Republic Resume
4.9
Based on 56 reviews
powered by Google
Ngoc Tien Nguyen
Ngoc Tien Nguyen
16:58 31 May 20
Malcolm is a very professional resume expert. He responds to emails promptly and always finish everything on time.... Malcolm also gives me a lot of honest advices and support. He also asked a lot of mind-intrigued questions that give me a clearer view about my career path. Last but not least, he had been able to help me shorten my four-page resume to a career-focused with two pages only along with a wonderful cover letter.read more
Erin Carnachan
Erin Carnachan
00:54 17 Feb 20
After googling and researching different companies, I contacted Malcolm to re-write my very old and outdated resume.... Malcolm was quick to respond, gave me an upfront quote and got straight to work. Malcolm worked with me to come up with a professionally written resume that really highlighted my skills and experiences and a cover letter that specifically targeted the job I wanted to apply for. Malcolm has been friendly, professional and efficient. I highly recommend Malcolm from Resume Republic.read more
T 2020
T 2020
00:07 03 Oct 19
Very prompt, pleasure to deal with. Highly Recommended.. understands how to deliver a quality resume by capturing... career wins in a short and concise way.read more
Natasha Lockett
Natasha Lockett
00:32 28 Sep 19
Malcom was extremely professional and efficient. Yes there are questions you need to provide answers for to Malcom of... course and the quicker you reply to him the quicker your resume is tailored to your needs. Would highly recommend to anyone.read more
Eliane Lim
Eliane Lim
12:04 27 Sep 19
Great Service! I strongly recommend Malcolm service! He did a fantastic resume for me and I got a job within a month!
Geuel Manaen Manzano II
Geuel Manaen Manzano II
09:44 20 Aug 19
Very professional. Replies promptly. I used the resume he made for my application for Engineers Australia and it... passed. I would recommend him for people who need to update their resume.read more
SW Y
SW Y
12:35 15 Aug 19
Was so lucky to find these people especially Malcolm. He edited my horrible resume to the top quality written one. He... was also so fast and such professional writer that I could trust 100%. Anyone who needs help with resume writing, I strongly recommend here.read more
Next Reviews

Why Australia isn’t aiming for ‘full employment’ anymore

I’m not a big fan on the media because of the spin, opinion passed off as news, gatekeeping out important stories, etc – and I used to be a journalist! But this one is a cracker… I’ve edited it but you can read the full story below. Written by the ABC’s Gareth Hutchens.

Why don’t politicians want as many people as possible to be employed?

Economists said the government could achieve it by using its spending power to cover shortfalls in economic activity left by the private sector and to lift investment and consumption to the point where a fully employed economy was maintained.

In Australia, it arrived with the Labor government’s 1945 White Paper on Full Employment, which lay the groundwork for official full employment from 1946 to 1975.

But the idea and practice of “full employment” was never universally welcomed.

In 1943, the brilliant Polish economist Michał Kalecki wrote an essay explaining why. Titled The Political Aspects of Full Employment, it became famous, years later, when its predictions came to pass. Kalecki put the problem this way.

 Kalecki said the arguments business leaders used against full employment were as follows:

  • They disliked government interference,
  • They disliked the idea of governments subsidising consumption and making public investments and
  • They were concerned about the social and political changes that would result from full employment.

Employers were worried about an increase in workers bargaining power.

“Under a regime of permanent full employment, the ‘sack’ would cease to play its role as a disciplinary measure,” he reasoned. “The social position of the boss would be undermined, and the self-assurance and class-consciousness of the working class would grow.”

Employers wanted ‘discipline in the factories’ and ‘political stability’. This was published in 1943, so attitudes, rhetoric, and the economic environment were different.

In Australia, economics students in the 1960s and 1970s were well aware of Kalecki’s essay. The “Keynesian consensus” of the post-war years was beginning to fray.

From 1946 to 1975, Australia’s national unemployment rate averaged below 2 per cent as successive federal governments intentionally used deficit spending to maintain full employment.

The economy, like economies in other Western nations, had grown strongly for decades. The number of industrial disputes had increased each decade too.

The share of national income going to workers in the form of wages and salaries had also risen, peaking in the 1970s, but then things came to a head.

Dropping the ‘full employment’ approach

Major advanced economies, including Australia’s, were hit by “stagflation” in the 1970s — slowing growth, rising inflation, and rising unemployment.

The complications metastasised through the decade, and business leaders were desperate to find a solution. Full employment was abandoned as an official policy in Australia.

A new policy was adopted: officials would pursue a level of ‘natural’ unemployment that kept a lid on inflation (i.e. on wages and prices). That policy remains in place today.

Following the reform era of the 1980s and 1990s, which was a direct response to the economic problems of the 1970s, industrial action has fallen to its lowest level in the post-war era, and wages are growing at their slowest pace in the post-war era.

Global systems have been deregulated, fixed exchange rates have been floated, high barriers to global investment and trade have been removed, and union membership has plummeted as unions’ bargaining power has been dismantled.

Even if Australia adopted genuine full employment again, Kalecki’s old analysis wouldn’t be directly applicable, but the political aspects of this labour market policy have never gone away.

As Kalecki pointed out, by the early 1940s business leaders accepted that some form of government intervention would be coming after the war to boost employment. They argued that government intervention should be used to stimulate private investment.

“This may be done by lowering the rate of interest, by the reduction of income tax, or by subsidising private investment directly in this or another form,” he said.

Why does that sound familiar?

 

Full story: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-01/why-wouldnt-governments-want-full-employment/12836424

Put your best foot forward

Malcolm builds expert resumes, cover letters and LinkedIn profiles, which unleash an unbeatable business case to promote you as a 'must have' asset to an employer.