Submitted by Shatner'sBassoon on Fri, 11/06/2015 - 19:48
AN ALL-ENCOMPASSING KALEIDOSCOPIC JOIN-THE-DOTS/ADULT COLOURING BOOK EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT IN NARCISSISTIC/ONANISTIC BIG PICTURE PARASITIC FORUM BLEEDING.
LIKE POLITICAL LIFE, PARTICIPATION IS WELCOME, ENCOURAGED EVEN, BUT NOT NECESSARY.
I think the swearing comes from my lack of literacy more than any psychology thing plus the fact I think you're one of the good people in life but your logic gets totally out of wack over side issues missing the big picture.
Last word from me on Trump on this thread.
Trump has undermine the US democratic institutions more than any previous US administrations than i am aware of mainly because he is a criminal and cannot allow any really or proper scrutiny of his business interests or political operations.
Trump has undermine the US democratic institutions more than any previous US administrations than i am aware of mainly because he is a criminal and cannot allow any real or proper scrutiny of his business interests or political operations.
sypkan, well you have the plot for a nice novel. There's always a demand for airport fiction so give it a go. Oh and the South Koreans have been on board before, if they were more active this time the most likely explanation was to get Trump out of the room so they could talk something approaching sense.
Please indulge me blindboy, which part do you think is so fanciful that it's only worthy of airport fiction?
sypkan, it didn't happen, so it's fiction, feasible? Maybe. Anyway, don't diss airport fiction it's a very lucrative genre
Our new Chinese overlords have something they think you may be interested in.....
I watched the tv version of this story a few weeks ago Blowin.
"....social credit is not a perfect system but believes it’s the best way to manage a complex country with the world’s biggest population."
That quote is from a supporter but it does state the truth.
The truth also is that social credit is a you beaut ridgy didge carrot vs stick big brother 21st century passive aggressive rice burning surveillance system. You are being watched, whether you like it or not.
And yet this beta version is so much more.
Like an 'Australia Card' on noodle laced meth.
Fundamentally though, it is based upon a simple common sense premise. Be a good citizen and find that you are rewarded, be a bad citizen and receive punishment. We know where you live work and play every minute of the day.
Get with the program or go your own way. But not too far.
In a country of 1,397,028,553 billion it's obviously important to maintain civil stability. In this day and technological age the movement toward social credit almost seems like a natural progression.
For China that is.
Glad I live in Australia.
Did you read the article ?
You realise that “ Good citizen “ includes NEVER disagreeing with or criticising the government or any official with a hint of power don’t you ?
Virtually everyone on this thread would be considered a bad citizen.
And it wouldn’t just be you suffering a bad credit score , also your friends and family.
If a good mate of yours attempted to route a bit of local corruption, then your credit score goes down as well as his. So you can’t travel , get a job .
It’s fucking evil.
China is evil.
For that comment alone I’d be exiled from society.
The only people that like this idea are the ones that assume they’ll be a part of the elite controlling the rules.
Like I said, glad I live in Australia.
What! No mention of reducing immigration. You better take a dose of your medication of choice before reading this one Blowin.
More intellectual dishonesty.
How can you have a discussion on declining wages in Australia without even mentioning the NUMBER 1 contributing factor , which is mass immigration ?
According to your link , Here’s where the blame lies , apparently:
“As it acknowledges, many things have been depressing wages, including the widespread underemployment, technological change, and global competition.”
You’re still so desperate to exonerate the flooding of the labour supply that you’ll bend over backwards in your refusal to acknowledge it.
This tells me that you are ideologically wedded to the idea of a Big Australia and are therefore the official ENEMY of incumbent Australian workers.
Lucky for you , you’ve got a few options of who to vote for ....LNP, ALP ,Greens.
Those of us who want to secure a decent standard of living have far less options.
You are truly part of the New Extreme Left who have divorced themselves from any alliance from the working class.
From the very same Australia institute you’re quoting:
“The Australia Institute’s chief economist, Richard Denniss, explained these very dynamics last year when he noted that the very purpose of foreign worker visas is to “suppress wage growth by allowing employers to recruit from a global pool of labour to compete with Australian workers”. That is, in a normal functioning labour market, “when demand for workers rises, employers would need to bid against each other for the available scarce talent”. But this mechanism has been bypassed by enabling employers to recruit labour globally. “It is only in recent years that the wage rises that accompany the normal functioning of the labour market have been rebranded as a ‘skills shortage'”.”
Let’s be honest here , BB .
You’re either ignorant for falling for the fictional campaigning by the vested interest groups and rent seekers - including the government ( and opposition) , the universities, business groups , media , real estate and various other sucker fish to prop up their Ponzi scheme.
You’re just a flat- out Anthropophile who gets erections whilst being crush loaded in crowded situations and you want to indulge your fetish in the extreme.
Which is it ?
A mathematician, an accountant and an economist apply for the same job.
The interviewer calls in the mathematician and asks “What do two plus two equal?” The mathematician replies “Four.” The interviewer asks “Four, exactly?” The mathematician looks at the interviewer incredulously and says “Yes, four, exactly.”
Then the interviewer calls in the accountant and asks the same question “What do two plus two equal?” The accountant says “On average, four - give or take ten percent, but on average, four.”
Then the interviewer calls in the economist and poses the same question “What do two plus two equal?” The economist gets up, locks the door, closes the shade, sits down next to the interviewer and says, “What do you want it to equal”?
Nice one westofthe
That reminds me of something I saw on sky news, which I reluctantly reference, along with peta credlin. She was on that liberal mouthpiece sky news after 6pm. She talked about being in a closed door meeting with abbott and co. when he was in power where the conversation was about the economy and immigration. She said she has literally seen the people in the room pump different numbers into a computer model where they upped and upped the immigration numbers until they could get the budget outcome they were looking for.
An interesting admission from the party of shameless capitalism. Also an interesting insight into the merits of computer modelling that are spruiked to the public as solid research.
Blowin you seem to believe that insults strengthen your argument when, of course, they weaken it by revealing your inability to address the specific points made in the article. The vested interests you identify stand to lose much less through immigration reform, which will only influence low wage earners, than through the kind of genuine reforms proposed by the article, which is why immigration is suddenly on the agenda. If, as you claim, you want to defend Australian workers from exploitation, you would also concerned with the other factors driving wages down. Note: I have not insulted or denigrated you in any way. Try to lift the tone of your posts.
Mate , you offend me when you don’t respond to the endless links I put up to back the reality.
How do the vested interests I mentioned, possibly stand to lose less through immigration reform?
The universities are utterly and irredeemably compromised on the subject. Immigration - as bait to lure foreign “ students “ is the source of most of their income . Real estate would be dead in the water without the immigration Ponzi scheme to sell houses to . Business needs continued growth in population to constantly increase sales and decrease wages . Media wants higher population for sales and to prop up its fundamental interest which is real estate . Politicians want people for GDP increase .
The other factors driving wages down are mostly peripheral downsides to mass immigration.
But immigration is the number one factor. How can you accept it being sidestepped in your article? Not a single mention. Bizarre.
It’s a puff piece designed to satisfy minds such as your own who would prefer to ignore the real driver of our declining standard of living.
It’s not insulting to describe you as the enemy of the working class. It’s factually correct. You’d rather employ casuistry than come at the issue head on.
You’ve yet to refute a single point I’ve made , you’ve just made ad hominem attacks on the source, despite the fact that my sources are usually just aggregate sites for statistics you cannot argue against.
I feel for your son being a chippy .....his future being undermined and his father contributing to the obfuscation of the event.
This is the argument over right here , BB.
From the Productivity Commission:
“The increase in labour supply causes the labour / capita ratio to rise and the terms of trade to fall. This generates a negative deviation in the average real wage. By 2025 the deviation in the real wage is –1.7 per cent…
Broadly, incumbent workers lose from the policy, while incumbent capital owners gain. At a 5 per cent discount rate, the net present value of per capita incumbent wage income losses over the period 2005 – 2025 is $1,775. The net present value of per capita incumbent capital income gains is $1,953 per capita…
Owners of capital in the sectors experiencing the largest output gains will, in general, experience the largest gains in capital income. Also, the distribution of capital income is quite concentrated: the capital owned by the wealthiest 10 per cent of the Australian population represents approximately 45 per cent of all household net wealth…“
In black and white. Increased immigration leads to decreasing wages and higher returns to capital.
You are defending Capital over Labour.
You are being a useful idiot.
You forgot the banks Blowin, banks love real estate growth driven by immigration, imagine how much more interest they make on 500K loan compared to a 250K loan.
