Rudd and the stockmarket

[mime]

Is anyone else concerned about what effects Kevin Rudds union friendly IR policy will have on company profits and the stock market? I personally want the good times to roll on.

 

[The Mint Man]

Put simply, YES!!!!

 

[Nick Radge]

Regardless of the IR policy, the markets have underperformed under Labour for over 50-years and I think you'll the underperformance is quite significant.

 

[nioka]

Regardless of the IR policy, the markets have underperformed under Labour for over 50-years and I think you'll the underperformance is quite significant.

In the past the markets may have underperformed under Labour but this was mainly because our economy was rural based for export income. This time we are in a resources boom which should last for some time. The legendry drovers dog could make money for the country right now.I'll probably vote Labour this time even though I have voted the other way for the past 55 years.

 

[tech/a]

I'll probably vote Labour this time even though I have voted the other way for the past 55 years.

Why on earth would you swing.
People have short memories.
Highest interest rates seen to the lowest in 30yrs.
Fullest employment for the same period.
Budget surpluses.
Booming economies.

Yeh makes sence give it to someone to stuff up!

 

[KIWIKARLOS]

I agree !

I work in a company that is 99% union dominated and i have marched down goerge st against john howard, but i didn't for the last rally and i won't again.

All i here from Labour AKA the unions is all the bad things that we should get angry about. Yet i have yet to hear a single good opposition policy from either. The fact is the unions want to get rid of work choices , and replace it with what i say !

kevin rudds attempt at IR policy is crap, he should keep workchoices and build protection into it. The fact is it works.

the way i see it we need to continue to maintain a strong economy above everything else or else were all not eating and sleeping in bus shelters.

Howard takes measured approaches, imagine what will happen if labour comes out and says right 50% reduction in emissions by 2020 like it or lump it and personally i don't want them dipping into the future fund for crappy projects that should be privatly funded. We just privatised telstra why build another gov telco through broadband.

I think Howard has balls to make decisions that are neccesary and not popular where as Rudd is a puppet of peoples opinions.

 

[doctorj]

Why on earth would you swing.
People have short memories.
Highest interest rates seen to the lowest in 30yrs.
Fullest employment for the same period.
Budget surpluses.
Booming economies.

Yeh makes sence give it to someone to stuff up!

People do have short memories. They forget that liberal policies have had very little to do with the current state of the economy. The success of the economy (and by extension unemployment, budget surpluses and even interest rates) have had more to do with commodity prices being what they are rather than any economic mastery on behalf of Howard or Costello.

I suspect if labour are voted in, they'll have received a hospital pass - I'll be surprised to see China continue in the fashion it has on the other side of the next Olympics.

Given the economic advisors either party will use when in power are for the most part constant, I don't think either party has any significant advantage in economic credentials.

Any correlation between who's in power and economic performance more than likely has to do with the impact the state of the economy has on the psychology of swinging voters rather than the economic prowess of either party.

I'm not sure who I'm going to vote for, but I'm tired of the liberals and their supporters claiming they are better economic managers than labour when there is no evidence that is the case.

 

[Uncle Festivus]

Why on earth would you swing.
People have short memories.
Highest interest rates seen to the lowest in 30yrs.
Fullest employment for the same period.
Budget surpluses.
Booming economies.

Yeh makes sence give it to someone to stuff up!

How much of the prosperity is in despite of the various governments though eg interest rates were high worldwide back then. I recall Paul Keating actually made some long lasting changes which may have set the country up for the following years, & Howard & co have simply kept a steady course while the world generally has been prosperous.

It would be ironic that Rudd wins the election (or rather Howard loses) & a world recession begins (not saying it will but would be ironic).

 

[chops_a_must]

Why on earth would you swing.
People have short memories.
Highest interest rates seen to the lowest in 30yrs.

Funny how Howard has been there for both. Short memory perhaps?

Regardless of the IR policy, the markets have underperformed under Labour for over 50-years and I think you'll the underperformance is quite significant.

I would like to see the actual statistics on that if you have them.

But it is a fact that when there is economic hardship, left leaning governments/ parties have a tendency to come to power. It's not just an Australian phenomenon, it's more or less world wide. So it becomes a chicken or egg argument.

And at the end of the day, it has been Keating and Hawke that have given the Australian stock market such positive impetus through modernising the economy - floating the dollar and deregulation etc. and most importantly compulsory superannuation.

I don't think it will make much difference really Mint Man. If Labor wins, I'll put more money in bio-tech and enviro-tech type companies, if they don't, I'll keep more in resources.

 

[mime]

I was reading in the Australian that new construction contracts written up have clauses that allow for a 30% increase in costs if Rudd wins the election. How is that ment to help the economy or the rental property shortage? Good news if I already own a home but bad if I want to buy a new one.

 

[wayneL]

People do have short memories. They forget that liberal policies have had very little to do with the current state of the economy. The success of the economy (and by extension unemployment, budget surpluses and even interest rates) have had more to do with commodity prices being what they are rather than any economic mastery on behalf of Howard or Costello.

I suspect if labour are voted in, they'll have received a hospital pass - I'll be surprised to see China continue in the fashion it has on the other side of the next Olympics.

Given the economic advisors either party will use when in power are for the most part constant, I don't think either party has any significant advantage in economic credentials.

Any correlation between who's in power and economic performance more than likely has to do with the impact the state of the economy has on the psychology of swinging voters rather than the economic prowess of either party.

I'm not sure who I'm going to vote for, but I'm tired of the liberals and their supporters claiming they are better economic managers than labour when there is no evidence that is the case.

You're right Doc,

Whoever wins the next election could quite possibly be dealt the death card... laboural or liber.

It is a mistake to fully accredit Johnny Rotten, Abbott and Costello, and minions with the remarkable run in Australia's economy. It has been an Angloshere phenomenom with USA, UK, NZ, Ire et al being along for the ride as well. The reasons have been extensively discussed on other threads.

The UK "Miracle Economy" has been under the stewardship of Labour... anyone notice that?

It all boils down to the US Fed who indirectly controls money supply for the whole English speaking world. Loose credit => Economic growth. Tight Credit => Economic Contraction. (It's a bit more complicated than that, but is the gist of how it works)

While Johnny Rotten and Costello haven't made a mess of it, the opportunity for true fiscal reform has been squandered. The taxation system is still an incomprehensible monster, and pork barreling and gravy training is as rife as it ever has been. Electoral bribery has been extensively expanded under the liberals. Plus we have become a puppet state of the US.

It's time for a change. I'm just not sure whether to trust laboural either.

 

[mime]

The Labor gov in the UK where in the middle. They arnt union controlled. Current Labor in a union bitch and swings to the far left. I have alot of respect for Tony Blair and what he did for politics(not being left or right) using the appeal of both sides. Too bad Australian Labor is a backward step giving all wage bargaining power to the unions otherwise I may have supported them.

 

[wayneL]

The Labor gov in the UK where in the middle. They arnt union controlled. Current Labor in a union bitch and swings to the far left. I have alot of respect for Tony Blair and what he did for politics(not being left or right) using the appeal of both sides. Too bad Australian Labor is a backward step giving all wage bargaining power to the unions otherwise I may have supported them.

Yer, I must admit the spectre of the militant unions getting a hand on the reins is not appealing in the slightest.

 

[mime]

Yer, I must admit the spectre of the militant unions getting a hand on the reins is not appealing in the slightest.

Then why support them if you know they will be a determent to the country?

 

[doctorj]

Union control of labor is almost a deal breaker for me too - giving power to those union groups is akin to voting for a socialist state.

That said, I'm not a fan of Howard's policies either. Given one or the other will form government, it becomes a choice of the two evils.

 

[wayneL]

Then why support them if you know they will be a determent to the country?

I don't support anyone... yet. But am desperate to support someone other than the incumbents. I just really don't think Oz should be Uncle Sam's byatch.

 

[KIWIKARLOS]

WayneL: would you rather be Chinas bi$tch? The fact is the US strategic alliance is essential for this country sure they got to be superpower from the backs of English/european/australian hardship but the fact is they are way more modernised and moderate than the other three potential super powers (India, China, Russia).

The unions are good as a counterbalance to the opposite side of politics and big business. Without them we would all be on minimum wage with no benefits. Unions set up this country and its workers once all the protect is gone we are screwed. But saying that i wouldn't want them running the country.

 

[mime]

I don't support anyone... yet. But am desperate to support someone other than the incumbents. I just really don't think Oz should be Uncle Sam's byatch.

Is the UK uncle Sams bitch too or a partner?

 

[Buster]

I don't support anyone... yet. But am desperate to support someone other than the incumbents. I just really don't think Oz should be Uncle Sam's byatch.

Ha.. I seem to remember standing on the flight deck of HMAS DARWIN way, way back for the first deployment of Desert Storm (called Op Damask).. And it was Bob Hawke that was giving us the farewell gee up.. Now he is certainly not one of the current incumbents..

I'm tipping it don't matter one way or the other, we'll always be 'Uncle Sam's byatch'..

Regards,

Buster

 

[Smurf1976]

It has far more to do with bankers and the international situation IMO.

Howard was Treasurer for the highest interest rates we've ever seen. Now he's Prime Minister for the lowest.

Bob Hawke came to power at a time of economic strife, saw the boom times of the 80's and was replaced around the time it ended.

Victoria in the 1980's had a Labor government. Tasmania had a Liberal government. Both states ran up massive debt to fund overly expensive infrastructure and, even more seriously, ongoing expenditure.

Victorians elected the Liberals to fix it, Tasmanians elected Labor-Green immediately before the problem became widely known - but the new government did its best to balance the books. Then Victorians put Labor back into office and Tasmanians returned the Liberals. Following another six years of stagnation, Tasmanians went back to Labor handing them a truly massive majority. Since then the economy has boomed or, as Labor would likely put it, been energized.

So, Howard tells us that Liberal is the party of economic stability and debt repayment. Victorians might well agree. Tasmanians would argue that Liberal is the one who promised more debt and Labor's the one that repays it. All of which comes down to what the international circumstances were at the time they were last in office for an extended period - we'd have seen interest rates fall no matter if it were Liberal or Labor unless one of them seriously proposes to start running the US Fed or hyperinflating the currency.

Given the recent economic success and that economics tends to be cyclical, I'd hate to the the next PM. Odds are that no matter if it's Labor or Liberal they'll face some very difficult times one way or another and quite possibly be branded "economically irresponsible" for it - if he stays around then that could well end up being Howard (though he's probably too smart to stay around for that).