311–316 of 316 posts
So the key question is what allows Australian companies to raise prices and improve profit margins in this situation? It could be monopoly or insufficient competition.
Monopoly/Duopoly is a natural result of competitive advantage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Only 30% of people have mortgages, why should the remaining 70% care Because the remaining 70% rent, with many wanting to own a property someday. Higher mortgages mean higher rent. Australia has very little social housing. Renting for families is an unpleasant experience. You can be forced to move with little warning, and finding a new rental in your area can be very difficult and sole destroying. So many would lov…
ABS figures from the 2021 census https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/housing/housing-cen... >: 31.0% owned outright, 35.0% owned with a mortgage, 30.6% rented.
I just made an assumption :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Only 30% of people have mortgages, why should the remaining 70% care Because the remaining 70% rent, with many wanting to own a property someday. Higher mortgages mean higher rent. Australia has very little social housing. Renting for families is an unpleasant experience. You can be forced to move with little warning, and finding a new rental in your area can be very difficult and sole destroying. So many would lov…
>Higher mortgages mean higher rent But lower mortgages also mean higher rent. I've never seen rent go down. Literally everything means higher rent. Go figure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it’s not the only factor but surely it’s the major factor right now? Sure, we had a supply shock, but then we printed the most currency in history and got soaring inflation.
Nope, doesn’t seem that way, the world is reeling from a variety of economic shocks right now, from covid to the Ukraine war and resource-prices fallout. “Printed the most money in history” is also one of those talking points that hides a massively complicated truth and doesn’t mean what people think it means. Soundbite economics (really soundbite anything) should be considered harmful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Qantas has raised prices to ensure the flight demand meets what it can supply. This is weasly language for "price gouging". There's literally no problem with Qantas just selling the seats they had at reasonable prices and then saying, "sorry, no more seats available". Instead, you're trying to portray it as totally natural and just that they take advantage of any circumstances to squeeze as much out of their custom…
Qantas is particularly scummy. They received over $2B in taxpayer money in bailouts and other concessions, stood down thousands of employees and did a $500M stock buyback.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/qantas-commits-to-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there is 1000 units of something but demand for 5000 units, you increase the price until demand equals 1000 units. There is no conspiracy. This is fundamental economics. “Market-think” is about freedom. The alternative is “authoritarian-think” and that always ends in tears. Just start setting prices by government decree and see what happens.
In the case where products can be profitably produced at a cheaper price, the people should band together, put aside the market system, and produce all 5000 units. More people are served. If its costs $100 to fly somebody from Sydney to Melbourne and Qantas is selling tickets for $1000, Australians should run an airline and sell tickets for $200. Governments should get into the business of keeping markets competitive…
Airlines are also highly capital intensive. It costs a lot of money to own and maintain a plan