The state of the economy at the street level

[McLovin]

definitively not a good trend in the west if you are white, male and above 40!!!

Are we looking at the same chart?

 

[qldfrog]

Are we looking at the same chart?

no need for a chart: what is the income now vs 10/20/30/40y ago of a white male in his 40's...
your US chart about mortality in the US will be matched with a delay elsewhere is my prognostic.
and drug/alcohol/suicide may not be cause but consequence of both a society and an economic change.
Anyway I am not here to have a fight

 

[qldfrog]

barista instead of engineers, employed at 10h a week, and no real wage growth...results in ....
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-20/underemployment-is-driving-up-problem-home-loans/7860710

 

[sptrawler]

barista instead of engineers, employed at 10h a week, and no real wage growth...results in ....
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-20/underemployment-is-driving-up-problem-home-loans/7860710

The problem is, there are plenty of cashed up people prepared to pick off the bargains, so a crash may not happen. But a change in demography may result, we may end up like most other western countries, actually why wouldn't we?

 

[qldfrog]

The problem is, there are plenty of cashed up people prepared to pick off the bargains, so a crash may not happen. But a change in demography may result, we may end up like most other western countries, actually why wouldn't we?

true but that is pushing a RE fall away:
money (as in most of the west) is with older people;
But we have a limited pension system so these cashed up people , as their retirement phase gets in will need to start freeing some assets for day to day expenses/medical bills
Once the cash buffer is empty, these assets will become the IP number 2 or 3: who will/can buy it from them, will the "rich asian from O/S" still be around?
Anyway, I believe these were interesting figures and related to previous talk about real unemployment/underemployment effects

 

[sptrawler]

The employment woes of W.A, are still worsening, but it does have a feeling that it may be bottoming out.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/32768484/wa-jobs-market-continues-to-weaken/#page1

 

[Macquack]

definitively not a good trend in the west if you are white, male and above 40!!!

Are we looking at the same chart?

I am a bit confused

After digesting your charts McLovin, I came up with the same conclusion as qldfrog.

White males 45 - 54 had the highest mortality rate per 100,000 people with "drug/ alcohol overdoses" as the main cause of death.

The Chart did read " On the Rise - Death rates have been rising for white Americans, which experts attribute to drug abuse, alcoholism and suicide"."

Where was the data for black Americans?

I forgot that Murdoch is not black. For that matter, Murdoch is not an American either.

 

[sptrawler]

Things certainly aren't looking rosy, for those who want a return to the"good times".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-23/business-investment-disappoints/8297520?section=business

The good thing is, we seem to have moved on from the whole media debate being about gay marriage, finally the penny has dropped.lol

 

[Smurf1976]

Something I find interesting at the moment is the unemployment rate and how it varies between states.

http://lmip.gov.au/default.aspx?LMIP/LFR_SAFOUR/LFR_UnemploymentRate

Of particular note is Tasmania having lower, not higher, unemployment than WA, SA, Qld and Vic.

Now, I have nothing against the island state (I live there) but one thing it sure hasn't been over the past few decades is a pillar of economic strength. Pick any economic measure and the state has been at or very close to the bottom.

So it's an unusual situation indeed to see Tas doing better on a key economic measure than 4 other states and slightly better than Australia as a whole. Very unusual.

WA could be explained by the end of the mining boom. SA could be explained by the ongoing loss of manufacturing in that state.

Qld is a bit harder since whilst it does have a lot of mining it also has a lot of tourism and general business. It's not a one trick pony.

Victoria, whilst the difference is minor, is even harder to explain given it has close to zero reliance on mining (they mine a lot of coal yes, but all of that is used within the state and not exported) and is largely a service economy with a significant financial sector.

Meanwhile we hear that NSW, which is doing well when measured in terms of unemployment, is at the point where at quarter of the whole country's economic growth is occurring in just a relatively small part of Sydney. Hmm....

I haven't thought too much about what all this really means but it does strike me as being unusual and something that probably won't be sustained. For the past few decades it has always been the case that anyone out of work in Tas would be wise to consider moving to another state, any other state, to improve their job prospects and many have done so over the years. Now the reverse is true and that most certainly isn't normal when looking at the past few decades.

If our national economic strength is being held up by public servants in the ACT, the financial district in Sydney and the relatively small populations of Tas and the NT then that's a rather narrow base with a lot of risk I think.

 

[boofhead]

Check the participation rate by state and territory. Tasmania has the lowest which makes the unemployment rate look better. Lowest employment rate too for Tasmania.

 

[sptrawler]

My call on the economy at street level, from a W.A perspective is, there will be a drop back to normality.
Wages are being cut, hand outs to beggars are being cut, people being able to afford their drugs are being cut.
Police are going to to have to work their ar$es off, as crime increases, just my thoughts.

 

[sptrawler]

Update on W.A, we seem to bouncing along on the bottom, IMO.

https://thewest.com.au/business/perth-truck-company-collapse-leaves-180-jobs-in-limbo-ng-b88540273z

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-13/mias-bakery-goes-into-administration-wa/8705156

 

[sptrawler]

There has been public outcry up here about a trial of a welfare debit card system. The recipient can only spend the money on the card on approved goods and services. I believe alcohol stores etc will not accept the card.

Here's a couple of articles recently about the card from our local paper:
http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.a...re-in-townsville/story-fnjfzprw-1227273821832

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.a...h-a-welfare-card/story-fnjfzqwh-1227301509176

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.a...jobs-not-welfare/story-fnjfzprw-1227310912844

That was posted Feb 2015, I wonder how many areas have adopted the welfare card now?
My bet, within five years, all recipients of unemployment benefits will have a welfare card.

 

[Smurf1976]

A thought which occurred to me recently is that there's not much talk about doing things cheaply these days.

Go back a few years and there was no shortage of businesses advertising their products or services based on cost. Either that they're cheaper than the competition, using their products will in some way save you money, or saying that whatever they're selling isn't really expensive at all. Saving money was always a key theme in advertising for anything other than actual luxury goods.

Likewise it was much the same thinking in government and "big" things (eg automotive industry). Some new addition to cars came along and no matter how valid the argument for it might have been (safety, pollution etc) there was always someone crunching the numbers that introducing technology x will cost $y and pondering whether or not the community could afford it.

Apart from mainstream media talk of house prices and power bills I just don't hear much mention of saving money or doing things cheaply these days.

Nobody seems to be advertising that they can fix a 15 year old car more economically than replacing it or that it's worthwhile reupholstering the furniture rather than replacing. Even "home brand" products are increasingly being marketed against their branded competitors on things other than price alone. Today the default for just about anything is "just buy a new one" and cost doesn't seem to rate a mention.

So it seems to me that apart from housing and electricity, the masses don't perceive money to be a problem. Something breaks or is simply no longer the latest model so they just buy a new one almost without question. Unaffordable housing and costly power maybe but everyday people seem to be throwing money around on everything else in a manner that only successful business owners, lottery winners and a few select professionals could afford not to long ago.

Just something I've noticed.

 

[qldfrog]

A thought which occurred to me recently is that there's not much talk about doing things cheaply these days.

You have a point, money has lost its value;governments want it so, remove physical money/gold, leave computer records
When federal banks print and print, and governments spend and spend, value attached to money disappears: why should i save 100$ when the government is racking debt in my name at a much higher rate..thinking becomes:
I will add to my debt, sooner or later, it will be wiped out..
And i personnally believe this thinking is probably actually right..Savers will become the heterosexuals of nowadays: filthy rich who dared saving whereas poor battlers have such big debts..You can be elected/reelected with that

When sh*t will hit the fan,as it will have to, saving will be seized and debt wiped..so why should the man in the street care anymore?

On a street level side of things, in the professional area in brisbane, things are improving: I see more jobs available, but no rate increase

 

[sptrawler]

A thought which occurred to me recently is that there's not much talk about doing things cheaply these days.

Go back a few years and there was no shortage of businesses advertising their products or services based on cost. Either that they're cheaper than the competition, using their products will in some way save you money, or saying that whatever they're selling isn't really expensive at all. Saving money was always a key theme in advertising for anything other than actual luxury goods.

Likewise it was much the same thinking in government and "big" things (eg automotive industry). Some new addition to cars came along and no matter how valid the argument for it might have been (safety, pollution etc) there was always someone crunching the numbers that introducing technology x will cost $y and pondering whether or not the community could afford it.

Apart from mainstream media talk of house prices and power bills I just don't hear much mention of saving money or doing things cheaply these days.

Nobody seems to be advertising that they can fix a 15 year old car more economically than replacing it or that it's worthwhile reupholstering the furniture rather than replacing. Even "home brand" products are increasingly being marketed against their branded competitors on things other than price alone. Today the default for just about anything is "just buy a new one" and cost doesn't seem to rate a mention.

So it seems to me that apart from housing and electricity, the masses don't perceive money to be a problem. Something breaks or is simply no longer the latest model so they just buy a new one almost without question. Unaffordable housing and costly power maybe but everyday people seem to be throwing money around on everything else in a manner that only successful business owners, lottery winners and a few select professionals could afford not to long ago.

Just something I've noticed.

Very true smurph, I was chatting with a mate the other day, about the very same thing.
It was only a few years ago, we would put a recon motor in a car and give it a cheap respray and sell it, now there are better cars abandoned on the freeway.

In the mid 1970's a 26" colour t.v cost $700, a sparky on day shift earned around $230/week. Last week I saw an advert for a 55" 4k jvc t.v, at Big W for $700, a tradie is on about $2,000/week.

The price of a new VN Commodore in 1988, was $26,661 + onroad, it was drive away at about $28,000, tradie's wages were around $20,000/annum, unemployment benefit was approx $100/wk or $5,000/annum.
The 2017 Commodore was $35,490 RRP, tradie's are on approx $80- 100k/annum,, unemployment benefit is $535/wk or approx $28,000/annum.
Consumables as a percentage of income, cost much less now, than they did 30 years ago.
Buying a house in a Sydney/Melbourne has gone up considerably, however houses in country areas are relatively cheap, also the amount of deposit required now, is much less than was required in the 1980's.

 

[boofhead]

Unemployment benefits for single person is about $540 a fortnight, $14,000 per annum.

 

[sptrawler]

Unemployment benefits for single person is about $540 a fortnight, $14,000 per annum.

My appologies, misread the info.
The fact still remains, the cost of a lot of historically expensive consumer goods,has dropped as a percentage of disposable income.

 

[satanoperca]

Rape is penile penetration and putting it in someone's bum hole is homosexuality by definition.

My appologies, misread the info.
The fact still remains, the cost of a lot of historically expensive consumer goods,has dropped as a percentage of disposable income.

Consumer goods have drop in cost significantly, I totally agree. But they are not need to survive.

Shelter, food, water and power (to keep warm) have not decreased but increased significantly.

I would rather TV's be $10K and shelter more affordable.

 

[sptrawler]

Consumer goods have drop in cost significantly, I totally agree. But they are not need to survive.

Shelter, food, water and power (to keep warm) have not decreased but increased significantly.

I would rather TV's be $10K and shelter more affordable.

True, but so have wages and welfare.
It never was easy to survive on welfare, and I assume it won't get any easier, as more of the population become dependent on it.