This is nothing but a con invented by economic rationalists. Australia, NZ, UK etc all did fine until the mid 70's oil crisis. Then they all freaked out. The truth of the matter is that all of this 'global economics' is being driven by very powerful and influential people with an agenda, and no I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

As I said before if the world is a truly global marketplace and one with a level playing field then why is the US so protectionist when it comes to it's own domestic markets? Same reason we should be, that's why!

Supply and demand is simply a mechanism that can be manipulated to serve its masters, any kid in year 11 economics can tell you that.

Australian and NZ industries went under and thousands of jobs lost as we opened up the floodgates for cheap poor quality products from asia etc, many made in sweatshops.

In the US one major TV manufacturer moved base to mexico so they could pay 53c an hour wages.

Recently in Perth there was ahuge debacle over a company going to import stone slabs cut out of the rock in India using child labour... and so it goes on.

When maybe you're full of cancer cos of all the crap in some imported produce then don't go complaining about the 'free market' will you?

Maybe though it would have been more prudent in the long term for govt to protect local producers? At least we know their products meet Austrailain food safety standards, yet we allow Chinese produce in that doesn't.

The whole thing is nothing but a con job and it seems plenty are willing to swallow it.

Australia should quit sucking up to Asia and the US and look after itself and it's people.

As another poster said - correctly - Capitalism is a good slave but a poor master.

Simplistic people always seem to equate Capitalists with rich moguls in top hats and chauffeur-driven cadillacs, but the truth is that capitalism merely means that anyone can forgo immediate gratification for future reward.

Joe Bloggs can get his pay packet/salary and piss it all up against a wall. OTOH he can lend it for interest or buy a share in some industry. He forgoes the beer today and hopes to have a double scotch tomorrow. Elementary economics. It is actually what generates wealth for everyone.

OTOH you can have a centralised economy - which is just about, in many ways, what we have in Australia with the rules and regulations and union power and OTT beaurocracy. I agree that you will be living in LaLa land if you really imagine that Australia is up there with *real* economies - digging up WA and selling it to East Asia while going surfing isn't a real economy, it's living in denial.

They all freaked out m8 cos they realised the industrial revolution was at an end. The western world woke up to the reality that Service and IT was the key to the new century. Thing was, "they" also saw that the Asian countries were starting to win this one....and if "they" didn't pull their finger out and learn how to compete pretty smartish...then "they" would suffer. Added to this, the old British Empire was no more. Even more competition on a bigger playing field.

Because the USA can afford to be, that's why! When you are the Super Power, with a country and population that size, then you can afford to be self sufficient and tell the rest of the world it don't matter. Australia ......as much as we love it.....aint anything like in their league!

Yes, to a certain degree you are right. Some producers can deliberatly manipulate the supply to increase demand and vice versa. However economic pressure is ultimatly governed by world supply and demand, but again the strongest economies are the ones making all the decisions. And they only become strong if they are good at producing whatever the world requires, and at an acceptable cost!

Those "cheap poor quality products" must have been in demand, or else no one would buy them, and therefore no need for them to be imported / supplied.

Yep, and that's the danger ....hence the reason most countries need to improve the way they do things so as to be able to compete on various levels, not just productivity, but quality, safety, marketability etc, etc....

And this is where sanctions come in. Not just import sanctions, but export sanctions. And those who buy should also stand up and be counted. On the other hand, some could argue that if those kids didn't get work, their families would starve. Poor economies don't have such things as housing benefits, child benefit, dole etc, etc. At the end of the day, whether we like it or not, there are some economies far poorer than ours. We have to hope that somewhere along the line there is a balance of sorts. And that's life ....

Thanks for the lovely thoughts

Don't shoot the messenger. Who said I liked what is happening any more than you do? I see why it's happening and how it's happening. Doesn't mean I like it!

Protectionism does occur. However governments can only do so much before they are harbouring a lost cause.....and paying more than something's worth. At the expense of the Tax payer too remember

See previous comments re supply/demand and strong economies, etc, etc...

Re food safety standards: Every country has shite food safety of some sort or another. Truth is, something's going to kill you. If "big brother" countries turn a blind eye, then us little cogs in this big wheel aint gonna be able to change it. Look what hapened with mad cow disease! We don't know the half of what we eat. And that's not just Chinese food either..

The only way you can atempt to give yourself "safe" food is to grow/slaughter your own. And even then that's debatable. There are chemicals in the soil, air, animal feed, medication....even the air we all breath....so in reality what bubble do you want to live in? How cheap do you want to live, cos you'll die anyways. It's the sign of the times....and most people go by the supply/demand principle. That's reality!

Gulp

You should get a job in economics .

It's obviously one of your strong points

>>You should get a job in economics<<

To misquote: "if you ask a question about economics of four economists you will get five answers."

I enjoyed reading your thought out reply to my last post. We could probably both dig up material to keep it going but I can't be bothered and it is heading off track, which is meant to relate a bit more directly to the IR reforms. And on that point I do see a very real danger that the face of the Australian workplace will become something so very far removed from what it used to be and way too much like the US.

