- Joined
- 24 February 2013
- Posts
- 813
- Reactions
- 1,344
If you don't think politicians and central bankers are guilty agree to disagree. They had so many evil policies. Debating that is a whole other can of worms which could be its own 20 page thread so I am not going to go there. And also to the extent they were fending off crises they were fending off crises caused by their own policies of ultra low rates, irresponsible fiscal deficits, etc all for long periods of time which snowballed the distortions until crises occurred. We should just get rid of central banks and let markets set interest rates. Why do we need central banks (I don't buy the lender of last resort argument as there are ways around that). I think the Austrian school of economics gets a lot of this stuff right.Cool, But I never claimed that was what is causing our current inflation.
Yep, that's my point
The monetary inflation side was caused by the central banks, mainly because they were avoiding major catastrophes, so they everyday consumer has probably had a much better time over the last 16 years than they would have if nothing was done to fend off the GFC and other crisis in the mean time. Some times if you have a good time you get a hangover.
The supply chain problem always requires belt tightening, but there will be other times where we get fat.
The Media always get the wrong idea, and like to sprout emotive headlines.
I don't think they are guilty, I think they did what they thought was needed keep the economy ticking and keep people in jobs, the everyday people have benefited.
Having a credible plan to prevent the next drought and install more irrigation will not have an immediate affect on the price of Avocados, or any other commodity that we consume hand to mouth like Oil, a shortage requires the consume to take action, price it the signal.
Also it would be interesting to see if there was any profiteering from mango producers and supermarkets etc (i.e. increasing the price well above their cost increases while using inflation as cover).It would be interesting to know how much the farm gate price of Mangos has risen, vs all the other costs of getting them from farm gate to market.
eg. card Board boxes, fuel, electricity, insurance, wages, etc etc.
Also, Australia is a mango exporter, so we are some what tied to the world price, so just because part of Australia has a bumper crop one year, doesn’t mean the rest of the world isn’t in short supply seeing higher prices.
The supermarkets should be split up. They have become an oligopoly.Also it would be interesting to see if there was any profiteering from mango producers and supermarkets etc (i.e. increasing the price well above their cost increases while using inflation as cover).
| 2019 | 2022 | 2023 |
Total Revenue ($) | 18.0bn | 9.1bn | 19.8bn |
Underlying profit/(loss) before tax ($) | 1.3bn | (1.86bn) | 2.5bn |
Operating margin (%) | 8.3% | (17.1%) | 13.5% |
No, I have mainly been talking about supply chain issues. But as I stated right from the start there is two main factors the first being monetary inflation.So there you go value collector. The point I am making is that while consumer demand is a contributor to inflation it is one of the smallest out of all the contributing factors but for some reason it seems to be the factor you are most fixated on.
although the consumer is only a small part of the inflation problem , it is normally a major part of the solution ( whether they chose this or not ) , governments rarely shrink ( in head-count or extravagance ) corporates have several tools , including head-count ( and limiting the income of some consumers .. former employees ) , but some residents will choose to leave the country reducing the consumer poolSo there you go value collector. The point I am making is that while consumer demand is a contributor to inflation it is one of the smallest out of all the contributing factors but for some reason it seems to be the factor you are most fixated on.
Just a bit of a side track humour me.although the consumer is only a small part of the inflation problem , it is normally a major part of the solution ( whether they chose this or not ) , governments rarely shrink ( in head-count or extravagance ) corporates have several tools , including head-count ( and limiting the income of some consumers .. former employees ) , but some residents will choose to leave the country reducing the consumer pool
GO TO THE ATLAS ON MORRISON RD.Just a bit of a side track humour me.
10 days ago when the tornado hit us, local servos were out also. had to drive to Midland to get fuel to keep the generators going. The local Ampol at the bottom of the hill was good. $1.625 a litre for unleaded. Next day, Wednesday jumped to $2.11 making this most of no fuel available where we are. We got our power back on, on Sunday evening at 5.30.
In case you're unaware, that sort of price movement happens in the major capitals routinely without needing a trigger. Literally a ~50c jump for no reason, then slowly comes back down. Happens every few weeks and it's a constant cycle.Just a bit of a side track humour me.
10 days ago when the tornado hit us, local servos were out also. had to drive to Midland to get fuel to keep the generators going. The local Ampol at the bottom of the hill was good. $1.625 a litre for unleaded. Next day, Wednesday jumped to $2.11
Wayne Petro at the other end of Morrison Rd is pretty good also, just a bit out of the way I was in a mad rush to get some fuel on Wed to keep the gen sets going, as we were told at that stage outage would not be a long one. That was wishful thinking. Got a text this morning that Gidge as a whole was back on streamGO TO THE ATLAS ON MORRISON RD.
I found that out but I didn't buy from Ampol and was talking to our friendly Anglo Indian at Petro Fuels who doesn't part take in these ramp-ups, so he says.In case you're unaware, that sort of price movement happens in the major capitals routinely without needing a trigger. Literally a ~50c jump for no reason, then slowly comes back down. Happens every few weeks and it's a constant cycle.
It's one thing city people cop that regional areas are often free from.
Back in the 60's when I first got a driving licence there would have been a royal commision into fuel prices even if the rise was a half-penny, now 50c appears to be the norm if and when it suits.In case you're unaware, that sort of price movement happens in the major capitals routinely without needing a trigger. Literally a ~50c jump for no reason, then slowly comes back down. Happens every few weeks and it's a constant cycle.
It's one thing city people cop that regional areas are often free from.
The consumer is a huge part in the inflation cycle, the consumer to a large extent is the worker and the two main components that dictate inflation are wages and prices.although the consumer is only a small part of the inflation problem , it is normally a major part of the solution ( whether they chose this or not ) , governments rarely shrink ( in head-count or extravagance ) corporates have several tools , including head-count ( and limiting the income of some consumers .. former employees ) , but some residents will choose to leave the country reducing the consumer pool
I disagree that the consumer is a huge part of the inflation cycle. If we had divide up what % of inflation is created by each cause (e.g. war, money printing, covid shutdowns, green agenda, corporate's profiteering, wages/consumers, etc) I would think the consumers would be fairly low on the list. This is where my disagreement lies with guys like you and Value Collector. The problem is that due to the economy being a complex dynamic system with reflexivity based feedback loops also that its hard to quantify such things accurately. If you go back to the 1970s stagflation consumer demand was weak as was real economic growth yet prices still kept rocketing. Therefore proof that dampening consumer demand won't end the inflation.The consumer is a huge part in the inflation cycle, the consumer to a large extent is the worker and the two main components that dictate inflation are wages and prices.
It is a positive feedback loop, if wages feed into the cost base, prices go up to compensate.
So that feedback loop has to be broken and it is extremely difficult to stop price increases, so wages take the hit and is why even though wages have risen disposable income has dropped.
Now the problem is the heaving mass of unwashed are pizzed off, so now it is time to put the blowtorch to prices ala the supermarket investigation to get them to get on the programme.
Smoke and mirrors grasshopper. Lol
The fly in the ointment is minerals under attack, that has really put a cat among the pidgeons. Lol
Well to be honest I'm too old to give a fck whether you agree or disagree, I started my apprenticeship in 1969, I've lived through a lot of economic ups and downs, you work with your ideas, i'll work with my experience.I disagree that the consumer is a huge part of the inflation cycle. If we had divide up what % of inflation is created by each cause (e.g. war, money printing, covid shutdowns, green agenda, corporate's profiteering, wages/consumers, etc) I would think the consumers would be fairly low on the list. This is where my disagreement lies with guys like you and Value Collector. The problem is that due to the economy being a complex dynamic system with reflexivity based feedback loops also that its hard to quantify such things accurately. If you go back to the 1970s stagflation consumer demand was weak as was real economic growth yet prices still kept rocketing. Therefore proof that dampening consumer demand won't end the inflation.
Here is what Milton Friedman said about inflation:
Milton Friedman: It is always and everywhere, a monetary phenomenon. It's always and everywhere, a result of too much money, of a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than an output. Moreover, in the modern era, the important next step is to recognize that today, governments control the quantity of money. So that as a result, inflation in the United States is made in Washington and nowhere else.
Friedman: If you listen to people in Washington and talk, they will tell you that inflation is produced by greedy businessmen or it's produced by grasping unions or it's produced by spendthrift consumers, or maybe, it's those terrible Arab Sheikhs who are producing it. Now, of course, businessmen are greedy. Who of us isn't? Trade unions are grasping. Who of us isn't? And there's no doubt that the consumer is a spendthrift. At least every man knows that about his wife.
Friedman: But none of them produce inflation for the very simple reason that neither the businessman, nor the trade union, nor the housewife has a printing press in their basement on which they can turn out those green pieces of paper we call money.
What you seem to be missing is, the only thing that the Government has any real control over is money and wages, in a capitalist system it is very seldom the Government interferes in the market place with regard prices, as has been shown when they have interfered in gas prices, super profit taxes etc.Also to the guys arguing about consumer demand nobody yet adressed the excerpt from the Eureka report article that I posted a few posts above about corporate profiteering. I will highlight the most important part below:
"In June last year, the International Monetary Fund said: “Rising corporate profits were the largest contributor to Europe’s inflation over the past two years as companies increased prices by more than the spiking costs of imported energy.”
It seems improbable that in Australia, a highly concentrated economy with a host of industries extracting monopoly rents, profiteering isn’t also a major cause of inflation.
The data bears this out, and not just in annual reports. Using the same ECB methodology, The Australia Institute finds that about 69% of the increase in inflation above the RBA’s target rate is due to corporate profiteering."
Also lets do some simple math on the "wage-price spiral thesis". For the last 12 months in Australia wages rose around 4%. A quick google search reveals that on average businesses typically spend between 15% and 30% of their revenue on payroll. So a 4% increase in wages would need an overall revenue (i.e. price increase) increase of between 0.6% and 1.2% to offset the additional cost.
According to the ABS "Monthly Overview The monthly CPI indicator rose 4.3% in the 12 months to November"
so where is the rest of the 4.3% increase (which other posters rightly pointed out is understated when you look at the living costs index) coming from and why is everybody so fixated on the wages bogeyman?
Simple price discrimination. Like when they know everyone are going to take the boat out on a long weekend they'll crank prices to make people pay through the nose to brim the tank.In case you're unaware, that sort of price movement happens in the major capitals routinely without needing a trigger. Literally a ~50c jump for no reason, then slowly comes back down. Happens every few weeks and it's a constant cycle.
It's one thing city people cop that regional areas are often free from.
Where that becomes a problem is when it results in a loss of customers.So do you leave your costs the same and wear the extra costs, or do you need to put up your prices to compensate?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?