47 thoughts on “Sandpit

  1. The need for productivity improvements in both Capital and Labour imports is central to the stagnation that is gripping the Australian economy. Bringing in short term visa labour inputs does not solve the productivity dilemma if makes it worse. As for capital imports the issue here is the lack of capital deepening and capital widening. Just importing replacement investment units does not improve capital productivity. The Capital-Labour ratio will not matter if imports of these two vital inputs are not advancing overall productivity.

  2. Gregory J. McKenzie, seems like capital is very productive, if your auditors are … the big 4.

    “Black holes, high-rises and the Meatloaf Principle: Australia’s top audit fails

    “Dirty Dozen audit fails: “…

    News corp… “No matter, the loan carried a hefty interest rate of 12 per cent. So News was effectively lending money to its cashed-up pay TV business Foxtel at 12 per cent, claiming tax deductions on the loan and lending the money back to itself at an interest rate of zero.”

    Lend Lease; “But the piece de resistance is that Lendlease has been buying retirement villages, claiming a bonanza of deductions by changing the contracts from lease to loan arrangements, booking the benefit of those deductions to its bottom line, and ignoring the tax law that says you can’t double dip.

    “It surely doesn’t help that Lendlease has had the same auditor since 1957, KPMG.”

    https://www.michaelwest.com.au/black-holes-high-rises-and-the-meatloaf-principle-australias-top-audit-fails/

    Highlight Romania for unbelievable rise in productivity;
    (The ‘sticks out like dogs b*@ll$’ outlier)
    https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/gdp-per-hour-worked.htm

    Where is data on capital mobility vs productivity change please?

  3. Just went to Victorian Government workshop (they’ve held about 10 throughout Victoria) for input into their Circular Economy policy they want to launch end of year. Process triggered by waste crisis, but broader in scope now. About 120 attendees, other workshops apparently also well attended – a lot of people who’ve thought and done a lot regarding waste and circular economy – business, community groups, citizens, consultants, students, academics. One attendee asked why there were no economists at a circular economy workshop. I’m an interested citizen that visits your webpage, first time question – any thoughts on circular economy and policy development John and others?

  4. My view is that if you are old enough to vote, you are old enough to go to an adult prison if found guilty of the requisite crimes, drive a truck, fly a plane, get married, own a credit card, take out a mortgage and serve in the military- including being drafted if that happens to be lawful. As I do not think any of these things are appropriate until age 18, I’d keep the voting age as it is.

  5. My view is that if you are old enough to vote, you are old enough to go to an adult prison if found guilty of the requisite crimes, drive a truck, fly a plane, get married, own a credit card, take out a mortgage and serve in the military- including being drafted if that happens to be lawful.

    My view is that your view is a crock.

    So we’ve established that you and I disagree. Where do you suggest we go from there?

  6. My view is that your view is a crock.

    So we’ve established that you and I disagree. Where do you suggest we go from there?

    My view is that you and I will never constitute a “we” because I prefer not to associate with sad trolls.

  7. I agree with Hugo. I would also add that if you are old enough to vote, you are also old enough to be exposed to and/or be targeted by political propaganda, lies and attack dog comments. Think the RWNJs reactions to Greta Thunberg are bad? Well that will be the norm if under 18s are allowed to vote.

  8. Thanks, Tom. If I valued power more than reason and ethics I would support lowering the voting age to 16 because it would probably give left wing candidates (my side of the political spectrum) a greater chance of being elected.

    I have trouble seeing how a thoughtful and intellectually honest person could think 16 year olds are adults at the ballot box while simultaneously being juveniles in the criminal justice system.

  9. Hugo’s comment on voting age was very thought proviking. Here in Germany the juvinile justice system is valid until age 21. Also a person can not get insurance to drive a Porsche until age 25. Most people have the sense not to get married until after age 25.
    More importantly, and more to the point, although I can not find the link, a very important philosopher said that no one at any age should be allowed to join the military without the permission of their mother.
    Therefore I have to wonder if we should make it a prerequisite that someone has a letter signed by their mother, certified by a Notary within the last 30 days, allowing them to vote. (or to register to vote.)

  10. My view is that you and I will never constitute a “we” because I prefer not to associate with sad trolls.

    I’m not sad. I’m happy to see that in support of your position you can offer no arguments but only abuse.

