The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Yes, a jobs crisis is building > Comments

Yes, a jobs crisis is building : Comments

By Syd Hickman, published 17/2/2014

Abbott believes it is all about individual firms, dud managers and greedy workers. Let them go broke and the economy magically creates new jobs.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
nice piece
Posted by Chris Lewis, Monday, 17 February 2014 7:34:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
THERE IS NO JOBs crises..THERE IS A WORk crisis
give the right conditions..and people will wORK

BUT TAX THEM WITH PUNITIVE TAXES/fees fines levies
[revenue raising for bankers interest..when goVT CAN ISSUE ITS OWN COINAGE]..THATS THe problem.

coin cant be taxed..but thus has bankers alloWED DEFLATED..the face value of the only tax-free/legal..AND LAWFULL tender..to devalue]VIA INFLATING THE ISSUE OF PRIMISE NOTE THE value is built on.

i could run social security..ON ONE PERCENT..OF THE MONEY..presently expended..but will explain..how for half

in one stroke pensions etc can be halved
how..simply by paying in coin..tax free..[IF I COULD PAY..IN TRUE TRADITIONALLY VALUED COIN.]

give me the payment..in coin..i pay them..in true valued coin
[its estimated..inflation has debased THE COIN..200 fold..so we revalue the face of all coin..by half that..[100 FOLD]

i will pay you..double your pension..by face value of the coin
think like the holly dollar/one stamping..you got two new coins

there will be thOSE..traditionally impoverished..WHO GET THE RESTANPING FRANCHISE[THERE WILL BE MINTING ERRORS GALORE[INVESTERS LOVE MINTING ERRORS..anyhow..the coin comes in..[say a fifty cent piece]..its stamped..with a die..and revalued..at 50 dollars

all must KNOW,..50 CENTS NOW = 50$
all of a sudden..our small chanGE is back to its true constituted values..one cent=one dollar..5 CENT=5 $..10 cent=10$..a dollar coin=100$..two dollar COIN=200$

COMSUMERS CONSUME..jobs jobs jobs
save your pennies..cause their historically..the only real value

EXPOSE..THE DEBASEMENT..of hrh coin
RESTore the values..by her decree..[debasement=treason]
govt takes back..full control of coin/note remain unchangED/DEBT UNCHANGED..BUT NOW WE HAVE..the means to survive..its about faiR values

A FAIR DAYS WORK
FOR A FAIR DAYS PAY
PAY OFF THE CREDIT CARD..WITH YOUR SMALL CHANGE
now we refound our values?..i now doNE MY JOB..GIVE ME BACK MY FAIR PENSION[IN COin]

add to other demands
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6152&page=0#178808

next court date=6 may
johannine*
Posted by one under god, Monday, 17 February 2014 8:43:57 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Syd
look I know you've been peddling this stuff for a while but protectionism is now very old fashioned, in Australia at least. A large part of Australia's current prosperity is due to the unwinding of layer upon layer of protection, ranging from agrisocialist meat/egg/chicken/whatever-marketing boards, through to enormous tariffs on all manufactured goods.

There are still elements of this wasteful and unproductive policy around, but hopefully it will continue to fade. Unemployment is climbing for various reasons, but in part because the resources boom has come off the boil, not because the govt is letting the car industry go, finally.. .
Posted by Curmudgeon, Monday, 17 February 2014 9:39:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong.”
Thomas Sowell

Ho hum, the economic illiteracy of the socialists is without end. Here they are popping up again, offering to solve the problems of scarce capital. But wait. According to Syd, one of the reasons we need industry policy is that there is a surplus of capital". Yet later, the reason for his bald assertion that government will need to "lead in the transition to the new economy" is his bald assertion "that returns on capital will be too long-term and risky for large private sector commitment".

Bit of a fundamental self-contradiction there, Syd? Which one is it - too much capital or not enough?

Of course, the fallacy underlying the whole piece is basing the entire argument on talk about "we":
a) without defining who that is
b) without explaining why that particular collectivity should be the decision-making entity
c) as if Australia is just a big farm owned by Kommisar Syd, and we are all his little sheep
d) without taking into account the coercive nature of what is proposed
e) without knowing whether those same resources might not produce more and better benefits, in Syd's own terms, if left in the hands of their owners and producers
f) without taking account of the conflict of interest within the monolithic "we" between those who will benefit from coerced takings, and those who will be reduced or ruined by them
g) without explaining why, if the assumption that government knows how best to allocate scarce resources to satisfy the most urgent and important human wants, this assumption only applies to some industries, and not all.

