If Australia does not break out of the cycle of high cost and low productivity in the construction industry, and other industries, the quality of life will eventually decline.

Perhaps it already has.

The reason Chinese road construction contractors are not allowed to operate in Australia is that Australian industry would be humiliated by the efficiency, low cost, and speed of construction by the Chinese.

Even a km or two of Australian suburban roads built by Australian contractors takes a decade to finish because the longer it takes the more money the people associated with the project make.

Australian society needs innovation, new ideas, and visionaries.

Australia is heading nowhere at breakneck speed and will eventually hit the wall where even doing nothing will become too laborious and uneconomic.

Australia could not finish a project like "China's Longest Highway in The Middle of The Ocean" in several million years which would not even start in Australia until there had been several decades-long debates before the final go ahead.

Yes, even the pro and con debaters make money by delaying the projects.

https://youtu.be/xagVR0cFhEc[/quote]

ltyc has posted something with which i agree

has ltyc started on the narrow road to success ?

In Australia the roads are managed in a strange way.

I know of a roundabout that was built 1 hour out of Melbourne.
It took 18 months to build and the traffic was held up every day in that time
with a bulldozed one way side road to get the traffic through each way.
It must have cost $millions?
It ended up being a magnificent roundabout but on the main road and the side road it connected to -
there were so many pot holes and there still are years later - go figure?

I believe the boat has already sailed for low tech manufacturing for Australia.   With our current standard of living and GDP, there is no way, we can compete with people working in developing countries (China or not) who live by $2  per day.    We are also geographically isolated from the rest of the world, meaning our price is highly dependent on transportation. 

Politically we are also stuck.   We have most favourable political and military alliance with USA and Europe.  However, our trade conditions with them are less than favourable.  Where as, we have very favourable trading conditions with China (despite sanctions), but at best we could do is to stabilise this relationship due to our reliance with the West. (We are the West).    Some believe we could develop more ties with India, which is a democracy (of sorts).  However, if India managed to get itself into a position to challenge USA, I suspect, it would be treated the same as China. 

Long term wise, if we want to have a more productive economy, it is going to be in the areas of new industries.  This means, we have to increase education, increase innovation, at the same time, improve our infrastructure.  And critically, be able to trade with everyone, and this include China, India and the Brics.   And this would require at least 20 to 25 years of bipartisan support.   So to put in simply, it’s a dream. 

Quote:

High cost, low productivity

We get paid a lot for doing bugger all. Sounds like success to me.

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 2:36pm:

In Australia the roads are managed in a strange way. I know of a roundabout that was built 1 hour out of Melbourne. It took 18 months to build and the traffic was held up every day in that time with a bulldozed one way side road to get the traffic through each way. It must have cost $millions? It ended up being a magnificent roundabout but on the main road and the side road it connected to - there were so many pot holes and there still are years later - go figure?

This could just be a failure of communication between the Department of digging holes and the Department of filling in holes.

The Department of filling in holes may be filling holes that have not yet been dug.

tickleandrose wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 2:40pm:

I believe the boat has already sailed for low tech manufacturing for Australia.   With our current standard of living and GDP, there is no way, we can compete with people working in developing countries (China or not) who live by $2  per day.

And that's the problem.
It's also super expensive to live in Australia.
People need high pay to cover the enormous living costs.

Back in the early 1980s Melbourne was a city of factories -
we made everything - but not anymore.
We stopped making shoes before the end of the 1980s.
What do we make now?
Go to Bunnings and just about everything is imported.
We can't compete with China and never will.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 2:44pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 2:36pm: In Australia the roads are managed in a strange way. I know of a roundabout that was built 1 hour out of Melbourne. It took 18 months to build and the traffic was held up every day in that time with a bulldozed one way side road to get the traffic through each way. It must have cost $millions? It ended up being a magnificent roundabout but on the main road and the side road it connected to - there were so many pot holes and there still are years later - go figure? This could just be a failure of communication between the Department of digging holes and the Department of filling in holes. The Department of filling in holes may be filling holes that have not yet been dug.

The Department of filling in holes needs a new manager.
We pay a fuel excise to repair our roads - where does all that money go?

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 2:51pm:

tickleandrose wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 2:40pm: I believe the boat has already sailed for low tech manufacturing for Australia.   With our current standard of living and GDP, there is no way, we can compete with people working in developing countries (China or not) who live by $2  per day.     And that's the problem. It's also super expensive to live in Australia. People need high pay to cover the enormous living costs. Back in the early 1980s Melbourne was a city of factories - we made everything - but not anymore. We stopped making shoes before the end of the 1980s. What do we make now? Go to Bunnings and just about everything is imported. We can't compete with China and never will.

