This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Inflation

Jump to new
Just run the swings in the meantime, tech's still your highest beta play by miles. TQQQ, SOXL, FNGU with 10-20% swings on the day...
 
Smurf1976 said:
So what happened? How did we end up with a more than 50% price jump in 3 days?
Click to expand...
For the record, the spot gas price reached $30.00 in Victoria at 18:00 today.

So that's a 90% price hike in 4 days.

Now looks to be coming back down quite rapidly (lower demand, it's Friday night) but the real point here, as it relates to inflation, is that all forms of energy are presently subject to a tight supply situation. Coal, oil, gas, uranium, electricity etc they're all somewhat on a precipice where any spike in demand or disruption to production sends the price to the moon.

Victorian gas is just the latest incident really. The UK, most EU countries, Japan, China, India and others have seen similar occurrences either gas or electricity over the past year or so and I note that the US natural gas price is quietly creeping up too, having roughly doubled over the past few weeks. No crisis yet but it's on the move.
 
I have two websites I have been watching for the past couple of years that track which fuels are being used for electricity production, and I have noticed since the Liddell coal plant began its shutdown a month or so ago the use of gas has stepped up quite a bit.

Do you think that this plant closure is causing the the higher usage/prices?
 

Concerning 22-day warning for Aussie workers

The average Aussie worker would be able to support themselves for less than a month if they lost their job. This is what you need to know.
au.news.yahoo.com

Around 342,000 Aussie workers wouldn’t even be able to support themselves for a month if they lost their job.

The average worker could only support themselves for 22 days if they lost their job, according to new research. (Source: Getty)
Around 342,000 Aussie workers wouldn’t even be able to support themselves for a month if they lost their job, according to new data.
Research released by Otivo found that Australians without a financial safety net could only survive 22 days if their income was to suddenly stop.
A financial safety net includes things like being able to draw down on a mortgage repayment, credit cards, other loans, or the ability to sell shares.
Australians with no financial safety net, but who did receive government support would survive around 21 weeks without an income, the report found.

Surprisingly, the research found there were many people living paycheque to paycheque who lived in affluent areas like Rose Bay, in Sydney’s eastern suburbs, who were considered to be more financially stable.

“Perhaps victims of keeping up appearances, the average person in Rose Bay with no financial safety net could only survive 11 weeks if their income was to suddenly cease, which is well below the national average,” the research found.

“Remove government support, and that survival rate reduces to less than 17 days for Rose Bay residents.”
 
Maybe be not support themselves but we do have a welfare system that seems almost limitless.
 
3 hound said:
Maybe be not support themselves but we do have a welfare system that seems almost limitless.
Click to expand...
And everyday there is another cause that wants to get on the teat.
As long as the worker keeps going, we'll be o.k., the unsung hero.
 
sptrawler said:
And everyday there is another cause that wants to get on the teat.
As long as the worker keeps going, we'll be o.k., the unsung hero.
Click to expand...

What did Keating say about the ratio of workers funding welfare dollars to the number of people consuming welfare dollars. I think he was talking about the aged but the principle is generally true (if not more so) for working age people as well.
 
3 hound said:
Maybe be not support themselves but we do have a welfare system that seems almost limitless.
Click to expand...
not as easy to get onto as you might think ( some associates usually assess the various charities , first )
AND being on that welfare system signs you up as a political football

i remember the Right Honorable Adam Bandt couldn't survive on the 'dole ' for a week ( and he had a bicycle at the time , so no motor vehicle expenses ) , so if Adam had trouble making his 'dole payment ' stretch two weeks , imagine those who have a waiting period before the first payment arrives .

mind you the serial unemployed ( temporary job to temporary job ) become quite resourceful ( maybe the politicians should have to live a few months watching the pennies BEFORE they start their term in Canberra , sort of a crude course in economics and finances )

REMEMBER as Ice-T says in one of his books .. 'crime is an equal opportunity employer '
 
sptrawler said:
And everyday there is another cause that wants to get on the teat.
As long as the worker keeps going, we'll be o.k., the unsung hero.
Click to expand...
the worker is being buried in paperwork and red and green tape they might be employed but productivity is being strangled

i remember one gig 'specialty cleaning ' at shopping complexes , a half hour ' safety induction ' at each site , and the standard spiel had no useful safety information about that specific site ( not even the location of toilets or centre management , let alone fire extinguishers first aid gear ) but a half hour building up blood clots and sign a book

and stuff like that is where productivity goes ( but i suppose it kept security awake a while longer maybe that was the upside )
 
3 hound said:
Maybe be not support themselves but we do have a welfare system that seems almost limitless.
Click to expand...
So in short, people on welfare can survive thanks to welfare whereas working and independent ones will get screwed and loose everything..a great lesson in life:
Repeat after me:
I am an Aussie, i should not work, i should parasite the dirty rich and winge.
 
