Bungle in the Jungle

There’s a reason he’s one of the most beloved heavyweights of all time:

In other questionably useful adviser news:

How Australia is home to the world’s richest public servants.

Australian taxpayers are forking out million-dollar salaries for unelected public servants who are paid three times as much as their overseas counterparts…

For instance, Australia’s Reserve Bank Governor Philip Lowe draws a total salary package of $1,059,761.

But his counterpart at the US Federal Reserve, Chairman Jerome Powell, is paid just $203,500 or about $A295,000 – even though the decisions he makes affect the world’s biggest economy and have major global ramifications…

Griffith University senior politics lecturer Dr Paul Williams said Australia’s central bank governor arguably had a tougher job than his American counterpart – and deserved to be paid three times as much.

‘The United States economy is far less regulated and in that sense less complex,’ he told Daily Mail Australia.

If that’s true, we obviously need less regulation rather than more expensive mandarins.

This entry was posted in Shut it down. Fire them all., Wasteful Spending. Bookmark the permalink.

58 Responses to Bungle in the Jungle

  1. Adelagado

    Currencylad’s article are an excellent addition to Catallaxy.

  2. mh

    Australia’s high speed gravy train.

  3. Tom

    The United States economy is far less regulated and in that sense less complex,’ he told Daily Mail Australia.

    Imagine that: a tax-eating academic, who’s never had a real job in the real economy, supporting the strangulation of the Australian economy by Big Government regulation.

    We’ve just about reached critical mass in stupid where growth above 2% p.a. is technically impossible and a falling standard of living into the Venezuelan Third World is inevitable.

    All supported by do-nothing tax hoover Scott Morrison (who’s also never had a real job in his life).

  4. JC

    Griffith University senior politics lecturer Dr Paul Williams said Australia’s central bank governor arguably had a tougher job than his American counterpart – and deserved to be paid three times as much.

    ‘The United States economy is far less regulated and in that sense less complex,’ he told Daily Mail Australia.

    Another example of “academic yet idiot”.
    The academic world is littered with these imbeciles. You can weigh them by ton.

  5. FelixKruell

    Australian taxpayers are forking out million-dollar salaries for unelected public servants who are paid three times as much as their overseas counterparts…

    In many of these cases, it’s the that the foreigners are being paid too little – rather than the local ones too much. They are being asked to take massive pay cuts in order to serve their country. An admirable sentiment, but still.

  6. sabena

    JC the reason for Williams’comment is self evident-it justifies his own pay.

  7. mh

    Felix, stop dribbling you moron.

  8. a happy little debunker

    There was a time when Public Servants were paid less than the average punter, but it gave them much more security of employment,
    Might it be time to realign public servants wages with more modern employment practices?

  9. max

    The Official Counterfeiter
    Gary North – June 15, 2019

    The primary function of all central banks is to send false signals to borrowers and creditors all the time. Their secondary function is to bail out large commercial banks that suffer bank runs and even face bankruptcy (bank + rupture). Bank runs are the consequence of commercial banks’ implementation of the central bank’s policy of deceiving borrowers and creditors.

    Murray Rothbard’s 1983 book, The Mystery of Banking:
    explains in detail why central banking rests on the dual assumption that (1) theft through monetary inflation is morally neutral and (2) is often (i.e., all the time) the best monetary policy. Keynesianism, monetarism, and supply-side economics all rest on this dual assumption. They debate only on which rate of theft is wise at any time.

    A central bank is the government’s officially licensed counterfeiter.

    Counterfeiting is illegal because governments, central banks, and commercial banks want no competition. What they are really protecting is their government-protected trademark. If anyone could create money, this would destroy the purchasing power of money.

    A financial bubble is always fiat-money created. It is created by interest rates that are set below what would have prevailed on a free market. When it pops, and investors lose money, they rarely blame the official counterfeiters: the central bank and the commercial banks.

    https://www.garynorth.com/public/19609.cfm

  10. JC

    Fuck off Kruell. Your oppositional crap is now bordering on dumb trolling. If we take your absurd comment to the nth degree we can also argue we’re not getting value for money over the vig that overseas tax eaters are earning/ stealing.

