World's richest woman wants her workers to take a pay cut

POSTED BY: kpo
UPDATED: Saturday, October 25, 2025 15:50
VIEWED: 6414
PAGE 3 of 5

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE

CANTTAKESKY

Saturday, September 8, 2012 3:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
er, no....

just having a conversation about her statement and its meaning,

It sounds like a conversation about some fantasy you guys have concocted in your heads about her statement, as opposed to what her statement really says.

And then getting off on that fantasy.

NIKI2

Saturday, September 8, 2012 5:27 PM

Quote:
says African workers willing to work for $2 a day should be an inspiration.

Since I got no answer asking where she actually said that, I'm going to assume that's a supposition. Although I guess "make her worry for her country's future" is kind of the same, if she's saying Australia's miners should work for the same amount or something near it. Which is a stupid statement on its face, especially given, as Mike mentioned, the recent fact that African workers WERE trying to strike for better wages, not to mention the discrepancy in the cost of living. Essentially she lied; African miners aren't "willing", they're "forced".

I certainly agree that expecting Australia to match Africa in wages is asinine. There are so many things that come into play in such a concept that it kinda boggles the mind.

Magons, could you please keep your "'orrible empire builders"? We already took Murdoch off your hands, and we have, believe me, FAR more of those than you do...we don't need any more! My sincere sympathy--I wish we could put them ALL on an island, by themselves, with a copy of one of Ayn Rand's rants, and see how well they get along!

KWICKO

Saturday, September 8, 2012 6:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
How would it look if Romney held up a FoxConn employee in China and said this was what America should be looking to as a blueprint for the future?

Again, that is NOT what she's saying.

She has never said in that link that I could find that Australia needs to become more like Africa in wages.

Why do you insist on mischaracterizing her statements?

I don't like her anymore than the next person here. But the method here is wrong. And without integrity. You guys are better than that.

Clarify her position, then. Explain to us all what we've got wrong about it.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Saturday, September 8, 2012 10:50 PM

Gina may not have said that Australian workers should be paid $2 per hour, but she is definitely insinuating that australian workers need to be paid less and accept poorer conditions so that we can compete with the likes of 3rd world markets that do pay shite. And really that leaves you with one choice, pay $2 or less to be competetive, because taking a pay cut and paying decent living wages will not impact on that competetiveness, will it?

So everyone knows that we just can't compete on wages in the west. Impoverished countries with a lower cost and standard of living will always be able to out do us every single time. So why is it even a conversation?

Because actually Gina has an agenda. She despises the strong union base in this country that have ensured decent wages and conditions for people who live here and she despises the fact that people can get unemployment benefits etc etc. She really feels she is entitled to rule this country as money is the only thing that matters.

The irony is that the mining industry has to pay over and above normal wages to attract people to work in the remote west. It's just that your standard market forces at pay. Not enough labour, high labour prices. What Gina really wants, and has twisted the arm of this so called leftwinged union supporting government, is to import 'guest workers' from poor nations to do the work at a fraction of the price. That is her agenda, and she is pretty much there.

So I am wondering how this sort of wealth generation will benefit the citizens of this country. Mining companies are largely foreign owned, so not sure what that use to us is. The government has been pretty much stymied on collecting appropriate revenue for the mining of our mineral wealth and it doesn't look like the workforce will benefit, but Gina will get richer, no doubt about that.

CANTTAKESKY

Saturday, September 8, 2012 11:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
And really that leaves you with one choice, pay $2 or less to be competetive, because taking a pay cut and paying decent living wages will not impact on that competetiveness, will it?

Um, are Gina's mines in Africa or in Australia?

Cause if the mines are in Australia, it doesn't matter how many Africans are willing to work for $2/day, if they can't physically get to the mines, does it?

So, no, I don't think she is suggesting that Australians be paid $2, because they have no global labor competition in the Australian mines.

Quote:
What Gina really wants, and has twisted the arm of this so called leftwinged union supporting government, is to import 'guest workers' from poor nations to do the work at a fraction of the price. That is her agenda, and she is pretty much there.

Bingo. She is not trying to lower Australian wages. She is trying to bring in guest workers, which is a different issue altogether.

http://afr.com/p/business/companies/furore_over_rinehart_guest_workers
_SV8zHafIGC1zNaDDqOUIHJ

This is a dangerous move and can be easily criticized on its own merits without resorting to misinterpreting some youtube comments and erecting strawmen.

KWICKO

Sunday, September 9, 2012 12:51 AM

*WHAT* is the goal of bringing in so-called "guest workers", CTS?

To force wages down for "regular" workers. To threaten them, to show them that if they won't take less, you'll replace them with someone who will.

Why do you think illegal immigrants are so commonly hired in the Southwest U.S.? To artificially lower wages for everyone else by threatening them, whether explicitly or implicitly, by showing them how easily they can be replaced, and how cheaply.

And the reason globalizing labor and chasing labor costs to the bottom doesn't work is this: There's always someone willing to do it cheaper once they get hungry enough. No matter how little you make, no matter how shitty the job, I can find someone to do it cheaper. All you can do about it - as a group, a union, or a nation - is make it harder for me to do that, and make it less worth my while to try.

There's a fallacy that non-union companies that offer wages and benefits competitive to unionized companies in the same industry are living proof of the obsolescence of unions. It's a fallacy because the second the unions are gone - completely gone - the non-union and formerly-union businesses will immediately start slashing wages and benefits, because what the hell are you going to do about it now?

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

KPO

Sunday, September 9, 2012 2:14 AM

Quote:
where did KPO get the "inspiration" bit?

I got it from the BBC article...

Should've double checked - though I was in a hurry when I posted this.

It's not personal. It's just war.

1KIKI

Sunday, September 9, 2012 3:01 AM

"I am saying her quotations have been mischaracterized to serve some ideological agenda."

Really? How are they mischaracterized? SHE holds up S African workers who are paid a pittance (and who are currently on strike for better wages and conditions as a result) as the example people should follow. How is that being mischaracterized?

"Simply demonizing them as "selfish" isn't going to work."

So you are pro-business b/c you are extremely anti-government. That's good to know.

CANTTAKESKY

Sunday, September 9, 2012 4:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
*WHAT* is the goal of bringing in so-called "guest workers", CTS?

To force wages down for "regular" workers. To threaten them, to show them that if they won't take less, you'll replace them with someone who will.

That may be, K.

But the strategy to combat this agenda is not to take some quotation out of context and demonize her. It makes whoever is doing it look unreasonable. It makes outsiders like me defend her just on the principle of the thing.

The only tactic that would work is to prevent guest workers from entering Australia. Stop the passage of the guest worker permits. That's it. End of story.

KWICKO

Sunday, September 9, 2012 4:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
*WHAT* is the goal of bringing in so-called "guest workers", CTS?

To force wages down for "regular" workers. To threaten them, to show them that if they won't take less, you'll replace them with someone who will.
That may be, K.

But the strategy to combat this agenda is not to take some quotation out of context and demonize her. It makes whoever is doing it look unreasonable.

Actually, to me it makes her look unreasonable.

Quote:

The only tactic that would work is to prevent guest workers from entering Australia. Stop the passage of the guest worker permits. That's it. End of story.

And what do you think they're trying to do by using this woman's unflattering words in this way, get MORE guest workers?

It seems to me this is directly aimed at making her position untenable by making it unpopular.

I believe it's called "politics".

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE