Bam wrote on Feb 20
th, 2018 at 2:29pm:
Auggie wrote on Feb 20
th, 2018 at 11:52am:
Bam wrote on Feb 20
th, 2018 at 10:56am:
crocodile wrote on Feb 19
th, 2018 at 11:56am:
BigOl64 wrote on Feb 18
th, 2018 at 5:20pm:
RightSaidFred wrote on Feb 18
th, 2018 at 4:50pm:
Bam
So for all unemployed its someone else's fault ?
You really are pathetic.
So which economic theory covers your silly notion that throw cash at dole bludgers will provide a massive boost to the economy ? Fairies at the bottom of the garden Volume 1
FYI you failed to address that key point in your little rant.
When people hire someone they are looking for qualifications and experience in relevant fields if you think that is discrimination then you are truly an idiot you don't mind throwing mindless insults around so live up that moron !
Even if it is someone else's fault they find themselves unemployed, it is not someone else's responsibility to find them a job.
Personal responsibility is just that.
Unfortunately, it isn't quite so simple. The RBA actively targets the inflation rate by manipulating the size of the money supply. Consequently, full employment is not achievable. There will always be a small pool of unemployed as a result of the tradeoff between employment and inflation due to shrinking labour supply. It is government policy so it seems reasonable that the displaced are not treated like child molesters.
Unemployed workers should be compensated a lot more for being forced to take one for the team against their will.
A better approach is to recognise that the RBA's method of targeting inflation is based on neoliberal mythology. The proposition that unemployment is necessary to control inflation is simply a lie. Australia had full employment for over 30 years from the Second World War to about 1972. Once the war inflation washed out of the economy, the period between 1952 and 1972 had inflation averaging 3.0% and unemployment averaging 1.2%. That was the most prosperous time in Australian history because everyone shared it. It is certainly possible to keep inflation and unemployment low at the same time because it's been done before. Restoring real full employment should be considered.
But surely though, changes to the global economy present different circumstances than in 1972? Would the measures implemented during those 20 years work as effectively now in the current economic climate??
The current economic climate would require new measures to eradicate involuntary unemployment. A Job Guarantee is one such measure that has a lot of promise as an economic stabiliser.
A Job Guarantee is a program where the government offers alternative employment for people who cannot find work in the private sector. It would offer work at award wages to anyone who wants it. It would stabilise the economy by employing more people when the economy was weak and more people when the economy contracted. It would have interesting side effects, such as eradicating sub-minimum work and putting downward pressure on casualisation.
The RBA could still control demand by altering interest rates, but that burden would no longer fall disproportionately on just a few people but be spread more equitably around the economy.
Yet the economy is stable and the unemployment rate is low ?
That's an illusion. Unemployment is only being held down because wages growth is in the shithouse. GDP growth is below trend and productivity is declining. Private capital expenditure is well down. Household savings are still up meaning people are not spending. None of this points to any degree of strength. Rather, we're just hanging in there.
In fact many industries are reporting a skills shortage which suggest job alignment / motivation is not there.
The good ol' deadly embrace. Skills shortages are a result of declining productivity. But productivity won't lift without skills. One of the reasons why the tax cut is desperately important. Without the necessary rise in business investment, wages and productivity will not grow.
What your suggesting is unsustainable rubbish.
It is only unsustainable rubbish if the marginal cost is greater than the system we currently have or it does not provide any input to production. May not be a silver bullet but certainly worth thinking about.
The pubic service is over bloated as it is.