Have a look at this debt clock:

http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/

Federal Govt. debt = $231 billion.

How did we get into such a mess?

How can Wayne Swann keep a straight face when he tells us how good our economy is?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 11:22pm:

Have a look at this debt clock: http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/ Federal Govt. debt = $231 billion. How did we get into such a mess? How can Wayne Swann keep a straight face when he tells us how good our economy is?

look at the housing debt - nearly 1.3 trillion !!

longloser will be happy !!

Yes Nail,
Look at the US debt clock:

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

I don't totally understand how our monastery system works...who do we owe all this money to?.

metal_j wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 11:50pm:

I don't totally understand how our monastery system works...who do we owe all this money to?.

It's the Jewssssssssssssss.


Would we be better off with liquidators as in for a failed company?
Maybe declare bankruptcy?

metal_j wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 11:50pm:

I don't totally understand how our monastery system works...who do we owe all this money to?.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFrpeaaSWjQ

How did this happen?


We owe $4.8 trillion



In 2010

National debt to reach $1 trillion

http://www.news.com.au/business/federal-budget/national-debt-to-reach-1-trillion/story-fn5dkrsb-1225861074909

Yes Pansi,
the debt has climbed very fast - too fast.

Could we declare bankruptcy?
What would happen if we did?

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 11:25pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 1st, 2013 at 11:22pm: Have a look at this debt clock: http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/ Federal Govt. debt = $231 billion. How did we get into such a mess? How can Wayne Swann keep a straight face when he tells us how good our economy is? look at the housing debt - nearly 1.3 trillion !! longloser will be happy !!

secured against assets of $4T you moron.  or are you planning on paying for your house in cash?

I think this includes private lending, right? eg people's house mortgages. Half million dollar houses stack up pretty quickly.

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 8:41am:

I think this includes private lending, right? eg people's house mortgages. Half million dollar houses stack up pretty quickly.

Hi FD,
so you're quite happy about this huge debt?

Quote:

so you're quite happy about this huge debt?

I know it means nothing when people start throwing around these enourmous numbers without context. Whether a debt is 'bad' depends on your ability to pay it off.

Here is an example from the US:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/734559_442988279100107_988135675_n.jpg

Hi FD,
I still think it's irresponsible to have so much debt.
It shows that we are living beyond our means.

Where will all of this end - financial collapse?

Labor thought the high commodity prices would never end -
all their budgets were based on that false premise.
They are just buying more beer on the credit card to keep the party going.

Quote:

It shows that we are living beyond our means.

No it doesn't bobby. You have no clue at all what it means. All you know is that it is a really big number. That alone means nothing. The number could be doubled or halved and you would say the same thing.

I probably would say the same thing.

We should be saving money for hard times like responsible adults not
getting into more & more debt.

I sorry, but I still don't understand... who does the Australian public owe  this money to ? 

metal_j wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 10:06am:

I sorry, but I still don't understand... who does the Australian public owe  this money to ?

No one knows - bankers overseas? - Jews ? , freemasons?

For the most part, it is probably owed to other Australians.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 8:23am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 1st, 2013 at 11:25pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 1st, 2013 at 11:22pm: Have a look at this debt clock: http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/ Federal Govt. debt = $231 billion. How did we get into such a mess? How can Wayne Swann keep a straight face when he tells us how good our economy is? look at the housing debt - nearly 1.3 trillion !! longloser will be happy !! secured against assets of $4T you moron.  or are you planning on paying for your house in cash?

Yes NON-PRODUCTIVE assets worth only what the bigger fool is willing to pay !! There is no shortage of fools in australia :(

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:20am:

Quote: It shows that we are living beyond our means. No it doesn't bobby. You have no clue at all what it means. All you know is that it is a really big number. That alone means nothing. The number could be doubled or halved and you would say the same thing.

that's totally absurd !

You are forgetting the cost of borrowing all of this money in terms of interest !! You don't get to borrow all of this money for nothing and amortizing it per head of population doesn't do anything to pay it off !!

I do not have any [personal] debt.

But, my bank deposits are not [100%] safe, because of the debt of all of my fellow Australians.       :P




Perhaps it is time for me to withdraw my deposits, and buy gold ?

Because, they [governments], always seem to want to print more and more paper money [debasing the value of all 'currencies', AND OUR SAVINGS!].

But, there is only a limited supply of available gold in the world.

If the world's financial [AND, currency] system(s) crash under a huge burden of unredeemable debt [THAT, is a possibility], what would you rather that the majority of your assets/savings be 'in';
1/ some 1,0,1,0,1,0,1,0,1,0's recorded on a banks computer somewhere ????????
OR,
2/ some gold or silver bullion ?






p.s.    and just remember, 'You can't take it with you'.             :P             :P              ;D

Bobby. wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 11:22pm:

Have a look at this debt clock: http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/ Federal Govt. debt = $231 billion. How did we get into such a mess? How can Wayne Swann keep a straight face when he tells us how good our economy is?

Bobby,
The area that governments directly control is their own Revenues & Expenditure. They can also have some indirect influences over what Business & Private Individuals do, BUT those Private & Business decisions are largely "not controlled" by government.

So, in regard to this Debt Clock, the figure of interest is the Commonwealth Government Debt, which is showing as around $231.5 Billion.

As another perspective, the following website shows -
The Gross Australian Federal Debt was A$244,325,881,000 as of 31st August 2012.  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt

To put that into perspective, $244 Billion gives OZ a Debt to GDP ratio of under 20%, which compares very favourably against the countries listed in the following chart.
http://static.cdn-seekingalpha.com/uploads/2012/12/26/4115211-13565026510973155-Michael-Fu.jpg

So, OZ is far from being a basket case, although there are many other countries who certainly qualify for that description & WE need to be alert, so that we do not follow their poor examples! That said, what has happened & continues to happen in many countries, such as Japan, the USA & Europe, will impact on Australia & that has already started.

BUT, that is not to say, that we should simply cut everything (Expenditure), as that may simply exacerbate existing problems.

We do need to act, BUT we need to act selectively to promote Productivity & we also need to be aware that "Growth" is no longer automatically part of the Economic scene. 

In fact, "Growth" as such, is now in the process of dying and IF we don't act appropriately, THEN we will contribute towards making likely problems, even worse!

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 11:12am:

freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:20am: Quote: It shows that we are living beyond our means. No it doesn't bobby. You have no clue at all what it means. All you know is that it is a really big number. That alone means nothing. The number could be doubled or halved and you would say the same thing. that's totally absurd ! You are forgetting the cost of borrowing all of this money in terms of interest !! You don't get to borrow all of this money for nothing and amortizing it per head of population doesn't do anything to pay it off !!

No I am not forgetting that. I am trying, very patiently, to point out that whether this cost is inappropriate to take on depends entirely on our ability to pay the cost, and that bobby has not made any effort to figure this out. You and bobby appear to think that because the cost is a big number, it must be unsustainable. For this to make any sense at all, it must be put into perspective with a comparison of what we can afford. This perspective is completely lacking.

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 12:03pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 11:12am: freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:20am: Quote: It shows that we are living beyond our means. No it doesn't bobby. You have no clue at all what it means. All you know is that it is a really big number. That alone means nothing. The number could be doubled or halved and you would say the same thing. that's totally absurd ! You are forgetting the cost of borrowing all of this money in terms of interest !! You don't get to borrow all of this money for nothing and amortizing it per head of population doesn't do anything to pay it off !! No I am not forgetting that. I am trying, very patiently, to point out that whether this cost is inappropriate to take on depends entirely on our ability to pay the cost, and that bobby has not made any effort to figure this out. You and bobby appear to think that because the cost is a big number, it must be unsustainable. For this to make any sense at all, it must be put into perspective with a comparison of what we can afford. This perspective is completely lacking.

if you can't service the interest on the debt without paying the principle then you are in trouble. We are approaching this precipice now that the economy is taking a turn for the worse and the so called "mining boom that could never stop" is now running out of steam !!

Quote:

if you can't service the interest on the debt without paying the principle then you are in trouble. We are approaching this precipice now

What makes you think that? A gut feeling?

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 12:26pm:

if you can't service the interest on the debt without paying the principle then you are in trouble. We are approaching this precipice now that the economy is taking a turn for the worse and the so called "mining boom that could never stop" is now running out of steam !!

That is the case, for some countries, including the USA & some of the EU countries, who have Debt to GDP ratio's of over 100% and climbing quickly AND in the case of Japan, it is well over 200% & climbing quickly.

BUT, In OZ, where that same Debt to GDP ratio is less than 20%, IT IS NOT YET APPLICABLE!

Our debt is climbing quickly too as Wayne Swann spends like a drunken sailor.

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 1:03pm:

Quote: if you can't service the interest on the debt without paying the principle then you are in trouble. We are approaching this precipice now What makes you think that? A gut feeling?

surplus turning into a deficit :(

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 1:26pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:03pm: Quote: if you can't service the interest on the debt without paying the principle then you are in trouble. We are approaching this precipice now What makes you think that? A gut feeling? surplus turning into a deficit :(

Can you explain your reasoning?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 1:16pm:

Our debt is climbing quickly too as Wayne Swann spends like a drunken sailor.

Ah, I have it, my diagnosis is -
You have been subjected to too many Maqq-attacks & she has desensitised your logic defenses, with her incessant LIBERAL SPIN.

My recommended treatment is simply to disengage from all Maqqa contact for 2 days or take 2 mogadons and get some rest.

Oh & watch out for some of those nasty side-effects.
Not from the Mogadons, BUT from Maqqa?
 

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 1:43pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:16pm: Our debt is climbing quickly too as Wayne Swann spends like a drunken sailor. Ah, I have it, my diagnosis is - You have been subjected to too many Maqq-attacks & she has desensitised your logic defenses, with her incessant LIBERAL SPIN. My recommended treatment is simply to disengage from all Maqqa contact for 2 days or take 2 mogadons and get some rest. Oh & watch out for some of those nasty side-effects. Not from the Mogadons, BUT from Maqqa?

Dear Perceptions,
Think of yourself - not me - not Maqqa -
just click on this

http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/

& you'll probably need prozac to recover from the shock.

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 1:34pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:26pm: freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:03pm: Quote: if you can't service the interest on the debt without paying the principle then you are in trouble. We are approaching this precipice now What makes you think that? A gut feeling? surplus turning into a deficit :( Can you explain your reasoning?

it means they have to borrow more because they are not getting enough tax !!

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 7:12pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:34pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:26pm: freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:03pm: Quote: if you can't service the interest on the debt without paying the principle then you are in trouble. We are approaching this precipice now What makes you think that? A gut feeling? surplus turning into a deficit :( Can you explain your reasoning? it means they have to borrow more because they are not getting enough tax !!

Duh. Can you explain why you think the debt is unserviceable? Would it only be serviceable if it decreased?

I think I can explain it - more from a worrying point of view:

we seem to be going into more debt every year than the cost of the interest we pay.

In other words - we are borrowing money to pay the interest.

The question is  - how long can this go on for?
Also - wouldn't that interest be better spent on schools, hospitals & social security
rather than giving to international bankers?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 8:26pm:

I think I can explain it - more from a worrying point of view: we seem to be going into more debt every year than the cost of the interest we pay. In other words - we are borrowing money to pay the interest. The question is  - how long can this go on for? Also - wouldn't that interest be better spent on schools, hospitals & social security rather than giving to international bankers?

I would suggest that, we are paying interest on what we borrow, which is commonly called Debt.

However, we we have one of the lowest Debt to GDP ratio's, as confirmed by the fact that our Debt to GDP ratio is under 20%, whilst many of the BIG Economies are already at 80% plus, which is generally considered as a cut point, beyond which there is great difficulty in recovering.

http://static.cdn-seekingalpha.com/uploads/2012/12/26/4115211-13565026510973155-Michael-Fu.jpg

If you borrowed 10c then borrowed 1c every year to repay the interest, would that be unserviceable? Would it be a bad idea if you were making 2c per year out of it?

