Archive

My recent FOI showed that the RBA Board was warned about the risks of QE but appeared to ignore those concerns, ultimately leading to huge losses with minimal benefits. The fiscal cost alone looks to be well over $50 billion, or more than $5,500 per household – a massive policy blunder.

Taylor Swift is in town, and so is government spin about the huge economic benefits she brings. But once you account for leakages and opportunity costs, the net impacts are probably negative. Enjoy the show, but don’t buy the hype!

Here are a few short takes for you to chew over on the weekend, from the week’s happenings that probably didn’t need a full post. 1. Stepped on by stamp duty # Move over income tax, because the always-interesting folks at the e61 Institute released a note this week looking at another highly inefficient tax: stamp duty. According to the authors, it now costs the average city dweller five months of after-tax income just to move house. And yes, our old friend bracket creep is largely responsible:

Japan’s “lost decades” of low growth are due to its declining working-age population, not necessarily failed policies. With aging populations, policymakers in developed nations such as Australia will need to focus on right metrics, not just GDP growth, to craft effective policies.

Dick Smith wants to cap Australia’s population at 30 million over concerns about a lack of resources and housing costs. In doing so he falls for the ’lump of labour’ fallacy, and fails Econ 101: it’s poor planning, not immigrants, that erodes housing affordability in Australia.