Ms Sloan and the volume of tobacco consumed

Mon, 16 Jun 2014  |  

Judith Sloan, who is Honorary Professorial Fellow at the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research at the University of Melbourne and who has a Master of Arts with First Class Honours in economics from the University of Melbourne and a Master of Science in economics from the London School of Economics penned an article in The Australian today making four criticisms of my analysis of tobacco consumption, which appeared here https://thekouk.com/blog/the-australian-s-claim-on-tobacco-go-up-in-smoke.html#.U56tQsa26f0

My reply to each of those four items is below:

Ms Sloan claims that my work includes "expenditure figures [that] do not allow us to know precisely what has happened to quantity."

Well, the figures do allow us to precisely let us know what is happening to the consumption of tobacco and cigarettes. Sorry Ms Sloan, but the figures I used are the chain volume or quantity measures, as was stated several times in the initial post, which is, by definition the VOLUME of tobacco and cigarette consumed by the household sector on a quarterly basis back to 1959. This is a pretty basic misunderstanding for Ms Sloan when it comes to the construct of the national accounts by the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Next Ms Sloan claims I was wrong because "through most of 2013, total spending on cigarettes rose... we can be reasonably confident the number of cigarettes consumed rose in 2013."

Well, if we sum the volume of tobacco consumed in 2013 versus 2012, we find that consumption fell 0.9 per cent. To be sure, the quarterly data are choppy, but it is pretty clear the amount of tobacco consumed in 2013 fell when compared with 2012 (and every single year compared to 1960, by the way).

I am not sure whether it is useful to go further after this embarrassment for Ms Sloan...but I will.

The third item that Ms Sloan uses to try to discredit my findings it to suggest "while it is true expenditure on cigarettes fell in the first quarter of this year, it needs to be borne in mind that the rate of excise on cigarettes rose sharply, by 12.5 per cent, in December last year". Well, yes! And plain packaging had been in for over a year and presumably a few smokers had successfully given up due to plain packaging. Not sure if Ms Sloan realises this actually supports my analysis showing a reduction in tobacco consumption, but hey. Whatever.

And finally, the lame arse excuse of the decade - Ms Sloan claims that "the seasonally adjusted figures are subject to substantial revision". Well, um, yes, um, of course they are but what if the ABS revised consumption lower? Plain packaging will have been even more successful that first thought. Ms Sloan claims that "the March figure will almost certainly be adjusted to show a smaller decline". Huh? What? It is curious in that our Professorial Fellow of Economics has stooped to arguing for a data revision which may or may not happen to support her argument yet at the same time acknowledging there may be "a smaller decline". Um, an own goal it would appear.

And I am happy to see the next year or two or three of data to see that rebound in tobacco consumption Ms Sloan obviously hopes to see. I suspect she'll be wrong...again.

 

comments powered by Disqus

THE LATEST FROM THE KOUK

Will the Banking Royal Commission undermine the economy?

Tue, 24 Apr 2018

This article first appeared on the Yahoo7 Finance website at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/will-banking-royal-commission-undermine-economy-054126660.html 

----------------------------------------------------------------------  

Will the Banking Royal Commission undermine the economy?

 For those of us worried about the health of the economy, economic growth and the objective of full-employment, the findings of the banking Royal Commission are extremely worrying.

There is a real risk that the revelations about the misconduct and devious practises of the banks will have the dual effect of undermining already fragile sentiment and will force the banks to tighten up on their credit policies. If ether of both of these happen, there would be a downgrading of investment and spending plans in an economy that is already growing below its long run trend. Sound, financially secure and well-run banks are the bedrock of a modern and successful economy.

Banks and other financial institutions allow consumers to borrow money for their house, to fund some of their personal expenditure while at the same time, often manage their superannuation savings. They also help business, big and small, expand and invest.

Why your tax is about to be pushed into the spotlight

Mon, 23 Apr 2018

This article first appeared on the Yahoo 7 Finance website at this link: https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/tax-pushed-spotlight-012812764.html 

 -------------------------------------------------------

Why your tax is about to be pushed into the spotlight

The budget is just a few weeks away. The Federal election is likely within a year.

Over this time, you will be hearing a lot more about tax. Some will claim the tax-take of the government in Australia is high and that cuts in company and personal income taxes are a necessary policy aim. Others will claim a decent amount of tax revenue is needed to fund the services the people demand from government, namely health care, education, roads, defence, pensions and the like. Closing loopholes and getting rid of unfair tax breaks, collecting more tax in other words, will allow billions of dollars to be directed from the wealthiest so that these services can be funded.

All this assumes, quite plainly, that responsible economic policy delivers budget surpluses when the economy is strong and allows for deficits when the economy is soft or downright weak.

But let’s have a look at a few of these claims on tax against some hard and fast facts.