Looking through the lens of history, I really dont think the days of 1960s to 1980s would ever come back.  It was the decades just after world war 2.   Our competitors, Japan, Korea, German - they were all trying to recover from ashes.   And so, Australian exports were wanted in USA and UK, and at the same time, our industrialist had no where to go for cheaper labour.    That was the golden time for Australia. 

The seed of our decline began when Britain joined EU, and decided to import and trade more with EU than Australia.    What followed was the rise of Japan, Korea, German, and then Chinese manufacturing, coupled with globalization.    And we got left behind.   :-[

freediver wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 2:44pm:

Quote: High cost, low productivity We get paid a lot for doing bugger all. Sounds like success to me.

lol

thats why your grandkids will never own a home  :'( :'(

tickleandrose wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 3:14pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 2:51pm: [quote author=tickleandrose link=1723507368/3#3 date=1723524022]I believe the boat has already sailed for low tech manufacturing for Australia.   With our current standard of living and GDP, there is no way, we can compete with people working in developing countries (China or not) who live by $2  per day.     And that's the problem. It's also super expensive to live in Australia. People need high pay to cover the enormous living costs. Back in the early 1980s Melbourne was a city of factories - we made everything - but not anymore. We stopped making shoes before the end of the 1980s. What do we make now? Go to Bunnings and just about everything is imported. We can't compete with China and never will.

Looking through the lens of history, I really dont think the days of 1960s to 1980s would ever come back.  It was the decades just after world war 2.   Our competitors, Japan, Korea, German - they were all trying to recover from ashes.   And so, Australian exports were wanted in USA and UK, and at the same time, our industrialist had no where to go for cheaper labour.    That was the golden time for Australia. 

The seed of our decline began when Britain joined EU, and decided to import and trade more with EU than Australia.    What followed was the rise of Japan, Korea, German, and then Chinese manufacturing, coupled with globalization.    And we got left behind.   :-[/quote]


The POMs were silly -
after spending 100s of years building up an empire that gave us all the Commonwealth -
they threw it all away to join the EU.
their standard of living went down -
the average British family could no longer afford a Sunday roast dinner of Australian or NZ lamb etc. -
they had only bangers and mash and lived like Steptoe and Son.

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 3:31pm:

The POMs were silly - after spending 100s of years building up an empire that gave us all the Commonwealth - they threw it all away to join the EU. their standard of living went down - the average British family could no longer afford a Sunday roast dinner of Australian or NZ lamb etc. - they had only bangers and mash and lived like Steptoe and Son.

I worked in the UK 1977-1979. It was a terrible place with poverty and rubbish blowing about on the streets.

UK families could not afford roast dinners of any kind, including road kill.

Uk Wage growth from 1973 to 2024 did no more than match inflation. So UK citizens did not move ahead for 50 years.

"Throughout the late 1960s and 1970s, the United Kingdom was sometimes characterized as the "sick man of Europe", first by commentators, and later at home by critics of the third Wilson/Callaghan ministry due to industrial strife and poor economic performance compared with other European countries."

Joining the EU in 1973 saved the UK from total economic collapse:


Quote:

The average weekly wage in 1973 was £41.90 for a man and £23.10 for a woman, compared to £517 combined for both in 2013.

Quote:

1973 to 1975 Production stalled due to weak trade and the miners' strikes, leading to a three-day working week to save the country's electricity. Consumer spending was also down, due to high unemployment, low wages and uncertainty in the market. People's income accounts for around half of the income measure of GDP.

https://youtu.be/DiWomXklfv8

Leaving the EU will be a decisive factor in how England goes forward.

I wish them only the best British luck but think they have chosen the road to economic disaster.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 6:07pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 3:31pm: The POMs were silly - after spending 100s of years building up an empire that gave us all the Commonwealth - they threw it all away to join the EU. their standard of living went down - the average British family could no longer afford a Sunday roast dinner of Australian or NZ lamb etc. - they had only bangers and mash and lived like Steptoe and Son. Lovin' your music links mate I worked in the UK 1977-1979. It was a terrible place with poverty and rubbish blowing about on the streets. UK families could not afford roast dinners of any kind, including road kill. Uk Wage growth from 1973 to 2024 did no more than match inflation. So UK citizens did not move ahead for 50 years. "Throughout the late 1960s and 1970s, the United Kingdom was sometimes characterized as the "sick man of Europe", first by commentators, and later at home by critics of the third Wilson/Callaghan ministry due to industrial strife and poor economic performance compared with other European countries." Joining the EU in 1973 saved the UK from total economic collapse: Quote: The average weekly wage in 1973 was £41.90 for a man and £23.10 for a woman, compared to £517 combined for both in 2013. [quote]1973 to 1975 Production stalled due to weak trade and the miners' strikes, leading to a three-day working week to save the country's electricity. Consumer spending was also down, due to high unemployment, low wages and uncertainty in the market. People's income accounts for around half of the income measure of GDP.

https://youtu.be/DiWomXklfv8[/quote]

Lovin' the music you have been posting!