"The third focus must be a new social contract ..."

What do you mean a new social contract? I can't recall signing the old one,can you? Oh that's right, it doesn't exist, and London to a brick Kommisar Syd will evade answering this complete demolition of his flatly untrue premise:
http://economics.org.au/2010/08/no-social-contract/
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Monday, 17 February 2014 9:40:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The second big crash is not far away. The debt is the problem and Labor had a big hand in creating it.

Labor was also instrumental in selling off the Commonwealth Bank and 4 state banks. We no longer have any monetary sovereignty and must borrow increases of productivity and inflation into existence as debt mainly from OS central banks. This means the more growth we have, the more debt we incur.Hence unemployment rises.

Barnaby Joyce has floated the idea of a Rural Govt Bank for the Farmers. This would be an excellent start.
Posted by Arjay, Monday, 17 February 2014 10:17:22 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh, dear. Poor Syd-ums.

You and your 80s Keating fire-sale gang sold off virtually every government enterprise that wasn't nailed down. Now that we've had a decade or so to pretend we were prosperous because we were spending all that spare cash we got from flogging the family silver, the windfall's run out and there's little else to sell off.

And, darn it! All the revenue earnings those sold-off government enterprises were reaping for decades past haven't been going into the nation's coffers for a couple of decades since. Instead, we're left only with those leftover bits of the public service that the private sector didn't want because it didn't make them any profit. And the corporations we sold everything off to have either gone elsewhere or are putting their hands out for a bigger slice of the corporate welfare pie.

I notice that Syd didn't have much in the way of ideas for the future after canonizing our glorious privatised past (aka the public wealth sell-off we had to have).
Posted by Killarney, Monday, 17 February 2014 10:17:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What is wrong with these western people calling themselves developed.They robbed people all over the world for centuries and are still continuing to do that.Always cry,jobs are going out, goods are dumped from overseas etc etc.So, what they want?Looting spree.Can't see countries whose wealth they looted,killed them,destroyed cultures and civilisation ,language and what not but not satisfied.
Posted by bulla, Monday, 17 February 2014 2:46:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I HAD NO IDEA..THE AUTHOR WAS WITH CHEATING KEATING
when keating wanted to borrow..[correct me if im wrong/after all 'you were there]

but keaTING..wanted to borrow..[10 BILION]..FROM COMMONWEALTH BANK]
noworries said commonwealth bank..we will lend it to you for 3.25 percent interest..fine said keating

but..BUT..THE IMF..[OR SOME OTHER TALING HEAD..money organization..said no..[intrest will be 12.5 percent..and youwill sell off the common wealth for 9 billion]..so you and he did

correct the record..if im wrong
but undeniable is you sold it..for 9 billion
yet today..[ok yesterday]..common wealth bank paid dividend..of 4 point 5 billion]

in just onE YEAR..you elites get paid..100 percent intrest[for what wAS STOLEN..FROM US ALL..[TELL US PLEASE AUTHOR..rE THE SELLING OFF OF THE state banks.

im sorry i didnt notice who you were earlier
its time yoU EXPOSED THE TRUTH..bought bac in the fix[ie isue our own money../in coin..[the only lawful tender read..federal constitution..115+]

gOVT MUST FOLlow its own rules

IF IT BINDS THE STATE..I
GT BINDS THE fed..full-stoP.

GOVT HAS The lawful duty/right..to issue ITS OWN WEALTH..FOR THE COMMONERS..[PS Debasing COIN=TREASON]..

INFORM HER MAJESTY IMMEDIATELY.
OR ALLOW ME TO DO IT 6 MAY..OK?

add to other demands
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6152&page=0#178808

next court date=6 may
johannine*

catch 22..EXPOSE THE ROOT OF OUR Problem..[your a spin meister apPARENTLY ..well stop spinning..and lets get back at the ones sinning
Posted by one under god, Monday, 17 February 2014 3:31:41 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
you know of course..how we watched the clinton show
while congress was deleting all the rules..that got is into this miss

stop spinning/begin truthing
hockey already tried paying 9 billion..in BORROWED CASh payola to the fed

simply..issue one 10 billion dollar coin..and buy iT back
failing TO DO//that your clearly able to do compounds the treason..i wil be informing hrh of 6 may...[ID PREFER I DONT NEED TO SAy nothin..but im obligated to see this through.

no-one can blame you/keating[after all these mob killed jfK..AND MANY OTHER PRESIDENTS..JFK SIMPLY FOR DARING TO WRITE PRESIDENTIAL ORDER NO 11,110..[BUT NOw the debt will break us all

usa tax paYERS OWE 2 QUADRILLION DOLLARS[OVER 1 MILLION EACH]..
why/how?..please feel free to explain.[que warrentO/..BY WHAT RIGHT?]

