Minimum Wage And My Submission To The Senate!
Ok, I suppose most of you have heard about the Federal Government’s submission to the minimum wage case. Apparently, heaps of these low-paid workers “are often found in high-income households”. (By that I presume that the government meant that they were members of the household and not just the cleaning lady or a burglar or someone who’d wandered in off the street!) Of course, when I say, “heaps” that’s because, like Senator Cash, I don’t want to put a number on it. The reason for that is very simple! I’ve no idea what the number is. But that doesn’t stop me – or Senator Cash – telling everyone that putting up the minimum wage would just be transferring wealth from those hard-up employers to high income families because let’s be real, it’s probably just uni students. And we all know that uni students live with their wealthy parents, right? I mean, poor people can’t afford to go to university any more, so it’d be outrageous to give a boost to the minimum wage because it’s just students earning pocket-money so that they can go clubbing on the weekend.
Of course, it’s not just uni students. In some cases, it’s the partner of some high income earner. You know, someone like Malcolm Turnbull earns millions at his job, but someone like Lucy goes out cleaning houses during the week so that she can use her own money to purchase her Prada clothing.
Yes, I like this principle that we should consider what the overall income of the household might be when we consider the implications of our decisions.
With that in mind, I’ve prepared this humble little submission for the Senate in their deliberations this week.
“Dear Senators,
When considering whether or not to pass the proposed company tax cuts, I would like you to consider the fact that many of the people benefitting from these are often found in high-income households. I don’t have the figure, ok, but it’s not as simple as that. And I don’t know why the income of anyone else in the house has any relevance when making a decision like this, but I reckon if it’s good enough for one submission then it’s good enough for another.
Cheers
Rossleigh!”
17 comments
Login here Register here-
olddavey -
jimhaz -
Susan -
Carol Taylor -
Keitha Granville -
Jaquix -
Roswell -
Roswell -
Matters Not -
Carol Taylor -
Matters Not -
Kaye Lee -
Alan Baird -
mandy vuk -
Terry2 -
Halfbreeder -
Mark Needham
Return to home pageRoss,
This is the same as saying that if you live in a rich household you should work for nothing so that your employer can then hire someone from a low income family who needs a job (in the LNP’s eyes to support their gambling or ice addiction, because that’s what low income earners work for), or pocket the savings.
I despair for our society every time I am confronted by any policies of this “government”
[many of the people benefitting from these are often found in high-income households]
And whats more, they are households in other countries.
Love your submission Rossleigh??
I hadn’t thought of that, low income people are found in high income households because…it’s the cleaning lady. That explains everything. Well done Rossleigh, now if someone asks me what Cash’s statement meant, I’ll have the answer.
none of them has any clue about living on less than $250,000 a year – it just doesn’t enter their conciousness.
Cash had no idea how many of these situations existed but our very smart Treaduref on 7.30 tonight was very pleased with himself as he said its about half. As usual he didnt answer any questions properly.
Rossleigh, again you think of the stuff nobody else does. You’re clever, if I may say so.
BTW, just heard that the Senate killed off the changes to 18C. ?
Brandis said it was a “sad day”.
Turnbull will be elated. His political strategy worked. Let the Senate knock down the changes so that those in marginal ‘ethnic’ seats in the HOR don’t have to. Can now say to his ‘rightwing’ urgers – I told you so – you’ve had your moment in the sunshine and you lost. Now get back in the box.
But they won’t in the longer term. Nevertheless, he buys time.
I’ve got it..the low income person in a household is likely to be a woman. Clearly working for a pittance is just because she needs a bit of pin money, therefore it would be a waste to pay HER any extra. This reminds me of the argument against equal pay – not needed because a woman has a man to support her.
Notice that Dr Chris Berg from the IPA is now a Post Doctoral Fellow at RMIT. Sinclair Davidson, a fellow member of the IPA, is perhaps now promoting his ideological bedmate in a type of Long March.
Just sayin …
“none of them has any clue about living on less than $250,000 a year – it just doesn’t enter their conciousness.”
“If you want to become a politician, resign your job at $5 million a year, come on to $250,000, if they can tolerate that, and enter the political debate.” – Peter Dutton, the low income property developer and ruler of the monkeypod, on who can publicly state a moral opinion.
Lucy T. should be employed for zero for a kick off. Anything more would be a drain on the economy. I’m still waiting for a sign outside a cafe: “Staff needed, wealthy parents/spouse/other desirable, sliding scale of remuneration based on household collective salary. Please detail their particulars to receive projected income (if any). NB. One person households need not apply.” And of course, Michaelia WASN’T thinking of the poor saps on their own as they WOULD be in deep dodoos.
NB. The above may be a joke but don’t for one minute think that the above WASN’T in the minds of jerks like Michaelia. Snide shit. I can’t believe she was actually given a hard time on a commercial radio station. Well done that man.
PS. Wasn’t yesterday good?! Latham gone from Sky. Something more I never had the pleasure of NOT seeing. Just schadenfreude, nothing more.
Recently I rang Brendon O’Connor’s office to explain that if the Labor Party wanted to rally against Sunday penalties being revoked, then why don’t they enforce the penalty rates that exist? I have been working in the Hospitality Industry for more than 30 years and the only places where I was paid the correct wage was at Sporting events. Let’s just say my suggestion hasn’t been uttered.
I’m sick of taking a pay cut so that the fat bosses can employ hundreds and conduct a rotating roster so that they don’t have to pay super, penalty rates on weekends. Grrrrrrrr
Nicely summarised by “The Shovel”
“Coalition Senator Michaelia Cash has hit back at claims she can’t name any low income workers in high income households, saying her personal chef Roberto and cleaners Voula and Jennifer are three she can name just off the top of her head.
The Government raised eyebrows yesterday when it claimed in its submission to the Fair Work Commission that many minimum wage earners were actually found in high income households. But Senator Cash said the claim was self evident.
“Between us my husband and I earn over $400k, and yet at any given time we have half a dozen people on the minimum wage in our household. So really, I don’t know why the claim was seen as so ludicrous”.
Pushed further to put a figure on just how many people fit into the category, Cash said she didn’t have the total number in front of her.
“Let’s see – there’s also Jessie our nannie, Richie our gardener, and I can’t remember the name of my household coordinator, but it’ll come to me. Let me get back to you”.
She recommended a cautious approach to increasing the minimum wage. “For every dollar that the minimum wage increases, I’m up for an extra $80 a day in costs – so I urge the commission to not let things spiral out of control,” she said.”
According to Cash’s bazzarro logic the low income earner probably rents a room in a house owned by a high income earner who also resides at the house and the low income earner can rely upon the high income earner to support them abd will never put the rent up or evict the lower oncome earner. This just goes to show that Cash is not just a stupid liar with a bad memory but also INSANE! Ok lets all feel sorry for the employer and support them and help them get more profits, make greater use of negative gearing to get more property and inflate property prices and allow them more generous capital gains tax a d tax exemptions.
Minimum wage being set. Reckon there should be a Maximum wage also set.
I was in the Navy, RAN, 1969, $64.00 per fortnight, $44.00 fortnight rent, married, 1 child.
Ship was in refit.
I worked as a cleaner, in Martin Place, 4hrs @$3.00/hour (or t’other way around) any how $60.00 per week. Nearly died when the ship came out of refit. But got me Hook, pay went up to about $90.00 per fortnight.
Best Job I ever had, cleaning, ie.
Mark Needham