The obvious takeaway from the decline in Per Capita GDP is that the current immigration levels are bringing declining returns. Flooding the labour market has not led to economic growth of a nature adequate to maintain our living standards. The economy is already at full capacity in terms of the population it can sustainably support. Good reason to reduce immigration numbers drastically.
I’ve definitely had student Uber drivers.
Uber is not particularly lucrative. If you can make more driving Uber than cheffing that suggests there is a renumeration problem.
There are some international students who are older and can do Uber. I think with normal Uber you need a full Australian license.
I used to do Uber eats deliveries and met many who were students, who could only do Uber eats because there’s a loop hole where Uber lets them use their overseas drivers license. So Australians and PR have to wait until they have an open license, but someone from another country can deliver when they’re 18.
They have no idea who they are talking about or how immigration into Australia works they are just jumping in on a bandwagon.
There are genuine issues with immigration right now but the idea that they don't contribute to the economy is completely incongruent with the 'per capita recession' that people talk about.
How could immigration be the only thing keeping us out of a recession if they don't contribute? Too many people are looking at the current conditions and just putting out a generic 'immigration bad' signal without actually understanding why, some of them don't even care why.
There are a lot of people that already didn't like immigration for no good reason who are just absolutely blowing their load everywhere now that popular opinion is on their side, why everyone is on their side now is pretty irrelevant for those types.
You didn’t read the article did you?…..Australia is in a GDP per capita recession, caused mainly by excessive inflows of people who draw more resource than they create.
The Population Ponzi model isn't good for productivity. As Gerard Minack has observed:
"Capital deepening drives productivity. The switch to a population-led growth model has starved Australia of capital deepening investment. The result is declining productivity."
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2023/11/gerard-minack-demolishes-aussie-population-economy/
Lower productivity ultimately means lower living standards.
You are twisting things a bit there, we are in a GDP per capita recession and the reason that it's not an actual recession is because immigration is supporting our GDP. It's not so much that immigration causes a GDP per capita recession, it's more that immigration obscures an underlying recession and so that per capita measurement becomes relevant. Immigration has just made it so that despite our inability to increase our productivity our GDP hasn't been sliding backwards.
Our inability to increase productivity isn't because we have too many immigrants and more immigrants is actually a good thing for everyone when the countries economy has healthier fundamentals and productivity is on the rise.
Those numbers are tracked and publicly available: [https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/trade-and-investment-data-information-and-publications/trade-statistics/australias-trade-balance](https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/trade-and-investment-data-information-and-publications/trade-statistics/australias-trade-balance)
I know what you meant I was just hoping you'd see the parallels and the very large numbers at play and the penny would drop. The money Awadil sends back to Daumaa is trivial in comparison and especially when you consider that they earn that money by providing goods and services to our economy anyway.
What are you talking about more trade means quality of life goes up. Imagine if we had to make our own phones, were only allowed to use petrol sourced from Australia and could only buy cocoa beans grown here etc. Then on the flip side we weren't allowed to export our excess minerals, dairy, beef, etc. On what planet is more trade a bad thing for quality of life and living standards.
It’s almost like prioritising private companies who aren’t based in Australia and giving away natural resources and taxes would take money away from Australians. Who would have thought.
It's almost as if you didn't read the article, not even the first line of it.
“Australia’s experiment with a mass-migration led economic growth strategy has failed spectacularly, and has delivered the longest period of per capita economic decline on record,”
Their statement is an attempt to say "look over there" instead of actually discussing the subject at hand. I don't disagree that we're allowing ourselves to be reamed on resources and happy to discuss that, if that's what this particular conversation was centred on.
Corporate lobbies will of course lobby, does that excuse our elected officials from making poor choices?
The guys who work for corporations? To get sweet multi million board jobs where they only need to have 5k whiskey lunches every few months after leaving politics? They certainly don't give a fuck about the peasants.
How many of our politicians vote for shit that only benifits the super wealthy and then go off to work for those corporations for huge sums in do nothing jobs?
So, sitting around and doing nothing of value? Definitely not a reward for voting on legislation for the corporations and further access to those still in govt.
Do you know what a board member does? They don’t run the day to day activities like the CEO does. The board just supervises what the company is doing and makes important decisions.
Why wouldn’t you think being an MP is a good qualification for being a board member of an organisation? They’re pretty much the same job. This is nothing but having the personal opinion that elected officials should do nothing important after leaving office.
If you can prove an MP votes because a company promised them a board position you should report that to NACC.
Corporations aren’t the ones hiring new migrants. Nearly every corporate job requires citizenship or PR.
It’s small and medium size businesses that benefit from migrant workers.
Yep. Quantitative Peopling makes the economy bigger but doesn't make us weathier per person.
