Weekend Links – March 14th-15th 2015

reynard

Macro & Markets

Asia

Americas

Europe

Australia/New Zealand

…and furthermore…

.. for Chuckles ..

 

Comments

    • China’s coal consumption declined by 2.9% in 2014, with an accompanying 1% fall in carbon dioxide emissions, while the economy grew by 7.4%.

      Surely not possible! Coal is good for humanity remember.

      Meanwhile in Australia, we’re carving up the Hunter and potentially trashing the Great Barrier Reef to invest in a fuel source that’s doomed.

    • Good lets work at it even harder.

      Next the bigger issue, ecological carnage from pointless growth and endless debt fueled financialisation of the environment.

      • The pacific garbage dump

        The cause of rising rates of allergies

        unsustainable population growth

        resource depletion

        destruction of biodiversity

        the loss of the cool stuff and places we had when we were kids

      • Yep. The Chinese people will be after the blood of guys like 3d when the start to realise the horrific things that they have facilitated.

        They don’t want their beautiful country turned into a cess-pit at the whim of western calital and its heartless henchmen any more than we do.

        Google chinese pollution pictures

    • I thought the ‘unprecedented stall in carbon emissions’ was going to tie in with the unprecedented stall in global warming (two decades)…but no, just a bit of a ramble on coal.

      The BP world Energy report notes coal is experiencing the fastest growth of the fossil fuels, even Germany has increased consumption to counter unreliability of renewables.

      ‘Natural forces have always caused the climate on Earth to fluctuate. Now researchers have found geological evidence that some of the same forces as today were at play 1.4 billion years ago.’

      Researchers at University of Southern Denmark.

      http://m.phys.org/news/2015-03-today-climate-billion-years.html

      • 2d,

        If you thought;

        “…. the ‘unprecedented stall in carbon emissions’ was going to tie in with the unprecedented stall in global warming (two decades)”

        Means that are not either broadly or well read on the subject.

        1 – the long term term AGW trend is 0.2 C per annum – vs 1 – 1.5C natural annual variability – so you need to look an long term trends to assess the progress of AGW.

        2 – previous stalls have been longer than 20 years.

        3 – the oceans store the vast majority of heat ~80% (due very obviously to the the very high Cp of water) – if we stopped CO2 growth today – the stored heat in the oceans would have still result in another 50-100 years of warming.

        This is basic stuff 3d. All pretty obvious too i might add and impossible to deny logically.

        Your statement above demonstrates your willful ignorance – and I say willful ignorance, with respect, because you very clearly have the intelligence to be well informed, if you chose to, if you were not blindsided by your ideology.

      • ‘Big Players of any sort distort the normal systemic activity and render the emergent outcomes unstable and unreliable and create an ideal breeding ground for incentives that motivate ideologically biased people to circumvent normal constraints in the name of pursuing a “greater good”.’

        http://judithcurry.com/2015/03/08/big-players-and-the-climate-science-boom/#more-18002

        HR, my views are best reflected by those of Judith Curry, probably the preminent climate blogger.

      • More claisscal denier behaviour 3d. Don’t address the facts and then throw in another obfuscation. And worse, an obfuscation that seems to assert Judith is a skeptic …. another bang up lie 3d.

        Judith Curry supports the consensus on AGW 3d. She’s interesting – I exchanged a number of emails with her years ago as I developed my general knowledge of AGW.

        She has concerns about the conclusions drawn by some scientists, the margins of error used, the assertions about the probability of the higher temperature outcomes – but 3d she supports AGW and she thinks action on CO2 is logical.

        Last I checked her views went something like this;
        – i will most probably get warmer, quite possibly a lot warmer. Hence we should act.

        – but exactly when it will get warmer and by how much is hard to say.

        – she thinks there is not the data accuracy state predicted temp rise probabilities as tightly as the IPCC has. That doesn make her right. Its just her position.

        – she’s frustrated by the way she is continually misrepresented by deniers like you, 3d.

        – but shed does not doubt AGW or think we should not act.

        She is skeptical of the process not AGW.

        Even so 3d- she is just one and her sole views are not perfect reviewed, she is not perfect and doesn’t claim to be either.

        Talk to me about the 100% peak body consensus 3d.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Meanwhile the plutocratic take over of the world continues whilst everyone passionately engages in this second rate debate.

        This is the greatest single issue diverting attention away from the domination of all of our lives by unaccountable Private tyranny’s

      • Meanwhile the plutocratic take over of the world continues whilst everyone passionately engages in this second rate debate.
        This is the greatest single issue diverting attention away from the domination of all of our lives by unaccountable Private tyranny’s

        I don’t doubt that the anti AGW attacks are a symptom of deeper problems such as those you note but, I seriously doubt you’ll win that war without winning some battles. You are complaining about “unaccountable private tyrannies” and yet you also complain about the debates that are in part an attempt to bring such tyrannies to account. This “diversion” you speak of is probably one of the greatest opportunities we have had in recent decades to focus attention on the consequences of allowing plutocrats to get their way.

      • @EP
        Incidentally, imho (and I know many others see it this way) a huge part of the problem we see re the plutocrats relates to the issue of cost externalisation (social, environmental …..etc ). If we can’t debate that then you’re pretty much tying our hands and giving them all the wriggle room they need to go on doing whatever they like.

      • @AlexD.

        I try and give a reason plutocrats are getting stronger and you give me

        “Probably wasting my time as usual, Unfortunately, you’re right again Smithy”

        You mate are left wing fucking clown that’s a far bigger part of the problem you talk about than you will ever understand because you refuse to listen to logic. Get fucked idiot. Wish you dismissed my comments in person. No wonder we are heading where we are.

      • Yo 3d – given that’ I’m quite keen on the use of actual facts and actual data to come to an actual rational position – I considered your perspectives.

        “even Germany has increased consumption to counter unreliability of renewables”

        Not materially 3d – check graphs below;. Given it a few more years to see a trend, it could stay flat, could easily go the other way. Hence it’s not likely a source of growth – – I suspect E.ON wouldn’t be GTFO coal if It was freaking roses there 3d, ol pal.

        http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=gm#coal

        BTW E.On is a cracking example of what happens if you stick your head in the coal pile 3d, check their share price performance – cracking it is ….
        https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=EOAN.DE#symbol=EOAN.DE;range=5y

        BTW – just let you know again – E.On are dumping coal and getting into errr what for it – RENEWABLES, 3d!! Must be because coal has a cracking future in Germany ….

        http://www.dw.de/german-energy-giant-eon-to-focus-on-renewables/a-18103057

        “coal is experiencing the fastest growth of the fossil fuels”

        Coal grew like topsy to 2012 then hit a wall, (as is quite self evident), 2013 almost flat – 2014 wasn’t exactly a growth year was it 3d ….

        http://www.worldcoal.org/resources/coal-statistics/

        Like I said – coal has had it’s day. yes it will be important for a long time, but it won’t be a growth sector. That’s all I’m saying.

        Your assertions are again – quite misleading – you make it like coal is having some kind of renaissance …

        If I was you I’d jump ship now, get a new angle, a new bone, before the value of your equity evaporates into a puff of CO2, SOx, NOx and noxious particulates.

      • From the BP “Energy Outlook 2035”

        – Global coal demand grows by 0.8% p.a. between 2013 and 2035, making it the slowest growing fuel.

      • Hell 3d – see above – you can’t even be trusted to accurately regurgitate the BP Energy Outlook;

        your words

        “The BP world Energy report notes coal is experiencing the fastest growth of the fossil fuels”

        BP’s Actual Word words;

        “Global coal demand grows by 0.8% p.a. between 2013 and 2035, making it the slowest growing fuel”

        First line, page 65 here;
        http://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/Energy-economics/energy-outlook-2015/Energy_Outlook_2035_booklet.pdf

        Pretty spectacular BS there 3d. I suspect you’ll make like it didn’t happen…

        Not to mention Germany, EON etc ….

        I read the paper with the forgone conclusion by the two economists on curry’s blog. It’s funny – like it might make sense ONLY if all the world governments were left wing, Greenies – including Putin, Iran, Saudi, Canada, Abbot etc …. totally not compelling stuff.

        Actually Hansen’s’ predictions in the 80’s weren’t bad – within the claimed accuracy.

        And let me say this AGAIN slows and even reversals have been predicted by AGW science – but I expect you’ll ignore that, again, again. as you will the resumed warming after the last 5 slowings. In cluding the 30 year 1940-1970 slowing…

        3d – Unless you can even attempt to make a sensible case for a conspiracy – your just another idiot denier to throw on the pile. Try differentiating yourself and explaining the why such a spectacular conspiracy exists.

      • 3d,

        It’s interesting stuff;

        Firstly – I don’t think coking coal is in this – treated as a feedstock – although it’s an energy input to a huge energy load – but hey – you still can’t realistically make steel without it …

        look at page 14 (link below).
        – LNG and renewals are the only ones to grow, market share. (I’ve been banging on about gas a transition fuel for ages). Had a ripping pubic debate with Mathew Wright – good fun – he got very angry.
        – I’ve always thought the assertion that Oz LNG assets are white elephants is inaccurate – they will be very busy assets – just heavily written down …
        – nuke & hydro are flat – nuke is buggered by cost if nothing else – it really doesn’t have a look in. Hinckley C says it all with a strike of $180/MWh. (oz could make a mots out of storing waste tho).
        – oil losing out big time (oil losing the power-gen market to gas)
        – considering page 70, nuke gets smashed by everything – the UK is probably only going for it for energy security reasons, (just as France did).

        Look at page 65.
        – coal had a spectacular run 2000 – 2013.
        – the 3% in 2013 was pretty anemic compared with the 2000 – 2013 run
        – it hit the wall in 2014
        – realistically – coal experienced a 10-13 year boom – but the BP forecasts, China’s cap, India’s lack of grunt – indicates that boom growth is over – it will now grow at the slowest rate – maybe (it’s just a forecast, hey).

        Considering page 70 again – storage will be a game changer;
        – domestic storage will start to work – but more slowly I think than the market expects – (paybacks are 10-20 years)
        – but EVs will take a part in domestic storage – working on the top 30-50% of the “tank” given the next day’s drive is mostly only short. So domestic storage will depend more on EV sales. EVs can also work when parked all day too. The business case for battery storage is crap – but not once the business case for a car, renders the battery cost sunk.
        – of the large scale storage solutions the only obvious near term option is Pumped Hydro – in the off river form. 80% round trip efficiency and gigawatts for hours if you want. Not Crazy expensive.
        – other storage forms – thermal (domestic), phase change (commercial) are likely to see (are in fact) commercial innovation.

        – Some thoughts are that PV cells propabaly aren’t going to go much farther down the cost curve. Production has boomed, it’s mature and most of the manufacturers are making losses. Cost reductions will be found in the balance of plant and installation. I don’t think it will be ever super cheap (latrobe dirt cheap). Cars aren’t yet free – so there is a limit to economies of scale – PV (cells) are there or close I think.
        – got to find a reference (will get it this week) for a Indian PV plant installed at $0.86/w!!
        – wind, PV with storage could quite realistically knock a hole in coal by 2035, with existing technology. Who knows what market fundamentals will be by then – but they could easily result in storage catalyzing a much higher penetration of wind and PV.

