RaymondPierreL3[edited to correct an grevious error]
I normally pay attention to #AlanKohler but I don’t always agree with him. In this article he tackle #Productivity and #AffordableHousing.
On productivity Kohler links #Wages with #Inflation to explain low productivity. WTF. That’s as close to #NeoLiberalEconomics as you can get and that old horse was put to pasture in 2008 (though it’s hanging around with a bad smell that every politicians and most economist fail to apprehend). Furthermore, you cannot ask workers to work harder for more hours with less pay just to increase productivity. That is not how it’s supposed to work. Capital investments in production processes and tooling are necessary to improve productivity. That is, cutting profits to re-invest — which of course runs counter to #NeoLiberalism and the #TrickleDownEconomic model the #Grifters have been peddling for the last 40 years or so.
When talking about #housing and #construction the only thing Kohler says that makes sence is that the only way to beat the current economic set up is to build housing that does not require private capital investment (because that requires a 6% pa return which goes to feed the crazy spiraling house prices, aka the #SpeculativeRealEstate markets). To do this, public funds must be used to build houses which requires #TaxReform to fund properly from federal revenues. There are other ways to do this of course. Like Community not-for-profit housing, as done in parts of Europe, through verious public funding models and favouring tax regimes. But when Kohler ties Immigration to housing shortages, he cuts corners and cherry picks. For example, immigrant families are generally bigger than Australia’s average of 2.57 per household (Source: ABS.gov.au), my family certainly was. Yet Kohler use the 2.5 adult per household figure to calculate the immigration demand on housing without differentiating between #NetImmigration and overall immigration numbers (wich include seasonal workers, international students, working holiday backpackers, ect.). This kind of data (mis)use goes some ways to discredit the validity of Kohler’s proposition and diminish the strength of his argument.
You can read the article here for yourself, but it does point out that even a well regarded economic analyst is prone to tailor their words to reflect their political and econmic hobby horses. Read it by all means, but don’t swallow anything until you’ve chewed the cud for a time. We are thinking beings, put your innate #CriticalThinkingSkills to good use in whatever you read (especially these days). Even when missing information and knowledge, think about what you hear/read/see before it goes to a change/shore up your opinion. Work in progress as always.
robcornelius
Egberto Willies
dee_le_brun
bs2
Lee 🌏
Prof Catherine Rowett 💚 Ex-MEP