Howard breaks his silence: Work Choices should've stayed
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: springfield retirement castle
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Codswallop. Do a little more research (that consisting of something more substantial than the re-reading and subsequent regurgitating of a certain P. Akerman's opinion pieces).
Last edited by jaded boiler; 21st May 2009 at 13:52.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes- reading indeed. The guilty parties crying "the government made us do it!" doesn't stand even a cursory investigation of the facts.
Doesn't stop the apologists finding their red herring, though.
Doesn't stop the apologists finding their red herring, though.
Grandpa Aerotart
There is more than enough guilt to go around...but at the very heart is policy settings put in place by Democrats. Republicans tried to rein it in but failed for a variety of reasons...mostly to do with self serving, gutless politicians of both sides but predominantly the left. Once you have put a policy of 'affordable housing' in place and made damn sure everyone knows about it how brave does a politician need to be to stand against that even when it makes perfect sense to do so and is ACTUALLY in everyone's best interest...including the people suddenly finding themselves in 'their very own house'. There is not a polly on the planet that brave...they spend there lives totally dedicated to getting re-elected (2 year senatorial terms in the US) so it would be a brave Republican indeed who would allow his Democrat competition the sort of free shot being labelled as 'anti affordable housing' would provide.
Socialist policy settings allowed human nature to do the rest. I never get over the stupidity, or more likely dishonesty, of people claiming to be caught out by 'the Law of unintended consequences'...to my mind this is just a cop out..."Its not my fault, I didn't expect that to happen".
Utter BS!
Human Nature being what it is, it is usually pretty damn easy to work out the logical consequences of an action.
You lean on a couple of Govt backed banks like Feddie and Fannie to facilitate home ownership for people who would otherwise not qualify.
They make it known to banks far and wide that they will buy up such mortgages.
Banks get fees and loan officers get a % of the loan 'products' they sell. Historically they were constrained by prudent banking practices but now they get to pass on all the risk to a third party that is Govt backed.
What happens next is not a result of the law of unintended consequences...its perfectly predictable....Millions of people get home loans they wouldn't have got before before and banks/Mortgage brokers/loan officers make lots of money from fees while the banks they actually work for have zero risk. Pretty soon the banks are inventing all sorts of new loan products as they continue to lower the bar to get more 'risk free' loans out the door and fees in the door.
For a fair old while Fannie/Freddie make lots of money...the housing market is booming (that's what lots of cheap money sloshing around does...it creates bubbles) soon the actual street banks want a piece of the action too. What can go wrong after all...house prices always go up...don't they? If a % of the mortgages go bad we just sell em up...no worries....WE CAN'T LOSE!!!!
And while we are at it lets extend them lines of credit (yet another new product) to buy 'stuff' based on the 'ever' increasing 'equity' in their homes....we REALLY cannot lose remember.
As an aside a mate who IS old enough to remember 16% interest rates and the last recession, and the one before that, said to me about a year ago "Chuck boom and bust is a thing of the past - 'they' are smarter than that these days".
Hell even that moron Brown got up in front of an audience and said that - Boom and bust is a product of human nature - it will NEVER be a thing of the past.
When well educated successful people convince themselves of that what hope for mr and mrs average min wage worker?
Apparently the tech bust with its attendant unemployment of LOTS of VERY, VERY, VERY smart mathematicians gave us CDSs, CDOs and sundry other credit derivatives...they went to work for the investment banks.
Banks like to insure against risk..the people actually selling the product may be too young to remember the last recession but the people RUNNING the banks certainly are old enough to know better.
Pretty soon credit derivatives are a boom money producer too...EVERYONE piles in to get their piece of the action...this is what happens near the end of a boom cycle...its no mystery its just human nature...it has always happened this way...but everyone is also 'insuring' themselves against default...AIG et al are making a KILLING on selling insurance for CDSs/CDOs etc.
All this credit was VERY highly leveraged...The US Government repealed Laws that dictate, for VERY good reasons, how much leverage is allowed...they deregulated laws put in place after the Depression that were designed to mitigate against just what has happened...because what has just happened in the last year is pretty much what happened in 1929/30.
