From: cwarren@peg.pegasus.oz.au
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: Compulsory Voting.
Date: 30 Jul 92 03:07:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:hoconnel.711000454@adelphi:728416550:peg:996200254:000:5537
Nf-From: peg.UUCP!cwarren    Jul 29 22:07:00 1992


Reply to Daniel LAM


Maybe you'd like to redraft your contribution for I can see little evidence
of either thought or understanding.  No-one likes to be Goebbell'd by such
ideological pap.

Statements like "we have a mixed economy (with) extensive regulations
shackling the free market" are just propaganda.  Australia may have some
mixing in its economy between public and private enterprise, but for the
most part, Government enterprise is becoming corporatised and operates on
commercial principles.

Some public enterprise, such as public transport, health services, and
Parliament are subsidised and this is the way it should be, in a democratic
society - capitalist or socialist.  You wouldn't want the rich to have more
power then the poor, as in America, would you?

Whether or not a government shackles a market is a ridiculous irrelevancy.
A government can shackle a market under socialism or capitalism.  A free
market can exist under socialism OR capitalism.  I know drunken Young Libs
like to blather-on about government regulation and the rest, thinking in so
doing they are somehow talking about capitalism but a free-market and
capitalism are not the same thing.  Lam has understood the problem no better
than a common liberal party drunk.

Few people will really understand what point Lam tried to make by saying
that Asian countries who have adopted more-or-less free market policies have
great economic growth.  Capo' propagandists never give you a proper
analysis.  Which countries????   Compared to who??????  For how long????
What are the figures????    Who published them???????   How do you
categorise your data????  How do you define your terms like "capitalism"?

We all know that Hong Kong and Singapore Asia have had significant economic
success, ie their average annual growth rates, over 20 years are high
according to World Bank data.  However their GDP per head is lousy.  Their
living and working conditions are dispicable compared to other nations such
as Australia.  Mixed economies like Australia have a much larger GDP per
head than any Asian free-market economy but lower average annual growth
rates - so what I know where I would rather live.

Japan which is in Asia, has had almost impregnable trade barriers (ie the
antithesis of free trade) but has more than double GDP per capita than Hong
Kong or slumping Singapore.  Government regulation in Japan has contributed
to its supremacy.  If Lam's free-market dogma held sway in Japan it would be
no better off than South Korea.   Lam should name countries, give figures
and present a full analysis.

For instance when you look at world figures for Average Annual Growth Rate
over twenty years (1965-87), Hong Kong and Singapore might look good to an
Asian-chauvinist, but they only tip 6 and 7% respectively.  For the same
period, Botswana averaged 8.9% and supposed champions of free-trade like the
USA, just scrapped 1.5% [see World Bank Development Report 1989, table 1, pg
164]

South Korea is another supposed great-growth success story at least
according to government puppets.  South Korea over the period we are talking
about achieved a respectable 6.4% average growth rate.  Unfortunately its
GDP per head measured in 1988, was less than one third that of Hong Kong and
approximately one tenth that of Australia, the mixed economy Lam hates so
much.

Next triviality of "Lam-logic" was this;

Individual economic freedom (do I hear trumpets) has always brought (you
mean promised) prosperity; governments have always detroyed it (deepen voice
and wait for pause).  That's why socialist countries are so poor. (turn to
camera and look sincere).

Again wretched propaganda and government dogma.  The GDP between supposed
'planned' Asian, East Europe, and other nations has been published by "The
Economist".

Eastern Europe out-performed Asia-Pacific and specifically, Asian planned
economies out-performed South Asian economies.  "Yes Lam planned economies
did do better".  All these economies outperformed the rest of the world not
in OECD.

The facts are clear and don't provide any basis for "Lam-logic".  The facts
are; while socialist countries are poorer than OECD they are MORE successful
than non-socialist countries in the same region. [see "The Economist Book of
Vital World Statistics: A Complete Guide to the World in Figures",
Hutchinson, UK, 1990. pg30].

Most of remaining "Lam-logic" can be refuted by simple counter assertion.

Such as - The US deficit is NOT caused, by definition, by excessive
government spending.  In Australia, government revenue can be in surplus,
but the CAD gets worse.!  Only dogmatists link CAD with government
expenditure so mechanically.

Great economic growth which idiots on the opposition benches twaddle on
about is meaningless and does NOT mean a better life for the people unless
firstly, GDP per head increases and secondly, the people actually get it,
ie. real wages don't fall.

Much of what remains of Lam's lament in fact is just rubbish, such as:

"Taxation is theft".

Stupid.

Or how about;

"Capitalism causes earthquakes and AIDS".  A stupid Lam tactic of inventing
meaningless provocations that only makes him look mega-stupid.

If Lam continues with his stupid Asian-chauvinistic propaganda we'll have to
examine social and working conditions in Asia, then we'll know just a little
bit more about the real experience of slaving under capitalism in Asian
capitalist sweat shops and corrupt capitalist societies.

Probably best if Lam went quiet for a while.



CHRIS WARREN
Newsgroups: aus.politics