A supply-side take on the PM’s package

I have to say that I have been charmed by the approach taken by the Government to bring us out of the lockdown. I find this especially extraordinary:

Value created by establishing successful products and services, the ability to be able to sell them at a competitive and profitable price and into growing and sustainable markets. It’s economics 101.

Here’s the thing. It is not Economics 101 and has not been for two generations. It ought to be, but isn’t. Because this is an entirely supply-side statement. There is not an ounce of C+I+G anywhere to be seen. It is entirely about Value Adding as the absolutely necessary core for regenerating growth.

Keynesian economics may really be dead, and not a moment too soon.

This entry was posted in Economics and economy. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to A supply-side take on the PM’s package

  1. Squirrel

    And it’s so comforting to know that the PM is committed to continue the supply to Straya of some of the highest-paid and therefore unquestionably amongst the best….. in the world politicians to lead us to the broad sunlit uplands of a post-virus economy.

  2. Shy Ted

    It’;s just ScoMo. Reads a few words, won’t translate them into action. What has he done so far in the right direction?

  3. Pickles

    Keynes’ acolytes won’t want to go on the cart.

  4. Botswana O'Hooligan

    The very short answer from an old bloke watching his family, their wellbeing, and his retirement fading away until he may have to go begging for a pension, and society in general collapsing, is that this is a gigantic stuff up. It was said that R J L Hawke created dissention so that he could resolve the problems arising from the dissention, and so too has Morrison, but on a grander scale and he cannot resolve the problem without massive taxation increases he and those in the employ of government or quasi government agencies will be immune from.

  5. Faye

    I can’t remember the sentence but I heard the PM say something about “supply side”. Found it:-

    “And so that’s why my point today has been that unless we focus on the success of that business that is going to employ someone, then there’s nothing really to offer. Because there’s no economy to offer it from. And so that’s why we’ve got to get our priorities right. That’s why we’ve got to get the order right. Now, if we can make that work on those supply-side reforms, as they’re sort of known technically, then all of the things Andrew has just talked about will be able to be guaranteed. I can guarantee hospitals, schools, the aged pension, childcare, one of the world’s most generous pharmaceutical benefits schemes, on the basis of a strong economy. And if you don’t put businesses at the centre of that economy, you can’t make that pledge.”

  6. Mother Lode

    Most remarkable of all is that he said it. He has put it out there that you cannot just expect to be able to bleed business for more money to spend of social schemes.

    When was the last pollie who said that.

    Part of this could come from the panic over Chinese actions in trade – we have outsourced so much production overseas and the shelves of our shops are overflowing with Chinese products. But the arguments he mounted are nevertheless couched in terms of how our economy will be stronger when we produce stuff and the role of the private sector.

    I wonder where this courage came from?

  7. Roger

    It’;s just ScoMo. Reads a few words, won’t translate them into action. What has he done so far in the right direction?

    Yes, but now he can be held to his word.

  8. Mark M

    Ocasio-Cortez Disappointed To Learn The ‘Free Market’ Isn’t A Grocery Store Where You Don’t Have To Pay For Anything

    A laugh from the official paper of record –


  9. Louis Hissink

    AOC and free markets?
    Perhaps she listened to someone mispronouncing “flea” as free. English pronunciation seems difficult to understand at times. I know someone with the family name Marjoribanks, that is pronounced Marshbanks. Or Colquhan as Cahoon.

  10. min

    I have always raised concerns that funding infrastructure may make life easier, or more convenient but does not produce income . Building dams, or energy producing factories that have a product that can be sold as a result but most does not except for toll roads . John Alexander who has researched ways of including regions explains that other countries get value catchment from the increase of value property as a result of infrastructure such as a new school in an area , viz Jackie Trad, He claims that value can increase 10 fold and should then contribute to the cost of the infrastructure. perhaps I have not explained this clearly but it is usually speculators who get rich eg apartments by the new hub etc at taxpayer funded projects.
    Any comments Steve?

  11. Spurgeon Monkfish III

    Cut taxes
    Cut red and green tape
    Cut government expenditure (i.e. monumental wastage) of taxpayers’ money
    Build some f*cking coal fired power stations, stop subsidising ruinables and cut them out of the grid

    Just for starters. None of this is rocket science.

  12. Rohan

    To add to that list of Spurgeon Monkfish, legislate to remove the power and ability of government to close down small businesses on any issue based on fear, panic and Marxist whim.

  13. Ed Case

    from the increase of value property as a result of infrastructure such as a new school in an area , viz Jackie Trad,

    Not sure when that site was identified as a potential School, or who by, but it’s an excellent site at Dutton Park on the corner of Gladstone Road and Annerley Road with views to the east, south and west.
    Old Tip Top bakery site. Would have been worth a fortune as high rise units.

  14. Spurgeon Monkfish III

    remove the power and ability of government to close down small businesses on any issue based on fear, panic and Marxist whim

    You’d have to dynamite (or possibly nuke, preferably from space) our political system, the bureaucracy and the braindead lamestream meeja (especially the stinking ALPBC) to achieve this.

  15. Spurgeon Monkfish III

    Having said that, Rohan, I’m not disagreeing with you. What we have witnessed in this country alone over the last two and half months has been effectively indistinguishable from totalitarianism.

  16. HGS

    A lot of words. Lots of words. And more words. From a man who so far seems to have done nothing to promote anything liberal, especially prosperity or freedom.

    The best is that some of these words needed to be said, and said again and again.

    Part of the culture war.

    All too late. We are not the society to make a break with the past.

  17. Watch Your Back

    The idea of taxing land values has been around since Henry George. In the UK Labour tried it three times, in 1947, 1968 and 1975. It failed every time, bringing development to a standstill.

    The argument is that ‘the community’ by building roads confers value on people with property and development sites near these roads. Same goes for trains and even buses.

    But the government pays for these things from taxation and the benefits are shared widely by users. Meanwhile, developers pay large amounts in planning ‘obligations’ and infrastructure charges.

    It’s just a feature of property rights and a market economy.

  18. Hay Stockard

    Invest in windjammers. Apparently the next big thing.

Comments are closed.