Guest Post: Arky looks back on Blair’s third way?

The shop.

I have just returned from shopping at a large chain superstore.

Everything about this experience fills me with disgust. The door “greeters” who are really there to discourage casual theft, because we can no longer be trusted to do a simple shop without pilfering the goods.

The milling crowd choosing from the items displayed in heaped piles. These buyers, if they work, work in pseudo jobs making nothing, producing little other than angst and gas.

The items for sale are made almost exclusively in China. The world’s new, real workforce. What we used to be. Before we became uniformly fat and stupid and useless.

The third way.

“Socialism as a rigid form of economic determinism has ended, and rightly” claimed Tony Blair.

It turns out the third way was a lie. The social welfare state born in the depression to prevent the unpleasant spectacle of people dying in the streets has mutated and grown… until today a third or more of the workforce is in some type of employ of the government. Government makes up almost 40% of the economy. Those it does not directly employ at state, federal or local level it either subsidises and therefore controls indirectly, as is the case with school, university and health funding, or regulates and controls though industrial relations and environmental legislation, for example.

What is this other than pure socialism of the economic determinist kind?

Blair and his Australian ilk responded to the death of the Soviet Union by doing the only thing they could to keep the socialist dream alive: dress it up in faux capitalist clothing.

Oh. And people still die in the streets. But they are mainly old alcoholic men, discovered quietly passed away under freeway overpasses. So that’s OK then.

Submarines

Over the next thirty years (thirty years!) we are to build twelve (twelve!) French designed submarines at an estimated cost of 50 Billion dollars.

I will write that in figures: $50,000,000,000. Around $2000 per man, woman and child, correct me if I am wrong.

What is the point of this?

In the last ten years Australia’s economy has added over 1.6 million service jobs, and lost hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs.

You either have a fully functioning manufacturing sector as part of an industrial base, or you don’t.

If you don’t, then you can fluff around with socialized sustainable part time energy; you can have a massive social welfare state where the vast, vast majority of people are either on welfare, in bogus service jobs or part of an ever expanding government sector.

But if you want to have a real economy you have to take on the hard tasks: educate the populace that there is no free ride. Bust the unions, defund the welfare state and reduce the size and reach of the state.

There is no third way.

No one has the stomach for it.

Yet.

This entry was posted in Guest Post. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Guest Post: Arky looks back on Blair’s third way?

  1. Zyconoclast

    At some point collapse will happen.
    The money will run out.

    Venezuela is the shape of things to come.

  2. Andysaurus

    Maggie was right, as always.

  3. Johno

    There is nothing special about manufacturing and there is nothing wrong with service jobs.

  4. Dr Fred lenin

    That 50 billion we should start our own missile industry will of course expand to 190 billionor more if pollies are involved like the krudsters nbn nd giliards ndis.we shoukd build our own missile industry to destroy hostile subs and surface ships ,also aircraft we have the capability and the people all we need is the will and the money . Stuff pynes seat we are k]talking security here .I am sure we coukd build our p]own nukes and delivery systems and then the Norks threats woukd be just that ,threats ,with these defence measures we woukd be a tough nut to crack . We would need to take measures against the third column within Australia but total defunding woukd fix them ,without other peopkes money they woukd wither on the vine and a reverse migration system would remove internal threats ,selective migration woukd reduce welfare expense and supply money fior defence all we need are Australian leaders ,nit u.n,communust fellow travellers .

  5. Tim Neilson

    There is nothing special about manufacturing … .
    Try feeding, clothing and sheltering yourself with compliance manuals.

  6. cynical1

    Try feeding, clothing and sheltering yourself with compliance manuals.

    That’s where the service jobs come in.

    Everybody gets a reach around.

  7. Squirrel

    “In the last ten years Australia’s economy has added over 1.6 million service jobs, and lost hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs.” – and so many of those jobs (particularly the better paid and more secure ones) are reliant upon government for funding or, at the least, for a coercive regulatory underpinning.

    It would be somewhat less of a problem if our services sector was more internationally competitive, so that it could help to pay for all those nice manufactured things which we don’t have time to design and make.

  8. zyconoclast

    There is nothing special about manufacturing … .
    Try feeding, clothing and sheltering yourself with compliance manuals.

    This looks like it works for the shelter part.

  9. Scavenger

    To be sure there is nothing wrong with service jobs. But if there is no one producing stuff, eg: creating wealth, and spending, where do the “service” people expect the dollars come from?

  10. Roger

    There is nothing special about manufacturing and there is nothing wrong with service jobs.

    Manufacturing paid decent wages with regard to the skills required.

    The service sector is low skilled and hence low wage.

    You can’t build or sustain a modern nation on a service economy.

  11. I am Spartacus

    There is nothing special about manufacturing and there is nothing wrong with service jobs.

    Manufacturing paid decent wages with regard to the skills required.

    The service sector is low skilled and hence low wage.

    You can’t build or sustain a modern nation on a service economy.

    I will be honest and say that I don’t have any data to support this, but intuitively this does not seem correct to me. IMO it all depends on the service jobs and the mix.

    Yes. Waiters and checkout operators are relatively low skilled. But doctors, lawyers and engineers are also service workers. Financial services is also services and not manufacturing (despite what some call their part of the value chain). Financial services also receives plenty direct and indirect government benefit.

    I don’t think Singapore has a large manufacturing base and they are doing ok. and please don’t start on their governance. Not relevant to this conversation.

    My point is not service jobs good or manufacturing jobs good. It depends on the jobs and the mix and what Australian’s are comparatively good at.