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 7:41pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 7:12pm: freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:34pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:26pm: freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:03pm: Quote: if you can't service the interest on the debt without paying the principle then you are in trouble. We are approaching this precipice now What makes you think that? A gut feeling? surplus turning into a deficit :( Can you explain your reasoning? it means they have to borrow more because they are not getting enough tax !! Duh. Can you explain why you think the debt is unserviceable? Would it only be serviceable if it decreased?

because we put all of our eggs in the mining boom basket so when resource prices start to tank as they are now we no longer have anything to fall back on because we allowed manufacturing to die in the arse.

think of it like someone who has a mortgage and just lost their job and can't find another one because their skills are no longer in demand or can be sourced elsewhere a lot cheaper !! Guess what will happen ? They can't service the loan anymore :(

Bobby. wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 4:39pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:43pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:16pm: Our debt is climbing quickly too as Wayne Swann spends like a drunken sailor. Ah, I have it, my diagnosis is - You have been subjected to too many Maqq-attacks & she has desensitised your logic defenses, with her incessant LIBERAL SPIN. My recommended treatment is simply to disengage from all Maqqa contact for 2 days or take 2 mogadons and get some rest. Oh & watch out for some of those nasty side-effects. Not from the Mogadons, BUT from Maqqa?   Dear Perceptions, Think of yourself - not me - not Maqqa - just click on this http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/ & you'll probably need prozac to recover from the shock.

Yes, I've already seen that, it was in your 1st post.

But No, I don't need prozac, it's not that bad, as I already explained -
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1357046552/21#21

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:02pm:

If you borrowed 10c then borrowed 1c every year to repay the interest, would that be unserviceable? Would it be a bad idea if you were making 2c per year out of it?

yes but we can't make the 2 cents anymore because resources prices have fallen a lot and there is no back up plan !!

If what you were saying is true then nobody would ever have their homes repossessed by the banks !!

Quote:

because we put all of our eggs in the mining boom basket

What makes you think that?


Quote:

so when resource prices start to tank as they are now we no longer have anything to fall back on

Sure we do. What makes you think we don't?


Quote:

because we allowed manufacturing to die in the arse.

There is still plenty of manufacturing in Australia. Probably about the same as before the mining boom. It will pick up even more if interest rates drop and labour becomes cheaper.


Quote:

think of it like someone who has a mortgage and just lost their job and can't find another one because their skills are no longer in demand or can be sourced elsewhere a lot cheaper !! Guess what will happen ? They can't service the loan anymore

Perhaps you would like to debate the actual facts, rather than analogies? I understand what an unserviceable debt is.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:07pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:02pm: If you borrowed 10c then borrowed 1c every year to repay the interest, would that be unserviceable? Would it be a bad idea if you were making 2c per year out of it? yes but we can't make the 2 cents anymore because resources prices have fallen a lot and there is no back up plan !!

Our economy is based on capitalism, there is no plan at all. We have no need for one.


Quote:

If what you were saying is true then nobody would ever have their homes repossessed by the banks !!

You will have to explain this bit to me.

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:05pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 4:39pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:43pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 1:16pm: Our debt is climbing quickly too as Wayne Swann spends like a drunken sailor. Ah, I have it, my diagnosis is - You have been subjected to too many Maqq-attacks & she has desensitised your logic defenses, with her incessant LIBERAL SPIN. My recommended treatment is simply to disengage from all Maqqa contact for 2 days or take 2 mogadons and get some rest. Oh & watch out for some of those nasty side-effects. Not from the Mogadons, BUT from Maqqa?   Dear Perceptions, Think of yourself - not me - not Maqqa - just click on this http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/ & you'll probably need prozac to recover from the shock. Yes, I've already seen that, it was in your 1st post. But No, I don't need prozac, it's not that bad, as I already explained - http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1357046552/21#21

OK if it's not bad lets keep borrowing more and keep the party going  :D

Those poor hard working chinese earning 2 bucks a day in a factory and putting their savings in the bank so they can lend to us aussies to have a party. Yep that sounds very sustainable.  ;D

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:09pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:07pm: freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:02pm: If you borrowed 10c then borrowed 1c every year to repay the interest, would that be unserviceable? Would it be a bad idea if you were making 2c per year out of it? yes but we can't make the 2 cents anymore because resources prices have fallen a lot and there is no back up plan !! Our economy is based on capitalism, there is no plan at all. We have no need for one. Quote: If what you were saying is true then nobody would ever have their homes repossessed by the banks !! You will have to explain this bit to me.

you sound like when you borrow money there is a free lunch. Where is it ?

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:08pm:

Quote: because we put all of our eggs in the mining boom basket There is still plenty of manufacturing in Australia. Probably about the same as before the mining boom. It will pick up even more if interest rates drop and labour becomes cheaper.

are you kidding me !! what manufacturing ?

Just look around you. Have a look at what is actually made here these days :(

You could always try addressing what I actually said rather than what you think it sounds like.

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:14pm:

You could always try addressing what I actually said rather than what you think it sounds like.

So where is this 'plenty' of manufacturing going on ?

Anyone actually making solar panels these days ?

They can't even make cars here without paying bribe money to foreign car corporations to stay here :(

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:14pm: You could always try addressing what I actually said rather than what you think it sounds like. So where is this 'plenty' of manufacturing going on ? Anyone actually making solar panels these days ? They can't even make cars here without paying bribe money to foreign car corporations to stay here :(

If mining collapses as you predict, the Aussie $$$$ will fall in value and manufacturing will improve across the board  ... the thing that is most hurting manufacturers right now is the high Aussie $$$$

It has not moved TNL. It is in the same place it was before the mining boom. One or two factory closures does not wipe out our manufacturing industry. It is a normal part of the industry.

John Smith wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:20pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:17pm: freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:14pm: You could always try addressing what I actually said rather than what you think it sounds like. So where is this 'plenty' of manufacturing going on ? Anyone actually making solar panels these days ? They can't even make cars here without paying bribe money to foreign car corporations to stay here :( If mining collapses as you predict, the Aussie $$$$ will fall in value and manufacturing will improve across the board  ... the thing that is most hurting manufacturers right now is the high Aussie $$$$

I never said that mining would collapse. It's the price of the resources that may nose dive because of  more competition and and less demand.

Having said that you can't just restart manufacturing over night because mining has fallen out of favour. Usually when a manufacturer closes its doors it never comes back. Do you honestly think that a manufacture that has moved out of australia to china is going to come back to australia when the dollar goes down ? I think your over optimism is showing there !!

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:21pm:

It has not moved TNL. It is in the same place it was before the mining boom. One or two factory closures does not wipe out our manufacturing industry. It is a normal part of the industry.

Where have you been ??

Manufacturing has been dying over the last 3 decades and the remaining manufacturers have not modernised and kept up with the competition. They are using old outdated equipment which they keep going by continually repairing and patching it up instead of tossing it and updating it with the latest gear. They are on their last legs or sort of like a dying star :(

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:20pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:17pm: freediver wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:14pm: You could always try addressing what I actually said rather than what you think it sounds like. So where is this 'plenty' of manufacturing going on ? Anyone actually making solar panels these days ? They can't even make cars here without paying bribe money to foreign car corporations to stay here :( If mining collapses as you predict, the Aussie $$$$ will fall in value and manufacturing will improve across the board  ... the thing that is most hurting manufacturers right now is the high Aussie $$$$ I never said that mining would collapse. It's the price of the resources that may nose dive because of  more competition and and less demand. Having said that you can't just restart manufacturing over night because mining has fallen out of favour. Usually when a manufacturer closes its doors it never comes back. Do you honestly think that a manufacture that has moved out of australia to china is going to come back to australia when the dollar goes down ? I think your over optimism is showing there !!

what rubbish ... you don't need a manufacturer to move here from China for manu. to increase ... if GMH (or any other manufacturer) export from Australia an additional 1000 cars next yr because the aussie $ has fallen, we've had an increase in manu. without Mr Wong opening a factory here ...

perc are they the latest figures or old ones.?

John Smith wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:33pm:

what rubbish ... you don't need a manufacturer to move here from China for manu. to increase ... if GMH (or any other manufacturer) export from Australia an additional 1000 cars next yr because the aussie $ has fallen, we've had an increase in manu. without Mr Wong opening a factory here ...

Are you kidding. Who is buying holden and ford in a big way ??

No one wants to buy it here let alone overseas. Mercedes it is not !!

Quote:

Having said that you can't just restart manufacturing over night

Lucky for us it did not actually stop.


Quote:

Manufacturing has been dying over the last 3 decades

Nothing to do with the mining boom then?


Quote:

and the remaining manufacturers have not modernised and kept up with the competition

I think you will find that the remaining ones are the ones that have kept up with the competition, by definition.


Quote:

They are using old outdated equipment which they keep going by continually repairing and patching it up instead of tossing it and updating it with the latest gear. They are on their last legs or sort of like a dying star

Every country, including Australia, has a range of old and new plants. Not bothering to look for them does not mean they don't exist.You are merely parroting whatever urban myths you have heard from various interest groups. Try thinking for yourself instead.


Quote:

Are you kidding. Who is buying holden and ford in a big way ??

I bought one recently. Most people only buy one at a time. That's the auto industry for you.

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:55pm:

Quote: Having said that you can't just restart manufacturing over night Lucky for us it did not actually stop. [quote]Manufacturing has been dying over the last 3 decades

Nothing to do with the mining boom then?


Quote:

and the remaining manufacturers have not modernised and kept up with the competition

I think you will find that the remaining ones are the ones that have kept up with the competition, by definition.


Quote:

They are using old outdated equipment which they keep going by continually repairing and patching it up instead of tossing it and updating it with the latest gear. They are on their last legs or sort of like a dying star

Every country, including Australia, has a range of old and new plants. Not bothering to look for them does not mean they don't exist.You are merely parroting whatever urban myths you have heard from various interest groups. Try thinking for yourself instead.


Quote:

Are you kidding. Who is buying holden and ford in a big way ??

I bought one recently. Most people only buy one at a time. That's the auto industry for you.[/quote]

You are dreaming freediver. All of the action is happening in china now.

And if Holden is doing so well then why the need for all of the corporate welfare handouts ? And why are we bailing out a foreign car corporations when we should have had our own brand of car by now ? So much for investment in manufacturing.

The government should not be bailing out or 'investing' in any industry. Let the weak and old businesses die. This is a good thing, not a harbinger of economic doom. We have a labor shortage and a high dollar. The biggest barrier to a lean economy is people not working where they are most highly valued. Our economy can absorb a lot of hits.

freediver wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 10:14pm:

The government should not be bailing out or 'investing' in any industry. Let the weak and old businesses die. This is a good thing, not a harbinger of economic doom. We have a labor shortage and a high dollar. The biggest barrier to a lean economy is people not working where they are most highly valued. Our economy can absorb a lot of hits.

your Holden has been heavily subsidized ;)

You don't half moan mate.

Happy new year!

I am surprised at the reactions on this thread - that I started.

Many posters seem to think that our huge debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in.

I say - the emperor has no clothes.

Only a few of us can see the light.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2013 at 9:47pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 9:33pm: what rubbish ... you don't need a manufacturer to move here from China for manu. to increase ... if GMH (or any other manufacturer) export from Australia an additional 1000 cars next yr because the aussie $ has fallen, we've had an increase in manu. without Mr Wong opening a factory here ... Are you kidding. Who is buying holden and ford in a big way ?? No one wants to buy it here let alone overseas. Mercedes it is not !!

Did you miss the part that said (or any other manufacturer)  ...I was using GMH simply because they are well known  ... the same applies to any manufacturer  from your local rubber ducky maker to your international steel suppliers ....  but I think you knew that and resorted to ridiculing the example because you have nothing else

Bobby and TNL, 4 pages in and you still haven't come up with the basic information needed to make any kind of case. I posted this example on the first page you you, but it was obviously too subtle. This is what you need to make a case that the debt is unsustainable:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/734559_442988279100107_988135675_n.jpg

OK FD,

Lets hear it from you then.

Just write:


Quote:

our huge debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in

Our federal government debt is easily serviceable and we are in an enviable situation.

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 8:50am:

Our federal government debt is easily serviceable and we are in an enviable situation.

I don't think so because our manufacturing industry has been decimated.

as one example:
Our iron ore is mostly sent overseas to be turned into steel whereas
we used to make a lot of it here.

We need to add value to our raw materials so that jobs can be created here
& more overseas income can be made.
That would help to pay the debt off rather than adding to it.

No bobby it would not help pay off the debt, it would make it worse. If there were money to be made doing that, we would be doing it. The people in the industry obviously think there is more money to be made elsewhere.

