most employees work the hours they want. That’s true of full-timers and part-timers, including full-timers working comparatively long hours:
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6361.0Jun%202000?OpenDocument

You say I unfairly accuse you of accentuating the negatives, but I’ve re-read your article and really can’t see much positive in there at all.

Daggett, I’m not indifferent to the fact that many people are struggling financially, and some are worse off now than they were in the past. Rising housing costs are a problem for some households, as are higher fuel costs. Some quality of life indicators have undoubtedly deteriorated. Governments possibly can and should do more to help. I’m not a Pollyanna or an apologist for Howard (I’d say the Hawke-Keating administrations are probably due more credit than Howard-Costello for Australia’s successful economic reforms of the past 25 years).

The data do nonetheless show that, for most Australians - including those on lower incomes - economic conditions are improving. I sympathise with Haygirl and others for whom this is not the case, and support policies that provide opportunities and financial help for those who need it. But it’s poor reasoning to generalise from the particular, and assume that because some people are poorer, then most are.

The danger is that an excessive focus on the negative can be used to argue for the reversal of the economic policies, implemented by both Labor and the Coalition, that have delivered considerable benefits to the majority of ordinary Australians.

It is beginning to look as if all you anti Howard people are going to get your wish to live in Rudd Paradise. I hope you enjoy it -even if for few weeks.
Then the unions will direct when,how,where,if you work, Ms Gillard will see to that.
Mr Rudd's love of all things Chinese will undoubtably see an inrush of Chinese seeking well paid jobs.[do the Chinese allow unions?]
These forums are going to be interesting to read in a couple of years time.Remember who voted him in won't you!
I look at the fools who make up the state government where I live and I fear for my country.Labor is Labor.

I too am tired of hearing how good the current government is at 'managing the economy'. It is pure spin. While politicians are smirking on the television telling us how well we are doing, many Australians are experiencing financial hardship through lower wages gratis WorkChoices, working longer hours for less, the highest level of personal debt the country has ever seen, not to mention those on pensions receiving a measley rise in their payments based on CPI rather than on real cost of living indicators.

In real terms the living standards of a large number of people are reducing. While we buy into the free trade and globalisation myth we are at risk of losing sight of the impact at the local level. Politicians think we have forgotten that it was not that long ago a family could live on one wage and pay off a house, now it takes two wages to cope with the burden of mortgages and cost of living, particularly with rising fuel and food prices.

While our levels of consumerism and materialism accounts for some of this, it is not significant in the big picture. What happened to work/life balance and the increased leisure time promised by the boom in technology and mechanisation?