        – many energy tech have fallen away (honestly all the ones I expected to – including geothermal, I advised Origin of that when they were cornerstone investor to GDY, (too late & the sales fellas from the geothermal industry were compelling – if you ignored the engineering – it was all driven by geological scale egos – if you know what I mean) .

        All modern geothermal in Oz ~$800 million spent – not a single friggin watt sent out. Not at all surprised either, suspected it earlier, became convinced of it in 2007. I did try to tell them….. don’t argue with thermodynamics – 3rd law is “you will always loose”. That and death by a thousand commercial split incentive cuts.

        Most investors don’t get it. The energy revolution IS NOT the IT revolution, for a heap of reasons…

        Working on some of this stuff tonight/tomoz – might tweak position later ….

  1. Hugh PavletichMEMBER

    Essential reading …

    Michael Lewis: ‘Flash Boys’ market still ‘rigged’ – Yahoo Finance

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/michael-lewis-flash-boys-market-124030194.html

    Michael Lewis Reflects on Flash Boys | Vanity Fair

    http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/03/michael-lewis-flash-boys-one-year-later

    Flash Boys, the author’s best-selling exposé of high-speed trading, made some of Wall Street’s richest people very angry. Dissecting the reaction, he argues that the furor has obscured his book’s real news. … read more via hyperlinks above …

      • ” The wealthiest 10% of Americans now account for 44% of retail spending, up from 30% prior to the Great Recession”.

        What a disgusting world of politicians there are. Australia has a compulsory voting democracy and we’re heading there too. We must be the dumbest people on earth.

  2. The Coming Chinese Crackup – WSJ

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-coming-chinese-crack-up-1425659198?utm_source=The+Sinocism+China+Newsletter&utm_campaign=a650c1339d-Sinocism03_08_15&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_171f237867-a650c1339d-29583909&mc_cid=a650c1339d&mc_eid=05ed3cf001

    The endgame of communist rule in China has begun, and Xi Jinping’s ruthless measures are only bringing the country closer to a breaking point … read more via hyperlink above …

    • China is about to stop making savers subsidize wasteful state companies – Quartz

      http://qz.com/362005/china-is-about-to-stop-making-savers-subsidize-wasteful-state-companies/

      For many Chinese, their country’s “miracle growth” hasn’t felt quite so miraculous. Because the government sets deposit rates artificially low—lower, usually, than inflation—Chinese have actually lost money on their savings most years. Though this discourages people from spending—China’s household consumption is woefully low—that hasn’t mattered to the government. Those ultra-cheap savings let state-owned banks lend favorably to companies, many of them also state-owned—in effect, shifting savers’ would-be wealth to the state instead. … read more via hyperlink above …

      • … then confusion … weak central control and pressure from the SOE’s ? …

        China puts brakes on banks’ rate freedom – FT.com … google search title if blocked …

        http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/b1d7a670-c955-11e4-a2d9-00144feab7de.html#axzz3UHcGgLgL

        Only days after formally granting China’s lenders greater freedom to set their own deposit rates, the country’s central bank has moved in the opposite direction by quietly asking several banks not to raise rates too sharply

        The “window guidance” from the People’s Bank of China is the latest sign of the delicate balance that authorities are seeking between structural reform to promote long-term growth and short-term support for a slowing economy through lower interest rates. … read more via hyperlink above …

  3. “Great areas” to invest in retail but avoid the mall: Howard Davidowitz – Yahoo Finance

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/-great-areas–to-invest-in-retail-but-avoid-the-mall–howard-davidowitz-010402431.html

    There’s no way to sugarcoat Thursday’s retail sales data: The numbers were weak and shockingly so to some.

    Howard Davidowitz, CEO of Davidowitz and Associates has been bearish on the consumer for some time, citing lackluster wage growth and low-quality of jobs being created, leading to a shrinking middle class. … read more via hyperlink above …

  4. The Traveling Wilbur

    “What we see is a dollar move, massive dollar buying from real money as well as hedge funds. It’s being bought all across the board versus all currencies and those relying heavily on short-term inflows are being hit the hardest,” said Bernd Berg, strategist at Societe Generale in London.

    and in the same article:

    “As (oil) keeps falling there are bigger concerns that we could see problems with respect to capital expenditures and employment in certain regions of the (United States),” said Michael Arone, chief investment strategist for State Street Global Advisors’ U.S. Intermediary Business in Boston.

    Would someone with pull / influence / cash to invest that people would notice making a move – please – please join the dots here. Rates in the US are not going up, the dollar is going to reach new (recent) highs and then tank, and it is going to be very, very bad, very, very soon. On the bright side, there certainly will be a large wealth transfer in the near future (well, next few months)… to all those shorting the dollar. From all those long it. In case that wasn’t clear.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/13/us-markets-global-idUSKBN0M902620150313

  5. Good story on the East India company, If it wasn’t for them we would more than likely be speaking French.
    A modern equivalent of the EIC would be Bechtel. WW

  6. Well after all the trials on the football field. looks like Lazarus has married the wrong woman. I dont think he’ll recover from this little fracas.WW

    • I think everything she has touched ends up as a tax write off…. Old coffee shop down the road back in the day.

      Skippy…. Sure glad I didn’t run over the little general in the same shop complex, came out between parked cars from nowhere. Not a good look for a recent addition to the mob.

      • Alf always amazed me as to how small he was, but not as little as Jessica Watson. For such a small person to sail like she did was a real feat of courage.
        Yes, I think The Brick is written off this time. WW

  7. An excellent 20 min video was recently produced on the top Climate Change problems facing mankind.

    The top 6 Climate Change problems

    1. The climate is changing, unexpectedly
    2. It is difficult to trust what you hear
    3. The future is uncertain
    4. The entire Solar System is changing
    5. The Sun may dictate our future
    6. Humans are messing with the weather

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ew05sRDAcU&feature=em-uploademail

    Included from the link above, during early-March the village of Capracotta Italy received a world record beating 256cm of snowfall within an 18 hour period.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/10/europe/italy-possible-snow-record/index.html

    Global Warming would have to be the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the general populace of all time.

    • Paddy Finucane

      That video is loaded to Youtube by someone calling themselves ‘SuspiciousObservers’

      They could have gone the whole hog and called themselves nutty cigarette or oil company funded climate birthers

      Global warming involves things getting colder on some days in some parts of the world, and freak weather events

    • Jagster.

      A friend sent me a 9/11 conspiracy theory video. With respect to the engine parts found at the pentagon it said, “these are sections if turbine from from the wrong engine type!”.

      To start with, they were most definitely compressor discs not turbine stages. Major error. Mistake proclaimed as fact. This is what happens when you don’t peer review.
      I checked flight 74’s rego, found the plane spec. Found the engine spec and yes, they were the right compressor discs. And yes I do know, I’m an engineer and I’ve also owned a similar turbine.

      One off bits of anecdotal evidence are not scientifically relevant. The long term trend is what is relevant. One stock rising on a day when the market fell, does not mean the market didn’t fall. Such is the idiocy of the Italian village claim.

      Going by the quality of you argument suggested by the Italian village claim, I’m not even going to watch the utter crap you linked.

      Answer me this;

      – how many peak science bodies reject AGW?
      (Answer – NONE anywhere in this planet).

      – if it’s a conspiracy, please tell me why the Russians (50% of their gov revenue from oil) and the Saudis (80% from oil) are part of the conspiracy?

      – if it’s all about scientists and funding – whty has not one peak body taken the cash on the table from 3d/rt/coal industry/oil industry/far right nutjob pollies – and broken the 10 year, 100%, cross cultural, cross political consensus?

      Your position is quite insane and without any VALID peer reviewed backing.

      Or is it all a big plan to subjugate us all, cut the food supply and put us in the matrix?

    • Jagster climate has changed since earth began. We are simply in a natural cycle we understand little about. A return to the Pliocene perhaps, or a Maunder Minimum. Sure as hell, climate scientists don’t know.

      Once it was apparent global warming was not progressing as predicted, the AGW movement changed language to encompass every manner of weather event – bound to be able to predict something then!

      Yes, it’s looking shakier by the day. The Church of Climate Scientology has thus far failed on every prediction, not a single Gore evangelism has eventuated. Eventually IPCC will morph into a generalised environmental wealth redistribution forum and cease outlandish claims (most are subtly being downgraded as we speak) and if you look carefully, there are even bright spots in the IPCCs report.

      Yes, change is afoot.

      • 3d,

        – it’s now warmer than it was in the MWP – but has only been so for 50-60 years.

        – modern warming (since 1850) is both the warmest and fastest changing period in this interglacial.

        – the current rate of CO2 rise is 35 times faster than has ever occurred in the previous 900,000 years/8 glaciations. Previous fastest natural rises occurred during exits from glaciations, when it makes sense that it should. This current spike in CO2 is occurring in the middle of an interglacial. This has never happened before.

        – slowings and stalls in warmings HAVE BEEN predicted by science 3d, (you are lying again). That they ocurr is blindingly obvious – as evidenced by the 5 well documented and studied stalls in the last 100 years – all of which were followed by a resumption in warming.

        With respect 3d – you are most certainly a denier rather than a skeptic.

        Unless you can stop obfuscating, repeating lies and false hoods, start referencing peer reviewed science. Address the elephant in the room – the 100% peak body consensus and how it might have occurred with the science so flawed. Unless you can do this, you will not be respected as an actual skeptic – you will remain a DENIER.

        I restrict my self to current, peer reviewed science, if your case is so good, you should be able to do the same.

        And lets not forget;
        – the current rate of CO2 rise is 35 times faster than any in the last 900,000 years. A CO2 spike has never occurred in an interglacial.
        – the fastest rate of warming in this interglacial is now
        – this current fastest rate of warming coincides perfectly with the fastest rise in CO2 in 900,000 years. A rise that has not ever occurred in an interglacial before.
        – there have been 5 slowings, stalls even slight reversals in warming in the last 100 years -ALL followed by a resumption in warming. (You always ignore this).

        That CO2 absorbs outbound long wave (heat) radiation from earth is known, proven empirically and as certain as the fact that hot air rises.

        There is a 100% consensus 3d, because frankly, scientifically, it’s just f#cking obvious.

      • “Jagster climate has changed since earth began.”

        Yes, but no one is arguing it hasn’t. There are clearly cycles over very long time scales, but what has that got to do with anthropogenic causes?

        “We are simply in a natural cycle we understand little about. A return to the Pliocene perhaps, or a Maunder Minimum. Sure as hell, climate scientists don’t know.”

        Ah yes, climate scientists don’t know but you do, fascinating.

        I’ll leave the rest, it was heading into fruitcake territory. Not my scene.

      • @Neo

        “I’ll leave the rest, it was heading into fruitcake territory. Not my scene.”

        Agree. That’s why I generally avoid the Church of Climate Scientology and assorted acolytes.

      • Time to get a real job 3D.

        For those that may be new to these boards reading this, you are better off reading credible sources like our Bureau of Meteorology and the CSIRO http://www.bom.gov.au/state-of-the-climate/documents/state-of-the-climate-2014_low-res.pdf?ref=button . The confidence of predictions re man made climate change has only increased in recent years because, according to our own Bureau of Meteorology, temperatures are only increasing at lower levels of the atmosphere (troposphere) where the CO2 collects and not the upper levels of the atmosphere (see “what is causing warming” here http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/?ref=ftr#tabs=About-climate-change).

      • More text book denier behavior 3d.

        Throw out some inaccurate crap, obfuscations, misrepresentations and straight up lies, avoid addressing actual points, make some dumb ideological remark and bugger off …

        Come on 3d – it’s so unoriginal, so unimaginative, so un-challenging. I’m sure you can do better.

      • 2d, are you being paid by the word?

        See you at the MCA Sunday Church group meeting discussing the Earth’s history.

        First item for discussion is the MCA science proving the Earth is only 8000 yrs old.

        Second is how burning coal lowers CO2 emissions.

        Commandments 3 to 10 are also very interesting.

        However, for me the highlight will be the talk from the High Priestess on the second coming of the Mining Age.

        I look forward to my conversion in the baptismal waters.

      • “We are simply in a natural cycle we understand little about. A return to the Pliocene perhaps, or a Maunder Minimum. Sure as hell, climate scientists don’t know.”

        Naturals cycles are multiple centuries long. The almost perfect correlation between the industrial revolution and climate change is very hard to ignore even if there is a natural cycle present.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        We are simply in a natural cycle we understand little about.

        Assertions like this would carry more weight if they weren’t contradicted by pretty much every expert in the field.

      • 3d,

        To write like gunna you’d need to improve infinitesimally!

        I know you’re sharp 3d, but even for you trying to argue against the science is proving very difficult, and it shows. Your trolling is not worthy of your ability, but I accept it’s difficult working with what you have, trying to defend the scientifically indefensible.

    • Jagstar,

      Australia: CSIRO/BoM/Chief Gov Scientist/UNSW etc.

      USA: NASA/NOAA/US Academy of Science/US Global Change Research Program

      UK: UK Academy of Science

      And you have a Youtube vid

      Quote: Global Warming would have to be the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the general populace of all time.

      Hoax my arse.

    • Jagstar,

      All you have done is present individual links that mean zilch.

      You seem to have missed the point that all those orgs listed support the science behind CC and its causes. All you are doing is trying to run interference and repeat your unsubstantiated claims with support like “see below” “see my citations” etc.

      Edit: Hahahahaha, had to laugh!! Quoting Nova, a molecular whatever whose masters in science is Science Communications, no climate credentials whatsoever. Really just a bare bones Bsc, so funny.

      Check out Brian Schmidt a Nobel prize winning astrophysicists, who stated the science is beyond him, but supports and accepts the peer review process of it. You even quote in support against GW orgs that accept the science.

      HR,

      Ignore him.

      • You seemed to have missed it to I’ll repeat it twice ..

        Unless you can even attempt to make a sensible case for a conspiracy – your just another idiot denier to throw on the pile. Try differentiating yourself and explaining the why such a spectacular conspiracy exists.

        Unless you can even attempt to make a sensible case for a conspiracy – your just another idiot denier to throw on the pile. Try differentiating yourself and explaining the why such a spectacular conspiracy exists.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        If you choose to believe flawed climate models using “adjusted” data, that’s your choice.

        If you choose to believe in a worldwide, multi-generational conspiracy involving basically all the world’s scientists, over them being right, that’s your choice.

        Ones integrity would have to come into question at some point.

        Why ? It is no secret that data is adjusted. The methods and reasoning are published and open for scrutiny.

    • Hey Jagster,

      I don’t want to insult your intelligence but you’re an idiot.

      Best, Lorax.

      • I like Spencer. But the usual suspects will attack him for his religious views. To them there is only one religion, the Church of Climate Scientology.

      • It’s obvious in the face of all the evidence proving there has been an unbacked peer reviewed global “adjustment” of historic climate data, when it comes to AGW debate the public have trouble deciphering fact from fiction. Or worse, doing so willfully..

        Warren Buffet, Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway said it best:, “In looking for people to hire, look for three qualities: integrity, intelligence, and energy. And if they don’t have the first one, the other two will kill you.”

        http://www.forbes.com/sites/amyanderson/2012/11/28/success-will-come-and-go-but-integrity-is-forever/

      • @Jagster-

        Warren Buffet would have to fire himself, if he held the same standards for his employes, to himself.

      • So point about all this bollocks – is that the peak bods know about all of it. All the aguments. All the adjustments. Still there is a consensus. Obviously either – they have a valid reason for their position or there is a spectacular conspiracy.

        So. Answer the below or talk to the hand or I might just be forced to use pejorative language..

        You still seemed to have missed it to I’ll repeat it twice, twice…

        Unless you can even attempt to make a sensible case for a conspiracy – your just another idiot denier to throw on the pile. Try differentiating yourself and explaining the why such a spectacular conspiracy exists.

        Unless you can even attempt to make a sensible case for a conspiracy – your just another idiot denier to throw on the pile. Try differentiating yourself and explaining the why such a spectacular conspiracy exists.

        Unless you can even attempt to make a sensible case for a conspiracy – your just another idiot denier to throw on the pile. Try differentiating yourself and explaining the why such a spectacular conspiracy exists.

        Unless you can even attempt to make a sensible case for a conspiracy – your just another idiot denier to throw on the pile. Try differentiating yourself and explaining the why such a spectacular conspiracy exists.

      • Really?!.. You want to know why big business and government agencies are trying to AGW climate scam the general populace?
        How’s self preservation for a start. Self relevance. Keep the green money flowing through while harming polluters and polluting industries – a noble cause indeed, but it’s the methods used to perpetrate the AGW scam which is the problem. The ends do not justify the means. It’s a lie, it’s a fraud, it’s a hoax no matter how its dolled-up..

        For the AGW scientists it would be fame, FORTUNE, power, influence, prestige…. The Noble Prize.

        Speaking of FORTUNE, here are just some of the beneficiaries behind the AGW big money climate scam – from the Sustainable Oregon blog.

        http://www.sustainableoregon.com/bigmoneyscaringshort.html

        PROMOTERS
        Al Gore gets $145,000 for speaking: – “The College Democrats will be appealing for almost $145,000 “
        Al Gore partner in venture capital firm to make money from government regulations
        Al Gore’s mutual fund profits from carbon trading
        Gore Admits Financial ‘Stake’ In Advancing Global Warming Hysteria
        Gore backed company looks to profit from requiring companies to get permits for emissions
        Gore’s venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins needs government mandates to make money
        350.org got millions in grants
        WWF hopes get $60 billion in carbon credits.

        SCIENCE
        Scientific organizations want $9 BILLION government money
        Hockeystick creator raked in $6 million
        Michael Mann Charges $10,000 Speaker Fee
        Dr. Jim Hansen received $250,000 Heinz Award with John Kerry connection
        Hansen gets $50,000 dollars

        BANKERS, TRADERS AND INDUSTRY
        Goldman started pushing hard for cap-and-trade long ago,….the firm spent $3.5 million to lobby climate issues.
        Carbon trades eventually will total $10 trillion a year
        Citigroup, Lehman Brothers Holdings and Morgan Stanley, BNP Paribas, Barclays Capital and Deutsche Bank, Climate Change Capital and Credit Suisse to profit from carbon trading
        Bankers lobby for carbon controls “The lobby — which includes Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley, Barclays Plc, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and 168 other firms…. The organization and its members haven’t disclosed how much they earned from trading carbon permits.
        Alarm industry rakes in Billions While Complaining About a Few Million From the Other Side
        $35 BILLION funding for climate change activities ($8.8 billion + $26.1 billion)
        George Soros will invest $1 billion in clean technology.
        GE makes $21 billion a year on “clean energy”

      • For the AGW scientists it would be fame, FORTUNE, power, influence, prestige…. The Noble Prize.

        That’s what you’d get for disproving climate change theory, yes. Just like you’d get for disproving, say, Evolution.

        Also, given the damage climate change is going to cause, I’d imagine most people would be overjoyed to see the science supporting it invalidated.

        And still nobody has come close. It’s the same tiny circle of people, usually with few qualifications in a relevant field (if any qualifications at all) circularly referencing each other.

        Speaking of FORTUNE, here are just some of the beneficiaries behind the AGW big money climate scam – from the Sustainable Oregon blog.

        Notably missing from your list are all the actual scientists.

  8. “Plunging rents a worry for property investors”
    Lol. What’s a rent the specufestor asks.
    Lucky rates have been slashed and capital gains equating to several years of rent have come about huh.

    • I can’t read most of the article but the capital gains on the featured properties have not equalled a couple of years of rent.

      “Rents are falling faster than house prices in one-time boom residential property markets, creating a “draconian dilemma” for investors of over-priced properties as well as massive over-supply.”

  9. Hahahaha, the U.S. “Justice” department is attempting to sue several world banks, with the argument, they partook in currency manipulation… Hahaha…

    Oh America.. You dirty rotten piece of S***, how you make me laugh… 😉

  10. This recent SMH article got me looking into Australian export services.

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/iron-ore-no-longer-our-biggest-export-20150313-142za6.html

    Looks impressive until you realize how much of this total is international air travel related…its a weird “service” that operates at such low gross margins as are typical within the Airline industry. As a result the top line value of our Aussie export services is bloated whereas the bottom line value (net margin/profits) is never mentioned anywhere.

    Unfortunately when it comes to investment and growth potential within any industry the bottom line is far more important than the top line. So IMHO this sort of SMH article obscures far more then it illumines, but maybe that’s intentional….

    Education is a similarly weird service because it typically delivers the additional tangible benefit of Permanent residency, if the cost of acquiring permanent residency by other means were subtracted from the Education services then I doubt the total would be even positive.

    I suspect if you remove both of these distortions you’ll get a more accurate but far more disturbing picture of the Aussie export services industry.

    • Interesting article in BS on China services
      http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/3/13/china/what-does-china-fta-mean-australian-services-firms

      Not sure I agree with all the upbeat conclusions but they’re right about one thing, the ChAFTA provides Aussie firms with unprecedented access to the Chinese services market. I suspect that China will adopt a very proactive approach to Aussie service firms because Aussie firms dont present any sort of threat to the growth of the Chinese services industry (unlike say Indian IT firms and US/Euro finance&banking )

      • Doesn’t leave alot of high value options left really. We can’t sell the property spruiking – they’re already good at that; dodgy construction practices – they’re better than us and could show us a thing or two!; education – possibly. I know, we can make a motza out of the Chinese running barister courses! Fuck yeh! I’m in!

    • My problem with including International travel as a service is that at least 80% of an airlines revenue goes directly to Jet Fuel and Aircraft leases (or purchase) (neither of these resulting from Australian labor or capital) meaning at most 20% of their Gross revenue is really for the service provided by Australian airlines and travel firms.

      • Wasn’t there that report (tried to search buggered if I can’t remember whom, the title or what barrow they were pushing) that estimated that only 18% of the resource value in the ground, ended up in Australian hands.

        Although, that said, this might have been true while the margins were bonkers – maybe not so much now – with a much greater proportion going into OPEX – not that OPEX and Australian direct benefit has risen of course…

    • I like Yanis, but wtf was he thinking here? Is being the centre of attention going to his head?

      • Unfortunately as time drags on it would appear so.

        I have stated before I thought he was political naive and his antics so far have shown that. This basically cements the idea for me. There is nothing wrong with success, but when you are running a campaign to save your nation based on the idea that you will be taking down the elite this is just plain stupid. Both Internally and externally this is a huge facepalm.

