Country towns not well
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
From: theo on 2 Dec 2008 18:25 On Dec 2, 1:00 pm, Diogenes <cy...(a)society.sux.ok> wrote: > theo wrote: >> Gerry wrote > >> And I'm opposed, in principle, to globalisation. Call me an economic > >> luddite... > > >You're an economic Luddite. But so am I to some extent. OTOH,I bought > >a new pair of jeans this week. $23.99 in Big W, not made in Australia. > >My main criteria was cost. > > I'd rather pay $70 bucks and get Australian jeans with Australian > cotton in them, made by Australian employees who have the right to > belong to a trade union. But such jeans are hard to find... And you'd pay $70 for them if they were the same quality? I wouldn't. But then, I've never paid $70 for a pair of jeans in my life. I used to buy Rivers though. > Our economy's running way too much on tourism and service/leasure > industries. These are the first ones to take big hits when there's an > economic drought happening. We're going to be suffering big-time here > soon, wishing we'd kept our more "real" industries protected by > tarrifs, I'll wager. Agreed on the tourism, not on the tarifs. Tarifs are, to me, a means of everybody paying to subsidise local noncompetitive industries, resulting in a pair of $23 jeans costing $70, then preventing the $23 jeans from entering the country. > Obmoto: Why can't have an Australian motorcycle industry (the > development of which could be subsidised my modest tarrifs on > imports)? We have tarifs on motorcycle chains, adding 50% to the price you pay. We don't make motorcycle chains in Oz, only some industrial and food industry chains, but hey, we've got to protect that industry eh? Theo Who doesn't buy motorcycle chains very often.
From: theo on 2 Dec 2008 20:15 On Dec 3, 9:13 am, Diogenes <cy...(a)society.sux.ok> wrote: > On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:25:35 -0800 (PST), theo <t...(a)bekkers.com.au> > wrote: > E.g. I stopped buying Vegemite and switched to MightyMite. I had to > re-tune my taste buds, but it's ok now. I never liked vegemite. > >Agreed on the tourism, not on the tarifs. Tarifs are, to me, a means > >of everybody paying to subsidise local noncompetitive industries, > >resulting in a pair of $23 jeans costing $70, then preventing the $23 > >jeans from entering the country. > > There are many ways to structure a tariff regime. Everything starts > off being "uncompetitive", but I say it ought not to even be about > competition. It ought to be about Australia striving for economic > self-sufficiency. A smaller economy, but OUR economy. > > If I were the dictator of Australia, using your example above, the $23 > import would cop a tariff of $47 and the money collect would be used > improve the quality of the Australian product and to improve > productivety within the same product stream. any left over money > collected in these tariffs would be used in educating the public about > buying Asutralian. So what incentive is there for the Oz jeans manufacturer to get competitive, or even of a higher quality? What prevents us from fellating the local industry? What do we gain for our $47? > Let's not forget that what I am proposing will never ever be allowed > to happen so this is just pub talk Another beer? Theo
From: Diogenes on 2 Dec 2008 20:29 On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 17:15:46 -0800 (PST), theo <theo(a)bekkers.com.au> wrote: >On Dec 3, 9:13�am, Diogenes <cy...(a)society.sux.ok> wrote: >> On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 15:25:35 -0800 (PST), theo <t...(a)bekkers.com.au> >> wrote: > >> E.g. �I stopped buying Vegemite and switched to MightyMite. �I had to >> re-tune my taste buds, but it's ok now. > >I never liked vegemite. Well maybe MightyMite is more to your liking. It's "milder". And it's West Australian. >> >Agreed on the tourism, not on the tarifs. Tarifs are, to me, a means >> >of everybody paying to subsidise local noncompetitive industries, >> >resulting in a pair of $23 jeans costing $70, then preventing the $23 >> >jeans from entering the country. >> >> There are many ways to structure a tariff regime. Everything starts >> off being �"uncompetitive", but I say it ought not to even be about >> competition. �It ought to be about Australia striving for economic >> self-sufficiency. �A smaller economy, but OUR economy. >> >> If I were the dictator of Australia, using your example above, the $23 >> import would cop a tariff of $47 and the money collect would be used >> improve the quality of the Australian product and to improve >> productivety within the same product stream. �any left over money >> collected in these tariffs would be used in educating the public about >> buying Asutralian. > >So what incentive is there for the Oz jeans manufacturer to get >competitive, or even of a higher quality? What prevents us from >fellating the local industry? What do we gain for our $47? We get to support our own cotton growers (Australian jobs) We get to support our own textile mills. (Australian jobs) We get to support our own clothing manufacturers. (Australian jobs) We get to keep these industries going instead of killing them by buying imports. We get to keep the money in Australia. >> Let's not forget that what I am proposing will never ever be allowed >> to happen so this is just pub talk > >Another beer? Why not. Australian or imported? Onya bike... Gerry
From: Diogenes on 2 Dec 2008 20:47 On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 17:15:46 -0800 (PST), theo <theo(a)bekkers.com.au> wrote: Oops, I missed a bit... >> >Agreed on the tourism, not on the tarifs. Tarifs are, to me, a means >> >of everybody paying to subsidise local noncompetitive industries, >> >resulting in a pair of $23 jeans costing $70, then preventing the $23 >> >jeans from entering the country. >> >> There are many ways to structure a tariff regime. Everything starts >> off being �"uncompetitive", but I say it ought not to even be about >> competition. �It ought to be about Australia striving for economic >> self-sufficiency. �A smaller economy, but OUR economy. >> >> If I were the dictator of Australia, using your example above, the $23 >> import would cop a tariff of $47 and the money collect would be used >> improve the quality of the Australian product and to improve >> productivety within the same product stream. �any left over money >> collected in these tariffs would be used in educating the public about >> buying Asutralian. >So what incentive is there for the Oz jeans manufacturer to get >competitive, The tariffs only equalise the price. The government then imposes standards and regulation in return for this tariff protection. >...or even of a higher quality? Governement imposed standards and regulation in return for tariff protection. Mobilising consumer activism. Subsidies coud be offered to assist in the interim/development phase. Tariff protection is not just a carrot, it's also a stick. It gives the govenment the clout to sort out an industry. Individual business who are seen to be not worthy of protection could be counselled, and if they don't lift their game, the goverment could withold assistance, and maybe even penalise them in some way. Where there's a will, there's a way, I say... :-) >What prevents us from fellating the local industry? Not sure how you mean that. Who is "us", and how might we fellate this local industry? Onya bike... Gerry
From: CrazyCam on 2 Dec 2008 21:44
Diogenes wrote: <snip> > We get to support our own cotton growers (Australian jobs) Ah, well, yes.... do you mean like Auscot? They are the mob I used to work for before I saw the silliness of working. Despite the implication of their name, suspected by many to be an abbreviation of Australian Cotton, they are 100% Yankee. They are owned by one of the largest private companies in the US, apart from a brief period, some years ago, when Kerry Packer owned them. They have some very specialist accountants, who manage to prove that they rarely actually make a profit, but the left overs from income minus expenditure gets neatly channeled back to California, under the guise of loan repayments, specialist consulting, <mumble> etc. They manage to use lots of our water, they get all sorts of tax breaks, and, to be fair, without them Warren would cease to exist, Trangie would probably close too, and Narrabri and Moree would be seriously crippled. Them, I know. How many other "Australian" cotton growers are real dinky-die Ozzies.....<shrug> I'd be surprised if there were many. regards, CrazyCam |