Queen’s Birthday long weekend links: 9-11 June 2018

Global Macro / Markets / Investing:







    Govt can’t grow house-building much faster than Nats did, Nick Smith says | Michael Daly | Stuff.co.nz


    … extract …

    … Hugh Pavletich, who is based in Christchurch and co-authors the Annual Demographic International Housing Affordability Survey, considers an affordable market would have starter houses on the urban fringe at prices just 2.5 times the gross annual median household income.

    He believes that will happen but won’t predict when. “The big driver is really public opinion. I think we can all sense in New Zealand, people are very incensed with the high prices,” Pavletich said.

    He doesn’t think Auckland Council has allowed for enough greenfield land on the fringes to be available for building houses. Central government was going to have to intervene to allow that to happen, as Labour had promised, he said.

    Pavletich dismissed arguments that people living on the fringes would face ever longer commutes. Jobs followed people, with cities continuing to decentralise, he said. “As we become more affluent … we need more space, so our cities, even with a stable population, will expand.”

    The level of congestion in Auckland, showed enough money had not been spent on roads.

    He pointed to comments by urbanist Alain Bertaud, in the 2014 Demographia survey, as a guide to providing affordable housing in Auckland ( access … http://www.demographia.com/db-dhi-index.htm ).

    “It is time for planners to abandon abstract objectives and to focus their efforts on two measurable outcomes that have always mattered since the growth of large cities during the 19th century’s industrial revolution: workers’ spatial mobility and housing affordability,” Bertaud said.

    Mobility meant being able to travel from one part of a city to another in less than an hour, and being able to trade dwellings easily with low transaction costs.

    Bertaud called on planners to abandon “abstract and unmeasurable objectives”. Instead, they had a key role in ensuring an elastic supply of land. Part of the way to do that was to plan new trunk infrastructure that would allow new areas to be developed, or faster travel time to already built-up areas. … read more via hyperlink above …

    … Release late October …

    Order without Design – Alain Bertaud | The MIT Press


  2. GunnamattaMEMBER

    Scomo on Immigration
    From about the 3.43 minute mark of this podcast…….

    Paul Colgan: Look one of the issues here is that the rate of immigration, you’ve got a unique perspective on this, having spent time as immigration minister, and now looking at Treasury and looking across the economy, and obviously factoring in levels of immigration into how that affects final demand, but also the skills mix in the economy etcetera, right. Now, with around about 180 thousand, I think, 190 thousand is our current intake, is…?

    Morrison: The Permanent cap is 190

    Paul Colgan: So with that rate of growth it’s inevitably going to dilute the impact of the overall economic growth rate on the existing population, right. So what we see…

    Morrison: Well you are making an assumption that population growth is running higher than economic growth, which it’s not.

    Paul Colgan: Well in line with economic growth.

    Morrison: Well it’s actually higher. Population growth is running at about 1.6% and at best it can get up to about 1.8, but round about 1.6 and you’ve got the economy growing over the year at about 3%.

    David Scutt: . But per capita growth is growing at about 1.5% year on year.

    Morrison: Per capita growth is the point. So it means there is more growth occurring per head of population, and that’s a good thing. But let’s break down the immigration figures themselves. I mean, if you’ve got 10 extra people in the country, you know, to simplify it, you got 4, just over 4, in fact, that are temporary migrants, so they’re here as students, or they’re here as working holidaymaking visas, they could be here as temporary skilled visa holders, so that’s just over 4. You’ve got almost 4, which is natural increase, and you’ve got 2 who are on a permanent visa. So the permanent migration program is not what’s driving population growth, and when you look at what’s happening with temporary migration, it’s actually in those first couple of categories that I mentioned.
    Now, one thing about that category is they’re younger, they’re much younger, they’re typically under about 25. Now, we have an ageing population, and with a migration program which has a front end driving it which is younger people, that means more people going into the working age population for longer, which is a long term benefit for growth in the economy.
    So, I think we need to understand when we’re talking about immigration, not only its size but also its composition. Now the composition of your program can mean any number is a good number or a bad number. But if your composition is focussed on skills, if it’s of the right demographic, if it’s actually building the capability of your economy, then it’s a plus.

    • WTF is that about? Jibber jabber it’s good for you. Yet he says it’s mostly young people. So we are deliberately making it harder for young people to find starter jobs and buy homes because we are mostly importing young Chinese and Indians who have no off swutch and just work work work. I know I work with these people and that’s fine but it’s creating a dog eat dog Australia.

      • St JacquesMEMBER

        And that’s exactly what they want. It feeds the FIRE rent seeking machine we call jokingly “an economy”. They don’t give a flying duck that wages are down on what they were 7 years ago and will continue going down, that homelessness and beggary is booming, that underemployment and the ripping off of workers is soaring, that roads, railways, hospitals and schools etc are overflowing, etc. All they care is that they service the needs of the rent-seeking masters and get a comfortable gig in a boardroom as a payoff at the end of their political career.

      • St JacquesMEMBER

        And of course they love to rant about GDP. Most people haven’t a clue how useless a measure GDP is by itself. A big part of last quarter’s surprise GDP increase was gas exports, yet the companies are making a loss on them and it employs hardly anyone, so as far as income generation was concerned, it was near zero.GDP, GDP, GDP blah, blah, blah.

      • Agree StJ. The quicker people wake up and vote independent as a protest vote the better off we will be without these liblab parasites in our govt. Putin said it well the other day on the Putin Interviews regarding US: doesn’t matter who is in charge the bureaucracy doesn’t change so things stay the same no matter the leader.

    • boomengineeringMEMBER

      The wife’s ex place of employment was just bought by Indian’s which got me thinking. If they are buying businesses in the Central Coast, sacking the workers and applying for 457’s to replace them ( with family and friends) only to shut the business down, then wouldn’t it be possible that charging the 457’s a fee to come to Australia may be more lucrative than continuing to run that business. The cost of the business could just be a business expense.

      • That’s sort of how our foreign students racket works. Except the government runs it.

        The student gets a path to citizenship. Our corporate sector gets a low skill low wage drone. The toilet paper degree is the cost of doing business. The business that ceases to function except as a front is what used to be called a “university”.

      • That is alive and well In Gippsland I was told. In Melbourne a courier guy I know says it’s true for the courier business. However, hats off to the genuine ones who are actually working and not on the dole. It’s been my experience working in the EU and US that Indians have a strong work ethic. I have lots of Indian mates and they just want what we all want. Actually, many will tell you that there is too much immigration and are very defensive of Oz. They are all caught up in the same sh1t as we all are and they want it to stop.

      • boomengineeringMEMBER

        Sad thing is that original workers without a job then it time the new one’s too without a job, so who pays for this.

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        Thats my experience too @Afund.

        I have an Indian bloke over the road, makes the journey up to Melbourne every morning, his kids play with mine. We have the occasional yack about the world at large and occasionally drift onto politics. He thinks most of our contemporary management is bullshit too. I explained my position on immigration volumes to him fairly carefully (not wanting to offend and to ensure he understood that for me it isnt about cultures values religions creeds or skin colours, but just about numbers). He got it instantly, and related that many of his friends (mainly uni educated Indian migrants) all thought pretty much the same thing. He certainly gets that cashed up migrants outbid local kids for houses and undercut local wages (but he does make the point that Australian labour is uber expensive and he considers his wicket pretty good), and he (like me) worries about what our kids do when they are looking for abodes, uni courses, jobs and the like in 15 – 20 years time.

      • Australian labour wouldn’t be uber expensive if land prices hadn’t hyperinflated and shelter wasn’t uber expensive.

      • @Gunna, it’s our fear as well. It has to stop, but we know it won’t as none of the political class are really effected by it, and in fact profit from it. There is a lot of hate on this site for the bank of mum and dad, but I can see me having to step into that role, and it’s probably 10 years off for me. My daughter works two jobs and studies, but she’ll never be able to afford a house on her own in the gig economy. Some of the kids we know with either a uni degree or several Cert 4’s can’t get jobs as they don’t have experience, and no one seems to want to give them a start. It’s not uncommon for kids to apply for hundreds of jobs, and some end up being unpaid. All the programs don’t seem to address the real issues. I could write an essay on this, but I’m worn out, and think you just have to help your kids as the government certainly won’t.

      • Its amazing that more people don’t seem to understand immigration is a policy choice. Its not that you turn it on and never stop until the average composition is some hypothetical ideal representing some progressive wet dream.

        You turn it on and off depending on the requirement of the local economy for new ideas and new blood. This is explicitly why monochrome societies don’t work. Everyone needs a minority of outsiders, the point is how many and for what? I would argue Australia was turning into a complete backwater into the mid-late 90’s. It was primitive – everyone young who could, left for England.

        Now it isn’t. We have an amazing workforce in terms of people who are open to, and know how to work with, new ideas. So its completely legitimate to reduce the immigration policy tap while government infrastructure catches up, and things calm down. On the plus side, this is the process through which we go through to become a real nation I guess.

      • The business model for many Cafe’s is quite similar with the cost of via sponsorship being equivalent to two years salary. Migrants are effectively working for free for two years which is the only way the Cafe can remain profitable.

      • Relevant StakeholderMEMBER

        @T monochrome societies that work

        South Korea
        All of Europe pre Euro
        Britain during the empire

        Successful multicultural societies (those not on a slow decline to s*&tness)

      • Plenty of monochrome societies fail too – i don’t understand the correlation you are drawing?

        My thinking is that without the minority of outsiders, technology and new ideas do not come around, and eventually someone more advanced takes you over. Hence long term, you would expect societies with stable demographics, i.e. a market dominant majority and minorities with clearly defined rights/spheres of influence, seem to work best.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Have you considered that the countries going to shit aren’t going to shit because of multiculturalism (whatever that might mean to you), but because of other things (like, say, the cancer of neoliberalism) ?

        The USA is a great melting pot of cultures. It was doing pretty well until the neoliberals took over in the ’70s.

      • Relevant StakeholderMEMBER

        @T, China/South Korea/Japan didn’t import a 10-20% Euro population to gain manufacturing knowledge that was once solely found in the U.S/Europe.

        @Drsmithy, neoliberalism was developed to attack the power of western labour. Immigration and multiculturalism are a core part of the project.


      • Yes – and I don’t consider multiculturalism the problem. Unlike you, I don’t consider neoliberalism the problem either. THe problem is mostly scale. If we were a country of 5m, none of these would be problems. The issue with scaling is, the feedback loops of our kind of democracy fail. Also known as corruption.

        Kind of like an app server. 1 server works for 5000 users, but if you make it 50,000 – no dice – that server will get fried. The problem is, we have no idea how to scale our government at the moment; i.e. what should the next form of government look like?

        Unfortunately, from your point of view, this means that I am completely opposed to anything remotely left / center left. Not specifically because I disagree with the ideas, these ideas work just fine at smaller scales, but because the system will pretend that these ideas are continuing to work for our current scaling problems.

        The system pretends this because, really, what else is it going to do? Hence my general approach of mocking, gaslighting and generally making the left live by its own virtue signalling – always funny, personally.

        In this scenario, I oppose multiculturalism, because, even if we were only importing lily white Brits only (think of the dental costs!) and reinstated white australia, it still would not work. Because we have are already past the scaling thresholds. Think about it this way, would a monarchy work in a country of 25m+, or a theocracy in a country of 5m+. Both are valid governance models, but each governance model has a ~ band of population within which it works. We are past (i suspect) the max threshold for parliamentary democracy. Our governance models are simply not sophisticated enough for the size of our population (while delivering good, non-corrupt, governance to the population).

        We are past where we need to be, hence the immigration tap needs to be turned off, while the rest of society catches up. Bringing in ‘multi-cultural’ folk, is more likely to compound the problem, but its not like bringing in Brits or Afrikaners is going to fix it.

        We need to turn it off, and quickly, before everyone develops a ‘race’ consciousness, and we slowly amble towards civil war.

      • @RS – “China/South Korea/Japan” – were all invaded and taken over for being insular monochrome societies which fell behind technologically – what exactly do you think I am talking about?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        The problems in our democracy would manifest even at smaller populations (and did – the late 1800s).

        The issue is that the people cannot circumvent the political gatekeepers. This works tolerably well when the political gatekeepers are still working at least someone with the overall benefit of the country in mind (eg: post-WW2 nation building), it fails when those people start falling out of the system (eg: from the late ’70s onwards).

        This is exactly the kind of thing Stephen Morris posts about.

      • ‘The issue is that the people cannot circumvent the political gatekeepers.’ – Only on the left. That your strategy and tactics cannot ensure that your leadership does what you want it to do, is not my problem. That the center left / left etc cannot gets its own elected officials to do anything useful is not my problem. Maybe virtue signal to some other invented identity group harder – that might work? Oh wait, that no longer works. Nvm, you’re f’ ed.

        Call it alt-right, call it neo reactionary thought, call it paleo conservatism, call it global populism, call it literally hitler. The strategy being used this side of the fence is working just fine thanks so much.

        Edit: Check out your leadership. Apparently the Chinese know him as, ‘the little potato’. I’m told they do not mean this kindly.


      • Relevant StakeholderMEMBER

        T, your ideal society has never existed. America (the only one close) was 85%+ European until the 90s.

        So essentially you loved the atomisation of societies until the advent of intersectional feminism? that’s when it went too far?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Only on the left.

        Rrright. So you’re in favour of the catastrophic policies of the last forty years ? You’re happy that your boys have been getting things done ?

        You are mistaking someone doing stuff you happen to like with being able to influence their actions.

        Call it alt-right, call it neo reactionary thought, call it paleo conservatism, call it global populism, call it literally hitler. The strategy being used this side of the fence is working just fine thanks so much.

        If your objective is to screw over everyone except the top fraction of a percent and return the world to medieval-esque feudalism, then, sure, you guys are doing great. Your point man there in the White House is keeping everyone distracted with his childish antics while the strike teams behind the scenes work tirelessly to disassemble basically every aspect of modern civilisation built to benefit the majority and protect them from the ravages of the powerful. Just like the last few decades of people before them.

        I hope you don’t think you’re going to be better off once they’re done, because if you do you’re in for a nasty shock.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        T, your ideal society has never existed. America (the only one close) was 85%+ European until the 90s.

        He’s a “Reactionary”. His ideal society looks something like hereditary medieval europe. Ie: about as far away from democracy as possible. People like him just think they’re going to be a butcher rather than a piggy.

    • He is right, by far the largest component of NOM is international students. There are now 800k in Australia.

      • Students have limited work rights which suits the ruling class here very nicely. Why travel to Thailand for a wristy when some poor student trying to survive will perform the job for $40, right next door to Woolworths at your local shopping strip.

        I am seriously worried for this country, every sort of economic and moral degradation is upon us.

      • Take away work rights for overseas students, they are here to study not to work, that;ll slow the fuckers down.

        But of course it;s not about education is it, it’s about export income the overseas students pay in university fees.
        And if working here isn’t enough sugar to get them to depart with their money you can apply for permanent residency too.
        Beautiful, fits the greedy business model and the multiculturalism policy, as they’re practically all 3rd world ‘students’.
        Laughable when the government claims they run a non discrimination permanent immigration program.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Take away work rights for overseas students, they are here to study not to work, that;ll slow the fuckers down.

        Personally I’d rather have students from across the entire socio-economic demographic, not just the obnoxious rich kids.

        The real problem is too many, not that they can work.

      • Smithy – work rights for overseas students is an attractant, take it away and fewer will come.
        Plenty of unemployed Australian youth that can do the 20 hours a week roles that overseas ‘students’ are taking.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Smithy – work rights for overseas students is an attractant, take it away and fewer will come.

        WTF would you care about an “attractant” ? You can literally legislate how many are allowed to enter, regardless of how many are “attracted”.

        Plenty of unemployed Australian youth that can do the 20 hours a week roles that overseas ‘students’ are taking.

        Yes. And ?

      • smithy – no worries, I’m very happy to have caps put on overseas student numbers,
        How about capping it at 160,000 onshore enrollments as it was 1999-2000.

        smithy – Yes. And ?

        Almost one-third of Australian young people are unemployed or underemployed, the highest level in 40 years, according to a report released on Monday. (The Guardian)
        Overseas students are taking jobs Australian youth could be doing.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        The point is that there’s nothing wrong with foreign students being able to work if there’s not too many of them. It’s fundamentally a quantity issue.

