Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
Is the economy part of the planet—or the planet part of the economy?
Kerryn Higgs is a longtime Webdiary columnist. Her last post was George W Bush—prospects for the sixth year. This is Kerryn's first contribution for 2007, and is the initial article in a series of three (see A Brief History of Economic Growth and Economics and the Laws of Physics) that Webdiary will be publishing over the next few weeks. Thanks, Kerryn, and great to hear from you again.
Most of us take economic growth for granted, barely questioning whether it might have any physical limit. It is seen as the answer to just about everything from creating jobs to environmental repair and ‘ending poverty’, and very few doubt that more is better. Indeed, lack of growth is thought to threaten the very fabric of our society and our ‘prosperity’. We’d be lost without it.
Or so we believe. I’ve been thinking about economic growth since I stumbled on The Limits to Growth, the first report for the Club of Rome, just after it was published in early 1972. Though the ideas underlying this book were taken seriously in the seventies, at the highest levels of some governments—for example by President Carter in the US—they were also bitterly attacked by neoclassical economists, who have come to dominate the great majority of economics and business schools since the 1960s as well as the public debate on anything related to economic issues. ‘Club of Rome’ became an epithet of scorn and derision, endlessly trotted out by economists on the attack against anyone who suggested that unfettered growth might be problematic.
Since 2000, there has been a growing movement for change within economics, one which encourages study of the broad historical, political, social and environmental settings in which economic activity takes place. The question of the physical limits of the human economic enterprise, however, had already been exhaustively addressed by a group known as ecological economists.
The first thing that we tend to forget about current economic growth is how recent it is in the history of human development. In his Boyer lectures of 2006, called The Search for Stability, retired Australian Reserve Bank Governor Ian MacFarlane remarked that “[v]iewed against the span of human history, economic growth is a relatively new phenomenon, dating only from the Industrial Revolution in the mid-eighteenth century. In the many centuries prior to that, it had been negligible”.
The extraordinary economic growth now pursued worldwide has its origins in the centuries before that take-off. Between five and six hundred years ago, Europeans launched a vast colonial expansion, which enabled them to accumulate great wealth without significant cost by appropriating land, resources and the labour of slaves, and to solve numerous resource constraints by moving on to new frontiers. Then came fossil fuel-based industrialization (initially coal), coinciding with a massive development of technological capacity, a great wave of urbanisation and the triumph of capitalism as an economic system.
More recently, the last 130 years has yielded an oil-based surge of far more rapid growth—a unique period in the history of civilization and one which will not be repeated when the oil runs down. Even if cold fusion were to be perfected, it would be a complex and expensive technology and could never be the kind of gushingly plentiful cheap fuel that oil has been.
All questions of the limits, boundaries and scale of the human economic enterprise hinge on whether or not the economic system can be understood independently of its physical context. Can human economies grow forever? If not, what determines their boundaries? If so, what happens to the natural world? For the ecological economists, who emerged in the 1960s during the most explosive era of economic growth ever known, these were crucial questions.
Which comes first—the planet or the economy?
Many standard economics textbooks introduce students to a diagram of ‘the economy’ which includes only the relationship between businesses and households, (producers and consumers), depicted as a circular flow; this flow is not represented in any wider physical context. Former World Bank economist Herman Daly describes an interchange with the World Bank’s Chief Economist:
I asked the Chief Economist if… he felt the issue of the physical size of the economic subsystem relative to the total ecosystem was important and if he thought economists should be asking the question, ‘What is the optimal scale of the macroeconomy relative to the environment that supports it?’ His reply was short and definitive: ‘That’s not the right way to look at it’ (Daly, 1999, Ecological Economics, p. 16-17).
Daly characterises this approach as “pre-analytic”—using a term coined by economist Joseph Schumpeter to describe assumptions which are not available for analysis. The ‘right way’ in this case includes ideas such as the following: The planet is functionally infinite, both as a source of materials and as a sink for wastes. Substitutes for depleted resources will be generated automatically by price rises. The laws of physics are not relevant to economic processes. These assumptions about the economy’s independence from its physical context inform the conduct of economic activity and the current public debate about it. They have immense consequences for the way people think about economic growth, and underpin a widely-held confidence that economic growth as we know it on earth today can continue indefinitely.
Here lies the central underlying difference in outlook between orthodox neoclassical economists and their critics. For ecological economists like Daly, the primary or overarching system is biophysical rather than economic—human endeavour is necessarily proscribed by the laws of physics and the physical constraints of a finite planet. It has inevitable limitations of scale: “If the ecosystem can grow indefinitely then so can the aggregate economy. But, until the surface of the earth begins to grow at a rate equal to the rate of interest, one should not take this issue too far” (Daly 1991, p. 258-9).
When the World Bank’s Chief Economist criticised Herman Daly’s approach to macroeconomic scale as simply ‘not the right way to look at it’, he was in line with the orthodox economists’ assumption that technological advance, alongside price signals which automatically attach to scarce items, will always allow for expansion and substitution. The ‘right way to look at it’ dismisses any notion of a finite world, assuming that physical limitations will always be surmounted by combining the fruits of human ingenuity with the magic of the free market.
Back in 1966, in his famous essay The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth, pioneer ecological economist Kenneth Boulding argued that a transition had begun: from the ‘open’ to the ‘closed’ earth, from the ‘empty’ world with ever more frontiers for exploitation to the ‘full’ world, where it is no longer possible to go somewhere else when resources fail or pollution destroys. The ‘illimitable plains’ of the endless frontier no longer stretched into the unknown. There were no more ‘unlimited reservoirs’ of anything. Daly, arguing along the same lines, has described ‘globalisation’ as the “last-gasp attempt to re-establish conditions of empty-world economy by growing into the economic and ecological space of other countries and into the remaining global commons” (Ecological Economics, p. 21).
On the face of it, the current economic orthodoxy—that the human economy is the primary system—seems an astonishing claim. Life on earth, after all, is something like 3.8 billion years old and human life an infinitesimal fraction of that. The capitalist economy is at most 500 years old, a small fraction of the 200,000-year span our species has been on earth. Even what we call ‘civilisation’, with settled life in established cities and the cultural complexity which accompanied it, is considerably younger than the 10,000 or so years since we started farming. Understanding the human economy as a primary system independent of the earth it arose upon would appear to defy common sense.
Actual constraints or limitations were, of course, far less obvious when classical economic theory was being developed (at the start of the accelerating growth of the past 250 years), or even when it was being revised at the end of the nineteenth century. All the basic ideas preceded the explosive growth of the late twentieth century, by which time (1999) the world economy was adding an annual increase (US$30 billion) of about half the entire global economy in 1900 (Living with Nature, p. 26-27).
These boundaries remain invisible or contested in mainstream economics, and of little concern to the current crop of politicians in most countries and to most of today’s citizens. Hardly a news bulletin goes by without reports about growth achieved, growth threatened or growth expected. Growth is the sine qua non of everyday economic language and expectation, and the much-touted solvent for critical problems such as poverty and pollution. At the same time, however necessary ongoing growth is to our current economic arrangements and however desirable from the point of view of our expectations of material wellbeing and comfort, it is hardly a practical aim if it is based on a misperception of reality.
Current Australian policy approaches to global warming, for example, reflect this emphasis on growth. While ‘demand management’ is an increasing consideration in the European Union, our own governments are focussed on catering to an ever-expanding appetite for energy and on ‘technological solutions’ to carbon dioxide emissions. In this approach, the rising curve of demand must be met and reductions in emissions (if any) have to be made while satisfying this demand. When Victoria experienced blackouts after bushfires shut down a transmission line at Tatong in January 2007, Rod Meyer, Energy Reporter for The Age, reported that “[t]he growth in peak-power use means more investment in power plants will be needed next year”, though the editors of The Age suggested, alternatively, that citizens might examine their escalating use of air-conditioners.
Reference:
Daly, H. E. (1991), “Towards an Environmental Macroeconomics”, Land Economics, Vol. 67, No. 2 (May, 1991), pp. 255-259.
 |
|
 |
 |
| © 2005-2011, Webdiary Pty Ltd |
| Disclaimer: | This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors. Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way, please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary. |
A "Team" Led by the Lame Duck and the Chicken
I suppose at my age I shouldn't get frustrated about the level of lying in the entire Howard government. I guess everybody would realise it by now.
It is just impossible to believe what any of them have to say. Lying and deception are their main tools of trade and they do so in accordance with the "master" of them all. Good little robots.
We should all remember the US sub-prime (dodgy) mortgage loans which caused a world tremor on the markets.Peter Costello (the chicken) advised us that their situation would not affect Australia because we didn't have those sort of problems.
I have become interested in the ABC financial commentator for Lateline, Stephen Long. Here is a section of a Lateline transcript on September 14:
VIRGINIA TRIOLI: We've heard a lot about the global credit crunch but it seems the personal credit crunch is hitting home, with evidence loan defaults in Australia have risen nearly 30 per cent. Joining us with more details is Stephen Long. Stephen, tell us about this new evidence.
STEPHEN LONG: This comes from Veda, the main credit reference agency in the country, it dominates the market. What it's found is that about 30 per cent of loans are in arrears by 60 days or more. You're talking here with a portfolio it looks at. It basically appraises people seeking loans from banks and other lenders. You're talking here about a situation where 1.8 million loans at least are in trouble. So it's an interesting statistic.
And not just home loans, it's assessing credit cards, personal debt, the whole gamut.
And there's some interesting regional variations as well. If you look at New South Wales, our most populous state, 40 per cent increase this year in debt, that's pretty big. Victoria’s not doing too bad. Western Australia, the boom state, where the unemployment rate is about 3 per cent, pretty close to full employment and huge wealth from the mining boom, a 44 per cent increase in loans 60 days or more in arrears.
VIRGINIA TRIOLI: What is the theory behind the big increase in Western Australia?
STEPHEN LONG: Part of it probably has to do with the huge increase in house prices over there. There was a separate report today by another consultancy assessing mortgage stress and it estimates there are about 70,000 households in Australia under mortgage stress, with a big increase in WA.
I think it's fascinating that in these boom times where we have the unemployment rate at a 32-year low and we've got the growth in the non-farm economy at more than 5 per cent, we've got the currency at these stellar levels, that you have this situation.
These are just a couple of stats highlighting that. Another one is personal bankruptcies and the number of personal bankruptcies now is more than double the level during the last recession in the early 1990s.
VIRGINIA TRIOLI: It's not being discussed in the same way it was back then which is amazing. It is slipping under the radar a bit. That's an alarming figure.
STEPHEN LONG: It is. Overall, the economy's still sound and most people are still making their debts but there are these huge pockets of disadvantaged and it raises very interesting question, it really wonders as a society how we could get in this position when we have a booming economy and it does suggest that there is just way too much easy availability of credit, people are borrowing too much.