IT Too could simply REVALUE ITS COIN/CLEAR THE DEBT
[LEST WE FORGET UNDER WRITTEN DEBT/SO YOU SEE WHY INSURANCe is advertising for cash flow

WHAT NEXT BAILIN?
BUT BANKERS DONT HOLD THE ASSETS..[SHARE'S IN EMPTY VAULTS
that will need a better plan..that using our super TO BUY empty bankS.

THERE IS PLENTY OF TIME
WE KNOW What happend..but wHAT REALLY IS GOING TO HAPPEN NEXT..IS GENOCIDE..[YOU WANT THAT GUILT ON Top..of all you allowed to happen?

tIMES HAVE CHanged,..we need heroes who know where the real thieves hid their loot.[see my transaction tax comments]OUBLE FOR TRUSTS AND ALL OTHER NON LIVING ENTITIES.

BRINGBACK THE COIN AGE
AS IF STILLRELLY GOLD/SILVER..coin

by deeming..AND PROCLamation..immediatly
her royal highness has trialed..the UDEA..BY MINTING her own high VALUE COIN.

ITS LAWFUL AND ITS THE RIGHT THING TO DO..FOR THE PEOPLE
IT BEGINS BY GOVT ISSUING [in coin]..say one billion
then hrh 'LEVERAGES'..IT BACK TO TRUE HISTORIC value...THATS ALL

FAIR IS FAIR..YOUR INCOMPITANCE/COMPLICITYSET THIS UP.
Posted by one under god, Monday, 17 February 2014 3:36:48 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
...I have just finished reading a great book by author Nassim Nicholas Taleb entitled “Antifragil”; (things that gain from disorder).

...After reading that book, I now seriously suspect all LNP policy is scripted on its’ contents!

...And welcome home "oneundergod"
Posted by diver dan, Monday, 17 February 2014 4:54:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are plenty of jobs in Australia. There just aren't enough people with sufficient brains to perform the work. Lazyness is another major factor besides no value for money bureaucrats.
Posted by individual, Monday, 17 February 2014 6:10:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/ Paul Craig Roberts is the ex-assistant secretary to the US Treasury and the father of Reagonomics. He is one of the few who tell the truth about the current economic mess that is just getting worse mainly because of money printing ,bailouts and toxic derivatives.

History shows that when economies collapse they take us to war. The Ukraine is the next country the USA is de-stabilising to put their missile shield there,like Russia did in Cuba. An ex Russian General already considers Russia to be at war with the West. Our oligarchs don't care about a nuke war since they have their underground cities ready and think the world is too over populated. We are dealing with psychopathic nutters.

Russia has been purging the shadow banking system of Western parasites and taking back resources/energy. This is why they must be invaded. We lost our monetary sovereignty under Hawke and Keating and Howard continued the sell out of this country. It is called Agenda 21 or total serfdom.

So wake up people, the major political parties are just puppets of the banking ,military industrial complex.
Posted by Arjay, Tuesday, 18 February 2014 6:32:22 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
INDI/QUOTE..<<..There just aren't enough people with sufficient brains to perform the work.>>

ACTUALLY INDI..YOUR Spot on
its govt policy..to deliberately dumb uS DOWN..BY FLUORIDE..[other use is AS RAT POISEN]..anyhow well done..now lets bush our teeth..[if you can remember how]..and drink PLENTY OF WATER

COMMON FREDDY..DRINK IT

<<..Lazyness is another major factor besides no value for money bureaucrats.>>

yeah i would look up agenda 21..but im too tired
the rest OF YOU ARE too tired to..the elites know this because we took the woest of the Nazi scientists..and finished what they started

now go get YOUR FLUE SHOT[WITH MERCURY..AND 50 SECRET VIRUS AND FUNGIE AND SIT DOWN IN YOUR NICE SEAT..LACED WITH antifungal and preservative..YOU AINT SEEN NUTHIN YET

and whEN[IF YOU FIND THE ENERGY]..to protest
we will send the POLICE AFTER YOU..[they got the cancer shots..YEAH ITS slower..but heck..we make long term pans..we wont need as many to cONTROL YOU..once..there is less of you.

if you think adgenda 21...is con theory..
OR WONT affect you..our minions did their worK..WWWhELL

you aint seen nothin yeT

Casual jobs to hide the bodies..from the mutant bird swine pos virus..grown on the juices of OUR DEAD...MIX WITH HEAVEY METAL..PUMP AND Dump it into the people..[why?]

JUST TO HIDE THE OTHER WORSE THINGS..like sterilization
..of youR KIDS
Plundering your banking medical and law systems..getting rid of the useless eaters

anyhow i KNOW we cant change minds
because its all designed to be irreversible

SO YOU WITH THE JOB..OF CARING FOR THE elite IMBECILES..yep jobs jobs jobs..TILL YA DROP YA LANDLESS BROKEN SERFS..you were just collateral drainage...sorry about the friendly fire..sick/dying yep jobs a plenty..[and knowing or helping..dont mean it wont get you too]

anyhow not long to go now..
its a hard reign going TA FALL
but were too dumbed doWN..TO PUT HUMPTY BACK TOGETHER..YET AGAIN.
Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 18 February 2014 7:54:40 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That is Abbott's way of cutting carbon, shut industry down.
Posted by 579, Tuesday, 18 February 2014 9:13:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579,

Just about all Juliar's carbon reduction came from the closing of manufacturing. The carbon tax had almost no effect whatsoever.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 18 February 2014 10:49:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One million $ stacked on the debt every 4.53 minutes.
Posted by 579, Tuesday, 18 February 2014 2:46:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interest on Labor's debt is roughly $1m per 45 minutes.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 18 February 2014 4:34:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well said Syd,
I agree with virtually everything you expounded, excepting the nuclear expansion. But lets not allow that to get in the way of our concord.

Unfortunately, the cheap, short sighted methods adopted by the Howard government have inculcated a whole generation to believe the Coalition is some sort of financial genius.
But Sadly, the mining boom whilst not about to disappear can no longer power us. The easy inflation of real estate and its subsequent release of equity to create a false boom is also no longer an option. The Howard governments short sightedness and the do nothing Rudd/ Gillard era marked by its symbolic distractions has finally come home to roost.

Welcome to the economic rationalist nightmare. Unfortunately, Syd, none of the common sense ideas you have detailed will find any traction until such time as this country and the western world suffers sufficiently to finally realise the prevailing economic theories are defunct.

With the global derivative market now some 10 times global GDP any small correction in the markets can trigger a financial meltdown which will dwarf the GFC. The consequences of such an event are anyone's guess but they can't be good. The global debt economy is at its death throes.

Notice that the simple prescriptions you wisely suggest are merely common sense but the vitriol they attract beggars belief. The market and industry will solve everything! Well industry is what 20-30% of our economy, and with automobiles emigrating that will only reduce industry by a further 5 % perhaps. And the true rationalist is against any plan to replace this loss
Posted by YEBIGA, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 3:57:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Syd seems to understand that there is a new problem but does not say
what he thinks it is. The reality is we are in a bind. We need very
large inputs to generate the new energy regime but now that growth is
drying up we no longer have the excess energy to do the work.
Our options now are very limited.
All the commentators assume some form of business as usual.
Business as usual requires significant GDP and growth, but energy costs
keep eating all our surplus funds.

From now on we have no choice but to apply sustainability principles
with a relish or else our GDP will go negative and we will be in recession.

Welcome to the Post Peak Oil World !
Posted by Bazz, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 4:55:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
sadly..joe hockey stick..has the same cure for jobs jobs jobs
ie sell off more furniture..so private for profit capitalists can reduce the workforce..AND REAP Their harvest..just so joe can build more infrastructure..[more furniture..to sell off next time

GREAT[not]..but think..these are the big stuff capitalists wont spend their 'investments on/TILL WE FIRE SELL IT..off..like the common wealth bank..the fed..telicom..etc

and so the new money..goes to the same builders
ONLY TO BUY IT UP..AT THE NEXT FIRE SALE..once the hard work is done
Posted by one under god, Wednesday, 19 February 2014 5:13:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yebiga
You don't define 'economic rationalist' bit I presume you mean free market. Yes? No? What do you actually mean by the term?

