Home > Economics - General > Monday Message Board

Monday Message Board

December 4th, 2017

Another Monday Message Board. Post comments on any topic. Civil discussion and no coarse language please. Side discussions and idees fixes to the sandpits, please.

Categories: Economics - General Tags:
  1. david
    December 4th, 2017 at 13:19 | #1

    Breaking news on the ABC Katy Gallagher may be ineligible! Oh dear what about Barnaby Joyce from 2004 to 2017 and Alexander from 2010 to 2017?

    Where is the balanced reporting when any idiot reading the High Court in re Canavan etc. can see there must be a point where all reasonable steps have been taken by a candidate, but still short of the receipt of the formal renunciation of citizenship by the foreign country, which candidate is still eligible to stand under 44. Ask Tony Abbott. I would love to see the opinions of 1. Donoghue and 2. Justin Gleeson here. This in turn again raises the issue of the politicisation of the SG’s role by Brandis. The High Court dismissed Donoghue’s arguments on section 44 – 7 to 0.

    It is noted Gillespie the National in Lyne is opposing the High Court’s jurisdiction to rule on his eligibility under section 44 as to indirect fiduciary interest in contracts with the Commonwealth. He is also opposing a subpoena on his company which dealt with the sublessee presumably which in turn subleased to Austpost. It is further noted the LNP opposed a FOI on Gillespie’s 2014 application to Brough the then Special Minister of State for extra funding for travel and staff etc.

    The Coalition expects the public to regard them as bona fide in section 44 matters hardly!

    ps. any reading of the High Court in re Canavan etc. still raises the issue Matty Canavanucci may not be out of the woods yet! There is still the evidentiary issue of the coincidental timing of the application by his mother for Italian citizenship for Matty when dad was about to be jailed in good old Queensland.

  2. Smith
    December 4th, 2017 at 14:38 | #2


    If Gallagher made a good enough effort to rid herself of her UK citizenship then the High Court will, ahem, so hold.

  3. sunshine
    December 6th, 2017 at 05:10 | #3

    Can someone please explain simply what Joseph Stiglitz means when he says “the trade deficit, which is determined by the disparity between domestic savings and investment.”. ? I assume that this relationship normally holds but is it contestable or more complicated than that ?

  4. Smith
    December 6th, 2017 at 09:54 | #4

    Vale Christine Keeler.

  5. Ikonoclast
    December 6th, 2017 at 12:47 | #5

    Australia’s poor economic performance continues when compared to what it could be with proper government spending and full capacity utilisation.

    One of my (now adult) children has a permanent part-time government job which could so easily be a permanent full-time job. The government could find the money. All that is required is some more deficit spending in a flat, low inflation part of the economic cycle. If it were a full-time job my offspring in question has a better springboard to independent household formation; a healthy thing personally, socially and economically. He or she would get more wages to spend helping other parts of the economy. The cultural, child-development and adult-development services that that workplace offers could be increased with more full-time staff. It would be win-win-win all round basically.

    I seriously question whether neoliberals just greedy and stupid or does it go beyond that? Are they actually hating and cruel? Do they actually hate most people and want to see them held back and immiserated. I am coming to believe strongly that there is a real pathology involved. When you look at the now revered icon of the modern alt-right, neoliberal class, Donald Trump, it is clear that hatred, malevolence, enjoyment of cruelty and inflicting pain are all involved and all being elevated into twisted “ideals”.

  6. John Quiggin
    December 6th, 2017 at 14:00 | #6


    Although she has already passed on, but the name of Mandy Rice-Davies will live forever thanks to one immortal quote


    As with all such lines, it’s most popular in a slightly misquoted form


    Also, looking at Wikipedia I see that my suggested acronym MRD, for a predictable statement has been independently proposed with a slight variation

  7. December 15th, 2017 at 02:39 | #7

    Apropos of Bitcoin. An interesting side – issue is the use of the underlying blockchain algorithms for other uses, such as a decentralised electricity market and automated grid operation. Some major players in the business are looking at this seriously, it’s not a silly bubble like Bitcoin.

    My question is this. The advantage of blockchain is as I understand it the authentication of contractual information without the need for trust. So you can cut out the government’ s role as policeman, for libertarians a big plus. But have they thought about Herstatt risk? This was a German bank that went bust in the middle of the trading day, creating chaos in the markets in which it was an active trader. The solution to Herstatt risk (the collapse of the counterparty) in organised securities markets is a compulsory central counterparty that insures the risk, as well as simplifying the paperwork.

    If blockchain does not solve the Herstatt issue, it looks like another clever solution to an unimportant problem.

  8. Collin Street
    December 15th, 2017 at 06:39 | #8

    I seriously question whether neoliberals just greedy and stupid or does it go beyond that?

    My thesis is — on this topic — that they’ve got poor understanding of systemic effects and feedback, and — in this context — believe that the economic situation is exogenous and not created by wages being paid.

    Second-order effects, coordination problems, or “everybody would be better if everybody did X, which they could if everybody did” appear to be beyond them. In general, not just specifically here.

Comments are closed.