    Philip Lowe, as an example, is earning over a million dollars a year. His contractual obligation is to adhere to RBA objectives with the most important being the inflation target. Inflation has been below the target range since 2016. He should have his arse fired immediately.

  11. JC

    Max
    Murray Rothbard was an idiot when it comes to monetary policy. There is no counterfeiting going on at all. Stop.

  12. Neil

    Nobody in the Public Service should be paid more than the Prime Minister. If they don’t like that they can get a job in private industry. What annoys me is the PS’s also get 15.4% Superannuation. Higher than most people

  13. max

    Gary North:

    Fiat Money Debasement
    The Oxford English Dictionary provides the most applicable definition of “debase”: “To lower in quality, value, or character; to make base, degrade; to adulterate. spec. To lower the value of (coin) by the mixture of alloy or otherwise; to depreciate.” 
    What Isaiah told the people of Judah was straightforward: they were debased. They were debased spiritually. They were debased culturally. They were also debased economically. God would not tolerate this debasement forever.

    The Inflation Process
    What is the incentive for debasement? Personal profit.

    This is the reason why civil governments have historically asserted the right to control the coinage. They may initially want to preserve the reliability of the monetary unit, but eventually the lure of profit is irresistible to governments, too. They become the inflators. They produce debased coins, or print pieces of paper, called money, or enter blips on a computer than can be transferred to the unsuspecting public. Governments may share the monopoly of money creation with modern banks, both central (quasi-government institutional and commercial, but only on the assumption that the bankers will buy the government’s debt (bills, notes, and bonds) whenever the government cannot sell them without paying voluntary lenders (the public) rates of interest that are higher than the government wishes to pay. 

    The winners are easier to pinpoint. They are those who have first access to the newly created fiat money. They can spend coins, buying goods and services at yesterday’s prices.

  14. Rohan

    If Philip Lowe is getting 3 times what his US counterpart is, shouldn’t we be getting 3 times a beter result for the money? But yet we aren’t. Based on current perfromance, he should be paid $100-120k.

  15. candy

    The RBA chiefs seem to be sucking the life out of the economy.
    I think their job description is something different though.

  16. RobK

    I find the gravity conjecture on the open thread, pavlovas and all, easier to digest than the postings of Gary North.

  17. FelixKruell

    JC:

    Philip Lowe, as an example, is earning over a million dollars a year. His contractual obligation is to adhere to RBA objectives with the most important being the inflation target. Inflation has been below the target range since 2016. He should have his arse fired immediately.

    Sure. But that’s kind of the point. At this level, I want them to be fire-able. But that also means you have to pay them something like what they’re worth. And the market says that anyone managing that many people/responsibilities in the financial services sector is worth much more than a $1m.

    Same with Department Heads or the heads of ASIC/APRA/ACCC/ABC. The pay should be just under market, but they should have limited time in the role and be fire-able.

    I should say that the next level of public servant down – the career middle managers – are the ones that are being paid far more than they’re worth.

  18. JC

    And the market says that anyone managing that many people/responsibilities in the financial services sector is worth much more than a $1m.

    First of all this isn’t the financial sector, it’s a public non-service. Why is a public service lackey worth as much as a non-public employee. Are there a lack of candidates for these jobs?

  19. FelixKruell

    JC:

    First of all this isn’t the financial sector, it’s a public non-service. Why is a public service lackey worth as much as a non-public employee. Are there a lack of candidates for these jobs?

    The reserve bank isn’t in the financial sector? Really?

    A public service lackey is usually worth less than a non-public employee. But not by millions. The CEO of our smallest banks make well more than $2m/year.

    Look at another example – the head of the ATO is paid around $800k. That’s less than half what he was paid in his previous (private sector) job.

