Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
Boston Consulting Group blows the Australian population ponzi horn; Does Australia face a shortage of 2.3 million workers by 2030?
Topic Started: 4 Aug 2014, 11:26 AM (3,099 Views)
Chris
Default APF Avatar


van
9 Aug 2014, 02:11 PM
Instead of worrying about the record level of unemployment currently, they instead concern themselves with a too tight employment market in the future :dry:





No Van, you will find that all they are concerned about is the engine room of big business. Banks, supermarkets, petrol refineries, insurance companies etc are on a capitalist trajectory. Business today is tied into more and more profits, think of CBA going to its shareholders and saying 'we made money but no YOY gains this FY ' heads would roll.

Any company not making YOY gains would be considered a failing venture to shareholders but the market place is limited by profit and the population. The population can only afford so much, wage growth needs to be controlled to protect profits so the only thing left is to increase your market share, but how do you do that with a limited market.

And this is where immigration comes in!!! You will find all major corporation both national and international would be pushing all developed nations governments to raise immigration exponentially irrespective of the consequences in amenities and infrastructure. In fact the more demand on infrastructure the greater the opportunity for these companies to create greater profit, in times of desperation people and their governments will always be willing to pay a premium.

Mass immigration is a flawed argument for economic success that we accept with blind faith. I always think to the single mothers on welfare who find wealth through having children. They get to the third or fourth and go 'shit, how good is this' baby bonus's plus all the welfare they can tap into and some are earning more than me pw.

The only thing they don't factor in is that whether they like it or not they will either become infertile or the kids reach an age where welfare is reduced or removed, then what? I am amazed in this day and age how many in governments and big business act and think like single mothers on welfare.

Edited by Chris, 9 Aug 2014, 05:59 PM.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Jimbo
Member Avatar


Chris
9 Aug 2014, 05:57 PM
Mass immigration is a flawed argument for economic success that we accept with blind faith. I always think to the single mothers on welfare who find wealth through having children. They get to the third or fourth and go 'shit, how good is this' baby bonus's plus all the welfare they can tap into and some are earning more than me pw.

T
Immigration is low hanging fruit. You import people who have been birthed, schooled and tested in the workplace at the expense of another countries government. You get the benefit of their labour without the initial outlay.

Problem being, one day these migrants will be old and will need greater numbers of new migrants to support them (hence the pyramid scheme analogies).

Do we really need more plasterers, painters, bricklayers and car mechanics when we can train them ourselves?

Yes, bring in the specialist brain surgeons and others that will be able to pass on the benefits of their knowledge but please, Australia is full of petrol head car enthusiasts. Do we really need to import car mechanics?

If you want to see what too much immigration does to a country, look no further than the UK.

Edit/Addenda. GDP growth is inflation adjusted but is not population adjusted. IMO, the figure reported should not be GDP, but GDP per capita. On that basis, the UK is still in negative territory compared to pre GFC.
Edited by Jimbo, 9 Aug 2014, 06:59 PM.
Matthew, 30 Jan 2016, 09:21 AM Your simplistic view is so flawed it is not worth debating. The current oversupply will be swallowed in 12 months. By the time dumb shits like you realise this prices will already be :?: rising.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
stinkbug
Member Avatar


John Frum
9 Aug 2014, 05:20 PM
So will the capital sitting in my bank account. You haven't even attempted to address my question as to whether the rises will be real or nominal.

A worthless contribution.




as will a well chosen postage stamp or baseball card.

Again, another worthless contribution.




I have been posting on APF for over a year, have revealed parts of my personal situation that are relevant in the context of the debate here, and present my own opinions for judgement by other forum members, as well as calling out those i find spurious and inconsistent. I don't just sit on the sidelines spitting vitriol and hurling insults like some bears do here. But feel free to call me a troll if it makes you feel better.
Capital sitting in your bank account does not go up. You get CPI level of interest if you're lucky, and then you pay tax on it. A losing strategy.

Nominal or real? For my properties: real. Overall market average: real (but not by as much).

You claim to make contributions, but you are inevitably the first to throw shit. Like in this thread.
---------------------------------------------------------------

While it's true that those who win never quit, and those who quit never win, those who never win and never quit are idiots.

Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
John Frum
Member Avatar


stinkbug
9 Aug 2014, 07:45 PM
Capital sitting in your bank account does not go up. You get CPI level of interest if you're lucky, and then you pay tax on it. A losing strategy.

Capital in my bank account is the same as capital in your house, insofar as it's an asset that provides an income stream, and is subject to fluctuations in value compared to other assets. Your rate of return may be higher (if you have a positive gearing strategy), but at the end of the day this is because holding a house entails more risk. Risk of not being able to rent the property. Risk of having to spend more on repairs than you'd like. Risk of a large correction in its value.

Also, like your beloved housing, money offers the opportunity for handsome capital gains via deflation. It's just that you're conditioned to think it won't happen. You think if there's a crisis of confidence with mortgage debt levels, the government will step in to devalue the currency to preserve the value of assets for rent seekers like yourself.

I say that won't happen. I say it will be yours that suffers over the next decade. This approach is not because I'm too chicken to indulge the animal spirits, it's just that I can see clearly the way the shell game works now, they're running out of new tricks to keep everyone distracted

Quote:
 
Nominal or real? For my properties: real. Overall market average: real (but not by as much).


oh dear, just when you're about to make a sensible contribution you have to go spoil it with pointless anonymous bragging - sure you're doing just fine (you remind us constantly), but just to be sure the question was directed at the housing market in general.

So... if you think housing will continue to outpace incomes, how will we be buying them in the future, considering affordability is streched by most measures currently? Will:

1) Productivity gains in other areas allow us to throw more of our income at housing?
2) The bank lend us more money, will 50 year inter-generational mortgages become the norm?
3) Or will it be like the tin-foil hat guy here says, that the market will transmute, inequality will increase and we return to a new gilded age, of rent seeking dilettantes and their beleaguered servants scrabbling out a living at the whim of their master's conscience?

...or something else?

Quote:
 
You claim to make contributions, but you are inevitably the first to throw shit. Like in this thread.


Er, hello? *You* started the shit-slinging by making vague, shapeless predictions.
Edited by John Frum, 9 Aug 2014, 08:52 PM.
"It were not best that we should all think alike; it is difference of opinion that makes horse races." - Mark Twain on why he avoids discussing house prices over at MacroBusiness.
"Buy land, they're not making any more of it." - Georgist Land Tax proponent Mark Twain laughing in his grave at humourless idiots like skamy that continually use this quip to justify housing bubbles.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
stinkbug
Member Avatar


John Frum
9 Aug 2014, 08:49 PM
Capital in my bank account is the same as capital in your house, insofar as it's an asset that provides an income stream, and is subject to fluctuations in value compared to other assets. Your rate of return may be higher (if you have a positive gearing strategy), but at the end of the day this is because holding a house entails more risk. Risk of not being able to rent the property. Risk of having to spend more on repairs than you'd like. Risk of a large correction in its value.

Also, like your beloved housing, money offers the opportunity for handsome capital gains via deflation. It's just that you're conditioned to think it won't happen. You think if there's a crisis of confidence with mortgage debt levels, the government will step in to devalue the currency to preserve the value of assets for rent seekers like yourself.

I say that won't happen. I say it will be yours that suffers over the next decade. This approach is not because I'm too chicken to indulge the animal spirits, it's just that I can see clearly the way the shell game works now, they're running out of new tricks to keep everyone distracted




oh dear, just when you're about to make a sensible contribution you have to go spoil it with pointless anonymous bragging - sure you're doing just fine (you remind us constantly), but just to be sure the question was directed at the housing market in general.

So... if you think housing will continue to outpace incomes, how will we be buying them in the future, considering affordability is streched by most measures currently? Will:

1) Productivity gains in other areas allow us to throw more of our income at housing?
2) The bank lend us more money, will 50 year inter-generational mortgages become the norm?
3) Or will it be like the tin-foil hat guy here says, that the market will transmute, inequality will increase and we return to a new gilded age, of rent seeking dilettantes and their beleaguered servants scrabbling out a living at the whim of their master's conscience?

...or something else?




Er, hello? *You* started the shit-slinging by making vague, shapeless predictions.
Wrong. Capital in the bank is not the same as capital in a house. Capital in a property grows or shrinks separately to the value of the yield, capital in a bank account does not do that. Capital in a bank account sees no capital growth at all, it simply generates a small yield which is subject to tax anyway.

Anonymous bragging? Wrong again. My properties have several characteristics that allow them to outperform the average, and these are quite obvious to anyone who owns more than a few IPs. You realise the 'average' location changes with time, yeah? But properties don't change location, do they? Think about it. Further, I don't think properties will grow to the moon - they don't need to for my strategy to work. I really think you need to stop jumping to conclusions and running down rabbit holes.

One thing that gives you away is that you start an argument with a personal attack, but then write posts portraying a poor, misunderstood forum member who just wants to chat. You've done this before. Frankly, I think you have significant gaps in your knowledge of properties and you use these little tricks to try to cover yourself. If you don't want to get into personal arguments, don't start them. I don't care either way.
John Frum
9 Aug 2014, 08:49 PM
*You* started the shit-slinging by making vague, shapeless predictions.
EDIT: You think making me a prediction that you don't agree with is shit-slinging? You're a liar and a troll.
Edited by stinkbug, 9 Aug 2014, 09:26 PM.
---------------------------------------------------------------

While it's true that those who win never quit, and those who quit never win, those who never win and never quit are idiots.

Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Will
Unregistered

Morris
4 Aug 2014, 11:26 AM
How anyone could travel on London’s public transport during peak hour, then argue – as The Economist does – that Britain needs to squeeze in even more people is a triumph of self-interested belief over evidence
I was at Brixton once, waiting for the tube to the Airport, I had to wait for 3 trains before I found one where me and the suitcase could squeeze in.
"REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
John Frum
Member Avatar


stinkbug
9 Aug 2014, 09:16 PM
Wrong. Capital in the bank is not the same as capital in a house. Capital in a property grows or shrinks separately to the value of the yield, capital in a bank account does not do that. Capital in a bank account sees no capital growth at all, it simply generates a small yield which is subject to tax anyway.
You didn't listen to me, did you? I said that inflation/deflation are essentially capital depreciation/appreciation for money, so money can see capital growth. You assume that because western nations have inflationary targets for money at around 2-3% that they will stay that way. I say they won't - attempting to maintain this target will eventually prove economically destructive, and given a choice between deflation or inflation, central banks will opt for the former to avoid insurrection and social upheaval.

If that scenario unfolds then my cash asset will be appreciating faster than your housing assets.

Got that?

Quote:
 
Anonymous bragging? Wrong again. My properties have several characteristics that allow them to outperform the average, and these are quite obvious to anyone who owns more than a few IPs. You realise the 'average' location changes with time, yeah? But properties don't change location, do they? Think about it. Further, I don't think properties will grow to the moon - they don't need to for my strategy to work. I really think you need to stop jumping to conclusions and running down rabbit holes.

One thing that gives you away is that you start an argument with a personal attack, but then write posts portraying a poor, misunderstood forum member who just wants to chat. You've done this before. Frankly, I think you have significant gaps in your knowledge of properties and you use these little tricks to try to cover yourself. If you don't want to get into personal arguments, don't start them. I don't care either way.

EDIT: You think making me a prediction that you don't agree with is shit-slinging? You're a liar and a troll.


Please don't misinterpret the fact that I don't lose my rag as an attempt to make polite conversation. My goal is to get you to come up with a deeper explanation of your ideas rather than having to sit through the usual bragging nonsense. I didn't disagree with your prediction because you didn't actually make one.

And as for hijacking threads, go back and read the OP again. It was making the point that now the west has run out of productivity gains and sucker wage slaves to underpay and load up with debt, it's now going all out on immigration to try and maintain growth levels that will keep the top tier enriched. No mention of properties at all until you and your tweedledum pal the doc dragged the conversation there. Then, like countless other threads, you use this opportunity to turn it into a staple bull "house prices to the moon" wankfest and a brag about your knack for picking the good ones.
Which was *totally* missing the point of the OP.

And now it continues. I attempt to probe you for an explanation on how house prices are going to continue their magnificent upward trajectory by offering 3 possible macro scenarios, and you again avoid replying, and instead launch into yet another skite about your powers at picking hotspots. Unfuckingbelievable!
Edited by John Frum, 9 Aug 2014, 11:25 PM.
"It were not best that we should all think alike; it is difference of opinion that makes horse races." - Mark Twain on why he avoids discussing house prices over at MacroBusiness.
"Buy land, they're not making any more of it." - Georgist Land Tax proponent Mark Twain laughing in his grave at humourless idiots like skamy that continually use this quip to justify housing bubbles.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Ned Flanders
Default APF Avatar


John Frum
9 Aug 2014, 11:19 PM
You didn't listen to me, did you? I said that inflation/deflation are essentially capital depreciation/appreciation for money, so money can see capital growth. You assume that because western nations have inflationary targets for money at around 2-3% that they will stay that way. I say they won't - attempting to maintain this target will eventually prove economically destructive, and given a choice between deflation or inflation, central banks will opt for the former to avoid insurrection and social upheaval.
Inflation has had a bull run since Bretton Woods. The only economy where the inflation bull run has ended is Japan (and Abenomics will destroy the economy of Japan entirely before it creates 2% inflation).

What makes you think the inflation bull run has ended in the West?

What is your timeline for the Western world to enter secular deflation?
------------------------------
" ... which is that all-too-familiar dynamic in Irish life where people tell lies, cover them up and create all sorts of collateral damage, sometimes spread out over decades, and never take responsibility."
- Alan Glynn
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
stinkbug
Member Avatar


John Frum
9 Aug 2014, 11:19 PM
You didn't listen to me, did you? I said that inflation/deflation are essentially capital depreciation/appreciation for money, so money can see capital growth. You assume that because western nations have inflationary targets for money at around 2-3% that they will stay that way. I say they won't - attempting to maintain this target will eventually prove economically destructive, and given a choice between deflation or inflation, central banks will opt for the former to avoid insurrection and social upheaval.

If that scenario unfolds then my cash asset will be appreciating faster than your housing assets.

Got that?




Please don't misinterpret the fact that I don't lose my rag as an attempt to make polite conversation. My goal is to get you to come up with a deeper explanation of your ideas rather than having to sit through the usual bragging nonsense. I didn't disagree with your prediction because you didn't actually make one.

And as for hijacking threads, go back and read the OP again. It was making the point that now the west has run out of productivity gains and sucker wage slaves to underpay and load up with debt, it's now going all out on immigration to try and maintain growth levels that will keep the top tier enriched. No mention of properties at all until you and your tweedledum pal the doc dragged the conversation there. Then, like countless other threads, you use this opportunity to turn it into a staple bull "house prices to the moon" wankfest and a brag about your knack for picking the good ones.
Which was *totally* missing the point of the OP.

And now it continues. I attempt to probe you for an explanation on how house prices are going to continue their magnificent upward trajectory by offering 3 possible macro scenarios, and you again avoid replying, and instead launch into yet another skite about your powers at picking hotspots. Unfuckingbelievable!
I understand what your saying, but disagree with most of it. Inflation is well controlled in this country and there's plenty of incentive to keep it that way. I'm on record here many times explaining my strategy, which doesn't require house prices to the moon, and I have never said we'll have constant real growth. Again, you need to read and think, not run down rabbit holes.

And I still think you're a troll. You love to get reactions, and even said so once.
---------------------------------------------------------------

While it's true that those who win never quit, and those who quit never win, those who never win and never quit are idiots.

Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Australian Property Forum · Next Topic »
Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3



Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.

Forum Rules: The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.

Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.

Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.

This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.

For more information go to Limitations on Exclusive Rights: Fair Use

Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ

Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy