Politics So I guess when the s**t hits the fan, everyone's a socialist

[Mofra]

I had a suspicion that foreign investors like to park cash in rich aussie properties, like tax evading corporates like tax havens.

So I did a google search:

do foreign property investors leave properties empty? - Google Search

It's a massive issue.
I'm all for taxing vacant property as a means of incentivising their addition to the rental market.
You can add a timeframe for residency/lease to allow renovators to avoid being taxed on property they intend to either live in or let out.

 

[Ants]

This explains why inflation is so bad now. Great job socialism.

The issue with your statement is twofold. Firstly, it doesn't actually touch on whether the government spending, even if it led to inflation, wasn't still the right and best thing to do.

Secondly, you are blaming socialism for something that wasn't socialism. As has been pointed out above.

Not really. Inflation has primarily been driven by supply problems created by covid lockdown policiies, undervinvestment in energy, droughts and floods, ukraine war and underlying problems in the shipping industry. There are some demand elements as well including stimulus payments during Covid and profit margin boosts but its mostly been driven by supply shocks.

if it was demand driven we would be seeing large rises in nominal wages and broadbased rises in prices across all sectors. But we are arent. Just moderate rises in wages that look like petering out and the inflation has been mostly in commodities and tradeable goods. And part of these moderate wage boosts were created by countries locking out cheap immigrant labour which is a supply shock to wages.

If you check my posting history you'll see I'm about as a died in the wool lefty as it is possible to be. But I'm afraid I have to agree with 'Royale with Cheese' on this one; a major, if not the major, contributor to current inflation was the government spending during lockdown. Which, as I said above doesn't mean it was the wrong decision.

On some of your items, inflation was raising post-Covid before a number of those shocks took place. Did supply side/supply chain issues exacerbate issues during COVID? Of course. But without government money the market reaction would have been some price increases, but far more reduction in use or exchanges. The government money meant those supply side shocks weren't met with lower demand, but higher demand, which thus exacerbated the issues.

Nobody expects that a surge in inflation will be equal across all sectors. That isn't really an argument against it. Wage increases not yet occurring also isn't evidence this wasn't driven by the government spending, especially since that (and access to superannuation) propped up spending above any wage increases.

I think you're underestimating the level of profiteering and its contribution to inflation.

‘An economic fairytale’: Australia’s inflation being driven by company profits and not wages, analysis finds

Australia Institute warns of a ‘profit price spiral’ and calls for shift in RBA and government narrative towards corporations

www.theguardian.com

This research suggests that 69% of inflation above the RBA target zone is due to profiteering and 18% is due to wages, which implies that 13% is due to other factors like the ongoing effects of price shocks.

Profiteering is a normal part of a high-inflation cycle. Hell, it is a major reason why governments try and achieve a stable inflationary environment. Because when there is high inflation, some will react out of greed. Hell, my brother works in senior management with a chain of stores and was saying they could "finally" put through price increases they should have put through years ago, but couldn't. I had to explain that was still profiting from the inflation cycle.

And wage inflation nearly always lags price inflation. If you don't think there won't be wage pressure in response to the CPI inflation, have a think again. Especially with the labor market still so tight.

Profiteering can occur because demand was meeting higher prices. Demand could do that because of the money in the system.

 

[Malifice]

If you tell entire sectors of the economy they can’t trade by immediate directive in the interests of the common good, then yes, you are socialist.

So banning the production, sale, and importation of methamphetamines or child sex dolls (for the common good) is 'socialism' now?

Why should my meth business be unfairly the victim of such a 'socialist' ban?

And in any event, now the lockdowns are over, the 'socialism' has now gone as well, and we're back to good ole Capitalism again.

You agree with me there right?

 

[royale with cheese]

So banning the production, sale, and importation of methamphetamines or child sex dolls (for the common good) is 'socialism' now?

Why should my meth business be unfairly the victim of such a 'socialist' ban?

And in any event, now the lockdowns are over, the 'socialism' has now gone as well, and we're back to good ole Capitalism again.

You agree with me there right?

Are you comparing restaurants, entertainment, manufacturing etc to meth?

 

[Carringbush2010]

It's a massive issue.
I'm all for taxing vacant property as a means of incentivising their addition to the rental market.
You can add a timeframe for residency/lease to allow renovators to avoid being taxed on property they intend to either live in or let out.

I looked up a timeline of the past after that link (probably should've linked later one).

The then fed government brought in legislation to restrict the practice (just looking at link headlines).Seems in hindsight whether or not foreign investors were the big part of the problem, we're still in the predicament

 

[kranky al]

The Cantillon effect is well established as the reason that inflation is uneven during a time of excessive money printing. “Profiteering” is 1st year undergrad social activist understanding of the world.

No surprise that the very dim bulbs at the Australia Institute and Guardian use it.

Yet we have all these businesses with massive profits atm.

Hmmm profits.


Profiteering.


Seems like these two words are related.


<<<

Corporate profits in Australia increased by 10.6% qoq in Q4 of 2022, easily exceeding market consensus of 1.5% and shifting from a downwardly revised 11.5% fall in the previous period. This was the strongest growth in corporate profits since Q2 of 2020, as the economy fully reopened from pandemic disruptions. Profits rebounded in miners (11.6% vs -17.3% in Q3), manufacturers (12.6% vs -21.5%), utility providers (8.5% vs -1%), retail traders (6.5% vs -4.6%), wholesale traders (12.2% vs -0.5%), constructors (3.6% vs -3.8%), information providers (5.6% vs -7.6%), financial and insurance services (22.0% vs -39.0), arts and recreation services (23.8% vs -26.2%), and other services (37.1% vs -17.6%). Also, profits picked up in transport providers (8.5% vs 3%) and administrative, support services (21.8% vs 7.6%), while accelerated in professional, scientific industries (19.4% vs 15.3%). Through the year to December, corporate profits jumped 16.0%, way stronger than a 9.6% rise in Q3. source: Australian Bureau of Statistics>>>​

Sooouuuurrrrcceee: Australia Corporate Profits - 2023 Data - 2024 Forecast - 1994-2022 Historical

 

[Malifice]

Are you comparing restaurants, entertainment, manufacturing etc to meth?

The manufacture and sale of Meth is banned for the public good.

Is that 'socialism', yes or no?

 

[royale with cheese]

The manufacture and sale of Meth is banned for the public good.

Is that 'socialism', yes or no?

No

 

[Malifice]

No

So you're saying the State controlling the means of production (in this case banning the sale and manufacture of meth) for the common good - with an absolute ban no less - is not socialism?

How does that differ from the State making temporary stay at home orders during a pandemic?

Why is one of those things 'socialism' and the other thing, not 'socialism'?

If you're curious, you're conflating liberalism (the State making laws to protect people from harm) which both of those laws fall into, with socialism (the State owning the means of production) which neither of those laws fall into.

 

[royale with cheese]

So you're saying the State controlling the means of production (in this case banning the sale and manufacture of meth) for the common good - with an absolute ban no less - is not socialism?

How does that differ from the State making temporary stay at home orders during a pandemic?

Because I said so.

 

[Malifice]

Because I said so.

Mature.

 

[Big Papa Ted]

So you're saying the State controlling the means of production (in this case banning the sale and manufacture of meth) for the common good - with an absolute ban no less - is not socialism?

How does that differ from the State making temporary stay at home orders during a pandemic?

Why is one of those things 'socialism' and the other thing, not 'socialism'?

If you're curious, you're conflating liberalism (the State making laws to protect people from harm) which both of those laws fall into, with socialism (the State owning the means of production) which neither of those laws fall into.

To ne fair, banning something isn't controlling the means of production. If the state nationalised meth manufacturing and banned any private production/sale, then yes that'd be controlling the means of production).

Not disagreeing with your premise, just saying that it isn't the most apt analogy.

 

[Ants]

Mature.

Heh, at least he's finally being honest. It was never about the facts, it was blaming stuff he didn't like on socialism regardless.

 

[Ants]

Yet we have all these businesses with massive profits atm.

Hmmm profits.


Profiteering.


Seems like these two words are related.


<<<

Corporate profits in Australia increased by 10.6% qoq in Q4 of 2022, easily exceeding market consensus of 1.5% and shifting from a downwardly revised 11.5% fall in the previous period. This was the strongest growth in corporate profits since Q2 of 2020, as the economy fully reopened from pandemic disruptions. Profits rebounded in miners (11.6% vs -17.3% in Q3), manufacturers (12.6% vs -21.5%), utility providers (8.5% vs -1%), retail traders (6.5% vs -4.6%), wholesale traders (12.2% vs -0.5%), constructors (3.6% vs -3.8%), information providers (5.6% vs -7.6%), financial and insurance services (22.0% vs -39.0), arts and recreation services (23.8% vs -26.2%), and other services (37.1% vs -17.6%). Also, profits picked up in transport providers (8.5% vs 3%) and administrative, support services (21.8% vs 7.6%), while accelerated in professional, scientific industries (19.4% vs 15.3%). Through the year to December, corporate profits jumped 16.0%, way stronger than a 9.6% rise in Q3. source: Australian Bureau of Statistics>>>​

Sooouuuurrrrcceee: Australia Corporate Profits - 2023 Data - 2024 Forecast - 1994-2022 Historical

As I mentioned above, profiteering because high inflation let's you is a normal facet of increased inflation. It wasn't the original driver.

 

[Messenger]

I had a suspicion that foreign investors like to park cash in rich aussie properties, like tax evading corporates like tax havens.

So I did a google search:

do foreign property investors leave properties empty? - Google Search

My brother is a copper in a well to do area of Melbourne. Plenty of very big houses empty or with one person living with a chair, mattress, bar fridge and portable TV.

 

[Carringbush2010]

My brother is a copper in a well to do area of Melbourne. Plenty of very big houses empty or with one person living with a chair, mattress, bar fridge and portable TV.

Sounds like one of these scenarios

• A renter who can barely afford or just moved in and hasn't moved all their stuff
• A home buyer who can barely afford or just moved in and hasn't moved all their stuff
• A squatter
• Someone who pays no rent but has been put up by someone, by maybe a foreign investor. Who knows.

 

[kranky al]

As I mentioned above, profiteering because high inflation let's you is a normal facet of increased inflation. It wasn't the original driver.

Yes the orignal driver finished quite some time ago.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

So; by the State.

I take it you don't enjoy reading posts or articles or books beyond the first sentence.

 

[Malifice]

I take it you don't enjoy reading posts or articles or books beyond the first sentence.

Socialism is ownership and control of the means of production by the State (as opposed to the means of production being in private hands, where it's done for profit).

If you want to start your own company, where profits to workers of the company, and the whole thing is run as a commune with all workers being equal, that isn't socialism. It's still privately held, being run for profit, and is not owned or controlled by the State.

 

[Gralin]

Socialism is ownership and control of the means of production by the State (as opposed to the means of production being in private hands, where it's done for profit).

If you want to start your own company, where profits to workers of the company, and the whole thing is run as a commune with all workers being equal, that isn't socialism. It's still privately held, being run for profit, and is not owned or controlled by the State.

Mal I gotta disagree with you here

Socialism does not mean state ownership of the means of production.

It can mean that and most commonly is thought of as that but its also about co-ops, community ownership, workers owning and making the decisions about their work

social control of the means of production, at its root that is what its about

its how that social control is exerted and what the framework for that is that decides whether we're talking state ownership or not

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Socialism is ownership and control of the means of production by the State (as opposed to the means of production being in private hands, where it's done for profit).

If you want to start your own company, where profits to workers of the company, and the whole thing is run as a commune with all workers being equal, that isn't socialism. It's still privately held, being run for profit, and is not owned or controlled by the State.

Incorrect. Ownership that is not private is collective ownership, and forms of collective ownership exist beyond state ownership. This comment is like observing a cat and a dog and concluding that because the cat is not a dog but both of them are animals, all animals that are not dogs are cats.

Are you under the misapprehension that all state-owned corporations aren't run for profit?

 

[Malifice]

Ownership that is not private is collective ownership, and forms of collective ownership exist beyond state ownership.

Such a thing doesn't exist.

Prove me wrong. Provide me an example of something that is not owned either privately (by one or more individuals or corporations), nor owned by the State.

 

[Malifice]

Mal I gotta disagree with you here

Socialism does not mean state ownership of the means of production.

Here is the literal OED definition of socialism:

An economic system in which the means of production are controlled by the state. Also known as socialist economy. Contrast capitalism. See also marxism.

socialism

It can mean that and most commonly is thought of as that but its also about co-ops, community ownership, workers owning and making the decisions about their work

None of those things are socialism. The company or business or co-op remains privately owned and run (and not State owned and run), and it operates for a profit (or for the benefit of the workers/ owners of the company).

That's capitalism, not socialism.

For example, ten mates and I can all pitch in money and buy a company, of which we all hold 1 equal share. We could all agree (via a constitution for that company) that all decisions made by the company are by collective majority vote (or unanimous vote) of all 11 shareholders, and that all profits of that company are to be divided 11 ways (equally among all of us). The only people constitutionally allowed to work for the company are the 11 of us.

That is NOT socialism. That is just a company, owned privately, and run for profit for the people (private individuals) that work for and own it.

It's capitalism.

If the State took control of that company (and ownership of it) then we could talk.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Such a thing doesn't exist.

Prove me wrong. Provide me an example of something that is not owned either privately (by one or more individuals or corporations), nor owned by the State.

1. Mondragon, a federation of worker co-operatives.

Alki - The federation of Worker cooperatives

12ft

12ft.io

2. Community cooperative-owned businesses and infrastructure, such as this wind farm in England.

Westmill Solar | Westmill Solar Co-operative | Solar Park in Shrivenham Wiltshire

Westmill Solar Park is located near to Watchfield in Wiltshire, the site consists of 30 acres of over 20,000 polycrystalline PV panels generating 4.8GWhr/yr

www.westmillsolar.coop

3. Any football club owned by its members.

 

[Mofra]

Not to mention PPP arrangements where the state not only has a controlling interest (but not sole interest) in an organisation, but the provides a regulatory framework within the same industry as a means of artificially inducing some form of competition into that sector.