        There isn’t any proof, I don’t know him, but given recent behavior I get the feeling he’s also got himself an ego problem.

        At this point I get the feeling he is going to be relegated to history as “remember that greek professor dude”.

        But we’ll see.

      • It’s a great photo shoot.

        Yanis is living by example| music, simple fare, vino, love – none of which need cost the earth.

        Simple pleasures. Enjoy.

      • Agree 3d .. It’s not like he’s lurching over the bonnet of his lambo or anything, but politics is about perception, and in this case this was just plain dumb.

        Check out what twitter has done to the pics to get the idea of what I am talking about.

      • Gents,

        Call me a Luddite – but aside from hearing daily insights from Malcolm Turnbull or getting up to the second, hopelessly inaccurate, not at all exclusive updates on #libspill, and various other mildly interesting, not really useful tidbits and ephemeral interests, #migrant #migisscatterlogical or selling into the consumer space maybe.

        What really is the actual VALUE of twitter…

      • HRHolden twitter takes a while to get used to, but a stream of aggregated headlines from sources the user can select is actually extremely powerful. I barely get news from any of other place these days, and 50% of the links above came from twitter. It’s all about who you follow.

    • I thought the hilarious bit was where he whinged that the ABC and Syd Uni didn’t pay him enough.

      I guess there might be a bit of a chill in the air if he enters the tearoom at any time soon.

      Given he charges something like 8000 bucks for a speaking gig he really needs to get some perspective.

    • The little I watched shows he is a scientist for sale and that means anything that comes from him is tainted, even support for CC.

      He should stick to being a TV celeb.

    • Best quote from event:

      “Joe Hockey needs to be convinced about negative gearing, I suspect that many Australians need to be convinced about Joe Hockey”

      • I heard a discussion on ABC yesterday morning with Bill Shorten and Jon Faine.

        I’m not usually a huge fan of Jon Faine but I have to give him credit for bringing up negative gearing when talk turned to the issue of unaffordable housing. The only “solution” to the problem of unaffordable housing Bill could come up with was the idea of releasing more land, though he didn’t expand on how that would happen.

        Jon persisted with negative gearing but Bill assured everyone that negative gearing was not on the agenda at all. He then talked about saving a couple of billion here and there. Jon pushed harder for negative gearing to be reviewed saying it was costing the government tens of billions of dollars. Bill had no answer to that and again tried to skirt the subject. Jon brought it back again and said something to the effect of: “Look, when someone of my age is buying property, they’re buying investment properties. They are the ones competing with and outbidding first home buyers. It’s as plain as the big nose on my fact that negative gearing is the problem.” Bill still didn’t reply, but made it clear that negative gearing was not going to be considered.

        Good on Jon in this one. Maybe if more talk show hosts pressured politicians, they might eventually listen. But in the meantime, the situation remains – both sides are not prepared to do anything to pop the bubble.

      • One of the key issues is that housing affordability is not a political issue (as was pointed out by the panel). It never comes up in political debates (as if it does not exist). This is because, there are many elements in our society (including every one that has an investment property) benefiting from the current status quo and driven by short term thinking and self interest.

        From RBA financial stability review (2014).
        http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/fsr/boxes/2014/sep/c.pdf

        Investor households with incomes in the top 20 per cent of the income distribution owe the bulk of the investor housing debt (60%). Also, 80% of the investor housing is negatively geared.
        These are the ones putting our politicians in charge (both sides of politics) and they are the ones politicians will listen to.

      • @2big2fail – “One of the key issues is that housing affordability is not a political issue (as was pointed out by the panel). It never comes up in political debates (as if it does not exist).”

        The reason I see for that is that there is no political party that has representation for younger people. It’s not a political debate because neither party wants or needs it to be. I know it’s been discussed on these pages many times, but until there is a viable “youth party”, or at least one that sits well with both GenX and Y the majors have no reason to change.

        It’ll become a political issue when politicians are forced to make it one when they are scared of being displaced from power. Until there is an alternative to the baked-on parties that won’t occur.

    • I will only believe that anyone wants to do anything about Sydney’s (or Australia’s) unaffordability crisis when they acknowledge that artificial props holding up this bubble need to be removed.

      The only way for housing to become affordable is to allow prices to drop. Not even force them to drop – just allow them to drop.

  11. (FT – http://tinyurl.com/nwvfemd ) “Sell ’em all! They’re not worth anything!”

    The advent of negative yields for the best European government or corporate issuers is usually reported in the media as some sort of curiosity, like a bright object in the night sky that seems to be getting bigger. What it really represents is the breakdown of the policy world’s response to the global financial crisis. A large European bank’s credit strategist told me: “We have searched through the records, and asked the ECB how they think their (asset purchase strategy) will work, and there is no evidence they know the answer.”

  12. ceteris paribus

    Morrison provides the biggest weekend laugh through the Oz rag. He is offering cross benchers a three year “independent” pension adequacy review if they will agree to pass the legislation reducing indexation down to the CPI.

    This independent review will be conducted by a panel appointed by the Minister of Social Services.

    Another appointment for Maurice Newman and for Patrick McClure? Ha, ha.

  13. Finally some sense on government borrowing to fund infrastructure. Why on earth shouldn’t Victoria be borrowing when the 10yr bond rate is under 3%?

    http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/daniel-andrews-signals-he-is-willing-to-borrow-to-pay-for-major-projects-20150313-143e8c.html

    “I think there is a tired dynamic where one side of politics comes out and says basically there is a three per cent interest rate going at the moment, money has never been cheaper … (and) the other side comes out instinctively, ‘oh they are running up debt, our grandkids will be paying for this, this is terrible, it’s evil’,” Mr Andrews told Fairfax Media. “That’s old and tired and binary and these things are never as clear as that.”

    • Mining BoganMEMBER

      Geez, this will have that headcase Abbott on the phone again, nodding and saying nothing.

      Can’t be seen to be doing things away from those dodgy PPPs.

    • Selling our farms, homes and businesses is the biggest theft from future generations. Why is that never discussed by Labor or Greens?

      What a joke politics has become in Australia.

      We need entirely new parties. Vote against all incumbent politicians leaving them last below the line.

      • It’s never discussed because they’re all for it. If they weren’t, that would mean they are condoning the bubble bursting. And we can’t have that!

        We do need new parties. There is not one party who is standing up for the benefit of Australians. I’ve always noticed this – I think politicians get into politics because they want to do some good, but when they see that it’s too hard to go against the party line, and when they see all the pollies with their snouts firmly entrenched in the trough, then the temptation to stick their snouts in the trough as well is just too hard to resist.

        They’re all the same – they’re all about what’s best for themselves. And that’s why nothing will ever be done to make housing affordable. No politician has a housing affordability problem, therefore there is no problem and no bubble.

      • @md. Agree. So let’s start the voting revolution. Leave them last below the line until, a few terms down the track realise they have to change to stay there. Alternative, we are headed for American type society or worse. They might have massive debt, but I don’t think America is selling all it’s assets. How have voters allowed this to happen in Australia?

      • But who to vote for? Sure, we could put them all last but who would we put first?

        In any case, there is not enough of us to make a difference. Most people own property and all property owners want to see their properties rise in value, no matter how overpriced they are already.

        As for selling off agricultural land etc. people are simply selling off to the highest bidder, and foreign buyers are prepared to pay bigtime. It’s like a massive tattslotto win for the seller.

        How did we allow it? I don’t remember any referendum asking – “Should we allow the country to be sold off?” The government does what it likes and we don’t have a choice. The same situation applies to the “Big Australia” policy. We’ve never been asked how big we want our population to grow. But we do get told a lot that bigger is better, even though most people would vote against massive immigration, given the choice.

      • We’d be better off with the fishing, 4WDor Poodle Walking party. Better still vote for independents that have no party telling them how to think.

        Vote for anyone. Just get rid of these three parties. Their collective vested interests are just insurmountable. It’s not all about housing. It’s selling our future to consume now that will bring us all down whether you own a house or not.

        Once we have cleansed the parliament of the most corrupted parliament we’ve ever had, then pressure whoever’s there to do what we want. ATM, 95% of Australians are not being represented with most policy. Parties work for the very rich. The mums and dads are kidding themselves thinking they’re in the big plan. Do they donate to parties? No, they’re outside of focus.

        73% of Australians don’t want a big Australia, yet we are growing by 400 thousand a year with next to zero infrastructure or enough housing to cope.

        It’s time the left realised it is them that is most of the problem. It is they that gave us the horrendous government we now have.

        We are destroying Australia’s future.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Selling our farms, homes and businesses is the biggest theft from future generations. Why is that never discussed by Labor or Greens?

        Probably wasting my time as usual, but:

        http://farmlandgrab.org/post/view/22436-don-t-sell-our-farms-greens

        http://christine-milne.greensmps.org.au/content/media-releases/greens-call-tighter-foreign-investment-rules

        http://christine-milne.greensmps.org.au/content/media-releases/barnaby%E2%80%99s-backflip-perfect-ten-foreign-investment

        http://christine-milne.greensmps.org.au/content/media-releases/old-parties-flip-flopping-foreign-ownership-too-little-too-late

        http://christine-milne.greensmps.org.au/content/media-releases/greens-protect-australian-land-and-water

        http://christine-milne.greensmps.org.au/content/news-stories/looking-out-food-security

        Etc.

        It’s time the left realised it is them that is most of the problem. It is they that gave us the horrendous government we now have.

        Indeed. Just like those women walking around in their short skirts and skimpy tops are most of the problem with sexual assault. If only they’d just cover up, men wouldn’t want to attack them !

      • “Indeed. Just like those women walking around in their short skirts and skimpy tops are most of the problem with sexual assault. If only they’d just cover up”.

        What rubbish. The electorate REJECTED Labor and the Greens because they are distracted with issues that don’t concern 99% of us. That gave us LNP. Quite different to your above scenario.

        Can you direct me to any time the Greens blocked supply, or encouraged debate, or held press conference or made a main stream media release re foreign ownership? No, because they are talking about boat people. They have to be destroyed so we can get a Green party that looks after Australian social issues and Australian environmental issues. It is destructive of you to defend these morons. It is destructive to Australian causes leaving these clowns with the social and environmental vote.

      • Just give it 5 minutes thought @drsmithy. If we had a Green party that concentrated on Australian issues only and didn’t get so extreme socially, most Australians would vote for them.

        So, you’re about to defend them and say, “but their causes are socially extreme and not just Australian”.

        That’s why they have to and will be destroyed. They have no future with their ridiculous views that only a handful of lefties agree with. That leaves them impotent and I give you LNP.

      • Look at the outcry when Hockey announced the illegal puchase of the $39 million mansion which would have to be sold. All of a sudden the experts were proclaiming this was racist, and that the new fee would be a terrible burden on foreigners wanting to buy Australian properties. They might even stop investing here – how terrible!

        Since then, we have heard nothing more about any other crackdowns, so I guess that was it. You see, if there has always been a policy against foreigners buying, or at least there has always been rules that have been policed, then that’s fine. But if you change the laws or start enforcing laws, then that’s unacceptable.

        Our government will do anything to show they are not racist and they will do anything to prop up our property bubble. So that puts them in a bind. Nobody has the balls to actually put Australians first.

      • @AlexD.

