Typography

The new Australian Employment Party advocates whatever the UN wants, while selling you the idea that only the Government can provide jobs for everyone because only the government creates wealth. While I agree with their social libertarianism, their policies are straight out of the UN's one world government, democracy-free future.

 

UNITED NATIONS CONTROL OF AUSTRALIA

AEP Policy: "Align with the UN first and foremost" including following all the conventions and treaties without question. That is a giveaway that the AEP has no interest in Australian sovereignty. There is no mention of parliamentary democracy on their website. None. This is because democracy is not part of the UN Agenda 2030. The favoured structure of the one world government is the European Union model. The EU is not a democracy, while people elect members of parliament, the parliament has no power - the votes go nowhere. Power is vested in the hands of unelected autocrats who rule according to the globalist elite agenda. 

Their policy of taxing emissions of CO2 is another UN trojan horse. Under the excuse of controlling CO2 emissions the UN are granting themselves the power to control every business and every household. This despite the fact that CO2 is a harmless gas that increases crop yields and feeds people. AGW proponents like the AEP are pursuing an anti-humanist agenda while thinking they are being morally superior. In so doing they are creating a tool for complete social and economic control. 

JOBS FOR EVERYONE

Full employment should not be a policy, it should be a prime directive. A proper job goes to the heart of social equity and cohesion. Many of the problems we face in domestic violence in the wider meaning -  not only in the home but also within our society between people who should all be family, comes from a failure of our economy to deliver viable employment. Without full employment we have no future as a society. 

While we agree on the problem, we disagree on the cure, which is the source of those jobs. 

Liberty consider globalisation a failed strategy that has reduced our wages and entitlements to those applying in our free trade partners in Asia, so we would seek to take our economy back under our own control.

Australian Employment Party embraces globalism and the loss of jobs and income that it has brought. They think the Government can just print the money we are losing and in that way keep everyone in jobs. 

Giving the one million Australians who are currently out of work (referencing the actual unemployment rate not the BS official statistic) at the average wage of $40,000 is a $40 billion per annum, on top of a budget deficit of $40 billion. But that is only part of the story. One million new jobs is one million new offices, desks and chairs, cars & trucks, laptops, phone & utilities bills, back hoes or whatever else their chosen tool of trade is. The basic wage also attracts superannuation and other on-costs like training. 

The real cost of this policy is probably $100 billion a year and would create a deficit of $150 billion a year.

INTRODUCING MONETARY THEORY (MMT) - KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS ON CRACK

The AEP are "paying" this extra $100 billion a year by invoking a theory called "Modern Monetary Theory". MMT has this as it's basic premise:

"Money is a “fiction” we create on top of the “real” world of labour and things—the world of houses, crops, factories, and cars...money is extraordinarily useful - it helps us organize labor and production, move goods around the world, and get everyone to show up for work on time..so we need to understand it's rules. The most basic and important rule is the "accounting identity": for every financial asset there is a corresponding liability, and when all of these liabilities are subtracted from all of those financial assets, nothing is left over. If the private sector wants to have wealth (have more money than it owes), the government must be in debt for that same amount of money. The private sector cannot run a surplus (grow wealth) unless the government runs a deficit - growth in private wealth is created by governments printing money and spending it. So what about real assets - houses, paintings, crops sitting in a silo? These are balanced out by the amount of Government debt, ensuring when you take the whole economy together it sums to zero because assets = liabilities. "

The MMT mantra then is this:

"Private industry does not create wealth, the government does, and the only way the Government creates wealth is by printing more money. Because the private sector can not print money, it can not create wealth"

So the MMT disciples at the Australian Employment Party would simply print $100 billion a year and use it to create a million strong people's army.

So you can see the MMT approach is just to print money and run deficits year after year. Somewhere in this process all that printed money will be balanced by assets created by the act of printing it and employing people - like new buildings and railways that improve economic output. Therefore the nett effect is zero and nothing bad happens.