Can you see that government monopoly control of the supply of money and credit, government cartelisation of banks, government granting banks a licence to print money in return for an endless market for government debt, government backing private banks so as to keep the whole scam going, so government can pursue a policy of cheap credit by endless inflation, government dictating fractional reserve banking, government fiat currency, government insurances of this whole dodgy Ponzi scheme ... can you see how it's mere economic ignorance to lay the blame for this or its fruits to free markets, economic rationalism or libertarian economic theory?
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Thursday, 20 February 2014 6:56:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jardine, all the fiddling with money & its derivatives is desperation
actions by economists who do not really understand what is going on.
Fortunately there are just a very few economists that do realise that
the economy is slave to the available energy. Not the other way around.

We are right now up against the peak of available energy and there is
no slack in the system to more than just keeping things going.
However as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow we have to plan to wind
down our unimportant expenditures and start prioritising where we spend
our resources.

This I think is beyond the ken of our political parties.
Posted by Bazz, Thursday, 20 February 2014 9:10:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Jardine
I agree with your depiction of the ponzi banking scheme - on this part the libertarians are right.

As for economic rationalism, to me this is a blessed conviction that everything can be done by the market, that there is no role for government in industry and no social welfare or health or other civic role.

In sporting terms its a good offensive game plan no defence. And in most games defense wins, or is at least as important as offence - which just looks like more fun.

Now. What do I mean by defense? Well, your chief asset are the people of any economy and they have some basic needs which must be addressed before you can expect to get the best out of them. If they are uneducated, hungry, without shelter, sick, lacking medicine then your never going to get the best out of them.

The counter argument is that if you give them all that, you will never get anything out of them because why should they bothered?

And it is this, just this argument and which side of it you fall, which essentially determines everyone's political leanings. The right is committed to offence and believes a success offence is the best kind of defence. The left argues for the reverse.

The right economic rationalist is convinced that the guarantee of essentials would make for so many slackers and become such a drain on the economy that we would all become impoverished.

The left, on the contrary, believe if you guarantee people their essentials they are then truly able to become fully engaged and operate at a far greater proficiency.

In practice, what this means is the right want to minimise all government interference and the left want to institute all sorts of public programs. Both are consistent with their view of human nature
Posted by YEBIGA, Thursday, 20 February 2014 9:16:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jardine to clarify myself
Thoroughly agree that the current banking system which creates money through debt and requires governments to borrow at interest is a Ponzi scheme.

But i also believe the correct balance between government and business was achieved in the 1970s. I do not accept the rationalist approach subsequently initiated by Reagan, Thatcher et al, which was then imported here. The economic success which this rationalism supposedly delivered is entirely based on a series of fallacies and myths which have beguiled our entire culture.

Selling off public assets was a short term band aid which injected capital into the economy via private debt to complete the sell off. This injection of debt helped increase economic activity in the short term.

Similarly, the evisceration of unions, the casualisation of the workforce, the proliferation of consultants has enabled huge increases in the profitability of the largest publicly listed corporations but at the same time Legitimised a culture of rewarding the senior management with obscene sums entirely disproportionate to their worth. Thus the savings made from extracting more and more productivity from the ordinary worker has been passed on to the once managers who are now ordained entrepreneur CXOs.

As the 1990s arrived the world was again heading for recession and stagnation the sell offs and thefts had lost their steam. Fortunately, high tech, computers, pcs, mobile phones and Internet arrived and kicked the d-day can down the road.

By 2001, the ideology is bankrupt. The high tech impetus absorbed. Now Reagan and Thatchers bastard children Resorted to war and asset inflation - the last desperate move, the death rattle of a system bereft of ideas.

The rationalists sold us a sick puppy a lie. The excess of big business is a kin to the excess of big government. A key role for Government is to limit excess not to enable it. The role of government is to enable anyone to open a business and contribute to wealth of a nation not to restrict entry and enable a culture of distortion to mask itself as legitimate.
Posted by YEBIGA, Thursday, 20 February 2014 10:15:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yebiga

Has it ever occurred to you that if your starting assumptions are wrong, your conclusions will be wrong, and your process of reasoning will prevent you from identifying those facts?