        Most of the point of a foreign student program is cultural exchange. In both directions. How well do you think that works if all you get is the rich kids ?

      • smithy – the overseas student program is a corrupt money making business, Australia’s third highest export income earner i think.
        So not really a cultural exchange thing at all.
        You need to be rich to come to an Australian university, though I think some of the third world countries sponsor some of their poorer students.
        Frankly I don’t care how many overseas students come here – so long as they aren’t allowed to work, visa hop, and can’t apply for permanent residency at the completion of their course, that’s the way it used to be.
        However you have a small point about students working here, if the number of students here is small.
        So maybe there could be a system so that as student numbers rise the work rights reduce on a sliding scale.
        eg. at 100,000 students they all have work rights gradually decreasing to zero work rights at say 160,000 overseas students here.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        The faint whistling noise is the point sailing over your head.

        When I went to Uni in the ’90s, there were foreign students. Most of them weren’t rich, and supported themselves by both savings they already had, supplemented by part-time local work – basically just like the local students did.

      • smithy – it’s taken you 4 comments to find the reason you want overseas students to have work rights – too bad about unemployed Australian youth.
        If overseas students can’t afford it they can’t come. Ridiculous to allow overseas students to work here to pay for their tuition, whilst Australians go on Newstart. Save your charity for Australians

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        smithy – it’s taken you 4 comments to find the reason you want overseas students to have work rights – too bad about unemployed Australian youth.

        Punish the straw man. Punish him !

    • SchillersMEMBER

      Thanks for the post Gunna and transcribing the interview with Morrison.
      The treasurer is lying, over and over again.
      He implies the migrant intake has a cap of 190,000. It doesn’t. The latest figures from the ABS show the last 12 months Net Overseas Migration at 250,000.
      He implies the intake is overwhelmingly skewed towards young “skilled” migrants.
      It isn’t.
      He lies about the composition of the intake by saying the increase in temporary visas are double that of rhe permanent intake (40 to 20% of the total population increase.) That’s a complete lie. Over the last 12 years the increase in permanent visas has far exceeded the increase in temporary visas, by at least 2.5 to 1. Australia’s permanent migration program is FAR in excess of other developed countries and many times what it used to be.

      The man is a fraud and liar. He cannot be trusted.

  3. ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

    “Since this often seems to come up in discussions of the radical style, I’ll mention one other gleaning from my voyages. Beware of Identity politics. I’ll rephrase that: have nothing to do with identity politics. I remember very well the first time I heard the saying “The Personal Is Political.” It began as a sort of reaction to defeats and downturns that followed 1968: a consolation prize, as you might say, for people who had missed that year. I knew in my bones that a truly Bad Idea had entered the discourse. Nor was I wrong. People began to stand up at meetings and orate about how they ‘felt’, not about what or how they thought, and about who they were rather than what (if anything) they had done or stood for. It became the replication in even less interesting form of the narcissism of the small difference, because each identity group begat its sub-groups and “specificities.” This tendency has often been satirised—the overweight caucus of the Cherokee transgender disabled lesbian faction demands a hearing on its needs—but never satirised enough. You have to have seen it really happen. From a way of being radical it very swiftly became a way of being reactionary; the Clarence Thomas hearings demonstrated this to all but the most dense and boring and selfish, but then, it was the dense and boring and selfish who had always seen identity politics as their big chance.

    Anyway, what you swiftly realise if you peek over the wall of your own immediate neighbourhood or environment, and travel beyond it, is, first, that we have a huge surplus of people who wouldn’t change anything about the way they were born, or the group they were born into, but second that “humanity” (and the idea of change) is best represented by those who have the wit not to think, or should I say feel, in this way.”

    ― Christopher Hitchens, Letters to a Young Contrarian

    • And you were doing so well last night on twitter!.

      You had the lingo slipping off the tongue like an episode of The Drum on fast forward.

      I had such hopes for you and now you are supporting the silencing of the special voice of the CTDL nation.

      Shame Shame Shame.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        I think you have failed to read the nuance of my reply to Migs twitter post correctly 007.

        I think your comment,… “You might go all the way in the ALP with such mastery of the lingo.” is Unfair in painting or suggesting, that all ALP members are fragile wall flowers, burning with a narcissistic intersectional indignation that leads them to endlessly engage in circle jerking Sessions, bemoaning their enslavement under the Boot of the White male Supremacist, Satanic Patriarchy.
        They are only Half our members!

        BTW,…WTF does “the special voice of the CTDL nation.” mean?

      • Mate how does it feel to have a plumber take you around the back side of the shed when your some self awarded super intellect that has an IP on knowlage has a fail.

      • Ermo,

        But that is the half that rises like cream!

        CTLD?. Its in your article Cherokee…………

        Now look what you have done. You got the free loading rodent all excited and going GOTCHA.

        Beep beep!

      • Hitchens was right about that.
        Everything turned to the proverbial when it stopped being cool to place primary allegiance to the party

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Ha Ha,…the Cherokee sheilas of course!
        Hear I was thinking, you were trying to steer the convo back on to your favorite esoteric economic obsession, with bring “Currency Transaction Development Levies” into the thread!
        Silly me

        As for Skip,…I still love his stuff,…the Info he puts out there, but I have become a little worried for him of late, taking things personally, seeming a little unhinged at times, much less “Chortling” than we used to see from him, I hope he’s not losing his sence of humor.

        What was it the Mahatma said.

        “If I had no sense of humor, I would long ago have committed suicide.”
        Mahatma Gandhi

  4. the cost of homelessness in Victoria has been costed at $25,615 per person per year

    It would literally be cheaper to put in an income guarantee. That is why probably why Milton Friedman wanted it. Cheaper.

    One man alone cost emergency wards $100,000 a month until he was found

    Astonishing! When will the innumerate left wing crunch the numbers and grow a spine? You can even put in an income guarantee at the state level. Crime would come down as well – resulting in more savings.

    On Sunday, Five Star leader Luigi Di Maio said a universal basic income for poorer Italians will be among the first measures he plans to put before the parliament.

    Italy is getting UBI (lowering the pension age to 18) again? (they had UBI when the Roman Empire existed) Good on him. Marine Le Pen wanted to lower it to 60 and she lost the election.

    The Surprisingly Low Cost of Implementing UBI

    To use Australia as an example again

    Modern society can choose what to do with its collective wealth, but this fact is often obscured by political agendas and vested interests that benefit from maintaining the status quo. Politicians and business hawks tout the unfeasibility of building more hospitals, investing more into education or introducing UBI, while they campaign to provide tax-breaks that benefit the rich and grant large corporations billion dollar subsidies to take up the nation’s resources.

    In this way, economics has become an intellectual weapon wielded only by the elite to squash any policy that not enough of their rich friends support. A prime example of this is can be seen in the unjust oversimplification of what a UBI would actually cost, something discussed in a previous post.


    It is outrageous that an income guarantee does not exist when even The Economist says:

    The most efficient way to spend money on the homeless might be to give it to them.

    • Yes, give everyone a UBI of a million dollars per month. Then everyone will be a millionaire.

      • That’s called “appeal to extremes”. It’s a fallacious form of non-argument. Google it.

      • Thank you Arrow2! Was going to reply to this but you’ve done it better that I would’ve (and with fewer invectives)

      • Andrew,

        I’m a bit lost. Too me it read as a lazy dismissal of something you disagree with. If it was as you say, then what principles were you testing and how did you test them?

      • Changing the numbers activates the part of the brain that realises that UBI is a huge disincentive to work, is insanely expensive, and it deflates the value of what you were trying to provide in the first place. UBI is as much of an economic magic bullet as inflating a housing bubble or made up electronic coins or burying jars with money. Any solution that involves something other than hard work is pure snake oil. But we seem to have a few people on this site who should actually be following Nathan Birch.

      • UBE, otoh, does not suffer from the demotivation to work.
        Universal Basic Employment.
        8hrs of public benefit work for the .gov.au to include but not limited to cleaning of the public toilets, gutters, stalking Sino home buyers at auctions to bid more, chasing unpaid traffic tickets or instigating ticket issuance, spying on leased homes reported as vacant or vacant homes reported as OO… anything that would cause .gov.au coffers to fill up moar.

      • Andrew,

        You are then not talking about a basic income, so you aren’t testing the principles. You are shifting the focus of the argument.
        In trials a basic income has been shown to increase workforce participation. I recommend Guy Standing if you are interested in learning about the topic. He can be a bit pompous, but he has done the work and has enough evidence to dismiss a lot of the assumptions that automatically jump to mind.

      • Andrew, the point Jacob is making us that homelessness as it is is hugely expensive. UBI might actually be cheaper. That is worth debating.

        It is lazy of you to dismiss UBI on the grounds it would mean every person gets a million dollars a month. Because it obviously wouldn’t.

        I don’t know if I support UBI or not. But I can undertake a debate on it rationally. The idea is that it’s more effecient and effective than current welfare arrangements. That’s worth considering (using sensible parameters).

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Wrong. It’s testing principles. It’s perfectly valid. Google it.

        How does a million dollars qualify as a “basic” income ?

        You didn’t test the principle, you moved the goalposts.

      • Lmmao… UBI is a stipend with huge inflationary factors and best of all will be front run by every supplier and servicer. Best part is its a free market concept forwarded to reduce democracy and fob of its failures.

      • The treacherous government won’t even increase the Newstart allowance despite calls from business and social services groups to increase it by $50 – $75 a week. So i don’t hold much hope for a UBI getting up in the foreseeable future
        “The Newstart Allowance has not increased in real terms (i.e. above the Consumer Price Index) since 1994. This means that people who are unemployed have not shared in increases in living standards received by the rest of the community for more than 20 years”
        The treacherous government says the best way to help the unemployed is to get them into work. Oh really.
        The trouble is the treacherous government is running employment for recently arrived immigrants, not the unemployed Australians. “Recent migrants accounted for two-thirds (64.5 per cent) of the approximately 850,000 net jobs created in the past five years. For full-time employment, the impact is even more pronounced, with recent migrants accounting for 72.4 per cent of new jobs created”

    • In practice, Australia in the 1980’s already had a UBI. In those days, you could register for unemployment benefits and keep collecting them indefinitely. You were supposed to be applying for jobs, etc. but no-one really checked. Today, they make you apply for 5 jobs per week. If we were simply to go “back to the future” on this (appropriately means-tested and assets-tested) it would serve the same purpose as a UBI, it would be affordable, very simple to administer, and it would not have any detrimental effect on the economy at all. People could afford to live on the dole if they grow their own vegetables and live in places that are not necessarily within commuting distance of the job interviews that they would no longer be required to attend.

      • +1 the dole should cover basic living expenses, such as affordable rent, basic food, and health care should you require it I also think a small allowance of say $500 P/month on top would be useful. So let’s say you’re out of work, you can still put a little money aside, maybe it’s to buy uniform of equipment for starting a new job etc.. or to give someone the ability to pay to learn new skills like programming or 3D printing or even start a small business.

        Right now it’s below poverty level and the longer you’re out of work the tougher it gets. I’m not for a socialist utopia, but I am for a minimum standard of living and existence that gives people dignity.

      • Mining BoganMEMBER

        Geez Gav, people with dignity contain the ability to fire up the pitchforks and liberate a few heads.

        The bosses dont like that. Removing the dignity is the first step in controlling the plebs,

      • boomengineeringMEMBER

        The beauty of high wages, UBI or easy dole is that people are reluctant to do menial or unsavory jobs which forces employers to find other means such as robotics but alas this idiotic 457 scam.

      • yogiman,

        I was just chatting to a friend about this. The external costs of the current set up aren’t often discussed. There’s the poor employers who receive and have to wade through unwanted insincere job applications. The rorts that are the job find networks. There is also the community costs associated with the excess stress that is placed upon those on the link. The older system that you refer to, while not being as popular with wowsers and moralisers, would seem to be the more sensible and economically prudent. But where is the division and the votes in that?

    • What’s your agenda behind pushing for a UBI?

      Wake up Jacob

      You are being manipulated

      A government job guarantee is a much better idea

      I think big business would rather see a UBI than GJG because it allows them to shrink the government secror and public service, and therefore run government services for a profit

      Eg if you have GJG then the government will have massive manpower to run public transport, electricity, land titles office, ports etc

      This prevents thr wealthy from getting their noses in the trough of privatisation

      • How about a combination of both? A UBI and then a job guarantee for those who wish to earn more but can’t find or create it in the climate if the day.

      • explain to me why we would tolerate or even encourage people to contribute nothing to society?

        Like, why do you think this is a good idea?
        So you can spend your days wanking and playing computer games, consuming the earth’s resources and doing nothing helpful for your fellow men or planet?

      • Cyclone Ranger

        So a human being is only worth supporting if they are capable of adding to the (from your perspective) net worth of society: and on top of that then actually go to the effort of doing so?

        You have it backwards mate. Society exists to allow individuals (and essentially their family units) to have a better life, not so that everyone’s life will be better *through work*. Work is just one of many ways to get there.

      • Its YOU that has it backwards mate

        you forgot about the “from each according to his abilities” part of the equation

        and I’m not sure what your definition of “work” is, but in my family unit only the under 5s get away without doing any of it
        What about your kids?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        What’s your agenda behind pushing for a UBI?

        He’s not pushing for a UBI, he’s pushing for larger welfare payouts. He just calls it a UBI.

        explain to me why we would tolerate or even encourage people to contribute nothing to society?

        Same reason we “tolerate” it now ? Not just in welfare recipients either, but in a myriad of pointless, or in some cases actively destructive to society, pursuits.

        We are within a few generations of the majority of people being unemployed and unemployable.

        Now, BEFORE we get to that point there is certainly no shortage of work for people to do that the private sector is not willing to cover and cannot be automated, that should be undertaken by publicly funded workers to soak up our massive labour surplus.

        But, eventually, we’re going to get there. What then ? Make up a load of pointless but mandatory busywork to satisfy the – usually relgious – beliefs of people who think life needs to be a struggle ?

      • I’m also dead set aginst UBI because it will be captured by the rent seekers in no time flat.
        I think UBI might as well be called rent support for underwater landlords, as valuations shrink were see a lot of calls from the speculator class for some form of support and I fear that UBI will resonant with both the disaffected jobless and their landlords….win win situation, especially for the Politicians.
        GJG on the other hand can work, I believe it is in Taiwan that companies can bid to either employ or not employ jobless workers (which btw includes lots of people that here would be confined to a sheltered workshop or some pretend make work place. As I understand their system companies above a certain size get told they need to employ so an d so many unemployed workers. The quality of the pool varies from employable to definitely not employable and the Incentive to hire these people increases as their employbbility decreases. The system is government administered but companies basically bid to pay someone else (another company) to employ these individuals (at award wage) if they are not able to do so themselves. This motivates even the highest of high tech companies to directly employ cleaners and tea ladies and a whole lot of people that they otherwise wouldn’t ever even consider employing. Interestingly it also gives the working poor insight into industries that are otherwise completely closed to them. I know of one instance where a tea lady’s son was motivated to study hard and become an Electrical Engineer became his Mum was able to point him in the right direction and show that it could happen (she also made the most amazing Ginger Tea and if she though you looked a little sick she’d be making you tea and checking on you (she became almost our in-house mum)
        Most Engineers that I know are more than happy to talk with school kids and explain a little of what they do, demystify it, and maybe in the process set their young minds to thinking that this might be an option, however they don’t usually meet anyone from outside their industry.
        Belief in yourself and belief in the path you’re on are both very powerful effects and easily capable of reshaping any society..

      • typical nonsense from drsmithy

        there are ALWAYS useful things for people to do

        whether it be building battery factories and solar power panels

        or simply picking up rubbish from the side of the road, helping injured animals, reading to children

        i just really dont understand why the “left” has been so stupid as to fall for this nonsense – probably because most of them deep down want to do nothing useful

        you honestly believe no one, anywhere, will ever have to do anything
        that everybody’s every need OR desire will be completely taken care of by benevolent and omniscient robots

        What kind of fuking nonsense are you even dribbling mate?

        in fact, if people stopped spending so much energy thinking about how they can get away with doing as little as possible, they might realize that helping others and helping yourself provides meaning in life

      • ill say it again:

        UBI is getting a big run in the media and “academic” circles because it is another way for rent-seekers to squeeze juice out of the population, and to push government out of service provision thereby allowing room for profits to accrue to private interests

        GJG is the better choice for the souls and equality of humankind

      • Fisho your PPP model of a jobs guarantee sounds like an abomination

        Is it really so incomprehensible that the government itself could gainfully employee the talents and energy of its people for the common good ?

