When the government reached agreement with Clive Palmer that abolition of the mining tax would be paid for in part by delaying increases in compulsory employer superannuation contributions, Tony Abbott declared that this was okay because workers would end up with the money in their wage packets.

This is plainly wrong. There is simply no mechanism by which a foregone 2.5% increase in super will translate into a 2.5 per cent increase, or any increase, in your pay packet unless your employer is feeling particularly considerate and benevolent. When Bill Shorten made similar remarks last year he was also wrong.

• Why a comfortable retirement is now up to you
• Maximise your super contributions at any income
• How much do you need to retire at 65?

For a start, consider the position of the growing number of people who rely on the minimum wage. Will the government now direct FairWork Australia to determine a series of increases to compensate? Fat chance.

Similarly, will other workers suddenly find that their awards are adjusted to provide increased minimum rates over the next few years? And will the mining companies whose profits will now be higher both as a result of lower tax and lower superannuation contributions decide to unilaterally pass on the benefits to their employees? Again, extremely unlikely.

Nest eggs will be less golden with recent changes to superannuation.

The supply and demand for labour which ultimately affects wage rates is a complex equation affected by many factors. Above all, when unemployment is on the rise this has a negative impact on the ability of wages to rise.

Other factors affecting whether or not wages in a particular company or sector will rise include union coverage, the degree of competition faced by the company (which in turn is a negative when the $A is too high and imports are relatively cheap), the scarcity of particular skills and the productivity and profitability of the particular company or sector.

Sometimes the cost of higher wages or higher super contributions are partly passed on to consumers through higher prices; sometimes they will be partly absorbed out of profits. Superannuation contributions will always in part be paid for by reduced government tax revenue. This, after all, is why the government is able to talk about an offset against the loss of taxes from the mining sector.

The legislative outcome achieved by the government is basically a transfer of wealth from working people to the mining sector. It may be complex but that is far closer to a true statement than the deceptive characterisation adopted by the government.

Garry Weaven is Chair of The New Daily and of IFM Investors, which manages money globally for super funds and like investors.