Malcolm Turnbull is pushing to have TPP implemented. What specifically is in this agreement other than allowing international companies the right to sue the Australian government for the loss of profits for laws passed that protects the Australia citizen.

Well if the liability from those law-suits is going to fall on the Australian government, then cheers - let them lose their pants and their false teeth, but in reality, Turnbull and his gang of politicians will continue to eat well, dress well, stay warm in winter and cool in summer, fly business/first class and retire well, while the bill is going to fall on the shoulders of ordinary tax-payers like you and me.

Yuyutsu
Then now that you understand this travesty of a contract, would it not make sense to at least contact your local MP to express your opposition to it?

Chris

"My local MP"? - I can't stand the stench!

And of all issues, this TPP is not even the worst - far from it, Chris.
If I were to attempt speaking to politicians, only one thing would be guaranteed - my throat becoming hoarse.

Just realise that politicians and their state/government are predators and sheep cannot bargain with wolves. Try to stay out of their sight, digging your own little hole in the remotest niche you can find, then hope to minimise the damage while the storm is raging outside.

Does anyone have a link to all the facts regarding the TPP?
Has an official version been released to the public, or are we still relying on hacked or leaked documents?

Or am I still being sold something that I'm not allowed to know anything about, but must still go along with...

Politicians saying 'Move along nothing to see here; only a FOOL would want to bother to read the fine print.'
Yeah right, and politicians don't ever lie;
Seems about as trusting or sensible as asking a pedophile to babysit your kids.

What exactly are they selling us, and how are they selling us out?

For those economic illiterates:

The TPP is a free trade agreement which will grant Aus further access to many markets in the US and Asia Pacific, and free trade is always good for business and the economy in the long term.

Some countries in the Asia pacific have a history of allowing a foreign country to invest and once the industry is set up, creating a whole new set of taxes and regulations that bleed the industry dry, which is why many Aussi companies that helped with the games in India got fleeced, and why virtually no one will invest in India without political protection. So the answer is that it is not to protect against day to day laws, but against unplanned new laws that subject companies to huge costs who would not have invested if they had known about them ahead of time.

This protection makes the host country a far more attractive investment environment.

Armchair Critic
I think you answered your own post questions.

There is nothing either leaked or in the MSM that tells what we are getting, if this agreement is signed within the agreed time frame of two years.

The only thing I know for sure is that the tax payer is on the hook for the government thoughtlessly passing of the plain packaging law for cigarettes.

My question for you as a fence sitter is how bad does it have to get before you actually get off the fence. Or are you like most of us old farts, just hoping it waits till we are gone, before it gets really bad.

Chris

shadow minister
Have you seen a copy of what is in the agreement? if so perhaps you could enlighten economic illiterates like me, as this is the point of my post.

I do know that as a tax payer in Australia you will have to pay every time the government passes health and safety laws that international companies can show effected their profits.

So which side are you on, the tax payer that wants to be safe and healthy. Or are you one of those people who thinks the multi nationals should not have any laws put in their way to makeing as much money as possible for the executives and share holders.

Chris

Lefty,

Now you are talking complete rubbish. Firstly you claim to know nothing about what is in the agreement, but then go on to make wild claims about how it will affect the tax payer. Make up your mind.

All I hear from you is propaganda direct from the CFMEU song sheet.

While I have not seen the final draft, I do know the principles, which do not affect health and safety laws that affect all Aus companies equally.

Hey LEFTY ONE,
I think Wikileaks did get their hands on a few sections of it.
http://www.google.com.au/#q=wikileaks+tpp

I don't totally know what to make of Assange...
He's provided a lot of insight into things with his document releases, (and that's a good thing generally in my opinion) but I read somewhere that he's also taken money from Soros; whatever that means.

Dear SM,

To what extent is the TPP about FREE trade, that is about removing restrictions, rather than about going the extra mile to actively ENCOURAGE trade?

Granted, since we all love freedom, we should never restrict what other people can do, be they Australian or otherwise - yet we need not help and encourage them either, them and their trade.