BTW, I note that your argument about our ability to pay off the debt did not touch on our actual ability to pay off the debt in any direct way. Why don't you spend a minute or two checking out whether the debt is actually serviceable before fretting about what is the best way to service it?

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 9:07am:

No bobby it would not help pay off the debt, it would make it worse. If there were money to be made doing that, we would be doing it. The people in the industry obviously think there is more money to be made elsewhere. BTW, I note that your argument about our ability to pay off the debt did not touch on our actual ability to pay off the debt in any direct way. Why don't you spend a minute or two checking out whether the debt is actually serviceable before fretting about what is the best way to service it?

Hi FD,
Yes - the debt is servicable - are you happy now?

Now - will you write:

our huge debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in

our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 9:30am:

our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in

Ok - so why did such a wealthy country like ours get into so much debt?

You see bobby, this is why I keep asking you to attempt to put the debt in perspective. It may seem big compared to your household budget, but it is for an entire nation. The numbers have actually been given already in this thread. It is not that hard to get your head around them.

The reasons are pretty much the same as why an individual or business would take on debt.

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 9:57am:

You see bobby, this is why I keep asking you to attempt to put the debt in perspective. It may seem big compared to your household budget, but it is for an entire nation. The numbers have actually been given already in this thread. It is not that hard to get your head around them. The reasons are pretty much the same as why an individual or business would take on debt.

What if I said that one reason for our debt has been to inflate a housing bubble? -

which could easily burst - just like in the USA.

I am not entirely happy with what the government spends money on either, but it is a bit silly to associate one item of spending with debt.

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 9:30am:

our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in

Not according to Steve Keen  !!

In 2008 his predictions of the economy have come to bear...

In 2008 his advice was to get out of debt !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHJrMUa1HBQ

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2385821.htm

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 9:43am:

freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:30am: our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in Ok - so why did such a wealthy country like ours get into so much debt?

How many wealthy people have mortgages?

Karnal wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 12:36pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:43am: freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:30am: our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in Ok - so why did such a wealthy country like ours get into so much debt? How many wealthy people have mortgages?

That's silly Karnal,
How many wealthy people  go into more debt every year & borrow
money to just pay the interest on their loans?

Heaps of people live off their credit cards - what's your point?

Most people have debts of some kind.

Karnal wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 3:18pm:

Heaps of people live off their credit cards - what's your point? Most people have debts of some kind.

Karnal,
what's your point?
because some people are fools & live of credit cards - does that make it right?

I think you need to do some meditation.

It most certainly does not make it right. But you tell the the difference between public and private debt, and we'll both know.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 3:16pm:

Karnal wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 12:36pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:43am: freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:30am: our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in Ok - so why did such a wealthy country like ours get into so much debt? How many wealthy people have mortgages? That's silly Karnal, How many wealthy people  go into more debt every year & borrow money to just pay the interest on their loans?

I must have missed something there Bobby, since when did OZ start taking loans, just to pay its interest?

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 3:24pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 3:16pm: Karnal wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 12:36pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:43am: freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:30am: our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in Ok - so why did such a wealthy country like ours get into so much debt? How many wealthy people have mortgages? That's silly Karnal, How many wealthy people  go into more debt every year & borrow money to just pay the interest on their loans? I must have missed something there Bobby, since when did OZ start taking loans, just to pay its interest?

Simple arithmetic:

if we are going into more debt every year - which we are -

we are not paying off the debt -
we are borrowing money to service the interest.

Simple isn't it?

It sounds simple, but sacking thousands of people and cutting social spending is not the best way to manage an economy. It often costs you more in the long run.

They could probably claw back a few billion from industry subsidies - I can't see what propping up Ford's going to achieve. And they should have torn up the contracts for those Collins Class subs years ago, but I guess someone owed someone in Washington a favour.

That's business. It's called politics. Sorry, politics is called business. Or vice versa. You scratch my back, etc, etc, etc.

Before we had federated nation states, we had little villages with chiefs and guards and people ploughing fields and bringing in the harvest and getting together to build houses, cook feasts and look after the kids. No one whinged about the cost of managing the economy back then. There wasn't one - there were thousands of little economic units powered by wood and potatoes and elbow grease.

Now we have a thing called the welfare state. We have an army and a public service and farmers and cooks and child care. So now we whinge.

Freewill, you see?

Yes bobby, simple arithmetic, but faulty logic. You appear to be equating an increase in debt with something sinister. Perhaps an inability to pay it off? Or a need to borrow to pay the interest? Who knows. But an increase in debt means nothing more than we are borrowing more.

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 5:00pm:

Yes bobby, simple arithmetic, but faulty logic. You appear to be equating an increase in debt with something sinister. Perhaps an inability to pay it off? Or a need to borrow to pay the interest? Who knows. But an increase in debt means nothing more than we are borrowing more.

Dear FD,
would you say the same for someone who's mortgage increases in size every year?

Rumour has it that Julia & Wayne are borrowing between $20 & 100 million every day to be able
to pay all the public servants & social security.

They even chase after lowly factory workers with savings for PAYG tax -
the Govt. can't wait till the end of the financial year for the extra tax money.
Also: large companies will have to pay their tax every month instead of once per year.
The Govt. is trying every trick to get more money because they are technically bankrupt
& have to borrow on the international market to make ends meet.

The strange thing is that we still have a AAA credit rating - go figure?

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 8:50am:

Our federal government debt is easily serviceable and we are in an enviable situation.

only in relative terms. being in crap up to our knees instad of our neck is not the same as standing on dry land, is it?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 3:30pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 3:24pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 3:16pm: Karnal wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 12:36pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:43am: freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:30am: our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in Ok - so why did such a wealthy country like ours get into so much debt? How many wealthy people have mortgages? That's silly Karnal, How many wealthy people  go into more debt every year & borrow money to just pay the interest on their loans? I must have missed something there Bobby, since when did OZ start taking loans, just to pay its interest? Simple arithmetic: if we are going into more debt every year - which we are - we are not paying off the debt - we are borrowing money to service the interest. Simple isn't it?

Well, you got me there, BUT that would still be the same, whether we borrowed $1 Trillion, $1 Billion or just $1.

But, IF you want to really simplify things, it still comes back to affordability, which means it is ok to borrow, to have Debt, PROVIDING it is kept within our capacity to repay.

We, in OZ, are still at the lower end of the Debt to GDP ratio, being under 20%, so providing we keep around there or under, BUT definitely no higher than 35%, THEN we will still be keeping a responsible reign on our Debt situation.

However, there are many other countries, who are already closing in on or exceeding the 100% Debt to GDP ratio & clearly those countries have BIG problems!

Unfortunately, for us & many others, some of those countries are the largest Economies in the world & the wash up from their problems, will cause problems for everyone else. 

gold_medal wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 6:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 8:50am: Our federal government debt is easily serviceable and we are in an enviable situation. only in relative terms. being in crap up to our knees instad of our neck is not the same as standing on dry land, is it?

Clearly, you still have no idea, what you are talking about!

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 9:57am:

You see bobby, this is why I keep asking you to attempt to put the debt in perspective. It may seem big compared to your household budget, but it is for an entire nation. The numbers have actually been given already in this thread. It is not that hard to get your head around them. The reasons are pretty much the same as why an individual or business would take on debt.

actually, they are no such thing. an individual would cute costs first before borrowing. A business would borro money to invest in something productive and ina shortfall, cuts costs, a govt however INCREASES costs and then says ok, lets borrow to pay for it.

not even remotely the same thing.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 10:35am:

freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:30am: our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in Not according to Steve Keen  !! In 2008 his predictions of the economy have come to bear... In 2008 his advice was to get out of debt !! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHJrMUa1HBQ http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2385821.htm

his predictions of a 40% drop in house prices??? when did that happen in australia besides never?

moron.

Quote:

We, in OZ, are still at the lower end of the Debt to GDP ratio, being under 20%, so providing we keep around there or under, BUT definitely no higher than 35%, THEN we will still be keeping a responsible reign on our Debt situation.

All those - larger than 20% countries - were once below 20%.

Karnal wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 3:44pm:

It sounds simple, but sacking thousands of people and cutting social spending is not the best way to manage an economy. It often costs you more in the long run. They could probably claw back a few billion from industry subsidies - I can't see what propping up Ford's going to achieve. And they should have torn up the contracts for those Collins Class subs years ago, but I guess someone owed someone in Washington a favour. That's business. It's called politics. Sorry, politics is called business. Or vice versa. You scratch my back, etc, etc, etc. Before we had federated nation states, we had little villages with chiefs and guards and people ploughing fields and bringing in the harvest and getting together to build houses, cook feasts and look after the kids. No one whinged about the cost of managing the economy back then. There wasn't one - there were thousands of little economic units powered by wood and potatoes and elbow grease. Now we have a thing called the welfare state. We have an army and a public service and farmers and cooks and child care. So now we whinge. Freewill, you see?

so your idea is that instead of govt sacking people that they stop subsidies so that private industry will sack them instead?

brilliant logic. the difference of course is that sacking public servants rarely affects actual service while most priavet enterprise actually makes or designs stuff.

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 5:00pm:

Yes bobby, simple arithmetic, but faulty logic. You appear to be equating an increase in debt with something sinister. Perhaps an inability to pay it off? Or a need to borrow to pay the interest? Who knows. But an increase in debt means nothing more than we are borrowing more.

actually bobby has a fairly potent argument. You can hardly argue that we are not borroing to at least in part cover interest if we are borrowing at all. Im a small business owner and I recently extended our financing. part of that cash flow analysis involved interest payments on existing debt.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 7:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 5:00pm: Yes bobby, simple arithmetic, but faulty logic. You appear to be equating an increase in debt with something sinister. Perhaps an inability to pay it off? Or a need to borrow to pay the interest? Who knows. But an increase in debt means nothing more than we are borrowing more. actually bobby has a fairly potent argument. You can hardly argue that we are not borroing to at least in part cover interest if we are borrowing at all. Im a small business owner and I recently extended our financing. part of that cash flow analysis involved interest payments on existing debt.

Longweekend is right.

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 6:55pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 6:52pm: freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 8:50am: Our federal government debt is easily serviceable and we are in an enviable situation. only in relative terms. being in crap up to our knees instad of our neck is not the same as standing on dry land, is it? Clearly, you still have no idea, what you are talking about!

you just have difficulty understanding anybodys argument but your own.

Quote:

would you say the same for someone who's mortgage increases in size every year?

Sure Bobby. If you don't know whether the mortgage is $10k and they are borrowing another $10k against the house to invest, or if it is $300k and steadily rising, or whether they are on $40k or $200k a year, then you know absolutely nothing at all about their situation, despite knowing that the mortgage is going up. I am not sure how many different ways I can say this. Likewise, you know absolutely nothing about Australia's debt situation if you cannot put the numbers in perspective. Merely pointing out that it is going up says nothing at all.


Quote:

only in relative terms. being in crap up to our knees instad of our neck is not the same as standing on dry land, is it?

Sure, dryness is always relative.


Quote:

actually, they are no such thing. an individual would cute costs first before borrowing

Not all individuals. Very few in fact. Cutting costs is not going to get you enough to buy a house, or even a car.

FD,

Quote:

Sure Bobby. If you don't know whether the mortgage is $10k and they are borrowing another $10k against the house to invest, or if it is $300k and steadily rising, or whether they are on $40k or $200k a year, then you know absolutely nothing at all about their situation, despite knowing that the mortgage is going up. I am not sure how many different ways I can say this. Likewise, you know absolutely nothing about Australia's debt situation if you cannot put the numbers in perspective. Merely pointing out that it is going up says nothing at all.

Hi FD,
I don't have as much trust in Wayne Swann's fiscal policies as you.

To me he acts like a drunken yobbo at a party who buys more beer
on his credit card to keep the party going.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 7:28pm:

FD, Quote: Sure Bobby. If you don't know whether the mortgage is $10k and they are borrowing another $10k against the house to invest, or if it is $300k and steadily rising, or whether they are on $40k or $200k a year, then you know absolutely nothing at all about their situation, despite knowing that the mortgage is going up. I am not sure how many different ways I can say this. Likewise, you know absolutely nothing about Australia's debt situation if you cannot put the numbers in perspective. Merely pointing out that it is going up says nothing at all. Hi FD, I don't have as much trust in Wayne Swann's fiscal policies as you. To me he acts like a drunken yobbo at a party who buys more beer on his credit card to keep the party going.

and yet I would bet that were you at said party you would have no problem partaking of any beer.