  20. JC

    The financial sector we are talking about is in the private sector. What you or I think about rem in the banking sector is not our concern. It’s a private transaction between the shareholders/ board and the senior execs.
    The RBA is involved in financial sector, but it’s not a private banking institution. It supervises the banks.

    Again, there is no evidence these useless human beings would knock back these jobs at 1/3 the going tab. They’re otherwise unemployable. See Phil Lowe.

  21. FelixKruell

    JC:

    The RBA is involved in financial sector, but it’s not a private banking institution. It supervises the banks.

    And while it’s hard to work out the market value of the head of an entity that supervises the banks, the closest proxy is the head of another entity in the same sector. Banks, super funds, credit unions etc.

    Again, there is no evidence these useless human beings would knock back these jobs at 1/3 the going tab. They’re otherwise unemployable. See Phil Lowe.

    And my Chris Jordan example?

  22. JC

    And while it’s hard to work out the market value of the head of an entity that supervises the banks, the closest proxy is the head of another entity in the same sector. Banks, super funds, credit unions etc.

    You’re insane. CEOs of US private institutions are paid multiples more than their Australian counterparts and the US employees of their supervising institutions (public sector)are paid multiples less than ours. Stop comparing private vs public sector jobs are they are not the same thing.

    Look at another example – the head of the ATO is paid around $800k. That’s less than half what he was paid in his previous (private sector) job.

    Obviously then, money wasn’t important to this thug. And he is a thug. Lording it over fellow citizens in the heavy handed way he does it was obviously more attractive to him.
    In any event, I once read his bio and never struck me as someone worth his keep.

    Your point about the money angle and this thug makes the point for me.

  23. FelixKruell

    JC:

    You’re insane. CEOs of US private institutions are paid multiples more than their Australian counterparts and the US employees of their supervising institutions (public sector)are paid multiples less than ours. Stop comparing private vs public sector jobs are they are not the same thing.

    That was my point – the overseas ones are underpaid, not ours are overpaid.

    But fine – what’s your alternative to working out the market value of public sector heads?

    Obviously then, money wasn’t important to this thug. And he is a thug. Lording it over fellow citizens in the heavy handed way he does it was obviously more attractive to him.
    In any event, I once read his bio and never struck me as someone worth his keep.

    It’s not about whether you think he was worth it – the market clearly said he was for many years (while he was at KPMG). He could walk back to KPMG (or any other advisory firm) and earn at least twice what he is being paid now. That’s a pretty strong indicator to me that he’s being underpaid at the ATO.

  24. JC

    Lol that the overseas counterparts are underpaid. There’s obviously a shortage of people filling those top jobs seeing so many positions remain infilled… Like NOT.

    So let’s see Jordan head back to the private sphere.

    You’re so confused. He takes a lower paying job and you consider this to be support for your argument. Nuts.

  25. notafan

    It’s not about whether you think he was worth it – the market clearly said he was for many years (while he was at KPMG). He could walk back to KPMG (or any other advisory firm) and earn at least twice what he is being paid now. That’s a pretty strong indicator to me that he’s being underpaid at the ATO.

    Jordan was compulsorily retired by KPMG..
    So no he couldn’t.

    Forced out of KPMG, Chris Jordan gives big four a bruising

  26. FelixKruell

    JC:

    Lol that the overseas counterparts are underpaid. There’s obviously a shortage of people filling those top jobs seeing so many positions remain infilled… Like NOT.

    Actually a lot are infilled at the moment. Mainly because trump hasn’t filled them. Either way, that’s a poor way to gauge worth. Very few private sector CEO roles are infilled. Are you suggesting they’re overpaid too? Maybe head on over to the guardian if you want to rail against market based CEO pay.

    You’re so confused. He takes a lower paying job and you consider this to be support for your argument. Nuts.

    It does support it. He’s worth more than his current pay, based on what the market will pay him for his skills. Ergo in accepting the commissioner role, he took a lower paying job, probably out of a sense of public service, or for a challenge. He could walk back into KPMG tomorrow and earn twice as much. You won’t find a clearer indication of market value.