You may be correct that free trade is good for business and the economy - that is indeed outside my area of expertise, but as business and economy are not sentient beings, I have no reason to be concerned about their welfare.

While we should never actively hinder people from trading, why should we advertise this fact and commit to it publicly? Why not allow foreigners who threaten to purchase Australian assets to remain a little scared that we might change our policies like India does? This is a case where it's beneficial to keep a barking dog at our gate, even if he's never going to bite!

Also, why should we ENCOURAGE foreigners to come and invest here, thus purchasing Australian assets, for example by recognising their foreignly-incorporated companies as legal and privileged entities in Australia (as I assume the TPP requires)? Companies are not people, so we should not be obliged to grant them recognition and a free hand like we should for individuals. Let those who wish to invest, then suck out the Australian resources and push us onto the mad rat-race of the rest of the world, at least be required to trade in their individual capacity without enjoying the extra privileges and securities afforded to incorporated bodies - then pay Australian tax on their Australian income just like the rest of us.

shadow minister
I think you need to spend a little more time actually reading my post before you rush to your key board. I know there is a special place that you put anything that comes from someone who professes to be a lefty.

So the thread reads “TPP what is in it that is good for Australia”. Clearly you have no Idea, but posted that it is a good thing and that anyone who disagrees is an economic illiterate.

The whole point of my post is that I am as much in the dark as anyone including our politicians, who we know only read the first page marked conclusion, before voting any new law up or down depending on what the whip says.

I do know that in the agreement, it states that courts will be set up, to see if laws that protect the health and safety (like the plain packaging laws) can be shown to effect company profits. It is clear that the plain packaging law will affect sales, or it is a waste of time. So my friend you as a tax payer will have to pay those companies millions of dollars whether you like it or not.

If I am wrong please send me a link.

So I ask you the question again, do you believe multinational profits are more important that the health and safety of your fellow citizens.

Chris

Lefty,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership#Contents

"Investor-state arbitration:
The TPP agreement establishes an investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which grants investors the right to sue foreign governments for treaty violations. For example, if an investor invests in country "A", a member of a trade treaty, and country A breaches that treaty, then the investor may sue country A's government for the breach. ISDS is meant to provide investors in foreign countries basic protections from foreign government actions such as "freedom from discrimination", "protection against uncompensated expropriation of property", "protection against denial of justice" and "right to transfer capital":

Freedom from discrimination: An assurance that those doing business abroad will face a level playing field and will not be treated less favorably than local investors or competitors from other countries.

Protection against uncompensated seizure of property: An assurance that property of investors won’t be seized by the government without just compensation.

Protection against denial of justice: An assurance that investors will not be denied justice in criminal, civil, or administrative adjudicatory proceedings.

Right to transfer capital: An assurance that investors will be able to move capital relating to their investments freely, subject to safeguards to provide government flexibility, including to respond to financial crises and ensure the integrity and stability of the financial system.

ISDS cannot overturn local laws (unlike the World Trade Organization) which violate trade agreements, but can grant monetary damages to investors adversely affected by such laws. As pointed out by the Office of the United States Trade Representative, ISDS requires specific treaty violations, and does not allow corporations to sue solely over "lost profits".

The TPP specifically excludes tobacco industries from the ISDS process. The carve-out came as a response to concerns about ISDS cases against anti-smoking laws, including Philip Morris v. Uruguay. The exemption of tobacco from ISDS is a first for an international trade agreement."

Lefty,

That effectively knocks what you are saying into a cocked hat.

Shadow minister
Thank you for the link and your post which was basically a cut and paste job from it, unfortunately you only covered the positive support of the tpp agreement.

However you are correct, that the tobacco industry has been cut out of the deal to make it more salable to the general public. The link listed many decanting voices, who are far from convinced that an agreement that is 2700 pages long should not be fast tracked until every one of those pages is analyzed in detail, for that legal back door that seem to find its way into trade agreements.

So although you have corrected one of my assumptions, you have not eased the suspicion that I and many others have about this agreement that has a lot more to do with the rights of companies than it does about the lives and futures of ordinary Australians.

