'Australian disease' has entered its terminal phase

[damoose]

And this would certainly help any industry we had left

http://www.theage.com.au/business/ma...212-32iib.html

[b0son]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

they could always stand down ingovt and let labor take over and re introduce an employment agenda , starting with science

science = public servants. you don't improve the economy by making the government bigger. as a former scientist, I can tell you, that sector wastes a huge amount of funding, and too much is spent on basic rather than applied research.

and big business taxes

tax = cost. increase my taxes, and I have to trim costs in other areas (eg. staff levels) or pass those costs on where I can (ie. inflation). neither are good for the economy.

throw some $$$$ out there to save some companies

when we had the dollars for such purposes, your precious Labor government decided that money was best spent on dropkicks to buy playstations. BER was a giant time-waster, building infrastructure that had no impact on improving productivity.

introduce new innovative economic energy investment , all being financed by revenue created by resources and banking taxes and essential services .

we had a carbon tax, but instead of using that to fund research and development of renewable energy, creating jobs/industries and possible export opportunities, the Labor government decided to supplement low income earners instead.

[Trump]

It shocks me that people believe that the financial sector is sustainable and able to absorb the jobs lost from manufacturing. It is built on the premise of exponential growth and fuelled by ever increasing levels of debt.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

You are absolutely right and that’s what I said. traditionally manufacturing absorbed displaced agriculture workers and more recently service industries absorbed the displacement of manufacturing in providing employment. Today, unique in history, I don’t think either can provide long term refuge for any other sector employees. All are suffering massive staff downsizing due to technological automation, robots and software. I believe it to be true that our children will be doing jobs we haven’t thought about yet, and the economy needs that otherwise there is nobody to buy stuff.

Your question about my competition with overseas competitors while holistically I agree, like for like skills, service and all the other guff etc the cheaper fee will win out. Where I believe Australia should head as a manufacturing base and where I have personally gone is into high end, complex, ultra specialist products or services. I survive because not many people in my industry, globally, can do what I do or have the experience and knowledge I have. Probably 1-2000 people globally which is pretty niche but I will admit won’t last forever as the world doesn’t need what I do as much anymore as there is only so many widgets the world needs. But I should see out my days doing this.
JP

Agreed, it will be very interesting to see what jobs our children are doing. I was tempted to push my children towards certain industries but I would prefer them to choose what they want to do.

Hopefully the world needs your services for as long as you want to work.

Personally I prefer Australia to have a diverse range of industries and services, so if one is struggling people can move to another industry. However at the moment I see several industries suffering, which I believe will add to Australia unemployment rate and put pressure on our economy.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

It shocks me that people believe that the financial sector is sustainable and able to absorb the jobs lost from manufacturing. It is built on the premise of exponential growth and fuelled by ever increasing levels of debt.

Add to that the financial sector is not immune to overseas competition. Our banks have already moved elements of the operations overseas and will continue to do so.

[fte50]

And to add to that, our banks have borrowed their reserves from international lenders.
Its only a matter of time, and when things tighten further o/s and the big lenders chase what they're owed, our banks could cripple.
Considering their obligation is to repay their debt, they have the legal capacity to claim all deposits as their own money, basically rob you of your deposits and leave you with nothing - Just as Cyprus did.
If you think this cant happen in Australia, think again. And its 100% legal !

[ryeman]

Originally Posted by SB076

I don't think the service industry is immune to what is happening. For instance how do you think you would fare competing against a similar qualified personal to yourself, but based overseas?

I know a few large companies that have outsourced the entire accounting department off shore.

Manufacturing is an important industry (before anyone starts all industry is important) Studies have been done that show every one manufacturing job spins off 5 other jobs.

I was lucky to go overseas last year and see what governments were doing to entice business (provide jobs) I think as we got through the GFC better than most we are a bit more complacent (in our policies etc)

I said before, nobody should assume fund management/investment advice cannot be done from India or by Indian owned companies as an example not to mention the dreaded Chinese.
Anglo Saxons need to wake up and understand what's going on in the wider world or we will be paying rent to foreigners just to live here.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by ryeman

I said before, nobody should assume fund management/investment advice cannot be done from India or by Indian owned companies as an example not to mention the dreaded Chinese.
Anglo Saxons need to wake up and understand what's going on in the wider world or we will be paying rent to foreigners just to live here.

One of the links I put up before describes software that has enough AI to do exactly that at greater efficiency and accuracy and doesn't need sleep. I think the last bastion of humanity is complex creativity, and the gut feel intuition fields.
There has actually been a book written by AI (described as acceptable) and music is quite often improved through Inteligent software. Dont assume anything.

