More Clever That.

To compete in the labour market on the world stage, it is necessary for Australia to have people prepared to work longer for less - in line with China and India, it's been said. People will, however, resist having their entitlements stripped. We aspire in life to earn more and more for our efforts, and will be outraged when the opposite is proposed in government policy. If I were to try to think up a 'What the Government can do to get Labor Elected' plan, it would look much like the IR reforms.

So, how do the government plan to do it and not get ousted?

Well, to subdue your populace (a), give everyone a mortgage, then prod them into having lots of children. Thus they are at the mercy of interest rates and employers if they wish to maintain their standard of living to any extent.

When condition (a) is met across a suitable portion of the community, initiate the IR reforms:

Longer hours. Reduced entitlements. Less representation. Less power. Less recourse. Lower wages.

The only unfortunate thing for the government in implementing these policies is that at the moment, there is not high unemployment. If there were, the government could say that the IR measures were aimed at reducing unemployment.

I wonder what the stats are like on teenage mums voting habits? Each year there is a greater financial incentive to breed. Each year more kids do. That money must seem like a fortune to the very low income. Perhaps with the poor begetting hordes of kids, competing with China and India on labour costs will be feasible in three generations. After all, that's only fifty years or so, if puberty = baby bonus earning ability.

I'm just going to sit on the porch in my rocker and clean my gun until the revolution comes...