Australian Politics Forum - The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates

Swagman

Gold Member

Offline

Beware of cheap imitations......

Posts: 15095
Illawarra NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #45 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:53pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:46pm:

Penalty rates are in place right now, and we don't pay double for coffee on Sundays

Because the price of a coffee is subject to competition. There is no coffee regulator demanding that the price must be double on a Sunday because it's Sunday?

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:46pm:

Sensible businesses factor in penalty rates, overtime, etc

Yes, because they have no choice.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 156342
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #46 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:58pm

Swagman wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:53pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:46pm:

Penalty rates are in place right now, and we don't pay double for coffee on Sundays

Because the price of a coffee is subject to competition. There is no coffee regulator demanding that the price must be double on a Sunday because it's Sunday?

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:46pm:

Sensible businesses factor in penalty rates, overtime, etc

Yes, because they have no choice.

Your point?

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

Swagman

Gold Member

Offline

Beware of cheap imitations......

Posts: 15095
Illawarra NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #47 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:06pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:58pm:

Swagman wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:53pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:46pm:

Penalty rates are in place right now, and we don't pay double for coffee on Sundays

Because the price of a coffee is subject to competition. There is no coffee regulator demanding that the price must be double on a Sunday because it's Sunday?

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:46pm:

Sensible businesses factor in penalty rates, overtime, etc

Yes, because they have no choice.

Your point?

It's the law (currently) so financial forecasting / business planning should include all cost factors including penalty rates.

Back to top

IP Logged

Grappler Racist Filth

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 90889
Proud Old White Australian Man
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #48 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:13pm

Instead of looking at your Sunday costs and going into shock, a business needs to be looking at its overall costs over a period of time and take into account all factors.

I had a manager once who couldn't get rid of me fast enough, when I was doing relief on $2000 a week (in 1992) - what he forgot to factor in was that the jobs I did actually cost more to run in the ordinary schedule because I was super-efficient, and that my overall hourly rate of pay was actually lower, despite a nominally higher rate, due to MY efficiency.

DUM AS!!!

Many 'business' people simply cannot do simple maths or have any idea of concepts... even when they wear a silk suit and a blue tie and take in millions..

DUM AS!!

If they didn't cop subsidies, including chopping pay rates for their 'serfs' - they could not survive in the real world, despite all their tax dodges and so forth.

What if they paid no business tax but the business paid total income tax like you and I, and received no handouts but had to fully pay their way? How do you reckon they'd go then?

Back to top

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 156342
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #49 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:14pm

Swagman wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:06pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:58pm:

Swagman wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:53pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:46pm:

Penalty rates are in place right now, and we don't pay double for coffee on Sundays

Because the price of a coffee is subject to competition. There is no coffee regulator demanding that the price must be double on a Sunday because it's Sunday?

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:46pm:

Sensible businesses factor in penalty rates, overtime, etc

Yes, because they have no choice.

Your point?

It's the law (currently) so financial forecasting / business planning should include all cost factors including penalty rates.

Indeed.

And, it does.

Thus, we don't pay double on Sundays.

And, if the penalty rates are removed, the price will remain the same and no extra jobs will be created: the business owner will pocket the extra profits and the existing casual staff will do the extra hours.

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 156342
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #50 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:16pm

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:52pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:09pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:10pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 6:54pm:

John S wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 12:31am:

If a coffee shop or restaurant has a average of 200 customer for a days trading and the business employs 4 staff and penalty rate is cut to single time and the business still get 200 customers would the business employ more staff.

poll added

It's not quite so simple. It depends whether the business faces competition from other businesses that lower their retail price since the marginal cost of production would decrease. If this should occur and the business grows its market share or the demand for coffee increases due to cheaper prices then there would be scope for increasing staff levels.

And, back in the real world: if the demand for coffee did increase, due to cheaper prices (which is a huge stretch of the imagination in the first place), the existing employees would just have to work harder (for less money).

When faced with the choice of a) pocketing the extra profits or, b) employing more staff, most small business owners will opt for option a). They're not in it to make friends: they're in it to make money.

So are you suggesting that price signals have no effect on demand.

What price signals ?

I would think with coffee the demand is very significant anyway and not real likely to dramatically increase due to anything related to penalty rates.

I'm not a coffee expert. What you're saying is the polar opposite of accepted theory. If demand was significant then so would be the price. If the price is already above or at the market clearing rate, a reduction would most certainly increase demand. If the price today is below the clearing rate you would see prices increase quick smart until the clearing rate is reached.

