Jump to content
Rocket Salad

The Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

No worries. While the stimulus wasn't well implemented, it was implemented. Schools got halls, people kept working. People got batts, their energy costs go down, and people kept working. If you blame the govt because a few people died due to a few cowboy operators, then you better string up the transport minister as I heard someone died on the roads today.

 

The main reason work has dried up as far as we re hearing is that multinationals are tightening up the purse strings due to international factors not particularly because of what's going on here. Look beyond our shores and you will still see that we are the envy of he world, the only reason we not know how good we've got it is because it didn't Get as bad as it could have.

I was in Ireland over Christmas, it's friggin nirvana here in comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Handouts made a big difference to us, and to my parents. As well as increases to the disability pension under Rudd, and which affected us both as well. I sit like Roxii. But my opinion will mean nothing when it comes to the election, one way or the other. Our seat is safe regardless of which govt and their circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Handouts made a big difference to us, and to my parents. As well as increases to the disability pension under Rudd, and which affected us both as well. I sit like Roxii. But my opinion will mean nothing when it comes to the election, one way or the other. Our seat is safe regardless of which govt and their circumstances.

 

FFS Goughy slow down. I can't read that fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should hear me talk! Anyway, don't you have a Melbourne thread to comment in? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realise he held senior ministerial roles in the howard govt and was generally considered to be a thoughtful and diligent minister.

 

Heck. He even use to be on friendly terms with gillard when liberals were in office.

 

Leaving aside the politics, the labor govt is massively short of the howard govt, from a governing perspective.

 

Funniest thing i read this week:

 

Journo - does this feel like last days of roman empire?

 

Unnamed labor mp - nah mate, even rome was good once...

 

I'm talking about in the future. When he's PM. And under pressure. And unscripted. Prove me wrong Tony. Prove. Me. Wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have voted Labour in every election bar one, the behaviour of the party leaders is appalling, the policy Vacuum even worse. Tony is a better option which is disappointing.

 

For me Doug Cameron should go lower house and lead the party following the pending election loss, man of true Labour values.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which stimulus package was that?

The one where they paid for school halls at twice the going rate?

The one where they paid for batts to be installed in peoples roof and where 4 young guys died and hundreds of houses burnt down?

Or the one where they mailed out cheques (not to me, mind you) so people could piss it up against a wall, have a slap of the cardies at the local or buy a big screen telly at Harvey Norman?

 

Was there another stimulus package Im not aware of that wasnt a total clusterf-k?

 

I know Im just a dumb tradie, but I do read just fine. Thanks anyway for the insult.

 

Seriously is this the sum total of your knowledge regarding the stimulus? Talk about drinking the cool-aid.

 

You don't have to believe me. Or Roxii. Or Gillard or Swan. How about this guy? A Nobel Laureate in Economics no less. Will you listen to him? In case you don't actually read it here's a few highlights for you.

 

"Kevin Rudd, who was prime minister when the crisis struck, put in place one of the best-designed Keynesian stimulus packages of any country. He realised it was important to act early, with money that would be spent quickly, but that there was a risk the crisis would not be over soon. So the first part of the stimulus was cash grants, followed by investments, which would take longer to put into place.

Rudd's stimulus worked: Australia had the shortest and shallowest of recessions of the advanced industrial countries."

 

"While the focus for the moment is on public-sector waste, that waste pales in comparison to the waste of resources resulting from a malfunctioning private financial sector, which in America already amounts to trillions of dollars. Likewise, the waste from not fully utilising society's resources - the inevitable consequence of not having had such a quick and strong stimulus - exceeds that of the public sector by an order of magnitude"

 

"Australia's deficit as a percentage of GDP is less than half that of the US; its gross national debt is less than a third.

Deficit fetishism never makes sense - the national debt is only one side of a country's balance sheet. Cutting back on high-return investments (such as education, infrastructure and technology) just to reduce the deficit is truly foolish, but especially so in the case of a country such as Australia, whose debt is so low."

 

Joseph Stiglitz is a professor at Columbia University and a Nobel laureate in economics

 

http://www.theage.com.au/business/in-praise-of-stimulus-20100808-11q8e.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah f-k it, lets just keep on spending like drunken sailors in the hope of avoiding a recession.

I mean , its not like you or me will be paying it back to the Chinese. It will be our kids' kids.

