51 economists (count ‘em) have released an open letter declaring that “The Labor federal government prevented the Australian economy from falling into a deep recession and a consequent huge rise in unemployment” by its stimulus activities.
What’s more they “hope that the economic achievements of the Australian Labor Government will be recognized by the population.” I wonder what they mean by that?
It’s the usual gaggle.
Now I have to say this is one of the most unusual name combos I’ve ever seen.
Nixon Apple
Industry and Economic
Advisor
Australian Manufacturing
Workers Union
JC
16 Aug 10 at 5:55 pm
Ken, how many of them are the ALP teat?
Peter Patton
16 Aug 10 at 5:57 pm
PP Most probably, though I know of one who has declared he will vote for the Greens. Perhaps their economic policies are even better.
Ken Nielsen
16 Aug 10 at 5:58 pm
How many academic economists are in Australia? I would have thought there would be at least 300 so 51 signatories leaves me underwhelmed.
dover_beach
16 Aug 10 at 5:59 pm
“The Labor federal government prevented the Australian economy from falling into a deep recession and a consequent huge rise in unemployment”
This is quite different to what Swan, Gillard etc actually claim.
I can’t agree with them. Look at non bank financial corporation assets since Mar 09. It has been declining as cumulative Federal debt has now risen to 75 bn AUD.
.
16 Aug 10 at 6:00 pm
I notice the paper peddled it through under AAP. That’s interesting because it seems no journo there may have wanted to put their name to it.
I suppose it would be too much to ask unFairfax to ask the signatories if they have been paid consultants of the ALP or its affiliates.
JC
16 Aug 10 at 6:02 pm
Jesus, I know quite a few of the signatories from back in the day, and they’re STILL only fricking “Senior Lecturers”. What a soul-destroying career!
Peter Patton
16 Aug 10 at 6:02 pm
It’s a who’s who of who the hell are they?
Infidel Tiger
16 Aug 10 at 6:08 pm
One of my best mates from my late teens and early 20s is there. Honours degree at Sydney Uni, then 5 years PhD in NYC, and still only a fricking “Senior Lecturer!”
He was a disciple of Keynes by second semester of 1st year. We had to write an essay, and we could choose either a 1,500 word one (worth 20%) or a 3,000 one (worth 40%). He chose the 3,000 word, and wrote a critique of some chapters from Keynes’ General Theory! In second semester first year, when I was actually sober, I was lucky to know what courses I was enrolled in!
Peter Patton
16 Aug 10 at 6:13 pm
Steve Keen? The Nostradamus who said the Australian housing bubble would burst around this time?
Alex Pundit
16 Aug 10 at 6:19 pm
Some false advertising there. The letter says “we the undersigned economists” yet are they all economists? For that matter, what is an ‘economist’? For example Jerry Courvisanos seems like an accountant to me (commerce graduate). And what of the evidence that it couldn’t have been the stimulus program since it came after the recovery? http://www.cecc.com.au/clients/uob/staff/staff_details.php?staff_id=37
Samuel J
16 Aug 10 at 6:27 pm
No, they’re not. I recognize a few who I know have degrees in Psychology, Sociology, and Law, who have never darkened the doorstep of an Economics lecture theatre.
Peter Patton
16 Aug 10 at 6:30 pm
Senior Lecturer. Sounds pretty impressive to those of us working in Soviet tractor factory.
Ev630
“Five year best worker” medal winner.
Ev630
16 Aug 10 at 6:35 pm
Not if you’ve been at that level for 10-15 years, after up to ten years at university, and you’re raking in a whopping $88,000 a year!
Peter Patton
16 Aug 10 at 6:40 pm
Is Kwiggan on the list parchance?
Michael Fisk
16 Aug 10 at 6:42 pm
Many will say the following is not analogous to our situation here in Oz, but this guy pretty much sums up why the American stimulus package in the US failed and why I would argue that the whole theory behind it no matter where it is applied is full of hot air.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcS45QccQvI
Don’t you wish there was someone in our government who could talk the talk like he does?
It is sad that our nation is so full of sheep that believe our government’s spin on the stimulus. I ask them to get out and see the rest of the world. I was on a seven week trip overseas this year, with a full month in the US. I visited three states, California, Nevada and Pennsylvania. The economy over there is a basket case, even after the trillion dollar stimulus package and circa $800B bail out months earlier. I recall that when speaking to people and the conversations got around to politics, there was one thing that they all agreed upon (and this came from both conservative and liberal minded people), the economy no matter what was being reported in the media at the time was not getting any better.
Alex Pundit
16 Aug 10 at 8:25 pm
Interesting that Steve Keen put his name to a letter that explicitly endorsed the first home owner boost of which he has been very critical, and quite publicly too. It is stated in the letter that it prevented a steep fall in property prices. Not a sentiment that I would have thought he’d endorse?
Skuter
16 Aug 10 at 10:15 pm
Almost none of the commenters have done serious work in macroeconomics and yet that is the type of judgement they are making. It’s a party political cheer squad and the more senior members of this choir should be ashamed of themselves.
hc
16 Aug 10 at 11:53 pm
Harry:
Not for nothing, but Homer also uses the same silly excuses that we don’t understand. However in the final It’s basically mindless drivel.
I’ve read more explanations of this tax than you have, all from qualified security analysts at the top I-banks and each and every single analysis of this rotten little tax was negative.