  27. FelixKruell

    Notafan:

    The mandatory retirement age is very selectively enforced. If you think any of the big 4 would knock him back now, you’re dreaming.

  28. notafan

    ‘very selectively enforced

    how convenient

    yet it appears in Jordan’s case it was

    as JC said let’s see him go back

    he’s had plenty of time

  29. FelixKruell

    Notafan:

    Really? You think they’d hesitate to take back the former Comissioner of Taxation? Wow.

    Let’s use another example. Ahmed Fahour. He walked into Aussie Post after earning millions at NAB, and walked out again afterwards earning millions.

  30. JC

    Kruell

    You’re trolling. Infilled or outfilled, there is no shortage or people working in the US civil service, you idiot. Don’t even try this bullshit with me.

    Are you suggesting they’re overpaid too? Maybe head on over to the guardian if you want to rail against market based CEO pay.

    ..when I suggested private sector pay is none of our business. It was you, stupidly suggesting there is some relevance to connect private / public sector jobs as somehow being comparable. You should head over to the Guardian and complain public sector pay elsewhere is too low, you clown… even though there are no shortage of people wanting those jobs.

    It does support it. He’s worth more than his current pay, based on what the market will pay him for his skills. Ergo in accepting the commissioner role, he took a lower paying job, probably out of a sense of public service, or for a challenge. He could walk back into KPMG tomorrow and earn twice as much. You won’t find a clearer indication of market value.

    Of course it doesn’t support your argument, you dolt. He went from a higher paying job to lower one. You’ve been arguing here that overseas civil servants are low paid by our standards.
    We now find out he was compulsorily retired over an age limit.

    Stop speculating about his odds of being able to go back to KPMG, you’re not a mind reader.

    Have you ever succeeded in winning one single argument here?

    There’s no shortage in filling lower paid overseas civil service jobs and here you are they aren’t paid enough. You clown.

  31. Tailgunner

    Fk these xunts.
    The Deep State.

  32. JC

    It does support it. He’s worth more than his current pay, based on what the market will pay him for his skills

    How the fuck would you know? Stop trying to turn speculation into fact.

  33. FelixKruell

    JC:

    Have you ever looked up the word trolling? It doesn’t mean what you think it does.

    The reason private sector pay is relevant to a discussion about public sector pay is that the same people can work in each sector at different times in their careers. So it provides a good (but not perfect) indication of the market value of those employees.

    You have provided no better way of working out the market value of public servants. Other than speculating that there are lots of people willing (but not necessarily able) to do the same job for less.

    Let me put it another way that you might understand. Do you think Trump is overpaid, at ~$500k/year? Is that higher than his market value? Because there are plenty of others who will do the role for less…

  34. Tim Neilson

    FelixKruell
    #3204157, posted on November 7, 2019 at 5:07 pm

    Felix,

    Philip Lowe has never had a job in the private sector, except maybe holiday or part time jobs as a student. There’s no grounds whatsoever to claim that private sector salaries indicate that he’s underpaid.

  35. JC

    Have you ever looked up the word trolling? It doesn’t mean what you think it does.

    Of course you’re trolling as you don’t have any argument to put forward.

    The reason private sector pay is relevant to a discussion about public sector pay is that the same people can work in each sector at different times in their careers. So it provides a good (but not perfect) indication of the market value of those employees.

    Don’t make us laugh. 99% of public servants would be incapable of running a for profit organization.

    You have provided no better way of working out the market value of public servants. Other than speculating that there are lots of people willing (but not necessarily able) to do the same job for less.

    I don’t need to dickhead. As I said, there are no shortage of civil servants in the US which has an unemployment rate ~ 50% lower than ours.

    Let me put it another way that you might understand. Do you think Trump is overpaid, at ~$500k/year? Is that higher than his market value? Because there are plenty of others who will do the role for less…

    First of all, we’re not talking about elected officials. Secondly, trump returns his salary to the treasury or gives it to charity. He doesn’t take the pay, you moron.
    Enough, you’re boring.