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 6:07pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 3:31pm: The POMs were silly - after spending 100s of years building up an empire that gave us all the Commonwealth - they threw it all away to join the EU. their standard of living went down - the average British family could no longer afford a Sunday roast dinner of Australian or NZ lamb etc. - they had only bangers and mash and lived like Steptoe and Son. I worked in the UK 1977-1979. It was a terrible place with poverty and rubbish blowing about on the streets. UK families could not afford roast dinners of any kind, including road kill.

That's not what I was told in 1985.
The average POM hated the EU -
they couldn't afford the prices any more.

Australia and NZ lost a hell of a lot of our exports due to the EU -
the EU put large tariffs on our products.
Brexit  eventually got the POMs out of the EU after they realised their mistake.

aquascoot wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 3:21pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 2:44pm: Quote: High cost, low productivity We get paid a lot for doing bugger all. Sounds like success to me. lol thats why your grandkids will never own a home  :'( :'(

I'm serious. Do you really want to be better than the Chinese at breaking your back for 50c a day?

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 7:23pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 6:07pm: Bobby. wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 3:31pm: The POMs were silly - after spending 100s of years building up an empire that gave us all the Commonwealth - they threw it all away to join the EU. their standard of living went down - the average British family could no longer afford a Sunday roast dinner of Australian or NZ lamb etc. - they had only bangers and mash and lived like Steptoe and Son. I worked in the UK 1977-1979. It was a terrible place with poverty and rubbish blowing about on the streets. UK families could not afford roast dinners of any kind, including road kill. That's not what I was told in 1985. The average POM hated the EU - they couldn't afford the prices any more. Australia and NZ lost a hell of a lot of our exports due to the EU - the EU put large tariffs on our products. Brexit  eventually got the POMs out of the EU after they realised their mistake.

"Independent report by Cambridge Econometrics".

The UK economy is in decline since Brexit. Bobby, you are misled and deluded.

The UK economy is GBP 140 Billion worse off by 2023 following Brexit in 2020.

"According to the new research, the economic damage is only going to get worse – with more than £300bn set to be wiped off the value of the UK’s economy by 2035 if no action is taken."

https://www.london.gov.uk/new-report-reveals-uk-economy-almost-ps140billion-smaller-because-brexit#:~:text=The%20new%20report%2C%20by%20Cambridge,of%20Brexit%2C%20the%20report%20reveals.


Quote:

Mayor highlights Brexit damage to London economy London’s economy alone has shrunk by more than £30billion, Mayor reveals at prestigious Mansion House dinner Independent report by Cambridge Econometrics, commissioned by City Hall, shows London has 290,000 fewer jobs than if Brexit had not taken place, with half the total two million job losses nationwide coming in the financial services and construction sectors Mayor of London identifies Brexit as ‘key contributor’ to the current cost-of-living crisis – highlighting evidence that it is fuelling food price increases Sadiq calls on the Government to build a closer relationship with the EU The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, will use a speech at Mansion House in the City of London tonight to reveal that the cost of Brexit to the UK’s economy is £140billion, according to new independent analysis. The new report, by Cambridge Econometrics commissioned by City Hall (1), also shows that London’s economy has shrunk by more than £30billion. The average Briton was nearly £2,000 worse off in 2023, while the average Londoner was nearly £3,400 worse off last year as a result of Brexit, the report reveals.* It also calculates that there are nearly two million fewer jobs overall in the UK due to Brexit – with almost 300,000 fewer jobs in the capital alone. The Mayor will tell the prestigious London Government Dinner that the UK “urgently needs to build a closer relationship with the EU” to help arrest the decline. According to the new research, the economic damage is only going to get worse – with more than £300bn set to be wiped off the value of the UK’s economy by 2035 if no action is taken, and more than £60 billion wiped off the value of London’s economy alone.

LTYC,

Quote:

The UK economy is in decline since Brexit. Bobby, you are misled and deluded. The UK economy is GBP 140 Billion worse off by 2023 following Brexit in 2020. "According to the new research, the economic damage is only going to get worse – with more than £300bn set to be wiped off the value of the UK’s economy by 2035 if no action is taken."