        Get fucked. Fucking clown.

        The lefties don’t like hearing the truth they? Left wing is synonymous with mental illness.

        Can’t pick holes in what I’ve said so you come out with that dismissive garbage.

      • “Selling our farms, homes and businesses is the biggest theft from future generations. Why is that never discussed by Labor or Greens?”

        The Greens’ policy may not be perfect but it’s a massive improvement over LibLab.

        http://greens.org.au/land-ownership

        What you need to know:

        – Multinational corporations and foreign governments have begun investing heavily in agricultural land and water.
        – Other countries like the USA, New Zealand and Brazil have greater scrutiny on foreign land ownership, but Australia’s laws are lax.
        – Foreign investment is important for Australia, but in an age of global warming and food insecurity Australians need to track purchases of our food-producing land and water, and for us to make sure that those purchases are in the national interest.
        – The Greens will create a register of foreign ownership of agricultural land and water assets to continuously track overseas purchases.
        – We will lower the threshold from $248 million to $5 million for consideration of the national interest by the Foreign Investment Review Board for purchases of agricultural land and water by a foreign private entity, including cumulative purchases.
        – We will legislate a stronger national interest test to be applied by the Foreign Investment Review Board for purchases of agricultural land and water resources.
        – We will ban the purchase of agricultural land and water by wholly owned subsidiaries of foreign governments.

      • @rich42

        I haven’t “picked holes” because there was and is no need to. Smithy has on a number of occasions gone to great lengths to correct your largely baseless attacks on the Greens, yet you still continue to harp on about the same issues and the Greens again and again. I find it odd that you share many of the same concerns the left has but spend most of your time here attacking them (and please – Labor is not left).

        Both Smithy and I in the past have made it clear we aren’t always in agreement with Green policy. I see those sorts of disagreements as inherent in any democratic system, so I try not to spend my days banging on about those points of difference at the expense of a considered view of the whole.

      • @AlexD

        You’re correct. Most of my beliefs are left.

        My entire point is, that because the Greens are too extreme, they can’t be voted for. Therefore we get no left policies. @drsmithy tries to discredit what I’m saying by making an analogy to rapists. I could also draw similar analogies. So because we can’t stop all rapes we don’t stop any? Ridiculous yeah?

        Back to Greens are killing Australia because they cannot be trusted with mine and most other peoples’ votes. Instead of condescendingly dismissing my view, it would be better to understand it. Where the only views you and he present are “they do too; here’s a link saying it”.

        It is the Greens lack of action, and getting bogged down with things that have little to do with Australia that makes them unelectable and until people like yourself consider that and rally for change, plutocrats will continue to gather strength exactly as you can see.

        Not sure why I have to argue my point and cop BS such as what you wrote, when exactly what I’m saying is there for all to see.

        I know hundreds of people that would love to vote Green, but just can’t until they get their act together.

        Crush the Greens. Milne, SHYoung and bald glasses guy have to go.

      • My entire point is, that because the Greens are too extreme, they can’t be voted for. Therefore we get no left policies. @drsmithy tries to discredit what I’m saying by making an analogy to rapists. I could also draw similar analogies. So because we can’t stop all rapes we don’t stop any? Ridiculous yeah?
        You don’t seem to comprehend what’s being said and why.
        Lets be clear – the Greens have never been in government in their own right and when they held the balance of power they did force Labor’s hand in the right direction. When they are in government in their own right and cock it up you’ll have something to crow about. As I said to you before, I don’t agree with Green policy on all points and I wish they had driven a harder bargain on the carbon price mechanism (and for the record I don’t like SHY either) but, they still weren’t and aren’t in government in their own right.

        … Instead of condescendingly dismissing my view, it would be better to understand it. Where the only views you and he present are “they do too; here’s a link saying it”….why I have to argue my point and cop BS such as what you wrote…
        You’ve been posting at MB for some time and this isn’t the first occasion we have had words. You seem to think that your perception of the Greens and the Greens are the same when the reality is quite different. Nothing anyone will say and no evidence anyone might provide will sway you from your personal crusade because you’ve made your mind up. In other words, you seem to automatically dismiss our view and any evidence anyway so it is a waste of time. If you want us to understand you, you at least have to be prepared to do the same.

      • @AlexD. As a scientist I am across what’s going on scientifically with warming more than most, however, I do not understand (nor have I overly seeked to understand) how us putting a price on carbon makes any difference and yes my knowledge on the matter is as little as listening to idiots like media.

        That aside. If we do not have wealth, and that’s where I see Australia going because of the powerful plutocrats you refer to, then zero environmental or social issues can be addressed. I think the Greens destroyed themselves and Labor with this policy and their asylum seeker policy the electorate was never going to accept. So, the Greens and Labor need to work out what their “greater good” is AND will that “greater good” be accepted by the electorate. Otherwise THEY DON’T GET TO MAKE ANY POLICY.

        I don’t even want to get into the refugee thing, they were jumping cues and taking the place of invited refugees. How even the Greens condoned this has me puzzled. If a price on carbon, that seemingly the electorate didn’t want (or was it about Gillard lying) was going to cost the Greens and Labor power, then the price has been too high and we get more plutocrats.

        Let me summarise by saying, Greens and Labor need to pick their battles or never get to win any battles. Dismissing what I’m saying by any fan of Green is really counter productive and frankly insulting.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        What rubbish. The electorate REJECTED Labor and the Greens because they are distracted with issues that don’t concern 99% of us. That gave us LNP. Quite different to your above scenario.

        The electorate rejected Labor.

        The Greens vote has remained pretty consistent.

        It is hard for the Greens to drive much debate when most of the professional media are – like you – at best ignorant of their policies, and at worst deliberately deceptive.

        Can you direct me to any time the Greens blocked supply, or encouraged debate, or held press conference or made a main stream media release re foreign ownership?

        Pretty sure I just did, above.

        I’m sure I could find more, but you’ll probably just ignore it and go off on some abusive rant again.

        The Greens have no direct political influence. They are limited solely to influencing pool the policy of either Liberals or Labor.

        No, because they are talking about boat people.

        Staggering as it might be for a single-issue person like you to comprehend, it is possible for a political party to pursue policies in multiple areas.

        If we had a Green party that concentrated on Australian issues only and didn’t get so extreme socially, most Australians would vote for them.

        I can’t think of any Greens policies, social or otherwise, that could be considered “extreme”. They operate in basically the same space Labor did in the ‘80s and early ‘90s.

        By all means, highlight some of these “extreme” policies. Here’s the Greens policy page (again).

      • @drsmithy. Don’t beat me up, I’m just the messenger trying my best to tell you what’s wrong. Greens killed Labor. Was that a good outcome? Every time Greens got in front of the camera I didn’t ever hear once, they opposed population growth. They were talking about refugees, or disability (that right or wrong 99% of the population see as already adequately generous), or David Hicks. They murdered Labor and committed suicide, not a strategy that seems to have worked huh?

        As I’ve written above somewhere to AlexD. Greens need to work out what their greater good is, that’s compatible with the electorate OR, we get more of the likes of LNP.

        It’s not difficult logic. In fact it is what’s happened. Maybe I could just say, instead of all the above, Greens need to get better at politics. It’s up to you if you take a deep breath and consider that I’m actually right. It doesn’t matter what their policies are, it’s what they’re presenting to the public as core policy that’s been comprehensively rejected by the electorate.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        If you simply want the Greens to agree with all the policies that Labor and the LNP already have – thus being more politically palatable – then what is the point of them even existing ?

      • “Selling our farms, homes and businesses is the biggest theft from future generations. Why is that never discussed by Labor or Greens?”

        Seems like you’re talking nonsense rich. Read the Greens policy on foreign ownership of land.

        http://greens.org.au/land-ownership

      • Whoa! I read a bit more of this thread. Didn’t realise rich42 was such a loon! I think this sums it up best:

        I find it odd that you share many of the same concerns the left has but spend most of your time here attacking them.

        Have we found our Caspar Jonquil?

      • Interesting thread, but for me it all come back to Australia’s chronic CAD. Correct for CAD and all of a sudden its’ Aussies wanting to turn their foreign holdings into tangible assets. Today we’re in an environment where Cash is worthless yet assets especially houses are riding a moon rocket. Naturally in this environment individuals that intend to continue holding AUD will structure their portfolio around tangible assets (aka housing)

        Fix the CAD and most of the follow-on problems will fix themselves, naturally our banks (and by extension our Pollies) dont want to hear such CAS heresy, they’ll decry it from the pulpits to the parliament labeling it the Devil’s work, yet until average Aussies starts demanding reform of the global fictionalization system, we’ll all remain owned by others and executing their plans.

      • @drsmithy. “If you simply want the Greens to agree with all the policies that Labor and the LNP already have – thus being more politically palatable – then what is the point of them even existing”

        That’s the opposite to what I’m saying. I want them to pick better battles that the electorate can understand and fight the fights worth fighting.

        @The Lorax. “Read the Greens policy on foreign ownership of land.”

        It doesn’t matter what their policies are outside of all the drivel they consume all their time with, AND WE SEE ON THE MEDIA. I’m not a loon, I have a great point that’s incredibly valuable. Fight the fights you can win and that are worthwhile. Or be like the Greens and don’t get to fight any.

        “Have we found our Caspar Jonquil?” Who’s that. I got 4 million google hits.

      • Hey CB
        I understand your concerns. The unfortunate consequence of financialization is that a great many people have been coopted into cheering for higher property values. They want to cling on to whatever wealth they have managed to accumulate. The fact that those gains are in large part unsustainable and come at a great cost to the nation is either ignored or not understood by many Lib/lab voters – so nothing will be done by them. We probably do need the mother of all corrections to snap many people out of this fantasy world.

        Will the Greens take them to task? I can see aspects of the problem will be a struggle for the Greens. Even on the housing affordability tackling supply side problems like UGBs are probably going to be staunchly opposed by many that vote green. That said, on most issues they present a far more reasoned approach to the problems we have and that includes the issue of housing affordability http://greens.org.au/housing. Is it enough? IMO no. Will they solve the CAD problem? I have my doubts but, for that and as you’ve acknowledged already, I think many Australians need to change their thinking. Perhaps it is time for the recession we needed some time ago.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        That’s the opposite to what I’m saying. I want them to pick better battles that the electorate can understand and fight the fights worth fighting.

        No, it’s really not.

        You keep arguing the Greens are “extreme” (without any evidence or examples of same).

        Then you say they never have a say on your pet topics, and are dutifully shown examples of where they do.

        Then you whinge that they aren’t presenting those positions out in the mainstream media.

        Have you considered that the problem here lies in the media ?

        You seem to think they’re not fighting the fight. The point is they’re trying to fight the fight, but the whole system from top to bottom is stacked against them.

  14. Greens and Labor have delivered the disaster we now have as government.

    How long will it take the lefties to understand this?

    To get good government these two parties ALSO need to be killed off.

    When voting, leave them last below the line.

    • I agree – Rudd and Gillard would probably tie as the worst prime ministers ever in Australia’s history. The Greens are an entity unto themselves – I don’t even try to understand what they are on about.

      But unfortunately, Libs are only continuing with some of the bad policies of Labor.

      A lot of Australia’s problems come from being willing to throw anything and everything at keeping the bubble alive – to the detriment of manufacturing, jobs, overcrowding and too many problems too numerous to list right now.

      Admittedly, bursting the bubble now would open up a huge can of worms. It shouldn’t have been allowed to get to this point in the first place. But now we are here, it’s become too big to burst. It’s swallowing us whole.

      • Don’t be so sure that Shorten cannot win. I can’t stand the man. But Abbott gets a really bad rap. The press, being all Lefties were out to get him long before he came to power. Personally, I think Abbott is a decent person and is really trying hard. He has stuffed up in a few ways, sure, but there are so many who want to demonise him for everything he does, (and things he hasn’t done too). Unfortunately for the Libs, Labor bequeathed them Australia in huge debt, and growing. Whatever they do won’t be popular, but it doesn’t help when Hockey comes up with hare-brained ideas.

        Realistically, I think Shorten would get in because so many hate Abbott. Most voters are not in favour of Big Australia but that’s not a policy that’s up for debate. And both sides are all for it.

      • “Most voters are not in favour of Big Australia but that’s not a policy that’s up for debate. And both sides are all for it.”.

        That’s why all three, LNP, Labor and Greens should be voted into history. Do we what we want or we vote you out. Only a dumb electorate would do differently.

        Why vote for people that betray us?

        Leave LNP, Labor and Greens last below the line and start fixing Australia.

      • md is right. Given the choice, I’d vote for Shorten.
        Anyone that has a chance to take out Abbott basically, I wouldn’t care what their names were or what their policies might bring about. I’m more anti-Abbott than I am pro – anything else now.

    • Hey rich42,
      Great piece posted today on the “idiottax” blog about immigration sleight of hand.

      http://www.idiottax.net/2015/03/how-to-shut-down-immigration-debate.html

      I think you might appreciate it, I certainly did.

      I have been despairing over who to vote for in my little world, and came to the same conclusion as you. Lab and lib definitely last, for sure. What the fuck has this place become where we have the illusion of democracy but whoever wins will be equally bad for ordinary people ?

      • Thanks Muz, I’ll have a read of it. Yep difficult, IMO, the best we can do is put the three main parties below the line and last. Spread the word, that’s the only way we get our say.

        “What the fuck has this place become where we have the illusion of democracy but whoever wins will be equally bad for ordinary people ?”. Absolutely. So we have to make it happen. Democracy is broken and it’s literally only voters that can fix it.

    • Blah blah blah lefties blah blah blah.

      These so-called ‘lefties’ that you refer to don’t exist; they’re a bogeyman. You’re basically arguing with voices in your head.

      Whenever anyone goes on about ‘the lefties’, I just ignore everything they say, because all their arguments are based around straw-men.

    • rich42, or should I call you Caspar?

      The only major party that is remotely anti Big Australia is the Greens:

      http://greensmps.org.au/content/audio/iq2-debate-if-we-keep-populating-we-will-perish

      A stable population appears to be an explicit policy goal of the South Australian Greens…

      The Greens will:

      – Aim to stabilise South Australia’s population within a generation.

      The Federal Greens policy is not as explicit, but its hardly cheering on Big Australia:

      The Australian Greens believe that:

      The current level of population, population growth and the way we consume are outstripping environmental capacity. Australia must contribute to achieving a globally sustainable population and encourage and support other nations to do the same.

      I don’t get what your problem with the Greens is. I suspect you are a social conservative and you find the Greens social policies unpalatable. Is that correct?

      • @Lorax.

        “I don’t get what your problem with the Greens is. I suspect you are a social conservative and you find the Greens social policies unpalatable. Is that correct?”

        Probably. My problem is the Greens are ineffective in solving any issues I see as important because they chase garbage issues that are unpalatable to the electorate and mostly irrelevant.

        1. Global warming. Probably the very least environmental issue we can do anything about. That’s pretty much all I’ve heard from the Greens on the environment for a decade. Meanwhile, a hundred other major environmental issues go unsaid.

        2. Disability. Disabled people already seem to me to be very well looked after.

        3. David Hicks. Who cares?

        4. Asylum seekers. They were literally jumping cues and many were economic refugees of the richest kind. Unbelievable the Greens would support this. If we spent the money this major fuck up by Rudd cost on overseas welfare it would have helped a thousand times as many people.

      • Lorax, there you go attacking the person and not the issue.
        You will notice your mate R2M has not appeared, since he was brought back to reality and good debating practice by the readers last week.
        By attacking the person you ruin your credibility.
        For a practical example refer to Leviathan. Shot himself in both hands and both feet. WW

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Lorax, there you go attacking the person and not the issue.

        Wow.

        Ol’ rich has got probably a dozen or more posts in this discussion filled with nothing but ad hominem, non-sequiturs, straw men, ignorance and lies, and you’re calling out Lorax ?

      • @drsmithy. “Ol’ rich has got probably a dozen or more posts in this discussion filled with nothing but ad hominem, non-sequiturs, straw men, ignorance and lies, and you’re calling out Lorax ?”.

        Your views are so lopsided, you can’t see the sense I’m talking.The only person I attacked was AlexD because he dismissed what I said in such a childish way, I saw red. No lies, no ignorance, no non-sequiturs, no straw men, just logic that you can’t see. That’s not my fault. As I’ve said a few times, the Greens have moved from a party that was about the environment and social issues, it’s now broadly known as a bunch of extreme nutters never to be trusted with your vote. So, who’s on the fringe here @drsmithy, you or me? I’m sorry I had to break this to you.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Your views are so lopsided, you can’t see the sense I’m talking.

        This is actually pretty funny, because – whenever you let slip what you actually think, rather than blaming the world’s problems on Greenies, lefties, and feminists – we agree on most things, and most of those things are textbook Greens beliefs.

        You just have some massive chip on your should about the them, for some reason, and feel the need to make shit up about them so you can pretend you don’t agree with them.

        I’m not the “lopsided” one in that equation.

        The only person I attacked was AlexD because he dismissed what I said in such a childish way, I saw red. No lies, no ignorance, no non-sequiturs, no straw men, just logic that you can’t see.

        Pretty much everything you have written about the Greens is wrong, in either fact or spirit. You base your screed against them on demonstrably incorrect premises, and continue to do so even after these have been corrected. You fabricate things the Greens do, based on your own inaccurate beliefs.

        As I’ve said a few times, the Greens have moved from a party that was about the environment and social issues, it’s now broadly known as a bunch of extreme nutters never to be trusted with your vote. So, who’s on the fringe here @drsmithy, you or me?

        Both of us, champ. ~85% of the population voted either Liberals or Labor. The vast, vast majority of people support the status quo, or only relatively minor variations thereof (PUP, Katter).

        Still waiting for you to list some of these “extreme” policies, as well.

      • Well I’ve long planned to retire there, I love the south and go there very often, in fact I’ll be there again next week. But given the turn in the jobs market it may be time to re-assess the timeline on that. Perhaps I’ll work there for a few years first.

      • I’d love to figure out a way to retire to somewhere like Akaroa. My skillset seems to mostly condemn me to working in big cities though.

      • My skillset seems to mostly condemn me to working in big cities though.

        Same boat. Love NZ but prefer the north island as it is warmer. However the housing situation there, even out of Auckland and Christchurch is pretty much the same as oz. Basic houses at 400-500K is not cheap in a city of 100-250K people.

  15. @drsmithy.

    “”Rest assured the Greens unlike the Nationals are steadfast on the issue of foreign investment in land and water. In the Senate we will continue to oppose sales of land and water to foreign governments and support the introduction of a specific national interest test and $5 million threshold to trigger it.”

    The FIRB has stopped a tiny handful of farms being sold ONLY after public outcry. It doesn’t matter if it’s $5k, $5m or $5b if they never stop them.

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      What is your point ?

      As has been REPEATEDLY pointed out, the Greens have no ability to affect policy on their own. They LITERALLY CANNOT make FIRB go out and enforce existing laws unless one or both of Liberals and Labor support it as well.

      • WTF do you mean what’s my point? It’s pretty clear. What’s the point of changing compliance standards if it’s never adhered to anyway? Tell the electorate about this, push the parties into fixing it via electorate outrage, or better still just say no more agricultural investment at all.

        Do you not think the electorate’s on Greens side with this issue but STILL Greens can’t get traction with it.

        No, that’s not what the Greens actually want. That would be racist not to sell to foreigners. See, they just have to go. Move aside and let a real environmental and moderate social party begin. Why do you defend this mob so aggressively? Are you a member?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Do you not think the electorate’s on Greens side with this issue but STILL Greens can’t get traction with it.

        Seems pretty clear the electorate is not, in fact, on the Greens side with this issue. Or yours.

        At least not according to how they vote.

        Let’s not forget: some 2/3 – 3/4 of the voting population will *always* vote Liberals or Labor. Regardless of their policies. Regardless of what they might have answered to polling questions or written in letters to the editor.

        My parents are strong believers in things like Medicare, public education, publicly owned infrastructure and a fair go. My mother was a teacher, FFS. Yet they are lifelong (well, my life at least) Liberals voters.

        Stephen Morris has written at length here on why these things happen in our system.

        No, that’s not what the Greens actually want. That would be racist not to sell to foreigners.

        And there we go. Making shit up again to match the narrative in your head.

        Why do you defend this mob so aggressively?

        I don’t.

        I correct your factual errors or provide examples showing that your opinions are not aligned to reality. And I try to do so calmly, objectively and politely.

        The only person who gets aggressive is you.

        Are you a member?

        No. My views on nuclear power wouldn’t fit in.

      • lol rich, you’ve lost the plot mate. Gotta watch out for those bloody Lefties!!!!!

        What is this, the McCarthy era?

      • @Jason

        The New McCarthysim is targeted at Skeptics and Fiscal Conservatives.

        Perhaps we can call it the KrugGore Factor.

      • “lol rich, you’ve lost the plot mate. Gotta watch out for those bloody Lefties!!!!!”

        I haven’t lost the plot. I have made a rational argument outlining why the Greens are no good for Australia. What have they achieved?

        Instead of dismissing what I’m saying as “lost the plot”. Think about it, if they were more moderate, they’d be a massive political force in Australia. The electorate is dying for another party to vote for. It could be the Greens. They could achieve so much, where now, they achieve zero. If that’s lost the plot, then, I’ve lost the plot. You should be an election strategist Jason.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Think about it, if they were more moderate, they’d be a massive political force in Australia.

        So, back to the point above, you basically want them to agree with the existing parties and be “moderate”.

        You have yet to identify a single things the Greens are not “moderate” on.

        The electorate is dying for another party to vote for.

        Sure. And when such a party starts to gain any prominence, they’ll be subject to the same concerted efforts against them that the Greens are, and you’ll be right back at square one only 15 years older.

        It could be the Greens. They could achieve so much, where now, they achieve zero. If that’s lost the plot, then, I’ve lost the plot. You should be an election strategist Jason.

        Maybe you should explain how you think they can do better within the constrains they have of being constantly questioned and whiteanted by the media and subject to ongoing ignorance and lies by people like yourself.

  16. “Billions poured into Chinese real estate, and big foreign financial firms hunted for the next hit — the small bet that investors could ride to great heights. One of those firms, Credit Suisse, scoured the landscape and in 2007 discovered Kaisa, a relatively small property developer in Shenzhen that mostly bought and rehabilitated distressed properties. Credit Suisse brokered a $300 million investment deal for Kaisa, and two years later, it went public. Its chairman, Guo Yingcheng, posed for photographs on the floor of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange holding a statue of a bull, which seemed to signify hopes for his company’s coming bull run. His colleagues poured Champagne into an ice sculpture of the company’s stock code: 1638.

    With the $450 million raised in the initial public offering, Kaisa embarked on an aggressive expansion into 20 more cities. It formed a partnership with Marriott hotels and announced plans to build one of the world’s tallest buildings. Kaisa shares skyrocketed, helping lift the fortunes of its Western patrons, including the Carlyle Group, an American private equity firm.

    Then came the fall.” ……

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/15/business/dealbook/in-china-a-building-frenzys-fault-lines.html

    • “Adding to the worries, Kaisa announced in February that its debt was valued at $10.4 billion, twice earlier projections. Several analysts said that it appeared the company had been borrowing through off-the-books affiliates, perhaps making its balance sheet look stronger than it was.”

      and

      “Analysts called the stock a “preferred name” and a “top pick.” Kaisa’s stock price soared, and global bond investors snapped up billions of dollars of offshore debt.”

      Textbook example..Enron comes to mind

  17. Reading about the Japanese bubble of the late 1980’s, couldn’t help but compare it to our bubble. Similarities are striking.

    The combination of excess liquidity in the banking system, financial deregulation and the country’s export “miracle” eventually led to overconfidence and over exuberance in Japan’s economy.
    Excess liquidity. Yup we’ve got that
    Overconfidence and over exuberance. Yup got that too

    Banks started to take increasingly excessive risks that were partly funded by 186 trillion worth of Yen borrowed from various capital markets.
    hhmm sounds familiar..

    Overconfidence and the Bank of Japan’s loose monetary policy in the mid-to-late 1980s led to aggressive speculation in domestic stocks and real estate, pushing the prices of these assets to previously unimaginable levels.
    Loose monetary policy. We’re loose too..
    Aggressive speculation in domestic stocks and real estate. We prefer to stick to real estate thank you.

    In addition, many Japanese corporations practiced a corporate invention known as “zaitech” or “financial engineering,” in which speculative profits and capital gains were reported as income on corporate financial statements. Zaitech-practicing firms obtained low-interest loans and used them to purchase stocks and real estate, which surged and helped the firms to report blowout earnings as long as asset prices continued to rise. At one point, it was estimated that an incredible 40-50% of Japanese corporate earnings were derived from zaitech.
    Our whole population is doing Zaitech..and lovin it.

    At the very peak of the bubble, a 1989 survey of institutional investors showed that the majority of them did not believe that the Nikkei was overvalued.
    Yup, just open the SMH any day of the week to find a proof of no bubble.

    Real estate prices experienced similar manic action, with prices in Tokyo’s prime neighborhoods rising to levels that made them 350 times more expensive than comparable land in Manhattan, New York.
    Ok, we’re not there yet, but on our way

    The land underneath the Tokyo Imperial Palace was rumored to have been worth as much as the entire state of California in the same year.
    Don’t know about the state of California, but we just sold a 1 bed apt in Bondi (65 sqm, no parking or balcony) for $1.3M. Beat that sucker!

    Soaring stock and real estate prices generated astounding amounts of “bubble wealth” in Japan
    We call it wealth effect here (we don’t like to use the word bubble..)

    By 1989, Japanese officials became increasingly concerned with the country’s growing asset bubbles and the Bank of Japan decided to tighten its monetary policy. Soon after, the Nikkei stock bubble popped and plunged by nearly 50% from approximately 39,000 to 20,000 during the year 1990, hitting 15,000 by 1992. Japan’s imploding stock bubble also popped the country’s real estate bubble, creating zaitech-in-reverse and throwing the country into a deep financial crisis and halting the three-decade old “Economic Miracle” in its tracks.
    hhmm.. zaitech-in-reverse, that must hurt..

    Japan’s deteriorating competitive edge against other Asian exporters, including China and South Korea, and its steadily deflating stock and property prices during the 1990s and 2000s have resulted those decades being called “Lost Decades.”
    Deteriorating competitive edge sounds about right

    By 2004, residential real estate in Tokyo was only worth of 10% of its late 1980s peak, while the most expensive land in Tokyo’s Ginza business district had fallen back to just 1% of its 1989 level in the same year.
    Ouch..

    Source for Japan data: http://www.thebubblebubble.com/japan-bubble/

    • There is a major difference between Japan’s bubble and ours though.

      Their bubble was not built on foreigners pushing up prices. For sure, their bubble was huge, but confined to Japanese purchasersand property owners. Our bubble is due, in part by the contribution of wealthy foreigners, especially Chinese. And, given that there are more wealthy Chinese than there are Australians, theoretically we could have foreign buyers outpricing Australians every time, if they wanted to.

      And that’s not all. Their bubble had to burst eventually but every policy in Australia is designed to keep property prices rising. And because it is such a multi-pronged focus on elevating prices, there really is a chance that our bubble will not burst. And if it does, everything will be thrown at it. Everything, whether it’s allowing the use of super to prop up prices, turning on the immigration tap harder than ever before, maybe a huge FHOG might be in order? Multi-generational loans? There’s still plenty of ammo left to fuel this bubble.

      • I agree with your comment. I estimate that a third of the RE transactions in Sydney and Melbourne are connected with mainland China because that’s the case in Vancouver according to an insider RE agent there (link below):

        http://www.theprovince.com/business/Real+estate+exec+Chinese+money+-There+huge+stake+local+people+keeping+this+thing+going/10858619/story.html

        Yes, they will use every thing in their power to keep it going, but all bubbles eventually burst and this one, I suspect, will burst when the mother of all bubbles (China) bursts.

      • Annoying Devil

        The Japanese to their credit, being a cohesive society, would never allow a massive sellout of their country, especially to Chinese. Talking to friends and contacts in Hong Kong, Singapore, cashed up Chinese are a problem there too and its creating social tension. It seems the whole of China’s elite and middle class are in flight, buying up foreign real estate, and the only places holding out the welcome mat, being Aus and Canada.

  18. From SMH:
    Gladesville home sells for $1.1 million over reserve
    http://news.domain.com.au/domain/real-estate-news/gladesville-home-sells-for-11-million-over-reserve-20150314-143zsh.html

    “The Gladesville sale, at $2.85 million, was among the biggest windfalls of the day, netting the owners $1.1 million more than they had hoped for. Agent Paul Tassone of the Professionals Ermington, said a crowd of about 300 watched on in disbelief as many of the 28 registered bidders tried to outdo each other to secure the property in Stansell Street, which is wedged between a petrol station and a block of units.” (emphasis mine)

    You really have to admit that (borrowing from speech by our PM) “We are a great country and a great people..”

    Think about it, who else would pull this off? We are great indeed!

    • The other side of the coin…

      “The Aussie towns destroyed by China’s economic slowdown”

      Things aren’t much better in Moranbah, the basin’s largest mining town. Three years ago, old weatherboard homes in Moranbah fetched rents as high as $2,000 a week, their driveways flush with speedboats, race cars, dirt bikes and Harley Davidsons. Today many of those trophies of success and excess are parked on the nature strip on Mills Avenue — Moranbah’s main street — with telltale for-sale signs sticky taped to their windscreens.

      “In 2011 more than 200 properties changed hands in this town,” says principal of AH Realty, Annemarie Haywood. “People were paying up to $1 million for houses that didn’t even have grass in the backyard. Now those investors are desperate to sell before the bank takes their properties. We have mortgagee sales every second week in Moranbah.

      http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/the-aussie-towns-destroyed-by-chinas-economic-slowdown/story-fnkgdg1h-1227262601440

      • Two (Adelaide) co workers have been telling everyone about the QLD IP’s they just bought after being inducted at multiple long seminars bombarding them with depreciation info, LNG forecasts etc. They struggle to relay info but are buoyed by the stats that tell them it will be good for their retirement (and kids).
        I just hope its nowhere near all of this!.

        Another has done his own homework after an inheritance and got a positively geared IP, inheritance is just a buffer ( good area, low vacancy rate, with tenants money coming straight from govt agency, happy to pay more than initial starting price to secure it?) quite easily.

        Where’s Mig?. I know people are trying to fill the gap ,but its not the same!.

    • Trying to work out who took more LSD

      The buyer or the designer?

      Is that a Gingerbread House?

      • Looking at it again (the Gladesville house), it’s a long piece of land sandwiched (literally) between a block of units and a petrol station. Given that it was bought by a developer, it will probably end up being developed into a block of units. Only thing is that on one side you’ll have the petrol station and on the other side you will have the other block of units (both within spitting distance of your window depending on which way you’re facing). Essentially, illustrates what’s wrong with the in-fill that’s happening everywhere. Seems like no one is asking is this the type of housing we want to develop?

    • “China is everything to Australia in lots of ways.” Simply put, he tells The Australian Financial Review, economies dependent on China for income, including Australia, are headed for recession and central banks will not be able to able to come to the rescue because they have exhausted the arsenal of policy weapons. “We’ve got a very old-fashioned recession which is spreading across the world,

      http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-14/old-fashioned-recession-spreading-across-world-billionaire-hedge-fund-manager-warns

    • Paddy Finucane

      It is based on a UK report highlighting how corrupt money makes its way into the UK.

      http://www.ukunmaskthecorrupt.org/

      The tide is slowly starting to turn here – Even Cameron and Miliband are facing questions from within their parties. If you could see how pervasive it is in London you would have an idea of how UKIP is starting to make inroads on the housing – foreign money line.

      Every corrupt bureaucratic official, every half arsed middle manager with access to a budget, every tribal despot with blood on their hands, gets their family out, and puts their kids into nice clothes and into nice schools in a world where nobody knows how they got the money in the first place. That is known only by people back in whatever land they have come from – sometimes they are protected from that homeland by British ‘Justice’ which places property rights first.

      They buy a nice house, and mix with ‘nice ‘ people, and mimic the behaviours of the money already there, and the money from other corrupt vermin coming in from elsewhere. They get their money handled by professionals in the City (and we all take our cut – and that underpins our housing search in the same city)

      I believe the situation in Sydney and Auckland and Melbourne is different only insofar as it is mainly Chinese there. But most of the motives will be the same. Just get the money, get somewhere different, and be nice respectable and moderately wealthy in relation to the people already there.

      • Great post, Paddy. As you said, most of the motives of the Chinese are the same as the UK. I’m sure some of the money directed here is corrupt too, as we hear that people who are officially on salaries of something like $10,000 per year are able to buy millions of dollars worth of property here. But of course we’ll never know how much of the money here is corrupt.

        All we know is that there have been no prosecutions here since 2006. And we know that some billionaire in China has to sell his $39 million dollar mansion in Sydney. And that’s about the full extent of the work the FIRB have done over the past several years. At least they can’t claim to be overworked!

        Meanwhile, the money keeps pouring in, pushing up Australian prices here.

        What really angers and depresses me is that we are powerless to do anything. We watch the next generation’s future being robbed while the country is sold beneath us, but if we make too much fuss about it, we are scolded for being racist. And in any case, making a ruckus about it isn’t going to change or enforce any laws. If our government / FIRB decide to not do anything, there is not a thing we as citizens can do.