VIRGINIA TRIOLI: What's to be done then, Stephen?
STEPHEN LONG: There is a big debate at the moment. The issue is complex and one of the things that's being pushed is a situation where if people lend irresponsibly, it would become no longer buyer beware, but lender beware and if someone lent unreasonably the contract could be voided.
But there's also a push on the other hand from lenders for more information about people who are borrowing.
We have in this country now a system of negative credit reporting where you can only find out if people have been bankrupted or have other bad issues on their credit file.
There is a push for a central bureau which would show how much debt people have, how many loans outstanding.
There are issues with that and they have a similar system in America and it didn't stop the big crisis we've seen there.
Nonetheless, it's an issue for debate. The Law Reform Commission this week released a report suggesting that we go part way there.
This is going to be an issue that has to be debate if we are going to get on top of this. There are arguments on both sides but expect to hear a lot more about this in coming months, Virginia.
*
A nation in financial turmoil - bring on the election.
NE OUBLIE.
Economic growth threatens one in four mammals.
The continual expansion of the world economy is threatening one in four mammals. We have no real knowledge of the effect this will have on all life, yet we are still ready to gamble with the future of the planet.
"We, the Jury."
Not that it is an "earth-shattering" statement but, Alexander Downer, probably the most spiteful "New Order" politician after John Howard, continues to make unsubstantiated claims against anything remotely close to Kevin Rudd.
Like almost all of Howard's robots, he now claims with an indignant expression, (on Lateline Monday night - where is Tony) that Kevin Rudd is telling everyone who will listen, Business, Unions, Labor and the local milkman (got carried away there) that he "has won the election already"! Fair dinkum.
All this without any witnesses, "reliable sources", media reps, U.S. Secret Service, CIA, ASIO, the AFP and even Reith's offsider, Peter Hendy from the Chamber of Commerce.
I would think that his stupid statement will also do more damage to Howard's "New Order" in the minds of "We the Jury".
Joe Hockey, Howard's WorkChoices Minister (who raised money for a Union Delegate because he was a Liberal) caused the first expression of frustration that I have ever seen on Julia Gillard's normally business-like expression.
This happened on last night's Kerry O'Brien's 7:30 report.
Knowing the "New Order" method of talking over and louder than, any person daring to make a point against them, neither Mr. Hockey nor Julia interrupted each other during their answers to Kerry.
While Julia stuck to the clearly advertised policies of the Kevin Rudd Opposition, Joe was well into his rhetoric of unsubstantiated statements of the supposed "good" side of WorkChoices. He continued to pluck figures and assumptions from thin air and I reckon he has finally "cheesed off" Julia.
But did it impress "We the Jury"?
It appears to me that just about every sleazy and sneaky move that Howard has tried to capitalise on as a mandate, seems to have appropriately back-fired.
He has gone into his notorious pre-election spendng spree (non-core promises) even though his debt-laden, cashless and false economy is coming apart at the seams.
He is "cherry -picking" the Liberal/Nationalist marginal seats for money offers (mostly after the election) which not only would "never ever" be honoured as promised but are feeding into his mismanagement of the economy.
Does the truth about the Howard/Costello false economy shock and awe "We the Jury"?
The biased economic issues that Howard and the robots have used against the Australian Labor Party, pale into insignificance when we have a reality check on the comparisons (Costello's favourite dodge).
John Howard was the treasurer in the Fraser Liberal government in 1982 when interest rates were at a record 21 per cent, and this is still an all time record.
He was also the Treasurer when the ALP with a young Paul Keating, swept into power, to face - in Matt Wade's words:
"At that time, the economy was mired in the deepest recession since the Great Depression, unemployment was high, and the budget deficit expanding". Another Howard incompetence record.
Now they have had nine (9) interest rate rises since 2002.
Well might they say that things would be different under the Australian Labor Party - we should expect so.
But what is impressing "We the Jury"?
NE OUBLIE.
The Howard/Costello Debt-laden False Economy.
Bob Hawke is credited with saying some time ago - "the biggest con of the Howard government is the economy".
Even those of us who are not like Ross Gittins have been able to see through the garbage that Howard/Costello has fed us for some ten years.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to be able to run a booming resources economy at a surplus if you also establish record taxes and reduce the services to the Public in all areas of federal responsibility.
Matt Wade wrote an article in the SMH on August 31 2007 entitled: "Treasured Position" and I quote a small part of it:
"The job of any modern treasurer is not so much to manage the economy as to pretend to manage the economy," says Rory Robertson, a Macquarie Bank economist and former Reserve Bank officer.
"The extent to which any modern Treasurer manages the Australian economy is modest compared with a quarter of a century ago."
Then there is the opprobrium that seems to come with the job. The experience of Paul Keating and Peter Costello shows that being a modern-day treasurer is not the best way to gain the public's affection.
But all that does not seem to deter Wayne Swan, the man poised to become treasurer if the opinions polls predicting a Labor victory in the imminent federal election are correct.
"Treasurer's have a history of being Dr No - it just comes with the territory," he says. "Does that worry me? No. I don't see this job as some sort of beauty contest."
Swan could be the first treasurer in an incoming Labor Government for more than two decades.
But the economy he stands to inherit is in a very different state to the one a young Paul Keating confronted when the ALP last swept to power in 1983.
At that time, the economy was mired in the deepest recession since the Great Depression, unemployment was high, and the budget deficit expanding.
This time, should Labor win, the new treasurer will take on an economy motoring into its 17th year of expansion with inflation about 3 per cent and unemployment at a three-decade low.
[And the first 4 years of that was the Australian Labor Party]
So as Bob Hawke and several others have stated, the beaurocracy established by the Howard/Costello so-called "team" can indeed run on its own without the Charles Dickens' working poor.
As Mark Latham famously said: "How does Howard get away with it"?
Well, he has for 11 years thanks to the U.S. and the Murdoch media.
NE OUBLIE.
[The government was Fraser's Liberals and the Treasurer was John Howard]
Let's Have a Reality Check.
Without any worthwhile education in economics, I have for some years complained that the Howard/Costello "prosperity" was an unsustainable debt-laden false economy.
If we just consider our household budgets and put into the mix an income of say $50,000 for each of two members of the family. That is a budget of $100,000 per year.
Then take away the income tax that amount would cost you.
Then add 10% GST to every item of normal life except cooked food and a few other non-essentials.
Add the increasing costs of inflation without compensating wage increases.
Lessen the "disposal income" by the debts of transport, credit cards, interest payments, rents, and mortgages etc. which have burgeoned under the Howard government of depraved indifference.
Then consider the nine consecutive interest rate rises over the last five years.
Even the "middle class" of our population would be starting to feel the pressure of the financial burdens.
Then factor in the introduction, 18 months ago, of the Corporation's WorkChoices, which means that those two members of the family can lose their employment at any time of the day or night.
Now realise Costello's stupid statement that those two people should have a child for the Mother, another for the Father and then one for the country (he means the State).
Would this be considered as "prosperity" by the two million Australians who are living below the poverty line?
Would the general Australian contemporary costs v incomes be considered as "Utopia" even by the slave labour introduced by Howard's 457 visas?
Let's get real and consider where the "surplus" Billions of taxpayer's money has been going over the last four elections?
It's time that the media came clean and repaid our nation for the $2 Billions of our money that Howard laundered into their pockets over the last 11 years.
And at this time, every three years, WE have an opportunity to stop this abuse of our democracy - let's not waste it.
For the sake of Australia's future and that of our children, and their children - vote for any party except the Liberal/Nationalists "New Order".
I believe that, with Howard's clear intentions, this will be our last chance.
NE OUBLIE.
Foreign Debt
Hi Ernest,
For an explanation of Aust Foreign Debt (see page 9 for the definition and concepts of ) ... Hope this helps !
Cheers
It's not the economy stupid - its all about smoke and mirrors
One of the areas of interest for myself is the whole question of inflation. Anyone who has to push the trolley through the supermarket these days does not believe that we have record low inflation. It seems to be running at double or more that what we are being told. The best piece of writing I have ever found on this was in Voltaire’s Bastards by John Ralston Saul. The book was published in 1992. Here are some egs from the book:
I could continue to quote from this book but I think you can get the gist of it. One of the things that was a revelation to me was the idea that credit cards are personal money printing machine, and when you think about it that is just what they are, it is so obvious, yet I have never seen that said anywhere else. It is little wonder we are starting to see a general meltdown in the deregulated banking and lending industry due to defaults on loans. Our economies appear to be based on smoke and mirrors, there is hardly a shredded of truth in anything that they are putting forward. Ern your point of a “debt laden false economy” is a good one.
“In a age of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act” George Orwell
More Questions - No Answers?
Occasionally some of the media report the disastrous situation of hundreds of thousands of Australians who were suckered in by Howard's "Aspirational Homes" con.
Make no mistake, it was the "New Order's" policies which created the sub-prime false housing boom in Australia. The deregulation of the financial institutions; the absence of giving any real power to the ACCC and the obscene lending practices which the Howard government has encouraged.
All of this and more to prop up his debt-laden false economy.
I ask again - can anyone tell me what the Howard government's foreign debt is currently? Last time I looked it was $532 Billion.
However, one of the Howard government's agency, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, is somewhat difficult for a hacker to find answers.
Can anyone tell me that foreign debt is NOT an Australian Government debt? If not, who is responsible?
Can anyone tell me what the current interest rate is on that enormous and dangerous debt - and can the Howard/Costello gang pay it with out taxes? And if they can't or won't - who does?
Does anyone know how that debt was allowed by the brilliant team of Howard/Costello?
Does anyone know what would happen, if the foreign investors who created some - if not all - of that debt, were to demand their debts be paid in their currency?
Under the Howard "New Order" there are always more questions than answers.
Perhaps a change of government would reveal all the questions we are entitled to ask and receive answers for.
The only problem would be that Howard could shred all of the important documents as it was reported that the Liberal Premier of Victoria did when he was defeated.
NE OUBLIE.
A Cashless, Debt-laden False Economy.
Crikey reports on Costello's banking incompetence at:
http://www.crikey.com.au/Business/20070830-Costello-twiddles-his-thumb-as-the-bank-cartel-gouges-away.html
Under Costello twiddles his thumb as the bank cartel gouges away, Stephen Mayne writes:
We’ve all seen plenty of hypocrites in our time but Future Fund chairman David Murray whingeing about excessive fund manager fees to The Weekend Australian is one of the more brazen examples of chutzpah you’d ever come across.
Murray is the former chief executive of the Commonwealth Bank who led the charge on punitive banking fees during his 13 year reign. Armed with a banking licence from the Federal Government and a Treasurer who sat back and watched whilst a ferocious cartel gouged away, Murray built himself a personal fortune of more than $40 million.
This didn’t come from taking CBA to the world or generating export earnings, but rather from gouging millions of Australians going about their daily lives.
For the five years that I owned Crikey, the Commonwealth Bank clipped the ticket for an average 4.2% on every credit card transaction we processed. All up, they helped themselves to about $50,000.
[David C: Ernest, I’ve cut some of the story because it’s not ours – people can use the link for the rest]
Having seen what Geoffrey Cousins is achieving by taking on Malcolm Turnbull in Wentworth, maybe it’s time someone ran an anti-bank campaign against Peter Costello in his seat of Higgins – because nothing else has woken him from his slumber on this issue over the years.
End of quote.
The biggest con by Howard/Costello is the claim that they have eliminated Federal Government debt.
The last time I looked, the Foreign Debt on Howard's watch had increased to $532,000,000,000.
Does the Reserve Bank consider that is NOT a Federal Government debt?
NE OUBLIE.
Rusted on Bullshit.
Actually Alan Curran, he said no such thing.
I wouldn't expect you to have any idea about what Labor policy may or may not be, but I would expect that you wouldn't tell lies about what is easily verifiable.
Of course, the truth is that you've found a comfortable little home here where you can spread whatever bullshit it is that takes you fancy with out ever having to provide a modicum of substantiation.
I'm not a neither a nice nor a polite person, so I suspect that my return to Webdiary will be short lived.
Richard: Oh, c'mon Marek, you're not that bad !?!
You, however, will be allowed to flatulate your world view until the cows come home with Kevin '07 stickers on their arse.
Nice one Alan. So what is it that you do for a living that make you so obviously superior to the rest of ?
Marek Bage, not many
Marek Bage, not many people do know what Labor policy is all about. The Health system costs $90 Billion a year, and Rudd is conning everybody by saying he will pump in another $2 billion. Now that is bullshit.
"So what is it that you do for a living that make you so obviously superior to the rest of us"? I am only superior to some people and you know who you are.
So its De States - De States?
Howard continues his Fantasy Island warnings.
If we care to notice, all of his financial promises are made in such a way that the election is the only thing between us and those prizes!
He will develop a Fund for this, a Fund for that etc. etc. Either he still considers us the fools we have been in the past or his finally lost his marbles.
The intervention against State incompetence started with the NT Aborigine settlements; their welfare payments; their land rights; the Anti-Discrimination laws and their permit system to stop unwanted people. The latter would have eliminated Brough and Howard himself - if he bothered.
Nevertheless, he has more or less wedged himself on "De States - De States" excuse in the Devonport Hospital by promising money up front and centre? Really?
My understanding is that he must first have his umpteenth Committee find out how the hospital works – could that be learned after the election?
Now we have a situation that must open the eyes of the blindest of Liberals:
PRIME Minister John Howard has refused to support a push by asbestos disease sufferers to subsidise the only drug available to treat mesothelioma.
Mr Howard has instead told the Asbestos Diseases Foundation that mesothelioma sufferers should go to their state governments for help to buy the drug, which costs $20,000 per treatment cycle. [De States - De States].
About 600 Australians are diagnosed every year with mesothelioma, a fatal cancer caused by exposure to asbestos.
Health Minister Tony Abbott also tried to shift blame onto the states, saying that state governments had an obligation to treat patients in public hospitals free of charge. [De States - De States]
Mr Abbott has consistently refused to support the push to have the drug, Alimta, listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme schedule.
Mr Abbott refused to speak to The Sunday Age but through a spokeswoman said that Alimta had not been listed on the PBS because "the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee [another useless Howard committee] — an independent, expert committee — rejected the submission on the basis of unacceptable cost-effectiveness and uncertainty about whether there is any increased quality of life associated with any survival gain".
Alimta, which is manufactured by pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly, has been knocked back three times by PBAC over the past three years. It is due for consideration again in November.
It would cost taxpayers between $5 million and $7 million a year to subsidise the drug. Last week, the 2006-07 budget surplus was revised upwards to more than $17 billion.
"Alimta makes for a softer landing for meso sufferers," Mr Robson said. "Not only does it extend life, but it improves the quality of life.
"So, for people who can't afford it, it's just tragic, and also for the doctors who want to use it but can't prescribe when they know patients can't afford it."
Alimta is subsidised for the treatment of mesothelioma in most other OECD countries, such as France, Germany, Sweden, Japan and Britain.
In NSW and Western Australia, government subsidy schemes are in place to help mesothelioma sufferers gain access to Alimta, but Victoria, South Australia, Queensland and Tasmania provide no government assistance.
The executive director of the Asbestos Diseases Society of Victoria, Leigh Hubbard, said the inequities were outrageous.
"If the PBAC submission in November is unsuccessful, we will hound whoever wins the federal election until they do the right thing," Mr Hubbard said.
"The Government has acted unilaterally on other vaccines and drugs and we expect them to support people in need — victims who in some cases are cancelling treatment or whose doctor won't even suggest Alimta because they know they can't pay for it."
Senior pharmaceutical industry sources remain bitter over the conduct of a senior adviser to Mr Abbott, Isobel Brown, who has been accused of trying to bully pharmaceutical manufacturers into not making their PBAC applications public.
Industry sources say Ms Brown has been instrumental in ensuring that Alimta was rejected by PBAC. Mr Abbott said through a spokeswoman that he had confidence in Ms Brown.
Asked if Mr Abbott was aware that Ms Brown was alleged to have threatened Eli Lilly if it tried to raise public awareness regarding Alimta, Mr Abbott's spokeswoman said: "It is important for companies to respect the processes for drug approvals for PBS listing. Ms Brown would have been doing her job in pointing that out."
Federal Labor health spokeswoman Nicola Roxon backed the push to have the drug listed on the PBS.
"We're talking about brave Australians who have suffered a lot, and obviously government should be doing all it can to help them," she said.
"Labor would ask PBAC to reconsider its decision to reject the listing of Alimta."
Meanwhile, since assisting these Australians who are suffering this terrible disease, would not make money and would not alter many votes, Howard/Abbott will ignore them.
After all, why should the "New Order" waste their wonderful surplus to give a service, when the surplus is significantly due to the removal of services?
But any intervention here would require it to be done to four States – not a few communities, eh?
There is no truth – just "De States - De States".
A total dictatorship cannot afford to have them any more than Unions.
NE OUBLIE.
Read this
Ernest William: “Now we have a situation that must open the eyes of the blindest of Liberals/or Labor.”
You should read the following and understand the bull**** that Labor is spruiking
Ms Gillard also said a Labor government would crack down on illegal strikes.
"We'd make sure that employers faced with a breach of the law could have very direct access to remedies.
"We don't want to see any return to increased industrial action levels. (no return to the good old days of union thuggery).
"There will be tough sanctions that employers can access if there is illegal activity."
The Australian Greens said Ms Gillard's comments represented a further softening of Labor's workplace policies.
"Workers and unions will be increasingly concerned with the ALP progressively watering down their industrial relations policy," Greens senator Rachel Siewert said.
"It is clear from Julia Gillard's comments today on the right of entry - following on from recent backdowns on key issues such as unfair dismissal, the right to strike, the ABCC (Australian Building and Construction Commission) and AWAs (Australian Workplace Agreements) - that the Greens are the only party committed to delivering a fair and just industrial relations system."
There is no truth, just more Labor lies.
Fiona: Alan, could you please provide links when you include quotations. I had time to go hunting for this one, but don't usually.
Fools and De States
Ernest William: "He will develop a Fund for this, a Fund for that etc. etc. Either he still considers us the fools we have been in the past or his finally lost his marbles".
Unlike Labor who will set up enquiries which will achieve nothing. However, Rudd has realised that the State Labor buffoons are incompetent in running the health systems, but he did not say anything during the State election campaigns. Now Rudd is saying he will take over the State hospitals if elected. I wonder if he will remember he said this, especially with his record of not remembering things.
"Either he still considers us the fools we have been in the past".
Ern, you are a fool if you think that Labor will improve your standard of living. This can only be done if you work hard and contribute to the economy, I know this is hard for an ex union delegate to understand but it is a fact of life. You know if you had got yourself a proper job all those years ago, you would not be whingeing now. Wake up, you only have yourself to blame for the hole you are in.
Massive surplus but - at what cost in services?
For an ordinary citizen to fully appreciate what the Howard government is boasting about, you have to disseminate the multiple reasons for it.
It would appear that the "New Order" master-plan is to squeeze the States until their ability to balance their budgets is seriously diminished.
Howard has also betrayed his assurances to the COAG meetings by using his well-known system of choices: do it – you have no choice. So much for democracy!
The "New Order" have begun their normal pork-barrelling with money they have no intention of spending.
I was actually amused at the Costello leaked claim that Howard spends recklessly at election time and Costello has to find the money!
Actually, if we check the promises Howard made in 2004 of some $70 billion, not including the $billion ear-marked for the Indonesian tsunami – they have still not been fulfilled.
So why did Costello leak that misleading claim? To balance the truth of Howard's extravagance with his conservatism – so Howard can promise anything and Costello will find the money? Struth.
But then Howard's wife states that he is not into firm commitments!
The final analysis is that the Howard/Costello surplus is our services deficit.
There is no truth – just the unsubstantiated claims to hide the continuation of a false economy.
NE OUBLIE.
NO to Gunns' pulp mill
More opportunity for direct democracy, from the GetUp! team. And another reminder that some Australians are already actively involved....
Dear friends,
While the rest of the world focuses on solving the climate crisis and protecting what is left of our precious natural resources, Australian politicians are hell-bent on approving an environmentally disastrous industrial development in Tasmania - the Gunns pulp mill.
Right now we have the power to stop the development before it's too late. Nationwide opposition has forced the Federal Environment Minister to allow ten days of public comment before making his final decision. You can help stop the pulp mill by voicing your opposition today:
http://www.getup.org.au
Gunns Ltd's proposed pulp mill will pour tonnes of dangerous greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and poisonous effluent into Bass Strait. The expected environmental damage will wreak havoc on the tourism, fishing, agriculture and wine industries in the area, and mean the further clear-felling of Tassie forests.
Tasmania's economic future depends on its clean, green image, not on pulp mills. Independent economic analysis released this week shows the mill will actually destroy more jobs and wealth than it creates. Tell Minister Turnbull there's no good reason to approve the pulp mill in its current form:
http://www.getup.org.au
The inquiry process into the mill's impact has been fraught with political and corporate interference. Let's put the people back into the process, and remind our decision-makers who they really answer to.
Thanks for being a part of this,
The GetUp team
Excessive consumerism and a liberal capitalist society
Peter Saunders is happy with excessive consumerism, as long as we don't get into too much debt. The planet is a finite resource: if all humans, were to embrace liberal capitalism and excessive consumerism, we will destroy the planet. The Wesley Mission is right when it urges us to curb our excessive consumerism.
Those Singing Philosophers, Como and Sinatra
Let's forget about tomorrow
Let's forget about tomorrow
Let's forget about tomorrow for tomorrow never comes
Domani, forget domani
Let's live for now and anyhow who needs domani?
Kerryn, it's the way of the smartest-stupidest species on the planet.
Tonight on the TV travel show Getaway, they showed the magnificence of The Tarkine. Meanwhile, 100 km away, Gunns want to build the most toxic woodchip plant in Australia.
Stupid, stupid, stupid!
There's Been A Death!
With the advent of the French Revolution, the bulk of mankind, for a brief period, thought that a New World had sprung into being, a place where democracy and freedom would reign. Slowly the dream began to die until now, well, there's little left and perhaps it's time to bury it, give it a decent funeral before the corpse begins to stink.
Politicians, those who were elected to represent us, now control us. And of course Capitalists, who control the world's economic purse strings, and Religious Ranters, who infiltrate and corrupt the thought processes of their flock, they control the politicians who control us. Where does that leave us, the little people who'd hoped for so much?
As we've always been: powerless pawns on a rigged chessboard.
Too late
Economics is just another ideology, promising much, but really providing little. Except to fewer and fewer. Economics is an illusion, like all ideologies, its promised outcomes can't be sustained by fact or verifiable evidence. Economic rationalism has seen the destruction of services and infrastructure, put the peoples wealth, resources and assets into corporate hands. Now we pay to drive on our roads, subsidise hugely rich companies and corporations and lose our money to banks, instead of gaining interest. When you have a political and bureaucratic system, orientated to a rationalising market driven unrestrained economy. The only long term outcome on that path is chaotic collapse.
The planet is a living organism, suffering a plague that's trying to destroy it, the human race. There can only be one winner and that's the planet, we've lost already. It's too late to do anything about the chaotic demise of our current society, along with the removal of a large number of humans, and many other species caught in our bulldozing destruction. The effects of what we have done up until this day, is enough to wipe us out. To dramatically slow the effects, we would have to stop doing what we as a world society currently do daily. But we are growing that rapidly, so nothing can be done. We just have to find a way through it to ensure a future. I expect we will have the answer to our questions, during the next 5-6 years and I bet we don't like, or are able to cope using our present approach.
What's in a Word?
There was a time when Howard lied and didn't bother to excuse it. He merely blamed his underlings and either promoted them or gave them a rise!
IMHO - during the period of prosperity for the wealthy and the Corporations, he changed tack and would rely on some word or sentence to confuse the issue. Like the parliament statement about "keeping the interest rates at record lows" he said with typical arrogance - "I didn't say that".
I have "never ever" known of any criminal or politician (except for "tricky Dicky" Nixon) who could find so many ways to lie.
As I have said, I believe that Howard has gathered around him people of his own type. Misfits; changing targets; incompetents and the outsourcing of responsibilities.
I also have no doubt that the massive backups of financial experts are those who make Costello's desires a fact - but they cannot reveal the truth for fear of a tour in jail.
This opinion of mine is being exhibited by the Nationalist Mark Vaile (of AWB and the U.S. FTA infamy) in that, according to the ABC News stories, he states that "residents" should have a say on the development of Nuclear Power plants in
Firstly - we ar told that there is no absolute decision for Nuclear Australia - yet Howard's mates register a Corporation to be ready.
Secondly - "Nationalism" the euphemism for Fascism, suggests that elected State Governments do not speak on behalf of their constituents - thus "residents" are portrayed as those directly effected in the area chosen by the Commercial Interests which will not be known for perhaps 10 years!!! Now that's reasonable isn't it?
Thirdly - the Howard-trained Vaile covers himself by using the terminology of "should have a say".
Now this fellow is a Nationalist, with the same credentials as that "I will not allow the sale of Telstra" Barnaby Joyce.
Opinion - there is NO split in the coalition and the Nationalists, as always, will do as they're told.
Then we come to that much heralded Bankrupt Millionaire, Malcolm Turnbull. Fair dinkum.
He may well be faced with a challenge by another Millionaire about his future election chances - but:
Without confessing that the "buck stops with him" regarding the Pulp Mill in
A tale of two cities
Subtitle: The plot centres on the years leading up to economic rationalisation and culminates in the Howard Reign of Terror[1].
.. is irresistible. And no-one need take my word for it; see below[3].)-=*=-
(Disclosure: I'm not Canberra (pron. Cairm-bra) born and bred; that distinction belongs to few of my age-cohort. I arrived (in Cairm-bra) as a sprog in the early 60's. From snotty young sprog to sysprog extraordinaire[2] in only 10 years!)
Back in those days, "The Department" ran Cairm-bra. We lacked almost nothing; wide, smooth and largely empty roads (admittedly in a lot'a funny curves, even circles); fancy bridges, artificial lakes, sterile town-centres. You name it, the shiny gifts and gee-gaws rained down upon us, most often without even asking. From recall, the 1st set'a traffic lights arrived in the mid-60s, and a gift unrecognised as such at the time was that TV was 'given' to us only near the end of my 2ndary schooling. A mate down the road had the street's 1st TV (he knows who he is; we chatted about it recently at a school fête, g'day!)
In those days we got gravity-feed wardah® from Bendora, after the Cotter pumps were shut down. Ah, sweet and sparklingly pure! Contrast that with now; looks, smells and tastes like what I expect it largely is: sheep's p**s out'a Googong. (Not available everywhere; check your local guides. By reading books, not by [verb redacted] girls!)
Also in those days we had a two-tier land-sale system; restricted and open. OK, the restricted blocks were most often inferior; low side of the street, say, smaller or both. But: 'restricted' meant only for the 1st-time buyers; the 'profis' - developer/builders, 2nd timers etc - were kept away from the 'cheapies.' Not exactly cheap; we like to say "no extra-charge;" the prices were kept close to cost (there was always some profit in it), and everyone was happy. Well, nearly everyone; you can guess who was griping: yep, the developers. [Many adjectives redacted; you choose one, say greedy, say whatever you like...]
In addition to build-it-yourself (via subbies (hard yakka) or the whole-hog contract-builder), there were the developer/builder 'speccies' as well as the 'used' market to choose from. Anything new was out on the edge (as now, but not sooo far out), and 'used' were a) established and/or b) closer; no need to plant a lawn or drive so far, say.
And, as to be expected in such a 'heaven,' govvies (aka 'government housing.' Shock! Horror! Socialism! Almost communism, even! Yeah; and that from a Liberal government too...) These were on land often less salacious than the restricted blocks, they were often in row after row of almost the sames, and they were small. But the next 'but' is a BIG but: they were cheap! Here, we don't say "no extra-charge;" there were no extras to charge for. Another but, a bit smaller, was that the entry to such govvies was harder than to the restricted blocks, but the rewards for doing so could be immense. They were cheap because "The Department" (possibly a different one) called tenders for the construction; Ta-ra! - Competition!
(Aside: the govvies were continually sold off, providing a) poor-end sheople with an entry into the own-your-own home dream and b) an entry into the house-speculation racket for the smarties.)
Long story short: prices had a lid; actually several lids. And, do you know what?
a) It worked! But then - Boo! Hiss!
b) The system was dismantled, to be what it is today: economic rationalisation, open slather, and recently (mostly thanks to Costello's halving of the CGT) house-prices have literally gone up through the roof.
(Yes, demand has its place, but see below. And yes, low interest enabled owner-occupiers to 'trade up.' But 'the biggie' driving house-price inflation was speculator/investors enabled by Costello's CGT fiddle; IMHO the graph ...
Another, but not so aside: the house-price inflation was begun in the big cities, and spread. An unexpected consequence (unexpected for those who: "Der, didn't think") is that with the high prices of used houses, the prices of new have been given 'breathing space' to rise as well. Further, as the big city types do their sea/tree changes, they drive up prices ouside'a the cities. Facit: WE (non-speculators, especially 1st-timer tryers) ALL LOSE!)
Just remember who crows the loudest, who says we are Oh, so well off, citing, even skiting about, drastically high house prices.
Not to mention extremely high debt, and concomitant stress.
Not to mention the loss of 'the dream' for so many.
-=*end*=-
PS One has to pose the question Q: is there a limit to growth? A: There must be; finite planet. The only way out is to stop population growth; either we do it in a planned fashion, or it will be done for us - by some agent/catastrophe presumably far, far less friendly/comfortable.
I have written elsewhere, that Cairm-bra is just about out'a wardah. But the local council, pushed by business (and possibly Howard's expansionary employment policies, i.e. adding ever more propagandists and other such purchased prostitutes to the PS) insists on ramming ever more people in. Madness. Sheer and utter, irresponsible, madness.
PPS To Daniel Smythe re your query about BW in your 'Banned...' post, you might consider a) checking my 'webdiary time-line' and b) any correlation that may have with this remark from RT: "Melbourne Indymedia shut its doors a couple of months back.. many blame t**lls for twisting perspectives until all others gave up" made on July 4, 2007 - 4:26pm.
-=*end*=-
Ref(s):
[1] A Tale of Two Cities
[wiki][2] aka par excellence. Sysprog is a contraction of System Programmer; a journeyman-sysprog could then roam the world...
[Colebatch & Maiden/The great Aussie dream II] October 31, 2005.[3] As quoted in my 'house-price inflation, responsibility ...:'
A new and lasting golden era?
Mining companies are making massive profits, no wonder the Federal Government has a $17 billlion surplus. Nothing to do with the fiscal skills of Costello. If it was not for the doubling of company tax revenue due to the mining boom we would have a $20 billion dollar deficit.
If we continue to export coal at the current rate we will eventually push the planet to the limit. Climate change will cause massive extinction events, droughts, floods, and sea level rises. We are living the high life now but our kids will pay for our party.
The future of the planet is in our hands.
The human population of the planet is expected to be 9,200,000,000 by 2050. Most of the human population will demand and deserve a reasonable standard of living, putting more pressure on the planet. A continuous growth in medicine is called a cancer. We must not let ourselves become a cancer that will eventually kill the planet. All life has evolved to take advantage of its environment; all life forms will grow in numbers until something cuts it down, normally a predator or when it runs out of food. We are the only life form on this planet that is conscious of our effect on the planet. We can choose to go on increasing our population and our demands on the planet or we can learn to limit our demands. The future of the planet is in our hands.