John Smith wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 7:52pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 7:28pm: FD, Quote: Sure Bobby. If you don't know whether the mortgage is $10k and they are borrowing another $10k against the house to invest, or if it is $300k and steadily rising, or whether they are on $40k or $200k a year, then you know absolutely nothing at all about their situation, despite knowing that the mortgage is going up. I am not sure how many different ways I can say this. Likewise, you know absolutely nothing about Australia's debt situation if you cannot put the numbers in perspective. Merely pointing out that it is going up says nothing at all. Hi FD, I don't have as much trust in Wayne Swann's fiscal policies as you. To me he acts like a drunken yobbo at a party who buys more beer on his credit card to keep the party going. and yet I would bet that were you at said party you would have no problem partaking of any beer.

Yes - a VB thanks - 4.9% for the full flavour.  :)

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 5:00pm:

Yes bobby, simple arithmetic, but faulty logic. You appear to be equating an increase in debt with something sinister. Perhaps an inability to pay it off? Or a need to borrow to pay the interest? Who knows. But an increase in debt means nothing more than we are borrowing more.

FD,
I agree!

Debt is part of the Economic cycle and has been for quite some time, although it has seen some very substantial increases, particularly in some countries and particularly after the early 1980's, when the Baby Boomer Economic Boom really got under way. 

Providing it (Debt) is kept controlled & doesn't wind up with a "tail wagging the dog situation", THEN IT IS NOT A PROBLEM & most Economists will also agree on that! 

Bobby,
It seems you are clearly concerned, perhaps due to the Global situation AND correctly so, BUT providing OZ keeps Debt under the 35% or so, I would suggest we will still be better placed than a lot of other countries, although we will still take a hammering, over the period ahead.

Quote:

I don't have as much trust in Wayne Swann's fiscal policies as you.

You don't need to bobby. You just need to look at the numbers for yourself.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 7:02pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 6:55pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 6:52pm: freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 8:50am: Our federal government debt is easily serviceable and we are in an enviable situation. only in relative terms. being in crap up to our knees instad of our neck is not the same as standing on dry land, is it? Clearly, you still have no idea, what you are talking about! you just have difficulty understanding anybodys argument but your own.

As I said, clearly you have no idea!

Debt is part of the Economic cycle and has been for quite some time!

Providing OZ keeps Debt to GDP ratio under the 35% or so, THEN we will still be better placed than a lot of other countries & most Economists will agree on that.

Providing it (Debt) is kept controlled, THEN IT IS NOT A PROBLEM & most Economists will also agree on that.

Quote:

Providing it (Debt) is kept controlled, THEN IT IS NOT A PROBLEM & most Economists will also agree on that.

A debt that is always increasing is out of control - like a runaway train.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 8:26pm:

Quote: Providing it (Debt) is kept controlled, THEN IT IS NOT A PROBLEM & most Economists will also agree on that. A debt that is always increasing is out of control - like a runaway train.

I agree!

AND, I have made that point many times, including in posts on this thread -
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1357043638/all

However, at this point we do not have anything like a runaway train, in OZ.

That said, WE will need to be very careful with what we do, particularly over the next few years, although that does not mean, we should simply make cuts across the board!

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 8:26pm:

Quote: Providing it (Debt) is kept controlled, THEN IT IS NOT A PROBLEM & most Economists will also agree on that. A debt that is always increasing is out of control - like a runaway train.

good thing our debt is always increasing out of control then isn't it !!!

gold_medal wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 6:56pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 10:35am: freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 9:30am: our relatively small debt obligation is a great circumstance to be in Not according to Steve Keen  !! In 2008 his predictions of the economy have come to bear... In 2008 his advice was to get out of debt !! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHJrMUa1HBQ http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2385821.htm his predictions of a 40% drop in house prices??? when did that happen in australia besides never? moron.

give it time arsehole. You said they would only go up but it turns out they have gone down so you were wrong of course. And everyone except you knows that Keens predictions didn't factor in labors first vendors boost which just bought more time for the housing bubble to suck people into debt they can't possibly service !!

if you watch the video Keen predicts a slump in retail spending as a consequence of the debt fueled housing bubble :( You never predicted that did you ?

keen was right on the money in 2008 ;)


Quote:

KERRY O'BRIEN: So within the landscape of the global economy, which again we're not sure... nobody really seems to be able to say with confidence where it is going. What do you think is likely... most likely to happen to the Australian economy now over the short to medium term? PROFESSOR STEVEN KEEN: I can see us going into a serious increase in unemployment, a serious economic slowdown. Credit level's collapsing; we've already seen that starting to happen in the most recent figures. And a credit driven downturn in the economy, driven largely through a collapse in retail sales, because this time around the part of society carrying the debt is the household sector; it business sector in the 1920s and also of course in the 1990s. Households can't sack the kids; they can't declare themselves bankrupt anywhere near as easily as a corporation can do. So the only thing they can do to control their situation is to cut back drastically on retail spending; and that will of course mean the retail sector is the first one to collapse.

LOL - 40%. That is hardly 'come to bear'. Most economists could have made a more accurate guess with about 5 minute's thought. The only thing that makes Keen stand out is how badly he got it wrong.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 6:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 8:50am: Our federal government debt is easily serviceable and we are in an enviable situation. only in relative terms. being in crap up to our knees instad of our neck is not the same as standing on dry land, is it?

it's funny how you don't think the same about the average mortgage holder that has paid to much for junk property and racked up 1.3 trillion in housing debt for something that creates nothing but debt !!

freediver wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 10:52pm:

LOL - 40%. That is hardly 'come to bear'. Most economists could have made a more accurate guess with about 5 minute's thought. The only thing that makes Keen stand out is how badly he got it wrong.

1.3 trillion in housing debt !! Are you kidding me !! It's only a matter of time before keen is vindicated !!

For starters when keen made that prediction he didn't allow for labors first home vendors boost which ended up making people pay more for housing and not the other way around :( Now they are drowning in a sea of debt. 1.3 trillion to be precise !!

But keen did get the retail slump right and I bet you wouldn't have believed it in 2008 when  he made it. All financial predictions take time and labor's meddling with the first home vendors boost has just delayed the inevitable housing slump !!

John Smith wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 7:52pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 7:28pm: FD, Quote: Sure Bobby. If you don't know whether the mortgage is $10k and they are borrowing another $10k against the house to invest, or if it is $300k and steadily rising, or whether they are on $40k or $200k a year, then you know absolutely nothing at all about their situation, despite knowing that the mortgage is going up. I am not sure how many different ways I can say this. Likewise, you know absolutely nothing about Australia's debt situation if you cannot put the numbers in perspective. Merely pointing out that it is going up says nothing at all. Hi FD, I don't have as much trust in Wayne Swann's fiscal policies as you. To me he acts like a drunken yobbo at a party who buys more beer on his credit card to keep the party going. and yet I would bet that were you at said party you would have no problem partaking of any beer.

there in lies the rub. that's exactly what people are doing with credit :(

banks are throwing money at them to buy anything and they are grabbing it without thinking about the consequences !!

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 11:39pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 7:52pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 3rd, 2013 at 7:28pm: FD, Quote: Sure Bobby. If you don't know whether the mortgage is $10k and they are borrowing another $10k against the house to invest, or if it is $300k and steadily rising, or whether they are on $40k or $200k a year, then you know absolutely nothing at all about their situation, despite knowing that the mortgage is going up. I am not sure how many different ways I can say this. Likewise, you know absolutely nothing about Australia's debt situation if you cannot put the numbers in perspective. Merely pointing out that it is going up says nothing at all. Hi FD, I don't have as much trust in Wayne Swann's fiscal policies as you. To me he acts like a drunken yobbo at a party who buys more beer on his credit card to keep the party going. and yet I would bet that were you at said party you would have no problem partaking of any beer. there in lies the rub. that's exactly what people are doing with credit :( banks are throwing money at them to buy anything and they are grabbing it without thinking about the consequences !!

Actually the banks dont throw it @ just anybody. I know several ppl that dont have credit cards and cant get them. They dont have bad credit -they just dont have any credit history @ all. They work but seriously banks arent taking on new ppl anymore.

SOB

But keen did get the retail slump right and I bet you wouldn't have believed it in 2008 when  he made it.

;D just after the GFC hit and everything was looking gloomy? In fact that makes him a bit behind the 8 ball. It is astounding how someone can predict the same thing that nearly every single economist is predicting, and their followers will insist this makes them some kind of genius and every other prediction is therefor going to come true. Think about it.

There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them.

Time will also prove that he was right about real estate. The government will run out of stimulus for that sector sooner rather than later, then see who was right. The cracks are already starting to show.

Get ready for the GFC part II, which is actually a continuation of the first one. Where's the growth?



In the East.

Quote:

There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them.

Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn.

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 8:20am:

Quote: There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them. Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn.

The lower interest rates haven't done much:

we still have the 2 speed economy yet mining is now giving less profits as well.
How much money has the mining super profit tax raised?

Who is doing well?

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 7:14am:

But keen did get the retail slump right and I bet you wouldn't have believed it in 2008 when  he made it. ;D just after the GFC hit and everything was looking gloomy? In fact that makes him a bit behind the 8 ball. It is astounding how someone can predict the same thing that nearly every single economist is predicting, and their followers will insist this makes them some kind of genius and every other prediction is therefor going to come true. Think about it.

Not true. Keen predicted the GFC and the retail slump has only really happened in the last 2 years.

Keen was only correct where he parroted what most other economists said. Wherever he diverged, he has been wrong. Or as you prefer to put it, you are still waiting for his predictions to come true. No wonder Nostradamus had it so easy.

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 8:20am:

Quote: There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them. Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn.

Why Did So Many Economists Fail to Predict the Global Financial Crisis, and So Many Policymakers Mishandle It - While Some Saw It All Coming?



Queen Elizabeth asked why the economist's didn't see this coming

In a now famous letter in response to a question by Queen Elizabeth, economists in England explained why no one foresaw the timing, extent and severity of the credit crisis by laying responsibility on the “failure of the collective imagination of many bright people.” (Link to letter, PDF) This answer only begs the question as to why the imagination of so many economists was so limited.

http://ineteconomics.org/financial-crisis-blinders

The answer to the Queen's question was "they didn't want to"

Why didn't they?

They were in denial, the same as many will be when we enter the next phase of the GFC, which will be a hell of a lot worse than what we've experienced already.

Hope not Pansi.

The next thing the government will do is to raid our super funds.

They will issue Govt. bonds to be paid on the never never - & you won't have a choice.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:21am:

freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:20am: Quote: There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them. Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn. Why Did So Many Economists Fail to Predict the Global Financial Crisis, and So Many Policymakers Mishandle It - While Some Saw It All Coming? Queen Elizabeth asked why the economist's didn't see this coming In a now famous letter in response to a question by Queen Elizabeth, economists in England explained why no one foresaw the timing, extent and severity of the credit crisis by laying responsibility on the “failure of the collective imagination of many bright people.” (Link to letter, PDF) This answer only begs the question as to why the imagination of so many economists was so limited. http://ineteconomics.org/financial-crisis-blinders The answer to the Queen's question was "they didn't want to" Why didn't they? They were in denial, the same as many will be when we enter the next phase of the GFC, which will be a hell of a lot worse than what we've experienced already.

Pansi, the fact that the Queen made the same mistake as you does not prove you are right. It just shows that the Queen does not understand macroeconomics either. Even if you don't understand economics, all you had to do was check the front page page of the Australian and you would have known it was on it's way.

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:16am:

Keen was only correct where he parroted what most other economists said. Wherever he diverged, he has been wrong. Or as you prefer to put it, you are still waiting for his predictions to come true. No wonder Nostradamus had it so easy.

I already explained why keen's prediction on the housing slump has not happened yet. Why do you and longloser keep ignoring the obvious ?

keen made the prediction on a housing slump before labor re-stimulated the housing market and reinflated the property bubble with there triple first home buyers scam. In essence they have just delayed the inevitable slump.

In fairness to keen you can't blame him for the government medaling in the property market :(

Because it doesn't matter. All he has done is taken mainstream economic predictions that anyone could get from the front page of the newspaper, added whatever political spin you want to hear, and you think he is some kind of genius.

