Fears of inflation, coupled with political imperatives to provide relief to households, leads governments to argue that particular budgetary expenditures, such as the Energy Bill Relief rebate are not inflationary (as they bring the CPI down). That would be magical, but this fairytale mistakes the measure (CPI) for the thing (inflation), as can be seen by tracing the actual impact of the rebate at the household and macroeconomic level.

In a ghost-written opinion piece in InDaily today, I argued that the industry initiatives and regulatory responses to the impending closure of the 3G mobile network and the roll out of energy smart meters is inadequate. Here I note that this inadequacy has its roots in neoliberalism.

Rather than reviewing Yanis Varoufarkis’ book on Technofeudalism, I want to add some thoughts from my own theoretical journey in relation to dominant modes of production and the definition of production and consumption. These ideas, and an insistence that production and surplus extraction be considered on their own terms, help open up the idea of technofeudalism.

It is Festival time in Adelaide, but we need to properly acknowledge the crucial role that public (taxpayers) funding plays in entertainment and the discussion of critical issues.

The SA Premier, Peter Malinauskas claims that South Australia has full employment. A quick check of ABS data shows that this is not true, unless he is using an economic definition which renders unemployed people invisible and limits policies that might support them.