        Is communism completely dead ?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        you honestly believe no one, anywhere, will ever have to do anything
        that everybody’s every need OR desire will be completely taken care of by benevolent and omniscient robots

        Of course not. Nor have I ever said that.

        I have said – like I did above – that eventually the vast majority of people will be unable to find work, because anything they can do will be done faster, better and cheaper by a robot or a computer.

        in fact, if people stopped spending so much energy thinking about how they can get away with doing as little as possible, they might realize that helping others and helping yourself provides meaning in life

        Indeed it does. But it often doesn’t pay the bills.

      • Eventually the universe will undergo heat death
        Therefore we shouldn’t have a GJG

        What a completely nonsense argument you have concocted there

        I suspect that deep down even you realise it , you’re just arguing for sport at this stage

        Here’s an idea for 2018
        Rural youth could be employed to cull feral cats and restore native habitats

        In the year 2078 this will probably be done by AI hunter drones but those youth will be dead by then
        Is it still worthwhile now ?

        Nah, stuff it
        Just let them sit around wanking and playing computer games while we wait for the rapture

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Eventually the universe will undergo heat death
        Therefore we shouldn’t have a GJG

        What a completely nonsense argument you have concocted there

        I suspect that deep down even you realise it , you’re just arguing for sport at this stage

        Now there’s some weapons-grade irony.

        I have never said we shouldn’t have a job guarantee. Indeed, I’ve already explicitly stated in this discussion that we should. Here, I’ll repeat it again just for you:

        Now, BEFORE we get to that point there is certainly no shortage of work for people to do that the private sector is not willing to cover and cannot [edit: cannot *currently*] be automated, that should be undertaken by publicly funded workers to soak up our massive labour surplus.

        (When I can be bothered, I tell Jacob the same thing. But again, he’s not after a UBI, he’s just after a more generous welfare scheme.)

        However, eventually we’re probably going to run out of productive things for most people to do. Western societies are already looking at real unemployment in double digits AFTER accounting for truckloads of BS jobs like “HR business partner”, Walmart greeters and multiple unnecessary layers of middle management. We should already be transitioning into a 4- or even 3-day working week (but that would eat into MOAR PROFITS so no chance of it happening).

        It will likely happen in advanced western countries within the lifetimes of today’s children. So, what then ? Do we force people into soul-crushing and meaningless work for welfare schemes just so people like you can get your moralising rocks off ? Or do we just use our massive wealth surplus to give people what they need to survive and let them spend their time doing stuff that they find personally fulfilling ? Sure, for some people it might be spending all day on Youporn. But for others it might be painting the next Mona Lisa (or whatever famous painting you prefer), building furniture or keeping a really nice garden. For many it will be teaching children or helping old ladies across the street. For others it will be playing computer games. So what ?

        Just let them sit around wanking and playing computer games while we wait for the rapture

        LOL. Projection much ?

      • “. For others it will be playing computer games. So what ?”

        So what?
        So the problem is there are lots of things that we as a society actually want or need people to do NOW
        So they can contribute to the society that allows them not just to play the computer games they enjoy but just to be alive, and prepare the ground for future generations as those that came before them did

        Rather than just being completely self-serving and self-interested

      • Fisho your PPP model of a jobs guarantee sounds like an abomination

        Is it really so incomprehensible that the government itself could gainfully employee the talents and energy of its people for the common good ?

        I suspect what you’re missing is what’s called the “Cycle or Poverty”
        Poverty is not so much an event as it is learned behavior coupled with the inability to see the situation differently.
        Banging ones head on the same door, that never opens, is not a solution to anything, the point is that there are good people that any business would gladly employ but they’re invisible, they have either never held a real job, or they simply have no idea how to sell their talents, this system in effect puts employers and the under employed / disadvantaged in a room with instructions to “figure it out”. By contrast Government make work always becomes some pointless task that separates good workers from good employers, teaching the underemployed more about rorting government schemes than understanding and marketing their unique skill set.
        To get back to the Cycle of Poverty idea, this is collective learned behavior, it can’t be broken by lumping together all society’s disaffected, you have to have people see with their own eyes just how others handle adversity and even turn adversity into opportunity. All too often I’d say it’s the mindset of the Rich that sets them apart from the poor (the successful apart from the failures) , I honestly believe that this successful mindset is learned behavior.

      • drsmithy….

        I agree with coming.

        The rest of your shtick about soul crushing and made up work is just a special plea. There is so much work to both clean up the mess made and to organize for what is to come. That’s not to mention all the study’s that show high paying work is not always fulfilling, just the opposite, some only stay on because of social ramifications e.g. loss of status.

        I’m all ways bemused by the Classicism and Bernays style rhetoric in forwarding social policy to keep the unwashed from going off reservation – so epic – but so banal at the same time.

      • Cyclone Ranger

        By your logic Coming: homeless people shouldn’t be given aid, allowed to sleep on park benches, provided with medical care or allowed to use the public transport network.

        Now one or more of those things are denied them already but your statements would deny them all of that. In other words there is a line. And this thread is about where to draw it. You seem to be failing to realise it already exists and simply can be redrawn whenever society so wishes.

        As to the kids thing. None of your business. But you might want to think about, since you mentioned it, what to tell your kids about work round the house for *their* kids when yours are grown up. As I understand it, robot polishing doesn’t take that long.

        Which, from my perspective, is the point of progress. Not *more* work. Where’s the logic in that?

      • Cyclone Ranger

        PS Good to see you keeping your hand in haroldus.

        PPS Do they make left-handed game console controllers?

      • Skippy: come on now, you know I dont engage with you

        Cyclone Ranger:

        “By your logic Coming: homeless people shouldn’t be given aid, allowed to sleep on park benches, provided with medical care or allowed to use the public transport network.”

        Not sure you even know what logic is to be honest

        But youre in fine company with drsmithy

        With unlimited manpower and resources, we can have the people of australia build homes for each other and for the disadvantaged.

        When the government is the employer, market forces are not a concern

        That is the whole point

        Of course, instead of having people build houses for the homeless, we COULD just let them spend their time wanking and playing computer games because, you know, its all about their own self-fulfillment

        Fisho: UBI wont do anything to help people with learned helplessness either

      • Cyclone Ranger

        And what of those who are unable to participate in your programme/Putsch/busy-work/long-walk future?

        And what of those who think making people work until they are 67 is corporate evil gone mad?

        Where do they sit in your Youtopia?

        Is it simply a case of #workorgetoffthebus with you?

      • coming..

        “Skippy: come on now, you know I dont engage with you”

        Mate I just agreed with you on this specific topic, don’t be an ass hat with irretrievable stakes in the ground ideologue.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        “explain to me why we would tolerate or even encourage people to contribute nothing to society?”

        Well,…we could also ask Coming,… why do we allow so few people to corral away for themselves, such a large percentage of our civilisations wealth and resources,way in excess of any “contribution they make to society”.
        Do you view the democratic redistribution of power during the 20th Century as some kind of an unpleasant Anomaly in the history of Human civilisation and hope for a return to Rule by an Aristocracy or Politburo of the most Aggressively competitive?

        What are you actually advocating for when you say,…”you forgot about the “from each according to his abilities” part of the equation” And ” I’m not sure what your definition of “work” is, but in my family unit only the under 5s get away without doing any of it”,….Forced labor as a kind of Moral ritual?

        I to have little Respect for those people devoid of any Work ethic,…but I dont advocate leaving them to the dogs like you seem to be Coming,… or using the power of a totalitarian state to force them to be “Productive”
        What’s wrong with letting Democracy decide the Matter,…why all the confused Ayn Randian Shtick.
        As for retirees,…most I know do use their Time to re engage with the community in a way they were never able too when so time poor,..”applying their abilities” being as productive as they can be for so much of their adult life, in the competitive Marketplace.

      • There is no appetite for a job guarantee:

        400,000 jobs were added in AUS in the last 12 months and 3rd world passport holders are allowed to take almost all of them. Data shows that foreigners take almost all jobs that are added!

        Now way are the Greens going to ban foreigners from driving trucks here. They want the truck driving jobs to go to 3rd world males along with entry level jobs in the NBN. 3rd world passport holders are probably hired to work as ticket sellers at train stations here.

        3rd world males were hired to install Rudd’s Pink Batts!

        What is the point of a make work program when 3rd world males are allowed to take the make work jobs?

        Even if 3rd world passport holders were finally banned from working in government funded jobs, some Aussies are too injured or too mentally ill to work in the job guarantee. Some will still fall through the cracks, become homeless, and cost $25,600/year anyway.

      • GunnamattaMEMBER


        Thats exactly what I would ask.

        We cant have people sitting around doing nothing……….OK….

        but we can have them sitting around being ground into the turf while the 1% extract the juice from them
        but we can have them corralled into meaningless lives as debt serfs
        but we can immerse them in mediocrity from the get go with substandard education
        but we can herd them into the military and send them off to do our bidding (and nickel and dime them afterward when they get injured or traumatised)
        But we can load them up with sugar and fats and wonder why they come down with diabetes and heart disease
        We can allow them to drink (but not smoke dope)
        We can feed our youth to the FIRE lobby, and provide them a world where their aspiration will be ‘bullshit’ jobs

        Personally i think a UBI is likely to be a waste of time because we can be 100% certain that right wing nutjobs (just like Coming) will run the ‘I am not paying taxes to pay for them’ line and any UBI becoming a seriously subsistence style bullshit of a chunk of society – presumably by the 1%ers who will happily euthenase those getting UBI or turn them into subhumans one way or another.

        But at a certain level while I dont like the idea of people relying on handouts to sit around and do sweet FA, I live in a society where people are happy to shell out tax concessions to gouge others (or do a load of other retrograde and meaningless things with their fellows)…..so why shouldnt we have a UBI? (apart from Coming style emotionality about people being paid to do nothing)

      • What I’m advocating is essentially communism, but somehow I am a “right wing nutjob”?

        Can you explain further?

        Why are you putting all these words in my mouth?
        I agree with literally 0 of the opinions you have projected on to me

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        What I’m advocating is essentially communism

        ……….As seen through the minimal light available inside my sphinctre once my head is wedged in

        What you, Sir, are advocating is essentially Serfdom…..(and if you think thats anywhere near communism you may wanna read up on the works of Karl and Vladimir inter alia)

      • ok buddy

        Its called the “worker’s” movement for a reason

        good luck with your wanking gaming utopia
        Fuk everybody else am I right?

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        a subservient underclass (one you could play games with)

        Theres a right wing nutters wet dream, am I right?

      • i lost any respect for your opinions quite a while ago, but you’re just embarrassing yourself now

        A GJG is now synonymous with jackbooted tyrannical oppression ?

        You’ve completely lost the plot
        Maybe the AMA is lacing your medicines

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        Bummer, I’ve always really worshiped yours

        Lets explore a right wing nutjobs GJG, shall we?

        If they were doing a GJG gig

        ……..should there be restrictions on whether they could spend it on booze or drugs?
        ……..should they be allowed to post incendiary comments on social media?
        ……..should they be allowed to protest employment conditions?
        ……should they have board and lodging taken out of their allowance before they get paid?
        ……should they be registered as GJG jobs and the people doing them registered too?

        and of course all thats before we think about the list of ‘jobs’ you seemingly envision for them. You seemingly like menial for the underclass, but I cant find myself wondering in the menial bullshit jobs age if we wouldnt get better bang for the buck getting robots to do most of them.

      • Cyclone Ranger

        Having thought about it some more it’s clear that people should only ever be able to benefit based on their level of contribution to the group.

        On another subject entirely, planning on buying a subscription anytime soon?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        I know this is the internet and all, and people never bother to read the article, but I’ve now explicitly stated TWICE that I am in favor of a jobs guarantee so long as there are productive jobs for people to do.

        To say nothing of the myriad times I’ve said the same thing in other discussions, and argued against a UBI today.

        Ignorant , the both of you.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        By contrast Government make work always becomes some pointless task that separates good workers from good employers, teaching the underemployed more about rorting government schemes than understanding and marketing their unique skill set.

        Let’s be clear, here. A Jobs Guarantee isn’t about “make work”, it’s about real work that needs to be done but isn’t being done.

        “Make work” is toxic, regardless of who’s paying for it.

      • “What I’m advocating is essentially communism, but somehow I am a “right wing nutjob”?”

        If you were advocating communism there would be no need for a job guarantee as employment would always be held back on the supply side per short side rule. Communism under scarcity (yes not what Marx envisaged) means queues and shortages and trade deficits, not enough stuff and not enough workers to make stuff.

        So come clean and admit you are advocating a job guarantee under capitalism to fix it’s involuntary unemployment mess. Everyone knows that nobody gets what they put in under capitalism so why should a guaranteed income need to come with a job?
        Unless the job is part of a redistribution scheme which lifts all wages at the expense of the do nothing class – in which case I am all in favour.

        “explain to me why we would tolerate or even encourage people to contribute nothing to society?”

        what did poo jogger contribute to society?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        What I’m advocating is essentially communism, but somehow I am a “right wing nutjob”?

        LOL. No you’re not. You’re advocating the Protestant work ethic. You’re basically just dressing up ‘idle hands are the devil’s tools’, which is fundamentally an authoritative, condescending, belittling worldview.

        But if we were to imagine for a moment you actually were advocating Communism, the point being made is that in the not-too-distant-future, the “to each according to their needs” side of the equation probably won’t require anything more than a small percentage of people on the “from each according to their abilities” side of the equation to balance the whole thing.

        But you’re clearly far more interested in the “from each according to their abilities” than the “to each according to their needs”. Sounds suspiciously like supply-side economics to me.

      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        Mr Coming is presenting to us the textbook example of unsophisticated psuedo-economic “common sense”. This is the wasp-y idea that UBI is not acceptable because paying people for doing nothing is unthinkable – government invented jobs would be better. In fact, government invented jobs would probably be a bad idea. UBI would also probably be a bad idea because under the current system it would just be directly earmarked for ticket clipping. We are discussing bad ideas because nobody has a clue what we really should do.

        ** Note – I am not advocating or denouncing UBI, but using it as a starting point to make another argument. (for the literalists)

        UBI and many other schemes are inherently flawed because they are based on economic notions that are obsolete (or soon to be). Most economic thinking rests on the ideas of limited resources, the primacy of human labour, and the value of ideas. There is a long list of civilisations that collapsed because the delicate balance of their economy broke. By any of their metrics, our society should have collapsed decades ago. None of them could support vast numbers of people who do nothing very useful. We have passed that – our society is not starving, despite most people doing useless stuff.

        Things are changing. There might not be and endless well spring of “jobs” popping up just like they did after the horse and buggy. There might not be anything important for most people to do. An economy based on consumerism might not be viable. How we transition to the future is a really big question. Unfortunately, insisting that the future can be described as a vision of the past is not very useful.

        Our “economy” is actually a type of control structure. It evolved based on resource allocation, which makes a lot of sense. An “economy” can be based on any system so long as it serves the same purpose – stability and control. Ultimately, any complex organism or society requires a set of rules that keep it whole and prevent decay or collapse. That is an entropy function. With the advent of computers and networks, stable systems could look a lot different to what we have seen in the past. The question is how we reconcile the future with our deeply ingrained ideas about money, work and jobs.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Well put Darkmatter,…tell me,…do you think our civilisations survival more reliant on, deference to an enlightened technocracy or a greater embrace of REAL Democracy?

        I think the corruption of “institutional power” is unavoidable and the oppression of the Majority only able to be thwarted by genuine, democratic constraints on power.
        Should we be controlled by our “leaders” or should we controll them?


