PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics) (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/628189-war-australia-any-oz-politics.html)

JustinHeywood 17th Dec 2019 05:52


Originally Posted by chuboy (Post 10641671)
I'll ignore the pot shot. On the contrary, there's plenty of evidence in dozens of economics textbooks. A first-year economics student would be able to predict what we have seen the Australian economy do in the last few years. Quarter after quarter we have seen reductions or stays on the interest rate, with no improvement to consumer confidence or retail spending. Harris Scarfe is the latest of many big names to go bust in the last year, unable to stay cash positive even through the busiest period of the year for retail sales. If that isn't enough to tell you that people aren't spending the money they have, then I don't know what will. With wage growth at miserly levels, inflation similar, and GDP growth per capita declining, as a country we are technically going backwards except that we are propping things up with immigration. Until that changes I can't see people suddenly deciding to go ahead with that renovation or business expansion.

If you want to avoid recession, you need to stimulate the economy - no different to paying for ads when sales are down even though your cashflow is hurting. Now is the time to be subsidising growth into new industries, stimulus packages for households (which worked during the GFC to protect Australia from recession at a time when the rest of the OECD succumbed), pressing ahead with infrastructure projects, etc. Not tightening the purse strings for the sake of saying you're paying down debt. Not all debt is bad - if people and corporations never went into debt we'd be a very poor country indeed. Even the USA's messiah Donald Trump has doubled down and increased US debt by $9 trillion, their economy is doing quite well despite the impact of his showboating and tariffs - how do the superior economic managers in the Coalition explain that?

No, don’t ignore the potshot. By the convoluted reasoning in your original post, both major parties are incompetent (the Greens must therefore be the answer), anyone who bought a house 10 years ago is now rich (millions would disagree), and the only sensible solution is to stimulate the economy by giving money to cashed-up inner city renters (not the bogans out in the ‘burbs).

But you’re not a cashed-up inner city renter and Green voter, no sir, and if you are, then that’s purely a coincidence.

BEACH KING 17th Dec 2019 09:30


The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) may open the new year with an interest rate cut, using the minutes of its December meeting to signal concern that slow wages growth is restricting heavily indebted households from boosting the economy.
Accelerated wages growth in the current environment is not very smart.
Small business, (the staple powerhouse of our economy) now have the tightest margins they have ever seen. This is mainly due to the huge growth of online commerce and sharp increases in rent and regulatory compliance costs.
The largest expense of small business is wages. When things get too tight (like when wages are sharply increased) ...jobs will go.
Increasing unemployment is no help in trying to sort out a difficult economy.... Unless you go down the pink batts road.

Fliegenmong 17th Dec 2019 12:06

Yet another LNP member with his snout in the trough..

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-...wance/11805904

Fliegenmong 17th Dec 2019 12:09

Hey JustinHeywood, I;m sure you can defend this filth, go right ahead

chuboy 18th Dec 2019 04:05


Originally Posted by JustinHeywood (Post 10641719)


No, don’t ignore the potshot. By the convoluted reasoning in your original post, both major parties are incompetent (the Greens must therefore be the answer), anyone who bought a house 10 years ago is now rich (millions would disagree), and the only sensible solution is to stimulate the economy by giving money to cashed-up inner city renters (not the bogans out in the ‘burbs).

But you’re not a cashed-up inner city renter and Green voter, no sir, and if you are, then that’s purely a coincidence.

That's your convoluted reasoning, not mine. I don't think I ever accused the major parties of incompetence. They're worse - competent but self-interested.

And yes, there are not many people who purchased real estate before about 2017-18 who have not seen a remarkable increase in their net worth simply through capital gains in their property value. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.

I don't think I differentiated between inner-city and outer suburbs in my post either - that's just you filling in blanks to try and confect some kind of point or personal attack. I said anybody who is currently paying down a mortgage in this environment is going to bank any extra money they receive (be it through stimulus or wage growth or otherwise), not circulate it through the economy by spending it on a good or service. Meanwhile, unencumbered renters, especially the ones without much disposable income, are more likely to spend any extra money they receive. If you believe the teachings of Keynes, then in an environment where wage growth was not considerely likely and interest rates are already low, direct economic stimulus should be considered as a way to keep the economy ticking over.

Of course as I said, generating employment by investing in large infrastructure projects is another perfectly legitimate lever which could be pulled at a time like this.

601 18th Dec 2019 04:25


If you believe the teachings of Keynes
So last century

WingNut60 18th Dec 2019 09:13


Originally Posted by chuboy (Post 10642456)
And yes, there are not many people who purchased real estate before about 2017-18 who have not seen a remarkable increase in their net worth simply through capital gains in their property value.

But the value of the capital has declined.
Is that still an increase in nett worth?


currawong 18th Dec 2019 09:58


Originally Posted by Fliegenmong (Post 10641969)
Hey JustinHeywood, I;m sure you can defend this filth, go right ahead

Why would one defend a corrupt politician?