 

f-king funny how some people think. Cant keep trying to spend our way out of mismanagement folks, regardless if our debt is low or high by international standards.

I wonder how many of you Abbott haters work for the bloated public sector built by Rudd/Gillard and know that you may actually have to do something once TA is in power, or lose your high paying, poor productivity jobs.

 

There is no where for me to hide from poor productivity. If I dont get shit done, I dont get paid, unlike too many of you it seems.

Peace out. Im outta here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many of you Abbott haters work for the bloated public sector built by Rudd/Gillard and know that you may actually have to do something once TA is in power, or lose your high paying, poor productivity jobs.

 

 

Now he want Triathlon Australia to run the country. :shocking:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Now he want Triathlon Australia to run the country. :shocking:

 

 

They'd probably do a better job than Gillard...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously is this the sum total of your knowledge regarding the stimulus? Talk about drinking the cool-aid.

 

You don't have to believe me. Or Roxii. Or Gillard or Swan. How about this guy? A Nobel Laureate in Economics no less. Will you listen to him? In case you don't actually read it here's a few highlights for you.

 

"Kevin Rudd, who was prime minister when the crisis struck, put in place one of the best-designed Keynesian stimulus packages of any country. He realised it was important to act early, with money that would be spent quickly, but that there was a risk the crisis would not be over soon. So the first part of the stimulus was cash grants, followed by investments, which would take longer to put into place.

Rudd's stimulus worked: Australia had the shortest and shallowest of recessions of the advanced industrial countries."

 

"While the focus for the moment is on public-sector waste, that waste pales in comparison to the waste of resources resulting from a malfunctioning private financial sector, which in America already amounts to trillions of dollars. Likewise, the waste from not fully utilising society's resources - the inevitable consequence of not having had such a quick and strong stimulus - exceeds that of the public sector by an order of magnitude"

 

"Australia's deficit as a percentage of GDP is less than half that of the US; its gross national debt is less than a third.

Deficit fetishism never makes sense - the national debt is only one side of a country's balance sheet. Cutting back on high-return investments (such as education, infrastructure and technology) just to reduce the deficit is truly foolish, but especially so in the case of a country such as Australia, whose debt is so low."

 

Joseph Stiglitz is a professor at Columbia University and a Nobel laureate in economics

 

http://www.theage.co...0808-11q8e.html

 

 

Wasting your time with Tinny, he's in his shelter with the tinfoil hat on until Mr Rabbit is elected. All them facts n stuff could have been written by Bob Menzies and it still wouldn't get through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Wasting your time with Tinny, he's in his shelter with the tinfoil hat on until Mr Rabbit is elected. All them facts n stuff could have been written by Bob Menzies and it still wouldn't get through.

 

 

Thing is . I could quote you economists saying the opposite.

 

Labor's net position will be 200b in debt plus significant forecast deficits over forward estimates. It started with money in the bank and no debt.

 

Ultimately people have to ask if this is a sustainable projectory. While we had the gfc we also had a massively favourable terms of trade over 09-11, and that is going backwards now.

 

For me labor is not capable of fixing the balance sheet. Look at qld. Qld had credit downgrade and newman has made cuts. Swan rails against this. What levers does a premier have other than cutting expenditure (and public sector jobs) or raising taxes? Swan not so good with the raising tax side of things, so he should be paying attention to what real cuts look like, not the pretend getting tough he blathers about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is . I could quote you economists saying the opposite.

 

Labor's net position will be 200b in debt plus significant forecast deficits over forward estimates. It started with money in the bank and no debt.

 

Ultimately people have to ask if this is a sustainable projectory. While we had the gfc we also had a massively favourable terms of trade over 09-11, and that is going backwards now.

 

For me labor is not capable of fixing the balance sheet. Look at qld. Qld had credit downgrade and newman has made cuts. Swan rails against this. What levers does a premier have other than cutting expenditure (and public sector jobs) or raising taxes? Swan not so good with the raising tax side of things, so he should be paying attention to what real cuts look like, not the pretend getting tough he blathers about.

 

 

Well, yes

 

But none of that matters because we're doing better than Greece and Tony Abbott wears speedos

 

[/Laborphile mode]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rabbit Inc will always say it would have been different with them running the show...easy to say !!

Most wont even acknowledge the GLOBAL financial crisis and the massive issues Krudd Inc needed to deal with.

