Comments on: Data, recession, Turnbull and a load of old experts

By: Pete

Pete — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

“Still, bad news sells. And mainstream media definitely needs more sales at the moment. Some people always do well out of recessions”

no mater what happens, Crikey always manages a crack at mainstream media, i.e. the press (the press, largely it’s dribble coming out of the rest) ….it must irk you guys that you’re such small fry…probably 1/1000th of the daily readers of newspapers

By: Geoff

Geoff — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I would like to see one more caption, next to Malcom Turnbull that shows Rudd saying “I AM DOOM.”

By: Placido Domingo

Placido Domingo — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Rudd has no feel for economics. He only has a feel for the politics of the situation. Unlike previous strong Prime Ministers, he is too scared to challenge his bureaucracy’s advice, with respect to both the early 2008 inflation genie and the late 2008 chance of dodging a recession. His initial thought was to try to hold back the tide because he was frightened of being blamed for the recession. Then he learnt what King Canute had always known: that he couldn’t hold back the tide. His cash splashes may only be $20 billion out of a $200 billion post-recession government debt, but that is one to two years of added burden on future tax payers. The moral hazard was that tax receipts which had been banked were then randomly disbursed, not on the basis of need, nor to those who necessarily deserved them.
Rudd’s other 2007 claim was to make Australia a high-skilled, high-wage, productive country. Now he would rather protect jobs at any cost, for example the current Holden attempt to reduce executive salaries and to a lesser extent reduce middle manager salaries and freeze worker salaries to protect jobs in a dinosaur industry. Rudd is trying to keep our economy exactly as it is, even if that means becoming a low wage economy. Shades of the old USSR. A stronger PM would accept the need for change. Old industries must be allowed to wither and new industries will arise and absorb re-trained workers.
Turnbull may not know all the answers, but he knew that inflation was only big in the rear-view mirror, that the recession was visible through the windscreen in the distance and that you can’t spend your way out of a recession, especially with helicopter drops of cash splashes. Turnbull argued for incentive giving personal and company tax cuts, as well as government funded productive infrastructure. Under Turnbull, we would be able to point to a government funded piece of economic infrastructure. Under Rudd, we smoked it, drank it, gambled it and spent it on stuff.

By: RJG

RJG — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I am really dissapointed in Malcom. I was hoping he would bring some intellectual honesty to federal politics that was totally lacking in Brendan and his tricky predeccessor JH. Malcom has turned out to be as bad if not worse than them. Gross political opportunism is not really neccessary given the hollow policy opportunities Rudd and his less than gifted front bench provide. But Malcom seems to prefer silly populist rubbish as political ammunition rather than solid policy positions. It makes me think you couldn’t push a cigarette paper between him and Rudd on any issue of any substance you chose to mention. It is almost as if the major party political system is dead and the only way out are independents or the Greens.

By: Dr Harvey M Tarvydas

Dr Harvey M Tarvydas — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Good article Mr Keane with a sound intellectual serving.
Good reminders for those whom think they know it all.
Media savvy and all.
Can I say that with many exceptions generally the bulk of the media can't tell the difference between their genitals and that centre of excellence housed in the retentive zone known as anal? Therefore they can't tell whether they are moving forward or back and direction is just a dirty word. Thinking just has to feel good whichever feeling.
Morality starts with discrimination ... ooops lost them. Oh well?

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Nice article, agree with RJG's comments, can't wait for the Crikey trolls to jump on him.

Watching the media/economists beat the hell out of this has been very frustrating. And, as usual, everyone seems to be trying for a "fresh angle" etc. Where's the measured observation? Are things really that bad?

I'm reminded of ex US President (and Nobel prize winning economist, don't try to tell me he's fictional) Jed Bartlet's observation that economists were put on earth to make astrologers look good.

By: Venise Alstergren

Venise Alstergren — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Why is it that I get the feeling neither Kevin Rudd, nor Malcolm Turnbull understands what it is like to be faced with poverty. Yet this is the state in which many of their voters live. Sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night screaming for a single unified nation. There are the politicians, the bureaucrats, the show biz millionaires, some surgeons, and what’s left of old money on one part of our land. All the rest of us are on another part of it. Like two reverse magnets the two hemispheres drift relentlessly in opposite directions.
Meanwhile Malcolm has no philosophy, except to achieve whatever power he can get, and to waffle on in a million words until ones eyes glaze over. Kevin, on the other hand, has an extraordinarily rich wife. How could he ever conceive of a life without money?
It would seem as if our top economists share the views of Rudd and Turnbull. I hadn’t realized they were so well paid.

By: AR

AR — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Hands up anyone, anywhere who has ever heard guessperts & economystics get their entrail readings within cooee of a bull’s roar of reality?
If they’re so rich, how come they ain’t smart?
Remind me again how the GFC occurred with such genii at the till.