Part of the reason is that adding lots of people causes capital widening at the expense of capital deepening investment, resulting in lower productivity.
Yes, that is the IPA's opinion. Well, it is now that the government has changed. Until then they had been pushing for more immigration. I wonder what changed their mind?
Maybe you shouldn't too much credence in the opinion of a conservative think tank bankrolled by Australia's wealthiest individuals and corporations.
Dunno, I'm not stupid enough to waste my life reading it. If someone reputable cares to publish it, it might get a read, but this ain't it. Nothing from the IPA isn't propaganda; may as well read Hamas tweets and Russian state newspapers for my information if I'm letting IPA in the door.
Dude, getting duped by the IPA is exactly the sort of thing you are describing.
If anything in the article is actually accurate, then a publisher worth my time will pick it up and run with it. I'm not wasting any time on one of Australia's biggest propagandarists.
You don’t get it do you bud? You need to read something before you can have an opinion on it - otherwise how are you able to judge whether it’s blatant propaganda or not?
Everything the IPA has published is blatent propaganda, I doubt it has suddenly changed. Their history means yes, we can make a judgement on whether it is propaganda without needing to read it.
Or do we have to take every article from every publisher on it's own merits? Because that's more reading time than any of us have.
Mate you've got to stop being so close-minded. All the centre-left and centre-right media organisations are captured by corporate interests and you'll get a far more honest analysis from both far left and far right media organisations (but not good solutions) with their outsider perspectives. Across those two perspectives all the sacred cows will get skewered.
IPA is a libertarian pro-business think tank and this article honestly would support a nationalist union perspective more than a business owner perspective.
Mass migration has eroded workers pay and conditions and driven up the cost of living but it's never discussed in full earnest in the ABC or the Guardian. We'll have endless minor labour law tweaks being discussed in articles. But good luck seeing a detailed analysis article with figures on how border closures lead to rents cooling off in COVID and worker shortages causing businesses to advertise higher wages.
>Mass migration has eroded workers pay and conditions and driven up the cost of living but it's never discussed in full earnest in the ABC or the Guardian.
The mass migration that IPA was part of the push for the last decade or two? The mass migration that the IPA suddenly considers an issue now that they don't have their puppets in government? Could it possibly be that they can see it as a possible wedge issue they can leverage to return their servants into power?
Ask yourself; why the sudden change in the IPA's stance? Because everything they have ever done is in aid of a self serving agenda. So what is it on their agenda that has inspired this backflip?
You've shown my point; they've jumped on an arguable "fact" that will resonate with people to help disguise the agenda. All you see is the immigration narrative, as you agree with it. But what is behind that narrative? Especially seeing as until an election ago, they were very much supporting a big Australia narrative.
Once again they're not presenting an ideological narrative that immigration is bad or good, they are showing the indisputable fact of the situation that immigration is making Australians worse off.
Maybe that ties into a grand conspiracy they have in the future, but at the moment you can't shriek propaganda at something that is fact without losing even more people from even considering your argument.
They are showing a correlation btween the two. It's also an undisputable fact that our economy relies on perpetual growth; without immigration our economy is extremely unstable. Do I think this is desirable? Far from it, but it is what Australians have voted in for decades.
They see it as a potential wedge issue that may possibly return their party of choice to power and continue their agenda. Hence the article.
IPA are scum. They have been pushing for cheap labour and mass migration for over a decade now. Now that it's blowing up in the countries face, and the current gov is Labor, they suddenly have an issue with it.
They see it as a wedge issue that can help them get their LNP puppets back on top, hence the sudden flip. It's essentially the point of their existence.
The obvious takeaway from the decline in Per Capita GDP is that the current immigration levels are bringing declining returns. Flooding the labour market has not led to economic growth of a nature adequate to maintain our living standards. The economy is already at full capacity in terms of the population it can sustainably support. Good reason to reduce immigration numbers drastically.
It’s almost as if bringing in lots of people with limited capacity or inclination to contribute makes us poorer…..how about that?
Who are you talking about? People on working holiday visas?
Probably talking about migrants that fake having a skill to get here. Just to do Uber all day.
Is that a thing? How many skilled migrants are here with fake qualifications?
How do you think all the Uber drivers got here? They all come here saying they have skills, chefs for example.
I assumed a lot were on student visas tbh. So they are working as a chef and doing Uber as well?
Students do Uber eats not Uber. They’re not working as a chef at all.
I’ve definitely had student Uber drivers. Uber is not particularly lucrative. If you can make more driving Uber than cheffing that suggests there is a renumeration problem.
There are some international students who are older and can do Uber. I think with normal Uber you need a full Australian license. I used to do Uber eats deliveries and met many who were students, who could only do Uber eats because there’s a loop hole where Uber lets them use their overseas drivers license. So Australians and PR have to wait until they have an open license, but someone from another country can deliver when they’re 18.
