THE
ECONOMY
"The prosperity
of each individual, family, business, state and nation is to the
advantage
of all. The failure of any of these is the root cause of
disadvantage,
hardship, poverty, anger, jealousy, ignorance, terror and finally war.
The ancient and ingrained notion that one must prosper to the
disadvantage
of another is proven obsolete! We are all in the same boat and so
we must all learn to share the risks the work and the rewards and row
together." Lyn
Vickery
"Australians
work the second longest working hours of all the OECD countries
after South Korea. 50% of Australian workers take no
holidays
whatsoever or reduced holidays."
Dec
2002
"Small
businesses (those that are privately owned and employ less than 20
people)
account for over 95% of all private sector businesses in Australia." Oct
2003
"Almost
20 years of uncontrolled deregulation has brought unparalleled
prosperity
to those who have managed this process or been able to adjust to the
shock
of the new. But it has also caused widespread job destruction in
productive primary and secondary industries; replaced full-time work
for
many with part-time or casual employment or contract labor; forced
thousand
of farmers off the land; created a huge pool of young and middle-aged
unemployed
and under-employed; and downsized essential public services in banking,
health, education and communications." News
Weekly January 13, 2001
BACK TO THE WORLD
OF THOMAS MUN (1571 - 1641)
The
Return of Thomas Mun
- by Martin Hutchinson
- July
27, 2009
China's recent
announcement that it would use its $2
trillion of foreign reserves to boost its companies overseas
acquisitions tells
us that its economic beliefs are neither those of Adam Smith, nor of
Karl Marx,
but of the 17th Century mercantilist Thomas Mun. It is becoming clear
that in
economics, unlike in "hard" sciences, old belief systems never die.
Mun (1571-1641)
wrote a classic magnum opus "England's Treasure by Foreign Trade." Published
only
after his death in 1664, it was nevertheless very influential. Mun had
been a
Director of the East India Company, and, unlike earlier theorists,
believed
that foreign trade was beneficial. However he didn't hold with any
high-faluting nonsense like comparative advantage, or maximization of
global
economic welfare. For Mun the purpose of foreign trade was to export
more than
you imported and, consequently, amass a huge store of foreign
"Treasure," which you could then use to found colonies that would take
control of natural resources.
To
further this objective, countries should: cut back
domestic consumption as far as possible; increase the use of land and
other
domestic resources to reduce imports; encourage the export of goods
made with
foreign raw materials; and export goods with price-inelastic demand
because
profits would be greater.
Mun's theory made sense in the 17th
Century economic
jungle — and today it obviously makes sense to China. The renminbi, China's currency, is undervalued, so exports
consistently
exceed imports. Domestic consumption is kept low and savings high, both
of
which suppress imports. In industries such as automobiles where
consumer demand
is inevitable, foreign manufacturers are forced into domestic joint
ventures,
so that domestic manufacturers can be developed to replace imports.
Domestic
agriculture and resource extraction efforts are intensive. China has set up free trade zones, in which
foreign parts
are assembled into goods that are then exported. Finally, the country
has
amassed a gigantic store of $2 trillion of "Treasure," which is now
to be used to assist in foreign acquisitions. Those acquisitions are
not to be
on Wall Street, as prime minister Wen Jiabao helpfully explained, but
in
natural resources, where China can assure itself of exclusive raw
materials
supplies for decades to come.
It's not often you see an economist's
ideas put into
effect with such precision. "Practical men, who believe themselves to
be
quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of
some
defunct economist" said Maynard Keynes, but he probably didn't expect
the
economist to be almost 370 years defunct, nor the slavery quite so
deferential.
William Gladstone's Britain never followed Adam Smith's theories with
such
precision. Neither was Clement Attlee's Britain so scrupulously faithful to the teachings
of Keynes
himself. Certainly Josef Stalin's Russia played fast and loose with the teachings
of Karl
Marx, as did Mao Zedong's China.
It indeed has to be doubtful whether any
member of China's current State Council has read Mun with
any care.
Wen himself is a geologist by training. One vice premier, Li Keqiang,
has an
economics PhD, but he got it at Beijing university in the early 1980s, so
probably did not
have Mun high on his reading list. Two other vice premiers, Hui Liangyu
and
Zhang Dejiang, have economics first degrees, but Hui got his at Jilin
Party
Provincial School while Zhang aced the economics syllabus at
Pyongyang's Kim Il
Sung University. Neither institution is known as a haven of Mun studies.
Still, to us practical men, the
interesting question
is not where the Chinese leadership got its exquisite understanding of
Mun's
theories, but whether they are likely to work.
For Adam Smith, writing a century later,
Mun's nostrums
were clearly inadequate. "If a foreign country can supply us with a
commodity cheaper than we ourselves can make it, better buy it of them
with
some part of the produce of our own industry, employed in a way in
which we
have some advantage," he wrote. China does not believe this. China preferred to force GM into a joint
venture in China that even now, twelve years after the
joint
venture's foundation and with Buick sales volume in China higher than in the US, makes China's citizens pay $32,200 for a base model
2010 Buick
LaCrosse–16% more than its US price of $27,835.
Thus in Smith's time the ideas of Thomas
Mun had come
to seem hopelessly primitive. With the supply of natural resources
essentially
infinite, countries maximized their wealth by exploiting their
comparative
advantages, whether through cheap natural resources, as in British
coal,
through high quality agriculture, as in French wines, or through
high-level
mechanical ingenuity, as in German manufactures. Whether a country ran
a
balance of payments surplus or deficit was of little short-term
consequence,
and unless a country ran out of money altogether, "Treasure" was of
no consequence at all. It was Smith's economics that brought the world
the
Industrial Revolution and the enormous advances in global prosperity
that
marked the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
There is, however, some evidence that
Smith's
economics are ceasing to work so well, and that we may be re-entering
the world
of Thomas Mun.
The key problem is natural resources. In
Smith's
time, with a global population of only 1 billion and little
industrialization,
the global supply of resources was almost infinite. Today, however,
when we
have allowed global population to bloat to 6.8 billion, there are signs
that
the global resources supply may be becoming disturbingly finite. Under
Smith's
economics, that isn't a problem; if one resource becomes scarce its
price
rises, and the world switches to an alternative. If, however, we are
now
dependent on a few critical resources for which alternatives are not
readily
available, price signals alone may not prevent us from depleting those
resources altogether, causing catastrophic disruption to our economic
life.
China clearly believes this is about to happen.
That's why
it is attempting to appropriate control of oilfields, mines and so
forth in
emerging markets, providing itself with secure sources of supply that
will
allow its economy to continue to flourish in a world of scarcity. Mun
would
surely have approved. In the dog-eat-dog world of 17th Century
mercantilism, a
$2 trillion hoard of "Treasure" would find ready use in such
activities, whether through formal colonies, or, as in China's case,
merely
through exploitation agreements backed, if necessary, by the People's
Liberation
Army.
In reality, China is probably a few decades premature. Oil,
the
world's most critical natural resource, is still in ample supply if the
price
is high enough to bring offshore drilling, oil shale and tar sands into
operation. Other natural resources may certainly find their prices
driven up by
the rapid industrialization of China and India, but there is no sign of their rising
prices being
due to any absolute global scarcity–not yet.
Nevertheless, over the coming decades we
are in
danger of reverting to a Thomas Mun world, in which prosperity depends
on
hoarding sources of natural resources and "Treasure." That will be a
world significantly poorer than our own, in which the price mechanism
no longer
carries much weight and innovation is stifled by the dead hand of the
government bureaucracies that dominate economic life through their
direction of
nations' economic policies. While initially a Mun world might survive
fairly
comfortably, the long-term economic prognostication for it must be
truly grim.
There are two possible escapes from this
future. One
is the 1950s dream of space exploration, in which technology advances
to the
level where we can garner resources from other worlds, and if necessary
dispose
of surplus population in galactic colonization. However, 40 years after
Apollo
11, our advance to that future seems much less certain than it did.
Indeed, we
are in reality no closer to it than were Jules Verne's fantasy
astronauts of
1865, who shot to the moon from the barrel of a gigantic Florida-based
cannon.
The other possibility is to return to the
world of
Adam Smith, in which global population was around 1 billion, so that
resources
and environmental problems posed little constraint. In such a world,
natural
resources would be abundant for centuries to come, so China's economics would be wholly foolish, and
the free
market would reign supreme. Government policy would no longer be
relevant, and
private sector companies would build new technologies and possibilities
in a
world of globalised free trade. Environmental constraints such as
global
warming would also pose little threat, since the carbon emitted into
the
atmosphere by the global economy would be a fraction of its current
level.
Returning
to a global population of 1 billion would
be difficult, but it may be more practicable than a gigantic
interstellar
exploration program. If so, it may form the only viable exit from the
inexorable approach of the world of Thomas Mun.
http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php/thebearslairview?art_id=10254
|
THE REAL ESTATE
MELTDOWN (U.S. SUB-PRIME DEBACLE)
Warnings
from 2006 ... "And now, in 2008, the chickens have come home to
roost!" See the article below.
Day
of Reckoning; America’s Economic Meltdown 
By Mike Whitney
09/09/06 "Information
Clearing House" - [link to
www.informationclearinghouse.info]
- There’s growing concern among economists and market-savvy pundits
that the global financial system is hanging by a few well-worn threads
that could snap at any time. The $10.4 trillion real estate “bubble”
has attracted the most attention, but the shaky derivatives market,
hedge funds, and falling dollar are equally worrisome. 20 years of
deregulation has created an economic monster which is increasingly
unmanageable and threatens to bring down the whole system in a heap.
As
Gabriel Kolko said in a recent counterpunch article (“Why a Global
Economic Deluge Looms” [link
to www.counterpunch.org]
), “The entire global financial structure is becoming uncontrollable in
crucial ways its nominal leaders never expected. Instability is
increasingly its hallmark….Contradictions now wrack the world’s
financial system, and if we are to believe the institutions and
personalities who have been in the forefront of the defense of
capitalism, it may very well be on the verge of serious crisis.”
Deregulation
has reduced market transparency and created a plethora of
financial instruments which are relatively untested and extraordinarily
volatile. By eliminating the “rules of the game” the market big shots
have raked in hefty profits but reshaped the economic landscape in a
way that no one can predict what the ultimate outcome will be. The new
investment-regime includes such opaque standards as credit derivatives,
credit derivative futures, and collateralized debt obligations. Hedge
funds are now loaded with these over-leveraged debt-instruments that
promise a generous return in an “up-tempo” market, but certain doom in
an economic downturn. Now, that the indicators are all pointing toward
a slowdown or recession, the potentially devastating effects of this
new “liberalized” system will soon be felt throughout the global
economy.
Kolko’s
article is a “must-read” for anyone who wants to get a better
idea of the fragility of the present system. Americans have dumped
trillions of their hard-earned savings into risky hedge funds which
have only been in existence for a short period of time. No one knows
what the future holds for these “flash-in-the-pan” investments. As
Kolko says, “The credit derivative market was almost nonexistent in
2001, grew fairly slowly until 2004 and went into the stratosphere,
reaching $17.3 trillion by the end of 2005.”
That’s
right; a whopping $17.3 trillion, enough to sink the entire economy if
the market takes a nosedive.
This
whole idea of re-selling debt is a relatively new phenomenon and
fraught with peril. Hedge funds can bundle together a slew of
Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMs) and make a handsome profit, but when
the housing market starts listing, the investor is trapped on a sinking
ship with little hope of recouping his losses.
Deregulation
is characterized in the business-friendly media as a way
of lifting the burdensome restrictions on the free flow of capital.
This is nonsense. Deregulation is, in fact, the removal of the laws
which traditionally protect the public from the hucksters and
scam-artists who create lofty-sounding investments which are nothing
more than Ponzi-schemes. (The purchase of “credit derivative futures”
definitely falls within this category of dicey investments)
Deregulation has gravely undermined the long-term prospects for western
capitalism to succeed. By removing the safeguards to investment, the
business and banking communities have created what many call “casino
capitalism,” an anarchic structure with few protections that is hurling
the markets toward a system-wide meltdown.
Similar
problems plague the sagging real estate market. In recent years
a buyer could pick up a house with no down payment, an “interest-only”
loan, a low ARM, and be reasonably certain that the next year it would
increase 20 to 30% in value. This allows the buyer to refinance his
home, use his “presto-equity” as discretionary income, and begin the
cycle all over again next year. With wages stagnating since the 1970s,
the increase in home equity has been the preferred method for most
Americans to “get ahead”. Housing prices have steadily increased since
the 1980s and skyrocketed in the last 5 years. This has created a
feeding-frenzy for low interest loans and attracted millions of
speculators and (traditionally) unqualified applicants to the real
estate gold rush.
It’s
been a great deal for the banks, too. Mortgages make up the bulk
of the banks loans in America, more than $400 billion last year alone.
If it wasn’t for the steady steam of mortgages many banks would have
seen negative growth in the last decade. Now that housing prices are
flattening out and expected to fall (precipitously) the easy money has
dried up and many over-leveraged homeowners are facing the dismal
prospect of having to pay off an asset that is quickly losing its
value. Economist Michael Hudson calls this phenomenon “negative
equity”, that is, when the current value of the house falls beneath the
amount that one has to pay on his mortgage. It is a predicament which
now faces an estimated 30 million Americans who are drowning in red ink
and skittering towards a life of indentured servitude.
The
magnitude of the housing bubble is shocking and unprecedented.
According to the Federal Reserves own figures, “The total amount of
residential housing wealth in the US just about doubled between 1999
and 2006 up from $10.4 trillion to $20.4 trillion.”(Times Online) This
tells us that the Fed had a clear idea of the size of the equity
balloon their low interest policies were creating, but decided not to
take corrective action. It also tells us that there will be no “soft
landing”. When the market begins to fall, no one knows when it will hit
bottom. $10 trillion is more than a “little froth”, as Greenspan
opined; it is an earth-shaking, economy-busting catastrophe that will
put millions at risk of foreclosure, bankruptcy and ruin.
Greenspan
and the privately-owned fed played a major role in putting us
in this mess by rubber-stamping the new system of precarious loans (no
down payments, interest-only loans, ARMs) and perpetuating their “cheap
money” policies. Greenspan admitted this a few months ago when he said
that current housing increases were “unsustainable” and would have
corrected long ago if not for the “the dramatic increase in the
prevalence of interest-only loans…and more exotic forms of adjustable
rate mortgages that enable marginally-qualified, highly leveraged
borrowers to purchase homes at inflated prices.”
Greenspan’s
circuitous comments are tantamount to an admission of
guilt. The fallout from the fed’s policies are bound to be widespread
and devastating. The country has been buoyed along on $10 trillion of
borrowed money which has created the unfortunate sense of prosperity
which is not reflected in the general economy. The increase in housing
prices has not come from wages (which have actually decreased under
Bush) or from demand (inventory is now at a 10 year high) It has merely
been the availability of low interest loans and the promise of getting
rich quick. As the market cools, millions of Americans will either face
foreclosure or be shackled to a mortgage that is higher than the
dwindling value of their home. It is a grim picture of 21st century
debt-slavery.
Industry
trade groups now believe that the falling housing market will
trigger “a softening of capital spending which will cause a slowdown in
US manufacturing next year”
“The
housing market has turned; it’s going to be down this year and
even more sharply next year,” said Dan Meckstroth, chief economist an
Arlington, Virginia-based trade group. (Reuters) As the housing bubble
deflates, economic growth will slump, and the anticipated recession
will steadily deepen.
Alas,
the deregulated “matchstick” markets and the housing bubble are
just two of the three worms which now infect the American economy. The
last of the fiscal demons is the falling dollar. Since, Bush took
office the dollar has dropped a whopping 30% against the euro. At the
same time Bush has added another $3 trillion to the national debt and
increased the trade deficit to an astonishing $800 billion a year; 6.5%
of GDP. The US now needs $2.5 billion per day just to cover its trade
deficit. No one believes that this will go on forever, in fact,
Greenspan sagely noted that it was “unsustainable”. The Bush
administration seems to think that if they corner the global oil-trade
by integrating Iran and Iraq (60% of world oil will come from the
Middle East by 2020) into the US economic system, they can forestall
the demise of the greenback as the world’s “reserve currency”. As long
as oil continues to be denominated (mainly) in dollars, the dollar will
remain the de-facto international currency and western elites will
maintain their role as the stewards of the global system. However, as
America’s debts continue to mushroom, the US produces fewer
manufactured goods, and the oil-producing countries become more hostile
to Bush’s belligerent foreign policy, there’s a real chance the dollar
will be abandoned as the main unit of foreign exchange. If this
happens, then the $3 trillion that is currently held in central banks
overseas will flood the US triggering hyper-inflation and economic
disaster.
Most
people understand now that our involvement in Iraq had a lot to do
with oil supplies, but that is only part of the story. The
administration is trying to maintain US dollar-hegemony so they can
preserve the system whereby fiat money is traded for precious
resources. That system is under growing strain and bound together by
the tattered webbing of military force. If the mission in Iraq fails,
the dollar-system, which has dominated the world since the Second World
War, will quickly unravel sending tremors through America’s economic
heartland.
Doug
Casey, president of Casey Research, comments on the fate of the
dollar in uniquely apocalyptic terms in a recent article in “Review and
Focus”. He says:
“Foreign
owners of the big green mountain of US dollars have become
uneasy and are generally looking to sell. There’s no dumping, at least
not yet. When it comes, the flight from the dollar will come slowly,
and then gain momentum before moving into a blow off. Like a glacier
sliding toward a cliff, movement that seems inevitable may take a
puzzlingly long time to get underway. But once it does, things speed up
at a surprising rate….Given the choice between (A) a dead housing
market and a scorched earth depression in the US or (B) a collapsing
currency, which at least has the virtue of reducing the real cost of
paying off all those Treasury bonds, I’m forced to believe the US
government will choose to sacrifice the dollar.”
Casey
does not mince words, but his sentiments are becoming more
mainstream as the Bush administration continues to increase its
“dollar-savaging” deficits and reckless economic policies.
Many
of America’s fiscal troubles could have been mitigated by prudent
management or judicious leadership, but that won’t change things now.
The system is not in the control of the elected representatives and the
deeply rooted problems are likely to persist until a calamitous event
precipitates a fundamental change. The imbalances are now so humongous
that everyone agrees that something has to give. The system is on its
last legs as manifested by its increasing tendency to express itself in
terms of repression at home and militarism abroad; the ominous signs of
an injured beast in its death throes.
From
the cratering hedge funds, to the faltering dollar, to the
fizzling housing bubble, western-style capitalism is in the advanced
stages of collapse. Deregulation and liberalization have only hastened
its decline.
The
mighty locomotive of global growth is slowly grinding to a
standstill, bogged down by the accumulated weight of it own
inconsistencies and inequities. Change is coming, for good or bad.
The above story may
not represent the views of Global Action, but is posted for
informational reasons.
|
Researchers
uncover the inequalities of Aussie wealth
Date:
June 16, 2005
How
much wealth does the typical Aussie family have? Researchers at the Melbourne
Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research have discovered
that
the distribution of wealth amongst Australians is very unequal. They
have
released their findings with some remarkable results - in the first
significant
survey since World War I.
Conducted
as part of the HILDA Survey, Melbourne Institute researchers Bruce
Headey,
Gary Marks and Mark Wooden have documented the distribution of
household
wealth in Australia and examined its relationships with demographic and
social factors. Not since World War I has there been a survey on
individual
wealth holdings in Australia.
The
studies find that the bottom half of the population owned less than ten
per cent of total household net worth, while the wealthiest ten per
cent
owned 45 per cent of total household wealth.
Dr
Marks, a Research Associate with the Melbourne Institute said
discovering
the unequal wealth distribution was not entirely unexpected. Although
there
is no evidence that wealth inequality has increased over the last
decade,
Dr Marks said that ‘wealth is much more unequally distributed than
household
income.’
Referring
to findings that property is the largest component of assets, Dr
Headey,
Principal Fellow at the Melbourne Institute, said ‘housing is not the
only
game in town.’ Many Australians end up with no cash when they retire
because
they have locked it into their house.
Dr
Headey also pointed out that wealth is heavily skewed with age. ‘Wealth
is not closely linked to a persons’ socioeconomic background’ he said.
Other
findings in the studies include:
•
The average wealth of the top wealth decile is about $1.8 million.
•
The largest component of both assets and debt is property.
•
Wealth is strongly associated with age. The median wealth of 55-65
year-olds
was $444,000 compared to $8,000 among 18 to 24 year olds.
•
University education is associated with substantially higher levels of
wealth.
•
Singles and single-parent households have the lowest levels of wealth.
•
Wealth is only weakly related to socioeconomic background.
•
Pensioners are well short of the wealth that would enable them to live
a ‘comfortable lifestyle’, as determined by the Association of
Superannuation
Funds of Australia.
•
Even when taking into account age differences, marriage and to a lesser
extent de facto relationships, are associated with greater wealth.
•
The affect of divorce on wealth differs between men and women.
•
Children are associated with less wealth.
•
Smokers are less wealthy.
•
Drinkers are wealthier, unless they are heavy drinkers.
•
Exercise makes no difference to levels of wealth.
‘These
findings are significant to all Australians’, Professor Mark Wooden
said.
Whilst
studies have been conducted by financial institutions in the past, the
information collected through the HILDA Survey is from individuals
representing
the Australian population. Financial institution surveys cannot say how
wealth is distributed, which is what these findings from the HILDA set
accomplish.
The
latest study will be released tomorrow in the Australian Economic
Review.
For
interviews, further information or advance, free media access to copies
of the Australian Economic Review (requiring a special media logon
&
password) contact Laura A'Bell on (03) 8344 2154 or email
labell@unimelb.edu.au.
More
Information:
Melbourne
Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research
Laura
A'Bell
Phone
: 03 8344 2154
Fax
: 03 8344 2111
Email
: labell@unimelb.edu.au
Web
: www.melbourneinstitute.com
|
"The
"free market" system - delivers some dismal outcomes - including
chronic
unemployment, poverty, welfare."
GENERAL
COMMENTS
What happened to the
lucky
country? What happened to the 38 hour week? Economic
Rationalism,
down sizing, cost cutting that is what happened. Did you ask or
vote
for these backward steps? I doubt it!
See: Economic
Rationalism
GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA) regards the preservation of Australia's political
and economic freedom and independence in a free
market
incentive based economy in which government provides a strong
clear
and unbiased balance between all the competing forces as
paramount.
Foreign
ownership of Australian assets is already over 40% of GDP. Net
foreign
debt is now over $300 billion or over 45% of GDP. However we examine
these
and other figures our economy is well out of balance.
It
is the responsibility of governments to create the economic
environment
in which the people can prosper. The people
are
the nation. For decades successive Australian
governments
have failed to heed that one simple fact as they blindly
followed the gurus of Economic Rationalism - Thatcher and
Reagan.
During
its term Labour wracked up huge deficits. Then the Liberals
gained office and sold out to big business, sold off more of our public
assets and helped finish the job of destroying our manufacturing
industries
in the name of economic rationalism. The fact the both
have blood
on their hands is the very reason why they will never save
Australia.
Foreign
debt continues to soar! At present most of our national debt is
in
the private sector - which is particularly unhealthy.
Already
our economic freedom is largely owned or mortgaged to foreigners!
The
logical end of the madness of economic rationalism is already in
sight.
We have seen the Asian meltdown, Japan's economy in stagnation and half
a dozen nations in South America on the brink of total collapse.
GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA) will not cave in to the madness
perpetuated
by the hawkers of this chaos, the OECD (Organisation for Economic
Cooperation
and Development, the IMF (International Monetary Fund) or the World
Bank.
What
Australia needs is a new broom to clean out the rats and stand
up
to the economic plunderers that robbed us of almost two decades of
genuine
prosperity. GLOBAL ACTION (AUSTRALIA) is that new broom!
A
SNAPSHOT ON TAX - UPTS
 GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA) supports a major review of the Australian taxation
system and the examination of the feasibility of a single tax to be
known
as UPTS (USER PAYS TAX SYSTEM)
Also
See TAXATION
WHAT
IS ECONOMIC RATIONALISM?
Economic
rationalism is putting the fox (banks, big business, speculators) in
charge
of the hen house (the people) and then wondering why the hens don't
prosper!
Economic
rationalism or deregulation, strips away all the checks and balances
that
protected Australia and Australians from the rape and pillage
or our land and its institutions and businesses caused by uncontrolled
short term speculator greed. * See Economic
Rationalism
HOW
DO WE FIX THE MESS?
Several
political parties trumpet that they will buy back the farm.
GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA) will buy back not just the farm, but the
factories, the
small business, the technology, the country and the
future.
Within
the real world economic framework of the 21st century GLOBAL
ACTION
(AUSTRALIA) stands for aggressive, responsible,
and progressive
economic nationalism. Australia will again start to look
after
itself and stop listening to so-called experts who have wrecked half of
the planet and left over billion human souls in poverty.
GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA) will drive hard and fast to make Australia the
powerhouse of the Southern Hemisphere by:
a. Returning real power and choice to
the
people and thereby creating the opportunity for a bright,
prosperous, future for all. See notes below on INVERTING THE
ECONOMIC
PYRAMID.
b. Vigorously engaging with the world in trade
(We are definitely not isolationist).
b. Immediately reactivating our dormant industrial manufacturing
power with the emphasis on quality and
Australian technological excellence. No more Australian
Inventions
will
be stolen by foreigners!
* See
Manufacturing
c.
Letting our mining industry get on with
the
job (Within strictly enforced, but not time consuming,
environmental
guidelines). * See Mining Industry.
* d. Returning
our smartest scientific
and
technological
people to work on real projects that benefit Australia and
the planet. See - Information
and
Computing Technology, Aerospace Industry,
Manufacturing.
e. Comprehensively and quickly resuscitating
and rebuilding
our Rural and Industrial might (Within strictly
enforced, but not time
consuming, environmental
guidelines). *See
Agriculture,
Environment.
f. Transforming Australian from a net
importer
of manufactured goods into a major exporter.
(At present we are down a $57 billion dollar hole!
Newsweekly
- Jan 13, 2001)
Lyn
Vickery and GLOBAL ACTION (AUSTRALIA) are not interested in excuses
about why
things can't be done, just in getting them done - now!
We
will trade with the world. We will rebuild the trade bridges
with Britain and Europe - so expertly destroyed by Hawk and
Keating,
but we will never yield control of this great nation's
commercial
enterprises small or large to foreigners.
GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA'S) DECLARATION OF ECONOMIC INDEPENDENCE
GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA) will introduce flexible smart tariff advantages
with sunset provisions to quarantine efficient Australian
manufacturers
from overseas raiders and unfair competition and create
a head
start for well planned and funded new enterprises with strong
growth
potential. A fair go for Australian businesses, plus a bit of a
push in the right direction.
In
instances where companies are already foreign owned and controlled,
control
will gradually be returned to Australian Interests without compromising
the investment returns to foreign investors.
The
Profits of foreign owned companies operating in Australia will primarily
remain in Australia to grow strong subsidiary companies with
the
potential to export and create good returns for both local and foreign
investors.
GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA) will release Australia's pent up human energy to
produce wealth, get the people off the endless treadmill of bills
and
hopelessness, and pour the profits back into their own pockets.
As
a top priority GLOBAL ACTION (AUSTRALIA) will release a sector by
sector integrated
economic development plan for the next decade and beyond and we
won't
be taking too much notice of advice from the OECD or the IMF because
they
will both soon be bankrupt.
GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA) supports:
a. Foreign investment in Australia (But not
control
of Australian Businesses). Preferably in partnerships and
new enterprises, not takeovers.
b. Australian investment overseas (In
politically
and economically stable growth markets).
c. A vigorous economy that nurtures
and
rewards responsible, secure, sane, integrated
growth.
d. Planning, tax, funding, growth, tariff,
manufacturing
and export incentives.
e. Small, efficient, at the coal face government.
Lean and hungry for economic progress.
f. Low tax and the abolition of the host of
government
charges and slugs that were supposed to be removed
when the GST was introduced.
g. Australian ownership and control of
Australia.
Take it or leave it!
h. Slashing interest rates on personal credit
cards.
i. Creating the economic climate for individuals to
have disposable
income, save more and invest more.
j. Import taxes and tariffs. *See
Manufacturing
k. An immediate halt to further
privatisation
and the possibility of reacquiring some privatised
instrumentalities that are not being operated satisfactorily. See:
CRIME ENERGY
PROVIDERS
l. The "Made in Australia" legislation
will
be revised to make this labeling compulsory and be broadened to
include "Australian Owned" if a company is over 51% Australian owned
and operated. The percentage
ownership will also be displayed so consumers are in no doubt
as
to who owns what.
m. Putting our already highly skilled workforce
to
work at what they were trained for. There are far too many
Australians with degrees out of work or running coffee shops!
GLOBAL
ACTION (AUSTRALIA) will reject or terminate multilateral commercial
agreements
that favour the interests
of
multinational corporations, at the expense of Australian consumers,
labour,
our environment, human
rights
or other of our industrial relations and commercial laws.
INVERTING
THE ECONOMIC PYRAMID
At
present the world
economic pyramid places the poor and the
great
bulk of people at the bottom and the wealthy few at the
top.
In this system the masses toil in numerous forms of subtle entrapment
(government,
legalistic, traditional, educational, religious, penalties, etc.) and
thereby
create and funnel wealth to the rich and powerful few.
GLOBAL
ACTION INTERNATIONAL plans to reshape and tip this pyramid on its head
and use the wealth and power of the richest to empower the most dynamic
of masses. This need not be feared by the rich or powerful,
because by allowing opportunity to more people even more wealth
will be generated to swell the cake of prosperity for the whole
of humanity.
On
the other hand, if the rich get richer, more controlling and meaner and
the poor get poorer, as is happening at present, the end of it all will
be chaos and poverty for all as the global pond of wealth is
concentrated
to such a point that wealth (though fabulous) has nowhere to go.
"It is no use being the fattest frog in the pond when the whole pond
has just dried up!" Lyn Vickery.
"The
selfish calculated grasping for wealth and
power
is generally negative - except for those who do it. The generation
or making of wealth is more positive and desirable because
it includes
many in the process." Lyn Vickery
Let us heed the
lessons of
history. Did Carl Marx not advocate the redistribution of wealth
from the rich to the poor? Did Jesus Christ not call for the
same!
Indeed, they both did - and so have many others.
What went wrong?
Both Communism and
socialism,
while great and noble in theory, at best only took from the wealthy and
dragged down the existing structures of power. Instead of giving opportunity
and power to the most dynamic of the masses, the young, the
fit,
the able, they gathered their gains only to themselves and so
created
a sterile self preserving new elite. Whilst promising opportunity,
they never knew how or where to bestow it and eventually they
succumbed
in the face of a more vigorous predator - capitalism!
The bane of all
socialist
and communistic systems has been their inability to motivate in
the way capitalism does (selfishness). It is human nature to ask
"What's in it for me?" And there is nothing wrong with that. The
problems occur when the answer is little or nothing - as in socialism
and
communism!
Communism and
socialism provide
little motivation or opportunity for individuals and communities to
really
advance.
On the other hand
capitalism
holds out much, but it is also beset with many traps, blind alleys and
snares. It's driving force is self - a powerful motive.
If
I do this, then I get that.
The trouble with
capitalism
is that the most dynamic, ruthless and selfish always rise to the top -
to positions of power and wealth. This is not good for the bulk
of
the lesser or more honest folk that the capitalist has walked over on
his
way to the top.
The weakness with
unregulated
capitalism is that it encourages and rewards excessive greed and self
acquisition.
Both systems exhibit
positive
and negative elements for Mankind - the trick is how do we keep the
good
elements and regulate out the bad. How do we retain and balance
the
powerful motivating elements of capitalism with the noble virtues or
equality
and sharing espoused at the heart of socialism.
At present the
weakness in
both systems lies in the area of the execution of Governmental power,
the balance between selfishness (greed) as a motivator and the virtue
of sharing.
GLOBAL ACTION
INTERNATIONAL
will strive to strike the right balance to create opportunity
for all - rather than this sector of society at the expense of that, as
happens at present.
"God told mankind
to "subdue"
or manage the earth. Not rip it, and ourselves, to shreds in a mad
selfish
squabbling frenzied grab for fleeting individual wealth and power."
Lyn Vickery.
"We hear many blindly
proclaim
that "Competition is good!" But is it? Think about
that
statement. If ten mad cats squabble over an animal of prey and nine die
of starvation because the strongest killed the prey and ate it all, is
that good for the nine? No! In fact it's not even good for
the tenth, because it can only gobble up that prey once.
The intelligent
thing
to have done would be for the ten cats to plan ahead and learn how to bread
more prey. That way they could all eat handsomely well into the
future."
Lyn Vickery
Think about the major
political
forces active in most western countries today. On one side we see
conservatives (usually strong supporters of capitalism and the wealthy
establishment). On the other are the socialists, who want to pull
down the rich and give equality to all - especially themselves.
In
between are the long-suffering voters who get only a choice between the
above. Is it any wonder that the world of politics lurches about
from left to right and back again like a drunk. Is this any
formula for prosperity and progress for
the people?
GLOBAL ACTION
INTERNATIONAL
proposes a better way. Strong, principled, fair, moral,
compassionate,
executive power that gives power to the people and encourages those who
are most able to use their energy to grow wealth for for the whole
community
and for themselves.
Also
see: Economic Rationalism
Banking Sector.
Agriculture.
Foreign
Affairs & Trade
Manufacturing
Taxation
Technology.
Aerospace Industry.
Conservation
Biodiversity
GLOBAL
ACTION
WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE YOUR FEEDBACK
Click here
issues@globalactint.com
JOIN
GLOBAL ACTION
DONATE
TO GLOBAL ACTION
|
