“Labor could introduce a super-profits tax to take the pressure off inflation, but they’re too busy protecting their corporate mates.”   

freediver wrote on Sep 7^th, 2024 at 7:59am:



But it was the RBA that printed all the money that caused high inflation.

They should have said NO to the Govt. when Govt bonds were issued -
and not printed money to pay for them.
We are still going into more National Govt. debt.
It's now $1.2 trillion as we live way beyond our means:

Australian Debt Clock
http://australiandebtclock.com.au/

This is why the greens are right.  Of course some people will use scare tactics though.  We need a super profit tax.   

whiteknight wrote on Sep 7^th, 2024 at 11:16am:



Sure we do, but that has little to do with interest rates.

John Smith wrote on Sep 7^th, 2024 at 12:41pm:


The Greens: “If Labor really cared about people being smashed by rising rates, they’d stop siding with the RBA and use the power they have to bring down interest rates.”

Unfortunately the Greens' spokesman didn't say  - as you correctly noted  - what power Labor has to bring down interest rates, and how they would do it, which is why the Greens answer to economc hardship is tax increases on the wealthty and big companies - non starters for politicians who have to get elected.      

That's because the Greens - like everyone else - don't want to explore altenatives to our obsolete mainstream neoclassical/neoliberal economies, with politicians hiding behind the "independent central bank" dogma.

The RBA was never independent.  but you are right about the appointment of yet another old mate from the barricades -  if you've served your time in some minor and ultimately forgettable 'war' for women or something - why - you could be a 'governor-general'!!

What's wrong with Labor these days?  THAT!!  It's all about getting a great gig for self and your old frontline mates who've done not a thing of use in life other than carry on the same as those lunatics who camp outside universities to support Hamas.

I'll call this one the Higgins Syndrome - how to become a high-ranking millionaire without work by becoming a Joan of Arc for 'women's rights', or something else trendy and totally unfounded in reality.

Men have been sitting on the rough end of the pineapple since the 1980's - and it began earlier with free uni and women with time on their hands flocking to them and building up numbers - now look at them - disasters from start to finish, same as politics and the public service and many professions... I looked up my doppleganger - Professor of Medicine - and what did I find? Five out of six 'professors' of medicine in that uni are now women.  As in WTF?

Did men suddenly become too stupid to handle the structures and jobs they designed, built, maintained and extended for generations, or is it so weak and powerless and without balls that they just allow this matriarchy to dominate and control and take all power positions?

Anyone?  If you want an example of how a matriarchy runs things into the ground - look at the NT government.... then cast your eyes on AlboGuv Inc..... and the Jobs for the Girls Scandals time and again.

Feminism is the greatest danger to Western social fabric, national security, and economic stability - and is the root cause of all the 'whinge until you get' idiotologies doing the rounds these days.  Every swinging tit that comes along with a Manifesto uses the now well-trodden path to Victory Uber Alles that was worn by the feminists - whinge, cry, carry on about feelings, be 'offended' by everything instead of growing up, say you are oppressed, rave about 'rights', any lie will do if repeated over and over (wage gap lie) ... and Bob who was your uncle is now your auntie and wants his balls cut off so he can share in the lovely... artificial advancement, coddling over everything, special this and special that, time off for feelings, right to make accusations without challenge ... the list grows and grows.  32 years of lunging the knives at men over any claimed or perceived possibility of a fight, and stealing their families and assets without any essence of fairness or decency, and they still don't get it.... the violent approach to men IS violence - it will never PREVENT violence but will instead leave another long chain of angry victims.  HELLO!!

Good men can't even get a decent gig in the Armed Services unless they take the hard and dangerous work - the engineer officers I used to know were often big blokes who could hold up the front of a Land Rover with one hand... now the bosses are sheilas ... will the young men of Australia - who WILL be the ones called upon in a real emergency - actually bother to defend a nation that has betrayed them?  How many women have passed through the British Parachute Regiment's training for full Para? NONE!  They don't like the mud, the hefty packs, and the thirty mile cross-countries etc, not to mention constant running here and there.

Sgt Guarnere:- "They can shoot me. I am NOT jumping into China under command of that woman..."

Bump for FD.

Bobby. wrote on Sep 7^th, 2024 at 2:47pm:


People did, by being overconfident.

The reserve bank goes a long way to reducing macroeconomic cycles. That is what it is there for. Since the reserve bank became independent, our highest inflation rates always coincided with the reserve bank doing the opposite of "printing money".

I know you say it Bobby. But why do you say it? Is someone telling you to?

Bobby. wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 8:56am:


How about we jump straight to the end Bobby, rather than me trying to figure out why you think the things you do from the inane questions you ask. Would you mind pointing out which high inflation you are accusing the reserve bank of causing? Then tell us what the RBA was doing in terms of "printing money" prior to the high inflation? Or is the extent of your argument based on the theoretical possibility that the reserve bank could do what you accuse it of, if it did the opposite of what it has been doing for the last three decades?

https://www.rba.gov.au/inflation/measures-cpi.html

I am talking about the facts Bobby. Not the spin doctoring from journalists desperate for something worth reporting on. I cannot explain why you get so scared every time you read  a newspaper, so there is no point asking me to.