  36. JC

    Tim

    Phillip Lowe would never be able to hold an executive job in the private sector.

  37. FelixKruell

    JC:

    Of course you’re trolling as you don’t have any argument to put forward.

    Sigh. I’ve put forward a pretty clear argument. The fact you disagree doesn’t stop it being an argument.

    Don’t make us laugh. 99% of public servants would be incapable of running a for profit organization.

    I agree. But we’re talking about the 1% here, and I’ve given several examples of those who could and have run a for profit business, and been paid heaps to do so.

    First of all, we’re not talking about elected officials. Secondly, trump returns his salary to the treasury or gives it to charity. He doesn’t take the pay, you moron.

    Why would it matter whether they’re elected or not? And why would it matter whether he takes his pay and spends it, or donates it? The question remains – is he not overpaid, given there are no shortage of other candidates? It’s your own test I am applying here…

  38. Eyrie

    JC, could you explain please why an inflation target of other than 0% is a good thing?

  39. JC

    Of course the president job is overpaid. It should be zero pay as the everything is provided including a private jet and huge house decked out with hired help. There would like be no shortage of candidates at zero pay.

    You have made no argument to justify massively high pay for Australian public servants.

    Surely you don’t consider elected officials the same as public servants?

  40. FelixKruell

    JC:

    You have made no argument to justify massively high pay for Australian public servants.

    Sure I have. Some of them are worth that much in terms of their market value. As evidenced by their pay in the private sector, before or after their public sector role, and the market value of their private sector counterparts.

    You’ve provided no alternative basis for determining public sector pay, other than that they should all be paid zero because others are happy to take the role. Good luck applying that in practice.

  41. notafan

    There was considerable outcry over the auspost ceo’s pay especially when he brought home a massive loss.

    His replacement took the job on a much smaller package.

    See it can happen.

  42. FelixKruell

    Notafan:

    That’s nice. But we get a popular outcry about all CEO pay.

    It doesn’t negate the fact that his pay at Aus Post was clearly not out of line with his market value.

    Oh and his replacement there is still on more than $2m…

  43. candy

    The CEO Aus Post was getting 5.6 million.

    Mind boggling, when post has moved to electronic. What did he do that improved Australia that he needed nearly 6 million dollars per annum?

    I reckon about $500,000 would be appropriate. Even then it’s the same as the PM.

  44. notafan

    Just proves that pay can be cut and suitable candidates will still take the job.

  45. FelixKruell

    Notafan:

    The same applies to the private sector though. And there’s no guarantee lower pays gets you a better deal overall.

  46. Squirrel

    Lowe would be worth every dollar if he had the cojones to call out the population ponzi scheme which our economy is now based on, instead of pretending that it can be fixed with insanely cheap money and debt-funded spending on infrastructure to support a bloated population.

    What is the point of statutory independence and a seven year term if they go along with the same b/s as officials who can have their contracts terminated at any time?

    On the broader question, the much-increased pay rates for senior officials is surely another reason why governments are getting such clueless advice – that level of affluence (including the certainty of a massive defined benefit super pension) would anaesthetise those officials to the realities facing many Australians.

  47. JC

    Eyrie

    I’ll post a comment about that later today. Just saw it. In a train off to crooklyn.

  48. JC

    Sure I have. Some of them are worth that much in terms of their market value. As evidenced by their pay in the private sector, before or after their public sector role, and the market value of their private sector counterparts.

    You make absolutely no sense. You talk nonsense. There are numerous countries with the US being the prime example employing civil servants at much lower rates of pay. You argue they are too lowly paid without offering any evidence. Moreover , there are no structural vacancies in the US civil service.

    You’ve provided no alternative basis for determining public sector pay, other than that they should all be paid zero because others are happy to take the role. Good luck applying that in practice.

