Hasbeen - here comes your Mediterranean holiday, from work at least.

I don't necessarily agree with the finer points of all your steps however the end result is inevitable

If wages fall by 10 percent.
So too will the economy.
Belly,
That's old hat thinking. Just think those top bureaucrats dropping 30 - 50 Grand a year how quickly that would fill the coffers. Drop any wage above 150 Grand by 10% and anything down to 40 Grand by 5% & you'll have an economy screaming in top gear.

individual - That's old hat thinking. Just think those top bureaucrats dropping 30 - 50 Grand a year how quickly that would fill the coffers. Drop any wage above 150 Grand by 10% and anything down to 40 Grand by 5% & you'll have an economy screaming in top gear.

There is no excuse for *ANY** bureaucrat being paid over $100,000. That level of income should be restricted to medical specialists, high ranking military officers and stuff-all others on the public teat. Anyone who don't like it can always go get that much higher paid private sector job they continually crap on about.

Ok, so wages can go up, but not down.

So how is that fair?

It's an economic fact that a higher minimum wage creates a higher level of economic efficiency. People are simply expected to do more for the money they are paid and employers are more likely to invest in improving staff skills and productivity.

The only people who want to reduce wages are those big businesses who employ people in "dead-end jobs" because it improves their bottom line in the easiest way possible.

Over the last 15 years the number of people employed in high-skill occupations (ABS classifications “managers” “professionals”. “technical and trade workers” and “community and personal service workers”) has grown by 2.3 million or 52 per cent, while the number of people in lesser-skill occupations (“clerical and administrative workers”, sales workers”, “machinery operators and drivers” and “labourers”) has risen by only 0.8 million or 20 per cent.

The workforce is changing, a point clearly acknowledged by the commission, when it observed that the proportion of workers described as “award reliant” has fallen from 23 per cent to 16 per cent since 2000, and that non-award incomes were running well ahead of award incomes.

The ACCI seems to be locked into an early nineteenth-century model of class struggle, which divides between “bosses” and “workers” with antagonistic interests.

So, my back woods butcher, how are you going to do when 90% of your customers can afford nothing more than sausage mince?
Or would you prefer to reduce wages to the point where us peasants have to give up meat altogether?
The exercise has been done time and time again. Smith's "invisible hand" and Reagan's trickle down economics DOESN'T WORK.
The one single thing Aus Labor got right (under Rudd) was to stimulate our economy from the bottom up; giving money to those who had little choice but to spend it straight back into the economy again.
Compare our success to the USA, who gave the money to the very criminals who caused the 'Great Recession' in the first place (they said "gee thanks" and "shored up their position" -gave themselves bonuses and left the rest in the vaults as increased collateral.
Which would any retailer prefer: have one billionaire walk into their shop, or a thousand ordinary people with money to spend?