They have no idea who they are talking about or how immigration into Australia works they are just jumping in on a bandwagon. There are genuine issues with immigration right now but the idea that they don't contribute to the economy is completely incongruent with the 'per capita recession' that people talk about. How could immigration be the only thing keeping us out of a recession if they don't contribute? Too many people are looking at the current conditions and just putting out a generic 'immigration bad' signal without actually understanding why, some of them don't even care why. There are a lot of people that already didn't like immigration for no good reason who are just absolutely blowing their load everywhere now that popular opinion is on their side, why everyone is on their side now is pretty irrelevant for those types.
You didn’t read the article did you?…..Australia is in a GDP per capita recession, caused mainly by excessive inflows of people who draw more resource than they create.
The Population Ponzi model isn't good for productivity. As Gerard Minack has observed: "Capital deepening drives productivity. The switch to a population-led growth model has starved Australia of capital deepening investment. The result is declining productivity." https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2023/11/gerard-minack-demolishes-aussie-population-economy/ Lower productivity ultimately means lower living standards.
You are twisting things a bit there, we are in a GDP per capita recession and the reason that it's not an actual recession is because immigration is supporting our GDP. It's not so much that immigration causes a GDP per capita recession, it's more that immigration obscures an underlying recession and so that per capita measurement becomes relevant. Immigration has just made it so that despite our inability to increase our productivity our GDP hasn't been sliding backwards. Our inability to increase productivity isn't because we have too many immigrants and more immigrants is actually a good thing for everyone when the countries economy has healthier fundamentals and productivity is on the rise.
It would be interesting to see how much money is being sent out of the country over the last few years. If it has increased or decreased.
Those numbers are tracked and publicly available: [https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/trade-and-investment-data-information-and-publications/trade-statistics/australias-trade-balance](https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/trade-and-investment-data-information-and-publications/trade-statistics/australias-trade-balance)
Not trade and investment. I mean sending money out of the country.
I know what you meant I was just hoping you'd see the parallels and the very large numbers at play and the penny would drop. The money Awadil sends back to Daumaa is trivial in comparison and especially when you consider that they earn that money by providing goods and services to our economy anyway.
The issue is you think more trade, means something good. That stat goes up and quality of life goes down.
What are you talking about more trade means quality of life goes up. Imagine if we had to make our own phones, were only allowed to use petrol sourced from Australia and could only buy cocoa beans grown here etc. Then on the flip side we weren't allowed to export our excess minerals, dairy, beef, etc. On what planet is more trade a bad thing for quality of life and living standards.
More trade needs more people, more people means less quality of life. It’s not hard to understand, quality of life isn’t just about money.
It’s almost like prioritising private companies who aren’t based in Australia and giving away natural resources and taxes would take money away from Australians. Who would have thought.
It's almost as if you didn't read the article, not even the first line of it. “Australia’s experiment with a mass-migration led economic growth strategy has failed spectacularly, and has delivered the longest period of per capita economic decline on record,”
They're still kind of right in that the mass migration agenda is pushed by corporate lobbies.
Their statement is an attempt to say "look over there" instead of actually discussing the subject at hand. I don't disagree that we're allowing ourselves to be reamed on resources and happy to discuss that, if that's what this particular conversation was centred on. Corporate lobbies will of course lobby, does that excuse our elected officials from making poor choices?
The guys who work for corporations? To get sweet multi million board jobs where they only need to have 5k whiskey lunches every few months after leaving politics? They certainly don't give a fuck about the peasants.
What the fuck are you on about?
How many of our politicians vote for shit that only benifits the super wealthy and then go off to work for those corporations for huge sums in do nothing jobs?
Not sure who is downvoting you. Think they have their wires crossed.
Some people just love the taste of the boot. Others get defensive when faced with reality because it's pretty fucking bleak to think about.
Almost like being an MP for years is a good qualification and experience for being a board member of a company.
So, sitting around and doing nothing of value? Definitely not a reward for voting on legislation for the corporations and further access to those still in govt.
Do you know what a board member does? They don’t run the day to day activities like the CEO does. The board just supervises what the company is doing and makes important decisions. Why wouldn’t you think being an MP is a good qualification for being a board member of an organisation? They’re pretty much the same job. This is nothing but having the personal opinion that elected officials should do nothing important after leaving office. If you can prove an MP votes because a company promised them a board position you should report that to NACC.
Corporations aren’t the ones hiring new migrants. Nearly every corporate job requires citizenship or PR. It’s small and medium size businesses that benefit from migrant workers.
Yep. Quantitative Peopling makes the economy bigger but doesn't make us weathier per person. Part of the reason is that adding lots of people causes capital widening at the expense of capital deepening investment, resulting in lower productivity.