Mate , the whole thing is a set up.
Winner takes all. Banks get the cash or they get the houses.
And if things look a bit jittery....then the tax payers bail out ( or bail in ) the banks.
“The increase in labour supply causes the labour / capita ratio to rise and the terms of trade to fall. This generates a negative deviation in the average real wage. By 2025 the deviation in the real wage is –1.7 per cent…"
Hahaha hoist by your own petard.
You’re kidding , right ?
Here you go , mate :
“Broadly, incumbent workers lose from the policy, while incumbent capital owners gain. “
1.7% ...... what about the huge other factors driving wages down. By concentrating on immigration you are doing EXACTLY what the vested interest want. Divide, divide, divide. Distract, distract, distract. Sucked in, as we used to say.
Oh , so you’re caught up in the numbers ?
I assumed you’d be smart enough to dismiss outright any figures that macroeconomic modelling ever threw out ?
You must be the one person who is surprised when the cost blowout of infrastructure is announced then ? Macroeconomic modelling is the substance found sitting on top of the hay in horse stables.
But you’ll believe it more than you will anecdotal evidence ?
Anyway mate , forget the made up figures and focus on the important bit :
BB , you’re so sucked in that you’re part of a human centipede.
Refute this in your own words, BB :
Oh well, so much for macron...
Oh well, so much for truth....
Third paragraph says pretty much what I have been saying for days, Blowin. The real problem is exploitation and abuse.
You’re really struggling with the concept of supply and demand aren’t you , BB ?
And you’re making the obvious mistake of assuming that workers are being exploited rather than merely undercutting each other for competitive advantage. A lot of which is cultural .
The reason that the competition arises.....over supply of labour.
Still doing the work of the ruling class there Blowin. Of course it's the workers fault. I never took you for one who could be so easily fooled by bullshit and anecdote.
Anecdote, the evidence of idiots.
The anecdotes are my own.
Statistics and modelling.....well, there’s not much point going into how reliable they are , is there ?
OK , but just one ! Here is the Australian burueau of statistics modelling predictions for our current population, made back in 1997. Witness the miracle of incredible accuracy that is statistical analysis !
“Where our population is headed by 2051 - ABS
Australia's 1997 population of 18.5 million could grow to between 23.5 and 26.4 million by the year 2051, according to various projections released today by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. The projections are based on a combination of assumptions in future levels of births, deaths and migration to arrive at the size, structure and distribution of Australia's population into the next century.
Australia's total fertility rate dropped below 1.8 births per woman in 1996. The ABS has assumed that fertility will continue to decline to between 1.6 and 1.75 births per woman. Each shift in the total fertility rate of 0.1 births per woman changes the projected 2051 population by about 1 million persons.
Net overseas migration in 1997 was 83,700. If there were no net overseas migration from 1997, the Australian population would peak at between 20.1 million and 20.6 million in the late 2020s before declining to between 18.3 and 19.5 million by 2051. Every 1,000 net overseas migrants per year adds approximately 77,000 to the total Australian population by 2051.
Between 1997 and 2051, the highest rates of growth for the Australian population are projected to occur in the Northern Territory (between 84 per cent and 154 per cent), Queensland (between 76 per cent and 90 per cent) and Western Australia (between 67 per cent and 74 per cent).
Queensland is projected to replace Victoria as the second most populous State between 2022 and 2048, while the population of the Australian Capital Territory could pass that of Tasmania between 2037 and 2043. The Northern Territory could overtake the populations of both Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory as early as 2039. Tasmania's population is projected to decline from 474,000 in 1997 to between 198,000 and 381,000 in 2051.
The populations of most capital cities are projected to increase between 1997 and 2051, with the largest proportionate increases in Darwin (between 53 per cent and 179 per cent), Brisbane (between 80 per cent and 90 per cent) and Perth (between 70 per cent and 78 per cent). Sydney and Melbourne are expected to experience more modest increases, of between 20 per cent and 58 per cent, and between 10 per cent and 37 per cent respectively.
While the population of Adelaide could fall by as much as 16 per cent under one projection, it could also increase by 7 per cent. The population of Hobart is projected to decrease by between 18 per cent and 56 per cent. While the population of the Australian Capital Territory (Canberra) could fall by as much as 23 per cent under one projection series, it could also increase by 43 per cent.
The projections show that the ageing of Australia's population will continue. This is the inevitable result of fertility remaining at low levels over a long period. The median age (where half of the population is younger and half older) of 34 years in 1997 is projected to be 44-46 years in 2051. Persons aged 65 years or over comprised 12 per cent of the population in 1997 and this is projected to rise to 24-26 per cent in 2051.
United Nations medium variant projections show the world's population increasing from 5.7 billion in 1995 to 9.8 billion in 2050. Indonesia's population could increase to 319 million in 2050. New Zealand's population is projected to increase by 31 per cent by 2050 to 4.7 million, while both Japan and Germany are projected to decline to levels below their 1995 populations of 125 million and 82 million respectively.
Comprehensive detail is in Population Projections, 1997 to 2051 (cat. no. 3222.0), available from ABS Bookshops.
Main features of the publication are available from this site.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics has produced three main series of population projections. The following table and paragraphs briefly describe the assumptions behind these projections.
Overseas Migration Assumption
Internal Migration Assumption
High - The total fertility rate falls to 1.75 births per woman by 2005-06, and then remains constant.
Low - The total fertility rate falls to 1.6 births per woman in 2005-06, and then remains constant.
Mortality Assumption (used for all projection series)
1994-96 mortality rates decline to the year 2005-06 according to short-term rates of decline and then by long-term rates to 2050-51. By 2051, life expectancy of males will be 82.0 years and of females 86.1 years.
Overseas Migration Assumptions:
High - Annual net overseas migration gain of 90,000 from 1998-99.
Low - Annual net overseas migration gain of 70,000 from 1998-99.
Internal Migration Assumptions:
High - 'Large' net gains and losses for all States and Territories.
Medium -'Medium' net gains and losses for all States and Territories.
Low - 'Small' net gains and losses for all States and Territories.”
Statistics....an accumulation of unreliable figures .
Modelling....an accumulation of statistics extrapolated into a prediction.
In layman’s terms : Bullshit multiplied by horseshit multiplied by a quantity of unpredictabile and unprecedented unknowns.
But you take them to the bank , BB.
Notice how no one ever pulls statisticians up on their useless industry?
If they’re ever called to account for their utter bullshit the answer is - “ Well , modelling has improved so much since then,,,,,”
Then it’s onto the next bullshit prediction.
No better than reading tea leaves.
Add economic modelling to the same basket of expensive fantasy .
Statistics and modelling are like the special effects industry in Hollywood.
Employed to add an illusory veneer to the fiction being peddled.
Immigration into this country is getting so out of control , that it no longer just pushes down wages , declines standards of living, places immense pressure on infrastructure and health and education, crowds and congests but it has also become a political force unto itself which lobbies against the best wishes of incumbent Australians :
“The Productivity Commission’s (PC) Migrant Intake Australia report, released in 2016, recommended significantly tightening parental visas and raising their price, given they are costing taxpayers an estimated $335 000 to $410 000 per adult, or between $2.6 and $3.2 billion per annual intake in present value terms (and growing):”
$3.2 B extra burden on taxpayers for EVERY YEAR of intake !
So the burden on taxpayers to service the needs of the parents of migrants who have moved here under family reunification between 2008 - 2018 alone is $32000000000 per year !
This is the cost just for the unproductive relatives !
Why would Australia allow elderly and frail pensioners to move to our country and become immediate drains on our community?
Because the immigration lobby is now so powerful because the rate of immigration is so ridiculously high. ALP as well as the government voted against making the reforms the Productivity Commission purposed . Why ? Because they want a Big Australia and because the immigration lobbies are so powerful.
And people wonder why the government is in so much debt and why hospitals are so understaffed and why the dole can’t keep place with inflation and why the government sells everything it can get its hands on....
Vote for Sustainable Australia at the next election and stop this rort.
"She said she has literally seen the people in the room pump different numbers into a computer model where they upped and upped the immigration numbers until they could get the budget outcome they were looking for."
Not surprising, but still somehow I'm shocked.
Why are you shocked ?
The brutality of economics in spite of a declining standard of living and a receding chance of a positive future.
But yeah, how can I be shocked?
It's neoliberalism cloaked in so many guises, forms which captivate people like Blindboy and Sharkman.