Well obviously the UK failed to make good deals with its former Commonwealth.

freediver wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 9:17pm:

aquascoot wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 3:21pm: freediver wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 2:44pm: Quote: High cost, low productivity We get paid a lot for doing bugger all. Sounds like success to me. lol thats why your grandkids will never own a home  :'( :'( I'm serious. Do you really want to be better than the Chinese at breaking your back for 50c a day?

Sounds like Scarface -  jump to 0:25    ;D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6GWQMPzOso

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 9:42pm:

LTYC, Quote: The UK economy is in decline since Brexit. Bobby, you are misled and deluded. The UK economy is GBP 140 Billion worse off by 2023 following Brexit in 2020. "According to the new research, the economic damage is only going to get worse – with more than £300bn set to be wiped off the value of the UK’s economy by 2035 if no action is taken." Well obviously the UK failed to make good deals with its former Commonwealth.

... wait, there's more. UK has paid ~GBP 35+ Billion to EU.

UK's Brexit divorce bill:


Quote:

By 31 December 2021, the UK had paid a net amount of £11 billion and was due to have paid a further net £3.3 billion to the end of May, leaving £21.3 billion outstanding, with future current payments of almost €900 million a month. The UK and EU began negotiations with differing perspectives on the basis for the bill.

I dont know about Brexit.  I mean, common sense in economics that if you work as a collective, you would have more bargaining power.   Now, Britain is alone, its more difficult to make favourable deals with larger players like USA, China, and European Union.   

Australia, with all of its political power and leverage could not even get half of what Britain had with EU.   Many of those trade deals could take years, even decades.  And until then... its like... putting a de facto economic sanction on yourself. 

To me, it does not make sense back then, it does not make sense now.   I mean, there are countries bending backwards trying to join the EU.   

tickleandrose wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 10:26pm:

I dont know about Brexit.  I mean, common sense in economics that if you work as a collective, you would have more bargaining power.   Now, Britain is alone, its more difficult to make favourable deals with larger players like USA, China, and European Union.    Australia, with all of its political power and leverage could not even get half of what Britain had with EU.   Many of those trade deals could take years, even decades.  And until then... its like... putting a de facto economic sanction on yourself.  To me, it does not make sense back then, it does not make sense now.   I mean, there are countries bending backwards trying to join the EU.

The end results of "breakaway republics"(which is effectively what Brexit is) through history, really depends on your time-frame of analysis. Of course if you do the simpleton short term economic analysis of which current "experts" are reduced to through sheer lack of intelligence and depth mixed with a level of indoctrination, it might lead to placing all the "weight" of result on the current and near term.

When the Germans and Britons broke away from the Roman Empire for example, it initially involved all the loss of the great collective power you speak of. However I'm pretty sure most of those "tribes" nowadays are damn happy they are no longer all part of that collective "Empire".

There may be a price to pay today, but as the EU gets slowly dragged down further by poor economic outlook additions, costs and internal fracture, I wouldn't bet it doesn't once again prove to be the far better outcome long term.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 10:12pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 9:42pm: LTYC, Quote: The UK economy is in decline since Brexit. Bobby, you are misled and deluded. The UK economy is GBP 140 Billion worse off by 2023 following Brexit in 2020. "According to the new research, the economic damage is only going to get worse – with more than £300bn set to be wiped off the value of the UK’s economy by 2035 if no action is taken." Well obviously the UK failed to make good deals with its former Commonwealth. ... wait, there's more. UK has paid ~GBP 35+ Billion to EU. UK's Brexit divorce bill: [quote]By 31 December 2021, the UK had paid a net amount of £11 billion and was due to have paid a further net £3.3 billion to the end of May, leaving £21.3 billion outstanding, with future current payments of almost €900 million a month. The UK and EU began negotiations with differing perspectives on the basis for the bill.

[/quote]


chickenfeed

loose change

the cost of the NDIS for 6 months  ::) ::)

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 10:12pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 9:42pm: LTYC, Quote: The UK economy is in decline since Brexit. Bobby, you are misled and deluded. The UK economy is GBP 140 Billion worse off by 2023 following Brexit in 2020. "According to the new research, the economic damage is only going to get worse – with more than £300bn set to be wiped off the value of the UK’s economy by 2035 if no action is taken." Well obviously the UK failed to make good deals with its former Commonwealth. ... wait, there's more. UK has paid ~GBP 35+ Billion to EU. UK's Brexit divorce bill: [quote]By 31 December 2021, the UK had paid a net amount of £11 billion and was due to have paid a further net £3.3 billion to the end of May, leaving £21.3 billion outstanding, with future current payments of almost €900 million a month. The UK and EU began negotiations with differing perspectives on the basis for the bill.