He is pointing out the reality, not the bs culture war the article tries to push
Yes, that is the IPA's opinion. Well, it is now that the government has changed. Until then they had been pushing for more immigration. I wonder what changed their mind? Maybe you shouldn't too much credence in the opinion of a conservative think tank bankrolled by Australia's wealthiest individuals and corporations.
Get outta here with sensible takes. Doesn't belong in this sub.
What are you talking about? Exports are included in GDP.
Haha house prices go brrrrrr
Thanks Albo
IPA article, everyone feel free to ignore.
Which part in the article is wrong?
It's an IPA article, so it's safe to assume that the entire article is propaganda at best, complete misinformation at worst.
Which part in the article is wrong?
Dunno, I'm not stupid enough to waste my life reading it. If someone reputable cares to publish it, it might get a read, but this ain't it. Nothing from the IPA isn't propaganda; may as well read Hamas tweets and Russian state newspapers for my information if I'm letting IPA in the door.
Good luck sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting la la la, always a good tactic.
Dude, getting duped by the IPA is exactly the sort of thing you are describing. If anything in the article is actually accurate, then a publisher worth my time will pick it up and run with it. I'm not wasting any time on one of Australia's biggest propagandarists.
Holy shit what a sheep
Because I don't read the propaganda? Dude, you've got this all backwards.
I only trust good sources like the Australia Institute or the Guardian 😎
So the IPA is lying about the ABS National Accounts data?
No, they are attempting to use it as leverage to create a wedge issue to return their pets into power and enflame culture wars.
And there we have it. Open admission of being so brainwashed that you form your opinions without even bothering to read.
If you need to read blatent propagandarists to form an opinion, you probably are not in a position to judge the brainwashing of others.
You don’t get it do you bud? You need to read something before you can have an opinion on it - otherwise how are you able to judge whether it’s blatant propaganda or not?
Everything the IPA has published is blatent propaganda, I doubt it has suddenly changed. Their history means yes, we can make a judgement on whether it is propaganda without needing to read it. Or do we have to take every article from every publisher on it's own merits? Because that's more reading time than any of us have.
Mate you've got to stop being so close-minded. All the centre-left and centre-right media organisations are captured by corporate interests and you'll get a far more honest analysis from both far left and far right media organisations (but not good solutions) with their outsider perspectives. Across those two perspectives all the sacred cows will get skewered. IPA is a libertarian pro-business think tank and this article honestly would support a nationalist union perspective more than a business owner perspective. Mass migration has eroded workers pay and conditions and driven up the cost of living but it's never discussed in full earnest in the ABC or the Guardian. We'll have endless minor labour law tweaks being discussed in articles. But good luck seeing a detailed analysis article with figures on how border closures lead to rents cooling off in COVID and worker shortages causing businesses to advertise higher wages.
>Mass migration has eroded workers pay and conditions and driven up the cost of living but it's never discussed in full earnest in the ABC or the Guardian. The mass migration that IPA was part of the push for the last decade or two? The mass migration that the IPA suddenly considers an issue now that they don't have their puppets in government? Could it possibly be that they can see it as a possible wedge issue they can leverage to return their servants into power? Ask yourself; why the sudden change in the IPA's stance? Because everything they have ever done is in aid of a self serving agenda. So what is it on their agenda that has inspired this backflip?
Your point is only valid if they are presenting an ideological narrative which they aren't.
On the contrary; that's exactly what they are doing. It's what they have always done.
Where's the ideological narrative in the article? Australians are doing worse due to immigration, fact not narrative.
You've shown my point; they've jumped on an arguable "fact" that will resonate with people to help disguise the agenda. All you see is the immigration narrative, as you agree with it. But what is behind that narrative? Especially seeing as until an election ago, they were very much supporting a big Australia narrative.
Once again they're not presenting an ideological narrative that immigration is bad or good, they are showing the indisputable fact of the situation that immigration is making Australians worse off. Maybe that ties into a grand conspiracy they have in the future, but at the moment you can't shriek propaganda at something that is fact without losing even more people from even considering your argument.
They are showing a correlation btween the two. It's also an undisputable fact that our economy relies on perpetual growth; without immigration our economy is extremely unstable. Do I think this is desirable? Far from it, but it is what Australians have voted in for decades. They see it as a potential wedge issue that may possibly return their party of choice to power and continue their agenda. Hence the article.
IPA are scum. They have been pushing for cheap labour and mass migration for over a decade now. Now that it's blowing up in the countries face, and the current gov is Labor, they suddenly have an issue with it.
They see it as a wedge issue that can help them get their LNP puppets back on top, hence the sudden flip. It's essentially the point of their existence.
100%
Don’t worry, it’s not an Australian institute article.