The Forum > General Discussion > Best decision in six years/Who is Labor?
Best decision in six years/Who is Labor?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Page 6
- 7
- 8
-
- All
Posted by sonofgloin, Tuesday, 3 December 2013 5:02:58 PM
| |
579>> It makes you wonder who is pulling Hockeys strings. Where are graincorp going to get money from, with dwindling market share and obsolete equipment they could run into trouble, then what.<<
Poor GC....dwindling market share...hahahahah...579 bleats on about infrastructure so tired and worn out that ADM wants it all....stupid ADM....they should have consulted 579...he would set the idiots straight...hahahahah....20% revenue hike in 2012 for GC....12% rise in dividends hahahah.....yeah 579 you know what your talking about.... Posted by sonofgloin, Tuesday, 3 December 2013 5:10:05 PM
| |
That's straight out of "Through the Looking Glass" Saltpetre.
>>...are EU 'free border' and internal trading arrangements not also aimed at protecting internal market share?<< You are suggesting that free trade agreements are a form of protectionism, which is both counter-intuitive and counter-factual. >>It would seem the whole world other than Oz is involved in some form of protectionism<< The whole world *including* Oz is involved in some form of protectionism. And this is definitely not a good thing - it has been shown many times over that the less protectionism, the greater is the world's economic growth. Here's a snapshot on its impact on the GFC. "Trade has rebounded partly because countries did not become too protectionist." http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/world-trade And Australia is actually lagging the major EC countries when it comes to the level of protectionism we already operate. http://www.iccrf.org/sites/default/files/docs/2011/12/OpenMarketsIndex_FINAL102711.pdf We are more insular than twentyeight other countries, sitting around mid-table. Above average, but not that much to boast about. All forms of tariffs, government subsidies to industry provide only a short-term defence against the economic realities. Ultimately, they all end up screwing the customer. That's us. Posted by Pericles, Tuesday, 3 December 2013 6:20:11 PM
| |
P, you can throw in all the good news from the Economist as you wish...bottom line the average household owns less and is 500 times more indebted than the Australian household of the 1970's.
Posted by sonofgloin, Tuesday, 3 December 2013 6:56:09 PM
| |
That is nonsense, and you know it.
>>...bottom line the average household owns less and is 500 times more indebted than the Australian household of the 1970's<< Look around you. Posted by Pericles, Tuesday, 3 December 2013 9:48:53 PM
| |
Look around you.
Pericles, Every mutt carrying an ipad & being oblivious to the real world around them is not a sign of a healthy economy. Posted by individual, Wednesday, 4 December 2013 5:15:02 AM
|
Better off P with no protection....hhahahah...gotta laugh...., thats a joke...let go of my leg!...... Here are some facts:
Before the Lima Declaration was signed in 1973 (the first global free trade agreement) more Aussies own their home then than we do now. Form the 1996 census (Census of Population and Housing 2015.0 1996) to the last census Aussies who own their homes outright has fallen from 40.9% to 32.1%.
Household debt in 1977 was 25% of disposable income..Today it is just short of 150% of disposable income. Yes Pericles for all your waffle regarding the benefits of globalization you did not mention the transference of the populations wealth to the corporations and bankers.