Govt assault on young 'uns continues

[Banditbandit]

Business is simply the mechanism whereby we generate the value to acquire the resources to live. Without that sideshow you don't HAVE food, water and shelter.

That's crap man. There's free food out there if you now where to find it ... (I eat free food at least once a week - could eat more if I didnt go to "work") free water too (I'm not on a town supply and pay no water rates ...) ... and shelter as well.

You are too tied into the contemporary capitalist system ...

[Banditbandit]

Understand this: If there's profit to be made in hiring someone at any given specific remuneration then someone WILL hire them. If they don't want to work for that hourly rate fine, don't. Just don't expect anyone to pay more than you're worth. It really is that simple.

And understand this -it's a Labour market as well ... if a business cannot pay a market rates for its workers then it is not going to be an economic business.

Who sets the market rates ? The business owner AND the workers ...

[oneofsix]

And understand this -it's a Labour market as well ... if a business cannot pay a market rates for its workers then it is not going to be an economic business.

Who sets the market rates ? The business owner AND the workers ...

Not "AND the workers" in NZ. That might apply in Aussie where they still have unions to represent the workers. The business "can't afford it" and yet pays over the top director and CEO fees. umm wonder why the Aussie economy is better with all that extra money going in at the bottom instead of being skimmed off at the top.

[Banditbandit]

Not "AND the workers" in NZ. That might apply in Aussie where they still have unions to represent the workers.

Not quitre what I meant - I mant that workers vote with their feet - they don't take the job ... I do not mean that in a naive way - take a look at our fruit picking industries - the law was changed to make it easier for overseas worjkers to cvome here to pick fruit because the employers could not get enough local workers ... and fruit was dying ont he trees, "threatening a major export sector" ...

However, if you look at what actually happens - a whole lot of fruit growers claim they can only afford to pay minimum wages - and these are the same ones who cannot get workers ... the fruit growers who pay reasonable rates and look after their workers get pickers ... But now a whole bunch of growers are importing workers (costing NZ jobs) and patying them minimum wage ... the growers make a fortune, the pickders get some mnoney (which they promptly take off shore) and New ZWEalanders lose out on jobs ... fi we truly had the free market that these so called economic experts want - then the Government would not legislate to prop up bad employers and failling industries ..

The business "can't afford it" and yet pays over the top director and CEO fees. umm wonder why the Aussie economy is better with all that extra money going in at the bottom instead of being skimmed off at the top.

Yes - exactly ...

[oneofsix]

Not quitre what I meant - I mant that workers vote with their feet - they don't take the job ... I do not mean that in a naive way - take a look at our fruit picking industries - the law was changed to make it easier for overseas worjkers to cvome here to pick fruit because the employers could not get enough local workers ... and fruit was dying ont he trees, "threatening a major export sector" ...

However, if you look at what actually happens - a whole lot of fruit growers claim they can only afford to pay minimum wages - and these are the same ones who cannot get workers ... the fruit growers who pay reasonable rates and look after their workers get pickers ... But now a whole bunch of growers are importing workers (costing NZ jobs) and patying them minimum wage ... the growers make a fortune, the pickders get some mnoney (which they promptly take off shore) and New ZWEalanders lose out on jobs ... fi we truly had the free market that these so called economic experts want - then the Government would not legislate to prop up bad employers and failling industries ..




Yes - exactly ...

I understand you now.

Most that spout free market crap are the same that bleat about the unemployed not taking underpaid demeaning jobs whilst the CEO's cream it. They don't understand that even if there was no benefit those unemployed would still not take those jobs as the unemployed are smart enough to understand fairness and how to grow dope or make P to sell to the CEO's kids.

[bogan]

That's crap man. There's free food out there if you now where to find it ... (I eat free food at least once a week - could eat more if I didnt go to "work") free water too (I'm not on a town supply and pay no water rates ...) ... and shelter as well.

You are too tied into the contemporary capitalist system ...

Of course there is, but obviously people prefer the barter system (business) than the lets all spend our live gathering food. Since only one of those systems leads to the constructions of motorcycles, I can see why most of us prefer it.

[Oscar]

Not "AND the workers" in NZ. That might apply in Aussie where they still have unions to represent the workers. The business "can't afford it" and yet pays over the top director and CEO fees. umm wonder why the Aussie economy is better with all that extra money going in at the bottom instead of being skimmed off at the top.

So have you some evidence that Aussie CEO's get paid less than Kiwi ones?

[oneofsix]

So have you some evidence that Aussie CEO's get paid less than Kiwi ones?

Who gives a shit how much the Aussie CEOs are paid compared to NZ ones. The evidence all over the media is the gap between the NZ CEOs and their workers is widening. The Aussie CEOs might still get the money but it is after it has filtered up from the bottom rather than skimmed at the top, as said earlier.