      • I don’t share DrSmithy despair wrt: what will happen when human work is no longer needed? Robotics , AI etc.
        I don’t think this way because for me work is primarily a social structure, at some point in the past we (that’s us..you and me) decided the rewards for work should be proportional to effort, skill, linage….and so on (which is to say that Remuneration should be a function of Productivity),,,but look now at what has happened to our definition of Productivity. Productivity is this new measure of anything but Units of Product per unit of Labour or Capital.
        We even have a Productivity Commission to help us decide what is…. umm ah Productive. Its not that it takes that much effort to understand how many Km’s or road we get per $B, a trained monkey could do that sum. The commission is there to employ people and perfect the narrative that makes this or that boondoggle socially acceptable. The more we move away from a traditional “Piece work” formula the more we’ll socialize the decision matrix and in the end analysis ultimately employ everyone in the boondoggle.
        As I’ve said on many an occasion, I don’t have a problem with this, however I do have a major problem with Economists and their ilk that would have us believe we’re ultimately operating in a Piece Work economy when it just not true, Socially we’ve moved on from Piece Work (wages linked directly to units of Product) Socially we are inventing / reinventing Work,
        What is it? where does it happen? how does it happen? who gets the biggest share? who gets sidelined and unmercifully assF’ed?
        These are not questions that will be answered by focusing on yesterday’s measurement metrics because the conclusions are so obviously wrong (not in keeping with the social objectives of any human grouping) If Productivity is measured in Units of output per unit of Input than Robots are going to win the game because in the end they’re more Energy efficient than us poorly designed humans.

        If we go back to the beginning Work was primarily a social event, I suspect in this sense our distant past is prologue, Economically we need to recognize this fact and begin the necessary transformation.

        BTW: I should have read Darkmatter’s missive before saying much the same thing minus his eloquence.

      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        do you think our civilisations survival more reliant on, deference to an enlightened technocracy or a greater embrace of REAL Democracy?

        I think the corruption of “institutional power” is unavoidable and the oppression of the Majority only able to be thwarted by genuine, democratic constraints on power.
        Should we be controlled by our “leaders” or should we controll them?

        The problem with the questions you have asked is that they effectively validate the past by by using the past as a reference point. We actually don’t know if Real Democracy can work. It is a nice idea, but most people might select policy that has a bad outcome. Our political and economic thinking comes from the 19th century and beyond. These ideas have become a bit like a religion – belief systems. The type of society we have now is a vast interconnection of complex networked systems. The truth is that nobody understands how it works. There is no mathematics that can predict the stability of complex systems (think about the Butterfly Effect for weather systems). So, many of the ideas for the way forward are barely guesses.

        Here is a possible way we could plan our society and economy in the future, and you might find it crazy. Complex systems cannot be analysed or “solved”. The only way manage them is to run lots of simulations and observe the outcomes then attempt to push the real system in a “better” direction. The best way to run the simulations would be as huge virtual worlds. We actually have the technology to do this now, and there are virtual worlds that have been around for at least 10 years. So, in the future, most people might spend a lot of time participating in virtual worlds, trying out new ideas and principles. What they do in the virtual worlds could be like jobs – or not. You might be able to build a society that way – a semi agrarian economy in the real world with politics replaced by a collection of virtual worlds. That might be possible. A future world may be radically different to what we saw in the 20th century.

        Just out of interest, what sort of a response would these speculative ideas get from your Labor Party meetings? How many people there would just think they are crazy? There is the problem. Our political systems are firmly rooted in the past, which is not helpful in dealing with change and uncertainty. What good does it do us if we pretend that radical change is unthinkable because it never happened in the past?

      • Relevant StakeholderMEMBER

        Nice words fisho, how does that correlate with your belief that Australians should submit to Chinese hegemony (who focus on manufacturing and traditional metrics of productivity) due to our previous poor choices (i.e. not focusing on traditional manufacturing and productivity)?

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        I don’t share DrSmithy despair wrt: what will happen when human work is no longer needed? Robotics , AI etc.

        Despair ?

        It’s not despair. Well, it is, but not about what will happen when human work is no longer needed, per se, but more about what will happen when that point is reached if nothing has changed about the people running the world.

        My view is ultimately optimistic. I’m a believer that the future can look like Star Trek TNG.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        We actually don’t know if Real Democracy can work.

        Sure we do. Switzerland. In fact, in most times and places Democracy works pretty well so long as it’s real democracy where the people have direct influence. It falls down in systems where the people only have indirect influence through representatives.

        You are using a lot of words, but not really saying much other than a) asserting nobody knows what’s going on (which is wrong) and b) things will change (which, at least, is not wrong).

      • Nice words fisho, how does that correlate with your belief that Australians should submit to Chinese hegemony

        I suspect you’re confusing what I believe is going to happen with what I hope will happen.
        China is winning because they’re playing the game that Western powers invented better than the Western powers .
        You’re also confusing our Domestic management of the Aussie economy with our Global management of the Aussie economy. One can be whatever we want it to be while the other has always been and will remain 100% Mercantile, always has been and probably always will be.
        This leaves us (Australians) with a problem: How do we run an economy which is internally a sort of Socialist utopia where nobody needs to work, while managing / balancing our Current Account.
        Today of course we simply ignore the Current account (in much the same manner as we have for the last 50 years) which raises the $64K : Will other nations continue to support our wonderful Aussie lifestyle if we produce absolutely nothing that’s of any tangible value to anyone outside the bubble? As I see it most of the problems that you guys complain about daily result from the mismanagement of the Current Account and the consequent Capital Account problems (which seem to tick you all off)
        Who knows is probably the right answer, but personally I wouldn’t bet on it, That’s why we need to be developing industries that leverage our human capital.
        BTW there is nothing inconsistent (not to my mind anyway) with Australian’s collectively producing something of near zero raw material value and selling this globally, this is after all the exact reason why most advanced economies are so fixated on developing and protecting Intellectual Property, IP is basically made out of thin air.
        It represents our unique knowledge, our collective wisdom or just the direction that we’re heading today….come join in the fun BUT don’t forget to pay us is the main message that IP dominate economies deliver globally.

      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        Sure we do. Switzerland. In fact, in most times and places Democracy works pretty well so long as it’s real democracy where the people have direct influence. It falls down in systems where the people only have indirect influence through representatives.

        You are using a lot of words, but not really saying much other than a) asserting nobody knows what’s going on (which is wrong) and b) things will change (which, at least, is not wrong).

        -> drsmithy When you don’t understand something, you just dismiss it or say something trite. That is not good.

        Democracy in Switzerland sort of works, but it doesn’t solve very basic problems like job fulfilment. Switzerland is still largely defined by its niche role in the global financial system. We don’t know if Switzerland will sail through the 21st century on cowbells and sensible shoes. Their democracy is probably a hell of a lot better than the Norks, but not infallible by any means.

        “a) asserting nobody knows what’s going on (which is wrong) ”

        That is one of the most ignorant comments anybody has ever said on this blog. Many people think they know what is going on. Many people know a little of what is going on. Many people just believe stuff. Very few people will actually concede that we can’t fully comprehend our situation because it is unknowable.

        One of the real problems we face is the manifold armies of smug idealogues who are quite sure that their brand of brain soup is the golden ticket. have a look at the Libs, Labor or the Greens and see if that description doesn’t fit.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        drsmithy When you don’t understand something, you just dismiss it or say something trite.

        Comedy gold.

        Your whole schtick is basically that the world is complex, nobody can model the whole thing, therefore everything that’s been said in the past is wrong, and consequently everything that’s ever worked in the past won’t work in the future so why even bother trying.

        Which you then use to dismiss anyone whose opinion you don’t like with what is essentially ad hominem – basically, ‘the future is unknowable, therefore anyone who disagrees with my opinion on it is an idiot mired in the past. Because, y’know, technology’.

      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        Comedy gold.

        Your whole schtick is basically that the world is complex, nobody can model the whole thing, therefore everything that’s been said in the past is wrong, and consequently everything that’s ever worked in the past won’t work in the future so why even bother trying.

        Which you then use to dismiss anyone whose opinion you don’t like with what is essentially ad hominem – basically, ‘the future is unknowable, therefore anyone who disagrees with my opinion on it is an idiot mired in the past. Because, y’know, technology’.

        “the world is complex, nobody can model the whole thing, therefore everything that’s been said in the past is wrong”

        Perhaps you have reading comprehension problems? My point, which I have made many times, is the futility of planning for change based on the past as an absolute certainty. Some things might work, and we might end up trying to force fit the future into what we know. What we can see as obviously true is that the dogged pursuit of old ideas is not working. For instance – our political parties have play books that come from last century. Scott Morrison doesn’t see Automation destroying jobs – he sees jobs growth and prosperity way on past 2060. The Labor party thinks that the Unions will make a comeback. The Greens will put a lentil in every pot and steer us to tie-dyed nirvana.

        “and consequently everything that’s ever worked in the past won’t work in the future so why even bother trying.”

        Is that a strawperson? When stuff that used to work no longer works, the logical thing is to try new things. You can’t do that when you are welded to old dogma. This is one of the problems religion had – they couldn’t let go of the old ideas, even when they were clearly wrong. Don’t believe me – go and read up on Galileo and his tussle with the catholic church. The irony here is that we can learn a lesson from the past about how the past doesn’t always inform us of the future (just in case you were going to launch another strawperson at me)

        “the future is unknowable, therefore anyone who disagrees with my opinion on it is an idiot mired in the past.”

        The future is unknowable! Your idiotic remark to the contrary was not really a disagreement, just an ill considered swipe.

        “Because, y’know, technology”

        That is a very poor comeback. If you look at the last 50 years of technology and computing, you would need to be almost blind to not see the magnitude of change. However, it is not just technology. Mathematics is advancing as well, so the 19th century classical ideas underpinning economics and popular thinking are looking very shaky. For example, i have noted that the idea that there are harmonic cycles in economics is silly – straight from the 19th century and still ticking along. Computer modelling largely doesn’t work very well for complex systems – and that is something we will need to comfront. The world as portrayed by our politicians is close to a fantasy.

        As an afterthought – Sweeper. What are you doing throwing spitballs from the peanut gallery? Go and eat a digestive biscuit and have a sleep.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        My point, which I have made many times, is the futility of planning for change based on the past as an absolute certainty.

        What does that even mean ? That we shouldn’t use knowledge we have ? That we have to assume nothing that has worked in the past will work in the future ?

        You can’t do that when you are welded to old dogma. This is one of the problems religion had – they couldn’t let go of the old ideas, even when they were clearly wrong. Don’t believe me – go and read up on Galileo and his tussle with the catholic church. The irony here is that we can learn a lesson from the past about how the past doesn’t always inform us of the future (just in case you were going to launch another strawperson at me)

        This is just more empty ad hominem.

        That is a very poor comeback. If you look at the last 50 years of technology and computing, you would need to be almost blind to not see the magnitude of change. However, it is not just technology. Mathematics is advancing as well, so the 19th century classical ideas underpinning economics and popular thinking are looking very shaky. For example, i have noted that the idea that there are harmonic cycles in economics is silly – straight from the 19th century and still ticking along.

        Right. Because nobody’s ever criticised the idea of economic cycles before.

        Like I said, you’re basically saying nothing more insightful than ‘things will change in the future’, and you’re then going on to dismiss or abuse anyone who suggests that maybe we can use some of our existing knowledge and previous experiences to try and formulate some strategies to deal with that change as being “mired in the dogma of the past”. Because apparently technology is going to fundamentally change human behaviour, somehow.

      • Cyclone Ranger

        Thank God that appears to be over. Guess no one’s going to be opening that door again in the near​ future.

        Didn’t even get on the important topics anyway. Like whether entertaining oneself with Zelda is better than Ms Pacman, for example. Only. Of course, not that I’d know about these things from first-hand experience myself, but one does hear​ things occasionally.

        Did you have a preference Coming?

  5. Something to put on a stick and swirl through the fondue pot while the Swiss get to have a say this weekend on public money and the role of private banks and central banks.

    Currently polling suggests that over 30% of the Swiss are likely to vote for reform. That is an impressive display of money crankiness considering the SNB, Swiss govt and the private banks have been running an intense disinformation campaign.

    Careful readers will note what while Werner is also an advocate of reform he believes that decentralization of public money is the best long term solution to the current broken cartel between the state and private banks.

    There is a lot of force in that conclusion and it is certainly viable in countries like Germany who have maintained more of the infrastructure decentralisation requires. Countries with highly centralised banking sectors might require a different path to get to more democratic and less concentrated control of public money creation / reduction.


    “..The Central Bank Narrative

    For more than the past four decades, public policy discourse, especially when touching on macroeconomic and monetary policy, has been dominated by the views held and actively sponsored by the central banks, particularly in Europe and North-America, as well as Japan.

    Their policy narrative has been consistent over time and virtually identical between central banks, which is why I shall refer to it collectively as the ‘central bank narrative’. It has been mirrored in the type of economics that central bankers have supported and that has indeed subsequently become dominant in academia and among the economists selected as the experts of choice in the major newspapers and television channels: the theoreticians advancing neo-classical economics.

    This central bank narrative (and hence also the dominant neo-classical economics, also known as ‘mainstream economics’) has at least five major pillars, which I shall list briefly….”.

    • And some other views before the Private Banker Apologist Under Bridge caretakers arrive.



      Martin Wolf


      The Bankers Bugle


      Fortunately an important monetary reform first step in Australia requires nothing more than allowing every Australian the SAME right as the private banks, the right to an account at the RBA.


      But even that is too much for the Private Bank Apologists who fear the thin edge of the wedge and slippery slopes etc reducing their fat profits and economic dominance.

      • Drsmithy,

        Bank credit creation is privatised public money creation.

        Not for profit of small local public banks is decentralised public money creation.

        Werner likes the approach in Germany where there are still lots of small community and not for profits banks exercising credit creation powers. Essentially a healthy small scale network of regulated public banks.

        I understand his argument but I think it will lend itself to the same confusion between public credit as public money and private bank credit creation as public money we have now.

        I think it is better to keep them separate.

      • The whole thing is centered around the wonky theory’s of QTM and EMH, both have been thoroughly refuted for decades, but when ones ideology is dependent on them…. wellie…. why let facts get in the way… sorta like a religion….

      • The underbridge maintenance crew arrives bearing gibberish, bold assertions and incantations of acronymns.


        But as usual not a scrap of coherent argument beyond the tired but convenient insistence that nothing can be done about anything until a full ‘unpacking’ of human greed is complete, and when that ‘unpacking’ is done in a decade or two, we should start as far away from private bankers and money as possible.


        Because private banks, their executives, shareholders, service providers, sucker fish and regulators have no agency.

        Or so the apologia goes.

      • “The underbridge maintenance crew arrives bearing gibberish, bold assertions and incantations of acronymns.”

        Rank ideologue special plea posse drive by.

        oo7 do you realize how that makes you look from an academic or intellectual perspective look.

      • “..oo7 do you realize how that makes you look from an academic or intellectual perspective look…”


        That you say that without a hint of irony or self awareness is brilliant. Yet again you manage to exceed your exceedingly high standards when it comes to towering self importance. Praise be.

        I guess I will never know, if I am relying on your judgment in that regard, as your efforts over the years reflect neither.

        Though of course if you are correct in suggesting that your gibberish nonsense is representative of academic or intellectual discourse, than I am perfectly happy having nothing in common with either.

        But as feeding “free loading” trolls simply encourages them I will leave it there.

      • Hay oo7 I’m not the one that confuses money with a labor credit or poses as a little person proponent whilst boot licking the elite.

      • what the heck 007?
        You want to “decentralize public money” yet you want every Australian to have an account at the RBA?

        I don’t even think that’s a bad Idea but I definitely wouldn’t call it a step on the path to decentralisation.

      • Sweeper,

        I agree it sounds counter intuitive but if you accept we have a highly centralised public/private system right now that has been captured by private interests, the key difficulty is how to unwind that in a practical sense.

        It may be easier to pull power back to the centre and then decentralise rather than trying to decentralise the current model directly. In other words wind down credit creation by private banks but encourage credit creation by not for profits and community banks. A stealth form of decentralised ‘nationalisation’.

        However, as I noted above I am not convinced that decentralised public money creation in the form of bank credit creation by not for profit / community banks will work…though it would be a lot better than what we have now. Regulating public money creation in the form of bank credit creation is just too difficult (those little not profit banks will go pop on a regular basis) and ultimately those regulations are a form of centralised control anyway.

        I think it would be easier to regulate centralised public money creation within a nation state (political unit) and deal with that implicit centralisation of power by different methods. Options might include.

        1. Reconfiguring the arrangement of tax and spend powers to reduce the current centralisation.

        2. Allocate some of the centralised money creation to decentralised units of govt automatically.

        Rather than a CPI adjustment the accounts of state and local govts at the RBA might receive a New Issuance adjustment (on the basis of populatiin or some other formula) so they are getting at least some money free of Canberra control.

        For federated nation states like Australia consideration could be given to allowing the states to introduce their own state money alongside the national money. They would establish their own central banks with deposit accounts and people could have a MyNSW account to go with their MyRBA account. Exchange rates between the two monetary systems would allow transfers.

        A bit of competition between domestic public monetary systems might keep them honest but more importantly it might allow some critical flexibility to the smaller states rendered uncompetitive by being chained to a national monetary system.

        But as they remain part of the federation they would still get New Issuance adjustments and other fiscal transfers etc in the national money

        It all depends on how much decentralisation is considered desirable. That ultimately should be for the voters to decide.

        The only thing that is clear that what we currently have ….a public / private model captured by major private interests is the worst possible option.

        Highly centralised but controlled by private interests concealing their control behind a fig leaf that claims that private banking is in some way a protection of liberty.

      • In principle I don’t think giving the RBA power to issue deposits direct to the public is a bad idea at all. I think it makes a lot of sense.

        However a CPI adjustment would be a really really bad idea as inflation would become indeterminate.

        I also think the stated motive behind removing banks deposit creation powers in Swiss referendum – to de link new credit and money creation is wrong. As there is no automatic link between the two in any case. If you look at the history of commercial banking, commercial banks were originally defined and acted effectively as providers of tradeable safety deposit boxes on liability side who bought assets on the secondary market on asset side.
        They were never defined or regulated as new credit providers. There was never a nexus between deposit issuance and credit provision. And this continues to present, even as commercial banks moved into new credit space their method of financing it as noted to you over and over and over has not been deposit creation it has been raising term funds on capital markets. And in any case most of the growth in new credit has been via the non banks as has been the case since the beginning of time.

        So I think the Swiss case on this is really really arse about. Removing deposit (serving as means of exchange) issuance powers of banks will not put a break on new credit. It will just mean current commercial banks will be begin to look more like non banks where all funds are sourced in capital markets and they become solely providers of new credit rather than buyers of securities in secondary markets as well.

        This is the problem when paranoia and mysticism take over a case.
        The plan should have been sold as the state taking back all responsibility for the payment system and for safe keeping of all money. Which is a worthwhile goal as the private sector have shown they can’t manage it and just gouge the public for the privilege. By confusing this with credit provision things have gone off the rails. Which has also allowed the against case to say “hang on if you want all deposits to be at the CB then the CB is going to become a provider of new credit. Who will make these decisions? Will they be motivated on commercial grounds or public interest grounds blah blah blah”.
        Which is complete rubbish because the CB would not need to become a new credit provider at all. 100% of its assets could be bought on the secondary market – which again was the original structure and direction of deposit banking in any case.

      • Sweeper,

        “..The plan should have been sold as the state taking back all responsibility for the payment system and for safe keeping of all money. Which is a worthwhile goal as the private sector have shown they can’t manage it and just gouge the public for the privilege. By confusing this with credit provision things have gone off the rails. Which has also allowed the against case to say “hang on if you want all deposits to be at the CB then the CB is going to become a provider of new credit. Who will make these decisions? Will they be motivated on commercial grounds or public interest grounds blah blah blah”…”

        I agree with that.

        That is pretty much the point I made to Nick Gruen when he commented on the MyRBA account post.

        Providing stability remains the overall objective a CPI adjustment need not be a problem. Zero CPI equals zero adjustment. In any event, not having an adjustment is not deal breaker as the 100% guarantee would be the key attraction and encouraging people to actually invest for returns has merit.

      • But you are promising to create more money to deal with inflation. That makes inflation indeterminate.
        How would your CPI adjustment deal with deflation? Forced confiscation of money?
        To keep inflation stable you need to promise the opposite eg. remove money when people expect inflation.

      • “..But you are promising to create more money to deal with inflation. That makes inflation indeterminate.
        How would your CPI adjustment deal with deflation? Forced confiscation of money?
        To keep inflation stable you need to promise the opposite eg. remove money when people expect inflation…”

        Only if no other actions were taken and you are assuming that the CPI adjustments are spent.

        Plus “removing money” doesnt necessary mean removing money from individual savings. A fiscal deficit reduction or surplus will have the effect of removing money.

        There are plenty of ways to take action that sends a message re inflationary expectations.

        Say CPI suggests an adjustment of 1% to MyRBA balances but you dont want to encourage people to rush out and demand 1% wage increase (which as we know hasnt really been an issue in recent years with the break down in centralised wage fixing) you could announce a reduction in fiscal policy or better still restrictions on private bank credit creation (assuming it still exists). I doubt it will prove to be a problem but if it was, a suspension of CPI adjustments until CPI is very low would be fine.

        Keep in mind that an increase in MyRBA balances may have zero effect on inflation anyway. Accounting entries to MyRBA accounts alone do not drive demand.

        Deflation is even easier to solve. No CPI adjustment but the government gets to run a larger deficit.

      • The Swiss referendum proposal did not succeed with only a 27% YES vote but considering the scare campaign and some of the problems with the proposal that is a pretty good effort.


        Less ambitious reforms are likely to be more successful.

        Something nice and simple like the option to open a MyRBA account at RBA – even without CPI adjustment – would be an effective first step.

        Next steps might include.

        1. Requiring all transfers from govt to be made to a MyRBA account. People can transfer out to other accounts.

        2. Withdrawal of public guarantees of deposit accounts with private banks.

        3. Requiring private banks to increase reserving of any ‘at call’ deposits accounts.

        Just need to get the ALP on board. The Greens as usual over egged the pudding with the Central Bank as a loan officer, but perhaps they can step back from that degree of over reach.

    • I think it’s funny, might try it now. All this moral outrage is hilarious, just don’t buy it and let the market decide. Instead of this we must police all the things in this world attitude. Plenty of example of sexism against men in the world. If a bunch of birds got together and made misandrist beers I’d laugh, I’d also not buy it (probsbly), so who cares?

      • Gavin, don’t you know that expressing an opinion whilst male is considered a hate crime in most circles these days. Talk about living on the edge …

    • adelaide_economist

      Ah yes, ‘global outrage’ which boils down to often *one* person tweeting from the comfort of their mobile phone about how bad something is. How sad is journalism today? And how sad is it that companies back down all the time because some random on the planet takes offence to something. You could scroll through the social media of any of these ‘offended’ tweeters and find they have posted things others could or would take offence at pretty quickly. Is anyone trying to destroy them for it?

      I wish more people and businesses would just ignore these insane rants and hashtag campaigns because in 99.9% of cases the thing blows over in less than 12 hours and is forgotten because we’re all on to the next thing we’re being told is ‘outrageous’ or some vacuous celebrity we’ve never heard of that we all need to mourn for. Meanwhile – jobs being destroyed, people can’t find shelter, environmental crisis – nah, they’re only stories if they can find someone tweeting about it with some cute hashtag as well.

      • +1 I mean FFS it takes Vice of all orgs to report on a homeless situation in Hobart…and there is no joining the dots as to the cause.

    • Yeah – its common sense. All the convenient climate change alarmism resulted in vast funding increases. When you get paid to have an opinion, it gets in the way of people trusting that opinion. The demonising of anyone who had differing views didn’t help either.

      That, and the replication crisis.

      • Common sense = collection of environmental biases.

        Heck did you know there is a plethora of definitions for common sense.

  6. An ode to feeble corporate apology.

    “Hi, America. We were awesome for a long time. Here are some culturally representative shots of people like you smiling and enjoying our services. After repeated denials, we recently had to admit to violating your trust, but the unelucidated bad thing doesn’t have to come between us. We promise: we fixed that 5h1t. You will now wake up feeling refreshed in 3,2,1…”

    • >(…)You will now wake up feeling refreshed in 3,2,1… Just pay no mind to the searing pain in the ass, it is normal after ‘falling’ asleep on this couch…

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        And feel free to call our customer service hotline if there is any discomfort with the stitches where we have taken our pound of flesh for your convenience. Calls may be recorded for coaching purposes.

    • Good article, I hate corporate apologies. Such contrived shyte, no sincerity just sorry to get caught.

  7. Capital’s Share of Income Is Way Higher than You Think

    “The shares of income going to “capital” and “labor” are vexed issues. How much is received for doing work, and how much is unearned “property income”— interest, dividends, etc.? For a long time, economists thought these relative shares stayed roughly unchanged over time. But since the 70s, and especially since 2000, the share going to owners of capital has been increasing, while labor’s share has gone down.

    People get income for doing stuff, and they get income for owning stuff. Increasingly the latter. And the ownership share of income goes to a small slice of households that own almost all the stuff.”

      • Mining BoganMEMBER

        Are the Ottoman Wars on again? Some of those museums in Vienna have pretty cool killing stuff in them. Sharp too. One would have to be very careful about nicking oneself. Don’t think a bandaid would do the job.

      • But what about the vibrancy?

        If we deport them, we won’t make our weekly quota of 4,000 net inward migrants.

      • I’m guessing you want them out purely because they’re rapists, not because they’re Pakistani rapists, or if they were foreign caucasian rapists you’d have less of a problem?

      • @Dennis this is why!

        They claimed in their defense that they couldn’t help themselves as it was part of their culture. HIs father said he would make a good gynecologist…incapable of changing due to their culture. As admitted by themselves. So yes partly because they come from an inferior culture and more so because these rapists with 0 respect for western women. Take your pick?

      • Gavin, what a load of bullshit. A dumbarse lawyer gave them that line, hoping I guess, that the judge would swallow it as there was no way out of a hefty sentence if it was’t. I don’t recall what they got, but it should have been at the top end of any possible sentence and then sent back. Back because of what they did, not because of where they come from.

      • Gavin, WTF. How does getting citizenship save them, didn’t they change the law to allow deportation back to their own country?

        WRT to culture, what about the white male aussie whose whole family were jailed over the death of the young (13) female foster child they had care of and the 19 yo son raped, father then murdered her to hide that and the whole family lied to police to cover it up. Shit people come from everywhere.

      • Having said that, I am watching this guy’s video. RE: Tommy Robinson. Clear concise and makes a valid point.

        Having said that, he says there is a lot of issues with child grooming gangs, who happen to be from Pakistan and happen to be Muslim. That’s not something that can be disputed.

      • Gavin, please tell me you didn’t need to watch that vid to understand why that dhead is in jail!

        Pedo gangs are rife world wide, including Australia and including white men.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        They claimed in their defense that they couldn’t help themselves as it was part of their culture.

        How is that any different from young rich guy or sports star claiming they shouldn’t be found guilty because it would ruin their promising careers ? Or those little grubs at ADFA ?

        There’s no shortage of arseholes the world over with no respect for women, regardless of where they’re from, and there’s plenty of people in western nations willing to give them a pass for it.

      • You are right Gav, all of the other idiots are wrong. I see this in Melbourne. They obviously haven’t seen what is happening in the UK, and haven’t read the Jay report.

  8. GeordieMEMBER

    What about the poor multimillionaire homeowners? – The Globe and Mail, Canada.


    “Another week, another protest rally held by multimillionaires on the west side of Vancouver who are upset they are going to have to pay a 0.2-per-cent property surtax on that portion of their home assessed at over $3-million.

    For many, it may cost a whole $1,500. I’m sure some of you reading this are now shaking in rage, too. Not in sympathy, but in anger at their pettiness. Even with the small increase, these outraged residents will be paying far less in property taxes than homeowners in major cities across the country.

    Many of these people paid peanuts for their homes decades ago. They admit it themselves. It’s mostly blind luck that has delivered them this massive cash windfall, but deliver it, it has. Many are retired professionals, living on wonderful pension plans as well.”

    • Haha if housing wasn’t turned into just another commodity this wouldn’t be happening.

      • GeordieMEMBER

        Now that neoliberalism dictates the value of your shelter from the elements as an extortionate proportion of your income you can be sure the end is near. (We can hope, I guess)

    • boomengineeringMEMBER

      Good day for you to study, and fixate on that goal of a less boring future life.

    • Rain should never be miserable.
      Think of it a a pathway to all the fresh healthy produce that will be abundant and less price blown.

    • GeordieMEMBER

      “I hate all those weathermen, too, who tell you that rain is bad weather. There’s no such thing as bad weather, just the wrong clothing, so get yourself a sexy raincoat and live a little.” – Billy Connolly

  9. https://www.domain.com.au/news/watch-this-space-the-sydney-suburbs-where-new-infrastructure-will-drive-prices-skyward-20180608-h10p6y

    I know the answer to getting angry reading this stuff is to stay away from DomainFax, but is it really the case that property was too affordable to begin with?? What the actual F ???? Sounds like the thinking of a Government that builds sports stadia whilst its emergency services infrastructure falls to bits in the face of never ending population growth.

    Next in line are suburbs like Randwick and Kingsford in the east, along the Sydney light-rail to the CBD, which have already seen strong growth.

    Randwick prices have risen by 73.52 per cent during the past five years to $2.516 million, and Kingsford prices by 103.7 per cent to $2.2 million.

    Higher property prices along the new Sydney light-rail corridor have been outlined as a key measure of success by the State Government.

    • Prices also rose substantially in and around Crows Nest after the light rail stop was announced. This is despite a St Leonards rail station being a 5-10min walk away, as well as a smorgasbord of buses to choose from 1 block away on Pacific Highway or Falcon Street.

      Investors have become irrational.

    • “In a period of strong overall price growth for Sydney, areas on the inner-west light-rail route have recorded healthy rises.”
      There were 20 guys working out at our gym, who all became “strong”. Five of these guys also took our protein shakes, and these 5 guys became “healthy”. Therefore, you should buy our protein shakes.

    • That’s the lazy entitled snowflake 2009 cohort still bludging off mum’n’dad’s future retirement…

    • GeordieMEMBER

      It’s not hard to demonstrate the LNPs income tax cuts are welfare for the wealthy and the fact that the ALP aren’t cutting them to pieces with basic logic backed by publicly available data goes a long way to showing how utterly pathetic both parties are.

      Want to help things along with tax cuts? Shift all the tax brackets up by $20k , including the tax free threshold, leaving the highest at $180k.

      • Irrelevant tripe

        Are you a paid shill trying to distract us ?

        Stop taxing income altogether

        Tax wealth

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Want to help things along with tax cuts? Shift all the tax brackets up by $20k , including the tax free threshold, leaving the highest at $180k.

        + Add a few more at the top, targeting the really high income earners on $500k, $1m+, etc. Then rejig the brackets so they’re calculated off the median income so we don’t have to sit through this “bracket creep” idiocy every four years.

        Tax wealth as well. Especially capital gains.

        Fifty years ago there were 20+ tax brackets and the top rate was 66%. We did OK.

      • Drsmithy,

        “..Fifty years ago there were 20+ tax brackets and the top rate was 66%. We did OK…”

        Are you sure about that?

        There is a narrative that argues that this brazen system of redistributive socialism fired up resistance in the country clubs and private businessmen lodges across the western world. They channeled tithes to underground teams who then set up think tanks, university departments and infiltrated the channels of population culture.

        Then they got to work lobbying factions in the republic and weakening the ventilation shafts in the design of the socialist death star to allow a dawn attack.

        Incredible how a small group of rebels, less than 10% of the galaxy…perhaps as few as 1%…could acheive such a victory.

        Perhaps we a paying a high price right now for that 66%.

        If only we left them in peace to a life of plutocracy we might still be living happy lives uninfected with the patterns of thought once safely limited to a few well watered postcodes.


      • Possible, PFH, but where there is a way the wealthy can manipulate the setting to favour themselves, regardless of tax rates or whatever you like, they will. It makes business sense to do so. Morality and ethics be damned as they’re making decisions where the total $$$ return is the prime (and only) concern.

        We need a tax system that is simple, straight-forward and inescapable. The goal should be a system that is so simple that you don’t need accountants any more; the ATO give you a live tax feed on a monthly basis, like your super does. At the end of the year you pay the difference, or opt to tweak the difference throughout the year as you go.

