Advanced members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Solomon

  1. The immigration debate is likely to be a crucial election issue. Currently there are something like 215 million migrants in the world, and Australia falls into the top 10 migration countries. This current period from about 2010 is now considered to be one of the largest human migration periods in history. It is difficult to fully determined the level of forced migration to voluntary migration. But one statistic is abundantly clear. The rise in female migration. I think I have begun to appreciate more clearly recently why both Labour and Libs want to retain this high level of immigration. (Consider me "slow", but it is unusual to find such bi-partisan support between the two parties) Their predominant thinking is this: That rapidly increasing the number of Australians will increase the taxation band (ie; more residents, more services, more purchases, more jobs, more tax), stimulate the economy by providing increasing number of consumers (in a consumer society, if you run out of consumers its curtains for business) and in turn provide additional candidates for the supposedly expanding workforce. It's called - Growing the nation!! I think this policy is primarily being driven by the banks, or at least economists who have long recognised that a debt laden society requires an increasing number of sardines, to hook into the debt train, so that the banks fractional reserve banking system doesn't completely unravel. They continually require new candidates for debt because otherwise the tide goes out and they are found to be swimming naked. It is now slowly dawning on those who have begun to see it, that a closed system (like a country) is never as simple as changing one element, and naively believing other elements of the system won't be affected. You see, their thinking would be fine, if our world was only economically based and defined. It isn't! There is a humanitarian element. What, I think the various politicians have failed to take into account has been the human behaviour and cultural characteristics of large groups, and the wistful nature of group dynamics. Groups develop their own culture, and will resist external influences. The only tool, politicians have is legislation. They know they cannot legislate for positive relationships. Large groups without meaningful employment and productive use of their time, is dangerous and destructive. We have seen such behaviour around the world in many countries. Governments, realise they are restricted to only offering formal controls, becase they can only legislate for break-downs in relationships. Criminal activities, or relationship abuses. The law is always dealing with the worst case scenario. Politicians want a positive outcome from their immigration policy, and they don't want to be involved with increasing conflict in their social sphere. They are now desperately trying to educate people of the benefits of having so many people added to our economy every year. Whilst we bring people from other countries on a drip feed level, they are more likely to assimilate. This has been the case in the past with Australia's moderate level of immigration. But when we greatly increase the mass, we run the risk of changing the entire demography of our nation. I believe this is what is happening in Europe and is a part of the underlying narrative in the USA and Canada. The "natives", are not welcoming the intrusion and change to their own culture (culture = previous traditional norms). Further, I happen to think their economic model is wrong as well. It takes time when you arrive in another country to locate meaningful employment, identify where you want to live, reach the level income necessary to obtain a mortgage, and become a debt/tax slave. In the meantime the welfare system has to take up the slack - otherwise you have homeless, hungry or even dead people starting to stack up around the place. Not a good look for any politician. This increase in the welfare spending requires more taxes, and so effectively it can easily stifle growth. We are walking a very fragile line here. The current mob in power are trying to alleviate this by offering tax cuts to stimulate the economy, but I have to wonder whether it can work, because in effect it is now just a catch-up. Our cost of living has long ago exceeded what these tiny incentives might have gained. My questions would be. Where does the cut-off lie? Can the politicians now even turn off the spigot of immigration, without the economy all collapsing around them? Yet the averse scenario is to ever so slowly watch our social fabric unwind, with increasing social unrest. I would like to hear your thoughts.
  2. I never had a phone when I was 17! My parents wouldn't let us use the phone for relationship calls. The phone on the wall was for emergencies and important business calls only.
  3. I don't find too much in that report to give optimism for those looking at home price reductions. I find it increasingly difficult to identify a single factor in our world economy that might allow prices to fall to affordable. If it was going to happen, it should have happened by now. With the ability to create money from nothing, I don't think governments really care. They will be more than happy to have home prices at an average of $5 or $10 million in a decade, and regard that as good economics. Everything is geared towards "growth at all costs" at the expense of any sense of decency. No government (or politician) anywhere in the world wants to be hailed as those who put a stop to growth and prosperity. It is just a total misnomer for a politician to be heralding, lets stop this incessant growth analogy. Every political party has to be able to point to their achievements. That's how they get elected. Anything other than growth is considered a political failure.
  4. Ahhh! Real estate, the joy of the masses. The wonderful little boxes of wood, steel, concrete and paint that just go up and up and up in value. And the lecherous creatures that it attracts with its promise of multi-millionaire status in just a few short years. Thanks for sharing your personal story zaph. $225,000 capital gain in 7 yrs. That's a pretty good investment zaph if you get the price you are after. It takes me five years to earn (gross) that amount of money. And when I think about all the work and time I've had to put in to get it, I can see, I should have just bought a wooden box. Did you do any improvements to the property, or is that all based on land/house value increase? All the very best to you on your intended sale.
  5. I don't know Barnaby Joyce personally. I am not intimately involved with the situation. I am therefore a little loath to comment, but........ It is worth remembering that this was the man, who was once second in charge of our country. Every human being has sexual urges, and in certain cases they are difficult to control given circumstance and environment. Many late nights isolated away from wife and family, etc. Most of us control this to the best of our ability. In this respect though we are all very similar. But I doubt this is what was really under judgement. After all, thousands of people have affairs and destroy their marriages every day around this country. No. It was his position of power, that drew the focus. And from my position of relative safety behind the computer screen, I can observe that he made some seriously stupid decisions regarding the matter. I thought the turmoil had died down. He should have let the sleeping dogs lie. Kept a low profile, and maintained his seat in parliament, even if it was on the back benches. He could have slipped off into obscurity after a few years and received his lucrative parliamentary pension. But his pride (or is it arrogance) wouldn't let him do this. He had to have the last word!! To then think that he could financially benefit from the scandal, and not receive outcry by the public is to completely misunderstand public life, or public sentiment. I have to wonder then, if he every really understood his constituency? Society is often prepared to accept/forgive a mistake, but they don't like people to personally benefit from their benevolence. But it also highlights for me how quickly a person can fall from grace with the public. (Yes, I know he is public fare for the media, and a lot of these politicians flirt with the media to get the spotlight on them.) But to go from darling to disgrace in a matter of months is a fascinating and debilitating fall. While we may ogle and glare from the sidelines, and secretly thank God that it isn't us undergoing this scrutiny, I'm not sure we have the right to throw too many stones either. I guess its a matter of perspective. I don't know now whether he can continue in politics. He may have jeopardised it all. I therefore can only wish him well for the future, as I would any other human being who gets themselves into a predicament of their own making. And most of us do!!
  6. Making it harder and harder to get off the grid. If you want to stay outside of the system just don't try to fly or have your children unregistered. Surely they could only access dna, if the children were born in state institutions. Reality is proving to be closely related to fiction.
  7. We really are different here!!!!
  8. This is just ludicrous. It is true. Mr Bumble from Oliver Twist got it right, "the law is an ass."
  9. Thanks guys. That makes sense.
  10. I couldn't find a copy of the speech Philip Lowe presented yesterday, so I can't perceive the context for his comment, but if he sees a need for a rate rise, I would like to know what is the driver. Is it the housing bubble any longer, or something else more insidious? Is it wage freeze, in which case would a rate rise influence companies to hire or to fire? Is it price inflation on good's or services? Again I ask which way would a rate rise drive these things. I say this, because as the housing bubble comes off the boil, wouldn't the RBA be more likely to want to hold rates where they are, for a slow release? Any manipulation of the levers could set off a domino. In my/our focus on housing, have we actually missed some other section of the economy that is a cause for concern. I'm asking questions, because I don't see from any recent data, any indication that a rate rise is warranted.
  11. Hi zaph, Don't worry. I'm not in any danger of exploding, but I have been watching this unfold for over 30 years in Australia. The "builder" generation lived in corrugated iron huts with often 10 or 12 in the one house. That often built their own homes, and surprisingly many of those homes still stand. (They don't build them like that any more!) That wasn't good enough for the next generation. They wanted larger dwellings and smaller families. Baby boomers went even further. Governments in cahoots with banks and real estate saw a market ripe for picking. With government regulation driving the nature of builds associated with increased costs, they slowly created an industry that destined many not to be able to afford to build or buy a home. We are seeing the end result of decades of policy that ramped up the whole home market "business". We can never go back now. They have burnt all the bridges that once allowed a keen young couple to purchase a small block of land and construct their own home. Now we have a situation where only a select few own far more houses than they can live in, and others will never own. I would love to see some historian trace the history of our current home price bubble. It would be fascinating to see what legislations were introduced at Federal, State and Local government levels that contributed to the increasing prices. Maybe there is a PhD in it for someone. Thanks for caring zaph.
  12. Not going to see any change then! I don't fully know why, but this whole report makes me extremely angry. These people couldn't possibly empathise with people who see no possible way of ever owning their own home, without extreme and massive debt. And I would dearly love to know - How implicit in the rampant rise of home prices since the year 2000 have politicians truly been? They are intimately connected with the information that must be channelled through government agencies. This is insider trading at its finest. Is the Royal Commission into the Financial sector even going to include and consideration of government policies? And why aren't the Real Estate industry included in this Royal Commission. They are "hand in glove" with the banks and mortgage brokers, and even the Superannuation industry. I can't help but feel the whole housing mess has been a sustained conspiracy to keep many people in the lifestyle they have become accustomed. Filthy rich!!!
  13. Last night caught a little piece on the 7pm Project with Steve Price suggesting that to assist the ailing manufacturing sector, Governments should insist (legislate) that companies operating in Australia use Australian materials and goods, and hire Australian labour first. That's got the faint smell of protectionism. I wonder how many other countries are thinking the same thing. Here's the link. (Sorry about the ads!! ) 7pm Project You need to fast forward to about 7:44 in the video.
  14. I think I agree with Mr Med. The zip files are cumbersome to load and then unpack. I guess I will just have to persevere. Thank you Cobran for trying. Regards. Sol.
  15. Cobran, Is it possible to get the size of these screenshots reduced? It seems to take ages to load on my internet speed (non - nbn).
  16. I happen to agree. Since the year 2000 when house prices increased 300%, I think we have arrived at a new normal. Too many people have made extraordinary amounts of money from housing, and they will maintain the levels. It would be an apocalyptic scenario to go back to $150,000 (average sized) housing from the heady heights we are currently experiencing. The most anyone can expect might be 25%. There would be so much wealth destruction with a 70% decline that almost half the population would be living in poverty. I just can't see it happening either. Unfortunately I am probably one of those who have been left behind. I will now no longer ever to be able to afford a detached home, and may have to be content with a unit, or villa somewhere. I'm sure if I went out west far enough I would find a home that I could afford, but at what cost to my lifestyle. I like your work Mr Med, and I do appreciate your comments on many subjects, but on this particular occasion I think you are wrong. No disrespect but my imagination is unable to create a scenario that would fit your suggestion. For those of us who have been left behind, we can only wish and dream such might be the case, but I doubt it. The chook has flown the coop!! I just feel for the future generations, because we are slowly but surely suffocating the working classes, and wealth is being accumulated in less and less hands. Human dignity will be lost somewhere in this.
  17. Hi zaph, What's your preferred genre? If you like horror/zombie/blood and guts, there seems to be a lot of material on netflix. My son watches these gory things, I can't stand. However, I have watched a couple of episodes of Vikings. Apparently it is as close to authentic, as we have historically been able to prove. I watched a documentary about the making of it, before having a look at the episodes. Not to everyone's taste I imagine. My wife watched "The Handmaid's Tale" which is an adaption of the Margaret Atwood book. Pretty good, I'm told. I've also watched a few of the Children's cartoons, when the grand-kids have come over. Some I wouldn't probably pay to see at the cinema/theatre, but worthwhile when its on my subscription. Personally, I'm more into Sci Fi, Futuristic, or Philosophical Thrillers. Occasionally I like a war movie, or one that stretches my imagination a little more. Some movies I have watched that might warrant a look include "The Revenant", "Transcendent" "Equilibrium" "Bright" "War Machine" "The Fundamentals of Caring" "Django Unchained"
  18. When I accessed the link, it had a short video of Andrew Winter giving hints about private sales. Why did Andrew Winter leave the UK? When the market there began to turn, he suddenly turned up in Australia "Selling Houses - Australia". Why does my blood boil, when I see his show, where they slap a bit of paint around, fix up a few dodgy bathrooms and then get $50,000 more for the property. Why not sell the property as is, at a greatly lower price and let the new home owners have the joy of slowly fixing it up themselves? I just find that there is something deceptive about their intent. The owners only find out the short-cuts they took after living in the place for a year, and the paint suddenly begins to peel off the ceilings. I'm also optimistically hoping one year, that "The Block" will also have an almighty fail. None of the properties sell for months!!! To the extent that Channel Nine has to actually bankroll the contestants themselves. Oh wait, that's right they have no money.
  19. What exactly did he buy? It takes a little bit of effort to spend $7500. Flights (Jetstar/Qantas/Virgin), Accommodation (Double Room/Executive suite, Studio apartment??) Food (Macca's, KFC, Hungry Jacks, etc.) Entertainment (Birch, Carroll and Coyle $40 to see a movie? Alcoholic beverages?? Gaming?? Travel fares, etc. These guys live in a whole different world, to the working classes. I'm almost prepared to go back to barbarism. Every person for themselves. I wouldn't survive long, but at least I would feel liberated.
  20. Hi Cobran, Thanks for posting these snapshots. I would wonder what other database has such a record of graphics which illustrate the state of the economy. Perhaps the ABC might keep a record but this is an amazing array of material for anyone interested in viewing a graphic representation of the past 10 or more years. It is a credit to you and I hope that "SimpleSustainable" can retain the record somehow. We don't hear from RE much these days, but we are indebted to her too, for keeping the page operational. So, I for one, are grateful to you for your time in providing this service, because I rarely watch the ABC news or see Alan's segment on the TV. Thanks. Solomon.
  21. This piece by Matt Barrie has been featured in several forums. This is referenced from Zero Hedge. Thought it was worth a new topic. So much to talk about. Which card will fall first? Which card will be played by the politicians in one last ditch effort to keep the dream afloat? Which card do the banks require to be maintained in order to stay solvent? So many cards. So little time. ****Warning - Very Long......****
  22. I agree with your suggestion Tor. The only trouble is: .... it seems to be required when you nominate. Imagine the work involved with nomination for members of the senate. I think the last ballot had 120 candidates just for Queensland. I just think there has to be some mechanism that would allow the matter to be dealt with, without the imposition being placed back on the individual. Once this fiasco calms down, apathy will again creep in, and we could face a similar situation in 10 - 20 years time. It would seem the parliament should only be made up with indigenous persons, who are the only ones who have a valid claim to single citizenship. The rest of us, probably have some migrant heritage in our past.
  23. What a circus! I'm inclined to agree with Tor on this. It should be easy to construct a simple declaration that every member of parliament signs at the time of nomination declaring that they will not be subject to the laws and regulations of another country, and renounce all citizenship of any foreign land. Of course that doesn't solve the current crisis whereby people were already citizens. We may have to go to the polls again to fully satisfy the suggestion above Otherwise any decisions of this entire government since its inception may be brought into dispute. (Tied up in the High Court for months.) I often wonder how many laws I break everyday, because of just plain ignorance. Still, the highest citizens of the country are expected to comply with the constitution.
  24. Why is this corpse still alive?
  25. Maybe this explains "why".