[/quote]


The UK should never have left their Commonwealth trading partners -
they were traitors to their own empire.

That's what happens when you have bean counters running companies and countries -
they don't see the long term vision.
The EU can't compete on a level playing field for
production of food with Australia and NZ.
They only keep their farmers going with massive subsidies and monster tariffs on Australia and NZ.
They denied the British people cheaper and more wholesome, high quality food.
The POMs don't care about their own people - at all.
As long as the rich can have their roast dinner on Sunday then it's OK by them -
and stuff the working class - they can eat bangers and mash and call it a luxury
and pay heaps for it.

Just watch the old episodes of Steptoe and Son -
that's how the POMs really live.

Bobby wants the UK to be dependent on Australia and others for its food.

Bobby wants Australians to drop everything and be the UK's farmers and sheep herders.

The UK has 62% food self-sufficiency which is below their objectives.

Australia would not be internationally competitive in UK's needs which are vegetables, fruit, and fish.

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/cpsprodpb/8963/production/_130717153_optimised-uk_food_supply-nc.png


Quote:

According to 2023 Defra figures, the UK is 62% self-sufficient in food. While this reflects similar levels of the past decade, some sectors have seen a recent decline.

n a report last year on improving food security, the government said the UK is largely self-sufficient in wheat, most meats and eggs.
More than 50% of the vegetables the country eats are grown on UK farms - but only 16% of fruit.
And despite having a large fishing fleet, we are a net importer of seafood, because British consumers prefer fish caught outside of UK waters, such as cod.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 14^th, 2024 at 9:46am:

Bobby wants the UK to be dependent on Australia and others for its food. Bobby wants Australians to drop everything and be the UK's farmers and sheep herders. The UK has 62% food self-sufficiency which is below their objectives. Australia would not be internationally competitive in UK's needs which are vegetables, fruit, and fish.

I don't have the numbers but I strongly suspect that without EU tariffs and farmer subsidies -
we can provide better food and a lot cheaper than the POMs could produce it.

Bobby. wrote on Aug 14^th, 2024 at 7:31pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 14th, 2024 at 9:46am: Bobby wants the UK to be dependent on Australia and others for its food. Bobby wants Australians to drop everything and be the UK's farmers and sheep herders. The UK has 62% food self-sufficiency which is below their objectives. Australia would not be internationally competitive in UK's needs which are vegetables, fruit, and fish. I don't have the numbers but I strongly suspect that without EU tariffs and farmer subsidies - we can provide better food and a lot cheaper than the POMs could produce it.

LTYC strongly suspects otherwise.

The best solution for the UK is to import farmers from China. UK farmers are not productive and drive around in Range Rovers and spend too much time in pubs.

Bobby is not familiar with economic history. There was a committee of Australian economists in the 1920s that was tasked with considering the issue of the agricultural industry v the manufacturing industry protected by tariffs. The UK was pressing Australia to be only a food and minerals supplier. The committee determined that the best course for Australia was to support industrial development and impose tariffs on imported manufactured goods.

That led to the era of Australian manufacturing from the 1920s until the 1990s when manufacturing declined.

"The contribution of manufacturing to Australia's gross domestic product peaked in the 1960s at 25%, and had dropped to 13% by 2001–2 and 10.5% by 2005–6."

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 14^th, 2024 at 8:28pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 14th, 2024 at 7:31pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 14th, 2024 at 9:46am: Bobby wants the UK to be dependent on Australia and others for its food. Bobby wants Australians to drop everything and be the UK's farmers and sheep herders. The UK has 62% food self-sufficiency which is below their objectives. Australia would not be internationally competitive in UK's needs which are vegetables, fruit, and fish. I don't have the numbers but I strongly suspect that without EU tariffs and farmer subsidies - we can provide better food and a lot cheaper than the POMs could produce it. LTYC strongly suspects otherwise. Bobby is not familiar with economic history. There was a committee of Australian economists in the 1920s that was tasked with considering the issue of the agricultural industry v the manufacturing industry protected by tariffs. The UK was pressing Australia to be only a food and minerals supplier. The committee determined that the best course for Australia was to support industrial development and impose tariffs on imported manufactured goods. That led to the era of Australian manufacturing from the 1920s until the 1990s when manufacturing declined. "The contribution of manufacturing to Australia's gross domestic product peaked in the 1960s at 25%, and had dropped to 13% by 2001–2 and 10.5% by 2005–6."