Sorry Andy but the process of modelling involves putting different figures into the model to determine how the variables influence the outcome. Yes, party hacks and prejudiced media will publish the data that best suits there agenda.
Blowin Ben will be very disappointed to hear that you totally discount his forecasts because they are based on statistics and modelling.
Seems like you've missed Sypkan's point BB.
I read that post and the "phrase babies and bathwater" kept popping into my head. Not trusting the elites is fine if it includes distinguishing between over-priveleged incompetent prats and skilled professionals. Me? I want elite engineers to design the roads and bridges I travel on and if I get seriously sick, I would really like an elite doctor to treat me. And yes, usually those people arise from a particular priveleged class. It would be nice to level the playing field but until then we need to use the skilled professionals we have.
Ben would be as aware of the limitations of modelling as anyone.
My old man worked for Qantas and the Navy for his whole life programming and repairing flight simulators . I was asking him about the limitations of modelling and he said that it was incredible the detail that could be accounted for with known qualities and quantities in any simulation.
When I asked him how unforeseen circumstances were quantified he laughed and said - “ How can you account for an unforseeable event ?”
And that’s what the future contains....myriads upon myriads of combinations of unforeseen events.
And that’s why modelling the future of any non static system is a blunt tool , a best guess and mostly just a fucking hoax if your forecast span is any greater than that which can be verified through other , less abstract techniques.
Anyway , why debate when you can just stroll through history and examine the litany of modelling failures that are swept under the carpet ?
I just provided ABS predictions for Australia’s future population from 1997 and it was laughably inaccurate. And this is the document upon which incredibly important decisions are made such as infrastructure spend , resource allocation, budgeting etc etc.
The document could not have been more inaccurate really and this without any unforseeable and influential exogenous global events taking place.
The ABS was just plain wrong.
As they almost always are.
Predicting Brexit ....fail.
Predicting next Earth Shattering Event...fail.
Modelling and statistics are a fucking hoax.
An indefensible hoax.
Problem arises when you take people’s qualifications at face value and assume they are experts at what they do.
There’s a massive gulf between attaining a qualification and attaining expert proficiency in an activity.
And then you’re assuming that someone that is an expert isn’t compromised or corrupted.
I’ve met too many “ experts “ who don’t have a fucking clue to trust them on their credentials alone.
Well if your dentist has a certificate showing he achieved a "first" at a reputable university within the last couple of decades, he, or she, will be a bloody good dentist. Their crowns and bridges will fit your bite perfectly and stay in place for decades.. So there is one qualification that is very reliable. Major companies compete for outstanding graduates. A mate of mine is a mining engineer who specialises in one aspect. He has been trying to retire for years but is pretty much irreplaceable. Qualifications and previous performance are the way professionals are judged. What would you suggest? Amateur guesswork?
My modelling predicts a big Cryptoknight bust up coming along shortly.
Trust me......I'm a doctor.
Blowin killing you here BB. Sorry.
I'm an analyst, often get asked to do forecasts on relevant stuff, build a model. I tell 'em 'nah, I don't do forecasts but I'm happy to run up some projections for you'.
It's the difference between being a fraud and not being a fraud.
For the record BB, immigration used to be set by the Dept of Immigration, admittedly with no plan or direction.
In the Howard years the principle input to setting immigration levels came from Treasury. For most of the 2000s immigration levels have largely been set purely with the aim of maintaining economic growth.
I'd link to something but that's the result of having read about 100,000 articles over the past 20 years.
Ask around though for people who actually work in federal govt. This is what they will say. Credlins comment wasn't news, it was a continuation of policy that had been in place for two decades. Treasury won the public service wars and basically all policy has to get past egghead economists and their really stupid little brothers, econometricians, I.e. the smartest dumb people on the planet.
I don't dispute what you say batfink but the debate was about the influence of immigration on wages and house prices. An influence I do not dispute except to put it in the context of the other significant influences. It then degenerated into a ridiculous slagging of all expertise, modelling and statistics. If you think Blowin was winning I doubt you read the who,e exchange. I reckon I left him swinging in the wind throwing nothing but insults and unsupported assertions.
Clearly a man of integrity
(An analysis not just from this one occasion - willing to go out there when the chips are down with uncomfortable truths)
Some people just don't know when the jig is up
It'd be funny if it wasn't so tragic
At last something we can all agree on.