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:31am:

Because it doesn't matter. All he has done is taken mainstream economic predictions that anyone could get from the front page of the newspaper, added whatever political spin you want to hear, and you think he is some kind of genius.

what rubbish. Keen predicted the housing slump which hasn't happened yet because labor distorted the market with its hair-brained scams and now you are saying that he copies all of the other economic flunkies who said the complete opposite.

Make up your mind !!

Quote:

Keen predicted the housing slump which hasn't happened yet

;D

So you keep saying.


Quote:

and now you are saying that he copies all of the other economic flunkies who said the complete opposite

Every real estate agent I spoke to at the time was saying something similar, and were far closer to the mark than Keen. And they are the last people you expect to see talking down the housing market. So were most economists. Why are people so gullible every time a fool like Keen stands up and pretends he was the only one who predicted something, when he was doing little more than reading what was predicted on the front page of the paper.

FD

Quote:

a fool like Keen

hello -
he is a professor of economics.

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:42am:

Quote: Keen predicted the housing slump which hasn't happened yet ;D So you keep saying. [quote]and now you are saying that he copies all of the other economic flunkies who said the complete opposite

Every real estate agent I spoke to at the time was saying something similar, and were far closer to the mark than Keen. And they are the last people you expect to see talking down the housing market. So were most economists. Why are people so gullible every time a fool like Keen stands up and pretends he was the only one who predicted something, when he was doing little more than reading what was predicted on the front page of the paper.[/quote]

Little wonder, it's was those same real estate parasites that went running to the government for corporate bail outs in the form of first home buyers scams in order to prop up the real estate industry which is why they were more optimistic than keen was !!

For information purposes -

Real-World Economics Review is an economics journal that in 2010 polled their readers and asked them to vote for "the three economists who first and most clearly anticipated and gave public warning of the Global Financial Collapse and whose work is most likely to prevent another GFC in the future." Revere Award for Economics winners and details are here and documentation of the predictions by the finalists are included in Foresight and Fait Accompli: Two Timelines for the Global Financial Collapse. The Revere finalists in voting order below.

1.  Steve Keen
2.  Nouriel Roubini
3.  Dean Baker
4.  Joseph Stiglitz
5.  Ann Pettifor
6.  Robert Shiller
7.  Paul Krugman
8.  Michael Hudson
9.  Wynne Godley
10.George Soros

Link -
http://investorhome.com/predicted.htm

I would agree, that both Keen & Roubini did the best job, in warning about events.

That said, IMO neither got it quite right, BUT they certainly got it a great deal MORE CORRECT, than the vast majority of "normal" Accountants, Economists & the Global Politicians.

It is also difficult, if not impossible, to be correct with all predictions, considering that nearly all Global Politicians & Central Banks are trying their utmost to ensure the status quo" continues.

AND so, some plans have been implemented, with CB's & Politicians thinking those plans would solve the problem/s or at the very least, postpone or kick the can further down the road, SO IT GOES INTO SOMEONE ELSE'S WATCH?

Some of these actions have succeeded in postponing the worst effects from happening, a bit longer than would otherwise have been the case, BUT the basic final outcomes are still going to happen, although the final outcomes may be a bit worse, because of those Government & CB interventions!

Dear Perceptions,
the fact is that we shouldn't be in so much debt -
that's all I was trying to say.

Quote:

AND so, some plans have been implemented, with CB's & Politicians thinking those plans would solve the problem/s or at the very least, postpone

The actions of the reserve bank are intended to bring a recession froward in time, not postpone it.

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:27am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:21am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:20am: Quote: There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them. Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn. Why Did So Many Economists Fail to Predict the Global Financial Crisis, and So Many Policymakers Mishandle It - While Some Saw It All Coming? Queen Elizabeth asked why the economist's didn't see this coming In a now famous letter in response to a question by Queen Elizabeth, economists in England explained why no one foresaw the timing, extent and severity of the credit crisis by laying responsibility on the “failure of the collective imagination of many bright people.” (Link to letter, PDF) This answer only begs the question as to why the imagination of so many economists was so limited. http://ineteconomics.org/financial-crisis-blinders The answer to the Queen's question was "they didn't want to" Why didn't they? They were in denial, the same as many will be when we enter the next phase of the GFC, which will be a hell of a lot worse than what we've experienced already. Pansi, the fact that the Queen made the same mistake as you does not prove you are right. It just shows that the Queen does not understand macroeconomics either. Even if you don't understand economics, all you had to do was check the front page page of the Australian and you would have known it was on it's way.

Maybe the Queen did see the GFC coming, I certainly did, as early as 2006. The thread went for ages on the Yahoo forum, there were a handful of us who were saying a crash is coming. We were called doomsayers by the righties, until the stockmarket crash of 2008, then......yes you guessed it, they blamed us for it ha! ha!....like we 'willed' it to happen.

Anyway, remember when Bernanke and Obama had to round up the fat cats and call an emergency sitting of parliament, if they didn't get a resolution by the Monday there would have been a catastrophic financial meltdown? Surely you've watched some of the documentaries about this.

They didn't know it was coming in 2008, our own government didn't even know, Keen, who has his eyes on the ball, and some others did.

It is mainstream economics pansi. It was on the front pages of the newspaper, before it happened.

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 12:59pm:

Quote: AND so, some plans have been implemented, with CB's & Politicians thinking those plans would solve the problem/s or at the very least, postpone The actions of the reserve bank are intended to bring a recession froward in time, not postpone it.

Now, that would surprise the RBA!

Bringing a Recession forward, is certainly not in their charter!

In fact, the RBA would normally "smooth" the edges, they would "try" to attain "normal steady Growth", by preventing runaways in both directions.

Which is why they started reducing interest rates and on most occasions, in the past, it worked, BUT THIS TIME IS DIFFERENT, as is already being indicated here in the R/E Market AND has already been shown in Japan, the USA & Europe. 


In short, all they have got IS DELAY OR KICK THE CAN TACTICS and eventually someone will stumble, that will fail and the House of Cards, will come tumbling down!

My expectation, for that event, is sometime between now & the end of 2014.

As for my expectations, of the current section of events, it was that almost everyone would know by the end of 2012 that we (in OZ) were finally entering the GFC downturn as it picked up force during 2012 AND I think that can now be given a tick.

That can be evidenced by the R/E Market not moving, despite the RBA interest rate reductions, the general Economy starting to slip noticeably AND the general Public starting to become noticeably hesitant about future confidence levels.

Quote:

Now, that would surprise the RBA!

No it wouldn't.


Quote:

Bringing a Recession forward, is certainly not in their charter!

It is their reason for existence.


Quote:

In fact, the RBA would normally "smooth" the edges

Guess how they do that?

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 1:25pm:

It is mainstream economics pansi. It was on the front pages of the newspaper, before it happened.

Really?

Are you saying that the bulk of mainstream Economists called the GFC, before it started?

And, the Queen?

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 1:41pm:

Quote: Now, that would surprise the RBA! No it wouldn't. [quote]Bringing a Recession forward, is certainly not in their charter!

It is their reason for existence.

Ok?

Please show me?
http://www.rba.gov.au/about-rba/our-role.html

Really?
The RBA would deliberately bring on a Recession?
And, BY lowering interest rates?
Common on FD, you gotta do better than that!


Quote:

In fact, the RBA would normally "smooth" the edges

Guess how they do that?

That should be apparent! BUT, the RBA is not going to bring about a Recession, BY lowering interest rates.
IF the RBA wanted to bring on a Recession, it would be raising rates &/or by withdrawing liquidity from the system, which hasn't happened.
That said, raising rates at this point in time, would certainly hasten a Recession, it would also likely tip a Recession into a Depression!


[/quote]

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 1:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:27am: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:21am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:20am: Quote: There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them. Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn. Why Did So Many Economists Fail to Predict the Global Financial Crisis, and So Many Policymakers Mishandle It - While Some Saw It All Coming? Queen Elizabeth asked why the economist's didn't see this coming In a now famous letter in response to a question by Queen Elizabeth, economists in England explained why no one foresaw the timing, extent and severity of the credit crisis by laying responsibility on the “failure of the collective imagination of many bright people.” (Link to letter, PDF) This answer only begs the question as to why the imagination of so many economists was so limited. http://ineteconomics.org/financial-crisis-blinders The answer to the Queen's question was "they didn't want to" Why didn't they? They were in denial, the same as many will be when we enter the next phase of the GFC, which will be a hell of a lot worse than what we've experienced already. Pansi, the fact that the Queen made the same mistake as you does not prove you are right. It just shows that the Queen does not understand macroeconomics either. Even if you don't understand economics, all you had to do was check the front page page of the Australian and you would have known it was on it's way. Maybe the Queen did see the GFC coming, I certainly did, as early as 2006. The thread went for ages on the Yahoo forum, there were a handful of us who were saying a crash is coming. We were called doomsayers by the righties, until the stockmarket crash of 2008, then......yes you guessed it, they blamed us for it ha! ha!....like we 'willed' it to happen. Anyway, remember when Bernanke and Obama had to round up the fat cats and call an emergency sitting of parliament, if they didn't get a resolution by the Monday there would have been a catastrophic financial meltdown? Surely you've watched some of the documentaries about this. They didn't know it was coming in 2008, our own government didn't even know, Keen, who has his eyes on the ball, and some others did.

was longweekend58 aka gold_medal one of those that dismissed the prediction outright just as he does now with the housing market ?

Keen saw it back in 2005, I don't think there was many headlines about a financial crisis back then.


The mainstream media should be reporting this information, otherwise people will be taken by surprise like in 2008. Someone has to tell people the bad news, he said.

He's regarded as a quack in Australia because too many people have too much money tied up in real estate, they're afraid to admit there's a problem on the horizon.

...................................................................................


Word on the street: Keen continues to claim that house prices in Australia will fall by 40 per cent.

Steve Keen, associate professor of economics at the University of Western Sydney, is becoming something of a superstar. He has been acknowledged as one of a handful of economists to have predicted the global financial crisis and now is a regular speaker at high-profile conventions around the world.

He is a consultant for the United Nations’ Economic and Social Commission for the Asia Pacific and in April he is speaking alongside George Soros and Nobel Prize-winning economists Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman at the Institute for New Economic Thinking where he has been asked to give a speech on “taming financial market instability”.

The same organisation has given Keen almost $250,000 to develop software capable of predicting an economic crisis before it happens.

Last November he was interviewed on the BBC’s Hardtalk program, which attracts a worldwide audience of almost 300 million, in which he “went public” about his idea for a “debt jubilee”, where private debts are written off “en masse” to avoid “two decades” of economic stagnation.

Yet in his home country, this renegade economist is regarded as something of a quack. His outspoken views about Australia’s housing market, which he maintains will fall by 40 per cent over the next 10-15 years, have caused many to dismiss him as an attention-seeking alarmist.

Ironically, it’s a label that Keen does not mind wearing. “Somebody has to tell people the bad news,” he says. “When I saw the signs of the financial crisis back in 2005, I didn’t want to see what I was seeing.

“It was an accident, stumbling across the data while preparing to appear as an expert witness in a court case. It showed an exponential rise in private debt in Australia, and in the US, that was clearly unsustainable and was going to lead to a collapse in asset prices.

“When you see something like that, you have a responsibility to ring the alarm bell.”

http://www.brw.com.au/p/sections/features/keen_to_be_heard_ibhMdopX0E8Soh00ql3mPO

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 1:45pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:25pm: It is mainstream economics pansi. It was on the front pages of the newspaper, before it happened. Really? Are you saying that the bulk of mainstream Economists called the GFC, before it started? And, the Queen?

Sure, just not a language most people understand. But it was in plain English on the front page of the Australian many times. They didn't call it a GFC or give a date or do any of the Nostradamus stuff. Do you recall all the references to the economy 'overheating'? The PM and treasurer were talking about it too.

The whole point of raising interest rates is to slow investment and trigger a downturn as early as possible, before the bubble gets too big.

The Queen is not an economist.


Quote:

IF the RBA wanted to bring on a Recession, it would be raising rates &/or by withdrawing liquidity from the system, which hasn't happened. That said, raising rates at this point in time, would certainly hasten a Recession, it would also likely tip a Recession into a Depression!

Our RBA, and foreign ones, all raised interest rates in the lead-up to the GFC. To anyone familiar with the lingo, this is economics for 'a downturn is coming.' Their actions helped trigger the GFC. They all lowered rates after the GFC hit.

