“After three long years, it seems the government has finally discovered their productivity disaster. If this change of heart by Labor is true, it will be akin to turning around the Titanic.”
???
Funnily enough, I kinda agree with that comment. The difference being that he wants them to move in ways that will make the country worse, just like his party constantly tries to. I’m hoping they might embrace their mandate to do something bold and progressive instead of the milquetoast liberalism they’ve done in the past.
productivity isn’t amazing but as far as I’m aware it’s not like it was great under the liberal party either? feels a bit hypocritical to me
Productivity isn’t great because of the kinds of jobs the people of this nation increasingly do, and likely will do for the foreseeable future.
And, sorry if this comes across a bit morbid. Until the baby boomers shuffle off this mortal coil in greater numbers, any serious productivity gains in certain industries are overtaken by the medical, care, and other old-age related, usually low productivity, work the country is providing.
Its because of this, that i’m sceptical that ‘productivity’ is a good measure to be relying on so heavily to gain an honest understanding of the working economy.
Edit: sorry, my point in saying this is, i don’t think we should be as hung up on low productivity. No matter who is the Government, theres the same demographic reality. Yhe economic settings and feedback need to be designed to cater for that, that means less of the industrial-output mindset that delivers productivity as a key measure of success.
The constant chase of productivity increases can make sense, but only if you’re not trying to increase output at the same rate.
We should be trying to reduce the total amount of work done, while increasing the quality of life of all Australians. If that is the goal then productivity increases are a win for everyone.
Well the industrial model it came out of came with pay rises for the work force for the productivity gains. So its use was acceptable to the workers then.
Not sure that was really a great set up, because a lot of the productivity gains were from implementation of technology, not so much better work in general by the employee base, although that was also the case often, but the technology changes were the larger productivity increases.
What you’re suggesting is coming up to what Maynard Keynes imagined as a future. People producing as much or even more, with less time spent on the work. Soyou’re in good company.
I don’t imagine a system like that will come in this century though. Too much competition between Nations and peoples, not enough machines to do the work.
This masthead reported last week that Australian officials believe biosecurity rules could be tweaked to allow US beef into Australia, a key demand of the Trump administration, without compromising safety.
I will literally never knowingly buy US beef as long as I live. I’d prefer to eat tofu.
Neither will I, but honestly if I remember I don’t think the biosecurity rules around imported beef here are that important (that isn’t to say biosecurity itself isn’t important). Neither are exports to America though. TBH these trade talks don’t seem to matter at all.
Tofu is pretty good when prepared well. Very low chance of contracting some fucked disease too.
What about those times of the year when local beef is out of season?
The government did not speak of the roundtable before its election win, the size of which has spurred calls from economists, think tanks and some MPs for Labor to consider broader reform to tackle issues such as reducing the reliance on income taxes…
The rest of the article details going the same route the USA has followed since Nixon. Do. not. open. the. door. to this. Please, for your own sakes.
reducing the reliance on income taxes
Tariffs!
They’re like increasing GST, but just for the poors that can’t buy what they want in one of the other countries/tax havens they live in.