    You’re a troll. I made no such claim other than suggesting the presidency could be filled at zero wage as there would be no shortage of candidates for that position. Mayoral jobs are mostly not salaried positions and there are no shortage of mayoral candidates. Now go away as you don’t have any argument why Australian tax eaters should be so highly rem’ed.

  49. JC

    Eyrie

    Central banks are concerned with deflation as its hard to deal with. They set the target low enough to create an environment for stable monetary policy. The target is also set high enough in order to avoid unconventional monetary policy (QE) in case there is a demand shock causing deflation.

    Prices, such as labor rates and goods and services are sticky, so the adjustment in a deflationary environment can be very problematic.

    Debt principal and interest payments are nominal, which means that in a deflation the impact is that nominal cost of debt and the repayment becomes more expensive… it rises.

    Like you, I support a zero inflation target, but you also have to a much more flexible economy with massive deregulation. You would also require social acceptance of nominal adjustments to wages/income.
    We’re not there and the end result seems to be that we end up with more leftism/extremism during a deflationary environment.

  50. FelixKruell

    JC:

    You make absolutely no sense. You talk nonsense. There are numerous countries with the US being the prime example employing civil servants at much lower rates of pay. You argue they are too lowly paid without offering any evidence. Moreover , there are no structural vacancies in the US civil service.

    You’ve failed to address my argument, once again. Let me repost it:

    Sure I have. Some of them are worth that much in terms of their market value. As evidenced by their pay in the private sector, before or after their public sector role, and the market value of their private sector counterparts.

  51. JC

    Who cares about what these taxeaters are worth in the private sector, you imbecile. The argument is if these positions would be filled by people of an equal caliber or the same taxeaters at a much lower wage comparable to those in comparable countries overseas. Evidence suggests they would. You moron.

  52. FelixKruell

    JC:

    When you’re ready to stop with the personal abuse, and engage with my actual argument, let me know. Until then…

  53. notafan

    and engage with my actual argument

    lol

  54. Dr Fred Lenin

    Sco mo didnt he practice law before politics? Probably had rooms above a fish and chip shop in the High Street,that usually where. Pollielawyers work .

  55. Overburdened

    The George Foreman grab tells you all you need to know.

    The fuckwit giving advice gets burned.

    I wonder if he was even there.

    When the first fighting games came out, I was in Harvey Norman on a mission and here were 2 no idea blokes using a joystick or something to make these computerised figures fight.

    In passing I said, you blokes should try the real thing, and one said, ‘ What, Nintendo?’

    Fair dinkum.

  56. JC

    Kruell

    I’m not being abusive. You are a dishonest, low IQ turdhead.
    You’re arguments are non existent and you lied suggesting I said civil servants shouldn’t be paid.

    Fuck off.

  57. Tim Neilson

    Felix,

    Your argument is utterly specious.

    Even if someone might earn a lot more at a totally different job to their actual one, that doesn’t prove that they’re underpaid for the job they’re actually doing.

    An example might help.

    I’m currently employed in a job for which I have undergraduate, postgraduate and professional qualifications and decades of experience and I get paid well for it.
    I could get a job holding a stop/go sign at some roadworks, and I’d be paid less. (Not a lot less, given how things are in CFMEUistan, but less.)
    If I did do that, would my previous salary be proof that my stop/go sign wages were too low?

    The public service is different to private enterprise. To take one example only, every public servant gets an unqualified, absolute, Commonwealth guaranteed indemnity for every liability incurred in their duties.
    Professionals have PI insurance and executives can have D&O insurance, but you don’t have to know much to be aware that the insurance isn’t an absolute 100% shield.
    That is, some aspects of public service employment are inherently more attractive than working in the private sector.

    So, even if it were true that people like Lowe could get paid more in the private sector, that tells us nothing about the correct level of remuneration for the job they’re actually doing.

    The fact that there’s no shortage of candidates for the jobs they’re actually doing is at least prima facie evidence that the remuneration for those jobs isn’t too low.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.