  11. Hugo, I’m curious about your dismisal of the “no age discrimination” argument. Do you have a reason for that? I mean, it’s in your constitution and I’m pretty sure that’s important in your country.

    In Australia you can be charged as an adult from age 10 and killed by cops at any age (we don’t technically have the death penalty), we don’t have a draft, driver licensing uses a graduated system starting from 12 IIRC (for farm kids). (legal) sex starts at 16 and paid work at 13. So I’m not wure when Hugo would let Australians vote. It’s all a bit of a mess.

  12. Moz, you’ve muddled your facts. One example: You can be prosecuted for a crime, if certain conditions are met, from age 10 in most states but can’t be tried as an adult to age 18 in every state.

  13. Hugo, juvenile crimes are perpetrated mostly by 15-17 year olds, many of whom feel powerless and ignored in other areas of their life, with their family situation and at school etc.

    What if giving 15-17 year olds the vote (treating them like capable, responsible, intelligent young citizens, who deserve a say in their future) actually reduced levels of juvenile crime over time?

    Would that be a reason to consider lowering the voting age?

    Perhaps giving 15-17 year olds some responsibility and a say in their future is a good way of teaching them to be responsible and to care about their future.

  14. Nick & Hugo

    I’d like an answer to Nick’s proposition too Hugo…

    Nick said: “actually reduced levels of juvenile crime over time? Would that be a reason to consider lowering the voting age?”

    Don Dale [ useless at reducing juvenile crime ] being the best example as we are already treating kids as adult humans in need of punitive seclusion and incarceration.

    My empathy says, if I were locked uo at 14 and still at 16 and a decent adult himan educated me in regards to voting and lobbying to change, I’d feel some agency and therefore having a say in my life at 16 would be one of the most powerful actiins ever bestowed on me.

    It is not black and white. Some kids at 16 should not be given the vote. But some 16 yo probably.

    Yes. Don Dale an outlier.

  15. I just cannot agree with this “whatever Labor’s many woes, he is up against one of the sharpest parliamentary tacticians of recent times.”.

    “Gladys Liu controversy holds a potent reminder for Scott Morrison, but is he listening?

    “When the odds are stacked against you, you fight where you can. This week has shown the Prime Minister learning that whatever Labor’s many woes, he is up against one of the sharpest parliamentary tacticians of recent times.”

    https://abc.net.au/news/2019-09-14/gladys-liu-scott-morrison-hubris/11511280

    “Perception of…” don’t seem to matter anymore either.

  16. Ikon… where are you? I’m missing my weekly dose of ontology. 😊

    I hope all is well. I thought of you when I read this…

    “Exiting the Anthropocene and Entering the Symbiocene

    By: Glenn Albrecht

    …”There can be no “Good Anthropocene” given the corruption that has already taken place.

    “In order to counter all these negative trends within the Anthropocene we clearly need, within popular politics and culture, visions and memes of a different future. We also will need more novel conceptual development, since the foundation on which we are building right now is seriously flawed and conducive of nothing but great waves of ennui, grief, dread, solastalgia, mourning, and melancholia. We must rapidly exit the Anthropocene with its non-sustainability, its perverse resilience, its authoritarianism, and its corrumpalism [ 1 ]. The new foundation, built around a new meme, will need to be an act of positive creation.”

    “Entering the Symbiocene
    I argue that the next era in human history should be named the Symbiocene (from the Greeksumbiosis, or companionship).”

    https://www.humansandnature.org/exiting-the-anthropocene-and-entering-the-symbiocene

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Albrecht

    [ 1 ] “corrumpalism” (from the Latin corrumpere, “to destroy”). Corrumpalism is the ability to corrupt and destroy the integrity of a social system and its biophysical foundation by perverting all forms of development via the use of misinformation, falsehoods, money, and/or violence to achieve self-interested outcomes that are the opposite of genuine cultural and ecological interests. ”

    New neologisms? Concept words? of the day:
    corrumpalism and symbiocene
    … by an Australian eco philosopher Glenn Albrecht