  12. I am Spartacus

    PS. Whether their salaries justify their productivity or not, there is another giant service sector in Australia that is growing rapidly. It’s call the public service.

    Now that is a sector I would like to shrink!

  13. Rev. Archibald

    At 20% of GDP, manufacturing is the largest segment of the Singaporean economy.
    15 years ago it was over 30% of the Singapore economy.

  14. Link
    ..
    And correction: should read almost 30%

  15. Roger

    I will be honest and say that I don’t have any data to support this, but intuitively this does not seem correct to me. IMO it all depends on the service jobs and the mix.

    True, but I suspect the major growth area for jobs in our economy are in health care – nursing home assistants, personal carers, etc., followed by fast food production; low skill, low wage & probably casual.

  16. Roger

    Plus the largely bogus education sector , of course.

  17. Rev. Archibald

    Per capita Singapore has the fifth largest gross capital add in manufacturing.
    Australia ranks 18th.

  18. Fat Tony

    Australia can’t be “de-industrialised” and still have heaps of manufacturing jobs.

  19. Ben G

    In regards to the submarines – I think the $50 billion isn’t the build price (it was meant to also be the ongoing maintenance and support), but as we don’t really know at this stage exactly how much the government is expecting to spend it’s as valid as any other figure. That works out to about $66.67 a year for every man, woman and child to pay for what is probably going to be our only offensive weapon.

    Spending on government to defend the country is probably one area most of us could agree on, though we’d appreciate greater transparency and processes that delivers the best bang for our buck (forgive the pun!). And these subs are possibly going to be the sum of our offensive military strength in the future, as we’ve disposed of the strike capacity we had in the F-111’s, we’re replacing the F/A-18’s with the F-35’s, and the rest of our navy is (in my mind rightly) focused on shipping defence and convoy/escort capacity.

    Though in the interests of full disclosure, I’m studying marine engineering, so do have a vested interest in us having ships and submarines to work on. Though I’d rather we were also building more civilian vessels for our merchant fleet as well – or even if we HAD a merchant fleet…

  20. Julian

    Just under $4 billion for each sub and they aren’t even nuclear powered. And we wonder why we have a deficit…

  21. Ben G

    I don’t want to hijack the thread debating pros and cons, but nuclear submarines are a bit beyond our economy , capacity and budget. Our nuclear industry sadly doesn’t exist, meaning we’d be reliant on others to train our crews, to build them and,probably, maintain them. Then at the end of their 30 year life, how will we store or dispose of them (look up Rosyth Dockyard in the UK for some of the fun issues with that one).
    Then there is the price – when governments aren’t fudging the figures over multiyear buys and extra payments to builders, how much do they really cost to build…
    Finally, imagine trying to get the idea of nuclear anything through the current parliament, or any conceivable one in the future. Sometime you have to settle for the best you can, both of what you can afford and whats on offer – and what the wife will let you buy!

  22. Andrew

    It isn’t about manufacturing vs services. It’s about export vs domestic. If we sold world class services, that would be fine. As it is, we will soon sell nothing except primary products and be a true banana republic.

    We sell uni degrees. But if you’re a rich Singaporean, do you send your kid to Syd U? If so, why?

  23. I don’t want to hijack the thread debating pros and cons . . .

    Then don’t. You’re rehashing a bunch of zombie memes that have been addressed and discredited here at the Cat several times over. It’s way too late at night to do it all again, especially on a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with military procurement.

  24. rickw

    “In the last ten years Australia’s economy has added over 1.6 million service jobs, and lost hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs.”

    Over the years I have met many people who used to work in manufacturing. They were always proud of their work and looked back at their time in manufacturing with fondness. I have rarely if ever seen the same from someone working in the service “industry”.

    In the end I think the destruction of manufacturing and rise the service industry has as much to do moulding a modern socialist society as it does with anything else.

  25. rickw

    Per capita Singapore has the fifth largest gross capital add in manufacturing.
    Australia ranks 18th.

    And they started with basically nothing around 70 years ago. What I would also add is that they seem to do quite a bit of design and supply coordination so they also feed quite a bit of manufacturing work into Malaysia and Indonesia.

  26. Philby

    At least they will qualify for the “Diesel rebate”😁

  27. Delta A

    you can have a massive social welfare state where the vast, vast majority of people are either on welfare, in bogus service jobs or part of an ever expanding government sector.

    Senator DL states in the $Oz today that 870,000 non-citizens receive $15 billion per annum in welfare payments.

    But if you want to have a real economy you have to take on the hard tasks: educate the populace that there is no free ride.

    Good luck with that.

  28. Mitch

    Whoever wrote this post should take over One Nation.

  29. .

    This is partly wrong.

    Manufacturing has grown in raw employment numbers and output. It simply isn’t as large relative to the rest of the economy.

  30. .

    Ben G
    #2374028, posted on May 7, 2017 at 10:37 pm

    No shills for piss poor procurement, please. We’ve had enough of people defending the useless F-35s.

    We ought to have just leased them as we have done with other platforms such as the F-4 Phantom. There is no issue in this.

  31. 132andBush

    There is nothing special about manufacturing and there is nothing wrong with service jobs.

    Let’s all become accountants then and count one another’s money.

  32. .

    The real point is we wouldn’t have as many accountants if we had a simpler, less invasive, less demanding and less greedy tax system.

  33. 132andBush

    Amen to that, dot.

    That was just my take on the johno trolls implication that our economy would survive without wealth being injected from external sources, be they from primary production or manufacturing. You can class the financial and IT service sectors as a form of manufacturing in my book. So long as they drag in external wealth.

Comments are closed.