Australia and the West have experienced, hand over fist, improvements in GDP and living standards since we moved our manufacturing and resource extraction overseas*.

Even as the working class got sold out**, living standards improved across the board. The rich got richer and so did the middle class - with most Australians joining the middle class, during and, since the post-war era.

We were getting a good deal on our imports, taking more from poorer countries (Global South) than we gave in return, but that has been coming to an end.

The Global North (the First World) has monopolised trade with the Global South, by Capital and demand but also coercion and regime change, which ensured a good deal. But with the rise of the BRIX and China’s Belt and Road initiative, the Global South has more opportunity for equal exchange of goods and services.

While the IMF used third world debt to influence policy change, allowing Western Capital to buy up and exploit industry, Chinese banks are forgiving debts and negotiating mutually beneficial agreements (to the benefit of China).

While Western Capital built limited infrastructure to extract a specific resource, China is investing in not just general infrastructure but education and the creation of a local workforce.

The Global South are trading with each other. They have more options, trade is more competitive - we get less of a deal.

Where previously Australia could afford to give Corporations absurd profits and still have money for the people, this will be less and less possible. Australia needs to re-embrace the policies of the post-war era, which ensured a dignified life, and roll back the last 50 years of neoliberal policy built for an age which no longer exists.

* Not just in the neoliberal era, but all the way back to the start of colonial expansion.

** With manufacturing moving overseas and the denationalisation by various Liberal -and some Labor- governments.

*** consent manufacturing became harder to enforce

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-49687-y

[2] https://ourworldindata.org/trade-and-globalization

[3] https://www.bu.edu/gdp/2021/03/08/bailouts-from-beijing-how-china-functions-as-an-alternative-to-the-imf/

[4] https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/10.1142/S2377740023500173

CC SA NC

    • FreedomAdvocateEnglish
      12·
      2 days ago

      What have I said that is racist or “propaganda”?

      Do you think that pausing immigration would help with the housing availability crisis? Yes or no?

      Do you think adding 1500 people a day to the country affects housing availability and affordability?

      • Hominine@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        2 days ago

        Racist propaganda that is easily debunked.

        One claim which spread online was that Australia was bringing in 1,500 new overseas arrivals each day. That claim was advanced by some conservative media outlets and picked up traction online among some supporters of the rally. But Rizvi and Gamlen said the number was inaccurate, and a misunderstanding of migration figures. That figure, they said, referred to overseas arrivals and departures (OAD) data – which is more about tourist arrivals than migrants. Media and online commentary about the issue led the Australian Bureau of Statistics to last week issue a stern rebuke and fact check, saying the use of OAD data “does not reflect the official ABS definition of migration and may lead to inaccurate conclusions on migration”. OAD data “is a count of border crossings rather than migration. It is best used to understand patterns in traveller movements, such as tourism trends and seasonal travel,” the ABS said. The bureau noted that someone on a temporary visa, who travelled in and out of Australia multiple times, would count as a visitor several times “even though they only migrated here once”. Rizvi said the use of that number by migration critics was “nonsense”.

        • FreedomAdvocateEnglish
          12·
          2 days ago

          According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics in the 12 months to June 2024, the net immigration number was 446k. That’s over 1200 people a day. They’ve increased migration since last June, so an increase to 1500 a day is easily possible. In fact from June 2023-2024 the ABS says the net migration figure was 536,000. Know how many a day that is? 1,468. So it was 1500 a day in 2023-2024 but it’s “racist propaganda” to say it is or could be 1500 a day in 2025?

          “Easily debunked racist propaganda” 🤣

          • Hominine@lemmy.worldEnglish
            11·
            2 days ago

            Media and online commentary about the issue led the Australian Bureau of Statistics to last week issue a stern rebuke and fact check, saying the use of OAD data “does not reflect the official ABS definition of migration and may lead to inaccurate conclusions on migration”.

            I mean you walked onto your own intellectual landmine there; the cognitive dissonance is now your row to hoe. Given that burden there is little surprise in watching you devolve to emojis like every other nervous boomer caught in a lie. Also the the phrase was “Racist propaganda that is easily debunked,” but we’re not allowing reading comprehension to get in our way now are we?

            • FreedomAdvocateEnglish
              1·
              1 day ago

              Did you not even read my comment?

              The ABS, on their own website and documents, show that the net migration - not the OAD data - just 2 years ago was 1500 a day, and last year was 1200 a day. With how quickly this government has been trying to pack electorates with newly imported Labor voters it’s absolutely possible it’s back to 1500 per day.

              So what is it - you believe the ABS or you don’t?

              The ABS are saying “that number isn’t what you think it is” about number A, while number B which is what people think number A is is virtually identical.