Thread by @KirstiMiller30

@JaneCaro Everything we have been told about public finance over the past 40 years has been a neoliberal con job.

@JaneCaro Australia's political elite can afford to spend far more than they are on public health and education, social housing, scientific research and climate change schemes, while eliminating unemployment.

@JaneCaro Many of the Australia’s problems today (extreme wealth inequality, poorly funded public hospitals and schools, chronic underemployment, stagnant wages) are a consequence of neoliberals way of government financing.

@JaneCaro The neoliberals say budget deficits (that they're bad) and government debt (that it burdens future generations).

@JaneCaro The neoliberal economic orthodoxy that has dominated policymaking in Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom and many other countries since the mid-1970s.

@JaneCaro The reigning orthodoxy assumes a couple of things.
Firstly, it assumes every country has a "natural rate" of unemployment and it's unwise to try to force the jobless rate below the natural level because inflation (and wages) will rise too quickly.

@JaneCaro Therefore, it assumes it's better to accept a certain amount of unemployment to keep prices stable (and to keep wage demands weak).

@JaneCaro At the moment, Australia's natural rate of unemployment is assumed to be somewhere between 4 and 5 per cent in reality the true rate in Australia is around 15%.

@JaneCaro The neoliberal economic orthodoxy holds that the national government needs to collect taxes, or borrow from savers, before it can spend money.

Politicians like Morrison repeat this point incessantly.

@JaneCaro When you hear a politician like Morrison & Fryberg saying the government must "live within its means," what they're really saying is the government mustn't spend more than it collects in taxes or borrowings.

@JaneCaro Budget deficits are not always bad. In fact, deficits are often necessary and beneficial. A budget deficit is merely evidence of extra government spending, and government spending boosts the wealth of private sector businesses and households.

@JaneCaro It depends what deficit spending is used for. Increasing the deficit to finance a war is not the same thing as increasing the deficit to build more hospitals and schools & to address climate change or build new infrastructure.

@JaneCaro Investments that will enhance productivity through better health, greater knowledge and skills, improved transport and the like are worth funding, even if it results in a budget deficit.

@JaneCaro The argument (promoted famously by British prime minister Margaret Thatcher) that national governments must tax or borrow before they can spend is wrong.

@JaneCaro Its the other way around, federal governments have to spend money into the economy before they can tax or borrow. Government spending actually precedes taxation.

@JaneCaro Australia needs a wartime effort to achieve "full employment.” Full employment in Australia is not only possible, it's a moral imperative. Anyone who wants a job in Australia should have one.

@JaneCaro Australia must prioritise genuine full employment and the federal governments should spend whatever is necessary to achieve it — no matter the debt or deficit.

@JaneCaro The federal government should run a permanent "Job Guarantee" (JG) program to provide a job to everyone who wants one.

@JaneCaro It could be linked to other economic and social programs, such as a infrastructure projects, such as climate change to create jobs by shifting to zero-emissions.

@JaneCaro The idea of a job guarantee is not radical. The basic human right to a job is outlined in Article 23 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

@JaneCaro A job guarantee program would play the role of an "automatic stabiliser" in the economy by employing more people during downturns and fewer people during boom times.

@JaneCaro In downturns, it would provide jobs for whoever wanted one, soaking up surplus workers who had lost their jobs, helping to prevent incomes falling below a living wage.

@JaneCaro A Job Guarantee would give rise to a "Buffer Employment Ratio (BER)," which is the ratio of Job Guarantee employment to total employment, which economists could use to track inflationary pressures and keep their eye on the capacity of the economy.

@JaneCaro The job guarantee program should be federally funded, but administered at the local level by municipal governments, non-profits and social enterprises.

@JaneCaro Because the job guarantee allows workers to transition into alternative employment rather than joining the ranks of the unemployed, the program helps to cushion the overall economy by supporting wages and

@JaneCaro preserving (or enhancing) skills until the economy recovers and workers begin to transition back into private sector jobs,

@JaneCaro The federal government guarantees the financing, establishes the broad parameters that define the types of jobs the program aims to support, and provides oversight to ensure compliance and accountability.

@JaneCaro Virtually everything else is handled in a decentralised way, bringing decision-making as close as possible to the people and communities who will benefit most directly from the tasks that will be performed. The job guarantee isn't about creating any old job.

@JaneCaro This isn't a make-work scheme, aimed simply at giving the unemployed a shovel in order to justify paying them a wage.

@JaneCaro The idea is to task people with useful work that is valued by the community and to provide compensation for that work in the form of a decent wage and benefit package.

@JaneCaro The Job Guarantee idea is superior to universal basic income because of the economic and social function it provides. A JG would supply everyone with a job, which is socially beneficial,

@JaneCaro and JG workers could be used as a "buffer stock" against inflationary pressures (while still providing everyone with a job).

@JaneCaro Whenever the topic of social security comes up, or when someone in government wants to put more money into education or health care, there's a lot of talk about how everything must be 'paid for' to avoid adding to the federal deficit.

@JaneCaro But have you noticed this never seems to be a problem when it comes to expanding the defence budget, bailing out banks, or giving tax breaks to the wealthiest Australians, even when these measures significantly raise the deficit?

@JaneCaro As long as the votes are there, the federal government can always fund its priorities. That's how it works with the neoliberal economic orthodoxy.