JP

[Trump]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

One of the links I put up before describes software that has enough AI to do exactly that at greater efficiency and accuracy and doesn't need sleep. I think the last bastion of humanity is complex creativity, and the gut feel intuition fields.
There has actually been a book written by AI (described as acceptable) and music is quite often improved through Inteligent software. Dont assume anything.

JP

I see one major obstacle to employing AI in financial matters. If implemented, it would essentially remove the ability to do insider trading and the usual market manipulations and rorts that are a part of the everyday financial world. Those that benefit most from the current financial paradigm would scream blue murder at the mere thought of AI shutting down their racket.

[cheap]

Fixing the mess, 5 things to stop unemployment from getting worse (as per Economic Professor Sinclair Davidson)

1) Massive tax cuts at both Federal and State level. Top rate a flat 30% (big call). Short term pain long term gain. Think about it, workers given an incentive to work rather than the current situation where half our pay goes to Canberra. More disposable income, people have some money to actually do stuff.

2) Big cuts in Government
a) Cuts to industry policy - don't give money to companies that don't need it e.g. SPC
b) Big cuts to Foreign Aid
c) Research cuts to CSIRO
d) Sell the ABC

3) Cut Green and Red tape
a) remove mandatory renewable targets - these have done nothing except cause massive price increases to energy
b) remove red tape which hinders business from doing business

4) Liberalise the Labor Market. For example Toyota wanted to change their EBA, rather than give workers the option to vote on a new EBA, the union took Toyota to court. In the meantime Toyota says to hard and pulls the pin. It is unacceptable to have a situation where the EBA process is used "against" workers such that workers lose their jobs.

5) Liberalise the housing market. Work is dynamic and moving all around (personally we once relocated 7 times in a 24 month period). Relocation is now the norm and you have got to make it easier for people to relocate, release more land, reduce stamp duties, reduce infrastructure levies. All these things add to the huge prices we pay for housing. Situations where people can not get to new jobs, because they're stuck where they are and can not afford to buy/sell.

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by cheap

Fixing the mess, 5 things to stop unemployment from getting worse (as per Economic Professor Sinclair Davidson)

1) Massive tax cuts at both Federal and State level. Top rate a flat 30% (big call). Short term pain long term gain. Think about it, workers given an incentive to work rather than the current situation where half our pay goes to Canberra. More disposable income, people have some money to actually do stuff.

2) Big cuts in Government
a) Cuts to industry policy - don't give money to companies that don't need it e.g. SPC
b) Big cuts to Foreign Aid
c) Research cuts to CSIRO
d) Sell the ABC

3) Cut Green and Red tape
a) remove mandatory renewable targets - these have done nothing except cause massive price increases to energy
b) remove red tape which hinders business from doing business

4) Liberalise the Labor Market. For example Toyota wanted to change their EBA, rather than give workers the option to vote on a new EBA, the union took Toyota to court. In the meantime Toyota says to hard and pulls the pin. It is unacceptable to have a situation where the EBA process is used "against" workers such that workers lose their jobs.

5) Liberalise the housing market. Work is dynamic and moving all around (personally we once relocated 7 times in a 24 month period). Relocation is now the norm and you have got to make it easier for people to relocate, release more land, reduce stamp duties, reduce infrastructure levies. All these things add to the huge prices we pay for housing. Situations where people can not get to new jobs, because they're stuck where they are and can not afford to buy/sell.

WOW . It's very interesting to read such a right wing take on things .i'm not going to tell you your wrong . I'm just going to say that from the opposite left view . this looks like a high school essay .no1 . massive tax cuts . hmm , there are 10 000 000 people with an income and paying tax , out of 23 000 000 people . and these 10 million need govt assistance with medicine , health and education too .

2. let companies fold . doesnt seem to be working

3. what sort of red tape . the kind of tape that says , climb up there and do this , and if you fall can we have your number so we can call someone to pick you up .

4. let the company not adhere to rules , so get some indian kids to take over some of the easier work maybe to save the company ,

5. tend to agree here . however tough on the family . kids leaving friends etc spouses having to leave there job to follow a partner .