I don't follow the point you're trying to make.
I'm talking about POMs getting a good deal.

Bobby. wrote on Aug 14^th, 2024 at 8:31pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 14th, 2024 at 8:28pm: Bobby. wrote on Aug 14th, 2024 at 7:31pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 14th, 2024 at 9:46am: Bobby wants the UK to be dependent on Australia and others for its food. Bobby wants Australians to drop everything and be the UK's farmers and sheep herders. The UK has 62% food self-sufficiency which is below their objectives. Australia would not be internationally competitive in UK's needs which are vegetables, fruit, and fish. I don't have the numbers but I strongly suspect that without EU tariffs and farmer subsidies - we can provide better food and a lot cheaper than the POMs could produce it. LTYC strongly suspects otherwise. Bobby is not familiar with economic history. There was a committee of Australian economists in the 1920s that was tasked with considering the issue of the agricultural industry v the manufacturing industry protected by tariffs. The UK was pressing Australia to be only a food and minerals supplier. The committee determined that the best course for Australia was to support industrial development and impose tariffs on imported manufactured goods. That led to the era of Australian manufacturing from the 1920s until the 1990s when manufacturing declined. "The contribution of manufacturing to Australia's gross domestic product peaked in the 1960s at 25%, and had dropped to 13% by 2001–2 and 10.5% by 2005–6." I don't follow the point you're trying to make. I'm talking about POMs getting a good deal.

Australians would like to get a good deal too.

Australian vegetable farmers are busy feeding New Zealand and nearby Asian countries. The UK imports bugger all Australian food before and after Brexit. Thereefore the EU was not the cause of the decline of food trade with the UK.

"Where does Australia export vegetables to?
In financial year 2023, the value of vegetable exports from Australia to New Zealand totaled 59.3 million Australian dollars. New Zealand was the leading export destination for Australian vegetable products, accounting for around 15 percent of the total value of vegetable exports.Jan 17, 2024"

aquascoot wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 12:44pm:

ltyc has posted something with which i agree has ltyc started on the narrow road to success ?

Not remotely possible

Laugh till you cry wrote on Aug 13^th, 2024 at 6:07pm:

Bobby. wrote on Aug 13th, 2024 at 3:31pm: The POMs were silly - after spending 100s of years building up an empire that gave us all the Commonwealth - they threw it all away to join the EU. their standard of living went down - the average British family could no longer afford a Sunday roast dinner of Australian or NZ lamb etc. - they had only bangers and mash and lived like Steptoe and Son. I worked in the UK 1977-1979. It was a terrible place with poverty and rubbish blowing about on the streets. UK families could not afford roast dinners of any kind, including road kill. Uk Wage growth from 1973 to 2024 did no more than match inflation. So UK citizens did not move ahead for 50 years. "Throughout the late 1960s and 1970s, the United Kingdom was sometimes characterized as the "sick man of Europe", first by commentators, and later at home by critics of the third Wilson/Callaghan ministry due to industrial strife and poor economic performance compared with other European countries." Joining the EU in 1973 saved the UK from total economic collapse: Quote: The average weekly wage in 1973 was £41.90 for a man and £23.10 for a woman, compared to £517 combined for both in 2013. [quote]1973 to 1975 Production stalled due to weak trade and the miners' strikes, leading to a three-day working week to save the country's electricity. Consumer spending was also down, due to high unemployment, low wages and uncertainty in the market. People's income accounts for around half of the income measure of GDP.

https://youtu.be/DiWomXklfv8[/quote]


Good God!  There's hope for you yet - now let's see you snatch defeat from the jaws of your victory in enlightened discussion..

The problem is that, compared to industry in other western nations like the United States, the UK, Canada, etc our industries aren't all that expensive. The problem is when we try to (or have to) compete with places like China, where they have workers earning a pittance and products being sold for less than those made here are undercutting our markets. The only way to compete would be for everyone to suddenly earn well below the minimum wage.

Australian manufacturing has fallen to ~5% of GDP. It was once bigger than the resources industry.

Can the government support policy revive a zombie? Are the carpet-baggers lining up for free money?

Why don't successful companies like Ansell diverge laterally instead of vertically?

The article below implies Australian manufacturing revival won't happen.

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/government-fund-wont-stop-australian-manufacturings-structural-decline/


Quote:

Government fund won’t stop Australian manufacturing’s structural decline 6 Oct 2020|David Uren The federal government sees the revival of Australian manufacturing as a matter of economic sovereignty, yet the annual national accounts highlight the enormity of the task it confronts. The government is establishing a $1.3 billion fund to cover up to a third of the cost of expanding a manufacturing plant to achieve economies of scale and up to half of the cost of projects to integrate products into global supply chains or bring new research into production. While there have been numerous government subsidy programs for manufacturers over the years, the investment fund concept is new and appears to be modelled on the Clean Energy Finance Corporation which has supported the expansion of solar and wind energy projects. There is déjà vu in the six priority sectors identified by the government that will be eligible for the new funding, which encompass resources, food and beverages, medical products, recycling and clean energy, defence, and space. The Abbott government’s 2014 industry plan established ‘growth centres’ for food and agribusiness, mining equipment, energy resources, medical technologies and advanced manufacturing. Indeed, the revival of manufacturing has been an ambition of successive governments. On being made leader of the Labor Party in 2007, Kevin Rudd memorably declared, ‘I don’t want to be a prime minister of a country that doesn’t make things anymore.’ As it happened, the Rudd government’s first year in office in 2008 marked the peak for manufacturing output, with the sector contributing $119.5 billion to GDP. The annual value of manufacturing production has dropped since then by $14.2 billion (after allowing for inflation). Manufacturing has been falling as a share of the economy for a lot longer than that, having peaked at more than 25% in the 1970s compared to just 5.5% now, but it’s only over the past 12 years that the sector’s actual output has dropped. Manufacturing was 40% larger than the resources industry, measured by its value added, in Rudd’s first year, but is now only two-thirds its size. The decline is destined to continue because investment has not even been keeping pace with the depreciation of existing plant and equipment, let alone providing a base for future growth. The value of machinery and equipment owned by manufacturing companies has fallen by $20 billion, a drop of 26%, since 2008 (again after allowing for inflation). This includes a 14% fall in IT hardware and a 32% drop in other electronic and electric equipment. This collapse has been precipitated by the iron law of market economies that says money and labour will flow to where the returns are greatest. And, over the past decade and a half, that has been to the resources and services sectors. The gains from the China-fuelled resources boom are obvious, but a perceptive comment by veteran industry analyst Phil Ruthven highlights the advantages of the services sector over manufacturing: The money exchanged from the time of production to consumption is much quicker, so there is a multiplier effect. You pay for breakfast in the morning, the waiter spends it visiting a doctor, the GP pays to get his lawn mown, and the gardener goes to the cinema that night. Try making and selling goods four times in a day. Manufacturing in Australia suffers from inescapable problems of distance from major markets and lack of scale, which mean it cannot overcome the disadvantage of its high labour costs, as do manufacturers in countries like Germany and Japan. Australian manufacturers are not hooked into the value chains that have reshaped global industry, with components made or assembled in different countries. The iPhone, for example, draws on components produced by 785 suppliers in 31 countries. As much as half of the value of China’s exports is generated in other countries which sell to China for assembly or further processing. For Australia, the import content of our exports is less than 20%. OECD research shows that to the extent Australian manufacturers form part of global value chains, they provide only the first links, exporting processed raw materials. Businesses do not send goods to Australia for further processing. The OECD says, ‘Australian manufacturing stands out as overall being less competitive’; it has an edge in only a small number of niches, such as non-ferrous metals, pulp and woodchips, and food and beverages—all low-technology industries. Competitive high-technology industries in Australia, such as pharmaceuticals, reflect multinational enterprises establishing local content in part to gain access to government procurement. ...

We sell Uranium processed ore known as Yellowcake but
we don't make the enriched Uranium rods used in nuclear reactor cores.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake

We miss out on a huge amount of money from not value adding to our commodities.

The same could be said of iron ore.
Most of BHPs steel plants are closed down now.
The Chinese make steel from our iron ore and sell it
even though our steel was a better quality.
The world prefers cheap sub standard Chinese steel.

Scammers will be lining up for free money from Governments and investors.

The Orbital engine was a scam.

https://www.amazon.com/Firepower-Spectacular-Fraud-Australian-History/dp/1741753554


Quote:

PERPETUAL MOTION Australian investors have long had a weakness for fuel-saving devices. Ever since Ralph Sarich appeared on the ABC television show The Inventors in 1972 and revealed a new type of engine, fortunes have been won and lost on assurances to revolutionise the car industry. Sarich's compact design promised more power, fewer emissions and significant fuel economy. The fact that his Orbital engine remained untested failed to dampen the resultant frenzy. Australia's largest company, BHP, formed a joint venture to develop the technology. Shares that once traded for 20 cents went to $24 each. Investors and analysts brimmed with confidence about the potential for lucrative multimillion-dollar contracts from big car manufacturers. Governments got involved. During the 1987 federal election campaign, the then prime minister, Bob Hawke, announced that $500 000 of taxpayers' money would be used to assess the viability of an Orbital engine manufacturing plant. He was responding to fears that Australia would lose the project to foreign interests. But the inflated confidence overlooked a number of fundamental problems. Key components of the Sarich engine couldn't be cooled. Others couldn't be readily lubricated. The engine was susceptible to overheating and was eventually deemed too impractical. By 2004, the Orbital Engine Company had accumulated losses of $480 million, and had defeated BHP, which unloaded its stock in 1998 and 1999 at prices below $1 per share. Sarich had been fortunate enough to get out sooner. He sold his shares for $3 each and did what every sensible millionaire does — he bought property in Perth's central business district. But the perceived success of Orbital spawned a number of imitators. In 1988, another radical engine design began making headlines. Split-Cycle Technology also promised more power, fewer emissions and better fuel economy. Rick Mayne, the New Zealand inventor, had appeared in Australia two years earlier. He had previously made his living selling caravans and trailers built from second-hand parts, arguing that because the material he used was second-hand, no sales tax was payable. Mayne sold shares to the general public in his new Split-Cycle venture without going through the usual step of listing on a stock exchange. Instead, trading in the shares occurred at the Split-Cycle headquarters on the Gold Coast and during sweaty revival-hall-style gatherings in packed hotel rooms. One story told by promoters was of the Split-Cycle dealer who made $139 000 running up and down between different floors of the Split-Cycle offices between buyers and sellers. Doctors, nightclub owners and accountants abandoned their careers to join the action, often contacting each other through newspaper advertisements, where the trading was perpetuated. An estimated 111 million shares changed hands. Stimulating the interest were Mayne's confident assertions. In 1992, he said his engine would be powering its first car within eighteen months. Soon after, he announced the multimillion-dollar sale of development rights to a Slovakian company. He also unveiled plans for an ambitious multi-billion-dollar joint research venture with four major American universities. The publicity-conscious Mayne enlisted the celebrity train robber Ronald Biggs as a representative, and hired three-time Formula One world champion Sir Jack Brabham to chair the company. At its peak, Split-Cycle was valued at more than $200 million. Mayne, as the biggest shareholder, was worth $50 million. In 1993, he was named as one of Australia's richest people, the owner of a string of exotic cars, including a $670 000 Lamborghini. That same year he was arrested when he returned to his native New Zealand for evading a $1 million tax bill on the caravans and trailers. The tax dispute was settled, but Mayne eventually shuffled off into the sunset, leaving behind thousands of empty-handed shareholders and a posse of frustrated corporate regulators. Market governance failed to save investors in Red River Limited, once one of the most traded stocks on the Australian Stock Exchange. The company's share price went from 9 cents in December 1993 to $1.85 in early May 1994 after it released test results on a device that claimed to radically reduce petrol consumption using a common garden hose. Red River had started life as a mining company, and its journey to automotive technology had involved prior stints importing waterbeds, trading confectionery and managing time-share properties. But it hit the big time when tests on its contraption the Econo Power apparently showed a 75 per cent fuel saving on a 1986 Holden Commodore driven over a distance of 1400 kilometres, without any loss of performance or other adverse occurrences. The Econo Power involved installing a separate water tank in the boot of the car, converting the water into vapour, then combining it with petrol before injecting the mixture into the engine. The company was expected to complete further independent trials with a major automotive company or university within four months. But only days after going public with the test result, the car burst into flames. ...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 14^th, 2024 at 9:35pm:

The problem is that, compared to industry in other western nations like the United States, the UK, Canada, etc our industries aren't all that expensive. The problem is when we try to (or have to) compete with places like China, where they have workers earning a pittance and products being sold for less than those made here are undercutting our markets. The only way to compete would be for everyone to suddenly earn well below the minimum wage.

And that, my son, is why we must first divorce ourselves from the mythical 'global economy and the associated 'global society' so beloved of all of our politicians.   The only way to do that is to get rid of the current parties and rebuild from the ground up.

Bobby is right on the money about 'value adding'  ..... if any of you imagine the current approach is the best option - get out and do what (gasps) LTYC posted yesterday ...  good old Grapplerdamus posted this for yez years ago... and you continue to tear down the country and its people for your Dark City ideologies .....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Dk1O1Tyhu4

Grapps,

Quote:

Bobby is right on the money about 'value adding'

Of course I'm right.
Value adding involves risk and the bean counters are only after quick, easy profits.

We also need to market ourselves better -
e.g.

Buy our steel and your bridge won't fall down.
We sell quality.