Either way, if the marginal cost of production is lowered by smaller input costs this will be reflected in the retail price ( coffee being a reasonably elastic supply commodity I assume ). If production costs stay as they are so will the retail cost.

This is incredibly naive.

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

Swagman

Gold Member

Offline

Beware of cheap imitations......

Posts: 15095
Illawarra NSW
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #51 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 3:02pm

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:13pm:

I was super-efficient

So what happened to make you champion inefficiency? Grin

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:13pm:

was super-efficient, and that my overall hourly rate of pay was actually lower, despite a nominally higher rate, due to MY efficiency.

You are making a good argument there for AWAs...

Back to top

IP Logged

John S

Gold Member

Offline

Fascist Party = Liberal
Party

Posts: 3691
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #52 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 3:17pm

As politicians and andrei (where is andrei) keep saying we all live in a 24/7 economy now, so how about if we have ALL business and government offices open 24/7 and everyone works for single time don't matter what time of day or night you work.

You could go to the bank and apply for a home loan at 11.00pm go to straight to medicare office after you have finish at the specialist and put a claim in at 2.00am. School would be open 24/7 so there would be less vandalism saving taxpayers money.

Back to top

'The worst Labor Government is always better then the best Liberal government for Australians workers'

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6686
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #53 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 3:47pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:16pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:52pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:09pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:10pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 6:54pm:

John S wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 12:31am:

If a coffee shop or restaurant has a average of 200 customer for a days trading and the business employs 4 staff and penalty rate is cut to single time and the business still get 200 customers would the business employ more staff.

poll added

It's not quite so simple. It depends whether the business faces competition from other businesses that lower their retail price since the marginal cost of production would decrease. If this should occur and the business grows its market share or the demand for coffee increases due to cheaper prices then there would be scope for increasing staff levels.

And, back in the real world: if the demand for coffee did increase, due to cheaper prices (which is a huge stretch of the imagination in the first place), the existing employees would just have to work harder (for less money).

When faced with the choice of a) pocketing the extra profits or, b) employing more staff, most small business owners will opt for option a). They're not in it to make friends: they're in it to make money.

So are you suggesting that price signals have no effect on demand.

What price signals ?

I would think with coffee the demand is very significant anyway and not real likely to dramatically increase due to anything related to penalty rates.

I'm not a coffee expert. What you're saying is the polar opposite of accepted theory. If demand was significant then so would be the price. If the price is already above or at the market clearing rate, a reduction would most certainly increase demand. If the price today is below the clearing rate you would see prices increase quick smart until the clearing rate is reached.

Either way, if the marginal cost of production is lowered by smaller input costs this will be reflected in the retail price ( coffee being a reasonably elastic supply commodity I assume ). If production costs stay as they are so will the retail cost.

This is incredibly naive.

Perhaps you could explain in sound economic terms just why it is naïve.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 156342
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #54 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:11pm

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 3:47pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:16pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:52pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:09pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:10pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 6:54pm:

John S wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 12:31am:

If a coffee shop or restaurant has a average of 200 customer for a days trading and the business employs 4 staff and penalty rate is cut to single time and the business still get 200 customers would the business employ more staff.

poll added

It's not quite so simple. It depends whether the business faces competition from other businesses that lower their retail price since the marginal cost of production would decrease. If this should occur and the business grows its market share or the demand for coffee increases due to cheaper prices then there would be scope for increasing staff levels.

And, back in the real world: if the demand for coffee did increase, due to cheaper prices (which is a huge stretch of the imagination in the first place), the existing employees would just have to work harder (for less money).

When faced with the choice of a) pocketing the extra profits or, b) employing more staff, most small business owners will opt for option a). They're not in it to make friends: they're in it to make money.

So are you suggesting that price signals have no effect on demand.

What price signals ?

I would think with coffee the demand is very significant anyway and not real likely to dramatically increase due to anything related to penalty rates.

I'm not a coffee expert. What you're saying is the polar opposite of accepted theory. If demand was significant then so would be the price. If the price is already above or at the market clearing rate, a reduction would most certainly increase demand. If the price today is below the clearing rate you would see prices increase quick smart until the clearing rate is reached.

Either way, if the marginal cost of production is lowered by smaller input costs this will be reflected in the retail price ( coffee being a reasonably elastic supply commodity I assume ). If production costs stay as they are so will the retail cost.

This is incredibly naive.

Perhaps you could explain in sound economic terms just why it is naïve.

It's incredibly naive, because you are talking in sound economic (theoretical) terms.

Your 'Introduction to Economics' unit at University is all well and good, however, once you've been in the real world for a few decades you'll see things differently.

This is how things work in the real world.

If penalty rates were abolished:
- employees are paid less (obviously)
- sales figures remain the same (obviously)
- the price of coffee remains the same (no rational reason to reduce it)
- no extra jobs are created (how can they be?)
- the business owner increases his/her profits (why wouldn't they?)

Don't get me wrong, your theory is nice, however, in the real world of coffee shops and casual workers being paid penalty rates, it's just not relevant.

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6686
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #55 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:28pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:11pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 3:47pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:16pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:52pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:09pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:10pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 6:54pm:

John S wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 12:31am:

If a coffee shop or restaurant has a average of 200 customer for a days trading and the business employs 4 staff and penalty rate is cut to single time and the business still get 200 customers would the business employ more staff.

poll added

It's not quite so simple. It depends whether the business faces competition from other businesses that lower their retail price since the marginal cost of production would decrease. If this should occur and the business grows its market share or the demand for coffee increases due to cheaper prices then there would be scope for increasing staff levels.

And, back in the real world: if the demand for coffee did increase, due to cheaper prices (which is a huge stretch of the imagination in the first place), the existing employees would just have to work harder (for less money).

When faced with the choice of a) pocketing the extra profits or, b) employing more staff, most small business owners will opt for option a). They're not in it to make friends: they're in it to make money.

So are you suggesting that price signals have no effect on demand.

What price signals ?

I would think with coffee the demand is very significant anyway and not real likely to dramatically increase due to anything related to penalty rates.

I'm not a coffee expert. What you're saying is the polar opposite of accepted theory. If demand was significant then so would be the price. If the price is already above or at the market clearing rate, a reduction would most certainly increase demand. If the price today is below the clearing rate you would see prices increase quick smart until the clearing rate is reached.

Either way, if the marginal cost of production is lowered by smaller input costs this will be reflected in the retail price ( coffee being a reasonably elastic supply commodity I assume ). If production costs stay as they are so will the retail cost.

This is incredibly naive.

Perhaps you could explain in sound economic terms just why it is naïve.

It's incredibly naive, because you are talking in sound economic (theoretical) terms.

Your 'Introduction to Economics' unit at University is all well and good, however, once you've been in the real world for a few decades you'll see things differently.

This is how things work in the real world.

If penalty rates were abolished:
- employees are paid less (obviously)
- sales figures remain the same (obviously)
- the price of coffee remains the same (no rational reason to reduce it)
- no extra jobs are created (how can they be?)
- the business owner increases his/her profits (why wouldn't they?)

Don't get me wrong, your theory is nice, however, in the real world of coffee shops and casual workers being paid penalty rates, it's just not relevant.

You've explained nothing. By your logic, since price signals with elastic supply sides don't effect retail demand let's raise the price of a coffee to $100 per serve. With undiminished sales we can afford to lift penalties to $1000 per day and a free trip to Fiji every month.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 156342
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #56 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:35pm

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:28pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:11pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 3:47pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:16pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:52pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:09pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:10pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 6:54pm:

John S wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 12:31am:

If a coffee shop or restaurant has a average of 200 customer for a days trading and the business employs 4 staff and penalty rate is cut to single time and the business still get 200 customers would the business employ more staff.

poll added

It's not quite so simple. It depends whether the business faces competition from other businesses that lower their retail price since the marginal cost of production would decrease. If this should occur and the business grows its market share or the demand for coffee increases due to cheaper prices then there would be scope for increasing staff levels.

And, back in the real world: if the demand for coffee did increase, due to cheaper prices (which is a huge stretch of the imagination in the first place), the existing employees would just have to work harder (for less money).

When faced with the choice of a) pocketing the extra profits or, b) employing more staff, most small business owners will opt for option a). They're not in it to make friends: they're in it to make money.

So are you suggesting that price signals have no effect on demand.

What price signals ?

I would think with coffee the demand is very significant anyway and not real likely to dramatically increase due to anything related to penalty rates.

I'm not a coffee expert. What you're saying is the polar opposite of accepted theory. If demand was significant then so would be the price. If the price is already above or at the market clearing rate, a reduction would most certainly increase demand. If the price today is below the clearing rate you would see prices increase quick smart until the clearing rate is reached.

Either way, if the marginal cost of production is lowered by smaller input costs this will be reflected in the retail price ( coffee being a reasonably elastic supply commodity I assume ). If production costs stay as they are so will the retail cost.

This is incredibly naive.

Perhaps you could explain in sound economic terms just why it is naïve.

It's incredibly naive, because you are talking in sound economic (theoretical) terms.

Your 'Introduction to Economics' unit at University is all well and good, however, once you've been in the real world for a few decades you'll see things differently.

This is how things work in the real world.

If penalty rates were abolished:
- employees are paid less (obviously)
- sales figures remain the same (obviously)
- the price of coffee remains the same (no rational reason to reduce it)
- no extra jobs are created (how can they be?)
- the business owner increases his/her profits (why wouldn't they?)

Don't get me wrong, your theory is nice, however, in the real world of coffee shops and casual workers being paid penalty rates, it's just not relevant.

You've explained nothing.

I've explained the truth.

Finish uni, get a job, experience the real world for a few years and you might just start to understand.

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

adelcrow Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20133 everywhere Gender:	Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates Reply #57 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:43pm Workchoices is dead...another Abbott lie
Back to top	Go the Bunnies IP Logged

crocodile

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6686
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #58 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:48pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:35pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:28pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:11pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 3:47pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 2:16pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:52pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 1:09pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:54pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 12:10pm:

crocodile wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 6:54pm:

John S wrote on Sep 7^th, 2014 at 12:31am:

If a coffee shop or restaurant has a average of 200 customer for a days trading and the business employs 4 staff and penalty rate is cut to single time and the business still get 200 customers would the business employ more staff.

poll added

It's not quite so simple. It depends whether the business faces competition from other businesses that lower their retail price since the marginal cost of production would decrease. If this should occur and the business grows its market share or the demand for coffee increases due to cheaper prices then there would be scope for increasing staff levels.

And, back in the real world: if the demand for coffee did increase, due to cheaper prices (which is a huge stretch of the imagination in the first place), the existing employees would just have to work harder (for less money).

When faced with the choice of a) pocketing the extra profits or, b) employing more staff, most small business owners will opt for option a). They're not in it to make friends: they're in it to make money.

So are you suggesting that price signals have no effect on demand.

What price signals ?

I would think with coffee the demand is very significant anyway and not real likely to dramatically increase due to anything related to penalty rates.

I'm not a coffee expert. What you're saying is the polar opposite of accepted theory. If demand was significant then so would be the price. If the price is already above or at the market clearing rate, a reduction would most certainly increase demand. If the price today is below the clearing rate you would see prices increase quick smart until the clearing rate is reached.

Either way, if the marginal cost of production is lowered by smaller input costs this will be reflected in the retail price ( coffee being a reasonably elastic supply commodity I assume ). If production costs stay as they are so will the retail cost.

This is incredibly naive.

Perhaps you could explain in sound economic terms just why it is naïve.

It's incredibly naive, because you are talking in sound economic (theoretical) terms.

Your 'Introduction to Economics' unit at University is all well and good, however, once you've been in the real world for a few decades you'll see things differently.

This is how things work in the real world.

If penalty rates were abolished:
- employees are paid less (obviously)
- sales figures remain the same (obviously)
- the price of coffee remains the same (no rational reason to reduce it)
- no extra jobs are created (how can they be?)
- the business owner increases his/her profits (why wouldn't they?)

Don't get me wrong, your theory is nice, however, in the real world of coffee shops and casual workers being paid penalty rates, it's just not relevant.

You've explained nothing.

I've explained the truth.

Finish uni, get a job, experience the real world for a few years and you might just start to understand.

Is that the best you can do. Can't explain it because it's a load of tosh. Because reality doesn't fit within your utopian view of how the world should work you ignorantly fail to take into account the ensuing competition created by diminished input margins nor increased sales volumes by retail price reduction.

It is you that needs to understand. By the way, I'm 57. The undergrad days are well and truly long gone.

Back to top

Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 156342
Gender: male

Re: The Liberal MP Was A Wing Nut On Penalty Rates
Reply #59 - Sep 8^th, 2014 at 6:54pm

crocodile wrote on Sep 8^th, 2014 at 4:48pm:

... increased sales volumes by retail price reduction.

You haven't been listening: there won't be a retail price reduction.

The workers will be paid less, and the business owner will pocket the extra cash. That's it.

There will be no increase in sales volumes, as absolutely nothing will change for the customer.

Back to top

GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Would you work Late night or weekends for single time
Yes 4 (21.1%) No 15 (78.9%) Total votes: 19 « Created by: John S on: Sep 7^th, 2014 at 12:31am »