You said you have not read a final draft of this agreement, could you please send any link you have that sets out the initial draft copy that was used for the original votes it received.

Chris

Lefty,

The link I gave above contains a summary of the TPP in plain English and not in Legalese, not just "the good bits" as you claim, and also includes pro and con political commentary. I suggest that you read it to allay the "suspicions" that you have.

It should be perfectly clear that the government is not going to stump up each time it makes a law, as long it follows the good governance provisions of the treaty. This gives investors assurances (much as a AAA rating gives lenders assurances) and encourages businesses to invest, employ people and pay taxes in Aus. It is pro business and pro people.

shadow minister

The link is a generalized over view at best in most places. Yes it is in plain English, but it does not explain the whole agreement in a way that can be analyzed by people who are skeptical, like US Senator Chuck Schumer.

My comment about “the good bits” was a reference to your post which was a copy and paste of some of the link that was supportive of TPP.
I am still suspicious, because as with many trade agreements, negotiations for the TPP were conducted with significant secrecy. Drafts of the agreement were kept classified during negotiations, and access to the working text was significantly restricted even for government officials and business representatives involved in the talks. So how can you agree to sign on to it if you don’t know what is in it. It’s the old ”trust me” that I have heard from used car salesman around the world.

There are many parts of the world economy that I don’t think you have any knowledge of such is the Indian pharmaceutical companies that produce many generic drugs at a price third world citizens can afford. This agreement spells out, that it will allow extensions of patents on many drugs thus compelling people whose income is $40 a week to go without.

IMO The idea that this agreement is going to increase the growth of the world’s economy shows a complete lack of economic knowledge. What this will do is increase the amount of taxes the respective governments have to extract from its citizens to make up for the disappearance of import levies. This will most likely fall on those who pay sales taxes, as it is the easiest to raise.

Chris

I oppose the TPP based on the fact that I'm not allowed to read the fine print, which leads me to believe they are trying to deceive and take advantage of me somehow.
Most of the international corporations that would benefit from this don't pay tax anyway, so I don't see why we should give them any advantage.

If this was a genuine benefit to Australian citizens then they wouldn't be hiding its contents, so I say No.

And it's a firm NO with a bonus piece of advice and action.
'What the hell are you thinking expecting us to agree to something we're not allowed to know the details of?'
Any government employee that ordered time be wasted on this (treason towards Australian citizens) should be made to pay back the money and any MP that supported deceiving Australians should be put in jail, their future entitlements annulled.

Lefty and AC,

To assuage your paranoia, here is link to the full text of the TPP on the DFA website as released on Jan 2016. I think that you will find that most of what you have heard is wrong.

There is no attempt to hide anything from anyone. That negotiations are kept confidential is standard for every negotiation from the beginning of time, but the final agreement is public knowledge.

P.S. the website to which I linked previously is not pro or con the TPP

shadow minister
Thank you for the link,I found all needed to read.I suggest you read the section on temporary entry of business persons to Australia. After you have thought about it, perhaps you can explain how any Australian based company or business can possibly compete when their competitor does not have to pay Australian taxes, for any staff they need.

I am guessing you think this is a good deal so that you can invest in other countries covered by this deal.However for the poor sods who have to pay tax in Australia, they are going to be really up against it when competing against say a Vietnamese machinery builder who does not.
Chris

Lefty,

Having read the section you mention, the bringing of people in applies to high level managers and technical specialists, not trades or labourers, and from experience they are not normally cheaper than people from here.

However, if you are looking at competing at manufacturing with a factory in Vietnam, the TPP is not going to change anything.

Dear SM,

«However, if you are looking at competing at manufacturing with a factory in Vietnam, the TPP is not going to change anything»

True, but it would lock in the existing situation.

Manufacturing and agriculture are essential for keeping our bodies alive. We are already losing our skills and ability to provide for ourselves and once, not 'if' but 'when', the totally-mad and unsupported world-economy collapses, we are going to have hunger and strife in this land and millions will probably die.

Instead of remaining self-sufficient, we try to balance the books by providing airy-fairy services, including financial. educational and electronic, as well as mining-exports that would no longer be needed once world-population shrinks and global transportation also is no longer there.

