CFMEU’s Tony Maher spells out why the MRRT won’t kill the mining golden goose.

In a few months, the tax which economists championed but which was the demise of a prime minister, will become a reality. When the super profits tax was proposed in 2009 few could have forseen the events it would produce — mining magnates Gina Rinehart and Andrew Twiggy Forrest crying poor on the back of a truck, a $20 million scare campaign by the miners and Australia’s historic toppling of a prime minister by his deputy.

This week on 3Q we examine the fallout which ended with a watered down mining tax which some say costs more to administer than it will produce – how exaggerated were the “facts” in the mining ad campaign? How different is it to its original form? And will any of the money go towards the big projects the Government has forecast — like the NDIS or the Gonski review?

Media Super’s Jon Glass explains how super funds manage risk and why they’re better than the average investor

The GFC decimated not only the world financial markets but also Australia’s super funds. Over $75 billion was wiped off our share value and it will be another two years before super savings are back to their pre-GFC levels. Yet here has been a recovery during that time — albeit with some hiccups along the way.

One positive from the economic tsunami has been the adoption of more risk averse strategies, as Dr Jon Glass, chief investment officer for Media Super, will explain on our upcoming 3Q.

But what if I want to take those risks and manage my fund according to my needs? The evidence suggests you’ll be much worse off, simply because of a tendency to stick to bad habits and make poor decisions.

Dr Jon Glass, chief investment officer for Media Super, explains how the psychology of risk affects our actions when it comes to investments — and not in a positive way.

ACTU’s Jeff Lawrence explains why we should increase the minimum wage.

Each year negotiations begin on a decision which will effect the lives and livelihoods of one in six Australians. They are the low wage workers who are employed in places where there is no collective agreement to ensure they receive basic wages.

It’s called the Annual Wage Review and it’s an opportunity for the ACTU and unions to mount arguments for an increase in the minimum wage. For the 1.4 million people on the minimum wage, its their one chance a year for a pay rise.

Last year, the minimum wage increased by over 3 per cent to $589.30 a week, or $15.51.

But is it enough? How far does less than $600 a week, before tax, go in the capital cities where rents and prices are up? Not far enough, according to Jeff Lawrence, the ACTU general secretary, who outlines on 3Q why there needs to be an increase for the country’s most disadvantaged workers.

We are still a class act

‘Class’ and ‘zeitgeist’ may seem strange bedfellows, but in the wake of Treasurer Wayne Swan’s much-pilloried call to arms against the very rich, they appear be staging an unexpected hook-up.

The accepted wisdom was that we had moved beyond class, a view propagated by both Tories trying to seduce battlers and Labor apparatchiks reaching out to the aspirationalists, all in a bid to capture a mythical centre.

But according to the Essential Report this week, the vast, vast majority of Australians still subscribe that that relic of Marxist analysis – when asked if class still matter sin Australia, they answer resoundingly in the affirmative.

Q. Do you believe social classes still exist in Australia? 

This is not some trendy leftie proposition for Green voters and latte-sipping inner city trendies, indeed the belief in classes exists across the political spectrum – it’s just that no one talks about it.

What’s more, about a third of the public (interestingly, higher than the Labor primary vote) see themselves as working class, with more than 50 per cent self-identifying as middle class and just a handful self-identifying as Upper Class.

Q. Do you consider yourself:

We also asked people to identify the dollar figure that would define individuals and households as ‘middle income’, ‘well-off’ and wealthy’.

The median results are as follows:

The median of ‘wealthy family’ is critical – $150,0000 of course is the cut off point for the health care rebate which sparked a tabloid outcry – but in the public’s mind $150,000 is beyond the purveyor of the well-off – its is the territory of the welfare

It puts in play a whole range of other Howard middle class welfare measures – the baby bonus, child care rebates, carer allowances, pharmaceutical benefits, student allowances and the much vaunted Family Tax Benefits, to name just a few.

But if the majority of Australians see a combined household income of $150,000 as wealthy, the government has a ready-made limit to reintroduce some constraints on its reverse-taxation payments to the community.

In light of these findings it’s also unsurprising the high level of support for Treasurer’s recent statement that some of Australia’s wealthiest individuals are using their wealth to try to influence public opinion and government policy to further their own commercial interests

* each question was asked of half the total sample.

The interesting point here is that once we took out the fact that Wayne Sawn had made the comments about the very wealthy, even the majority of Liberal voters agreed – although the Labor faithful tapered off a bit.

So if Tony Abbott wants to give Labor a narrow whiff at redemption he should continue to campaign against a mining tax.

While he is at it he should accuse the government of employing the ‘politics of envy’, as mining moguls continue to air their extremely expensive dirty linen in public.

And if he really wants to give the government momentum he should talk about Australia having moved beyond the class, while he proposes more measures that are blind to inequality – like a parental leave scheme that delivers you more depending on how much you earn.

Class and Zeitgeist – who’d a thunk?