It is Friday, my blog lay day, so no real blog. I am editing my Europe book in the freezing weather down in Melbourne. The laugh of the week was the Federal governments bungled attempt to get rid of the carbon tax. It will probably go next week and then we will rely on that expert on the environment, Prime Minister Tony Abbott (see credentials overleaf) to lead the way into the future.
Today’s release of the – Labour Force data – for June 2014 by the Australian Bureau of Statistics is slightly improved on recent months but still portrays a weak labour market. While the participation rate rose, which pushed extra workers into the labour force, employment growth still remained below population growth and so unemployment would have risen without the participation rate rise. The other poor outcome was the decline in full-time employment. Overall, the labour market is scudding along a very flat path and unemployment continues to eke its way up. The unemployment rate topped 6 per cent in June 2014 and is now higher than it was 5 years ago (June 2009) when the worst of crisis was being endured before the fiscal stimulus took effect. That symbolises policy failure.
There is a lot of misinformation spread in the media about the fiscal history of Australia and elsewhere. The Australian Broadcasting Commission, for example, has now a “Fact Check” facility where it checks statements made by politicians against the facts. It should apply it to some of its own stories and subject more journalists (including its own) to the scrutiny it imposes on the pollies.
One of the major demands that the Germans made on its partners leading into Maastricht in 1991 was the need for a politically independent central bank that was focused on price stability alone. This was claimed to be essential because it would stop politicians imposing so-called short-termism onto monetary policy (read: caring about people who might be unemployed or otherwise in need of fiscal assistance), which would compromise the inflation fighting process. These unaccountable, unelected central bank boards were then free to do what they wanted and demonstrated a willingness to use unemployment as a policy tool rather than a policy target to ensure economies were as close to deflating as possible, irrespective of what that meant for economic and employment growth. It is, of-course a farce to think that a central bank can be independent anyway either in a political sense or an economic sense. But the neo-liberal hype about independence was to ensure governments could absolve themselves of the public ignominy of rising unemployment and the political costs that went with that, and, instead, blame the central bankers. The bankers had no political constituency to manage or groom and could hide behind the ever-present paranoia about hyperinflation to ‘justify’ their policy approach. But the central bankers are ‘independent’ only when it suits them. Or should we say ‘independence’ is a one-way street. If the politicians dare to comment on monetary policies there is a hue and cry. But central bankers feel they can provide advice to the democratically elected governments whenever they choose and the media hardly blinks. Hypocrisy has no bounds.
Apparently, the mangy cat that was the Celtic Tiger is about to become the Celtic Tiger again. One of many reports that suggest Ireland is about to have a “here we go again” boom – The mauled Celtic Tiger is ready to roar again (UK Telegaph, July 5, 2014) – claimed last week that while “few Western nations suffered more than Ireland” as the GFC unfolded, it is now “perhaps” about “to stage a convincing recovery”. This statement followed the release of the “latest GDP rebound, driven by a 1.8pc rise in exports over the first quarter and an inventory turnaround”. I am not yet convinced nor should I say was the journalist in question. The so-called recovery is very tentative and domestic demand remains weak. Further, as before the crisis, a substantial portion of the growth is being repatriated offshore to foreign owners of capital. Moreover, a new phenomenon has crept into the picture – the so-called ‘tax inversion’, which makes it harder to disentangle what is actually happening with the Irish National Accounts.
Here are the answers with discussion for yesterday’s quiz. The information provided should help you understand the reasoning behind the answers. If you haven’t already done the Quiz from yesterday then have a go at it before you read the answers. I hope this helps you develop an understanding of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and its application to macroeconomic thinking. Comments as usual welcome, especially if I have made an error.
Welcome to the Billy Blog Saturday Quiz. The quiz tests whether you have been paying attention over the last seven days. See how you go with the following questions. Your results are only known to you and no records are retained.
It is Friday, my blog lay day, so no real blog. I am editing my Europe book and up in the North of Australia today dealing with various projects I have been working on. But here is an example of what happens when climate change denialists merge with fiscal austerians. Mindless and damaging confusion! Here is my non-blog for today!
The Fair Work Commission, the Federal body entrusted with the task of determining Australia’s minimum wage handed down its – 2013-14 decision – on June 4, 2014. The decision meant that more than 1.5 million of our lowest paid workers (out of some 11.6 million) received an extra $18.70 per week from July 1. This amounted to an increase of 3 per cent (up from last year’s rise of 2.6 per cent). The Federal Minimum Wage (FMW) is now $640.90 per week or $16.87 per hour. For the low-paid workers in the retail sector, personal care services, hospitality, cleaning services and unskilled labouring sectors there was no cause for celebration. They already earn a pittance and endure poor working conditions. The pay rise will at best maintain the current real minimum wage but denies this cohort access to the fairly robust national productivity growth that has occurred over the last two years. The decision also widens the gap between the low paid workers and other wage and salary recipients. The real story though is that today’s minimum wage outcome is another casualty of the fiscal austerity that the Federal Government has imposed on the nation which is destroying jobs and impacting disproportionately on low-paid workers.
My upcoming book about Europe is tentatively called ‘European Groupthink: denial on a grand scale’. I have covered the concept of Groupthink before but I have been thinking about this in relation to the economics curriculum, given our textbook is entering its final stages of completion. When I was at the iNET conference in Toronto in early April, there was much to-do about the so-called ‘exciting’ new developments in economics curricula being sponsored by iNET at their Oxford University centre (CORE). Forgive me for being the ‘wet blanket’ but the more I spoke to people at the conference the more I realised that the neo-liberals were reinventing themselves as ‘progressive’ or ‘heterodox’ and hi-jacking the reform process. I mentioned this to one of the iNET Board members who I shared a flight with back to San Francisco. He seemed taken aback. My expectation is that very little of substance will change in this new approach to economics. It will dispense with the most evil aspects of the current dominant framework but will remain sufficiently engaged with it that we will not see a truly progressive teaching approach emerge that can deal with evidence and real world facts. People are scared to break out of the ‘group’.