America will fall, Europe and China probably too: why do we want to fall with them?

Another problem with the TPP, not mentioned so far, I believe, is that it forces the Australian regime to legislate all sorts of restrictive laws, which must remain even if the people of Australia, through a newly-democratically-elected government, wish to kick them out.

Anyway, I think that this discussion is only useless whining: the Australian government is signing this agreement with a gun pointed at their head, not because they like it. They probably would have liked to tell us that they have no choice, but they are not allowed to.

shadow minister
You really do need to pay more attention and read more thoroughly than you do.It includes trades people, that means fitters, plumbers, carpenters, welders,and machinists.It also means they will be paid by these companies from Vietnam and pay taxes there not in Australia.

So I hope you have your overseas investment port folio all sorted out so you wont have to worry, but any of your neighbors who are going to have to compete will be in deep trouble.

So I would suggest you don't talk to load at the next barby that you attend, about how wonderful you think this deal is as you are likely to get ostracized or worse.

lefty,

Time and again you make wild accusations about the TPP that prove to be hugely incorrect. I have read the portion to which you refer, and see nothing of "It includes trades people, that means fitters, plumbers, carpenters, welders,and machinists.It also means they will be paid by these companies from Vietnam and pay taxes there not in Australia."

Perhaps you could enlighten us with a reference to a part of the TPP that all of us have missed.

Shadow minister
I tried to cut and paste 12-A. Australia from the section regarding the temporary entry of business persons, but I was unable. If you read the part marked 12.4 you will perhaps see what I am talking about
Please look at A,B,D, and E .Some of the staff mentioned are installers, and warranty workers whose financial support comes from outside Australia. So these trades’ people could be fitters, welders, plumbers, and mechanics, as all these trades are involved in this kind of work. If they are under contract to a foreign company, and they are not resident then Australian tax would not apply.

If somebody decides to import kit set houses from Vietnam then, please show me the clause that says they could not use Vietnamese skilled labor on that project.

I am happy to acknowledge if I am wrong, however my concern is that this agreement is so vague in certain clauses that any competent lawyer could drive bus threw it. I am not trying to get at you personally, its just I think that too many people such as your self are so focused on the bit that is good for them, that they happily sign on to the other thousands of page of clauses and sub clauses that they have been told by experts that this in the interests of every one.

Remember the sales job that was done on collateralized debt obligations and chaos that that caused just a few years ago. If we don’t remain vigilant it will be done to us again, until there is nothing left to steal.
Chris

Lefty,

"A business person who is an Installer or Servicer of machinery or equipment, where such installation or servicing by the supplying enterprise is a condition of purchase under contract of the said machinery or equipment, and who must not perform services which are not related to the service activity which is the subject of the contract."

Firstly read the definition,
-Machinery and equipment - not kit houses
-and who must not perform services which are not related to the service activity which is the subject of the contract.
-Entry is for periods of stay up to a maximum of three months.

Secondly, this exists to some extent already, as my company bring out equipment suppliers' experts to install and maintain sophisticated equipment, but at a price tag of about $10k p.w. these are not your average tradesmen.

In all, your average Aussie worker is under no threat.

From: /independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/if-the-tpp-was-really-about-trade-it-would-include-china,8249

"When one thinks about the costs of trade barriers and the benefits of trade liberalisation in these terms, it is easy to see major flaws in the TPP as an economic policy.

Firstly, because tariff barriers are all already very low between the member countries, any economic gains that might be realised by mutual concessions are likely to be exceedingly small. Reasonable estimates come up with numbers like one tenth of a percent of GDP. This, as the Nobel Laureate and economist Paul Krugman notes, is hardly world-shaking."

Why then is it that China is not included into this little club of latte quaffing tossers ? What else is in the 'fine print' ?
What else is not being disclosed, prior to and once the TPP is signed off and legally in effect?