    • Adani’s timing for finance couldn’t be more problematic, finance markets for resources projects tight. Still it’s not the only bank in town.

      • Mining BoganMEMBER

        More a case of backers realising that not so many corners will be allowed to be cut now that CanDo is gone.

  19. After the jobs dry up, what then?

    Ive mentioned before we may one day need something like a modest universal wage to provide basic living costs for the growing numbers of unemployed expected as a result of robotics and technology.

    Brighter minds than mine will figure out how to pay for it – it shouldnt be too hard – just read total of all Wall Street bonuses greater than total of all US minimum wage earners. So it’s doable.

    Roubini thinks so too.

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/11/world/europe/after-jobs-dry-up-what-then.html?_r=3&referrer=

    • You’re not suggesting executive bonuses should be lowered, heaven forbid!?

      No, it will be the middle class who will pay for it – just look now how our government is trying to work out a way to get their hands on the billions of dollars of super in Australia.

      The gap between rich and poor is widening every day, and I can only see it getting worse.

      • Surely Wall Street traders are amongst the most easy to automate occupations ? Don’t need to pay a bonus to an algorithm.

  20. Pyne has warned the Senate that 1700 research jobs will be scrapped if he doesn’t get his way on uncapping university fees. That’s right, it’s not a threat any more to get his shitty bill through the Senate it’s now officially a threat. No pass the bill: 1700 science jobs out the door. There is simply nothing to like about the man nor the Government that he represents.

    “1700 researchers become the bargaining chip in Government fight to uncap university fees”

    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/1700-researchers-become-the-bargaining-chip-in-government-fight-to-uncap-university-fees-20150314-144ckd.html

    • But we’re the clever country – NOT.

      If Christopher Pyne wanted to look for more money he only need look at the billions spent on negative gearing. He could also find plenty if he started looking at subsidies given to wealthy people who have millions in super. He could even increase fees for foreign buyers. But it would mean touching the housing bubble, the one industry that is engulfing the country.

  21. Oh. I forgot about gay marriage the Greens spent most hours banging on about.

    You self indulgent micro issue group. How fucking dare you hijack an entire party for your little pet issue while all else falls around you.

    I bet you were the first to ridicule Ricky Muir getting a seat.

    All this policy I get links to, is irrelevant while they focus on non issues in the media.

    Fuck the Greens. Destroy their self indulgent little party.

    • Mining BoganMEMBER

      Just maybe gay marriage is the answer to war.

      “The Light Entertainment War [4.03]
      Private Shirley: Sir!
      General Shirley: Yes?
      Private Shirley: News from the Western Front, sir!
      General Shirley: Yes, what is it?
      Private Shirley: The enemy attacked at dawn, sir.
      General Shirley: Yes, how was it?
      Private Shirley: Well… the enemy were all wearing little silver halos, sir. And they had fairy wands with big stars on the end, and…
      General Shirley: They what?!
      Private Shirley: They had spiders in matchboxes, sir!
      General Shirley: Good God! How did our chaps react?
      Private Shirley: Well, they… they were jolly interested, sir! Some of them, I think it was the Fourth Armoured Brigade, they…
      General Shirley: Yes?
      Private Shirley: Well, they went and had a look at the spiders, sir!
      Peter Woods: We interrupt show jumping to bring you a news flash. The Second World War has now entered a sentimental stage. The morning on the Ardennes Front, the Germans started spooning at dawn, but the British Fifth Army responded by gazing deep in their eyes, and the Germans are reported to have gone ‘all coy’.”

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      Oh. I forgot about gay marriage the Greens spent most hours banging on about.

      Yeah. Wanting two people to be able to be subject to the same treatment in law regardless of their gender. How outrageous is that !

      • t’s not outrageous FFS, I’m all for it. BTW, I think most law is applicable to defacto (to which gay couples can be deemed?) relationships, correct me if I’m wrong. I just don’t think it should have consumed the Greens. I’d march with the gay community for this AFTER all the other stuff that’s 10000000 times more urgent FOR ALL OF US.

        “The point is they’re trying to fight the fight, but the whole system from top to bottom is stacked against them.”

        That should be their number one platform then. Announce in parliament every day, the media is stacked with plutocrats that are running the other two parties. That would get attention.

        All I’m saying is drsmithy, is the Greens need to get smarter or move the fuck aside and let another party take the social environment vote. You must now see, I have a point?

      • Why would the gay community want marriage? Most hetero people say it sucks. Just joking, lighten up hey?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        It’s not outrageous FFS, I’m all for it.

        Awesome. Stop bringing it up then.

        BTW, I think most law is applicable to defacto (to which gay couples can be deemed?) relationships, correct me if I’m wrong.

        “Most” is not “all”.

        Black people used to have “most” of the same rights white people did, as well. At least on paper.

        I just don’t think it should have consumed the Greens.

        It hasn’t “consumed” the Greens. It’s a standard policy, they discuss it when it’s relevant.

        I’d march with the gay community for this AFTER all the other stuff that’s 10000000 times more urgent FOR ALL OF US.

        It’s not an either/or proposition.

        That should be their number one platform then. Announce in parliament every day, the media is stacked with plutocrats that are running the other two parties. That would get attention.

        Indeed it would. Not the kind of attention that’s productive, however.

        All I’m saying is drsmithy, is the Greens need to get smarter or move the fuck aside and let another party take the social environment vote. You must now see, I have a point?

        You don’t have a point. Another “social environment” party – indeed, pretty much any centre-left social democracy party – would have basically the same policies, and you’d be ranting and raving about them for the same reason: because they don’t represent exactly and precisely what you want them to.

    • Good read

      Especially like the conclusion, can tell he is a sociologist.

      “For several years, we have operated with a cultural and moral worldview which finds value only in ‘winners’. Our cities must be ‘world-leading’ to matter. Universities must be ‘excellent’, or else they dwindle. This is a philosophy which condemns the majority of spaces, people and organizations to the status of ‘losers’. It also seems entirely unable to live up to its own meritocratic ideal any longer. The discovery that, if you cut a ‘winner’ enough slack, eventually they’ll try to close down the game once and for all, should throw our obsession with competitiveness into question. And then we can consider how else to find value in things, other than their being ‘better’ than something else.”

      You find this disease everywhere in modern society. It has seeped into everything in our culture. I know many people who actively think like this, always comparing themselves to others and aiming to be better than them, obsessing over money as they are told it makes them the ‘winner’. Obviously that’s a never ending cycle, you can always find someone better, richer than you.

      Ironically it tends to be these people who appear to be most unhappy, but money buys pleasure not happiness, I doubt they will ever work that out though.

      It’s deranged but you see it everywhere and, as he states in the article, everything you see in modern society is shaped around this ideal. It’s completely pervasive, and challenging it instantly tars you as some sort of ‘weirdo’..

      Fortunately there are some who would rather be weird and happy, rather than normal and miserable.

      • Has it ever really been different? Western culture has become the world’s preeminent model for good reason.

        The competitive drive that ignites innovation, excellence and generally rewards same has delivered most the accoutrements of modern existence!

        It’s not perfect, but that’s OK. Such a culture always allows and encourages improvement.

      • The competitive drive that ignites innovation, excellence and generally rewards same has delivered most the accoutrements of modern existence!

        But it doesn’t. It drive monopolistic behaviour….

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        I think the point of the piece, which I picked up off twiiter from Steve Keen (while taking a break from a long drive) was that after a certain point competition starts to become ever more monopolistic.

        For mine the idea fits hand in glove with the works of Baran and Sweezy (and other followers of Marx) in that capitalism does gravitate towards monopoly, as well as the work of Minsky in his position that capitalism is inherently unstable (particularly in the truly competitive stage – which is the stage that most benefits people and economic development) – with the instability I suppose throwing itself towards monopoly or over regulation reasonably easily.

        It also bring me to the idea that since 2008 we have had this massive government involvement in the economy with monetary policy flooding the system and organisations which became too big to fail.

        I think it is time to make sure we reduce any organisation which is too big to fail, normalise monetary policy (even if that involves a recession) and take a far more overt step towards regulating the economy to make sure it is genuinely competitive and to ensure that it is so in a way which is to the benefit of the community .

        Of course that would require politicians with some integrity, some ability for them to communicate with the public on policy issues and a media which was addicted to real estate revenues………….

    • Gunna, that the less competitive in society are being left behind is not in doubt, I guess the question to those being left behind is why. the answer is in the text, but before I highlight that, was at the Quicksilver Pro competition at the beach over the last few days. The competitors are very young mostly in their early 20’s but they all had a team behind them and coaches standing in the pavilion giving encouragement.
      The text says, “To use the sort of sporting metaphor the top has not only the best coaches, physios and facilities, but also has the referee and the journalists on side as well”. And there is the difference. The first thing you notice about those getting left behind is they are not getting “correct advice and encouragement” . The trouble is that good common sense advice is pretty much the intellectual property of the wealthy (in all forms) and it is not copied and is often despised by the others.
      I guess it has always been that way , but now the others have a voice, such as this platform, hence we are hearing more about it. (and look at the quality of the comments)
      If you are not doing so well and wish to get ahead, you are going to need good coaches and mentors, and believe me the answer is not in houses.WW.

      • interested party

        WW,
        Very true,,,,,,,and all the harder now with the headwinds we face. Still, there will always be competition, always has been , always will be.
        To expect a world with no competition is to expect a world full of unicorns.,,,just ain’t gonna happen.

    • Bit of a painful read. Still not sure what he wants replace competition with.

      Reminds me of the Liberal Democrats in the UK – football games shouldn’t be played to win.

      Losers 😉

    • Gunna

      Thanks for posting this – a good read that really resonated with me on a number of levels. I appreciated in the concluding remarks this – “The discovery that, if you cut a ‘winner’ enough slack, eventually they’ll try to close down the game once and for all, should throw our obsession with competitiveness into question.” Of course, I totally agree.

      The article also got me thinking about recent events/trends in my life. Most salient were instances where good friends started talking like a completely different person after attending some property seminars. These “seminars” were more like brain washing than a balanced medium for financial advice. You can’t talk sense to people after they’ve attended these events and worse still, they often start telling you there’s something wrong with your life because you “work too hard” and that ” you should become like me…..”

      Of course this is all part of larger “property winners milieu package”. These seminars often start with some guru telling them how terrible the world of tomorrow is going to be and how stupid they have been not to see it. Then the guru starts telling them “you must be like me” (ie: a winner) and eventually a whole new set of friends gets grafted onto their lives just to make sure they all stay true to the new implanted “winner” dogma and to recruit others to the winner circle.

      Of course I’m talking about extreme examples here but, the above is actually quite an accurate portrayal of what I’ve seen in some cases. Many seminars exploit peoples insecurities by telling them being a good, honest, hard working person with your own house and super isn’t enough. They work very hard at helping to engineer a social environment that helps to block out any competing voices. Voices that might be saying “you’re a better person than that shallow fuckwit on the stage at the seminar”.

      Eventually the correction in property values in Perth a few years ago wiped out some of my friends. You don’t hear about these cases because of the shame. There’s not a lot of room for these stories in a world obsessed with winning and there are a lot of them out there. There’s also a lot more to be learned from failure; a lot to celebrate in resilience and in the rediscovery of things that matter far more than having millions in property and a flash car.