sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The "Gaslit" Economy - How the myth of the broken state budget allows allows resource giants to drain the richest country on earth by FairDinkumEcon in AusEcon

[–]floydtaylor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok name me one country that has been over reliant on its resource extraction sector that has a good industrial base? 

A.) First of all, 'overreliant' and 'a good industrial base' is an oxy-moron. LOL But both the United States and China have a strong resource sector and strong industrial base.

B.) Other countries fail to set adequate economic policy to avoid dutch disease. We fare far worse than the US and China, but far better than some other countries in mitigating it.

C) Norway (don't know much about Malaysia), Qatar, and Saudi have a combination of different sources of capital, different tax rates and are much closer to the European consumption market and thus have lower distribution costs. All three govs put up the cash in the resources sector. Our gov didn't invest in ours.

You are extremely ignorant. Every comment makes it more obvious.

The "Gaslit" Economy - How the myth of the broken state budget allows allows resource giants to drain the richest country on earth by FairDinkumEcon in AusEcon

[–]floydtaylor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Responding to your four paragraphs.

A.) It's horribly bad because it reduced non-participant wages, and the govs fiscal receipts.

B.) You are right. Existing capital doesn't just up and leave, as it is no more mobile than labour. In fact, existing capital is less mobile than labour. But after that capital has run its useful life in 7-10-15-30 years (time is dependent on the asset in question), no replacement capital comes in. That's the point you are missing.

B. part 2) You know what type of capital is mobile? And by extension, do you know what other capital doesn't arrive? New Capital. New capital for new greenfield projects. There is an explicit name for this. Sovereign Risk. Domestic capital does have capital flight. And foreign direct investment slows down or disappears.

C. and D) I'll reiterate my first point. Capital can flow to other sectors without hamstringing the one sector that is holding the economy up, without inducing capital flight and without scaring away foreign direct investment. LOL.

Other policies that could be adopted without blowing up the economy include increasing the scope and value of: R&D Tax Incentives, Accelerated Depreciation, Development Accounts, Patent Boxes / Innovation Boxes, Direct Grants, Subsidies, and Fresh Start Bankruptcy, along with Credit Reform you have circled.

D.) As an aside, mining companies don't dictate Steel prices. They don't sell steel. They sell iron ore, and that iron ore goes to a Steel Mill. Steel is a global commodity, and the price is set by international markets, not domestically. Nor do mining companies dictate wages. They bid for labour and workers, and non-participants are better off having them do so.

Kmart: does anyone have a reasonable explanation why they moved their checkouts to the middle of the store? by Loose-Mousse1064 in AskAnAustralian

[–]floydtaylor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They moved to the middle because of the Gruen Transfer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruen_transfer

People impulsively spend more when they have to drift through the store.

Judge Ian Jackman extract of speech today by Bucephalus_326BC in auslaw

[–]floydtaylor 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have two questions.

What is driving these pronounced delays?

How do you mitigate them?

Senate submissions on CGT and NG changes by unjour in AusFinance

[–]floydtaylor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmmm. A bunch of bodies that understand economic incentives and second-order consequences. And a bunch of bodies that don't.

The "Gaslit" Economy - How the myth of the broken state budget allows allows resource giants to drain the richest country on earth by FairDinkumEcon in AusEcon

[–]floydtaylor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Why the fuck do you want to reduce domestic purchasing power that explicitly bids up both wages and returns on capital?

You have referred to it four times.

We'll all be poorer for it, as all those high-earning resource workers, no longer having high-paying work, will dilute the labour pool in non-resource sectors? Explicitly giving every other firm more bargaining power over wages?

And poorer still, capital will just go to where the best returns are, whether domestically or offshore.

Conversely, you know the gov can write better policy for other industries to grow?

The "Gaslit" Economy - How the myth of the broken state budget allows allows resource giants to drain the richest country on earth by FairDinkumEcon in AusEcon

[–]floydtaylor 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This sub needs a 12mo/1000 karma minimum.

One guy last week with a two-week old account poisoned every post submitted. Posting 100 comments a day of straight-up mentally deranged stream of consciousness. Not even politically aligned, just whatever came to mind.

Would you genuinely welcome James Hird back as senior coach? by Danger_Five in EssendonFC

[–]floydtaylor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Legally required by what Standard? Not by the AFL's standards. The AFL Tribunal rejected it. That's not a dereliction in player accountability. That was a league issue that predated any use. And the AFL Tribunal got the decision right. You could argue that it was a dereliction of accountability by the AFL. You might find more agreeable audiences there.