Let's take a little look down memory lane...
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/mind-the-gap-benefits-from-free-trade-havent-quite-gone-the-distance-20100302-pg6p.html

"But short-term political benefits flow in the other direction. A bilateral meeting with a friendly leader presents many domestic political advantages. It gives the appearance of advancing the national interests and attracts intense and usually uncritical media coverage.

After bilateral meetings, leaders can sing each other's praises and hail the breakthrough their mutual brilliance has achieved. In practice, the promised benefits often fade just a little more slowly than the TV lights."

Sounding a bit like Dastardly Sams misdemeanour somewhat and sorry, but the words: "...short term political advantage..." ring louder every time I read the letters 'T' 'P' and 'P' in the same sentence.

shadow minister
Your right I can’t find a smoking gun in the information provided on the DFA web site, and you will excuse me if I don’t wade through all 2700 pages looking for one. It is clear to me that you live in a different world to most Australians, as you own or work for company that pays out about $200 per hour to some of your overseas staff.

It is also clear you have not talked to ordinary worker/consumers that make up most of the population of Australia, about how they are doing these days economically speaking. You may think we are economic illiterates for not trusting this so called trade agreement, but as a member of the ordinary worker class I have seen my economic advancement opportunity dwindle by the decade.

In case you had not noticed housing is now un affordable, job security is virtually nonexistent, and my kids have been loaded up with student dept , that will they will probably have deducted from their pension assuming that is still around when they retire.

So in future I would appreciate it if you would try to avoid calling people like me economically illiterate, as I can tell you I may not know how to find the devil in the detail of these pro businesses trade deals, but I understand the economic plight of the average occa far better than you do, and I have never actually lived there.
Chris

The TPP was negotiated between the Government and private Corporations behind closed doors and no public debate was allowed or even considered.
The only reason we found out even some of the details in advance was due to leaks.

It's a sell-out of our rights as citizens in favour of Corporate interests and provides no assurances for such matters as the environment.

It's fine to say that the Government can be sued under certain circumstances but ultimately it's always the taxpayer who pays.

Like those heavily politically promoted Free Trade Agreements, which promised much but end up costing us more as individuals, the TPP is potentially even worse.

If it was such a terrific deal for the taxpayer/consumer, the details would have been shouted from the rooftops by politicians long ago.

It seems now even some American politicians are reluctant to sign-off on it because of the increased Corporate power that will result.

Lefty,

Free trade through lowering tariffs and other trade barriers is primarily responsible for the massive increase in living standards over the past 4 decades, which is why it has been pursued by governments of all stripe in all countries.

However, it does threaten inflexible and heavily unionised industries, which is why the CFMEU are trying to rubbish it as well as every other trade deal. So if you don't want to appear economically illiterate check your facts.

Even if you read through all 2700 pages you won't find any clause which backs up your simplistic propaganda.

shadow minister
So my propaganda is simplistic is it, where as yours can be backed up by facts.

Well how about you read the latest data put out by the Australian government regarding the standard of living for your average occa.It all depends how you measure your standard of living, which I am guessing for you, things are just peachy.

So measured in simple terms of overseas goods price, and the amount of cash you start the week with you would be correct.However when we get to the number of hours you have to work, the percentage of your wage that goes for housing, and the amount of crime has increased in Australia, then you a demonstrably wrong.

I think the appropriate phrase here is, "hoisted on your own pattered".

Then there is the issue of them pesky unions who have this annoying habit of asking to get a fair suck of the sav when comes to sharing out the profits of a company they work for.It used to be that the ratio between management and workers was more reasonable 40 years ago, however gap is much larger now, to a point of being obscene.

As you are obviously part of management,I suspect you cant wait to completely de unionize, and get every one on a zero hour contracts.

Final point is I don't see any one else on the thread who has anything good to say about TPP I guess your sales pitch is not going so well with the rest of us economic illiterates.
Chris

Lefty,

Firstly the term is "hoisted by your own petard" which refers to being blown up by your own weapon, which is not the correct useage.

Secondly, wages growth is strongly linked to increased labor productivity, and the period of low wage growth is tied into the last 8 years of productivity flatlining and labor inflexibility. The unions and the regressive labour laws installed in 2008 are largely responsible.

The TPP like all free trade deals in the past will grant access to markets that will benefit many Aus businesses but a few others will disappear, but the net result is always a benefit.

As the world economy changes only the CFMEU is stupid enough to think that things can be kept from changing.

Just wanted to shout out for the good points that are brought up on both sides of the coin and also for the links to the agreement. Let's continue to compile any other resources if there are any?

Shadow Minister,
Hoist by your own petard refers to that tail of
hair that was frequently worn by seamen over their back collar.

You gave url to the DFA site of the text of the TPP a few days back
but there was no link in your post.

The TPP is all about global corporatism . It gives them the power to sue our Govts if their profits are compromised by Govt policy.It will be a corporate kangaroo court outside our legal system.Welcome to their new world order of totalitarianism.

Shadow minister

Thank you for the word correction, however I think it is an appropriate term to use in this case. You see it is an idiom meaning your argument was incorrect, the same way I was when I thought that the plain packaging laws could allow the tobacco lobby to sue due to lost profits.
As you said it means blown up by your own weapon, or in this case the statement made by you that” living standards have improved over the last forty year” was not a true statement according to the quote below from a parliamentary document regarding living standards.

“While several other factors could have been discussed in this paper (e.g. environmental factors) it is clear that any judgment on whether living standards have improved or deteriorated over the past 20 years is very much dependent on the relative importance that individuals attach to the indicators discussed above”.

Moving on, could you give some examples of businesses or industries that will benefit from this agreement,also the new employment opportunities that they will provide for the displaced workers from those that disappear?

And finally, you are correct when you say, you can’t stop change, however I think it is a bit on the nose to call the CFMEU stupid for speaking up for workers concerns. I guess you think court ordered damages for industrial injury are just a cost of doing business and no big deal. Don’t forget as a mid level white collar worker you may well find yourself surplus to requirements in the not too distant future, as globalization really takes hold.
Chris

Lefty,

From the same paper you quoted

"For most people, THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ECONOMIC INDICATOR of living standards is average real (after adjustment for inflation) income and on this basis living standards in Australia have been rising for several decades."

With a few exceptions the cost of goods and services have dropped in real terms, while wages have increased. Life spans and general health have increased, and this is driven by increased productivity driven by free trade. If you don't understand this, I have linked a very basic explanation.

http://www.economicshelp.org/trade/benefits_free_trade/

If you want an example of employment changes with trade, the simplest and most obvious is to look at what people were doing in 1980 and compare it to now. The unemployment rate is down, but most people are not employed in the types of jobs that were prevalent nearly 4 decades ago.

Every step in the liberalisation of trade has been opposed by the unions not because it benefits Australians, but because it threatens the industries in which their power is based. This is not the only reason I have such disdain for the unions (especially the CFMEU) it also appears that they are primarily concerned with feathering their own nests with dodgy "training" payments and outright theft. It is no surprise that union numbers are collapsing, and in the private sector heading for single digits.

Lefty...from 2004 to 2014 BHP Billiton showed a "profit to ordinary shareholders" of some $1,017 Billion (Australian). In the same time it cost them just over half a million $Aust ($576,000 to be precise) in the WA Supreme Court for deaths caused to employees/contractors and injuries attributable to their poor work practices and safety system issues.

Not a bad 'profit' hey ?

I have enjoyed the many "window seats" home from various sites around Australia after taking on management/supervisors over OH&S concerns. My best effort was the photos I sent directly to ABC News when WorkSafe officers had been en route to site after a scaffolder was injured.

As the WorkSafe reps pulled up at the scene, 2 x steel wedges ('dogs') weighing around 3 kg each had slipped out of a plate of steel about 36 metres up on the side of a caustic soda tank, due to sunlight heating up the plates. They ricocheted off the pipework and went through both doors of the Hilux they were sitting in. One wedge took out the gearstick after ripping through the blokes trousers ( no injuries) and the other wedge punched a neat hole through the guard and into the engine block.

When they had both got out and checked their underwear, they closed down the site entirely. IF the Rio Tinto Safety reps had actually listened to the tradesmen on the job and taken the wedges out prior to their blanket ban on tasks progressing due to the scaffy being hurt, then this very near miss could have been avoided.

What has killed the mining industry is the 457 Visa, cost over run and a very severe lack of common sense. The Safety issue became another Gravy Train for every Tom, Richard Head and Harry to exploit, so much so that it more often than not takes 3 times longer to do the documentation on a single task than it does to do the actual job.

Shadow minister

Thank you for the Jack and Jill version of economic theory. If life was as it described then you would be correct, but it is not. Ask people and they will tell you the most important part of their budget is the part that buys accommodation and descent food. When I left school a skilled trade’s man wage packet was sufficient to buy a simple home and basic food for a home cooked meal for the family.

Fast forward to today and that is no longer the case for most people. Buying a house is no longer an option for many university graduates, and the quality of food has deteriorated markedly. I am not sure why you alone on this thread don’t understood that, I guess you don’t get out much. You are also correct that occupations have changed over the years, that does not mean that things are better than they used to be.

You have still not stated exactly what people are supposed to re train as and what industries they should focus on. All you seem to post is generalized waffle that does not answer my question.

This is why are keep prodding you for answers regarding this wonderful time we are supposed to be living in. You continue to ignore parts of the government paper that don’t fit your reality. You are correct that the price of many things have been reduced, so Australians have a lot more stuff than they used to, however the household debt is the highest in the world per captor, is that also a good thing?

The reality is that most manufacturing is now in countries that pay $5 a day with no benefits or pensions. Also more AI is taking out many office jobs such as accounting, legal, and computer aided design, to name a few. So please tell me what we are supposed to do, to sell to the rest of the world, now that they don’t need as much stuff we used to dig out of the ground.
Chris

Lefty,

The reality is that the economic theory is more than 100yrs old, and has proven repeatedly ad nauseum to be correct. The anecdotal recollections of your mates does not comprise accurate evidence in any way. For example, we hire nearly 30 tradesmen of which nearly all have at least one property and an enviable lifestyle, most of whom with overtime get >$100k.

As for Jobs, with the collapse in the mining sector, why is unemployment lower than in 2013 when labor lost power?

As to living standards, I have given your examples, yet you have not provided one iota of evidence to prove your point.

Shadow minister
The economic theory that you refer to is in its death throes. I say this without hesitation, or having had some chats with mates over a few beers. It has worked well for many years but now the basic flaws in the system are clear to anyone who cares to look at the financial news instead of the funny papers.The GFC in 2008 was the cannery in the mine, which laid bare the ridicules casino that world finance has become. According to the author of the big short , 5 trillion US (in the US alone) disappeared from the valuations of pension funds, university endowment funds, etc.

The world’s financial mandarin’s solution is printing money to bail out the failing banking system. We are supposed to be in recovery which is why the stock markets are rising. However the clue that we are actually in a recession, is the fact that interest rates are still dropping with 20 % of the world government bonds, (65T) now having negative returns. A number of major trading nations imports and exports have dropped for the last 2 quarters . This includes China, Japan and Germany, which has nothing to do with Australia’s labor party or unions.

I don’t doubt you pay your tradesman well. As a fitter and turner who started his life as a tradesman in England on 20 pounds a week, I remember the fights the unions had to raise our wages and conditions. There are only two reasons you pay what you pay to your tradesman, and that is union pressure over the years and you can pass that cost onto the buyer of your final product.

If TTP is implemented and your customers can find a cheaper supplier,then you will cut costs,get bought out,or close. What you fail to understand is that the very efficiency that you advocate for so strongly is creating a world of over capacity in the productive sector. I know you think I am a complete fool for my ideas, well time will tell if I am right or not.
Chris

Lefty,

Our plant is brand new and not unionised. A high tech plant needs highly skilled tradesmen and technicians and in the field we are in these are not unusual wages. And as we we trade internationally our prices are set by the market and cannot be passed on.

Secondly, the GFC has nothing to do with basic economic laws, rather the inverse. Ignoring basic economic laws was precisely why the GFC, and subsequently the debt crisis occurred, namely:
1) Pouring money via junk bonds into unsecured loans for housing in a bubble would inevitably lead to a crash,
2) Uncontrolled government spending leading to high government debt made the crisis far worse as increased debt repayment costs and reduced tax revenues made recessions far more severe.

Thirdly, Aus is not in recession, and presently neither is the rest of the world. Growth is slow but positive, and the economies are essentially restructuring where the old inefficient businesses are replaced with new ones as has happened many times before after just about every recession.

In short, I will take my economics degree before your conspiracy theory any day.

Shadow Minister & Lefty;
SM, Lefty is right to a large extent but not for the reasons he gives.
There is a serious energy problem facing us that few economists
understand and that is distorting most opinions on future paths.
Note the almost total cessation by major oil companies of investment
in search and development. They lost two trillion dollars in S & D in
2013 to 2014 because the result was so poor.
In not so many years that cessation will lead to significant problems.

What will happen is that capitalism will have to adapt to a completely
new environment. I do not think anyone can estimate just how much
disruption to normal operations will occur.
Expect a cessation of air freight and probably the abandonment of
Badgeries Creek airport due to lower air traffic caused by high air fares.

Watch the major oil companies and see where they invest their money.
It is not generally understood that conventional oil production has
fallen over the last years from the peak in 2005 of 83 million
barrels a day to the current 74 million a day.
The most the economy can pay is around $50 to $60 a barrel but the
drillers now need around $100 plus for tight shale oil which is also
declining.

Those are very difficult to get around facts that are easily checked.
Then coal is also in trouble and not just for political reasons.
The energy return on coal world wide has fallen to the point where it is becoming uneconomical.

So capitalism if it is to continue will have to adapt and I have no
doubt it will but as governments just do not want to know it will not
be without severe pain.

Shadow minister

Thank you for your informative reply, as I think we are finally getting somewhere.

So you have a shiny new factory that makes what exactly, and I know a good number of tradesmen who make similar money. However why exactly cant a company in China do what you are at a tenth of the labor cost. As you said all prices are set by the market, but if your costs are higher than the market will bare you have to either, cut cost, merge, or go out of business. The idea that you are immune from this basic law of economics is just plain silly. I do understand the various companies that worked on a cost plus basis, as I worked for a couple of them in the past.

The GFC was caused by fraud in the international banking system, and that is still going on today. You are right, it was the” collateralized debt obligation bonds” in the housing market that was part of the problem, but only a part. Now around the world we have central banks”expanding their balance sheets” (printing money) to buy up chunk bonds to keep the world’s economy afloat.

Your point 2 is correct, but only part of the story.

Thirdly, I do understand why you believe, everything in the economy is improving, because you are still reading the economic funny papers that I referred to in my last post. If we are not in a recession worldwide why are the interest rates in the UK the lowest in over three hundred years, and why is the ECB buying company bond at negative interest rate? There are many other examples on the net of dodgy financial transaction that will create a worse GFC than the last time.Perhaps if you expanded your channels of information, and asked a few more questions, you might get a better understanding of the economic morass that the world is in.

TBC

So you have an economics degree which I am pleased to hear and not surprised. However as you said the issue is understanding the basic laws of economics. And these are supply, demand, and liquidity. There is no shortage of any of those elements in the world today, so the markets should be humming at the historical interest rate of 4-5%, so why aren't they.

And finely please tell me what particular conspiracy theory, it is that you think I believe.
Chris

Bazz
You are of course correct regarding the cost of energy of extraction, and the worlds inability to pay for the reality of dwindling cheap supply .However as important as energy is to the economy, I feel we need cashed up consumers even more. The level of debt, caused by tax loop holes has caused a massive distortion that will take years to resolve, if ever.

Personally I dropped out nearly ten years ago, and now live in a third world country with low population density. I married a local who has a small farm with cows, pigs, chickens and ducks. We grow most of the food for our stock, which we sell to pay our bills. We have no debt and should be able to cope with what comes next. I hope you have similar plans in place, is it is going to get really nasty in the first world.
Chris