On that point, just because the US can apply protectionist policies, does it really mean we should just shut up and put up with it's pressure to conform to the model it expects other countries to adhere to? Are we wimps or what?

On economics, not all economists would agree with your viewpoints at all. Especially Keynes who argued strongly for a more mixed market economy and
therefore greater govt involvement in regulating it. The arguments on the economics of it all are really more ideological than anything else.

You have your ideological viewpoint and I mine, they just happen to differ. I have studied social sciences though not to a postgrad level, and perhaps you have made some study of economics or business. In anycase it is always interesting and beneficial to look at different viewpoints and question them.

Cheers

This all sounds good but you can't create wealth if you have little disposable cash after paying out your living expenses. Those who create wealth the most do so because they are able to.

And unions in OZ and NZ haven't been a truly strong force in decades. Some union figures in the past did give the whole lot of them a bad name, I will agree, but the principle of collective bargaining, awards protection, etc were fought hard for and have served workers well in the main.

The us and them mentality is an old british import that has no place in the modern world, but that does not mean workers should be left vulnerable to the whims of unscrupulous employers.. Unions and employers can work together and did so extremely well for years under Hawke's 'Accord". It's not impossible. It has been proven these two factions can come together and work to benefit all. trouble is employers have now long seen that they have a friend in Howard and Costello that will enable them to push the envelope further and no need to develop consensus.

Agreed. And you are right. We are all entitled to our own view points and I respect ours differs. Non the less, it was a good debate

As for Keynes, been there, done that..... and you are right. We'd both lose the will to live if we carry on debating that one

Lets agree to disagree.....and I'll share a drink with you.

Cheers m8

Can't agree with that one, mate!

Have a chat to your local CEPU reps some time. When I worked for Aussie Post, the CEPU's boast was "We have the power to shut this country down" - and they meant it! :scared:

Oh yeah, and a trip to your local CFMEU branch should be a real eye-opener.

We didn't have a Royal Commission for nothing, ya know!

While we're on the subject of dodgy practices within major industries, take a Captain Cook at this:
Source.

Price-fixing ahoy!

And it's not the first time, either.

Sounds good to me Cheers

I agree Vash. This was what it was like in UK in certain industries too, before Margaret Thatcher took away the Union's powers

She was a cow in a lot of ways, but she disarmed the Unions and gave back the power to the people and the business's. It wasn't a good time in the UK during these workforce reforms. There were lots of tribunals and test cases whilst each side amended their rash and stupid behaviour. Things in the main eventually evened out for employer / employee alike and now the pendulum has swung more in the middle.

UK Unions now serve more as mediator than as Big Brother [except in hardline industries like Rail ]... and employees / employers better understand each others responsibilities. This ensures both parties agree on what they need to do to service consumer need, thereby keeping in business.

We're a long way off that in Aus just yet as it's all still new and raw. However given time, things will improve drastically. Cos at the moment, Aus work ethos leaves a lot to be desired

>>Cos at the moment, Aus work ethos leaves a lot to be desired<<

An example is the apparent universal acceptance if the entitlement to the "sickie".

in my book sick leave is something which is taken if and when you are sick (novel concept, eh?). If a relatively small number of workers fall ill, the overall number of sick days remains an acceptable part of the budget. But if, as seems to be the case here, the sick days are taken as a matter of right when the surf's up, the whole "insurance" concept goes out of the window and it's merely another drain on the employer without freeing up a longer period of grace for the genuinely sick.

That's an excellent example as it's probably the one I noticed the most here.

Speaking to fellow Aussie mates, in the main sick pay seems to be seen as a benefit rather than a privilege. I can't count the amount of times my Aussie mates have told me "I get X amount of days holiday ....and on top of that I get X amount of sick days...so I make sure I take them before the end of the year"

On the other hand, I'm absolutely amazed at the amount of people on temporary contracts here. I spoke to one Aussie who is married to my mate, who was on a temp contract for FOUR YEARS! He's a boss there now so it wasn't cos he wasn't any good at his job. It's just acceptable practice here. A few of our friends have said they have worked this way for years.....and don't seem too perturbed. However these poor sods don't get sick pay, don't get holiday pay etc, etc, which when in your late 40's / 50's....is not good.Not good at all

Having said all that, both these examples were also true of UK some 15 / 20 years ago. I remember them / it well. Thank Goodness UK work ethics have changed!

Hence why I can see Aus getting better. Eventually

There is also a problem that now employers are demanding a doctors certificate for each and every day they are absent from work. Yet it is well known that if you have a cold it's far better to take the day or two off rather than go to work and spread it. The problem is that it can be impossible at times to get a doctors appointment on the day, so may prove very hard to provide medical certificates for one day's absence. Add to that maybe there will be loss of pay and also the cost of going to a doctors for a simple cold.

It's ridiculous. The previous system worked fine. The concept of taking a 'sickie' has unfortuantely become an ingrained part of aussie workplce culture. This could be overturned by having an end of year bonus for those who had taken little or no sick time off work. Sometimes in life you just have to use a carrot rather than a stick.

Good management practices are inclusive not oppressive and divisive.

Great post, I agree with what you say here.

True, but sometimes it depends on where you're sticking the carrot!

Agreed.