But of course Greenspan et al were much smarter than the people running things in the 1920s
I think it is a little tough to 'blame' those who took out the mortgages...human nature being what it is you could hardly expect them to say no to cheap money to buy their own home...but you can certainly blame the pollies and the CEOs of Fannie/Freddie/AIG/Morgan Stanley etc etc etc.
But it starts with the Politicians and their policy settings...everything else flows from there.
The world is experiencing a MASSIVE de-leveraging of credit...that is what puts the lie to Swan/Rudd/Henry's claims of 4+% growth in just a year or twos time and why they will never get the budget back in the black. For that sort of growth we need to US/Japan/China etc to be buying lots of stuff...but the de-leveraging will assure that sundry greatly reduced asset values won't allow credit to be extended in the way it has been lately...without that credit we can't have 4+% growth any time soon.
It will likely be 60 years before we see 'growth' like we experienced in the last 10. It will take that long for everyone who experienced this one to die and for direct human memory to fade and the next Alan Greenspan and sundry pollies to be so arrogant as to believe they 'know better' again.
Its just human nature.
Socialist policy settings allowed human nature to do the rest. I never get over the stupidity, or more likely dishonesty, of people claiming to be caught out by 'the Law of unintended consequences'...to my mind this is just a cop out..."Its not my fault, I didn't expect that to happen".
Utter BS!
Human Nature being what it is, it is usually pretty damn easy to work out the logical consequences of an action.
You lean on a couple of Govt backed banks like Feddie and Fannie to facilitate home ownership for people who would otherwise not qualify.
They make it known to banks far and wide that they will buy up such mortgages.
Banks get fees and loan officers get a % of the loan 'products' they sell. Historically they were constrained by prudent banking practices but now they get to pass on all the risk to a third party that is Govt backed.
What happens next is not a result of the law of unintended consequences...its perfectly predictable....Millions of people get home loans they wouldn't have got before before and banks/Mortgage brokers/loan officers make lots of money from fees while the banks they actually work for have zero risk. Pretty soon the banks are inventing all sorts of new loan products as they continue to lower the bar to get more 'risk free' loans out the door and fees in the door.
For a fair old while Fannie/Freddie make lots of money...the housing market is booming (that's what lots of cheap money sloshing around does...it creates bubbles) soon the actual street banks want a piece of the action too. What can go wrong after all...house prices always go up...don't they? If a % of the mortgages go bad we just sell em up...no worries....WE CAN'T LOSE!!!!
And while we are at it lets extend them lines of credit (yet another new product) to buy 'stuff' based on the 'ever' increasing 'equity' in their homes....we REALLY cannot lose remember.
As an aside a mate who IS old enough to remember 16% interest rates and the last recession, and the one before that, said to me about a year ago "Chuck boom and bust is a thing of the past - 'they' are smarter than that these days".
Hell even that moron Brown got up in front of an audience and said that - Boom and bust is a product of human nature - it will NEVER be a thing of the past.
When well educated successful people convince themselves of that what hope for mr and mrs average min wage worker?
Apparently the tech bust with its attendant unemployment of LOTS of VERY, VERY, VERY smart mathematicians gave us CDSs, CDOs and sundry other credit derivatives...they went to work for the investment banks.
Banks like to insure against risk..the people actually selling the product may be too young to remember the last recession but the people RUNNING the banks certainly are old enough to know better.
Pretty soon credit derivatives are a boom money producer too...EVERYONE piles in to get their piece of the action...this is what happens near the end of a boom cycle...its no mystery its just human nature...it has always happened this way...but everyone is also 'insuring' themselves against default...AIG et al are making a KILLING on selling insurance for CDSs/CDOs etc.
All this credit was VERY highly leveraged...The US Government repealed Laws that dictate, for VERY good reasons, how much leverage is allowed...they deregulated laws put in place after the Depression that were designed to mitigate against just what has happened...because what has just happened in the last year is pretty much what happened in 1929/30.
But of course Greenspan et al were much smarter than the people running things in the 1920s
I think it is a little tough to 'blame' those who took out the mortgages...human nature being what it is you could hardly expect them to say no to cheap money to buy their own home...but you can certainly blame the pollies and the CEOs of Fannie/Freddie/AIG/Morgan Stanley etc etc etc.