Each one explained that it was a tax crab and each one stated that a promise to recompense was not the same as issuing a redeemable note- something that the government/ Treasury refused to do.
It also explained that investor profile in mining is not looking for smoothing but the chance to hit the ball out of the ballpark as far as small miners go.
A similar industry in terms of these characteristics is pharma where investors buy a series of bets in order to spread the risk. Investors don’t want to co-share with the government. It’s as simple as that.
Lastly the tax as it was originally proposed by Rudd and the one you support was a tax grab pure and simple.
In your hubris have you even bothered to ask yourself how you can call the tax neutral and yet at the same time recognize the tax was a grab. Those were your words, Harry. Not mine.
And you have the nerve to say people don’t understand the tax. You really are offensive in the worst possible way.
Let’s be clear there are strong merit towards moving to a profits based tax rather than a production one. However the risk free of return was a joke and the grab was monstrously high. Lastly it ought to be the states that decide, not the federal government.
Almost none of the commenters have done serious work in macroeconomics
You’re an offensive joke.
JC
17 Aug 10 at 12:20 am
I learnt more as a 22 year old in my first month on the London JP Morgan gilt derivatives desk than these bozoes will ever cotton on to. Psssstttt…guys, the answers ain’t in textbooks or academic seminar rooms. Not even the questions are.
Peter Patton
17 Aug 10 at 12:23 am
Oops sorry harry I thought you were commenting on the rent tax and thought that you were replying on that thread. I should have looked more carefully.
I agree with your comment, not that it matters.
Ironically it could be transposed to the RSPT thread word for word if you want to say the same thing over there, in which case I’ll withdraw my apology
JC
17 Aug 10 at 12:24 am
I think you assumed my comments related to the RSPT you moron JC. This thread didn’t discuss taxes but Labor’s fiscal expansion. Your powers of comprehensive are as bad as your lack of reasoning.
Try writing your irrelevant meanderings on the right thread.
I
hc
17 Aug 10 at 12:26 am
Unlike you I apologized for my mistake. Consider your abuse as a freebie Hare. Take your best shot, as even the least endowed among us have the right to feel good about themselves on the odd occasion.
Stay classy.
JC
17 Aug 10 at 12:30 am
It’s a pity you are both too old and frail to have this fight sanctioned by any sporting federation on the east coast. You will probably have to come to perth if you want to punch on.
Yobbo
17 Aug 10 at 12:34 am
Harry
you moron JC
Hey, aren’t you voting for The Greens? Dude, pot meet kettle. Now check yourself into the nearest loony bin.
Peter Patton
17 Aug 10 at 12:34 am
yobbo:
I ran around the freaking tan today which is around 4 k. at a decent clip. I go to gym most days and ride a bike.
I’d love a UFC 5 rounder with Hare.
If you can put it together and promote it I’d be in it.
JC
17 Aug 10 at 12:40 am
jc
Ya reckon Harry’s cruisin’ for a bitchslappin’ do ya?
Peter Patton
17 Aug 10 at 12:42 am
Anthony Mundine’ll have ya, JC. Or Harry.
C.L.
17 Aug 10 at 12:43 am
All i need 4 weeks of intensive training and I’m ready.
I don’t want any money. If i win Hare promises never to vote for the One Nation Greens ever again or promote those loons.
JC
17 Aug 10 at 12:48 am
I don’t think a gentleman is ever permitted to strike a man in a straight-jacket.
Peter Patton
17 Aug 10 at 12:50 am
“Almost none of the commenters have done serious work in macroeconomics and yet that is the type of judgement they are making.”
Ditto for the signers. Note they include lawyers etc…
.
17 Aug 10 at 1:21 am
@hc: “Almost none of the commenters have done serious work in macroeconomics and yet that is the type of judgement they are making”
In 5 days’ time all adult australians will have to make this judgement. Are you suggesting they are not qualified because they haven’t done any serious work in macroeconomics?
The question of labor stimuli is far more complicated than that of the mining tax, which is a grab of money based on a statist based view of economics. But the letter signed by 5o economists is nothing more than party political propaganda. Now, I for one am not sure that this is ethical: for academics to engage in popitical propaganda during the election campaign. They of course are perfectly entitled to do this as private citizens, but they they should not sign as representing their respective institutions. At best, it is borderline. I am seriously thinking of making a complaint.
Boris
17 Aug 10 at 3:23 am
I have read the letter. Unbelievable misuse of office for shameless political propaganda.
If anyone has any advice how it is possible to complain, please let me know.
Boris
17 Aug 10 at 3:30 am
http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/03/22/fhb-boost-is-australias-sub-prime-lite/
Here’s one of Keen’s blog posts on the first home owner boost. Not such a ringing endorsement. How can the man sign such a letter?
Skuter
17 Aug 10 at 6:02 am
From Keen’s blog:
“Very few of those who’ve received the FHOB would qualify as Subprime as it was defined in America–a borrower actually had to have a poor credit history to get a Subprime loan. But First Home Buyers are, almost by definition, young and newly in the workforce. They will be amongst the first to lose their jobs when the downturn bites.”
I don’t even agree with that. It’s those older workers in middle management who are targeted first.
Not many kids say “Hi honey, I’ve been retrenched”
.
17 Aug 10 at 7:25 am