Monday Message Board

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. If you would like to receive my (hopefully) regular email news, please sign up using the following link You can also follow me on Twitter @JohnQuiggin, at my Facebook public page   and at my Economics in Two Lessons page

63 thoughts on “Monday Message Board

  1. The refusal of the Australian Government to re-new a visa to Chinese Australian billionaire Huang Jiangmo despite his ‘residency’ status is intriguing. The close links to the Chinese Communist Party plus large political donations to both the ALP and the Libs lie behind the move. But in an election atmosphere your would have to see the move by ScoMo’s side as an attempt to smear the ALP.
    Huang was the money man behind Sam Dastyari but the Bob Carr links through the Australia China
    Relations Institute at UTS were bankrolled by Huang. He can appeal the decision but as May rolls around he may have to just skype his family back ‘home’ in the $11 million Mosman mansion.
    What Sussex St will do could be interesting. Huang has a lot of favours owed.

  2. Deplorable. I also posted this comment to the deplorable thread as I believe the cdp fits with ‘we can’t mention the r word’. Appropriate imho.

    “Of 1,000 surveyed participants, 21% felt their community was better off since the Community Development Program was introduced, but 36% said the community was worse off and 32% said their community was the same as before it began in 2015.”

    “The CDP is also expensive. For every dollar that a CDP recipient receives in income support, approximately 70 cents is spent administering the scheme. It costs five times as much per participant as Jobactive and twice as much as the scheme it replaced.

    The achievement of 2,682 part- and full-time 26-week employment outcomes each year must be put in the context of the overall CDP scheme, which costs about $360 million per year to operate. That amount could directly employ 19,700 people for 26 weeks full-time.”
    Not at $11 / hr with 3.5% breach penalties, job NOT guaranteed. 

  3. Fun fact on “24/7” coal generation: “A report by the Australia Institute has found that in 2018 coal plants broke down 118 times or once every 3.1 days.” *****/
    The new HELE hard coal plants were actually worse than old ones.

  4. Looks like the Labor Party might succeed in achieving the seemingly impossible and will lose the election.

    And over what? Control over the country’s borders, a fight the Labor Party will always lose, regardless of the objective merits. To be fair, this is unprecedented. The Labor Party has never lost an election over border control policy. Apart from when it did lose an election over border control policy. And border control is not a hot issue in any other country right now. Apart from the countries where it is a hot issue, such as most of Europe and the United States.

    I thought Shorten was a political hard head. More like a cement head.

  5. Labor has a poor track record on this issue. The Rudd years…. People have not forgotten the thousands who came and the 1200+ who drowned at sea. The conspiracy-minded might believe Phelps was a LNP plant designed to destroy Labor. Mediscare worked well for Labor so now Borderscare will get a go for the LNP! Australian politics is a terminal sewer.

  6. The conspiracy-minded might believe Phelps was a LNP plant designed to destroy Labor.

    That’s not as crazy as it sounds. “Good morning, Dr Phelps. The man in the photo is Bill Shorten, a dangerous subversive who promises to increase the taxes on our people. Your mission, should you choose to accept it …”

  7. It seems a bit early to be declaring that Labor will lose the election. What are you basing that on – the Ipsos poll? Better wait and see if it represents a trend first.

  8. @Tim Mackney
    I didn’t say Labor will lose the election. I said it might lose the election, which is not the same thing. But even the realistic possibility that it might lose was unthinkable a week ago.

  9. Not will lose the election, might lose the election. Not the same thing, but unthinkable a week ago.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s