Which way is the economy heading?

Is our economy

  • Is about to boom

    Votes: 21 11.9%
  • or completely stuffed and worse to come

    Votes: 39 22.2%
  • Going to be as flat as anything

    Votes: 116 65.9%

  • Total voters
    176
is the average joe just so unaware of whats going on? or am I missing something big time
No, they're not unaware.

And that's what I've been saying for at least a year on this topic - talking to folks on the ground across a lot of industries and areas.

Whenever I bring this subject up, I get howled down by several folks saying I'm basing it on my little corner and little workshop...I'm not.

But this contradicts what I just said, doesn't it?...Those who howl me down must be unaware?
 
Last edited:
No, they're not unaware.

And that's what I've been saying for at least a year on this topic - talking to folks on the ground across a lot of industries and areas.

Whenever I bring this subject up, I get howled down by several folks saying I'm basing it on my little corner and little workshop...I'm not.

But this contradicts what I just said, doesn't it?...Those who howl me down must be unaware?
unfortunately, opinions are like a$$holes, everybody has one

especially topics that there is not a clear right or wrong, and especially topics that makes think they appear smarter ;)
 
Bayview

At least you want things to be good , unlike some of the perma bears :rolleyes:

I personally appreciate your ongoing comments and candour in reporting what you see . That what people want to hear . Honest opinions .

Cliff
 
Whenever I bring this subject up, I get howled down by several folks saying I'm basing it on my little corner and little workshop...I'm not.
That's the only problem with silent evidence no one is game to look at the causes and effects till it hits them smack bang in the face, just get up each morning and say to yourself this is going to be the best day of your life while withholding any judgment and just say "I don't know"..
 
Some 47 per cent of jobs in industrialized nations like Australia are at risk of redundancy as automation outstrips job creation

It begs the question, if a company making $10M PA reduces its workforce from 100 to 50 via automation, how does that affect society? The company's wage bill drops but it has a (temporary) cost for automation. Once the automation is paid off, the company has increased profit. Shouldn't governments be looking at how best to tax such entities?

There may come a time when the number of jobs available overall may drop 50% as Trippy says. Yet companies will still be making their profit. A mechanism will be needed to redistribute wealth.
 
It begs the question, if a company making $10M PA reduces its workforce from 100 to 50 via automation, how does that affect society? The company's wage bill drops but it has a (temporary) cost for automation. Once the automation is paid off, the company has increased profit. Shouldn't governments be looking at how best to tax such entities?

There may come a time when the number of jobs available overall may drop 50% as Trippy says. Yet companies will still be making their profit. A mechanism will be needed to redistribute wealth.
Redistribute wealth? You might need to go back to the USSR buddy.

The whole point is that these efficiencies create greater productivity so we can move people into other areas of the economy and create better products. The more, the better.

The luddites were a very unsuccessful bunch.

If we were against automation and removal of labour from profit generation 99% of the population would still be tilling the fields by hand, would you rather this?
 
Redistribute wealth? You might need to go back to the USSR buddy.

The whole point is that these efficiencies create greater productivity so we can move people into other areas of the economy and create better products. The more, the better.

The luddites were a very unsuccessful bunch.

If we were against automation and removal of labour from profit generation 99% of the population would still be tilling the fields by hand, would you rather this?
Love it CJay, don't let anything stand in the way of progess!
 
Good news for the economy, folks!

Announcement on ABC news yesterday morning - there were over 100,000 jobs created last month.

No; that is not a type-o;

100,000

and;

last month...

Now, what time are Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny due to arrive tonight? :rolleyes:
 
Good news for the economy, folks!

Announcement on ABC news yesterday morning - there were over 100,000 jobs created last month.

No; that is not a type-o;

100,000

and;

last month...

Now, what time are Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny due to arrive tonight? :rolleyes:
But bad news for interest rates
 
But bad news for interest rates
I was being facetious;

There is as much chance of that many jobs being created - real jobs - in one month as there is a Melbourne Premiership next year.

One of the Gubb spokesman came on after that and said words such as:"I'd take that with a grain of salt", and went on further to intimate they were mostly part-time and/or casual jobs that might have been created morelike.
 
There is as much chance of that many jobs being created - real jobs - in one month as there is a Melbourne Premiership next year.
You're absolutely right....

The ABS reckons it might be far more than only 100K jobs created in Aug - they are 95% sure the figure is somewhere between 63,400 and 178,600. Even the lower bound is a v. positive result.

And back in 1991 (shortly after the recession) well over 100,000 were created in one month, so it isn't unprecedented.

One of the Gubb spokesman came on after that and said words such as:"I'd take that with a grain of salt", and went on further to intimate they were mostly part-time and/or casual jobs that might have been created morelike.
I'm sure that there will be a revision of these figures next month - many are sceptical. Last months figures were recently revised upwards.

Around 100K of the additional jobs were part time, with only 20K full time.

The interest rate futures market certainly believed the figures - the likelihood of a rise has been brought forward a little.
 
You're absolutely right....

The ABS reckons it might be far more than only 100K jobs created in Aug - they are 95% sure the figure is somewhere between 63,400 and 178,600. Even the lower bound is a v. positive result.

And back in 1991 (shortly after the recession) well over 100,000 were created in one month, so it isn't unprecedented.

I'm sure that there will be a revision of these figures next month - many are sceptical. Last months figures were recently revised upwards.

Around 100K of the additional jobs were part time, with only 20K full time.

The interest rate futures market certainly believed the figures - the likelihood of a rise has been brought forward a little.
The other thing that wasn't mentioned was where are these jobs created - what industries were they created in?
 
The other thing that wasn't mentioned was where are these jobs created - what industries were they created in?
I would agree with sanj - who cares what industry?

The ABS' sampling methodology doesn't publish industry stats, however the ANZ job ads series (which is a fairly good proxy) suggests...

On the one hand, strengthening labour demand in some labour intensive industries, such as in construction, health and retail, is an encouraging sign.
However, the effect on employment from the windback in mining investment is likely to have further to run
....
 
does it matter?
Maybe not.

To me; it does.

My feelings on this is it's no good crowing about a zillion more jobs created if folks can't pay their bills from having one.

For example; a retrenched 45 year old dude, who is now a Bunnings worker in one of their newest constructed branches, who gets 15-20 hours per week.

But the Gubbmint reckons it's great! Look what we've done, folks!!

And they didn't create the jobs; Bunnings did.

This is not really employment. He's only doing it until he can get a real job that earns decent bucks...if he even can at that age..

Same as everybody else in that boat I'd wager.

Lots of those more "substantial" jobs/careers are disappearing...

Of course, there are plenty who find this type of hours perfect; house wives/husbands with school kids, students, etc.

The term is too general and the Pollies don't seem to ever want to make any distinction - just crow about "more jobs".

Would any of them - or anyone here on SS - stay in a job like that?

Would you call that a "career"? Most wouldn't.

I suppose there is the possibility of the Bunnings guy working his way up to Store Manager if he can hang around and do it well for long enough.

When you consider who vocal the current crop of younger folk are about how hard it is to buy a house now; there is not much satisfaction in hearing that there are more jobs going, but they are like the ones as described.

People want meaningful and solid careers....decent rate of pay, sick leave, annual leave pay and so on.
 
Well Bayview a job is a job. He does work, gets paid for it. That's the definition of employment. That's good for the economy so long as it is isn't being paid for by the taxpayer. Whether it's a high paying white collar job or not, makes no difference.
 
For example; a retrenched 45 year old dude, who is now a Bunnings worker in one of their newest constructed branches, who gets 15-20 hours per week.

.
Maybe just read between the social lines,if the 45 year old gentleman only wants to work those hours because they may affect his sit-down-centrelink payments,that's the problem with standardized minds if you zoom in on one single person it's always a different story,but a job is a job in no matter how the statistics make it look..imho..
 
Top