I find it childish and somewhat stupid to be blaming a government for the deaths of some contractors working on projects that were funded by a stimulus package...a slippery slope you have there.

No government can work effectively with virtually no majority and have to pander to a few independents...the opposition just stamps everything with NO and then sits back and yells that the government is not achieving anything...crazy stuff!! Then the election rolls around Labor will be smashed and Rabbit gets a massive majority ...politics really is warped.

 

Tinman you must live in a different OZ to me ...haha

Edited by DingoDave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think it would be any different if Abbott took office when Rudd did and walked into the GFC?

 

 

Absolutely

 

China kept us afloat during the GFC, not replacing school halls and mailing $900 cheques to dead people

 

There is no reason whatsoever why we should have a debt of nearly $300 billion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely

 

China kept us afloat during the GFC, not replacing school halls and mailing $900 cheques to dead people

 

There is no reason whatsoever why we should have a debt of nearly $300 billion

 

According to who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

According to who?

 

 

According to anyone who:

 

( a ) knows anything about economics; and

( b ) is not an ALP apologist

 

Perhaps you can tell me what we have to show for our $300 billion, because I haven't been able to find anyone else who can...

Edited by IronJimbo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
According to anyone who: ( a ) knows anything about economics; and ( b ) is not an ALP apologist Perhaps you can tell me what we have to show for our $300 billion, because I haven't been able to find anyone else who can...

No worries. Can you be a bit more specific? Maybe some names or links?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will preface this by saying I’m not drawn to either party – I would be best defined as a ‘swinging voter’.

 

Like many, I can’t see the ALP getting anywhere near being re-elected, but I don’t like Abbott either…

 

 

Perhaps you can tell me what we have to show for our $300 billion, because I haven't been able to find anyone else who can...

 

 

I can tell you – we have a nation that avoided recession when every other advanced nation in the world basically fell into a black hole of economic crap! I am luck to live half my life in Australia, and half in UK/Europe and I can tell you that you DO NOT want to have their situation. We have dozens of friends who lost jobs (I mean, when you sit around with 30 friends and 12 of them have recently been made redundant, it makes you think about how lucky we are in Australia).

 

I was in the UK the week when Woolworths went bankrupt, along with a dozen other key national chains. Unemployment on some parts of Europe at 60%. Have you watched the news in the last few years? These were not just mum-and-dad shops going out of business, but massive national chains employing tens of thousands of people….

 

As at this week, $2.5 million british people are out of work (unemployment almost 8%) – which they are really pleased with, given their recent economic turmoil…

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21857396

 

Australia has sailed through with low unemployment, low interest rates, un-precedented consecutive decades of growth….

 

That’s what we got for $300 Billion….basically every economist agrees that we sailed through the GFC better than almost any other country.

 

In terms of the national debt/GFC thing – I regard both parties has having a hand in the successful avoidance of recession – the Libs for having surpluses and low national debt in the early 2000’s, and the ALP for their implementation of stimulus from 2007 onwards.

 

I’m often amused by people’s objection to the national debt. I mean, our national debt is a piddly amount compared to our GDP and the debt of other nations (sure, saying $300 Billion looks big, but that’s against our nearly $1.4 TRILLION economy)….. our GDP (as at 2011) was more than $70,000 per person…..that is seriously unbelievably good compared to anywhere, ever!

 

https://www.google.com.au/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:AUS&dl=en&hl=en&q=gdp%20australia

 

The national debt is really a non-issue for those who understand how the world works.

 

There are no economists saying Australia is over-exposed, there are none saying we are in huge debt, there are none concerned about future prospects….

 

I think it was Tinman above who described himself as a ‘tradie’. Without knowing Mr Tinman, I assume that (if he is self employed) he has a lease/loan over his work vehicle/ute? He probably has an account with suppliers? Many tradies will also have leases/loans over other key equipment (depending on what they do for a living etc).

 

Debt is a part of any business. Its how we get things. If Virgin airlines buy 10 new planes tomorrow, they will do so using debt.

 

It’s how you buy a house (very few would be able to buy a house without a mortgage).

 

I have a tradie friend who has opinions much like Tinman (ie national debt is bad). Yet he has a loan over 2 work vehicles, accounts and numerous suppliers/wholesalers as well as a company credit card and other forward looking obligations (mobile phones, IT equipment on contracts etc). He lives in a house where the bank owns the majority through debt he has with them….

 

If we use the same argument against him (ie get rid of your debt, debt is bad) he goes to being an employee with someone else (cause he wouldn’t have funds up front to buy necessary equipment) and he would be renting (to get rid of the mortgage). Which would be better for his future prospects??

 

Even people who understand how they use debt to their own advantage don’t understand when a nation has debt?

 

I have limited respect for those people who use debt for their own business, fully accepting the benefits of how they have managed to grow their company, buy their house, and live their lifestyle by using debt but then say every nation should be 100% debt free…

 

Sure, if you made an argument that the Australia’s national debt was too large, or not well managed, or did not lead to benefits then sure, that’s a whole other argument….

 

But if you are going to say “debt is bad, we should have NO debt ever” then you are an idiot! Especially if you are yourself using debt to advance your own interests…why don’t YOU get rid of all your debt today???

 

But using simplistic terms like ‘Australia’s Credit Card’ simply does not dissuade anyone who ACTUALLY understands the world…..

 

And this brings me to my issue with the Libs at the moment…..

 

And I make it clear that I cannot see the ALP as a decent alternative for election…..however, I feel that the Liberal are simply targeting the unthinking masses with one liners:

 

“stop the boats”

 

“reduce the waste”

 

‘Australia’s Credit Card”

 

“Great big new tax”

 

These are one-liners, they are not policies or even a hint at a direction….

 

I seriously dunno who I’m gonna vote for – at the current time they all appear to be lost causes in my book.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I seriously dunno who I’m gonna vote for – at the current time they all appear to be lost causes in my book.

 

I think this is why you see more and more results of the "Anyone but them" type.

People see little difference with either party, so if they're doing OK, leave them there.

Once they get on the nose and the opposition isn't a total wreck, turf them out.

It's one of the reasons I don't understand the anti Abbott comments.

His personal views are from the 50s, but so were Howard's and people still survived his reign.

I'm personally more concerned with not giving disproportionate power to single agenda\wedge parties or "independents".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole minority govt has been crap. Even more crap when the govt is crap. I talk lots of crap!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working in the financial sector, i am often surprised at how little people still know about the GFC. Years after the main event and its continuation since. It just doesn't register on peoples radars how serious it was/still is.

 

If you think that it really wasn't that bigger deal, then you probably have to have some thanks to the Labour government for that, along with a number of other factors.

 

I think it was easy for the Libs to take pot shots now, but they would have had to have done something almost identical in order to help the economy tick along and get us over the worst of it. Debt isn't bad - Tony Abbott has more debt than the Australian economy, based on a income percentage basis - yet we don't hold that against him nor consider him a poor economic manager as a result. Even billionaires call their Bank manager and ask for a loan on occassions.

 

We are essentially the gold standard for the world economy. People just seem so negative about an economy that is some sort of first world miracle.

 

Who to vote for in the next election? Who knows, but one thing i won't be considering - is the poor state of our economy when casting my vote.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, if you made an argument that the Australia’s national debt was too large, or not well managed, or did not lead to benefits then sure, that’s a whole other argument….

 

That is, and has always been, my argument

 

I am not against debt. It is quite likely that a coalition government would have gone into debt as well. Let's remember that they supported the first stimulus package, after all

 

Treasury estimated in 2010 that the government's stimulus saved 200,000 jobs though. That works out at $1.5 million per job

 

As I've said before, that's like curing the flu with chemotherapy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That is, and has always been, my argument

 

I am not against debt. It is quite likely that a coalition government would have gone into debt as well. Let's remember that they supported the first stimulus package, after all

 

Treasury estimated in 2010 that the government's stimulus saved 200,000 jobs though. That works out at $1.5 million per job

 

As I've said before, that's like curing the flu with chemotherapy...

 

 

 

And it I think its perfectly valid to argue against HOW the stimulus was injected into the economy.

 

Problem is though, in hindsight its easy to judge....when faced with the prospect of a recession, driven by the global economy, how much is 'enough' to inject into the economy?

 

$10 billion? 500 Billion? A trillion??

 

Its all a bit of an unknown and its only with hindsight that people can reflect on how well (or otherwise) it was done...

 

Its easy to poke holes in it now, and to come up with one liners like 'Australia's credit card' but the fact is that it WORKED, unbelievably well.