Bursting the Bubble on SBS Insight

check out Keen giving Saul Eslake a serve :D LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhNBXdZzls8


Quote:

Bursting the Bubble Will a slowing economy lower house prices in Australia? Add Your Comments Currently 285 comments The Housing Industry Association says housing affordability is at a 24-year low. Yet economists are divided over whether Australia's troubled economy will work for or against those struggling to buy a home or maintain a mortgage. Economist Steven Keen has claimed Australia is heading for the worst recession since the Great Depression, and predicts housing prices will drop by over 40 per cent. The ANZ’s Saul Eslake warns this is a dangerous assumption, while economic journalist Ross Gittins believes we are in uncharted waters, with household debt at an all-time high. Home owners mortgaged to the hilt, economists, housing and construction representatives, government and opposition meet on Insight to discuss who could benefit from a big economic dip.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:04pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:06pm: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:27am: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:21am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:20am: Quote: There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them. Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn. Why Did So Many Economists Fail to Predict the Global Financial Crisis, and So Many Policymakers Mishandle It - While Some Saw It All Coming? Queen Elizabeth asked why the economist's didn't see this coming In a now famous letter in response to a question by Queen Elizabeth, economists in England explained why no one foresaw the timing, extent and severity of the credit crisis by laying responsibility on the “failure of the collective imagination of many bright people.” (Link to letter, PDF) This answer only begs the question as to why the imagination of so many economists was so limited. http://ineteconomics.org/financial-crisis-blinders The answer to the Queen's question was "they didn't want to" Why didn't they? They were in denial, the same as many will be when we enter the next phase of the GFC, which will be a hell of a lot worse than what we've experienced already. Pansi, the fact that the Queen made the same mistake as you does not prove you are right. It just shows that the Queen does not understand macroeconomics either. Even if you don't understand economics, all you had to do was check the front page page of the Australian and you would have known it was on it's way. Maybe the Queen did see the GFC coming, I certainly did, as early as 2006. The thread went for ages on the Yahoo forum, there were a handful of us who were saying a crash is coming. We were called doomsayers by the righties, until the stockmarket crash of 2008, then......yes you guessed it, they blamed us for it ha! ha!....like we 'willed' it to happen. Anyway, remember when Bernanke and Obama had to round up the fat cats and call an emergency sitting of parliament, if they didn't get a resolution by the Monday there would have been a catastrophic financial meltdown? Surely you've watched some of the documentaries about this. They didn't know it was coming in 2008, our own government didn't even know, Keen, who has his eyes on the ball, and some others did. was longweekend58 aka gold_medal one of those that dismissed the prediction outright just as he does now with the housing market ?

He certainly did, he said we were scare mongers, he's always worn rose coloured glasses. He won't admit a real estate drop of even 10%, let alone 40%, which has already happened at the Gold Coast, because he's hocked up to his eyeballs. He said he mortgaged his house for his water-boy business because house prices double every seven years. Shame they don't.

As close to debt free is the way to go if you want to survive the coming tsunami.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:36am:

freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:31am: Because it doesn't matter. All he has done is taken mainstream economic predictions that anyone could get from the front page of the newspaper, added whatever political spin you want to hear, and you think he is some kind of genius. what rubbish. Keen predicted the housing slump which hasn't happened yet because labor distorted the market with its hair-brained scams and now you are saying that he copies all of the other economic flunkies who said the complete opposite. Make up your mind !!

you cant have it both ways. If Keen is a genius then his predictions would have come true but they actually missed by a mile. You cant say that the FHOG was the difference or that it was unpredictable. The notion that the govt would stand idly by and let a housing slump simply happen is also ridiculous. this is what is wrong with both you and Steve Keen. You base your arguments on bitterness and iedology rather than hard fact logic or historical precedence.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:47am:

FD Quote: a fool like Keen hello - he is a professor of economics.

big deal. it is his predictive ability in question and he is dead wrong all teh time - just like you, nail and pansi.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 1:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:27am: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:21am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:20am: Quote: There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them. Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn. Why Did So Many Economists Fail to Predict the Global Financial Crisis, and So Many Policymakers Mishandle It - While Some Saw It All Coming? Queen Elizabeth asked why the economist's didn't see this coming In a now famous letter in response to a question by Queen Elizabeth, economists in England explained why no one foresaw the timing, extent and severity of the credit crisis by laying responsibility on the “failure of the collective imagination of many bright people.” (Link to letter, PDF) This answer only begs the question as to why the imagination of so many economists was so limited. http://ineteconomics.org/financial-crisis-blinders The answer to the Queen's question was "they didn't want to" Why didn't they? They were in denial, the same as many will be when we enter the next phase of the GFC, which will be a hell of a lot worse than what we've experienced already. Pansi, the fact that the Queen made the same mistake as you does not prove you are right. It just shows that the Queen does not understand macroeconomics either. Even if you don't understand economics, all you had to do was check the front page page of the Australian and you would have known it was on it's way. Maybe the Queen did see the GFC coming, I certainly did, as early as 2006. The thread went for ages on the Yahoo forum, there were a handful of us who were saying a crash is coming. We were called doomsayers by the righties, until the stockmarket crash of 2008, then......yes you guessed it, they blamed us for it ha! ha!....like we 'willed' it to happen. Anyway, remember when Bernanke and Obama had to round up the fat cats and call an emergency sitting of parliament, if they didn't get a resolution by the Monday there would have been a catastrophic financial meltdown? Surely you've watched some of the documentaries about this. They didn't know it was coming in 2008, our own government didn't even know, Keen, who has his eyes on the ball, and some others did.

the difference is that you ALWAYS predict doom and gloom. ALWAYS. eventually even you will be 'right'. it is hardly indicative of any predictive ability. you also predicted a 75% drop in house prices and depression for the USA and Europe plus deep long-last recession for Australia. not really a record tpo stand on, is it?

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 1:45pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:25pm: It is mainstream economics pansi. It was on the front pages of the newspaper, before it happened. Really? Are you saying that the bulk of mainstream Economists called the GFC, before it started? And, the Queen?

it was discussed all around the world for some time as soon as the sub-prime market collapsed. your memory is short - almost goldfish-like.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:04pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:06pm: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:27am: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:21am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:20am: Quote: There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them. Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn. Why Did So Many Economists Fail to Predict the Global Financial Crisis, and So Many Policymakers Mishandle It - While Some Saw It All Coming? Queen Elizabeth asked why the economist's didn't see this coming In a now famous letter in response to a question by Queen Elizabeth, economists in England explained why no one foresaw the timing, extent and severity of the credit crisis by laying responsibility on the “failure of the collective imagination of many bright people.” (Link to letter, PDF) This answer only begs the question as to why the imagination of so many economists was so limited. http://ineteconomics.org/financial-crisis-blinders The answer to the Queen's question was "they didn't want to" Why didn't they? They were in denial, the same as many will be when we enter the next phase of the GFC, which will be a hell of a lot worse than what we've experienced already. Pansi, the fact that the Queen made the same mistake as you does not prove you are right. It just shows that the Queen does not understand macroeconomics either. Even if you don't understand economics, all you had to do was check the front page page of the Australian and you would have known it was on it's way. Maybe the Queen did see the GFC coming, I certainly did, as early as 2006. The thread went for ages on the Yahoo forum, there were a handful of us who were saying a crash is coming. We were called doomsayers by the righties, until the stockmarket crash of 2008, then......yes you guessed it, they blamed us for it ha! ha!....like we 'willed' it to happen. Anyway, remember when Bernanke and Obama had to round up the fat cats and call an emergency sitting of parliament, if they didn't get a resolution by the Monday there would have been a catastrophic financial meltdown? Surely you've watched some of the documentaries about this. They didn't know it was coming in 2008, our own government didn't even know, Keen, who has his eyes on the ball, and some others did. was longweekend58 aka gold_medal one of those that dismissed the prediction outright just as he does now with the housing market ?

my actual predictrions were:

no recession for australia - correct
slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe)
no crash in our house market - correct

2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:27pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:45pm: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:25pm: It is mainstream economics pansi. It was on the front pages of the newspaper, before it happened. Really? Are you saying that the bulk of mainstream Economists called the GFC, before it started? And, the Queen? Sure, just not a language most people understand. But it was in plain English on the front page of the Australian many times. They didn't call it a GFC or give a date or do any of the Nostradamus stuff. Do you recall all the references to the economy 'overheating'? The PM and treasurer were talking about it too. The whole point of raising interest rates is to slow investment and trigger a downturn as early as possible, before the bubble gets too big. The Queen is not an economist. Quote: IF the RBA wanted to bring on a Recession, it would be raising rates &/or by withdrawing liquidity from the system, which hasn't happened. That said, raising rates at this point in time, would certainly hasten a Recession, it would also likely tip a Recession into a Depression! Our RBA, and foreign ones, all raised interest rates in the lead-up to the GFC. To anyone familiar with the lingo, this is economics for 'a downturn is coming.' Their actions helped trigger the GFC. They all lowered rates after the GFC hit.

thats not even a remotely accurate interpretation or even an accurate recal of the facts. Australie was raising its rates because the RBA were about the only people in the country who DIDNT see the GFC coming and acted in the wrong direction. Overseas interest rates were low and going lower which unfortunately didnt give them much leeway to use rates as a stimulatory effect.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:38pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:36am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:31am: Because it doesn't matter. All he has done is taken mainstream economic predictions that anyone could get from the front page of the newspaper, added whatever political spin you want to hear, and you think he is some kind of genius. what rubbish. Keen predicted the housing slump which hasn't happened yet because labor distorted the market with its hair-brained scams and now you are saying that he copies all of the other economic flunkies who said the complete opposite. Make up your mind !! you cant have it both ways. If Keen is a genius then his predictions would have come true but they actually missed by a mile. You cant say that the FHOG was the difference or that it was unpredictable. The notion that the govt would stand idly by and let a housing slump simply happen is also ridiculous. this is what is wrong with both you and Steve Keen. You base your arguments on bitterness and iedology rather than hard fact logic or historical precedence.

Yes keen got the GFC right and you didn't !!!!

And you can't make a fair prediction about the housing market when the government distorts the market with home owners grants and gives guarantees on bank deposits. You keep missing this valid point.

Watch the Insight program and you can see that housing was already on the downward slope and then when labor got in it tripled the first home buyers scam to keep the bubble from deflating. It's so obvious except to a retard such as yourself. Now today, housing is on the downward slope again just as it was at the start of the GFC and guess what ?? No more easy credit from banks and no more first home buyers scams to prop it up again !!

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:39pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:47am: FD Quote: a fool like Keen hello - he is a professor of economics. big deal. it is his predictive ability in question and he is dead wrong all teh time - just like you, nail and pansi.

Keen was not wrong - this has all been predicted.

you are forgiven according the divine plan.

namaste

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:37pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:04pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:06pm: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:27am: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:21am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:20am: Quote: There were very few economists that predicted the GFC before it hit, Keen was one of them. Nearly all of them did - hence the very high interest rates. That's what it means when the reserve bank keeps raising interest rates like that - they are trying to get people to stop borrowing. In fact the high interest rates usually trigger the downturn. Why Did So Many Economists Fail to Predict the Global Financial Crisis, and So Many Policymakers Mishandle It - While Some Saw It All Coming? Queen Elizabeth asked why the economist's didn't see this coming In a now famous letter in response to a question by Queen Elizabeth, economists in England explained why no one foresaw the timing, extent and severity of the credit crisis by laying responsibility on the “failure of the collective imagination of many bright people.” (Link to letter, PDF) This answer only begs the question as to why the imagination of so many economists was so limited. http://ineteconomics.org/financial-crisis-blinders The answer to the Queen's question was "they didn't want to" Why didn't they? They were in denial, the same as many will be when we enter the next phase of the GFC, which will be a hell of a lot worse than what we've experienced already. Pansi, the fact that the Queen made the same mistake as you does not prove you are right. It just shows that the Queen does not understand macroeconomics either. Even if you don't understand economics, all you had to do was check the front page page of the Australian and you would have known it was on it's way. Maybe the Queen did see the GFC coming, I certainly did, as early as 2006. The thread went for ages on the Yahoo forum, there were a handful of us who were saying a crash is coming. We were called doomsayers by the righties, until the stockmarket crash of 2008, then......yes you guessed it, they blamed us for it ha! ha!....like we 'willed' it to happen. Anyway, remember when Bernanke and Obama had to round up the fat cats and call an emergency sitting of parliament, if they didn't get a resolution by the Monday there would have been a catastrophic financial meltdown? Surely you've watched some of the documentaries about this. They didn't know it was coming in 2008, our own government didn't even know, Keen, who has his eyes on the ball, and some others did. was longweekend58 aka gold_medal one of those that dismissed the prediction outright just as he does now with the housing market ? He certainly did, he said we were scare mongers, he's always worn rose coloured glasses. He won't admit a real estate drop of even 10%, let alone 40%, which has already happened at the Gold Coast, because he's hocked up to his eyeballs. He said he mortgaged his house for his water-boy business because house prices double every seven years. Shame they don't. As close to debt free is the way to go if you want to survive the coming tsunami.

Pansi, you perdicted a 75% drop and were dead wrong. angry-nail predicted 40% and was also dead wrong. Keen has done the same thing and ALSO been wrong. all that happend was that the market had a correction of 7%. nothing more and nothing even remotely unusual. quoting the goad coast as a an example does yu now help because I can quote areas where prices have risen 30% in the same period. both would be uselss bits of selctively chosen data.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:49pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:38pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:36am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:31am: Because it doesn't matter. All he has done is taken mainstream economic predictions that anyone could get from the front page of the newspaper, added whatever political spin you want to hear, and you think he is some kind of genius. what rubbish. Keen predicted the housing slump which hasn't happened yet because labor distorted the market with its hair-brained scams and now you are saying that he copies all of the other economic flunkies who said the complete opposite. Make up your mind !! you cant have it both ways. If Keen is a genius then his predictions would have come true but they actually missed by a mile. You cant say that the FHOG was the difference or that it was unpredictable. The notion that the govt would stand idly by and let a housing slump simply happen is also ridiculous. this is what is wrong with both you and Steve Keen. You base your arguments on bitterness and iedology rather than hard fact logic or historical precedence. Yes keen got the GFC right and you didn't !!!! And you can't make a fair prediction about the housing market when the government distorts the market with home owners grants and gives guarantees on bank deposits. You keep missing this valid point. Watch the Insight program and you can see that housing was already on the downward slope and then when labor got in it tripled the first home buyers scam to keep the bubble from deflating. It's so obvious except to a retard such as yourself. Now today, housing is on the downward slope again just as it was at the start of the GFC and guess what ?? No more easy credit from banks and no more first home buyers scams to prop it up again !!

its NOT  a valid point and that IS the point. it is the same argument you made in the IPCC temperature prediction thread.  There you essentially said that the predictions would have been right if not for all the events that made it fail. Govt intervention was always going to happen. Interest rates were always going to drop to protect valuations. do you think the banks are stupid???

you cannot say Keen was right when he has been dead wrong for a very long time. on house prices he has now been dad wrong for over 8 years. hardly a record to be proud of.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:45pm:

my actual predictrions were: no recession for australia - correct slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe) no crash in our house market - correct 2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3

It aint over yet, baby......by a looooong shot!

Enter the great recession/depression, it's a comin'

You can't tally the scores until the game's over.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:49pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:38pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:36am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:31am: Because it doesn't matter. All he has done is taken mainstream economic predictions that anyone could get from the front page of the newspaper, added whatever political spin you want to hear, and you think he is some kind of genius. what rubbish. Keen predicted the housing slump which hasn't happened yet because labor distorted the market with its hair-brained scams and now you are saying that he copies all of the other economic flunkies who said the complete opposite. Make up your mind !! you cant have it both ways. If Keen is a genius then his predictions would have come true but they actually missed by a mile. You cant say that the FHOG was the difference or that it was unpredictable. The notion that the govt would stand idly by and let a housing slump simply happen is also ridiculous. this is what is wrong with both you and Steve Keen. You base your arguments on bitterness and iedology rather than hard fact logic or historical precedence. Yes keen got the GFC right and you didn't !!!! And you can't make a fair prediction about the housing market when the government distorts the market with home owners grants and gives guarantees on bank deposits. You keep missing this valid point. Watch the Insight program and you can see that housing was already on the downward slope and then when labor got in it tripled the first home buyers scam to keep the bubble from deflating. It's so obvious except to a retard such as yourself. Now today, housing is on the downward slope again just as it was at the start of the GFC and guess what ?? No more easy credit from banks and no more first home buyers scams to prop it up again !!

except that stats show that house prices are creepig UP again. or is this to be like your temperature claims in which you just asy it is hotter despite the evidence saying something else?

house prices are rising - not dropping. [cue gaynail using a singular example of a hosue with massive drop]

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:55pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:45pm: my actual predictrions were: no recession for australia - correct slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe) no crash in our house market - correct 2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3 It aint over yet, baby......by a looooong shot! Enter the great recession/depression, it's a comin' You can't tally the scores until the game's over.

and the game is over when exactly??? and i mean that sincerely. tell me exactly WHEN you consider it appropriate to tally the scores?

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:45pm:

my actual predictrions were: no recession for australia - correct slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe) no crash in our house market - correct 2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3

so you didn't predict the GFC then.

And your prediction of house prices was based on NO government stimulus and intervention in stopping house prices from collapsing which means you would have got that wrong if it wasn't for labor wasting money to prop it up !!

And did you predict the slump in the retail sector because Steve Keen did ;)

Gold_medal/Longweekend,

Quote:

house prices are rising - not dropping.

false statement.

forgiven for lying.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:59pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:45pm: my actual predictrions were: no recession for australia - correct slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe) no crash in our house market - correct 2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3 so you didn't predict the GFC then. And your prediction of house prices was based on NO government stimulus and intervention in stopping house prices from collapsing which means you would have got that wrong if it wasn't for labor wasting money to prop it up !! And did you predict the slump in the retail sector because Steve Keen did ;)

look idiot... my prediction was simply NO HOUSING CRASH. Im not the moron saying i would ahve been right if not for blah, blah blah... you got it wrong because you dont understand how all of this works. Predictive modelling is complex and it does mean you have to understand all the factors involed. just because you thought the govt would do nothing and that banks wouldnt protect their valuatiuons doesnt meann that the majority of other people didnt. we did. and we were right and you were wrong. as it usually is.

PS I did predict the GFC. i said we wouldnt go into recession over it. and we didnt. you predicted depression. you are never right. ever. like pansi, you are almost always wrong.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:02pm:

Gold_medal/Longweekend, Quote: house prices are rising - not dropping. false statement. forgiven for lying.

topic too difficult for you lawnmower man?

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:27pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:45pm: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:25pm: It is mainstream economics pansi. It was on the front pages of the newspaper, before it happened. Really? Are you saying that the bulk of mainstream Economists called the GFC, before it started? And, the Queen? Sure, just not a language most people understand. But it was in plain English on the front page of the Australian many times. They didn't call it a GFC or give a date or do any of the Nostradamus stuff. Do you recall all the references to the economy 'overheating'? The PM and treasurer were talking about it too. The whole point of raising interest rates is to slow investment and trigger a downturn as early as possible, before the bubble gets too big. The Queen is not an economist. Quote: IF the RBA wanted to bring on a Recession, it would be raising rates &/or by withdrawing liquidity from the system, which hasn't happened. That said, raising rates at this point in time, would certainly hasten a Recession, it would also likely tip a Recession into a Depression! Our RBA, and foreign ones, all raised interest rates in the lead-up to the GFC. To anyone familiar with the lingo, this is economics for 'a downturn is coming.' Their actions helped trigger the GFC. They all lowered rates after the GFC hit. thats not even a remotely accurate interpretation or even an accurate recal of the facts. Australie was raising its rates because the RBA were about the only people in the country who DIDNT see the GFC coming and acted in the wrong direction. Overseas interest rates were low and going lower which unfortunately didnt give them much leeway to use rates as a stimulatory effect.

You are confused GM. Raising rates is the right direction, up until the bubble bursts. You don't need to rely on my recollection. There are plenty of records of interest rates from here and overseas. Lowering interest rates would be a really bad idea. It would encourage people to get further into debt just before a recession. Does that sound like a good idea to you?

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:56pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:49pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:38pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:36am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:31am: Because it doesn't matter. All he has done is taken mainstream economic predictions that anyone could get from the front page of the newspaper, added whatever political spin you want to hear, and you think he is some kind of genius. what rubbish. Keen predicted the housing slump which hasn't happened yet because labor distorted the market with its hair-brained scams and now you are saying that he copies all of the other economic flunkies who said the complete opposite. Make up your mind !! you cant have it both ways. If Keen is a genius then his predictions would have come true but they actually missed by a mile. You cant say that the FHOG was the difference or that it was unpredictable. The notion that the govt would stand idly by and let a housing slump simply happen is also ridiculous. this is what is wrong with both you and Steve Keen. You base your arguments on bitterness and iedology rather than hard fact logic or historical precedence. Yes keen got the GFC right and you didn't !!!! And you can't make a fair prediction about the housing market when the government distorts the market with home owners grants and gives guarantees on bank deposits. You keep missing this valid point. Watch the Insight program and you can see that housing was already on the downward slope and then when labor got in it tripled the first home buyers scam to keep the bubble from deflating. It's so obvious except to a retard such as yourself. Now today, housing is on the downward slope again just as it was at the start of the GFC and guess what ?? No more easy credit from banks and no more first home buyers scams to prop it up again !! except that stats show that house prices are creepig UP again. or is this to be like your temperature claims in which you just asy it is hotter despite the evidence saying something else? house prices are rising - not dropping. [cue gaynail using a singular example of a hosue with massive drop]

in melbourne they are going down mate. same as tasmania and SA.

pansi has given you many examples of 20-40% drop in house prices but you choose to ignore that in favour of some rubbery bullshit figures that come from the same mob that give us low unemployment rates when we know that there are some areas that have 20% and more unemployment !!

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:05pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:02pm: Gold_medal/Longweekend, Quote: house prices are rising - not dropping. false statement. forgiven for lying. topic too difficult for you lawnmower man?

Longweekend,
you are a proven liar:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1356646946/57#57

and you've shown no remorse & haven't even apologised to the readers.

freediver wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:06pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:48pm: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:27pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:45pm: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:25pm: It is mainstream economics pansi. It was on the front pages of the newspaper, before it happened. Really? Are you saying that the bulk of mainstream Economists called the GFC, before it started? And, the Queen? Sure, just not a language most people understand. But it was in plain English on the front page of the Australian many times. They didn't call it a GFC or give a date or do any of the Nostradamus stuff. Do you recall all the references to the economy 'overheating'? The PM and treasurer were talking about it too. The whole point of raising interest rates is to slow investment and trigger a downturn as early as possible, before the bubble gets too big. The Queen is not an economist. Quote: IF the RBA wanted to bring on a Recession, it would be raising rates &/or by withdrawing liquidity from the system, which hasn't happened. That said, raising rates at this point in time, would certainly hasten a Recession, it would also likely tip a Recession into a Depression! Our RBA, and foreign ones, all raised interest rates in the lead-up to the GFC. To anyone familiar with the lingo, this is economics for 'a downturn is coming.' Their actions helped trigger the GFC. They all lowered rates after the GFC hit. thats not even a remotely accurate interpretation or even an accurate recal of the facts. Australie was raising its rates because the RBA were about the only people in the country who DIDNT see the GFC coming and acted in the wrong direction. Overseas interest rates were low and going lower which unfortunately didnt give them much leeway to use rates as a stimulatory effect. You are confused GM. Raising rates is the right direction, up until the bubble bursts. You don't need to rely on my recollection. There are plenty of records of interest rates from here and overseas. Lowering interest rates would be a really bad idea. It would encourage people to get further into debt just before a recession. Does that sound like a good idea to you?