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by cheap

Fixing the mess, 5 things to stop unemployment from getting worse (as per Economic Professor Sinclair Davidson)
a) Cuts to industry policy - don't give money to companies that don't need it e.g. SPC

I believe the Victorian government bailed out SPC which is good news.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-1...rdmona/5257564

[cheap]

Originally Posted by trublu

I believe the Victorian government bailed out SPC which is good news.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-1...rdmona/5257564

Exactly the point, SPC are profitable, so why did our money go to their bailout. Some people need to get the message that the government is not there to bailout everyone. We have Richard Branson (of all people) crying poor - go figure?

[mik]

It's amusing that some think putting the other mob in will make things betterer(yes i ment to spell it that way )...... when in fact they played a pivotal policy role in getting us to where we stand today..................

[fte50]

Originally Posted by trublu

I believe the Victorian government bailed out SPC which is good news.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-1...rdmona/5257564

Funny that, I spoke to a fella from SPC tonight and he tells me they are still being made redundant.
Didn't elaborate further as he was busy ... I myself am confused.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by fte50

Funny that, I spoke to a fella from SPC tonight and he tells me they are still being made redundant.

They are increasing the level of automation.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by b0son

They are increasing the level of automation.

I think Ardmona were upfront in asking for money to help 'modernise' their factories. In my mind modernise is to automate to increase production while reducing labor input machines can make and fill cans better than people today, cost less in the short term and work faultlessly without pee stops.
And nobody asked the question is this a good thing?

JP

[irish2]

The SPC thing is bad in two ways. If they close the workers and farmers lose out. If they get more automation, the factory workers lose out, but the farmers still operate as per normal.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by irish2

The SPC thing is bad in two ways. If they close the workers and farmers lose out. If they get more automation, the factory workers lose out, but the farmers still operate as per normal.

assuming they don't start canning imported fruit. oh wait, they do ....

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by mik

It's amusing that some think putting the other mob in will make things betterer(yes i ment to spell it that way )...... when in fact they played a pivotal policy role in getting us to where we stand today..................

this govt are the best finger pointers in this century . but starange its all happening now , when theyre in govt . new slogan . ( it's ok , it wasnt me )
i wonder if they will get elected next time with this educated slogan , with their educated voters..... we're betterer we promise .

[jpblue1000]

I’m not defending or attacking either party, ideology or person. But Unemployment can be a good thing for an economy. Never a good thing for the individual and their families though.
A slowdown in spending, through employment falling has several benefits governments may pursue which will have benefit to the longer term economy. Usually we can’t see the reasoning as no politician is coming out to declare this is the unemployment we had to have...
Macroeconomics theoretically dictates an optimum unemployment rate for given scenarios, how the government of the day achieves this is what history will judge them by.
They will also be judged by who they help and who they will let fall through the net. Electorate favouritism or vote seeding is dangerous and can lead to effective punishment in susceptible jurisdictions for voting a particular way.

An aside, Dubais government has just launched a pilot program of delivery by drones which the likes of google and amazon have been testing for some time. The end of traditional couriers is nigh over the next 10-15 years

JP

[CAMS290]

The aging population is going to be the biggest economic challenge for Australia in years to come and the high level of unemployment will only make things worse. There is only a very small percentage of self funded retirees, massive pressure placed on the health system and social welfare system, that coupled with a shrinking manufacturing base, high unemployment, and ever increasing cost of living is going to make things very interesting.
I can envisage that at some stage retirees will have to forfeit their family home in some kind of Govt mortgage that will ensure their pension benefits until they die and the govt will recoup a percentage of their money upon sale of the property.

Constructive thoughts on the subject anyone !

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by CAMS290

The aging population is going to be the biggest economic challenge for Australia in years to come and the high level of unemployment will only make things worse. There is only a very small percentage of self funded retirees, massive pressure placed on the health system and social welfare system, that coupled with a shrinking manufacturing base, high unemployment, and ever increasing cost of living is going to make things very interesting.
I can envisage that at some stage retirees will have to forfeit their family home in some kind of Govt mortgage that will ensure their pension benefits until they die and the govt will recoup a percentage of their money upon sale of the property.

Constructive thoughts on the subject anyone !

Your right!

Cant see any government changing the rules about pensions etc for a while given the BBoomers still wierld very large social sticks. And its their 'god given right' to recieve what they 'have been promised all these years'.

This employment slump wil only last 3-5 maybe 6 years then back to Normal (when will we learn) until the next time 15 years hence.

Manufacturing slump?, from todays 8 percent of GDP wont affect retirees...they dont work in any job let alone manufacturing.

Soylent green anyone.