Obviously you are in no position to determine what the "balance" should be if you
a) you have no rational criterion for distinguishing what government interventions are justified, even in your own terms, from what aren't;
b) confuse state ownership and control of the means of production with private, blaming "economic rationalism" for evils and disorders caused by government.

As I have demonstrated these defects in your argument, over and over again, and as you just keep making the same assumptions, it just means you're wrong. It's important to understand that the problem is not that you have a valid viewpoint, on which reasonable people can disagree. It's just simply an irrational belief system. It's in the same category as belief in Santa Claus, or throwing virgins into the volcano to increase crop fertility.

AT NO TIME have you justified or attempted to justify your assumption that the State can do what you assume it can do. Yes it can give industry handouts, we know that. What you have not demonstrated, is *how you know* that the resources foregone, and the values sacrificed, to achieve that end, would not have been better and fairer employed left in the hands of their owners and producers.

No, I'm not asking you to give me assumptions, an slogans, and ideology, and aggregative fallacies, which is all you keep offering. I'm asking you to show by what *rational criterion* you *know* what is in issue.

This is not a contest between "ideologies". I have demonstrated that what you are saying is flatly incorrect, self-contradictory, and unjustifiable even in your own terms.

What you have is a mere superstition, and none the less so for being the predominant and fashionable religion of the modern age: the blind unquestioning anti-rational, anti-human, anti-social adoration of state power.
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Saturday, 22 February 2014 12:57:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The role of government is to enable anyone to open a business and contribute to wealth of a nation not to restrict entry and enable a culture of distortion to mask itself as legitimate."

That's an argument *against* government's economic intervention, not in favour, isn't it?

The interesting thing is that although you consistently appear running left-wing slogans, on challenge and examination, you equally consistently give away any socialist claims at the outset, and say you agree with libertarian principles.

Has it ever occurred to you to examine the extent to which the things you're blaming on economic rationalism, are the result of government interventions?

Are you sure you're not just deeply confused?
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Saturday, 22 February 2014 1:08:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have tried my best to step you thru my conceptual and simple understanding. But no matter how clear I make it, you revert back to the same core foundation that business creates wealth and is the best possible and only prove. Method of doing it,

I don't dispute this.

What I dispute is that this is all there is.
And here you find it difficult to get out of grade school.

I am assuming you accept there will be a governmen, schools, police, a defence system which will be funded outside the strict business world economy?

And it is just this where the hard work begins. How big should government be? What is its responsibility? Its limits?

Whenever I try to raise the conversation above the basic you insist on dragging it back to fundamentals.
Posted by YEBIGA, Saturday, 22 February 2014 11:43:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"And it is just this where the hard work begins. How big should government be? What is its responsibility? Its limits?

Whenever I try to raise the conversation above the basic you insist on dragging it back to fundamentals."

No I don't. I keep asking what is the criterion by which those questions are to be answered, and you keep not answering.

In my opinion, they can only be answered by a principle, and that principle must have the following characteristics:
- it must be logically coherent, i.e. no fallacies, double standards or self-contradictions
- it must be ethical, for example it cannot entail an open-ended warrant for a privileged class to engage in fraud or aggression
- it must identify a sphere in which people have a right to be free from aggression initiated by others
- it must answer why, if governmental power is justified for one thing, the same reasoning would not apply to everything else.

I don't think you can do that by just plumping for a particular historical period, and saying you liked the "balance" as between private and public at that time, because
a) that's not a principle, it's an impression, and
b) the world keeps changing forever, e.g. compare China in the 70s, versus now,
c) that method doesn't distinguish the critical parts of the inquiry, such as what good things in that period were because of liberty and property, or despite them; and what things were because of government, or despite it. In other words, it has no theory of causation. So for example we often get the clearly false claim left-wing claim that evils of the Ponzi scheme of monetary policy - government intervention piled on government intervention - represent "unregulated capitalism".

Obviously if your theory doesn't distinguish private from state, it's useless.

Go ahead: what's the principle that distinguishes legitimate from illegitimate government power?
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Sunday, 23 February 2014 8:45:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For example, what makes you think that the interventions in industry that you are in favour of, are *not* going to cause the destruction of industry?

And then the people who voted for policies to destroy industry, look in dismay at the loss of their jobs, and cry "Why doesn't the government [intervene to] fix it?"

