If it wasn't for the internet a lot more people would know FA about the goings on in the world of the bankers. Regards Errol 43
JulieW..The link you provided above in Post 22 should be a must view for SS members who wish to understand what the hell is going on in the world's financial world. It's no good worrying about what is going on in Australia. Our banks including the Reserve are told what to do. Now the UK has a Conservative government and now they are pumping 50000 pounds for each new home buyer..The price of homes will rise and TPTB will claim a recovery just in time for the next election. Will the red or blue party here in Australia up the first home buyers scheme, I just think they might.. It is not going to end well... I hope that I am wrong. Regards Errol43
Besides there being a lot of bad economists out there (especially bad macroeconomists), typically the one good thing is that they tend to understand the basics of supply and demand and price theory and, more importantly, the theorem of opportunity cost. Hopefully he'll reinvigorate places like the Productivity Commission which was deliberately neutered by Julia by appointing one of their cronies to head it up.
Ye I been contemplating going back to school and doing something like economics basics at least....Though if it wasn't for this site and Alex Jones/Peter Schiff/Jim Rogers etc etc I don't know where I would be financially as I could have possibly been indebted up to my eyeballs with a mortgage and working in a job that I hate for 30yrs...... I recently left the job I hated and only owe about 13k to a bank so payments are smallish per month.... Hopefully starting a fresh new job this coming week....waiting to here back from Head Office in Sydney they're really taking their time about it all!
Soon economist will be as dirty a word as bankster. Learn bookkeeping instead. Everything is in there.
At least Abbott has some qualifications that are relevant compared to Rudds first class honours in Asian studies and a job as a house cleaner for Laurie oaks.
Abott said clearly it is only a part of the overall policy and not the whole policy. I don't like the policy but for f*#+ sake be fair about it when you make comments.
I don't really know the ins and outs of either party's asylum seeker policies because I couldn't care less, it just blew my mind when I saw that they were going to buy the boats to stop people smugglers using them lol. No chance of price gouging lol.
A picture changes when viewed by itself or viewed as a part of a whole, it is called judging an action in context. We are not privy to the information the government has this we do not have the full picture consequently pulling one action and saying that is the whole policy and criticizing based solely on that action reflects more on yourself than Abott.
I'm sure that the same was probably argued for the school halls. Luckily there was no price gouging there either. Is it common practice to have good over-arching policies made up of retarded policies? Edit: Just in case you're just really defensive of Abbott/libs, I personally would prefer him to Rudd/labor, however that doesn't changing the fact that it is a stupid policy and negates any assumption of economic awareness suggested by his degree. I wonder what Hockey thinks of it lol.
No point in discussing with you as you are too biased to view things with an open mind. the outcome is almost certain to be a labour thrashing, for one simple reason: they had 6 years to run the government and they were crap at it, so the people will give the other mob a chance.
Obviously missed my edit. You're so obviously biased that you take any criticism of stupid policies as a personal attack. I think both parties are worse than useless and infact cause more harm than good. However, like I said above, if I had to choose one or the other it would be the libs. Now that that is sorted, please explain to me how a policy is good purely because it is put forward by the party you support. On the same note, would it be a shit policy if it had been suggested by labor?
I don't have a party I support but I am a realist, someone will win and it will only be either liberal or labour. Labour had their go, their policies sounded nice but the execution was crap thus the only logical choice is the next mob.
You're not explaining how the libs plan is a piece of art and the buying of boats is but one facet of it lol :lol: Can we please just agree that buying the boats is obviously stupid?
If you read my post, I clearly said I did not like the policy but I am just commenting on the policy as viewed as part of a whole policy. As the other guy was talking as if that was the WHOLE policy and judging it so, all I said that it should be viewed in context. I will admit taken by itself it does sound stupid.
Each illegal boat person cost's us the taxpayer around $70,000 a year in their first year here, god knows how much a year after that when family reunions and such occur. Based on the 50,000 people that have arrived by boat since Rudd ditched a perfectly good arrangement that amount would be around $3.500.000.000 just based on the cost in the first year of arrival. How many boats could you buy for just that amount ?