JP

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by CAMS290

The aging population is going to be the biggest economic challenge for Australia in years to come and the high level of unemployment will only make things worse. There is only a very small percentage of self funded retirees, massive pressure placed on the health system and social welfare system, that coupled with a shrinking manufacturing base, high unemployment, and ever increasing cost of living is going to make things very interesting.

I hadn't thought about that. QFT.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by CAMS290

The aging population is going to be the biggest economic challenge for Australia in years to come and the high level of unemployment will only make things worse. There is only a very small percentage of self funded retirees, massive pressure placed on the health system and social welfare system, that coupled with a shrinking manufacturing base, high unemployment, and ever increasing cost of living is going to make things very interesting.
I can envisage that at some stage retirees will have to forfeit their family home in some kind of Govt mortgage that will ensure their pension benefits until they die and the govt will recoup a percentage of their money upon sale of the property.

Constructive thoughts on the subject anyone !

Retiree's can currently reverse mortgage their home (not saying its a good idea just letting you know options) There is a large % of Australia's population that is at or close to retirement age (Baby boomers) They do have considerable wealth and they also have significant political power (number of votes) Governments know this so they need to keep them happy (need their vote or at least some of their vote) At this stage no government will tax super due to the above. However as the baby boomers reduce in number a government (labor or liberal) will tax super. There is so much money in super the government will not be able to keep their hands off it (and they will need the money)

[cheap]

Originally Posted by CAMS290

The aging population is going to be the biggest economic challenge for Australia in years to come and the high level of unemployment will only make things worse. There is only a very small percentage of self funded retirees, massive pressure placed on the health system and social welfare system, that coupled with a shrinking manufacturing base, high unemployment, and ever increasing cost of living is going to make things very interesting.
I can envisage that at some stage retirees will have to forfeit their family home in some kind of Govt mortgage that will ensure their pension benefits until they die and the govt will recoup a percentage of their money upon sale of the property.

Constructive thoughts on the subject anyone !

We're already there.

If a pensioner is living at home, then the house is not asset tested. But if they're widowed or a widower, and require high level care in a nursing home, they are fairly much forced to sell the family home to pay for the care.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by SB076

There is so much money in super the government will not be able to keep their hands off it (and they will need the money)

Whoever or whatever they are they can keep their ******* mits of my super.

Previous generations had the promise of a pension as thanks for their lifetime contribution. The retirement age was determined based on life expectancy such that the pension would only be paid for a reasonable short time. Of course the life expectancy of Baby boomers is so much better than expected but their health is as expected meaning longer periods of reliance on the healthcare system than had they just lied down and died.

Younger generations have had superannuation forced onto them to reduce reliance on the state once they cease working, a greater propensity for self funding their retirement, the age of which will be increased to match life expectancy and further reduce the likely impost on the community. (UK has started this process)

The question is how does our society pay for the baby boomers who had promises made and collectively are in no position to change direction now only a decade away from all of them being retired and dying and until they are just a memory they still wield significant financial, social and political clout

JP

[bungarra]

Originally Posted by SB076

At this stage no government will tax super due to the above. However as the baby boomers reduce in number a government (labor or liberal) will tax super. There is so much money in super the government will not be able to keep their hands off it (and they will need the money)

It was being considered by the previous government. It was in their review of the tax system and we all know, no matter which side of the political fence, if a governemnt can screw more out of us, they will.

[BHDOGS]

Im confused by super doesnt the business you work for pay it? and there raising it slowly to 12% if thats the case i think it should be taxed they could tax it at 2 or 3 percent and youd still be infront compared to the super you get today? or am i wrong?. This money business isnt my strong suite.

[Trump]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

Whoever or whatever they are they can keep their ******* mits of my super.

Previous generations had the promise of a pension as thanks for their lifetime contribution. The retirement age was determined based on life expectancy such that the pension would only be paid for a reasonable short time. Of course the life expectancy of Baby boomers is so much better than expected but their health is as expected meaning longer periods of reliance on the healthcare system than had they just lied down and died.

Younger generations have had superannuation forced onto them to reduce reliance on the state once they cease working, a greater propensity for self funding their retirement, the age of which will be increased to match life expectancy and further reduce the likely impost on the community. (UK has started this process)

The question is how does our society pay for the baby boomers who had promises made and collectively are in no position to change direction now only a decade away from all of them being retired and dying and until they are just a memory they still wield significant financial, social and political clout

JP

The problem is, we at the moment can't do sweet FA with whatever superannuation funds we have accrued over the years. Unless you go self managed, take the funds and buy bullion...

An old adage:

- You don't hold it, you don't own it.