        We have all the tools necessary to do this right now, so why not migrate toward it?

        I love being able to long into eTax and see all my interest and dividend payments pre-filled. Where are my capital gains and losses, they should be there as well – the data is out there. And who’d complain if accounts largely became extinct? (Apologies if you’re married to one, for many reasons)

    • Which just shows how nuts our property prices have gotten to. If you’re average Joe can only muster $55k P/year. Average homes should be $400-$450k.

      • So, what happens if one isn’t in a couple, or if the something happens to the earning ability of one of a pair? The lower the cost of necessities the better off society is. This also assists business, well those whose business model isn’t rentseeking.

      • I’m not disagreeing, but I’m also talking about detached homes. Singles could purchase smaller town houses or apartments. Especially if they were $200k or so.

    • Cyclone Ranger

      Thanks rj. Wondered about that for yonks. Certainly didn’t feel like everyone round where I live was on 89k.

      I think this stat started being packaged this way under Swan… so can’t blame Scumo really. However, basing an entire 20 billion tax cut strategy on it? Wow. They must really think they have no chance at the next poll and are getting *really* desperate.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        It’s always been presented like that. But since wage growth for decades has gone mostly to people in the top percentiles, the gap between the mean and the median is becoming much more noticeable..

      • Cyclone Ranger

        Average *full time* wage has always been the benchmark? When I were a lad, it were just average.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        When you were a lad, part-time work was probably the anomaly, rather than nearly the norm.

        At least, I’m going to assume you were a lad back when full employment was still Government policy ?

      • Cyclone Ranger

        When I were a lad, Tuppence was the cat’s name, Australia used to know how to play rugby and we had to be home from school by 4pm, or we waited until our Father got home.

        And we were grateful for it.

      • I don’t agree CR,,,

        Anyone’s youth is a false base line to establish anything off e.g. don’t think water scarcity was an issue in your youth.

      • I think the point is that they didn’t work all their life

        Not sure why getting to a certain age entitles you to a permanent paid holiday anyway

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        I think the point is that they didn’t work all their life

        “Patricia worked in a textile factory – which did not pay superannuation – and also picked up a range of cleaning jobs, but a work injury forced her into retirement at age 58.”

        Not sure why getting to a certain age entitles you to a permanent paid holiday anyway

        Some people find it preferable to leaving them out on the street to die.

      • Can she answer phones ? Read to children? Enter Data?

        These are all ways in which she could meaningfully contribute to society rather than playing bingo and watching daytime tv

        Or was the hip injury so severe she is on a respirator and responds only to painful stimuli

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Can she answer phones ? Read to children? Enter Data?


        Is there anyone who’s going to employ her to do that ?

        Probably not.

      • Coming I agree with drsmithy…

        There is more than enough studies on jerking people around to suit market driven expectations and how that screws with not only individuals but family structures. You’re being a bit axiomatic from an individualistic perspective imo.

    • Also notice the last budget had the government reverse mortgage for “pensioners wanting to enhance their lifestyle”. Now we know what Scomo really means. Pensioners wanting to stay alive with food and heating will have all their assets stripped and thrown onto the streets when they no longer have any assets.

    • Or you can be a migrant, that comes here at 50, works 17 years in a low-skilled, low-tax contributing job, and get a pension.

    • J BauerMEMBER

      If you’re bored google pizzagate. Whitehouse emails released by Wikileaks about Obama ordering $65k of hotdogs (apparently code for young boys) for a private Whitehouse party. The emails talk about getting the hotdogs through the “usual channels”. They also discuss being excited about visiting hotdog stands in Hawaii. It’s all very weird.

      • I’ve heard about •that• (thanks Zerohedge!! Didn’t know I needed to wear my tinfoil pith helmet at all times) but my brain stil goes WTF??? Really??

  10. Monetary easing in China flowing through to Australian property this week?

    Huge 88% clearance rate at mid-week auctions.
    88% clearance rate in the Domain Auction House last night. @StellaGankin & Marina Makhlin of Belle Property Bondi Junction had two great sales, the standout being a deceased estate in Paddington selling 410k above the owners expectations #auctionresults

    Low volumes due to the long weekend could see a reasonable clearance rate given Chinese buying. Early indications:
    Hot Auction at 3 Cooper St Double Bay this morning. It sold for a whopping 4.462m which was 1.462m over reserve for @RaineHorneDB by auctioneer @damiencooley

    • Please god no.

      Says the atheist. Don’t they read the news? Don’t they know prices are going DOWN and therefore Chinese are genetically programmed to not buy?

      • Real estate where I’m looking EXPLODED this week. A large number of places went under offer after having been on the market for a while. It was truly a step change in the space of about 48 hours. I’m not sure what else could have caused such a U turn in the market in such a short period of time.

      • @Grammus I can well believe that they could be responsible for such a quick step change. I have been saying to the olds for a while it looks like a correction might be starting but if anything changes in China then it probably won’t last. There is enough dumb money in China that won’t be informed of local market conditions that this correction might be stillborn and we could be looking at new highs. And while the CH gov may have stopped a lot of capital outflow, the Chinese just need enough time to figure out new ways of moving money across borders.

    • The Chinese have switched tastes for hiving off both wealth transfers and family safe havens, historically this is normal, albeit the speed of such palette shifts is the difference. This is curious when considering the whole homo economicus perspective.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Did the Nazis change the capital flight rules, when the smart German Jewish money started looking for somewhere else to go?
        Were there Property spikes/Bubbles in the few Anglosphere locations that money fled to?

        Big moneyed individuals can always find complex ways to protect themselves,…but what of this enormous Chinese Middle class with family fortunes in the range of only a few million to the low 10s of millions.
        The Anglosphere must still look like one of the best safe havens, in spite of likely coming Price falls and accompanying recessions.
        German and Eastern european Jews didn’t hord their wealth away in Gold because of its yield or capital growth, it was because of increasingly rapacious and Authoritarian states with long histories of confiscations from “enemies of the state”,…just like our major trading partner and Immigrant source country.
        The main difference now is that we’re not looking at 500,000 jews fleeing Nazi Germany, but rather a 300 million+ Middle class looking to escape an Authoritarian Police state that still purports to be a Communist Nation.
        Once your fortune was made, why would you not want to leave!

      • EP,

        A few months ago I caught up with a friend who has been working throughout Asia over the past few years. He had just finished three years in China dealing with all sorts, but mostly the fairly well to dos. The one point he drilled into me was that even if only a fraction of one percent were loaded, that is more people than all of Australia, and they all want to make sure their cash and family is somewhere safe. So, even if a fraction of that fraction makes it through then it is going to have a big influence on the market it goes to.

        On that topic, I heard a good one during the week. A developer of an apartment block in Melbourne is under pressure to renumber their apartments. They apparently got council to sign off on having no fourth floor, or any room with the number four. Why? Because the Chinese can be superstitious and four and death sound very similar in their language. It just shows that the complex wasn’t built with local residents or investors in mind. The developers had the folk you are mentioning in mind when they put the project together.

      • EP…

        America alone has over 450 billionaires in a population of about 300 million…. do the maths….

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Sure,…but, American Billionaires,…Or their Upper Middle class, are NOT looking to Australian real estate and residency, as a “Plan B” safe haven like the Chinese are,…the scale is just not there.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        @ footsore

        I heard those 4th floor stories years ago here in Sydney,…a Funny thing last week, was me buying a shout at the very lowbrow Australian Hotel at McGraths Hill after a local job there and listening to a very bogan looking, overweight, hi vis wearing, 50ish looking, council worker, explaining this very phenomenon, to his 2 similar, red faced, alcoholic looking, Aussie mates.
        Made me wonder how long our housing Affordability crisis can be ignored by our political class.

      • EP…

        That is what I was referring to WRT tastes, heaps of yanks like say NZ, they did prime the pump for its RE boom post Iraq war as a safe haven IMO. The Chinese are just late comers to the party, so that begs the question of what enabled it all regardless of nationality.

  11. – I don’t celebrate the birthday of the queen. If I had it my way then we have ditched the queen as our head of state long time ago.

    • J BauerMEMBER

      Given how dumb Straya and it’s people are, I can only imagine the magnitude of megalomaniac we’d have as the head of state. bob Carr, Kevin Rudd, fck it’s scary.

      • – Indeed. Perhaps the queen is indeed not so bad after all. When she’s that far away she can’t do (too) much damage, unlike the australian politicians over here. :-p
        – But the queen – as the head of state – is a relic of the past. And I want to get rid of that relic. I also would remove the union jack form the australian and the new zealand flag. These are also relics of the past. time to move on.

      • The queen might be a relic of the past, Willy, but what would you replace her with? And would that make Australia a better place? Last time we had a republic plebiscite, it was voted against because there wasn’t agreement on the type of republic we would have. In any case, nothing will happen until after the queen passes away.

      • If you have the President elected by 75% of the parliament – you don’t get Rudd. I personally voted against thte Republic for two reasons. Malcolm Frased and Gough Whitlam were BOTH for it. President would be elected by ‘popular vote’ so it would be just another cheap political position.

    • It’s probably lower. Last weekend I went to two auctions in Melbourne and neither were reported on Domain, yet as always now they report regional auctions as part of Melb. When I see them take say Ballarat Myrtleford etc out of the results we’ll see even lower numbers….fraud.

    • If I remember correctly, long weekend auction clearance rates in Melbourne are always higher than they are in normal weekends. This is the first time I’ve seen it significantly lower.

    • You know another annoying thing I am noticing now, if you search on real estate.com for houses, units are also showing up.
      It’s like that type of dwelling isn’t a real criterion anymore.

      • They know you’re aiming tooo high 😉 Go for that “low hanging fruit”! Be welcomed as an Esteemed Member to their debt club…..!

    • Really, this is an ideological issue that can be boiled down to whether you believe in privatisation and free markets, or whether you are a communist
      The author is notoriously and irredeemably in the former camp, and his diatribe is coloured by that pre-existing bias

      This person has ignored the main reason why a jobs guarantee is powerful: the government can put into action underutilised labour to effect profound projects that are not otherwise “economically viable”

      Additionally, the issue is not wholly about the personal satisfaction of the individual
      This is about the greater good of the group
      Once again this is a collectivist vs individualist ideological divide

      You and others are consistently assuming that the work is punishment in return for the income
      That we will invent the work to justify the job

      That is completely backwards
      There is major, major work that needs to be done in many, many areas of our society
      This need justifies the creation of the jobs
      There is no reason why ANY of the australian population should not be utilised to better the condition of the nation

      • “Really, this is an ideological issue that can be boiled down to whether you believe in privatisation and free markets, or whether you are a communist”

        Ahahahaah… remember our past convo about R&R….

      • The US already has a GJG: its called the armed services

        We could have a similar thing, it just wouldn’t involve blowing up children in the middle east

        You sign up, get free training in how to lay and connect fibre cable, then you’re on a contract for a certain number of years building the NBN

        For instance
        etc etc

      • I don’t confuse MIC Keynesianism with a JG proffered by MMT or PK coming, go read the literature and respond to it.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        “There is no reason why ANY of the australian population should not be utilised to better the condition of the nation”
        Freedom from coercion is one reason I can think of,…but otherwise I’m with you Brother.

        I dont like this, “one or the other” mentality though,…collectivist vs individualist, privatisation and free markets, vs communist etc etc,…the Democracies of the west were at their best when a mixed a Hybrid of both developed through a real Left/right parliamentary dichotomy, where compromises had to be made by both main ideological camps,…now it just seems like a winner take all game.

      • Coersion has been used in every single society in the history of humanity (and animals as well)
        and always will be

        Why do you think we have jails? and police? and shame?

        As to your second point, my sentiments exactly
        We can have a GJG, but also reward productive or dedicated or gifted workers

        Except instead of rewarding them for profits that accrue to the owners of capital, we reward them for benefit they deliver to society as a whole

        Government doesn’t have to be corrupt and incompetent
        Socialism doesn’t entail a free ride with no responsibility

      • GunnamattaMEMBER

        Coersion has been used in every single society in the history of humanity (and animals as well)
        and always will be

        So we should perfect it and make it efficient and user (or coerced) pays, and then we should really bully the shit out of the underclass to let them really know what we think of them. And then the uber set should be entitled to get their jollies. And then we should invest heavily in defence and security and starve the underclass of education – because we know they will get militant and we wanna make sure we win…

        …and we want to have first night with their wives or daughters….or to be able to sacrifice them to whatever cause we think appropriate….or sell them a multigenerational mortgage….or get a tax concession they pay for (now theres an idea)

      • In a revolution, one wins or one dies – if it is a true revolution. (Che Guevara).

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Well those Latinos can be a little hotheaded,…Karl Marx thought a Communist revolution could have taken place in the UK and the USA without any bloodshed at all,….I think he may have underestimated the Plutocratic controlled media’s ability to pervert/subvert Democracy.
        But I think there is still some hope for change,….but before a Revolution, one must first exhaust all the avenues for Reform.

        You tried any of that yet?


      • Gunnamatta you are off your trolley

        I’ve finally replaced the dastardly AMA as your ultimate bogeyman lmao

      • Coming no socialist here, social democratic administration is another thing. You know establishing a level playing field and basics our knowlage has on offer to all, making it cheaper for businesses to operate whilst putting a floor under society vs the propensity for the free market types to blow themselves and everyone else to smithereens and then wonder why the unwashed go off the reservation.

        Persoanly I don’t think we need “Coersion” when incentives work better and don’t trigger the libertarians inherent paranoia. And yeah I understand the dramas with everyone judging each other by the size of their numerically based size and not what they contribute to society as a whole e.g. an OB-GYN vs Midwife – where the OB-GYN get payed more and will argue they deliver more baby’s due to Fordism like dynamics vs the lower payed Midwife that actually provides more patient care at a lower cost.

    • Since I have some free time i can individually rebut each one

      1. Basic jobs don’t help the disabled
      This is a strawman. Introducing a GJG does not magically make other social welfare disappear.
      People who have no capacity to contribute wont be asked to contribute

      2. Basic jobs don’t help caretakers
      A strawman for exactly the same reason as 1.
      Additionally, there would be more labour for the government to provide “free” care if the carer wished to take that option instead

      3. Basic jobs don’t help parents
      See above

      4. Jobs are actually a big cause of poverty
      My mind exploded. His explanation is nonsense, and I think you will agree if you read it. For starters, we could use labour to build mass-transit systems and improve everyone’s quality of life
      This one was really just a load of garbage

      5. Basic jobs may not pay for themselves by doing useful work
      For instance, picking up litter from the side of the road would improve everybody’s quality of life, and requires absolutely no skill , intelligence or strong committment
      Again , from each according to their abilities

      6. Private industry deals with bad workers by firing them; nobody has a good plan for how basic jobs would replace this
      Good workers can be rewarded by receiving more desirable or higher paid government jobs, and vice versa for the poor workers
      We don’t have to assume that the public service is by definition a basket-case, and we don’t have to throw meritocracy out the window just because we are becoming socialists
      Once again his ideological biases are showing

      7. Private employees deal with bad workplaces by quitting them; nobody has a good plan for how basic jobs would replace this
      See above
      Or, alternatively Its called voting

      8. Basic income could fix private industry; basic jobs could destroy it
      GJG sets a floor for wages, and worker conditions.
      If that destroys some industries so be it: the excess capacity can be utilised by the government instead for projects that benefit the society rather than the owners of capital

      9. Basic income supports personal development; basic jobs prevent it
      I’m sure he wouldn’t say the same thing about private jobs.
      And this is not some type of chain-gang situation
      8 hours work, 8 hours sleep, 8 hours play

      10. Basic income puts everyone on the same side; basic jobs preserve the poor-vs-the-rest-of-us dichotomy
      This one is another nonsense. I challenge you to read this and deem it comprehensible

      11. Work sucks
      Lots of things in life suck, but we do them because they are good for us, or for other people
      Once our robot slave army finally arrive, I am happy to throw the GJG out the window

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      I’ll admit upfront I didn’t read the article, I only skimmed the headings, but it seems clear just from that the author has completely the wrong idea about a JG.

      A JG isn’t a work-for-the-dole scheme where you have to do some almost certainly pointless task to qualify for a welfare payment, just so certain kinds of people who are aghast at the idea of getting something for nothing are satisfied.

      A JG is about doing useful, productive, necessary work and being paid at or near market rates for doing so. For example, paying some of the vast number of unemployed people we currently have to fix all the broken roads. At the same rate the people currently being paid to fix roads receive.

      Yes, it certainly does nothing to help people who can’t work, for whatever reason. But a JG isn’t supposed to replace welfare (to be fair, neither is a UBI in the lefty models), it’s supposed to employ people who don’t have work and want it, but can’t find anyone to employ them. Welfare for people who can’t (or won’t) work is an entirely separate issue.

      • drsmithy, can you name a nation where a job guarantee exists?

        UBI exists, in its purest form, in Iran and Alaska.

        Xi Jinping is trying to expand China’s means tested income guarantee (called dibao) nationwide: https://www.economist.com/china/2017/04/29/chinas-new-approach-to-beating-poverty

        President Xi Jinping on Friday avowed that philosopher and revolutionary socialist Karl Marx is the “greatest thinker of modern times”

        Despite massive construction and manufacturing in China, some people are still destitute and they need an income. To boot, automation is taking hold in China. The latest solar panel factory has no lighting – robots do not need lighting. The only staff there are security guards to open and shut the gates.

        If your road fixing project goes ahead, 457 visa staff will be hired to fix the roads. Gillard gave 457 visas to KFC and PM Bill English said during the debate with Jacinda, and I am paraphrasing here, “Kiwis are too retarded to drive trucks and milk the cows”. Before him, PM John Key says he wants foreigners to do the jobs because “Kiwis are probably on drugs”.

        Governments do not wish to fix roads – they would rather hand out negative gearing subsidies. The railway tracks on the eastern side of Melbourne are very rickety and Dan Andrews does not care. Dan would rather spend $60 million per year to host an F1 race.

        Tanya Plibersek still wants 50% of year 12 finishers to go into “uni”. Where they will learn accounting and law rather than road repair. They will not get jobs as accountants either – those jobs are given to 3rd world passport holders along with IT jobs in the government-funded NBN.

      • Jacob…

        The problem is not government, its neoliberalism, what it advocates and its core axioms that forward that agenda. Until people understand its dominance, over a considerable period of time, its consequences, any policy advocacy forwarded is a fools errand.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        drsmithy, can you name a nation where a job guarantee exists?

        This country, along with many others post-WW2, had a full employment policy.

      • footsore, that is an interesting report:

        “neoliberal” ideas and policy prescriptions had been developed
        over decades by small-government, free market advocates who were waiting in the
        wings for an opportunity to implement them. The oil shocks provided just such an
        opportunity to paint the dominant Keynesian system as a failure

        At the same time that Australian policy-makers were focused on full employment,
        the United Nations Charter enshrined employment as a basic human right and
        committed signatories to using available policy levers to achieve full employment
        (Mitchell & Muysken, 2010).
        Involuntary unemployment was effectively eliminated during the post-war boom
        through the maintenance of a buffer-stock of jobs. It was possible for the unemployed
        to simply turn up at a rail yard or parks and gardens office and be given a job that was
        ready to do. The Commonwealth Employment Service (CES) was dedicated to finding
        work for people and providing them with financial assistance when needed to achieve
        employment. Contrast this with the last days of the CES or today’s Centrelink whose
        role seems to be to make unemployed life as miserable and degrading as possible.

        The abandonment of the gold standard in the US by President Nixon in 1971
        was the beginning of the end for heavily interventionist government.

        So Nixon tried to put in an income guarantee for people who will be left behind by imminent neoliberalism and open borders but the Democrats blocked the bill in the upper house – twice! He then thought “suit yourself, here comes privatisation and open borders anyway”.

        A 2% unemployment rate still means a section of society gets left behind, and Martin Luther King, Milton Friedman, Nixon, tried to put in an income guarantee but the perfection-pursuing Democrats blocked the good legislation.

        Perfect is the enemy of the good.

        If an income guarantee exists, wages can go up because every Aussie worker can threaten to quit their job.

      • Nah nah! Youse just don’t hases the mental branial capacity to understandses them contrarian investors! Opportunities matey! They sometimes lookses like them falling knifes but you gotta thinkses outsides them boxes, ya’ gotta risk it to get the biskit! Do youse get what I means?

      • That’s only available for new applications.
        With LTI, restricted lending and reduced valuations, if you have an exisiting loan at higher rates – good luck moving to new interest rates without a margin call. Even for existing St.G customers, it is quite a stretch.

    • That was a good read. I’d never taken Kuhn to be Kantian. If you’ve read his book Structure if Scientific Revolutions you should also check out Physics on the Fringe. It’s about outsider science.

      More philosophically, type Bryan Magee into YouTube and you’ll get some good discussions on the ideas raised in the review.

    • Applying a UBI to Australia is a big problem because of our housing bubble. There has always been and there will always be some homeless people but in recent years the cost of rent in our big cities has blown out to a large percentage of the dole/pension/newstart and homeless numbers have grown. To make housing affordable to everyone you would need to have a higher UBI than in other countries and most of this money would come from the middle class, many of whom are already struggling to pay rent/mortgage, electricity etc. With increasing job insecurity it’s just not practical. Yet another consequence of blowing our housing bubble to insane proportions.

    • Nothing happens until capitalism is brought down. Nothing until naive people recognise this a system that rewards 1% at the expense of rest of the population.

    • Bush lawyers unite!

      Actually it’s more a case of ‘who cares what the lawyers think’?

      The best evidence that allowing corporations to sue for defamation is bad is Jeff Morris saying that such laws would have prevented him going public on the practices in CBA. Dodgy Don would still be giving investment advice and the bank would be happily billing dead people.

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      Good post Mr Bogan,…this kinda stuff really makes my blood boil,…..much more so than houses costing to much, UBIs, “Wealfare bludgers”, Mass Immigration or our money creation system.
      All of the above issues run counter to the majority of public opinion because of the very erosion of Democracy by a Coporate Plutocracy who long term goal seems to be some kind of Neo Feudalism!

      I hate them with every ounce of my being.

      What little Democracy we have is in peril.

      “The vast majority of legal threats sent to journalists and media are tactical, designed to win an apology or have a story stopped or taken down. The one thing these actions all had in common is “Not for Publication” on the letterhead from the lawyers.

      In some cases, there was justification for the complaint. In most, it was a case of bullying.

      It is a stock-in-trade of the defamation lawyer to intimidate and to gain advantage by scaring people. There is no legal basis for insisting an unsolicited threat be treated confidentially. Neither is there legal basis for paying the costs of a lawyer who has just bobbed out of the blue and threatened you.

      The public interest in this legal intimidation caper has never been greater. The disintegration of the mainstream media and the proliferation of niche publishers has become a smorgasbord for aggressive lawyers. The big media players are tight for cash, less inclined to fight, more inclined to settle, more inclined to self-censor, less inclined to chase big stories of public interest. They simply do not have enough experienced journalists to cover enough big stories or finance forensic investigations. The ABC too is under pressure. Witness the Emma Alberici jihad by News Corporation and the government.

      Small publishers don’t have the resources to fight. The spectre of defending a story means committing to the risk that, in the event of a loss, the publisher picks up the bill for millions of dollars in court costs and legal fees for both sides. A family home and a lifetime of savings gone.”

      How do we fight this?

      • The primary and absolute defense to a defamation suit is that what is published / uttered is a) the truth and b) it is in the public interest. I think that the plaintiff has to rebut these presumptions. b) is a bonus.

        Random threats of legal action are often signals that the journalist is on the right track and there is much more to be unearthed.

        Not expert but these are basic overarching legal principals. IMHO

  12. GunnamattaMEMBER

    Odds shorten on a Turnbull backflip to a spring poll


    I reckon theres something in this, particularly if the Tories do OK in the byelections

    What I was told from within a Ministers office this time last year was that the Libs thought they had the wood on the ALP in a citizenship meltdown (in fact I was told they had proposed some sort of everyone lay doggo deal to the ALP on the subject)

    The government would be acutely aware that the economic tide will go out and that the gap between forecast and reality will start to sheet home with the electorate, especially now the Royal Commission has exposed them and the banks. I reckon they could easily run for a Spring Campaign with a highlight about being tough on the banks (while not actually being that in reality) and just juicing our little economic Indian summer for some populism. ScoMo will have a few funds for electoral goodies

    I reckon they’d want to get in before any house price melt went too far too

    • proofreadersMEMBER

      But according to an earlier post hereon, the Chinese bid is back in business (with suitcases of cash being to the fore), so it’s now back to melt up all the way to the moon?

    • Turnbull paid $1.5m to become Prime Minister, he’s not going to let some Abbott/Abetz/Andrews bone headed Cntservative roll him. Given Abbott’s already said Turnbull has until December to improve the polling and that ain’t happening, you can rest assured Turnbull will call an early election.

    • There’s so much wrong in that I’m not going to start.

      But if this translates as “government is not going to intervene” then I’m all for it.

      yay scomo.

  13. GunnamattaMEMBER

    superb read from Martin Flanagan….

    Why are the Chinese so interested in Tasmania?

    this encapsulates my thoughts nicely……

    I have respect for Chinese culture and its great thinkers. The Book of Tao informed my youth. I have no fear of Australia becoming, in time, a predominantly Asian country if it has democratic values. I would vote for Penny Wong as prime minister. This is not an issue of race but it is, among other things, an issue of political culture, of two very different political cultures, one immensely more powerful and wealthy than the other, and what can happen when they meet behind closed doors.

    As recently as last month, Australia was told by a senior Chinese official that “it must abandon traditional thinking and take off its coloured glasses”. What does that mean exactly? It seems necessary in this context to state two obvious facts. One, China is not a democracy. Two, it is a country we have indicated we may be prepared to go to war with in the event of conflict in the South China Sea.

    Imagine it is not 2018 but 1913. Britain and Germany are the world’s two vying superpowers; we are tied to Britain. Would anyone think it wise to build a German village in the middle of Tasmania? To be selling our farmlands, our food security, to massive German interests?

    and particularly this

    Australia’s policy towards China is a dangerous contradiction. I say to our politicians: you got us into this mess, you get us out of it. What is needed is an open debate about economic sovereignty, one that avoids racism. It can’t be ignored.

    • Before 1914 the Germans had colonies in New Guinea and nearby islands. The Australian govt and the country’s elite class would have been nervous and covetous about those colonies. But Australia then did not like or trust multiculturalism or anything that was not British.

      • Marxism, Capitalism, pick any ‘ism you like, it’s just a ruse used to cover the abuse of power and corruption by individuals.

      • Relevant StakeholderMEMBER

        Skip, do you think it’s in the current interests of Australians for China to continue buying our farmland, houses, businesses?

        Please note Australians are/were not:
        Alive during colonisation or the opium wars

        Also note China and the Soviets hated each other.

      • RS…

        My question to you is what does nationally have to do with any thing or are you saying during Keatings era that selling off private concerns to anglophone investors is somehow different to – them – selling it off to the Chinese.

        That said I’m quite happy to go back to the day I came here, warts and all, where we all had to earn our place and were afforded the space to do just that, tho looking out for the less successful was a responsibility too the successful.

    • Relevant StakeholderMEMBER

      Misread your comment skip, thought you were indicating marxists should embrace China’s buying spree because they’re notionally commos, carry on.

      I agree with you, we shouldn’t have sold out to anyone.

      • No dramas RS….

        I do get exasperated at the concept that the unwashed drove the bus into the ditch meme which leaves the financial elitists off he hook, As an old time commeter here [TW] once said the – capitalism made me do it special plea bunch of BS.

        Hell as a capitalist I would want people to make more income which then means I can service demand, if I can deliver.

    • Even an hour is pretty soul destroying with a young family – couldn’t imagine 2.5. I give that bloke 6months

      • I almost bought a Warehouse in Newcastle and considered doing it. But I don’t think I could either.

      • Its could work? Aim to work remotely for a few months, and look for a local job in the meantime.

        He might not be saying the whole plan in case it does not work out.

    • Mining BoganMEMBER

      Yep, that bloke’s life is doomed. 5 hours a day. Geez. How safe is his marketing job when the banks get wobbley anyway? If he’s lucky the redundancy will come before he signs the slavery indenture.

      And a comment..

      “michaelgarland8941 HOUR AGO
      I rent, work in Crown Casino in Melbourne and commute from the Eastern suburbs to work. I would be happy to buy an apartment but would that be smart when they are considered the worst unit investment in Melbourne? Also many of the people who live there are renting the rooms out on Air Bnb or have multiple people in each room and are full of chinese students. People are not going to move to the city if there is no appeal for owner occupiers..”

      Straya. Winning.

      • TailorTrashMEMBER

        Remember once being at a war memorial in Perth ….think it may have been in Kings Park ……but it was swarming with Chinese students stepping on it and climbing all over it taking photos ………..of course we need to be culturally sensitive and not tell them to respect our monuments …….John Curtin might have asked what happened in his absence …………Straya maaaaaate ……..the Dreamtime has room for many more stories .

    • What does anyone expect if 1000 people arrive week after week after week and not one new hospital bed gets opened?

  14. the spoils of war folks


    3 unopened bottles of beer, found initially coated in pumpkin soup in a bowling club trash can i was clearing out earlier this afternoon

    about $10 worth of recyclables in the bin but this was the topper, washed them under a park tap and them got them home, dunked them in washing detergent infused water and rinsed

    now they sit, together at the back of my fridge, waiting to be consumed

    best long weekend ever? yes. yes it is

    • DarkMatterMEMBER

      You should brew your own beer. It is cheap, fun, and (usually) delivers a much nicer product.

      Coopers longnecks are worth keeping as they are designed not to explode – (I think Coopers are still bottle fermented).

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Back in the recession of the early 90s, I drank a lot of different home brew.
        Never brewed my own, but being a fairly social guy with plenty of green to share around as a young fella, I got to tast a wide variety of garage made ales, brewed by dozens of different blokes,…. and even a few sheila’s,… but I Gotta say, it was a rare and pleasant surprise to down one that didn’t taste like total $hite.
        Less than 10% of em were any good,….they still gotcha Pi$$ed I suppose, …dont give up ya bin crawling for the good stuff Staggsie

      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        Yes, back in the early 90’s it was bad. People poured in white sugar and syrup and the yeast was probably bakers yeast. The result was usually alcoholic grass clippings.

        When i tried it about 10 years ago, things had improved. The kits were quite sophisticated and it was easy to make very nice ales. I actually discovered the joys of real ales like Irish Reds, Nut Brown Ale and the strong germanic Bochs. After tasting real ales I could never touch the cordial beers made by the big guys like Fosters and the rest.

        I came across a brew shop over in Marrickville a while back. Nowadays they sell Fresh Wort Kits – which is about 20l of craft beer in a container for about $45. Put it in a carboy, add the yeast, leave it for a week or two and bottle it. 24 bottles of boutique beer for about $2 a bottle. It is hard to argue with that.

  15. Accountants become unlicensed as Dover shuts down


    Lawyer and financial services executive Terry McMaster last week wrote to authorised representatives of his Dover licensee business announcing the cancellation of its AFSL following the intervention of ASIC. According to the email, obtained by Accountants Daily sister title ifa, the group’s 400-plus advisers are unable to provide new advice effective immediately on 8 June, with the licence to be officially wound up by 6 July. The decision will have major implications for a number of accountants who are authorised to provide limited or full-service advice under Dover’s AFSL and will now be seeking to urgently move to new licensing arrangements in order to continue trading.

    • DarkMatterMEMBER

      Well, 8086 was a dogs breakfast. Why is it that the Dogs Breakfasts are the ones that make it big?

      Anyway, the real star of the 70’s was the 6502. Taped out in 1975 I think, and a masterpiece. A computer chip for $20 was revolutionary. Probably the best 8 bit machine ever made.

      SPARC – is it dead yet? The graveyard of dead 32 bit RISC architectures is like Rookwood.

      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        Status: Not Recommended for new designs

        Even MIPS is struggling at Microchip. The other big contender is RISC-V which is at least open source. We might see a full 64bit SoC in RISC-V, which would be interesting.

        The trail of defunct 32 bit chips is pretty amazing. There was actually a 32 bit Z80000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zilog_Z80000
        but not widely adopted. The semiconductor industry was a bit of a wild west for sure. It helps to pretend that assembly code doesn’t exist.

      • Where’s the Moto 68000 that was a damn good processor.
        But in the end what Intel understood was that process speed beats architecture any day of the week.
        Intel focused on doubling their speed and halving their chip sizes every 12 to 18 months (basically double the value at half the cost) . That equation was impossible to better with architecture especially when the wafer level yields of processors like the 68000 were terrible (sub 40% I’m told) . Intel by contract always maintained 80% to 90% yielded good die at wafer test on simplified semiconductor processes. Yield and process costs make a Huge difference to profitability and that’s basically the thing that IBM understood and Motorola learned the hard way.
        The rest as they say is history.
        BTW you’re missing my favorite the DEC Alpha (and I even have a working Alpha system) . That thing was insane especially for the day…The Clock Tree was absolutely crazy it was probably the last truly synchronous CPU and the last hand crafted Clocking system. Alas it was too little too late and ran way WAY to hot, google Alpha Cooling system for a wtf were they thinking moment.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Amigas ran on Moto 68000s

        “The Amiga was so far ahead of its time that almost nobody—including Commodore’s marketing department—could fully articulate what it was all about. Today, it’s obvious the Amiga was the first multimedia computer, but in those days it was derided as a game machine because few people grasped the importance of advanced graphics, sound, and video. Nine years later, vendors are still struggling to make systems that work like 1985 Amigas.

        — Byte Magazine, August 1994


      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        The 68K had a good run. It was in the Sinclair QL, the Amiga Mac and even in the Next cube from Steve Jobs. Back in the late 80’s I designed a whole lot of memory and expansion addons for the Amiga. You wouldn’t believe how much people used to spend on a MB of memory or a 20Mb Hard drive. A lot – even without adjusting for 30 years

        Intel definitely spent their money on cranking up their chips, but really the war was over because of the IBM PC and Microsoft. Vast amounts of useful software and it would always run on a PC clone. I spent an arm and leg stuffing 4Mb of RAM and a graphics card in a clone so I could run OrCad – which was PCB CAD software. Still, it was only a couple of thousand dollars – tiny compared to the cost of a workstation or a DEC machine. One small guy being able to own a personal CAD system – that is what killed off all the non Intel PC contenders. Don’t even mention Turbo Pascal or VB for empowering the engineering deplorables.

        Back in the late 80’s I knew some people who worked at DEC. I asked them what their future was – DEC had an overpriced, over engineered PC with a non standard OS and they were still building mainframes with VAX. They told me DEC was too big and wonderful to fail and the upcoming new Alpha chip was so fancy that it would wipe out the inferior Intel. Yeah, right – that worked well for them. Big companies made some dumb mistakes. Silicon Graphics was another one. Jim Clarke saw the writing on the wall for the elite Graphics Workstation and wanted them to move their graphics technology into a PC graphics card. His board said no – they would lose too much revenue if they stopped selling expensive workstations. People stopped buying the expensive workstations anyway and they were screwed. Their last hail mary was shoving the Silicon Graphics technology into the Nintendo 64 machine – which was very nice. I think Nvidia rose up out of the ashes of SG.

      • Yeah the guys running DEC were drinking their own koolaid and wouldn’t hear that they were wrong, but that was the North East back in the late 80’s they didn’t want to hear anything about the guys in the Valley, they were stupid, focused on the wrong end of the market….the serious money was all in Business computer and scientific/engineering computing systems, Military systems …PC were just toys for the uneducated.
        How times have changed. I remember back some time in 1989 or 1990 talking with a rather famous Aussie computer designer Neil Weste, Neil was working of a processor that ran LISP native, he gave me one of the chips that they had made up as desk paper weights (probably fail bin chips) it was the biggest chip I’ve ever seen about 11/2 inches on a side and was produced on 4in wafers, you do the math on die per wafer not to mention yield. He also wouldn’t hear how a small chip running very fast or array of small chips could whop his massive mainframe on a chip, but that was the thinking all over the North East at that point in time. I suspect this mind set had a lot to do with the importance of Defense projects and their Military customers, so with the end of the cold war we saw the US military budget shrink and those dependent on Uncle Sam’s generosity suffered a similar fate to the Soviets.

        The managers at DEC were crazy they purposely made the MicroVax run much slower than the Vax so that it wouldn’t adversely impact Vax sales. The Alpha was a similar story of not being able to steal any existing DEC markets / customers, which sort of made it a product targeted just at winning Engineering systems from SUN, trouble was its wasn’t that fast in the semiconductor processes that they had access to and burned WAY to much power, On chip supply decoupling was also a nightmare because of Clock driver supply spikes.

        It was fun back in the early days these days it’s just work.

      • @Fisho

        These days it’s all cloud – you’d be lucky to get your fingers cut by real tin anymore.

      • I cut my teeth on a DEC MicroVAX back in the day. I miss DCL & Fortran and my wall of manuals.

    • Mining BoganMEMBER

      Just a little message to all Australians that if you are a lying, filthy, stinking piece of sh!t then you too can do well in this fine country.

      • Mining BoganMEMBER

        He shouldn’t be. Feeling guilt about destroying your own country is UnAustralian!

      • Robb should be the first person Abbott knights if he gets to sit in the big seat again. Robb is a true Australian hero. Something to aspire to. Unlike those spies Carr or Dastyari.

      • Not a bad overview of the main forces then and why the aristocrats admired the Nazis. The author could have added the story about the Wagner family, that is the Bayreuth, Ring of the Nibelung family. The eldest son, Siegfried was bisexual and there was fear of it getting know and also no chance of children. They found a willing English girl, Winifred, 28 years younger, whom Siegfried married. It worked out, they had children and the dynasty carried on. However Winifred was an unrepentant Nazi, even after de-Nazification.

    • Very interesting!

      From 23:25 they talk about the Bank of Mum and Dad. They talk about the “Category 1” – well educated, aspirant people in professions. Looking at the 1.5-2m market as being candidates for the BoMaD. Martin describes them as “Young Affluents” – relatively high incomes, ability to spend a lot – but also have the highest LVR and LTI ratios, and the most exposed in all segments.

      The risk is that parents have given them large sums of money, which is reliant on their property values not dropping. Considers this “High risk cohort” (YA and professional exclusives) – often with multiple, cross leveraged properties, to be most exposed to rate rises. Lenders have been quite tight in some areas; but really free to lending to these household groups. With IO loans set to expire, these households are being forced to sell IPs to make ends meet. Both say that focusing on the LTI ratio should have been done years ago.

      Also, Chris makes a comment about there being “Great nervousness” in the valuation industry; may ignore recent auction figures leading to an equity shortfall. Martin gives an example of banks insisting on second valuations – can be down 15-20%.

      • It’s data I’ve heard before from Martin, but it’s good to hear it again. I’d almost fall into that young affluent group with my mum offering to help out with a deposit and a high income, but I’m quite risk adverse and like to take much more calculated risks and leave some buffer factoring in worst case scenarios. I’ve worked too hard for too long to lose it all on 1 investment decision.

      • If the Bank of Mun & Dad use real cash as a deposit but if they have drawn down on equity in their own home or perhaps used SMSF money, well that wont happen in a declining market so there is another load of buyers out of the market.

      • Make rates 5% RAT positive ASAP! i.e. 13 or 14% nominal Save the nation! Save the planet. Get rid of the moronic consumption and all those who ride on it.
        (With capital controls to sink the A$ of course)

  16. Was having a browse through the awards and came across these two:

    Leonard Hastings AINSWORTH (NSW) – AM
    For significant service to business and manufacturing, and to the community through philanthropic contributions.

    Jennifer Anne WESTACOTT (NSW) – AO
    For distinguished service to private and public sector administration through executive roles, to policy development and reform, to cross sector collaboration, to equity, and to business.

    • proofreadersMEMBER

      And here’s just a few more spotted:
      Dawn Fraser (NSW) – AC
      Kurt Fearnley (NSW) – AO
      Christine Milne (TAS) – AO
      Glenn A Baker (NSW) – AM – music guru
      Brian Cadd (NSW) – AM – singer/songwriter
      Robert Gottliebsen (VIC) – AM – MB’s very own Gottiboff
      Anthony Bell (NSW) – OAM – celebrity accountant.

  17. Here’s another beauty for the wanking/gaming crowd here

    Rent seekers come in two types
    -the neoliberals
    -the opportunistic socialists who also want a free ride

    Here is the latter


    A nurse turned “social and environmental artist”,

    So she went from being a productive and contributing member of society to an apparatchik
    And was essentially squatting , preventing dozens of poor from having their own place to live (albeit within the corrupted neoliberal system)

    “She soon took over as manager of the boarding house terrace at the address and raised her daughter, Arana, as a single mother in the home.”

    And were profits directed back to the government or social works? Or did she pocket it, becoming a petty rentier herself

    Do any of those on the waiting list for public housing have any sympathy for her?
    Do any of the working poor paying off mortgages in Penrith have any sympathy for her ?

    Or is it just the Chardonnay set

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        That’s the kind of consummate professionalism we expect from you harry. Rising to the challenge under withering circumstances.

      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        There you have it. Coming is right on the money here!

        She is a pron star and almost certainly owns Bitcoin and is an avid World of Warcraft player. Coming would be well within his rights to organise a mob to go round there and skin her for her pelt and sell that to compensate her victims.

        Stamping out corruption from the bottom up – the hallmark of a civilised society. Forget the Bankers – its the little people we need to bring to book.

      • I didn’t forget them

        I specifically pointed out there are two types of rent seeking

        But you pointedly ignored that

        This is exactly why trump won the election

      • DarkMatterMEMBER

        Its hardly fair to lump the bankers and the pensioners in the same category. The old lady might be pulling a few strings to try and survive, but by the look of her she hasn’t been particularly successful. You seem to resent her inventing a title. Scott Morrison calls himself a “treasurer” and nobody complains, so why can’t she call herself a “social and environmental artist”?

        What you seem to be promoting is a sort of moral absolutism that usually is the preserve of Methodists. The Methodists (and religion in general), ran out of ways to threaten and bully the poor people – who already were living in hell – so they threatened them in the afterlife. Any sin was as bad as any other, from the smallest to the largest. This is great for the crooks at the top, having the little people dilute the moral outrage.

        I think quite a few people are wondering how this dried up old lady from the Rocks is on the same level as the crooked bankers at the RC?

        Also, can you explain how haroldus having a wank affected the US elections and got Trump in? Is this like Russiagate?

      • Cyclone Ranger

        Ooh, ooh! Me Sir, me!

        Because… Trump winning the election was a massive wank!

      • Cyclone Ranger

        And this is comment #457.

        18 more months on here and my agent tells me I get PR.

      • Cyclone Ranger

        Actually… this thread reminds me of the time I was driving out to the airport and spotted haroldus on the side of the motorway standing next to his diabled truck. Clearly, given the signage and what I could see of his load, he was in the process of hauling a shed load of adult DVDs to parts unknown.

        Last I saw of him he was trying to nurse his semi back to life.

    • Coming, how do you come to the conclusion she was a rentier. She managed a boarding house, which prior to the late 70s were pretty common (in Perth anyway). I’d say she received subsidised rent and maybe a small wage for looking after the boarders, there’s nothing in that article to support your belief.

      • did you read the article?

        She was renting out rooms in a government owned property
        This wasn’t a government programme. There was no oversight, no account

        She was profiting privately from a public premises

        And no she didnt maintain the building – those millers points building are all decrepit. To the point that children under 18 are not allowed inside for inspections, and you must sign a waiver.

        Essentially she lived rent free, while also extracting rent from vagrants and travellers (why don’t they have a claim to the property).
        She wasn’t cooking and cleaning for them. She wasn’t doing any type of foramlised social work
        All at the multimillion dollar expense of everybody else.

        And there haven’t been renters there for years if not decades
        And she has the audacity to claim it as her own?

    • Coming, you must have more info than the article, as none of that is mentioned. This is the only bit in the article about her “position” there: “She soon took over as manager of the boarding house terrace at the address and raised her daughter, Arana, as a single mother in the home.” Nowhere does it state what you claim, and nothing on collecting rent for a 4 story terrace, how would she have been able to claim that?

      • Yes it states in the article she rented out rooms in a house she doesn’t own

        I am a local so I know the shennanigans
        Additionally, her neighbours were busted for putting their social housing up for rent on airbnb
        I’ll try to find the news article

        Sally of course was too old fashioned for airbnb and it didn’t exist back then so there’s no records with which to prosecute her

        Edit: here you are

        It was rampant

        There were a number of locals driving bmws and Mercedes as well , sending their kids to St. Andrews cathedral
        The local doctors and police were fully aware

        Now of course they’re battlers

        Bare in mind each of these houses is in the most historic and beautiful part of the rocks
        The houses are worth millions even with the absurdly strict heritage overlays

        It’s really beside the point though
        The house isn’t hers and never was : why is it even up for discussion ? Some animals are more equal than others

        Here’s some more


        A large number of these people had investment properties too

        The ones with a modicum of dignity/shame left quietly
        The more entitled ones tried to start a grass roots resistance that fell flat on its face when it turned out sanjit in baulkham hills was too busy worrying about his mortgage and health and could care less about their “community”

        Only a handful of financially comfortable virtue-signallers got involved

        As usual the only people who really get stiffed are the working poor

      • Like what?

        The court decided her claim was invalid
        Where is the additional information here

        See my comment above if you would like more information

      • The attack lacks evidence and has no basis in the printed evidence. Take that axe and grind it elsewhere.

    • If what you say is correct, good riddance, however the article you linked to does not mention her renting out rooms. If that’s the case how did our pollies and gov depts allow one person with no legal right rent out 4 floors of housing. Again, the article only says she took over management of a boarding house, no mention of renting rooms unless you read that as implied.

    • Parasites, let them go to Indonesia or China, we do not need such industry in Australia.

    • StephenMEMBER

      Extension of the falling market. No-one buying houses so no-one buying goods to fit them out and no-one else buying discretionary goods.

      WA is gone.

    • Mean not median. I would be surprised if the median is anywhere near that.

      Edit: Median was $527k as of June 2016.

  18. ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

    Is the EU an Empire?
    It’s certainly seems to be a kind of bureaucratic empire and yet there’s not much criticism of it from the left,…why?
    Tony Benn was against it,…and he’s was as left as ya get in the Brittish labour party.
    He was Jeremy Corbyns beloved mentor,…and yet little support for a robust Brexit from British Labour.
    What is going on?


    • Because of the effects EP, Brexit was a ill conceived political ploy by the far right wing that got more traction than anticipated. Now none of the wing nuts know what to do, its a self inflicted wound.

      Best bit is when it does go wrong the same wing nuts can then say the ev’bal EU did it, yet the EU did not force the vote or activate article 50.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        Skip,…Don’t you think the people of the UK more able to democratically resist Economic Neoliberalism (when they finally wake up to it) as a truly sovereign nation state, who able to produce her own currency?
        The EU concentrates to much undemocratic decision making Power,….why would a stated believer in “Social democratic administration” support this Plutocratic instutionl that is built around Globalisation and Coporate preferences rather than European solidarity and the fostering of a pan European wealfare state.
        The EU is Economic Right wing!
        So what if the first to articulate the will of the majority of Brits, are right wing ball bags,…if it’s their will,…so be it.
        Are you really for Democracy or not.

        I agree with Brendan’s points on Brexit,…does that make me a right winger?


      • EP…. what part about England being one of the original neoliberal state besides America, sure the EU has moved in that direction but not as much.

        No I don’t think pulling on peoples emotions and feeding them rubbish is a form of democracy.

        Also don’t think you have the slightest notion about what is going down in England at the moment or how it will play out.

    • Cyclone Ranger

      Well… in this instance… the historical precedent of just sending money over to one side or another (or both) and then deciding to fund the other side (or both) for a while had been working pretty well (for the US et al).

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      Well, there are some fairly obvious differences between WW1 and WW2 and the various imperialist adventures/war toy profiteering of the last couple of decades.

      Anyway, this is obviously fake news. I was assured here when one of those awful Greens Senators suggested that maybe our boys had been naughty that nobody in the Australian armed forces would ever misbehave.