    And JQ, this may be of interest as the author of above has input into…

    ABSTRACT 
    “Climate change is a phenomenon of the Earth system, which is characterized by thresholds and non‐linear change. This analysis considers the adequacy of insurance (in its broadest sense) responses to climate risk. This paper provides novel critiques of insurance system responses to climate change and of the attendant political economy perspective on the relationship between insurance and climate change. A complex adaptive systems (CAS) analysis suggests that ecologically effective (i.e. strong) mitigation is the only viable approach to manage medium‐ and long‐term climate risk – for the insurance system itself and for human societies more widely. In contrast, we find that even the most substantial insurance system responses to date are generally adaptive and weakly mitigative. This analysis extends an earlier political economy perspective that explains the limitations of insurance system responses to climate change, but provides little guidance to the ecological implications of such responses. As such, this paper raises questions about the ongoing viability of the insurance system, and hence about the many aspects of human societies globally reliant on the insurance system as their primary risk governance tool. We conclude that the CAS approach provides new insights, which could prompt insurance system evolution in support of effective climate risk governance. ”

    Environmental Policy and Governance Env. Pol. Gov. (2011) Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/eet.565

    Ecological Viability or Liability? Insurance System Responses to Climate Risk

    Liam Phelan,1* Ros Taplin,2 Ann Henderson‐Sellers3 and Glenn Albrecht4 

  17. This article suggests that renewables are causing global warming through the use of Sulphur hexafluoride. This is used for some reason to shore up an unstable grid. So it won’t be an issue if we have a second wave of renewables with storage. This may constitute another reason to fix the grid before too much more zealotry. Patience people. Patience.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49567197

  18. I think we need the concept of a company 100% owned by Australian citizens. That way we could have zero interest loans going to companies handling strategically important undertakings, without the value heading overseas.

    Now supposing for the next 100 years we have these zero interest loans for renewables and storage and for nuclear? What else would be needed to leave us in a position where we can take coal or leave it? People are trying to say we can take it or leave it right now. I’m used to thinking in terms of decades and centuries and we need warmth, CO2 and coal energy to get us through this cold era that will plague us at least until mid-century.

    Well lets say all we further to the zero interest rate loans was $20 per tonne on coal burnt in Australia and $50 per tonne on exported coal? That may not seem much, but if you are expecting results over many decades, rather than in a panic to get results right away, maybe its sufficient.

    But I would say its all about coal. Nature has taken care of oil for us. Oil pressure from older wells isn’t there the way it used to be. New wells are getting harder to find. As for methane thats the most worrying thing to be taxing. If we tax methane, the guys at the field won’t tell anyone they have excess gas. They’ll have to burn this gas off clandestinely like they are doing in all those fracking fields. Fracking shows the terrible things that happen when you try and rush things. One of those terrible things is that we find out with satellite photos that these guys are wasting heaps of gas by burning it off at night.

    Methane is CH4. Held by people who believe in this stuff to be a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2. So if you go along with this the important thing about CH4 is that it probably ought to be burnt off on or near location and not allowed to escape to the atmosphere. Putting a carbon price on CH4 is likely to be counter-productive.

  19. It’s all a bit of a mess.

    There’s no good reason why the exact same age should be set as the age when a person qualifies to vote, when a person is eligible for a driver’s licence, when a person is eligible for a pilot’s licence, when a person is legally permitted to get married, and so on. There’s no good reason why there shouldn’t be different legal qualifying ages for different purposes–as in fact there are.

  20. GB says; “This article suggests that renewables are causing global warming through the use of Sulphur hexafluoride”.

    No it doesn’t.

    It says ANY switchgear does. Electical switch NOT high voltage has a solution. Now.

    Imo, a very ambiguous comment and disingenuous reading of the article gb.

  21. J-D +1
    “There’s no good reason why there shouldn’t be different legal qualifying ages for different purposes–as in fact there are.”

  22. I guess I’m saying that coal if not dug up will stay in the ground. But we cannot make the same assumption for gas. So with gas we don’t want to put an impost on the local consumption of it. One way or another it seems destined to wind up in the air.

  23. Yeah its any switch-gear I can agree with that. I won’t contradict you there. But I think its a by-product of rushing. Like this mess that the Frackers are making, and the reality that they are almost to a company financially non-viable. Thats something that happens with too much of a sprint. I think these excessive sprints are what we have to avoid. Make haste slowly said Caesar.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s