Posts in ‘Economics’

Your benefits may not be so well-defined

Saturday, July 18th, 2009

The letter came in last week, and already seems to have been swallowed in the paper clutter. So I can only paraphrase (which is surely better than mis-quoting.) They were writing about the Defined Benefits scheme, and its sustainability. Some figures about what their actuaries said, some percentages and some comforting words about not cutting […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Ronda Jambe at 7:30 am | Comments Off on Your benefits may not be so well-defined |
Filed under: Economics

China and the US – conjoined at the hippocket

Wednesday, May 27th, 2009

Last night George Friedman, founder of the Stratfor forecasting company, spoke at the ANU. He was sceptical about claims of impending doom for the US economy, and not, he made clear, because he loves the culture there. Rather he pointed to vast size of the US megalith, which dwarfs the total of the next 3 […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Ronda Jambe at 9:53 am | Comments (3) |
Filed under: Economics

Hitchhikers guide to economics

Friday, February 6th, 2009

Appropriately enough, if you have read the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, or heard the original BBC Radio series, this post is driven entirely by coincidence. But has it struck anyone as a little odd that the answer to the current GFC is $42 billion, an answer which is derived from a model in a […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Graham at 10:01 am | Comments Off on Hitchhikers guide to economics |
Filed under: Economics

Cash grants versus tax cuts

Friday, February 6th, 2009

(Cross posted from What the people want) Federal Parliamentarians are debating whether tax cuts or cash grants are more effective in encouraging spending. Our research suggests that it probably doesn’t make much difference. Between January 30 and February 3, 1573 Australians gave us their views on politics and the economy. This research is qualitative, and […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Graham at 8:30 am | Comments (1) |
Filed under: Economics

More evidence please

Thursday, February 5th, 2009

Kevin Rudd should be thanking Malcolm Turnbull for holding up his $42 billion recession buster bill. Not only will a process of review make the bill better, but he now has an opportunity to demonise the opposition and drive their vote down even further. And we need a better process of review. How is anyone […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Graham at 8:31 am | Comments (8) |
Filed under: Economics

Panic stations

Wednesday, February 4th, 2009

The Australian government has announced a $42 billion “rescue” package for the Australian economy. What sort of economic analysis says that we have gotten ourselves into trouble by maxing out the collective credit card to buy consumer goods, so here is another credit card, max this one out too and buy, buy buy, that will […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Graham at 7:53 am | Comments (5) |
Filed under: Economics

Will the real capitalists please stand up?

Monday, January 26th, 2009

And perhaps define yourselves. Along with most of the general public, I am now very confused about exactly what kind of economy we are running. Just about all US politicans, and nearly all true-blue Aussie officials, of both parties, reflexively shun labels such as ‘socialist’ or ‘nationalisation’. Terms such as ‘the market’, or ‘free enterprise’, […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Ronda Jambe at 2:05 pm | Comments (11) |
Filed under: Economics

Unions have the power to check executive pay

Thursday, October 23rd, 2008

Kevin Rudd has declared war on “extreme capitalism”, by which he mostly seems to mean obscene executive rewards. But you have to ask yourself what the unions have been doing. One of the consequences of the introduction of compulsory superannuation was the establishment of industry super-funds with significant union representation on their boards. These funds […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Graham at 9:17 am | Comments (4) |
Filed under: Economics

The bailout -stealing in plain view

Friday, October 3rd, 2008

It is almost beyond belief that the Congress of the US is likely to pass the huge bailout. Can it be the pork features that have been added, such as a half billion dollar tax cut for the film industry and subsidies for manufacturers of wooden arrows, have been aimed at individual recluctant members of […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Ronda Jambe at 12:18 am | Comments (2) |
Filed under: Economics

‘P’ stands for ‘Petrac’ and ‘Pear-shaped’

Thursday, October 2nd, 2008

Things look like they have turned pear-shaped for Queensland developer Petrac. Last year they had $200 million in projects, this year it is $100 million – same projects, different value. They were not shy borrowers, so somewhere between the two values lies the loss that their lenders are likely to suffer. Petrac is today looking […]

Continue Reading...
Posted by Graham at 5:58 pm | Comments (3) |
Filed under: Economics