So lets look at a few numbers. The value of Australia's money supply (M1) is $326 billion at April 2016. The total value of the economy is around $1.4 trillion. So the AEP would increase the value of the money supply by one third, which needs to be matched by a $100 billion increase in assets, which represents growth in the Australian economy of 7% each year.

Luckily we do not need to guess if MMT is correct. We have the example of Prime Minister Rudd's 'cash splash" in 2014 to go by. Rudd splashed $52 billion into the economy over a year. That is half of what the AEP are promising. If MMT is valid that should have created a rise in GDP of around 3.5% on top of the underlying rate. It did not. If you look at the graph of GDP across this period (link below) there is no GDP effect. There is simply no link between extreme money printing and GDP growth. 

This is the graph of US money supply and US GDP, used because the USA has printed way more than us and is running a much larger deficit. Note that M1 stays ahead of, or if you like predicts the rise in GDP, proving the MMT theory until 2011 (when the theory came out). Then it diverges - President Obama fell for the MMT trick and it failed because available money is one small component of economic activity, there is a hard limit on how much good it can do, and we are well past that point:

M1 GDP2

MMT is based on a false premise which is grounded in Keynesian economics that the Government can intervene in tough times and inject wealth into an economy. Actually their premise is Keynes on crack - the Government creates ALL wealth, the more wealth you want the more money you print. When I was at Uni we studied Keynesian economics, his theory was the accepted one and Friedman was considered a right wing crank. I still have sympathy for this notion that the Government can pick up the slack in bad times. But only to a degree. This is because the elements of an economy are much more than just the available cash.

The theoretical outcome of printing more money than the economy needs is inflation. However we are not seeing that in the official figures, which shows inflation is on a settled course:

us inflation

Why not? Well mostly because the Government is using high unemployment to constrain inflation:

us inflation unemployment

Those are the official figures, the real figures are more than double. See our articles on the real inflation rate and the real unemployment rate.

Real inflation is already pushing 10% even with real unemployment above 12%. If you employ MMT theory and give all the unemployed Government jobs paid for by inflating the money supply, the only outcome will be HYPERINFLATION!

ASSET DESTRUCTION IS THE GOAL OF THE UN

That however is the plan. The United Nations Agenda 2030 calls for the implementation of one world government dedicated to a set of objectives that include:

  • Levelling economic advantage. This means de-industrialising western economies, making us a lot poorer and making under developed countries richer through free trade deals. The reason that they do not support bringing the third world up to our income level is because this will in their minds harm the natural environment;
  • Protecting the natural environment - locking up 75% of the land mass as human no-go zones. This involves returning those areas and any farms, cities and human activity generally to forest;
  • Transport is limited to rail - cars are restricted to the elite. That is why they are letting our car industry die - they know we won't need it. Remember cities will be too dense to support cars, and you are blocked from leaving the city anyway;
  • Reducing the world population - the middle class are simply not necessary any more, they are being turned into the have nots and disenfranchised, prior to having their numbers reduced in a manner not specified;
  • The remaining population will be shoe horned into tiny apartments in mega cities to reduce our footprint to just 25% of available land mass.

So how is this agenda to be implemented? Why would people give up their homes, their cars - lie as they know it? The answer is no surprise, destroy what we have and then rebuild it in the UN's image.

Enter MMT. By blowing up the money supply you will create hyperinflation. That will give you the same result as the Weimar Republic or modern day Venezuela. We will see a total meltdown affecting everyone except those doing it - the elite. Add to that the United Nations migration plan, which they are quite open about (see Replacement Migration) and which is underway now in Europe. Replacement Migration is designed to divide and conquer a society. The result will be total chaos, exactly the situation needed to implement a totalitarian outcome called Agenda 2030.

Just remember to take everyone's guns and neuter the armed forces so they cannot defend the little they will have left.

Don't fall for it. 

Reference on MMT

Rudd's cash splash

GDP Growth

M1 to GDP

BLOG COMMENTS POWERED BY DISQUS
Advertisement