For example the carbon tax wasn't even touted as being primarily about revenue-raising. No sir. It was specifically *intended* to to destroy industry.

Well? Are you Labor voters happy now?

Can you imagine how frustrating it is for the non-moron part of the population to see this kind of foolery take in a majority of the population?

And what was the high value for the sake of which industry was to be deliberately destroyed by policy?

Because otherwise all the DNA in the world will unzip and de-nature itself, from the boiling of "the planet" caused by global warming from people not being forced to use curly light-globes, so there won't be any nature left for "our grandchildren".

Don't laugh. This is literally the level of their mentality.

We're talking about people who are literally so dumb that they can't make the connection between voting for policies that destroy industry, and the following destruction of industry!

Now the question for you is - and this is the same as what you are asking: "How big should government be? What is its responsibility? Its limits?" -
by what rational criterion do you distinguish your theory of government from theirs?

Because it's *the same* isn't it?

But if it's not, then explain how you know that government interventions in industry aren't going to cause consequences worse than the problems they were intended to solve?

Even if you read only the first two chapters of "Economics in One Lesson", you will understand more about political economy than all the Labor party put together:
http://www.hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf

They are stuck in a belief in Santa Claus, crying for mummy's tittie, real infantile stuff.
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Sunday, 23 February 2014 1:48:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jardine
Please don't suppose that I am a fan of the ALP. Particularly, the current crop of nuts. Likewise, I am not a Howard or Abbott fan. And in case you are wondering, I am not a green either.

The carbon tax was always going to be a joke. Real things should be and can' be done to protect our environment and transition in a sensible way to renewable energy.

The Hawke/Keating government, for example, showed that it is possible for government to work with industry and implement coherent and sustainable plans. Remember, back in the early 1980s the automotive industry also threatened to leave en masse. By negotiating union concessions, tariff concessions, providing R & D grants the industry was retained and even grew of its own volition during the intervening years.

There are constructive interventions and large infrastructure projects only government can facilitate. I am firmly convinced that much of its failure is not that government is intrinsically stupid and incapable ,rather, it consistently sells out our national interest to short term prescriptions, down right corruption or mad ideology - as in the desalination plant in Victoria.

J Shumpeter, himself, warns in Capitalism, Socialism & Democracy, that as more and more large public companies predominate a disconnect occurs as ownership becomes abstracted into shares; Reducing the vitality of capitalism. In other words, the passion and energy common with private ownership becomes more bureaucratised in large public companies. He does not say it quite like this but in time there is little difference between a big public company and the efficiency of a government department.

Thus two options are available - break them up as the US did with AT&T and the baby bells or government has to become involved. The first will not happen because in truth the public companies are now the citizens in all but name. So the way forward is problematic.

Personally, I believe, the system as it stands is entirely screwed. The necessary changes are not as hard to figure out as they are impossible to implement absent a catastrophic economic melt down.
Posted by YEBIGA, Sunday, 23 February 2014 10:54:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"In other words, the passion and energy common with private ownership becomes more bureaucratised in large public companies. He does not say it quite like this but in time there is little difference between a big public company and the efficiency of a government department. Thus two options are available - break them up as the US did with AT&T and the baby bells or government has to become involved."

Notice the double standard? The original problem, as given, is that big companies become more like government. At all times government is bigger and more bureaucratised. Yet the problem is to break up private companies? Why isn't it to break up governments? According to your own aims and your own theory?

And that is to
a) assume that government has nothing to do with the problem in the first place. But the effect of *all* economic interventions by government is to add overheads to business. Because of economies of scale, the bigger companies can bear them better: the smaller are driven to the wall. Thus government is the main single cause of the cartelisation of big business (quite apart from licensing, subsidies, contracts etc.) Yet the solution is for government to break up business? Why shouldn't the solution be to break up government?

b) assume the benefits outweigh the costs. Prove it?

c) ignore the fact that ALL the revenue of the private companies is consensual, and ALL the revenue of government is not. They are both ethically and economically different in kind.

You can't make a case for action against oligopolies if you can't make it against monopolies. You have a monopoly of the sale of your own labour. Should that be illegal too?

Notice you still not identified any actual principle that would let anyone know what they would have to do to avoid proscription?

"The necessary changes are not as hard to figure out ..."

Then how come you can't even identify the criterion for them without contradicting yourself?
Posted by Jardine K. Jardine, Sunday, 23 February 2014 11:27:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy