As one who has on several occasions been forced to accept the dole, I know how pitifully inadequate it is to maintain a family. I was of course still very grateful to the taxpayers of Australia to receive it -as well as humbled if not humiliated, in the process.

So you might be surprised to learn that I honestly believe we should end the dole, forever.

I don’t understand the logic of forcing our children from a very young age to ‘work’ at school five days a week, plus homework on weekends, up to a certain age when they are able to get paid to sit at home watching TV, until such time as they can get a job. Is this a continuation of their education? How to adapt to conditions of poverty?

I have children at high school, and at TAFE. I have been constantly amazed at how much work they have to do, and the long hours they put in at their studies.

Without pay.

Meanwhile, I am at the other end of the spectrum. At 53, I have qualifications in several trades and skillsets; sadly all involving a certain amount of physical labour. I believe I have reached an age where I should be able to find a more sedentary occupation, but the money involved in doing extra courses is prohibitive, and if I have to take time off work to do them, almost impossible.

Howard, under the guidance of his Guru, George W., insisted that workers need to be more ‘flexible’, in the modern, rapidly changing workplace. All very well and good, but how?

The truth is, all of us are working longer hours than ever before, with worse conditions and less security. Where can we find the time or the money to further our education, and improve our lot?

Over a hundred years ago, Justice Henry Bournes Higgins declared that workers should be paid a ‘living wage’; ie a minimum sum which allowed a ‘decent’ standard of living.

It seems we were more civilized a hundred years ago, than we are today.

I suggest everyone over the age of eighteen be eligible for a basic wage -on an hourly rate basis. To earn this basic wage, they must perform community service, maybe army reserve, or do a course, at school or TAFE or university, to improve their chances of employment. The hourly rate gives them the flexibility to spend as much or as little time at their studies as they need, to either spend more time looking for work, or accelerate the process of achieving their qualifications.

Most -if not all- modules in tech courses these days have a time rating; how many hours it should take to complete the module. For those in remote areas, or who have reason to stay at home should be paid on a module completed basis.

This one basic rate should apply equally to all people, unemployed and pensioners alike; although in special cases, such as being over 65 or a carer, a certain number of hours a week would be considered to have been performed.

Employers would have to compete against this basic wage to get workers.

This would achieve a smarter, more flexible workforce. It would introduce school leavers to the idea of better recompense for application, and no free lunches.

It would take people off the poverty line, and give them a chance at a better life and a little self respect.

Schools could become more than places of education, but venues for networking between skillsets; putting potential accountants, lawyers and business managers in touch with tradespeople, inventors, innovators and small business proponents. Schools would also be de facto employment agencies, as the ideal venue for putting the right people into the right jobs, and offering a ‘one stop shop’ for employers.

Could we afford it? No, not under the current system.

So let’s change the system.

In the same vein, I think we should stop all cash payments in overseas aid; but that’s a story for another day.

 Loading ...

G’day.

We keep being told what a high standard of living we have. How we have had a ‘boom’ time, through selling minerals to China. How the ‘average’ wage has grown to $58k.

The median wage in this country is about $35k. That’s the figure exactly 50% of Australians make less than.

Meanwhile, our politicians are getting an extra $4,700 pa in their pay packets, in the form of an increase in an ‘allowance’. This allowance is now abut $32k, on top of the $127k plus they receive in wages, paid for by us.

These people are supposed to be our representatives. They have become so representative, they have to commission university studies, to find out what working class Aussies are thinking.

Does anyone else think their representatives are out of touch with real Australia?

 Loading ...

How much are they worth?

Have you heard the one about all pay rises must be linked to increases in productivity?

What do we pay our representatives for? How do we measure their productivity?

I would suggest we pay them to look after our best interests. In short, we pay them to find ways to improve the basic standard of living for ALL Australians; not just the privileged few. Since Malcolm Fraser declared: “Life wasn’t meant to be easy”, the gap between rich and poor -and politicians and their constituents- has grown monstrously, through successive governments of both persuasions.

And just as in Fraser’s day, when he said “we must all tighten our belts”, not long before granting all federal pollies a 9% pay rise, today, when we are facing the worst economic downturn in 70 years, our noble representatives are doing it again.

Incredibly, a few of our brilliant pollies have defended their pay rises with the claim that ” we have to offer big money, to attract the best talent”. This clearly indicates that all the existing politicians, who joined up before the pay rises, must be no talent bums who should immediately resign to make way for the new, talented pollies.

History indicates offering big money to politicians attracts people who are really interested in -and really good at- lining their own pockets.

If pay increases should be linked to productivity, how about this? Our representatives get a pay rise (dollar for dollar, NOT percentage) when the median wage rises.

In other words, we reward our representatives with a pay increase, when they manage to get us one.

 Loading ...

I quite liked this article in Ambit Gambit: Politics, Power and Pay.

I don’t think we can ask our pollies to do it for nothing, however…

These are the people who choose to send our children overseas, to places like Afghanistan and Iraq, to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country; their very lives.

What are our politicians prepared to sacrifice?

In Christian or Jesuan terms, how can our representatives ask our children to make such a sacrifice, if they themselves are not willing to do as much?

While our children sacrifice their lives overseas, our representatives stay home and discuss how much of a tax cut they should award themselves, or how much they can increase their bonuses by.

We have tried paying our politicians more (and more) and all it has achieved is better tax scales for the wealthy, and an increase in the gap between rich and poor.

Why not put them on a pension?

They will be in no danger of starving; they should still get travel allowances, and all the other allowances that are necessary for their job.

And if they find they still can’t live on the pension, then they will know how pensioners feel.