[Banditbandit]

Of course there is, but obviously people prefer the barter system (business) than the lets all spend our live gathering food. Since only one of those systems leads to the constructions of motorcycles, I can see why most of us prefer it.

Some researcher did some work to determine just how much work people would have to do in a hunter-gatherer society to survive .. the answers is .. 20 hours a week ...

Bear in mind that that is to survive ... any more than 20 hours and you're starting to get into "well off" territory ... with food and goods to barter with others ... so we would not have to spend ALL our days gathering food ...

But yeah .. lol ... it was a bit of a tongue-in cheek comment ... *(tho' it's true I gather food to eat at least once a week ) .. and in response to Ocean1's requirements for business to exist .. I too like an economy that produces motorcycles ...

[Oscar]

Who gives a shit how much the Aussie CEOs are paid compared to NZ ones. The evidence all over the media is the gap between the NZ CEOs and their workers is widening. The Aussie CEOs might still get the money but it is after it has filtered up from the bottom rather than skimmed at the top, as said earlier.

So the evidence is all over the media?
Care to share it?

Also, you might wanna explain how your "filtered up from the bottom" theory works...

[Banditbandit]

So the evidence is all over the media?
Care to share it?

Also, you might wanna explain how your "filtered up from the bottom" theory works...

Go here (August this year ...)

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/gap-...-shows-5043296

or here

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7462...-rich-and-poor


Or here

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10828941

Is that enough???

[oneofsix]

Go here (August this year ...)

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/gap-...-shows-5043296

Thank Banditbandit but waste of effort I think you will find.

He has probably read capitalist economics and not looked at the real world.

If he can't understand how giving a poorer person an extra dollars means it gets spent and there derives more wealth for the original person plus the one he spends it with, whereas giving the same dollar to someone who doesn't need it it gets put aside and no-one gets wealthier and if he hasn't seen those articles by now then I would guess the "no so blind..." saying applies.

[Banditbandit]

Thank Banditbandit but waste of effort I think you will find.

He has probably read capitalist economics and not looked at the real world.

If he can't understand how giving a poorer person an extra dollars means it gets spent and there derives more wealth for the original person plus the one he spends it with, whereas giving the same dollar to someone who doesn't need it it gets put aside and no-one gets wealthier and if he hasn't seen those articles by now then I would guess the "no so blind..." saying applies.

Yes.

I was horrified recently to read on the herald that 11 suburbs in Orcland have average house prices of more than $1million.

(http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/n...ectid=10834737)

That's shocking - One $1million house will buy four $250,000 houses ... People are living in squallor becasuse they can't afford house in the same city as people are paying mill;ions and milions of dollars for a house ..

The wealth distriution in this country is shocking .. and getting worse ...

But some here will argue that is because poor people are poor because they are lazy - not because the fat cats are creaming it at the expense of others

(And no, before you dickheads say anything .. I am not jealous .. I do own my own property - MORTGAGE FREE ... I worked hard to buy it and pay it off .. and I owe diddly-squat to anybody - everything I own is paid for ...)

[Oscar]

Thank Banditbandit but waste of effort I think you will find.

He has probably read capitalist economics and not looked at the real world.

If he can't understand how giving a poorer person an extra dollars means it gets spent and there derives more wealth for the original person plus the one he spends it with, whereas giving the same dollar to someone who doesn't need it it gets put aside and no-one gets wealthier and if he hasn't seen those articles by now then I would guess the "no so blind..." saying applies.

So now you're saying that the filthy rich CEO puts his extra $$$'s under the bed, thereby taking them out of circulation?

You still haven't explain you contention that the Aussies somehow do it differently.

[Oscar]

Yes.

I was horrified recently to read on the herald that 11 suburbs in Orcland have average house prices of more than $1million.

(http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/n...ectid=10834737)

That's shocking - One $1million house will buy four $250,000 houses ... People are living in squallor becasuse they can't afford house in the same city as people are paying mill;ions and milions of dollars for a house ..

The wealth distriution in this country is shocking .. and getting worse ...

But some here wil argue that is because poor peple are poor because they are lazy - not because the fat cats are creaming it at the expense of others

(And no, before you dickheads say anything .. I am not jealous .. I do own my own property - MORTGAGE FREE ... I worked hard to buy it and pay it off .. and I owe diddly-squat to anybody - everything I own is paid for ...)

So what would you do?
Force those people to buy cheaper houses?
Regulate higher salaries in private companies?
Increase the marginal tax rate?

If you do any of those, it'll only benefit the Australian economy, as more people leave.