But it starts with the Politicians and their policy settings...everything else flows from there.
The world is experiencing a MASSIVE de-leveraging of credit...that is what puts the lie to Swan/Rudd/Henry's claims of 4+% growth in just a year or twos time and why they will never get the budget back in the black. For that sort of growth we need to US/Japan/China etc to be buying lots of stuff...but the de-leveraging will assure that sundry greatly reduced asset values won't allow credit to be extended in the way it has been lately...without that credit we can't have 4+% growth any time soon.
It will likely be 60 years before we see 'growth' like we experienced in the last 10. It will take that long for everyone who experienced this one to die and for direct human memory to fade and the next Alan Greenspan and sundry pollies to be so arrogant as to believe they 'know better' again.
Its just human nature.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 21st May 2009 at 16:14.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Codswallop. Do a little more research (that consisting of something more substantial than the re-reading and subsequent regurgitating of a certain P. Akerman's opinion pieces).
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeesus, I just wish Howard had stayed, never mind work choices, now look at the freckin mess we are in, at least with Howard we would have had a experienced treasurer at the end of the prong, and as you all know when in severe turbulance, hand it back to a very experienced Captain, regardless what you think of him, NOT to three Second Officers. (No blight on S/O's we were all one once) but the ship needs real experience now, not three blokes running around like blue arsed flies, trying to cope.
Anybody who watched Lateline, their blood would have run cold.
Anybody who watched Lateline, their blood would have run cold.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This may prove informative: CDO Powerpoint SubPrime Primer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: springfield retirement castle
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I'll take my posts being described as "contrived", defined as "planned with ingenuity", as a compliment.
The only leaning I do is as a result of advancing years. I have always considered myself a centrist. Unfortunately I don't suffer fools, ideologues or those so welded to their dogma that they are unable to countenance conflicting viewpoints.
The only leaning I do is as a result of advancing years. I have always considered myself a centrist. Unfortunately I don't suffer fools, ideologues or those so welded to their dogma that they are unable to countenance conflicting viewpoints.
Last edited by jaded boiler; 24th May 2009 at 13:21.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't suffer fools, idealogues or those so welded to their dogma that they are unable to countenance conflicting viewpoints.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, haven't you heard?
Ever since the PM declared war on ADF catering, all flying rations have been increased in size to accommodate his palate: hence the extra "z" in Frozzo.
Ever since the PM declared war on ADF catering, all flying rations have been increased in size to accommodate his palate: hence the extra "z" in Frozzo.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 53
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok PAF, this is my last post or I'll never get away from you and this thread!
What is it with you guys and your love affair with the Howard gov. Don't get me wrong, I don't like Rudd much at all, but I would have voted for him just to see the rear end of Howard et al. I can't see why anyone would think they did such a brilliant job. Go and read what a majority of commentators have said, Hawke and Keating did a lot for getting Australia back on the road.
The last 5-6 yrs they had more money from the resources boom than you could poke a burnt stick at. Yeah, they retired all the debt then set about spending up big with middle class welfare, which may have still left them with a surplus, but was growing at a rate that was more than the Govs historical revenues could sustain. A large number of commentators, including past supporters of Howard have stated that it had left Swan with a huge problem in balancing the budget, such that even without the cash splash that the budget would still be in deficit for yrs. Costello has been quoted a number of times on how Howard kept on wanting to throw the money around when there was less need to and the game he (Costello) played in misleading Howard on the true forecast surplus. Howard and co failed to set this country up for when the boom ended. I know, they paid out all the debt, but there's more to it than just that. They also used 457 visas to bring in cheap labour/trades because they are responsible for ruining the apprenticeship system along with industry believing it wasn't something they should have to be involved in. No Gov intervention until it suits them! Youth unemployment was still way higher than it should have been.
I don't like Rudd, I agree with the pension handout last year and increase this year and any handout (if there was) to low income earners, the rest was just a bloody stupid waste (infrastructure aside). I choke when I read of people earning north of 150k whinning about the private health insurance rebate. IMO if your getting north of 130k you shouldn't get a cent. I read in the SMH of one couple earning between 160-240 bleating about maybe having to go back to the public system; good luck, I say! No means testing on child care payments, for F...s sake! Everyone these days, no matter what they earn wants to suck on the public tit.
