Imdi, you are right.

I am about to build a rental on one of my lots, a transportable, aimed at miners and it should rent for about $1500 to $2000 per week. Not bad for a $200K investment.

Had I done the same five years ago, my rent would have been $120 to $150 per week, if anything, as I am ten km from town.

The expectations of young workers today is out of whack. Nowadays, two week on, two week off and a $120K per year is the norm.

Out here we have young guys finishing their apprenticeships, being scooped up by the mines on a start up rate of $180K+.

They are the ones who will suffer as they simply won't cope with reality when the boom stops.

Wages for on miners must be subsidized or business will simply fold.

As I have said many times, welfare is governments responsibility, not small businesses.

rehctub said "Wages for miners must be subsidized or business will simply fold.
As I have said many times, welfare is governments responsibility, not small businesses."

Let me get this straight. When the non sustainable mining crash comes, Government should make huge handouts to unemployed miners

As rehctub said "start up rate of $180K+."

The unemployment benefit for these ex miners living in rehctub's neck of the woods will have to be equal to $180k per year. You may ask, why is it so?

rehctub also posted: I am about to build a rental on one of my lots, a transportable, aimed at miners and it should rent for about $1500 to $2000 per week. Not bad for a $200K investment.

Now we know why the unemployed miners have to get this huge government benefit, so they can pay rehctub the outlandish rent for his mobile hovel. If they are on normal unemployment benefit as rehctub said all he will get for rent is, "my rent would have been $120 to $150 per week"

It is the taxpayers responsibility to ensure rehctub continues getting $2000 a week from an unemployed miner for his mobile hovel and not $150 a week from some dole bludger! Nothing like a bit of targeted welfare. ROTFLOL.

Are you really that dumb Paul? Or do you just think it's smart to misrepresent something so badly?

I guess the latter, after all you are a lefty, & going by their climate change scam, they could not lie straight in bed, even if their life depended on it.

My apologies Paul, a small typo in my post, but it sure got you going.

What I meant to say was that NON MINERS wages need to be subsidized so non mining businesses can afford to employ staff. At present they simply can't compete.

I have suggested before that a levy should be charged on miners pay rolls so this money can be used for the subsidizing of non miners wages. Same deal for rents.

As for young ones wages, my point is that when the industry does slow/crash, it is they who will find it hard to accept what most of us consider as the norm.

A for them getting 180K on the dole, yea right, don't know how you think that was my thinking.
But then again, some people just can't help sticking the knife in.

It's often a habit of under achievers, not sure if that's you, don't really care.

It becomes clear from comments all around that the whole I.R. thing only addresses two sides independently, opposing that is. The employers' side is all about getting the most out of the employee & the employees' side is all about getting the most out of the employer.
There is no flexibility & that's where the trouble lies.
The one factor stuffing up both deals is bureaucracy which grabs a larger than fair slice from the employer & the employee.
Government is supposed to regulate everyday live for it's citizens but in Australia it's mission appears to be fleecing everyone to the max in order to pay for it's own incompetence.
The present mining boom would be an ideal point in time to refurbish IR. Put it to to those who claim sky-high pays what their plans are after the boom is gone in a few years. Put it to them that because they're on such high pay now they won't be eligible for unemployment money for some time. The same goes for the overpaid bureaucrats in the Public Service. If you are on very high pay for several years then you really should have enough in the kitty to keep going for some time without asking the lower paid to support you. If you think you can't put enough aside from your big pay to support yourself beyond the boom then stay with your present job, don't cling to our aprons.

Butch,
IR will only be an issue at the next election if Labor chooses it to be. If you really want change the government then I suggest you drop this matter. The present government is far more vulnerable on many other issues.

For example, carbon tax, illegal boat people and all the stuff ups they have made. They could present an argument about IR and frighten some electors about work choices.

No matter how important you see it for small business, and it is, best stick with other issues I have mentioned.