Home > Regular Features > Monday message board

Monday message board

October 15th, 2007

It’s time, once again for the Monday Message Board. As usual, civilised discussion and absolutely no coarse language, please.

Categories: Regular Features Tags:
  1. October 15th, 2007 at 09:00 | #1

    great to see you at MACS on Friday!

  2. Peter
    October 15th, 2007 at 14:34 | #2

    Growth in International student numbers has reduced drastically.
    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22585948-12332,00.html

    Following are the possible reasons:

    - Most Australian companies don’t prefer International students. So it does not make sense for students to come to Australia and spend more money on tuition and living expenses(compared to their home country), and then not being able to work in Australia.

    - The Asian students are getting the sense that Australia prefers British/European migrants. Some of students don’t appreciate Australia’s discriminiatory immigrant policy, so they decide to go back to their home countries. They also convey this message to their friend, who then think twice before deciding to come to Australia.

    - In the past few years race attacks on International student’s have increased. Also in some instances Australian government have been inciting the Australian public against Asian and African immigrants. This doesn’t help.

    http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/12/2058585.htm

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Two-accused-of-Sudanese-students-murder/2007/10/03/1191091172161.html

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071010/wl_africa_afp/australiaafricarefugeessudan_071010114647

    - Other European countries like France and Germany are increasingly looking for overseas student. Even Poland is aggressively looking for skilled migrants from Asia. So some of the International students/migrants have begun substituting Europe for Australia.

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Aging_Europe_seeks_manpower_from_young_India/rssarticleshow/2257907.cms

  3. Hermit
    October 15th, 2007 at 15:00 | #3

    I’ve posted on this before but I’ll say it again because I think it’s a sleeper: the next PM will increase coal production whatever the rhetoric on climate change. With exports India is begging for more cheap coal now and China will do the same within 3 years. I’d argue that iron ore exports are a complementary good even if they go to a different country than metallurgical coal, since they are part of a pool. Therefore a lot of the resources boom relies on keeping the party going in Asia i.e. we are co-dependent.

    Domestically Garrett’s pie-in-the-sky renewable energy schemes simply won’t be enough to replace coal. We will be given innumerable reasons why we can’t cut back just yet.

  4. October 15th, 2007 at 17:13 | #4

    hi,
    I’m new to the blogosphere, and have a link to a post about indigenous policy and economists. Am interested in what contribution economists can make to social capital, indigenous policy and related topics in light of Dr Ken Henry’s comments…

    http://rawnsley.wordpress.com/2007/10/10/economists-and-the-social-signals-of-productivity/

  5. gordon
    October 16th, 2007 at 09:19 | #5

    I wonder whether any of the professional economists here would like to comment on a recent article in Business Week which suggests official US manufacturing production and productivity data are wrong. Apparently there is a problem with so-called “Phantom GDP” created by mistaken import price statistics. An extract:

    “…new evidence suggests that shifting production overseas has inflicted worse damage on the U.S. economy than the numbers show. BusinessWeek has learned of a gaping flaw in the way statistics treat offshoring…

    The underlying problem is located in an obscure statistic: the import price data published monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Because of it, many of the cost cuts and product innovations being made overseas by global companies and foreign suppliers aren’t being counted properly. And that spells trouble because, surprisingly, the government uses the erroneous import price data directly and indirectly as part of its calculation for many other major economic statistics, including productivity, the output of the manufacturing sector, and real gross domestic product (GDP)…

    By BusinessWeek’s admittedly rough estimate, offshoring may have created about $66 billion in phantom GDP gains since 2003 (page 31). That would lower real GDP today by about half of 1%, which is substantial but not huge. But put another way, $66 billion would wipe out as much as 40% of the gains in manufacturing output over the same period…â€?.

    Thanks to Angry Bear.

  6. gordon
    October 16th, 2007 at 10:28 | #6

    I shot a comment into the air
    It fell to earth I know not where…

    But not bloody here!

  7. gordon
    October 17th, 2007 at 08:55 | #7

    Hey, it finally landed!

Comments are closed.