I have no idea why that scares you Bobby. Like I said, there is no point asking me for an explanation.

Quote:


Only to you Bobby. No-one else cares.

Sir lastnail wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 1:45pm:



How depressing to pay $1.37 million and to work all your life for a dump like that.  WTF?

The pictures look like a nightmare.

Sir lastnail wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 1:50pm:



Look out the back - it's full of asbestos.
That can't be renovated.

Sir lastnail wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 2:05pm:



But it didn't scare FD.

here again:

https://www.domain.com.au/59-rowntree-street-birchgrove-nsw-2041-2019401686

Quick question-

Does Jim charmers ears travel on there own passports?

I mean, wtf?

They are bigger than most business profits!!

Bobby. wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 2:11pm:


Listen dumbarse, because you are soooooo stuupid, I feel the need to point out to you that the price is pretty much just land value.

The tin shed is free.

What a bargain.


And if you spend $500k fixing it like sirshitforbarns claims , you'll can sell it for anywhere between $2m to $2.2m.

$200 to $400k profit for 6 months work ....

thats why you and nails will never move out of your housing commission flats, you're lazy spongers to scared to get your hands dirty

Bobby. wrote on Sep 9^th, 2024 at 8:45am:



You're not supposed to eat it goober

goosecat wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 3:02pm:


Excellent post.

He asks (in the video, after stating government is financed by treasury bonds, not taxes): "how does the Fed buy bonds"?

Answer: "by printing money. So basically you finance the government by printing money out of thin air.


2nd question: "If the government can print unlimited amounts of money out of thin air, why do they collect taxes.?"

"The answer is shocking: it's to uphold the illusion you are funding the government, which you are not.

"Paper backed by paper, a bubble which will inevitably burst"
.....

Observation: after correctly explaining how government is financed, he goes astray with the 2nd question, because he doesn't understand MMT.

The government can theoretically print unlimited amounts of money, but in practice money printing is limited by the nation's available resources, to avoid inflation

Milton Friedman - and the current crop of neoclassical economists - did/do not understand this.

The mainstream says 'money doesn't grow on trees' which is true, (apples do); but money  IS always created out of thin air, whether in private banks when they write loans for credit worthy customers, or in the government's Treasury to fund government.   

[Put another way, as  Keynes knew: "if you (the govt.)  can build it, you can afford it", also an MMT axiom].


So his worry that "paper backed by paper' will eventually result in the collapse of the US is unfounded:  US debt can increase indefinitely, so long as the nation's productive capacity remains intact.
(US debt is projected to be $100 trillion by 2030, but it's immaterial: the US government cannot run-out of US dollars).

As Alan Kohler correctly stated in the article I linked in another post (available in the MMT thread): governments will HAVE to accept growing public debt, if they want to get elected, and supply the services people want, without raising taxes (as fewer workers will be available to pay tax when the population ages - as per the mainstream myth).   

The RBA is 100% independent of government.

lee wrote on Sep 9^th, 2024 at 5:34pm:



yes - printing as much money as the Govt asks for -

forgetting all about Zimbabwe.    

Bobby. wrote on Sep 9^th, 2024 at 3:25pm:


You never learn,  you just repeat old orthodoxy.

Note: in the US, despite its debt expected to reach $100 trillion by 2030, inflation is falling.

And average incomes can and will still buy a loaf of bread with a few dollars, despite the cost of living crisis; one problem is Musk is expected to become the world's first trillionaire by 2030, an amazing example of market failure and mal-distribution of income......

goosecat wrote on Sep 9^th, 2024 at 8:45pm:


The Greens have the "balls" to increase taxes, but the problem is economic orthodoxy - and the powerful, wealthy portion of the electorate with its self interest, is against higher taxes. .

Solution: 

The RBA should be demoted to a 'clearing house' for private banks.

The nation's Treasury - issuer of the currency - should ensure sufficient money suppy for the public sector, consistent with resources available for purchase by the government (MMT), to avoid inflation.   

Official government interest rates should be near zero, in a mandated full employment scenario (see the 'variable pool' Job Guarantee concept); private banks can compete on loans and interest rates. 

I'm almost hoping Albo - following economic orthodoxy -loses the next election (the ALP's primary vote is c. 30% and falling -dismal); yet people know the Coalition are even less likely to support wanted government spending on housing, health and education. 

Interest rates will stay where they are through this year. The risk is that dropping interest rates will encourage inflation in the opinion of the RBA. They likely try a drop around next March. I doubt there is much risk.

Dnarever wrote on Sep 10^th, 2024 at 10:24pm:


Yeh - and Albo's popularity is sinking like a stone result, because  some mortagees are forced to sell,  and a majority of the population - mortagees plus renters are suffering.

Quote:


That's the opinion of mainstream neoclassical economists - witch-doctors all of them -  including Bullock who said: "people should stop getting haircuts and dental treatment".... the pathetic bitch is getting paid a million bucks to spout crap such as that (...good work if you can get it...) 