 

Will (above) said this:

 

Working in the financial sector, i am often surprised at how little people still know about the GFC. Years after the main event and its continuation since. It just doesn't register on peoples radars how serious it was/still is.

 

And that is exactly the point - the government HAS done a good job at protecting Australia from the GFC. Anyone who has travelled on business (or, indeed holidays) will know whats its been like in many overseas countries for hte past couple of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bunny_729-420x0.jpg

 

Surely it is over now?

 

Her PR people need a seeing to.

Of all people... How could they invite that dipshit into her official residence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her PR people need a seeing to.

Of all people... How could they invite that dipshit into her official residence?

 

 

It's kind of like a plain looking guy or girl going out nightclubbing looking to pick up, best way to improve their chances is go with the butt ugliest guy or girl so they look spectacular in comparison...

 

Now Julia for a brief time looked favourable and reminded us all things could be a lot worse if Kyle was running the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That photo with dipshit was taken during a visit or something at a special center that deals with children who have a limited time left to live. I can't remember what it was exactly, but saw it on the project. Like him, her, or not, it was for a very worthy cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Total govt receipts 09-10, 284b.

 

Total govt receipts 10-11, 302b.

 

Estimate in 11-12 (12-13 budget papers) 330b.

 

 

Payments 10-11, 346b.

 

Estimated payments 11-12, 371b.

 

Budget expenses 07-08, 280b. Budget revenue 07-08, 303b.

Edited by Formerly known as BOTP II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just received a nice letter from my local Member, Tony Abbott, inviting me to a pubic forum.

 

While I don't agree with most of his politics, I happen to think Tony is alright as a man and I respect someone who stands by their convictions.

 

But the letter made me cringe - a gratuitous use of "fair dinkum" started it off. Does anyone except politicians still say this?

 

Then throughout the letter he refers to Parliament and Government in their proper noun senses with capitalising them. Anyone who understands and has a passion for the law (which you would really hope all politicians do) would not make that mistake.

 

Makes me sad. But it won't matter. He will still be the next PM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask him whether he's going to pull his finger out & go sub 13 for his next IM, or whether he's just going to coast around the course like a bucket-lister and stop a real Ironman from getting a start?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And that is exactly the point - the government HAS done a good job at protecting Australia from the GFC. Anyone who has travelled on business (or, indeed holidays) will know whats its been like in many overseas countries for hte past couple of years.

 

 

For a look at how bad things can get after the GFC, check out the data on Ireland:

 

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2013/04/ireland-the-greatest-property-bust-of-all/

 

Bear in mind as well that prior to the GFC Ireland was in a similar economic position to Australia in that the Govt. had been running regular budget surpluses, record boom in property prices etc, ample foreign investment. and, unlike Greece, citizens who pay their taxes. Obviously Ireland differs in that they don't have natural resources so couldn't literally dig themselves out of a hole, but the fact remains that for relatively little outlay Australia has (so far) dodged a bullet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ireland was greatly dependent on the financial services industry as a significant portion of their economy. They were far more reliant on countries badly affected by the GFC and specifically on sectors worst hit.

 

Australia on the other hand was heavily dependent on countries less affected by the GFC (primarily China.) In fact, without the sectors of the economy that were exporting to these markets (e.g. mining, agriculture, tourism) Australia would have found itself deep in recession just like many other countries in the western world. It was not good financial management by this government that saved Australia from anything. What's more, the money that was injected into the economy is agreed by even those most forgiving of the ALP to have been distributed in a manner far less effective than would have been optimal. The ROI on projects directly involving the government (school halls, insulation, etc.) was extremely poor and much of the money distribute to individuals was spent directly on imported goods sending much of the cash straight out of the country to stimulate foreign markets. It had the desired effect in the short term but could have had a much greater long term benefit for the nation if it had ben more wisely implemented.

 

The asian financial crisis of 1997 caused a much greater disruption to the key drivers of the Australian economy than the GFC did. We escaped the worst effects of the GFC through good fortune much more so than through good management.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The strength, and prudential practices of our banks put us in a massively better place than ireland.

 

My understanding is irelands property boom was financed by lots of bad debt. The very thing triggering the gfc. With rising bad debt, credit growth dropped, construction activity collapsed. Knock on effects etc.

 

I'm sceptical that the cure for the damage caused by lots of bad private debt, is to load up on public debt. On the otherhand debt per se is not a bad thing and debt can be productive (if it generates returns greater than the costs).

Edited by Formerly known as BOTP II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gillard goes to China and her latest approval poll rises.

 

If Labor can keep her overseas for another 6 months, they may have a chance...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Australia on the other hand was heavily dependent on countries less affected by the GFC (primarily China.) In fact, without the sectors of the economy that were exporting to these markets (e.g. mining, agriculture, tourism) Australia would have found itself deep in recession just like many other countries in the western world. It was not good financial management by this government that saved Australia from anything.

 

 

OK, if this is true, would we not have expected our terms of trade to be improving at the time?

 

Looking at the ABS's GDP figures, (GDP, % change) shows two quarters of anaemic growth, Mar & Jun '09, followed by only 0.3% in Sep. '09. (I recall two quarters of slightly negative growth post-GFC, so obviously these are adjusted/massaged figures) However, our terms of trade declined for a full year starting in the Dec '08 quarter (-0.8%, -5%, -8,7%, -2.7%), before showing 2.6% growth in Dec '09 then 5.5% and 10% in the following two quarters, so the "exports saved our ass" didn't really appear in our national accounts until Mar 2010.

 

Exports pre-GFC peaked at $75bn in Dec '08 quarter, then went 72, 62, 58 & 59bn in successive quarters before starting to rise again.

 

That appears to be a year of potential shit hitting the fan before the export/mining/China train came to the rescue.

 

As for "stimulus money disappearing overseas", imports peaked at 73bn in Sep '08, then went 71, 67, 63 & 61 before starting to rebound.

 

Indeed, looking at the GDP figures, the biggest effect of the GFC in any sector was household savings; typically 0.5% during Howard's era, it picked up to 3-4% in '07 until it accelerated from Sep '08 (5.2%, 6.9%, 8.5%, 9.1% in subsequent quarters) and it hasn't come back down since, hovering around 10% now.

 

I'll freely admit I'm no economist, so perhaps I'm looking at the wrong data, but it seems pretty clear that households radically cut back on spending post GFC and our exports also declined significantly. I'm not sure what series measures private output (non-household) but I don't recall industry going gangbusters at the time, so if the size of our economy didn't decline at all, who filled in the blanks?

Edited by Donncha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, just looking at quarterly GDP figures, Jun '08 was $333bn. Since then $302bn in total has been added to the economy (incl. Dec '12 qtr), which just so happens to be about the same as our public debt.

 

So if the Govt. had run a balanced budget, we'd basically have had 4.5 years of zero growth. I'd say that would have been pleasant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, just looking at quarterly GDP figures, Jun '08 was $333bn. Since then $302bn in total has been added to the economy (incl. Dec '12 qtr), which just so happens to be about the same as our public debt.

 

So if the Govt. had run a balanced budget, we'd basically have had 4.5 years of zero growth. I'd say that would have been pleasant.

 

If they had done that unemployment would have hit 8%+ - meaning an even bigger decline in revenues and a corresponding increase in welfare payments - most of the 'savings' would have been illusory and we would still be in deficit. The time to cut spending (or at least refine the quality of the spend) is when the economy is booming - something Howard spectacularly failed to do - rather he spend boom revenues to pork barrel the nuclear family and create the entitlement culture of the middle and upper classes ...

 

Unfortunately we have two centre right parties whose default position is socialist style welfare - the ALP is into traditional welfare and the Liberals and Nats are into middle class and upper class welfare in a way that now rivals traditional welfare. Between them they have strangled the federal budget - billions are spent each year on really stupid handouts and there is no money left for the things the government should be doing - like infrastructure (who on here is enjoying Sydney's 3 hour commutes?), education and training. The coalition's latest penny pinching will see savings of perhaps $15 billion over a decade to deliver a dud version of the NBN. Cutting out the breeder bonus for one or two years would pay for the difference. When viewed in that way it is a totally stupid argument. Give us the real NBN please.

 

As for the the nuclear family, with the Iron Ladies passing I think it is apt to reflect on one her 'bullet point' philosophies - namely Government should help those who can't help themselves, but those who can stand on their own two feet, should! Rule Britannia!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Zealand is now a more progressive nation than a country run by an unmarried, atheist, female prime minister.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Zealand is now a more progressive nation than a country run by an unmarried, atheist, female prime minister.

 

 

Can they marry sheep now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×