EXCLUSIVE: Workchoices Instigators Are Righties.

Hello?

AJFA - lets apply a little of the scrutiny to you, that you're applying to this researcher hmm?

A few from the blog:
"Brown the Clown"
"Media Watch increasingly absurd and irrelevant"

And from here at OLO:

"anyone who would resent having to answer some questions about our values wouldn’t have a very good attitude towards migrating to Australia"

OH NO! You're a RIGHT WINGER! Don't listen to him!

Actually, I think the argument I just put forward is bulldust - in precisely the same manner as the topic of this post.
It should be about the report itself.

Now to Communicat - your posts on people such as Julia Gillard also hint at a right wing attitude, but I see you're now addressing the report.

But with all this talk of bias and dodginess, I'd need to see actual examples of what you're talking about, and given that I've seen no solid analysis from places such as The Australian, or even much from the Liberal party, I'm exceedingly sceptical.

Well obviously only peers of these academics would be best placed to comment on the methodology, however concerns have been raised already.

I at least don't hide my political views. If i did want to hide them, I wouldn't have a blog now would I?

The other facts I have cited are also pertinent. They constitute evidence that the study is little more than a hatchet job on the government

AJFA. I hope your level of zeal in investigating corruption can be directed at the current chief scientist and ANY GOVERNMENT INQUIRY TO DATE.

Get to work. Or shut up. Because your focus here indicates you are a partisan yourself, a bigot if you will. Your own words to describe and persecute a researcher is PROOF of this FACT.

I'm more willing to believe a researcher than some sh**-faced hack like you

Actually Communicat, I'm not even sure it's possible to phrase a open-ended question without your own personal bias affecting how you ask it, so it need not be a choice between "incompetent" and "deliberate".
Almost certainly the report has highlighted negative aspects of WorkChoices at the expensive of potential positive aspects, and has probably exaggerated certain claims or cherry-picked data. Everyone does it, intentionally or otherwise. But you have to demonstrate that it's been done to a sufficient degree that the overall conclusion (that WorkChoices has generally not been kind to lower-income/lower-skilled workers) is wrong. Or better, attempt to demonstrate that although on average lower-income workers have seen salaries fall and/or conditions reduced, either a) this was necessary to ensure Australian business remained internationally competitive, and hence able to employ anyone at all or b) this is a short-term phenonema, and there is good reason to project that pay and conditions will improve considerably in coming years.
There is almost certainly a grain of truth to both those claims, though I am personally highly skeptical that WorkChoices will actually benefit anybody very much in the long run, because it will inevitably lead to less equal income distribution, which is neither economically nor socially sustainable (see
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1083 for a partial explanation of why it makes no economic sense).

I don't have the report to hand Frank and I think that any further comment would probably become political - something I was trying to avoid.
Examples of questions designed to elicit certain responses are common in research - I have been guilty of it myself!
Something like, "Which of the following do you support (a), the death penalty by firing squad (b), by lethal injection (c) by hanging" instead of "Which of the following do you support (a)the death penalty by firing squad, (b)by lethal injection (c) by hanging (d) None of the above"
Both questions are designed to elicit a positive response in favour of the death penalty. (By answering (d) are you opposing the death penalty or just those forms of the death penalty? What is needed is a further option which allows the respondent to state that they do not support the death penalty.
I am sure you have seen this sort of thing and worked it out for yourself. Some political polls do not take into account those who refuse to answer or the fact that people feel under pressure to state a preference...
Social science research has a lot of "social" and often very little "science"!