Quote:


The risk is recession and the ALP losing the election.

thegreatdivide wrote on Sep 11^th, 2024 at 4:34pm:

Mortgagors, renters, the homeless, the poor etc etc, have always been most affected by supply and demand issues throughout all human existence, under every different economic system tried.

thegreatdivide wrote on Sep 11^th, 2024 at 4:28pm:



About the only thing I've heard from you of late I agree with.

goosecat wrote on Sep 11^th, 2024 at 5:54pm:


From a google article  on inflation in the Soviet command economy:

"The Soviet system of price controls prevented inflation, but it also created persistent shortages of food and consumer goods".

There's a clue to a functional economic system: if a nation  can create sufficient productive capacity (or even excess capacity , as in China which is now experiencing deflation), then price controls on essential goods and services will be a superior method of inflation cotrol.

Obsolete mainstream economic orthodoxy is accusing   China of "overcapacity", which is nonsense; "overcapacity" means prices can fall, enabling living standards to rise, without inflation.

Unfortunately, China hasn't woken up yet that it's Treasury can subsidize Chinese consumption by low wage earners, to increase effective local demand  while the West is trying to lock China out of its (US and EU) markets because the West can't compete eg in EVs and PVs. 

Today Bernie Fraser (former RBA governor) has said the RBA is causing too much distress with its interest rate policy.

He's correct, but he didn't say what the RBA SHOULD be doing.

Such is the consequence of following flat-earth, obsolete mainstream neoclassical economics as some sort of unchangeable law of nature, like gravity.   

And just like that we see yet more evidence of low IQ thinkers masquerading as something other, ensconced in a sea of Dunning Kruger reality.
The RBA is but a product and indeed creation of the political system. It has a limited amount of tools to use to help the ill-informed, self deluded, uneducated masses regarding "living within your means" and it's affects on inflation.
You should be able to read the tea leaves and see why multiple sources go on about things like buying coffee every day and Hairdresser visits etc but the masses are generally stupid and need protecting from themselves at times.
If you keep paying the exorbitant price of any item, the supplier will keep raising the prices until you don't. If you want more direct government interference and price setting control, than that should be your target and argument.
In the meantime the RBA is doing exactly as it must. Forcing the average imbecile, as much as possible within their available tools, to stop underwriting price increases by continuing to demonstrate the inability to understand the importance of actually saying and demonstrating the maxim; "bugger you price gouging suppliers, we're not paying that,"
If it requires better education throughout the education system at all levels to grasp that foundational truth, then that is another target to aim at.

goosecat wrote on Sep 12^th, 2024 at 2:04pm:


Your error: some products and services are essential (non-discretionary) purchases; the RBA - following your obsolete orthodoxy - blithely ignores that reality.

But you are correct in that the RBA is only 'following  the current rules of the system', which is why it is  "crashing the economy" to control inflation, as examined by ABC's business reporter Gareth Hutchins:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-09-08/is-the-reserve-bank-to-blame-for-people-s...

Is it the Reserve Bank's fault that some people might have to sell their homes?
........

Hutchins concludes: "What will it take for policymakers to explore alternative ways of doing things, as Phil Lowe suggested, so the burden of inflation control is felt more evenly by the community?

goosecat wrote on Sep 16^th, 2024 at 9:44am:


You wrote:

(Low IQ people showing) .

That says consumers have to tell Coles and Woolies (who have  70% of the retail food market) "we aren't going to buy food until you lower your prices".

What do you think you imagined you said?

Quote:


...who are f**kwits  who think its ok to increase  unemployment and force mortgagees to sell their homes to control inflation (as Hutchens examined).

Quote:


Bullock was the complete and utter fool who said expenditure on haircuts and dental  treatment was causing inflation.

Quote:


Exactly, but the problem is obsolete mainstream neoclassical economists including the fools running the RBA DON'T want governments to take control of markets; and politicians are committed to the 'independence' of the  RBA so they ALSO don't have to be responsible for demand control.   

Quote:


So you are incapable of exploring the urgent need for alternative RBA tools,  as Hutchens called for.

goosecat wrote on Sep 16^th, 2024 at 1:39pm:


Notice:  you can't address what Bullock actually said (following  her mainstream neoclassical idiocy)  so you attempt to change the narrative displaying your own idiocy, namely, attempting to show non-discretionary spending is discretionary.  Why are food prices increasing?

Quote:


I ask again, why are food prices increasing?

Quote:


Most people suffering the current cost of living crisis aren't buying cars, they are forced to choose between paying rent, or sellling their home, or turning on the heater, or buying healthy food. 

Your classical economics' blindness is egregious.

Quote:


If you are ideologically blinded by "the dismal science" - obsolete in a world of plenty.

Quote:


That's right, which is why the Greens want rent controls.

The actual solution to rising house and rental price increases is recreation of a public housing department; the private sector has created the current massive market failure - to house everyone affordably. 

Quote:


Addressed and refuted above; you are merely displaying the egregious results of blind, obsolete economic orthodoxy.

Start using your brain:

If the treasury of a currency-issuing government issues 'debt' (via money created out of thin air), to whom is the 'debt' owed?