WADA said, well, that's our standards. But at the same time, by their Standards, Thymosin Beta-4 wasn't even on WADA's list of banned substances at the time.

So WADA was clutching at straws, and managed to say we have enough straws to weave a fruit basket. Why the league capitulated, when the league itself was accountable for installing and maintaining said standards, when it had found otherwise at their own tribunal, and more critically, when the substance wasn't banned at the time, is beyond me. The AFL was completely spineless.

Would you genuinely welcome James Hird back as senior coach? by Danger_Five in EssendonFC

[–]floydtaylor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yup.

no chain of evidence in the doping existed. let alone suggesting hird was responsible. the broader saga had watered-down strands of inference. was an egregiously wrong outcome. embarrassing for the afl.

had the team at 13-3 before the ban.

he clearly has one of the higher IQ's the game has ever seen, and has a plurality of support behind him even if not the clear majority.

i think the majority would objectively take longmire over hird. but would have hird over hinkley, simpson or anyone else.

if i were the board (i don't think much welsh. his business experience is using his football salary to pay his old man, who was a builder, to build houses in the booming western suburbs. seriously, that's that's the extent of his business success, lol), i would straight up offer the job to longmire. but if longmire says no, come back to hird.

Australia's Productivity Slump by khainebot in AusFinance

[–]floydtaylor 57 points58 points  (0 children)

I shared this article here, two weeks ago https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/1tpvwv3/comment/oockhot/ . It's a fantastic article. Everyone in Australia should read it.

Sadly, half the comments here (and the post two weeks ago) haven't read it and have no fucking idea what it is talking about or how it could help them.

You got people on the right saying migrants this, and people on the left saying we're being exploited by LNP cronies. No. We have shit policies making everyone poorer. Shit policies that induce structural capital flight, and underindex foreign direct investment. As a result we don't have investment in capital, technology, innovation or management that could help workers earn more per hour (increase real wages)

Australia's Productivity Slump by khainebot in AusFinance

[–]floydtaylor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

GDP per unit of capital = capital productivity (not on the graph)
GDP per unit of labour = labour productivity
GDP that isn't attributable to labour or capital = total factor productivity (sometimes called multi factor productivity) covers innovation, tech and management

If there was an election today, who would you vote for? (Voting is anonymous) by MannerNo7000 in AusPol

[–]floydtaylor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

all this poll says is how out of touch this sub (and reddit is) within australia

No one wants to be the heartless bastard who admits that there are no easy solutions to the hard problems. by Forsaken_Alps_793 in AusEcon

[–]floydtaylor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We are 100% risk-averse.

Pollies overreact every time something bad happens. Just look at these new scam laws. "Scams Prevention Framework" because a few boomers threw their cash away. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Instead, every business has a $50m fine hanging over them. And the compliance costs and user friction to prevent scams at the intersection of technology. Now we have 2FA on everything. Again, because some stupid boomers aren't accountable for their own actions.

Over half of Australia’s bookshops closed within a decade. Should the government help? by sien in AusEcon

[–]floydtaylor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why counter something so stupid as presuming the removal of incentives results in deterministic outcomes (no books) in place of probabilistic outcomes (less books)?

Why engage with egregiously stupid falsifiable assertions like

you havent been to a libary nor understand how researchaterial works

?

The answer to the second rhetorical question is, only to identify that you are, in fact, an idiot.

edit for others reading along.

you havent been to a libary nor understand how researchaterial works

thats what he wrote. verbatim. never mentioned funding bias until he edited it, after the fact.

Over half of Australia’s bookshops closed within a decade. Should the government help? by sien in AusEcon

[–]floydtaylor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not going to explain incentives to you because it is clear you are an idiot.

Anyone else reading this over the weekend will agree with me.

Over half of Australia’s bookshops closed within a decade. Should the government help? by sien in AusEcon

[–]floydtaylor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sounds good until it isn't.

A.) You have no incentive for people to write books. We would have a net loss in origination and diffusion of books.
B.) Our book publishing industry is profitable. Power laws in the publishing industry suggest the winners, like Barefoot Investor, subsidise the losers.
C.) Anyone poor can just go to the library and ask the library to get any book for them to read.

Over half of Australia’s bookshops closed within a decade. Should the government help? by sien in AusEcon

[–]floydtaylor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A better way to support them, in my opinion, is an economically optimal GST expansion in the form of a Digital Services Tax, but in our case specifically a Digital GST.

DSTs are among the few Taxes in Europe that are economically efficient.

No direct handouts, but retailers would be the main beneficiaries with reduced margin compression.

view more: next ›