>> I can't speak for Sancho, but as an atheist I have certainly never suggested that there is no wisdom to be found in the Bible... <<

Wisdom, certainly, but it's the wisdom of humans, not a deity, combined with a pile of contradictions and exhortations to violence.

I don't consider you an enemy, Glorfindel. You're intelligent and good-hearted. But the recycling of archaic fairytales is no basis for modern thought or society. You could do so much better, but instead you choose to chain yourself with unfounded superstition.

And Yabby, if you're still pushing the debt argument, you may as well stick to the tabloids and not bother debating. Howard squandered a boom and moved debt onto the populace, Turnbull has no better plan than Rudd, and, since you obviously haven't noticed, Australia is the star of the financial meltdown and other countries are asking Swan for advice.

Why do you even bother?

Interesting that rehctub has shifted his parameters - he's gone from complaining about not being able to sack workers if somebody's prepared to do the same job for less, to wanting to be able to sack workers if they aren't "more efficient" than someone else.

CJ, this is only about the inbalance in the system between the rights of employees and the rights of employers.

As for the issue of 'boning beef', it is in fact a skill that is obtained and required if one is to call themselves 'a tradesman'.

Now as an employer, if I have a butcher that can only bone one body per hour, then another fronts who can bone four per hour, why then can't I choose the more efficient one? Afer all, I am just wanting a 'fair days work' for my 'fair days pay', or does this senario only go one way?

Our industry is like many others where we suffer from a 'skill shortage', then, when a highly skilled person becomes available, we jump at the oportunity to have them on board, often at a higher rate of pay than the one we have replaced. Is there a problem with that?

After all, it's not my fault the first employee lacks abillity.

Most highly skilled butchers in my industry, myself included, have worked many hours FOR FREE just to better themselves. So why not reward them for their efforts by giving the job to them, often for more money.

I say again, if employees can pick and choose where to work, why can't I pick and choose who to employ?

Please explain why I can't give the job to the better employee and reward them for their skills.

By the way. My industry is renowned for paying well over the award for high skilled butchers. Many of us struggled with school yet earn more than your average lawyer.

My argument has nothing to do with under paying anyone! This is your spin on my view.

*Australia is the star of the financial meltdown and other countries are asking Swan for advice.*

Sancho, I guess in that case Swan will have to turn to Costello
for advice, for it was Costello who sorted out Apra and it was
Apra which kept our banks in line.

It was also Costello who ensured that the Govt was not burdenend
by a mountain of debt, to his credit.

What people borrowed privately, is their affair, not the affair of
the Govt. If you want to go nuts at the pokies, or run up credit
card debt, that is your problem, not my problem. But if Kev blows
out the Australia card debt, it is my problem. Job creation schemes
will be just one part of it.

So it appears that none of the 'anti employer lobby' can answer one simple question.

Q: Why is it that an employee can pick and choose their employer at will and when it suits them, for what ever reason, yet an employer can't pick and choose their employees at will for fear of retribution from the regulator?

So where is Sharon Burrow in this debate. Perhaps she can put some light on this subject as none of her supporters seem to be able to answer my simple question.

So Sharon, I put it to you directly. Why is it that an employee can pick and choose their employer at will, yet an employer can't pick and choose their employee at will?

Employees often up and leave when the workload is heavy, even though employers tend to carry staff through tough times in the knowledge that there is plenty of work on the horison.

Or, is it as I suspect, a flaw in the system that doesn't matter to you or your supporters as it is in your favour.

So Yabby, your argument is that a treasurer who is earning worldwide admiration for keeping Australia's economy going in a depression should be asking advice of a treasurer who pushed the ideology that created the depression in the first place? That's hero worship, not rationality.

And rechtub, employers can employ whomever they choose. There are probation periods to ensure they can sack people without notice if necessary, and if there is a legitimate reason to let them go, the regulator won't do a thing.

As for employees being able to pick and choose jobs, well, if you really think that's how things work, you'll never understand why Australians rejected WorkChoices.

And if we're onto simple questions that always seem to go unanswered, what do the Costello loyalists think he'd be doing now to undo the mess his dogma created?