Sydney house prices rising $1,000 per day

The dole is $43 a day hardly a disincentive to work

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..

There was this story from a few years ago, highlighting the difficult conditions and the poor pay that they get in reality on some farms:

www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/young-backpackers-describe-farm-works-seedy-underbelly/news-story/1ed97861da0c387101fe7c5ae554eb80

I remember watching a TV program where a farmer said that 'Australians don't want to work', and then going on to say that the paperwork was too difficult for him.

I think we can all imagine that the work is not easy and that where they can some people will try and underpay staff and take advantage of them. A local would know what they have to put up with and know exactly what they have to be paid as a minimum.

I know I wouldn't like a job where you have to leave wherever you are settled, work on a farm for months in not always the best conditions, and then only get minimum wage if you are lucky. How many people would really do this work?

You can find a bad story from every industry.

It's strange that despite the minimum salary being "so low" most backpackers makes enough money to travel around Australia and Asia on the money they make from that kind of work. And may farm jobs paying decent money. You can get $35/h to drive a tractor at some farms.

Of course its better if you can stay in your home town where you can stroll to work and don't have to work very hard. But is it really the taxpayers responsibility to provide for someone that prefer not to make much of an effort?

When I at one point couldn't find work I moved interstate to a city I never been in for a short term contract. I never thought about that as inhumane.

Select to expand quote

Number said..

FormulaNova said..

There was this story from a few years ago, highlighting the difficult conditions and the poor pay that they get in reality on some farms:

www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/young-backpackers-describe-farm-works-seedy-underbelly/news-story/1ed97861da0c387101fe7c5ae554eb80

I remember watching a TV program where a farmer said that 'Australians don't want to work', and then going on to say that the paperwork was too difficult for him.

I think we can all imagine that the work is not easy and that where they can some people will try and underpay staff and take advantage of them. A local would know what they have to put up with and know exactly what they have to be paid as a minimum.

I know I wouldn't like a job where you have to leave wherever you are settled, work on a farm for months in not always the best conditions, and then only get minimum wage if you are lucky. How many people would really do this work?

You can find a bad story from every industry.

It's strange that despite the minimum salary being "so low" most backpackers makes enough money to travel around Australia and Asia on the money they make from that kind of work. And may farm jobs paying decent money. You can get $35/h to drive a tractor at some farms.

Of course its better if you can stay in your home town where you can stroll to work and don't have to work very hard. But is it really the taxpayers responsibility to provide for someone that prefer not to make much of an effort?

When I at one point couldn't find work I moved interstate to a city I never been in for a short term contract. I never thought about that as inhumane.

Yeah, I have done something similar for work, but I wouldn't be doing it at minimum wage.

People, and you I think too, forget that for backpackers its as much about the travel around Australia and the lifestyle that they want, not just the work. If you are a backpacker here for a couple of years you have all your possessions with you and its not a big deal to move cities or towns. You are making friends as you go. Most locals will want to have friends where they have decided to live.

I think it is the taxpayers responsibility to cover the cost of people that either refuse to work or cannot work. A friend expressed an idea to me that there is a natural level of unemployable people where they just don't want to work no matter what you do for them or to them. Should you waste your time trying to make them work or just accept it as fact and spend your resources on helping the ones that do want jobs?

We seem to be in a funny situation in Australia. Normally when you get close to a low level of unemployment, wages rise and keep rising and you reach an equilibrium. Currently we seem to have a cheap source of workers from overseas that we are using to grow the economy, so the wages are not rising, and those guys down the street that don't want a job are quite entitled to sit it out.

Its not like the old (mythical?) days where workers were so scarce that someone could front up with no experience and still get taken on and trained up. Its almost the reverse where there is 'demand' but employers still want people already skilled up.

When I started in the IT industry, my only sphere of experience, you could get a job with the right attitude and willingness to learn. Despite so called shortages now it seems that employers want a crazy number of certs and you won't get to meet them unless you have the pieces of paper. If you ask me its a problem with their recruitment process that is easier for them to blame on 'a shortage'.

Farming is a lot of hard work, which also depends on the weather... This is not as easy as it may seem at first glance. I think they need to be supported .

Select to expand quote

AnneR said..
Farming is a lot of hard work, which also depends on the weather... This is not as easy as it may seem at first glance. I think they need to be supported .

Farming is a business just like any other. All businesses are subject to external influences. Farming does not deserve a special status.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..

I think it is the taxpayers responsibility to cover the cost of people that either refuse to work or cannot work. A friend expressed an idea to me that there is a natural level of unemployable people where they just don't want to work no matter what you do for them or to them. Should you waste your time trying to make them work or just accept it as fact and spend your resources on helping the ones that do want jobs?

Yes, we have plenty on "unemployable" people. It's ok for the tax payers to pay for them, as long as they are ok with showing up at the dole office at 8am sharp every weekday morning to mark their attendance. Maybe not so fun to be a pothead/pisshead on benefits if you cannot sleep in every morning.

Select to expand quote

Number said..

FormulaNova said..

I think it is the taxpayers responsibility to cover the cost of people that either refuse to work or cannot work. A friend expressed an idea to me that there is a natural level of unemployable people where they just don't want to work no matter what you do for them or to them. Should you waste your time trying to make them work or just accept it as fact and spend your resources on helping the ones that do want jobs?

Yes, we have plenty on "unemployable" people. It's ok for the tax payers to pay for them, as long as they are ok with showing up at the dole office at 8am sharp every weekday morning to mark their attendance. Maybe not so fun to be a pothead/pisshead on benefits if you cannot sleep in every morning.

Those same people are still going to be potheads/pissheads.

Do you want those same people getting up early to drive the school bus, or have them behind the controls of a semi-trailer?

Sometimes people are beyond hope and if their life is fulfilled getting stoned or pissed, maybe we should leave them at it. Maybe make them take a training course every now and then, but otherwise who cares? As long as they are not so poor that they need to mug me or steal my car, I don't mind.