for goodness sake FD... the GFC was coming and the economy was starting to stall; and the RBA... RAISED rates with the stated objective of 'slowing an overheating economy' that was already slowing down. It was the classic Keating 'recession we had to have' mistake of relying on official stats that were 6 months old while the anecdotal evidence was plain to most that the economy was already slowing rapidly. They got a lot of flak over it and all deserved. the rest of the world was lowering interest rates well ahead of the RBA. the RBA were absolutely OBSESSED with inflation at the time to the extent that nothing else mattered and rate rise followed rate rise all to slow an economy when they seemed to have no idea that the GFC has already started overseas and was headed our way. they are not a very good economic manager because the either over-react, under-react or react too late.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:09pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:56pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:49pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:38pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:36am: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:31am: Because it doesn't matter. All he has done is taken mainstream economic predictions that anyone could get from the front page of the newspaper, added whatever political spin you want to hear, and you think he is some kind of genius. what rubbish. Keen predicted the housing slump which hasn't happened yet because labor distorted the market with its hair-brained scams and now you are saying that he copies all of the other economic flunkies who said the complete opposite. Make up your mind !! you cant have it both ways. If Keen is a genius then his predictions would have come true but they actually missed by a mile. You cant say that the FHOG was the difference or that it was unpredictable. The notion that the govt would stand idly by and let a housing slump simply happen is also ridiculous. this is what is wrong with both you and Steve Keen. You base your arguments on bitterness and iedology rather than hard fact logic or historical precedence. Yes keen got the GFC right and you didn't !!!! And you can't make a fair prediction about the housing market when the government distorts the market with home owners grants and gives guarantees on bank deposits. You keep missing this valid point. Watch the Insight program and you can see that housing was already on the downward slope and then when labor got in it tripled the first home buyers scam to keep the bubble from deflating. It's so obvious except to a retard such as yourself. Now today, housing is on the downward slope again just as it was at the start of the GFC and guess what ?? No more easy credit from banks and no more first home buyers scams to prop it up again !! except that stats show that house prices are creepig UP again. or is this to be like your temperature claims in which you just asy it is hotter despite the evidence saying something else? house prices are rising - not dropping. [cue gaynail using a singular example of a hosue with massive drop] in melbourne they are going down mate. same as tasmania and SA. pansi has given you many examples of 20-40% drop in house prices but you choose to ignore that in favour of some rubbery bullshit figures that come from the same mob that give us low unemployment rates when we know that there are some areas that have 20% and more unemployment !!

you will be granted zero credibility with the 'official stats are crap and I know better' line. thatr is about the only thing you could do to lower your already subterranean credibility.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:09pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:05pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:02pm: Gold_medal/Longweekend, Quote: house prices are rising - not dropping. false statement. forgiven for lying. topic too difficult for you lawnmower man? Longweekend, you are a proven liar: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1356646946/57#57 and you've shown no remorse & haven't even apologised to the readers.

booby: the gay stalker

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:43pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:45pm: freediver wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 1:25pm: It is mainstream economics pansi. It was on the front pages of the newspaper, before it happened. Really? Are you saying that the bulk of mainstream Economists called the GFC, before it started? And, the Queen? it was discussed all around the world for some time as soon as the sub-prime market collapsed. your memory is short - almost goldfish-like.

The Queen yesterday called the global financial crisis "awful" - and asked why nobody had seen it coming.

The Queen, 82, was opening a £71million building at the London School of Economics.

LSE's Professor Luis Garicano told her: "At every stage, someone was relying on somebody else and everyone thought they were doing the right thing."
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/queen-asks-why-nobody-saw-the-financial-355566
=====================

Financial Crisis Blinders

Why Did So Many Economists Fail to Predict the Global Financial Crisis, and So Many Policymakers Mishandle It - While Some Saw It All Coming?

Economists by and large either failed to anticipate the global financial crisis that began in 2008, or greatly underestimated its severity. What about the economics field led policymakers and practitioners to fail so spectacularly? Will the same problems get in the way again and so undermine the recovery, or worse, lead to a repeat disaster? Or are there alternative theories to analyze the situation and avoid the problems next time?

In a now famous letter in response to a question by Queen Elizabeth, economists in England explained why no one foresaw the timing, extent and severity of the credit crisis by laying responsibility on the “failure of the collective imagination of many bright people.”

How did the economics profession come to be so complacent about the possibility of such a crash? Could it be the increasing belief over the last 30 years in the self-equilibrating properties of financial markets?

There were economists who did see the crisis coming and were very vocal about it at the time. More prominent (and celebrated) examples include people such as Robert Shiller, Nouriel Roubini and Raghuram Rajan.

http://ineteconomics.org/financial-crisis-blinders
==============================

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:14pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:09pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:05pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:02pm: Gold_medal/Longweekend, Quote: house prices are rising - not dropping. false statement. forgiven for lying. topic too difficult for you lawnmower man? Longweekend, you are a proven liar: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1356646946/57#57 and you've shown no remorse & haven't even apologised to the readers. booby: the gay stalker

Another lie

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 2:57pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:55pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:45pm: my actual predictrions were: no recession for australia - correct slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe) no crash in our house market - correct 2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3 It aint over yet, baby......by a looooong shot! Enter the great recession/depression, it's a comin' You can't tally the scores until the game's over. and the game is over when exactly??? and i mean that sincerely. tell me exactly WHEN you consider it appropriate to tally the scores?

We can predict when a recession/depression is on our doorstep, but no one can predict when it will end. If you think that this GFC that we are still very much in will end on a certain day, you shouldn't be talking economics.

Nations will try their own methods along the way, like America, they have had no effect so far, but they'll keep trying with one thing after another, so it could go on for a decade, maybe two, no one knows.

Steve Keen predicted the housing bubble collapse, but he couldn't predict the government intervention, so the game changes according to austerity/stimulus measures. Government intervention caused the bubble to stay inflated somewhat, but rest assured stimulus will run out, then watch the debt.

America is up to QE forever, so the effects of that has to be taken into account.

One thing for sure, the debt is mounting, the can is being kicked a little further each week and the economy does have a breaking point.

Goodbye growth fairy.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:05pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:59pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:45pm: my actual predictrions were: no recession for australia - correct slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe) no crash in our house market - correct 2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3 so you didn't predict the GFC then. And your prediction of house prices was based on NO government stimulus and intervention in stopping house prices from collapsing which means you would have got that wrong if it wasn't for labor wasting money to prop it up !! And did you predict the slump in the retail sector because Steve Keen did ;) look idiot... my prediction was simply NO HOUSING CRASH. Im not the moron saying i would ahve been right if not for blah, blah blah... you got it wrong because you dont understand how all of this works. Predictive modelling is complex and it does mean you have to understand all the factors involed. just because you thought the govt would do nothing and that banks wouldnt protect their valuatiuons doesnt meann that the majority of other people didnt. we did. and we were right and you were wrong. as it usually is. PS I did predict the GFC. i said we wouldnt go into recession over it. and we didnt. you predicted depression. you are never right. ever. like pansi, you are almost always wrong.

you didn't predict the GFC at all you mental midget. Saying the US was only going into a slight recession means that you were way off the mark !!

And does the so called predictive modeling include medaling in the housing market by the federal government ?

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:15pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:14pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:09pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:05pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:02pm: Gold_medal/Longweekend, Quote: house prices are rising - not dropping. false statement. forgiven for lying. topic too difficult for you lawnmower man? Longweekend, you are a proven liar: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1356646946/57#57 and you've shown no remorse & haven't even apologised to the readers. booby: the gay stalker Another lie

if it LOOKS like a gay stalker, ACTS like a gay stalker and POSTS like a gay stalker then logic suggest that it probably IS a gay stalker.

time to move on, booby. How about IMFULLOFIT? I believe he is gay.

Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:19pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:05pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:59pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:45pm: my actual predictrions were: no recession for australia - correct slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe) no crash in our house market - correct 2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3 so you didn't predict the GFC then. And your prediction of house prices was based on NO government stimulus and intervention in stopping house prices from collapsing which means you would have got that wrong if it wasn't for labor wasting money to prop it up !! And did you predict the slump in the retail sector because Steve Keen did ;) look idiot... my prediction was simply NO HOUSING CRASH. Im not the moron saying i would ahve been right if not for blah, blah blah... you got it wrong because you dont understand how all of this works. Predictive modelling is complex and it does mean you have to understand all the factors involed. just because you thought the govt would do nothing and that banks wouldnt protect their valuatiuons doesnt meann that the majority of other people didnt. we did. and we were right and you were wrong. as it usually is. PS I did predict the GFC. i said we wouldnt go into recession over it. and we didnt. you predicted depression. you are never right. ever. like pansi, you are almost always wrong. you didn't predict the GFC at all you mental midget. Saying the US was only going into a slight recession means that you were way off the mark !! And does the so called predictive modeling include medaling in the housing market by the federal government ?

you are slowly getting there, inch by inch. YES IT DOES! Just like any successful predictive modelling design. proper predictive modelling looks for ALL likely scenarios and impacts to build a model. any economist worth their salt (ie not Keen) would have expected the govt and the banks to sand up and support the housing market. to not expect that would have been stupid and in the washup, WAS stupid.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:19pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:57pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:55pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:45pm: my actual predictrions were: no recession for australia - correct slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe) no crash in our house market - correct 2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3 It aint over yet, baby......by a looooong shot! Enter the great recession/depression, it's a comin' You can't tally the scores until the game's over. and the game is over when exactly??? and i mean that sincerely. tell me exactly WHEN you consider it appropriate to tally the scores? We can predict when a recession/depression is on our doorstep, but no one can predict when it will end. If you think that this GFC that we are still very much in will end on a certain day, you shouldn't be talking economics. Nations will try their own methods along the way, like America, they have had no effect so far, but they'll keep trying with one thing after another, so it could go on for a decade, maybe two, no one knows. Steve Keen predicted the housing bubble collapse, but he couldn't predict the government intervention, so the game changes according to austerity/stimulus measures. Government intervention caused the bubble to stay inflated somewhat, but rest assured stimulus will run out, then watch the debt. America is up to QE forever, so the effects of that has to be taken into account. One thing for sure, the debt is mounting, the can is being kicked a little further each week and the economy does have a breaking point. Goodbye growth fairy.

Somehow longloser has a piece of his brain missing which can't comprehend the idea of market manipulation and he purposely completely ignores it in any discussion on house  prices as though it had absolutely no affect whatsoever when any real estate guru worth his salt will tell you otherwise !!

1.3 trillion over invested in non productive assets and longloser wants to tell us that prices can only go up !!

give me a break will you :(

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:21pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:15pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:14pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:09pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:05pm: Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 3:02pm: Gold_medal/Longweekend, Quote: house prices are rising - not dropping. false statement. forgiven for lying. topic too difficult for you lawnmower man? Longweekend, you are a proven liar: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1356646946/57#57 and you've shown no remorse & haven't even apologised to the readers. booby: the gay stalker Another lie if it LOOKS like a gay stalker, ACTS like a gay stalker and POSTS like a gay stalker then logic suggest that it probably IS a gay stalker. time to move on, booby. How about IMFULLOFIT? I believe he is gay.

Well, there you go, something we can agree on.

YOUAREFULLOFIT!

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 3:19pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:57pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:55pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 2:45pm: my actual predictrions were: no recession for australia - correct slight recession in USA - wrong (it was severe) no crash in our house market - correct 2.5 out of 3 while you were predicting depression in USA, deep recession here and 40% drop in house prices.  thats 0 out of 3 It aint over yet, baby......by a looooong shot! Enter the great recession/depression, it's a comin' You can't tally the scores until the game's over. and the game is over when exactly??? and i mean that sincerely. tell me exactly WHEN you consider it appropriate to tally the scores? We can predict when a recession/depression is on our doorstep, but no one can predict when it will end. If you think that this GFC that we are still very much in will end on a certain day, you shouldn't be talking economics. Nations will try their own methods along the way, like America, they have had no effect so far, but they'll keep trying with one thing after another, so it could go on for a decade, maybe two, no one knows. Steve Keen predicted the housing bubble collapse, but he couldn't predict the government intervention, so the game changes according to austerity/stimulus measures. Government intervention caused the bubble to stay inflated somewhat, but rest assured stimulus will run out, then watch the debt. America is up to QE forever, so the effects of that has to be taken into account. One thing for sure, the debt is mounting, the can is being kicked a little further each week and the economy does have a breaking point. Goodbye growth fairy.

so roughly translated: you have no idea and want to extend the predictive period on ad infinitum until you are proven right or the sun explodes.

it is not dissimilar tyo the notion of entering the same lotto numbers every week. given enough time you will eventually win. that does not make you a lott expert. However, if you say your numbers will win in the next 3 years THAT would be impressive.

Predicting a global massive recession sometime in the next millenia is probably correct. it is hardly the stuff of nostradamus tho, is it?