Swings and roundabouts....

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-...-jail/11800078

Just pleased some of them are getting caught.

chuboy 18th Dec 2019 22:48


Originally Posted by WingNut60 (Post 10642628)
But the value of the capital has declined.
Is that still an increase in nett worth?

Most definitely, capital gains have outstripped inflation for all but the unluckiest armchair property moguls.

chuboy 18th Dec 2019 23:06


Originally Posted by 601 (Post 10642464)
So last century

So sorry - which macroeconomic theory is currently occupying the zeitgeist?

megan 19th Dec 2019 04:22


Yet another LNP member with his snout in the trough..
How did Bob Hawke accumulate a $18 million nest egg as a union rep and politician? Proof of the old saw show me a rich pollie and I'll show you a crook? Or was it Blanches wealth?

layman 19th Dec 2019 07:32

megan

an anecdote relayed to me many years ago was that Hawke made his fortune as a lawyer/barrister ‘long’ before he entered politics

As I recall the story was that on a drive through an expensive area of Melbourne Hawke was regaling his guest with comments along the lines of “I bought that house after I won the xxx case” and “I bought that one after yyy” etc

Anyone know enough to be able to verify / disprove that story?

601 19th Dec 2019 12:50


an anecdote relayed to me many years ago was that Hawke made his fortune as a lawyer/barrister ‘long’ before he entered politics
From Wikipedia
He was first appointed as an ACTU advocate in 1959. He was elected ACTU President in 1969. In 1973, Hawke was elected as the Federal President of the Labor Party.
He stood for and won the election to the House of Representatives at the 1980 election for the safe Melbourne seat of Wills,

The rest is history.
Cannot find any mention of Hawke making his fortune as a lawyer/barrister ‘long’ before he entered politics.

But I did get the impression while he was in the ACTU, that in industrial disputes, it appeared that he would let the dispute run for a fair while intil things got angry and step in at the last moment, solve the problem and get the accolades.

WingNut60 19th Dec 2019 13:47


Originally Posted by megan (Post 10643249)
How did Bob Hawke accumulate a $18 million nest egg as a union rep, politician AND PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA? Proof of the old saw show me a rich pollie and I'll show you a crook? Or was it Blanches wealth?

Hawke graduated from UWA with a Law degree and an Arts degree in 1953 then attended Oxford University as Western Australia’s Rhodes scholar.
Abandoning his planned degree, he submitted a thesis on the history of wage-fixing in Australia.
He graduated with a Bachelor of Letters in 1955 and returned to Australia in 1956.Hawke then enrolled in a doctoral program at the Australian National University in 1956 but left two years later, with the degree unfinished,
Hawke then took a job with the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) as an advocate.

Not saying that he was squeaky clean but I don't find the idea of a lawyer (refer Law degree - above) accumulating $18M over a 50+ year career to be all that exceptional.

601 19th Dec 2019 13:58


a lawyer (refer Law degree - above)
When and where did he practice law. He may have had a law degree but was that his profession?
There are plenty of people who did a law degree who have not practice law and I doubt that any would call themselves a lawyer. They would call themselves, pilot, bricklayer, teacher, journalist etc.

emeritus 19th Dec 2019 23:21

Interesting reading. As a matrimonially recycled person it sprang to mind that when he divorced Hazel there must have been something like a 50 % settlement. It must have been a decent sized nest egg !

currawong 20th Dec 2019 04:16

Look at when Mr Hawke went to university.

Does that give you a clue?

Disclaimer: not a statement of any particular opinion

megan 20th Dec 2019 05:07


union rep, politician [u=left]AND PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA[/u]
Don't know why the need to add the PM bit there WN, unless things have changed I thought all PM's were politicians.

WingNut60 20th Dec 2019 08:32


Originally Posted by 601 (Post 10643554)
When and where did he practice law. He may have had a law degree but was that his profession?
There are plenty of people who did a law degree who have not practice law and I doubt that any would call themselves a lawyer. They would call themselves, pilot, bricklayer, teacher, journalist etc.

Perhaps not, if you're working as a bricklayer, however unlikely that may be.
But you don't have to have a shingle hanging off a shopping centre office door to be a lawyer.
But if you have a law degree and you're an advocate for a registered union and make regular appearances in industrial courts then you might.

How do you differentiate Hawkes advocacy from that of say, a corporate lawyer, most of whom never see the inside of a court.
And still manage to amass a tidy retirement package.
Many of whom also are on their 2nd or even 3rd marriage.

WingNut60 20th Dec 2019 08:34


Originally Posted by megan (Post 10643950)
Don't know why the need to add the PM bit there WN, unless things have changed I thought all PM's were politicians.

Because that's what he was. And omitting that fact seems to be a deliberate attempt to denigrate a person who deserves respect and acknowledgement for his services to his country.


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:44.


Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.