Opinion AUSTRALIAN Politics: Adelaide Board Discussion Part 6

[Mutineer]

Chalmers is right and the reputable economists Chris Richardson and Saul Eslake are wrong?

Pull the other one Grim Jim Chalmers.

 

[Vader]

Am I missing something here?
Government stopping credit card surcharges being passed on.
All that’s going to happen is businesses will need to increase prices and now the banks will get even more?

They're also reducing the "interchange fees" which the banks charge the businesses, from 0.8% to 0.3%, so the hit on businesses isn't as bad as the headline would suggest. The banks will actually earn less from the interchange fees than they do now.

What it means for customers is that they'll now pay the same price, regardless of whether they pay by cash or credit card. Yes, businesses will probably increase their costs by the amount of the credit card fees - but it won't be a hidden cost any more, and it will be the same price regardless of payment type.

The most likely impact will be a reduction in companies offering frequent flyer points with purchases.

 

[Vader]

Chalmers is right and the reputable economists Chris Richardson and Saul Eslake are wrong?

Pull the other one Grim Jim Chalmers.

I mean, I suppose there's a chance that an economist might get something right, for the first time in recorded history. Any economist. Anywhere in the world. Anywhere in time.

There has to be a first time for everything, right?

There's no such thing as a "reputable economist", given that economics itself is about as far from a reputable science as it's possible to be.

 

[Mutineer]

I mean, I suppose there's a chance that an economist might get something right, for the first time in recorded history. Any economist. Anywhere in the world. Anywhere in time.

There has to be a first time for everything, right?

There's no such thing as a "reputable economist", given that economics itself is about as far from a reputable science as it's possible to be.

LOL

One things for sure both Chris Richardson and Saul Eslake are way way way way better qualified than you and your useless and unquaified mate Grim Jim Chalmers.

Find me a reputable economist that agrees with this ALP Governments continued spendathon and escalating debt.

 

[FR0GGY]

The fact that it went up immediately is due to rorting by the petrol station companies - nothing to do with the Govt.

You are quite right that the fuel prices shouldn't have gone up as quickly as they did. They shouldn't have gone up until the petrol stations received new supplies at the higher price. But they did... Welcome to Capitalism 101.

I never said it was to do with the government.
But they never said anything about it that I heard, a few weeks after they said they’d be fining servos, that would have been every servo.

 

[Mutineer]

lol at chalmers saying don’t expect the fuel excise discount to come off immediately as the fuel has already been bought at the higher price.
Didn’t hear them saying anything about it going up immediately.

History will not be kind to Grim Jim Chalmers and his partner in crime Katy Gallagher, both hopelessly inept and in way over their heads. Both talentless hacks.

 

[Vader]

LOL

One things for sure both Chris Richardson and Saul Eslake are way way way way better qualified than you and your useless and unquaified mate Grim Jim Chalmers.

Find me a reputable economist that agrees with this ALP Governments continued spendathon and escalating debt.

Once again, repeating the words "reputable economist" as if they mean something. No such thing exists, given that economics itself is barely one step up from astrology.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The fact that it went up immediately is due to rorting by the petrol station companies - nothing to do with the Govt.

You are quite right that the fuel prices shouldn't have gone up as quickly as they did. They shouldn't have gone up until the petrol stations received new supplies at the higher price. But they did... Welcome to Capitalism 101.

What is the point of the ACCC?

 

[Vader]

What is the point of the ACCC?

Something many people have questioned over the years...

 

[FR0GGY]

They're also reducing the "interchange fees" which the banks charge the businesses, from 0.8% to 0.3%, so the hit on businesses isn't as bad as the headline would suggest. The banks will actually earn less from the interchange fees than they do now.

What it means for customers is that they'll now pay the same price, regardless of whether they pay by cash or credit card. Yes, businesses will probably increase their costs by the amount of the credit card fees - but it won't be a hidden cost any more, and it will be the same price regardless of payment type.

The most likely impact will be a reduction in companies offering frequent flyer points with purchases.

Thanks, we pay 1.2% now so I’m guessing we have to wear the 0.7% now?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Something many people have questioned over the years...

It's almost if the different governments over time are OK with big businesses rorting consumers...

 

[Vader]

It's almost if the different governments over time are OK with big businesses rorting consumers...

Follow the money, Kane, follow the money...

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I know all roads lead back to your unhealthy Donald Trump obsession, but it couldn’t be more obvious that Australia has a structural price premium on energy and fuel that not only makes it more expensive, but less reliable and less resilient to outside shocks.

Interesting to note how much more expensive diesel is here than in the US.

TBH I don’t think you really give two shits about “climate change” or “net zero”.

On this particular front, I think you’re fully aware that it’s civilizational suicide. You just have to pay lip service to it.

So you are in complete denial that Trump has ****ed up oil supply & prices for most of the world.

You live in the land of delusion defending this moron who started a war with no known end game.

I'm not surprised given you follow him like a loyal lemming.

 

[Vader]

Thanks, we pay 1.2% now so I’m guessing we have to wear the 0.7% now?

Businesses are not (currently) supposed to charge customers more than what the banks charge them. The banks will still charge fees to the businesses, but they will be reduced.

Businesses would be expected to either wear the remaining fee, or increase their sticker prices to incorporate the fees they're no longer receiving from customers. I'd expect 99.9% of businesses to adopt the latter approach.

 

[Mutineer]

Once again, repeating the words "reputable economist" as if they mean something. No such thing exists, given that economics itself is barely one step up from astrology.

What utter complete claptrap, but hey you are silly enough to believe the Chalmers/Gallagher duo are half competent when clearly there record is miserable.

 

[FR0GGY]

Businesses are not (currently) supposed to charge customers more than what the banks charge them. The banks will still charge fees to the businesses, but they will be reduced.

Businesses would be expected to either wear the remaining fee, or increase their sticker prices to incorporate the fees they're no longer receiving from customers. I'd expect 99.9% of businesses to adopt the latter approach.

We don’t, we just charge the same as get charged, 1.2% and we wear the rental fee.

Honestly just feels like it’s hurting the business if they don’t increase prices and hurting the consumer if they do.
Not much changes for the banks.

 

[Slippery Pete]

So you are in complete denial that Trump has ****ed up oil supply & prices for most of the world.

You live in the land of delusion defending this moron who started a war with no known end game.

I'm not surprised given you follow him like a loyal lemming.

Definition of a lemming:

It's ridiculous I'm having to wear a mask at the cricket on a hot day... along with everyone else.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

Definition of a lemming:

A centrist Lemming, to be accurate.

 

[Slippery Pete]

What utter complete claptrap, but hey you are silly enough to believe the Chalmers/Gallagher duo are half competent when clearly there record is miserable.

I agree there’s good and bad economists but these people stood on squares in the supermarket for two years because “tHe eXpErTs” told them to — I don’t think judging which ones are credible is their strong suit.

 

[Slippery Pete]

A centrist Lemming, to be accurate.

The “along with everyone else” really caps it off for full lemming points.

An outright lemming victory.

 

[Mutineer]

Another payout by the ABC on the cards possibly.

ACMA finds Four Corners breached code

ACMA finds ABC’s Four Corners breached accuracy and impartiality rules over Water Grab claims. Nerida O’Loughlin outlines failings.

www.mediaweek.com.au

ACMA finds ABC’s Four Corners breached accuracy and impartiality rules


(ACMA) has ruled that an episode of Four Corners breached the ABC’s code of practice.


The regulator found that the August 2024 episode, Water Grab, failed to meet accuracy and impartiality requirements after incorrectly suggesting that a Northern Territory pastoral station had illegally used fire to clear land for cotton production.

That assertion, the regulator said, was not supported by sufficient evidence and was likely to mislead a reasonable viewer.

While the ABC argued it had made reasonable efforts to contact the landowners and relied on contextual clues, the ACMA ultimately found that wasn’t enough. In particular, the regulator said the program should have made clear that the cause of the fire was uncertain rather than presenting it as a factual conclusion.

That failure tipped the segment into a breach of the accuracy provision.

 

[BRL121]

I mean, I suppose there's a chance that an economist might get something right, for the first time in recorded history. Any economist. Anywhere in the world. Anywhere in time.

There has to be a first time for everything, right?

There's no such thing as a "reputable economist", given that economics itself is about as far from a reputable science as it's possible to be.

It's not a science.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

I mean, I suppose there's a chance that an economist might get something right, for the first time in recorded history. Any economist. Anywhere in the world. Anywhere in time.

There has to be a first time for everything, right?

There's no such thing as a "reputable economist", given that economics itself is about as far from a reputable science as it's possible to be.

Doesn't help that the people that are actually good at predicting economic trends will always be able to make more money trading.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

So you are in complete denial that Trump has ****ed up oil supply & prices for most of the world.

You live in the land of delusion defending this moron who started a war with no known end game.

I'm not surprised given you follow him like a loyal lemming.

Just imagine there was a Democrat in charge and they started a new war in the middle east and caused a global energy crisis. You would never hear the end of it.

 

[Vader]

It's not a science.

At best it's a Black Art. Economics is on par with astrology, which makes "reputable economists" about as reputable as Madam Zelda.