My last bugbear is reading posts here complaining about our reward for what we do, comparing to a "mate" allegedly earning 1Mil + in finance etc. Sorry, but not many earning that. Try engineering, which I know fairly well and a experienced engineer will be on about 180-220K unless he's in very senior management, or up in China/Africa or where ever! A close friend (lawyer) said an Associate Partner would be on 180-200K and working there arse off. My biggest complaint is companies having you pay for your endorsements and the attitude towards crew in general. If as I'm told a J* captain will actually earn around 180K don't complain, if you think you are I suggest you go and have a REAL close look at the outside world and you'll be bloody surprised at not just the money, but the hours. And no, I dislike management as much as the rest of you.
PAF seriously, I don't want to see you post for 48 hrs, you have to wean yourself off this site!! Otherwise I'll have to have a word with CASA that you may not be stable! See ya.
What is it with you guys and your love affair with the Howard gov. Don't get me wrong, I don't like Rudd much at all, but I would have voted for him just to see the rear end of Howard et al. I can't see why anyone would think they did such a brilliant job. Go and read what a majority of commentators have said, Hawke and Keating did a lot for getting Australia back on the road.
The last 5-6 yrs they had more money from the resources boom than you could poke a burnt stick at. Yeah, they retired all the debt then set about spending up big with middle class welfare, which may have still left them with a surplus, but was growing at a rate that was more than the Govs historical revenues could sustain. A large number of commentators, including past supporters of Howard have stated that it had left Swan with a huge problem in balancing the budget, such that even without the cash splash that the budget would still be in deficit for yrs. Costello has been quoted a number of times on how Howard kept on wanting to throw the money around when there was less need to and the game he (Costello) played in misleading Howard on the true forecast surplus. Howard and co failed to set this country up for when the boom ended. I know, they paid out all the debt, but there's more to it than just that. They also used 457 visas to bring in cheap labour/trades because they are responsible for ruining the apprenticeship system along with industry believing it wasn't something they should have to be involved in. No Gov intervention until it suits them! Youth unemployment was still way higher than it should have been.
I don't like Rudd, I agree with the pension handout last year and increase this year and any handout (if there was) to low income earners, the rest was just a bloody stupid waste (infrastructure aside). I choke when I read of people earning north of 150k whinning about the private health insurance rebate. IMO if your getting north of 130k you shouldn't get a cent. I read in the SMH of one couple earning between 160-240 bleating about maybe having to go back to the public system; good luck, I say! No means testing on child care payments, for F...s sake! Everyone these days, no matter what they earn wants to suck on the public tit.
My last bugbear is reading posts here complaining about our reward for what we do, comparing to a "mate" allegedly earning 1Mil + in finance etc. Sorry, but not many earning that. Try engineering, which I know fairly well and a experienced engineer will be on about 180-220K unless he's in very senior management, or up in China/Africa or where ever! A close friend (lawyer) said an Associate Partner would be on 180-200K and working there arse off. My biggest complaint is companies having you pay for your endorsements and the attitude towards crew in general. If as I'm told a J* captain will actually earn around 180K don't complain, if you think you are I suggest you go and have a REAL close look at the outside world and you'll be bloody surprised at not just the money, but the hours. And no, I dislike management as much as the rest of you.
PAF seriously, I don't want to see you post for 48 hrs, you have to wean yourself off this site!! Otherwise I'll have to have a word with CASA that you may not be stable! See ya.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: springfield retirement castle
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If finding the revisionism, mindless nastiness, haughtiness, distortions and counter-intuitive sententious nonsense spouted by individuals on the far right repugnant defines me as a far leftist in your eyes PAFF, then so be it. I guess the view to the centre is a long way left from where you're standing.
Although that does leave me a tad perplexed. If I am a far leftist, where would that place a communist on the ideological spectrum?
And no parabellum, I don't have any friends who are ALP members. I do have several comrades however who are supporters of Rudd, and some who happen to be union members. Strangely enough they appear as astute, rational and contemplative as several other balanced, non-extremist coalition supporters of my acquaintance.
