The federal government would sack the RBA Board and Governor except it is too busy jumping at its own shadow

It’s Wednesday and as usual I cover a few topics briefly rather than provide a deeper analysis of a single issue. Today, I consider yesterday’s RBA monetary policy decision which held interest rates at elevated levels despite the inflation rate dropping towards the lower range of its targetting band. The RBA has lost credibility and the federal government should sack the RBA Board and Governor. The problem is that the federal government is too busy jumping at its own shadow to actually take any meaningful decisions about almost anything. I also reflect on the recent decision by the Nobel Committee to award the Peace Prize to the – Hibakusha – which reminds us of the devastation that nuclear arms can (and did) cause. Some other matters then precede today’s great music segment.

Read more

The demise of trade unions as a countervailing power to civilise Capitalism

One of the striking characteristics of the neoliberal era has been the dramatic decline in trade union membership across the world. The decline has also been associated with depressed wages growth for workers overall, increased income inequality, reduced job security, and the rising domination of the ‘gig’ job phenomena. Related trends include rising household indebtedness (as wage suppression has led to use of credit to maintain consumption levels) and reduced housing affordability, etc. Today (December 9, 2024), the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released the latest edition of biannual – Trade union membership – for August 2024 (the latest data available), which shows that trade union membership has grown from 12.5 per cent in August 2022 to 13.1 per cent now. But that modest rise doesn’t hide the fact that trade unions are no longer serving the role as a – Countervailing power – in the labour market. The decline has many drivers and many consequences and I consider that topic a bit in this post.

Read more

The concept of degrowth remains underspecified – reform or revolution?

I have done quite a number of podcast interviews with various hosts over the last few weeks and the discussions often turn to issues relating to the environment and what Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) has to say about those issues. Inevitably, the discussions then meandered into debates about what is possible given that we humans are estimated to be using 1.7 times the regenerative capacity of our biosphere at present. At some unknown point, but sometime, that overuse will have to come to an end as the biosphere asserts its capacity constraints in one way or another. The question that seems to interest people now is whether the existing mode of production (Capitalism) is at all compatible with reducing that ratio. My answer is always the same. Those progressives who promote the notion of ‘green growth’, which is embedded in ‘green new deal’ proposals or their ilk, seem to think that we can make the shift away from fossil fuels and reduce the claim on the biosphere within a growth paradigm while retaining the Capitalist ownership relations. For me, a system where the logic is ever accumulation of capital via the creation and expropriation of surplus value and realisation of that value as profit, is incompatible with being able to live within the limits imposed by the biosphere. If we are to have any long-term future as a race, then we will have to embrace a degrowth strategy and radically alter the way we allocate resources and our patterns of production and consumption. In a sense, Marx’s long discredited notion of the – Tendency of the rate of profit to fall – as an intrinsic feature of Capitalism, which he believed would eventually bring the system asunder, is likely to be realised as the environmental constraints impinge on the accumulation system. Simply put, the logic of Capitalism requires growth and degrowth is the anathema of that logic.

Read more

Australia national accounts – government expenditure saves the economy from recession

Today (December 4, 2024), the Australian Bureau of Statistics released the latest – Australian National Accounts: National Income, Expenditure and Product, June 2024 – which shows that the Australian economy grew by just 0.3 per cent in the September-quarter 2024 and by just 0.8 per cent over the 12 months (down from 1 per cent). That growth rate is well below the rate required to keep unemployment from rising. GDP per capita fell for the 7th consecutive quarter and was 1.5 per cent down over the year. This is a rough measure of how far material living standards have declined but if we factor in the unequal distribution of income, which is getting worse, then the last 12 months have been very harsh for the bottom end of the distribution. Household consumption expenditure was flat. The only source of expenditure keeping GDP growth positive came from government – both recurrent and investment. However, fiscal policy is not expansionary enough and at the current growth rate, unemployment will rise. Both fiscal and monetary policy are squeezing household expenditure and the contribution of direct government spending, while positive, will not be sufficient to fill the expanding non-government spending gap. At the current growth rate, unemployment will rise. And that will be a deliberate act from our policy makers.

Read more

Austerity cultist Kenneth Rogoff continues to bore us with his broken record

One would reasonably think that if someone had been exposed in the past for pumping out a discredited academic paper after being at the forefront of the destructive austerity push during the Global Financial Crisis, then some circumspection might be in order. Apparently not. In 2010, Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff published a paper in one of the leading mainstream academic journals – Growth in a Time of Debt – which became one of the most cited academic papers at the time. At the time, they even registered a WWW domain for themselves (now defunct) to promote the paper and tell us all how many journalists, media programs etc have been citing their work. While one can understand the self-promotion by Rogoff and Reinhart, it seems that none of these media outlets or journalists did much checking. It turned out that they had based their results on research that had grossly mishandled the data – deliberately or inadvertently – and that a correct use of the available data found that that nations who have public debt to GDP ratios that cross the alleged 90 per cent threshold experienced average real GDP growth of 2.2 per cent rather than -0.1 per cent as was published by Rogoff and Reinhart in their original paper. So all their boasting about finding robust “debt intolerance limits” arising from “sharply rising interest rates” – and then “painful fiscal adjustments” and “outright default” were not sustainable. Humility might have been the order of the day. But not for Rogoff. He regularly keeps popping up making predictions of doom based on faulty mainstream logic.

Read more
Back To Top