Keep at it *RehcTub* I enjoy these kind of threads and consider that you have made a number of worthwhile contributions from the micro economic perspective.

I recall one poster who expressed the view that there was a time when the ALP paid far more attention than what it currently does to the micro perspective, but that this has been in progressive decline for some years.

..

If at least some of us can agree that wages cannot continue to go up then obviously costs must come down.

A sacrifice of a "Holy Cow" is required i.m.o.

In that regard, I look to the dividing line between those who have a regulated wage and to those who do not. I personally would like to see the medics (including dentists) put back on a fixed price, means tested, sustainable fund/diversified funds as previously mentioned, with professional incentives for excellence and special conditions for those who actually have a good or service that is in international demand, to be evidenced by a positive cash flow into the country, who are to be encouraged and rewarded, but would still be required to service the local economy, at say for the sake of argument, the "Enhanced Medicare" rate.

The majority of the doctors are mere functionaries in my view, that are in their positions to service the health and well being of the citizens to amongst other things, enhance productivity.

The fund managers themselves would have to be limited in terms of wages/salaries and bonuses to only a measure above and beyond what is required for sustainability of the fund, which incidentally ought also include research and a reserve.

Same for the lawyers.

..

I would further add that no public service member/consultant/contractor ought earn more than say 75% of the base rate of his/her Minister.

..

There is in my view too many areas which ought not be afforded the right to make up their own price in the interests of sustainability and equilibrium.

tbc

Property - what a joke - when I last heard Alan "Big Bud" Cola comment he indicated that even in the view of the I.M.F. the Aust market is something like 35% overvalued and then some in my view.

What's the average Joe first time home buyer got to pay for a $AU500,000 house? Upward of 1.1 million over 30 years? Please ...

..

Is there any truth to the assertion from an economic perspective that the economy was inflated to pay for the wars?

..

The working class of Aust is being screwed and if you vote for either red or blue and you're not on the gravy train then you are nigh on committing self harm.

..

Having said all that though, I note that I have only a limited understanding of economics and will be interested to read any further "reasonable" comments made by others.

DreamOn,

I have a quite simple test for those who post on blogs. It’s called the “Mythbuster Test” It used to be quite difficult to apply because of the “plausibility factor”. So many posters used terms, phrases, references, academic and research links that create the illusion of learning. (Like reference to Holy Cow rather than Sacred Cow)

I came to realize some time ago that such posters owe their repertoire to “blogging” and not to education. Thus they create “plausibility”.

There are hidden clues in their texts that give the game away. Mostly they relate to comprehension, context or relevance. An example might be as simple as reference to a book, link or a piece of research which the author has either never actually read, does not comprehend or is used utterly out of context.

This is why some posters fail to make it from “Busted” to “Plausible”, let alone to “Confirmed”.

Entertaining though this may be occasionally, once one becomes tuned to the flawed but artificially plausible rhetoric, it does begin to grate.

So when you say to rehctub that you “enjoy these kind of threads” (very bad English by the way), all you are telling us is that you actually believe your own rhetoric and are absolutely convinced of your plausibility.

I would very much like to hear more about your economic credentials to which you refer? Then we may all be able to contribute to your desire for “further reasonable comments” on this subject.

Otherwise we may reluctantly reach the “patronizing tosser” conclusion.

DreamOn,

<<I enjoy these kind(s) of thread(s) and consider that you have made a number of worthwhile contributions from the micro economic perspective.>>

So you assert that you do know the difference between macro and micro economics? OK question. What is structural deficit?

If the past ALP paid << far more attention than what it currently does to the micro perspective, but that this has been in progressive decline for some years>>. Is it the ALP that is in decline, their policies or their attention to micro-economics? And what does this mean for current ALP fiscal policy?

<<If at least some of us can agree that wages cannot continue to go up then obviously costs must come down>>.

Bollocks. Upon what business model is this predicated? It is in the interest of all businesses, their employee’s, customers, government and trade unions to have all businesses generating enough EBIT to pay greater than the going rate for wages.

Medical services are on the right hand side of the balance sheet, expenses. It is rude to refer to any service providers such as doctors or any expert medic as a “functionary” you arrogant little toad.

At least we have validated some key facts. You do not have the foggiest what is meant by most of what you write, especially when you spout such as, << the interests of sustainability and equilibrium >>. Further, we are left in no doubt that your assertion that you “have only a limited understanding of economics” is very, very true. So why spout about it?

Zip it before you destroy the last remnants of your credibility.

Do we still have a problem? Of course we do, & will have until we defeminize the education system.

With the current system of stress-less assignment & in class assessment, by teachers we are turning out year 12 graduate students rated as "very high achiever", who have trouble with junior high level work.

I am not surprised that the TAFE in Bazzs area have dropped the electrical trade course. The electrical course requires a bit of moderate level math. What's more, it requires you to actually have the math, & be able to use it daily. It is not enough to have looked at it for a couple of days, months back, done an assignment, & promptly forgotten it. This may get you into a uni science course, [god save us], but will not get you through an electrical trade course.

A friend of mine an ex high school math teacher, is now a TAFE math teacher, & loves it. His students not only want to know, they must understand what they are taught, & how to use it. He tells me that less than one percent of the students actually have the math, or physics, the piece of paper they got from high school says they have.

He does some private coaching, & says only about 10% of uni engineering students have the math they are supposed to, the rest have to get coaching to catch up.

Only externally set & marked examinations covering the full senior course can correct this rot, but the feminists are going to be hard to beat. The idea that a teacher may have to actually be able to do, what they are teaching would horrify them. Then expecting the students to actually pass an exam on what they really learned would be just too much. Hell, anyone would think we expect students should really learn something.

*SpinDoc*

True to your "handle," your regurgitation of the echoes of your own delusions are barely worth commenting on, however it ought be quite plain that both I and other posters here speak as we please, within reason, without regard for your own personal bizarre idiosyncrasies.

Apart from noting a left out "s" on one word (a typo) your writing is notable by its distinct poverty of content and none of your assertions are backed up and you make no attempt to refute the substance. Except that is it to suggest that it is rude to refer to service providers in the manner in which I have done. I was actually being polite, as the reality of "Do you have private insurance? - No, sorry out the door" makes the vast majority of doctors and lawyers in my book to be absolute blood sucking parasites.

Thus, I would suggest without respect that it is you that have a credibility problem and not I. I am quite comfortable with my mojo and my shine.

Actually, I think that you understand me all too well and simply do not like that which I have written so have made a vain and pathetic attempt to attack me personally.

Water off a duck's back I assure you.