Although that does leave me a tad perplexed. If I am a far leftist, where would that place a communist on the ideological spectrum?
And no parabellum, I don't have any friends who are ALP members. I do have several comrades however who are supporters of Rudd, and some who happen to be union members. Strangely enough they appear as astute, rational and contemplative as several other balanced, non-extremist coalition supporters of my acquaintance.
Last edited by jaded boiler; 25th May 2009 at 12:01.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 48
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
FOCX Spot On!
People complaining about the private Health Insurance rebate on salary's above the cutoff oh please...
Jaided
Don't worry, remember they are now in the minority! They lost!
The extreme right are always like that, just enjoy life while they are sidelined in the gutters where they belong! Hey lifes good!
Forget about intelligent debate, I mean look at what happened to the US under the perfect example of right politics?! LOL! It shouldn't be funny but in fact it is and was so predictable. Howard was a complete umitigated disaster! I said it years ago and I still say it now! History will look bleak on that pathetic individual.
People complaining about the private Health Insurance rebate on salary's above the cutoff oh please...
Jaided
the revisionism, mindless nastiness, haughtiness, distortions and counter-intuitive sententious nonsense spouted by individuals on the far right
The extreme right are always like that, just enjoy life while they are sidelined in the gutters where they belong! Hey lifes good!
Forget about intelligent debate, I mean look at what happened to the US under the perfect example of right politics?! LOL! It shouldn't be funny but in fact it is and was so predictable. Howard was a complete umitigated disaster! I said it years ago and I still say it now! History will look bleak on that pathetic individual.
Mods, What does this thread have to do with Aviation? It is largely a slanging match between the extreme-right PAF and everyone else. It is also largely irrelevent.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree that this has become Jetblast grist.
What surprises me is the number of 'intelligent, well-balanced' individuals* (see footnote) who appear to reserve a visceral, almost pathological hatred for John Winston Howard that's way up there with the feelings many 89ers reserve for one robert hawke (sic). Did Howard have as detrimental an effect opon these people's lives as hawke (sic) did on so many in the Aviation industry?
As I've said earlier in this thread, you don't have to like the individual or everything he does to deem him, of those offering their services, the more capable manager of your country. As much as I disagreed with many of the things Howard and his Party did, after experiencing the Whitlam years first hand, I feared before the 2007 election, and fear even moreso now, that we're going to pay an enormous price just so these intelligent, well-balanced individuals can feel good about having a more acceptable (to them) leader in place than John Howard.
It's scary to think - when you consider the enormous effect they had on the Australian economy - that there were only three 'Whitlam years'. I wonder if taxpayers in years to come, as they (attempt to?) pay off the huge debt the country is currently incurring, will be saying something similar about the Rudd years?
-------------
*(I know they are 'intelligent, well balanced' individuals, because they've told us all that one automatically becomes so if one is not of the far right wing persuasion in one's political leanings)
What surprises me is the number of 'intelligent, well-balanced' individuals* (see footnote) who appear to reserve a visceral, almost pathological hatred for John Winston Howard that's way up there with the feelings many 89ers reserve for one robert hawke (sic). Did Howard have as detrimental an effect opon these people's lives as hawke (sic) did on so many in the Aviation industry?
As I've said earlier in this thread, you don't have to like the individual or everything he does to deem him, of those offering their services, the more capable manager of your country. As much as I disagreed with many of the things Howard and his Party did, after experiencing the Whitlam years first hand, I feared before the 2007 election, and fear even moreso now, that we're going to pay an enormous price just so these intelligent, well-balanced individuals can feel good about having a more acceptable (to them) leader in place than John Howard.
It's scary to think - when you consider the enormous effect they had on the Australian economy - that there were only three 'Whitlam years'. I wonder if taxpayers in years to come, as they (attempt to?) pay off the huge debt the country is currently incurring, will be saying something similar about the Rudd years?
-------------
*(I know they are 'intelligent, well balanced' individuals, because they've told us all that one automatically becomes so if one is not of the far right wing persuasion in one's political leanings)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Queensland Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually it was Labor who introduced Work Choices back in that unmentionable year after 1988. Choice was, you either work on an Individual contract or don't work at all. Short memories eh!.