Your story doesn't compute, we are into third generation welfare families. They have/rent houses and have cars, smart phones....etc.

I have not heard of any government caps or limits on so it appears limitless.
 
Last edited:
3 hound said:
Your story doesn't compute, we are into third generation welfare families where nobody has ever worked. They all have houses, cars, smart phones...more and more around here are buying their land/houses while on welfare.
Click to expand...
you are correct , BUT the treadmill of unemployment /employment/unemployment creates it's own depressive trap there will always be SOME trapped on welfare ( whether that is begging on the street or lining up at centre-link regularly )

fun-fact how much could you shrink government by stopping all welfare ( think of the politicians and bureaucrats sitting on the curb , jobless ) and think of the price reductions ( say ) in 5% of the population can't afford to buy much , so overall consumption would plummet , as would tax receipts

if houses are being bought by welfare recipients , you are talking about a banking problem ( rewatch The Big Short ) , surely we don't still have the rent-to-buy property trap

BTW the government NEEDS residents to over-consume , sure i don't think that is clever , but i am not in government ( and tax-addicted )
 
divs4ever said:
if houses are being bought by welfare recipients , you are talking about a banking problem ( rewatch The Big Short ) , surely we don't still have the rent-to-buy property trap
Click to expand...

What is rent-to-own and does it let you buy a house without a deposit?

These schemes are hugely popular in the US. But in Australia they are a relatively new concept.
www.afr.com

The risk with these schemes is that the consumer does not actually own the dwelling, and if they are unable to refinance the property commercially at the end of their agreed period, they lose both the property and the equity they paid.
A platform such as OwnHome argues that mortgages can also leave consumers out of pocket and without a home. It says its hardship provisions that support customers in times of need address the concerns that gave rise to the Victorian regulations.
In Victoria, developer Assemble Communities has a different model.

The developer, which Australian Super has a 25 per cent stake in, builds apartments aimed at households in low- to moderate-income bands.

Taking into account two years for an apartment to be built, tenants who qualify then rent for five years and then can choose to buy at the end of that period – after seven years – at the originally agreed price.

Over that period, residents receive financial coaching and, unlike in traditional rent-to-buy models, they can walk away with their savings intact if they decide not to go ahead and purchase the apartment.
Separately, in Canberra, the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation, a federal government agency, expects to start a pilot development this year, the Ginninderry joint venture, with Riverview Developments, the ACT government’s Suburban Land Agency and Community Housing Canberra.

Under that model, tenants will pay an affordable rent to the community housing provider with the right to buy the home after 10 years.

NHFIC boss Nathan Dal Bon says the build-to-rent-to-buy model offers a way to provide housing to vulnerable groups, such as older women.

“With vulnerable women’s housing needs increasingly in focus, this pilot provides an opportunity to explore affordable pathways to homeownership for at-risk women,” he says.
 

I am not an economist so can't answer that, it would more likely increase productivity I would guess.

As far as consumption goes I wouldn't know the answer in the long term at least, do you have some modelling to show consumption would decrease??

As far as bureaucrats losing jobs isn't that one of the key argument for a UBI, Nothing to evaluate every fortnight so no need to pay a massive bureaucracies to evaluate. EVERYONE just gets the UBI regardless.
 
divs4ever said:
the worker is being buried in paperwork and red and green tape they might be employed but productivity is being strangled
Click to expand...
Even if we ignore $ and just measure time (labour) then pretty much everything costs a fortune today compared to what it cost a generation ago.

Without wanting to name the project details, productivity really does go to crap when workers on site must wait for a "supervisor" (who isn't a supervisor in the normal sense of the word) to turn up and supervise the work.

Now said supervisor lives a couple of hundred km away and clocks on when they get in the car, same time as the workers, and can't be sacked even if they fail to turn up at all.

Details left out intentionally but it's a real project in Australia. Needless to say, said "supervisors" would not be on the job if the company wasn't forced - and no it's not the doing of unions, it's just the company dodging the bullets trying to get it done amidst circumstances that are, shall we say, difficult on account of location.
 
There has been a run of men getting killed on the job sites recently, I do not know the details of every accident but it pushes me in favour that correct supervision and processes should be mandatory and industry should not be allowed to skimp on safety to increase profits.

No man or woman (they are almost exclusively men tho) should have to die in the workplace for just doing their job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dogs, mans best friend and family members
Replies
6
Views
634
farmerge
DFND - VanEck Global Defence ETF
Replies
4
Views
339
finicky
Have you won the B/Wankers jackpot? I did!
Replies
12
Views
950
basilio
AI revolution and the Australian economy
2 3
Replies
50
Views
6K
moXJO
M
Electricity demand and data centres
Replies
15
Views
2K
farmerge
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...