[Barrabundy]

.

 

[Barrabundy]

.

 

[koich]

I wonder which party got the debt so high?

The one that was in power during the GFC. Regardless of who was in power it would have happened and is largely irrelevant to the political debate. The course of action had to be taken.

 

[Cresta57]

I wonder which party got the debt so high?

The one that was in power during the GFC. Regardless of who was in power it would have happened and is largely irrelevant to the political debate. The course of action had to be taken.

The course of action being to give everyone a grand to buy a Chinese made flat screen T.V? No wonder he speaks fluent Mandarin he's a commie spy.

 

[dru]

SA, Vic, Tas, more or less sitting in recession for three years. Aus dragged out by WA and Qld. A lack of testing and common sense over the RBA when most economists were correctly suggesting that things had changed. A tax (more than one) that produced no revenue. The big spend that got palmed off to Peter as the only minister stupid enough to accept the responsibility inevitably leading to fatality.

Lots to give a thumbs up. So let's look for the comparisons that are largely irrelevant,I dont know, maybe to the US, and Euro. Yay! Aren't we fantastic! We are only SEMI hopeless! Yay! In the mean time the ALP has been very nearly as effective as Maggie Thatcher in destroying manufacture.

Still K1s thread on gay marriage has me so worked up that crud count out on my vote. Mindless expectation that he follows through on his commitment. At the end of the day, Aus I will hand on to Aus natural strengths in the hope that even crud can't stuff it up.

 

[Slide]

I used to think they couldn't organise a root in a brothel, but then one of them did

 

[dru]

And another few billion advised today.

Ken, I don't get what you seem to be attempting to imply. I don't have an issue with a Nation running debt when times are tough. I do however suspect that in Aus the Conservatives have generally been responsible for the savings, which whittle away when Labor takes control.

Happy to state this is a perception, what have I missed.

 

[Barrabundy]

.

 

[Barrabundy]

.

 

[Barrabundy]

.

 

[bildad]

In reality - the small debt (and it is tiny by any measure) that australia has today was arrived at thru prudent fiscal policy. .

Well it is miniscule especially when compared to US fast approaching 17000,000,000,000,000 :lol:

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

like watching keno 10 number jackpot go up. :lol:

http://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html

 

[bildad]

"I told you a million times! Don't exaggerate!"

Your number is one thousand time higher than the range shown in your link. Sorry. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

My bad but it'll get there. :lol:

 

[suehobieadventure]

Antithetical -
an·ti·thet·i·cal
/ˌantəˈTHetikəl/Adjective
1.Directly opposed or contrasted; mutually incompatible.
2.Connected with, containing, or using the rhetorical device of antithesis.

Synonyms
antithetic

Who knew AKFF would increase my vocabulary :shock:
RE politics I am so over the adversarial style of politics we have in Australia. If politicians spent as much time familiarising themselves with their latest portfolio as they do attacking each other we would have a great country.

 

[Guest]

Well it is miniscule especially when compared to US

... but are still listed 'High' on the global debt clock - $17,184.42 per head of population.
http://www.economist.com/content/global_debt_clock

The situation is not improving
http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/

 

[dru]

Comparisons are always tricky. These figures being quoted, do they include the NBN, toll roads, and Hospital PPPs? State debt? Still I don't disagree that the debt levels are low on international levels and on that basis should not be hyped up. Two things do concern or irritate. 1 is the way it is spent and what it is spent on. 2 is the constant advice that the economy is doing well, on trend even. In which case a desire to keep debt down would be sensible.

 

[ArWeTherYet]

but they live on a diet of fear.

Its a means of keeping inflation down, although you dont want to end up like Japan with negative inflation growth. Works much better than high interest rates.......well that would depend if you were an investor or paying off a mortgage.

 

[Guest]

Can you point me to any serious economist that maintains that debt is a concern here? I would love to hear the rational.

I don't think the level of debt is a concern for anyone at the moment. Around the time immediately before the GFC, I saw a similar graphic of all the top economies. At the time, Australia was the only country I recall whose debt was actually reducing. The reduction was slow and cent-by-cent but was moving in a direction that proved it to be fiscal genius. The problem now isn't the size of the debt. The problem is a planned surplus gone badly wrong. Debt is increasing despite action said to have been be taken to reduce it.

Before I am accused of carrying a Liberals member card, that's not the case. Nor am I a Labour supporter; nor a Greens supporter; nor ... To me, politics, political parties and politicians are a necessary evil. Not something to be supported come hell or high water. I live in a very marginal electorate and need to get my vote right but have had enough thinking about politics for a while.

 

[dru]

I'm a Keynesian.

Not so popular these days, but wish you were running Euroland.

I believe that we should tax more when the economy is flourishing, and that we should spend more when the economy is floundering. The type of spending should be targeted to enhance the multiplier effect - I am not concerned about debt levels as a primary measure - I am primarily concerned with growth, interest rates and employment.

We tend to spend too little to counteract recession and a sluggish economy and want to cut tax revenues in the good times to try to 'reward' business. This is exactly opposite of what good fiscal policy would do if you believe in the theory.

If the debt is caused by revenue shortfalls because business revenue's are falling - then the clear path would be to spend enough to get the multiplier effect going - not to get all crazy about deficits because of folksy wisdom and the shouts of the shockjocks.

I am with this. There are problems though.

The "balanced budget" debate in Aus is a defacto political statement of fiscal responsibility and prudence. Ridiculous but true. This does not mean that a political platform of not following the rabid press is economically irresponsble but it should raise eyebrows and we should dig in to understand what it is that they are proposing as well as how they propose to implement it.

Next we have had the ongoing tripe from the world's best treasurer as to how well we were doing on trend. Ken would you accept 3% as trend? We have been consistently running at 2% to 2.3%. It's a bigger difference than the masses might get.

Then we have a total distortion to the Aussie economy that simply wasn't publicly addressed by Swann. Economists have been calling this structural. If they are right there are some seriously concerning changes happening. Examples:
x toursim has been decimated. Though I guess we expect this to not be a part of the structural chane and probably will come back.
x manufacturing basically DOA or transferred to Asia. A Keynesian would see this as inevitable and appropriate? I think otherwise. We are constraining g our natural national advantages and killing industry in order to be PC on economic terms.
x retail is being crushed. Yes Internet is a key here, but so is ALP led wages and industrial policy.
x centralization of the rural industries (including some possibly xenophobic discussion of sovereign risk). Commodity industries are widely forecast as the next major global Industry and we are carefully positioning ourselves to not be part of it. And it is a traditional strength
x education, jeez I don't even want to start here.

Ultimately it is about concern on the economic literacy, not of Alan Jones or his broad voter base listeners ( who should not IMHO be dismissed), but the literacy of our policy makers. Noting that it is easy enough to view our Treasury as incompetent (each major stuff up recently has been broadcast previously by elements of the economist press). So we actually need effective political leadership.

If we are to stimulate can we target those flagging industries that are not subject to structural change? If we are to throw cash around, let it be an NBN not pink batts.

 

[Ado]

I'm not an economist (i.e. ignore everything I'm about to say because I'm speak from my ...), but:

(1) The debt is not a non-issue other than Tony saying it is and gaining votes.
(2) The deficit is not an issue other than (see above) and the fact that Swan made a stupid commitment.
(3) The structural deficit is a big issue. It was created by the last government (middle class welfare and tax cuts).
(4) It is unlikerly the structural deficit will be resolved by cuts. We will likely need to be taxed more.
(5) Labor tend to get elected when times are tough. The coalition when times are good.
(6) Labor therefore will seem to be 'poor economic managers' because they get into power as the economy dips.
(7) The seemingly good figures hide under-employment. People aren't earning as much as they used to.
(8) Returning to surplus in the near future through cuts rather than increased taxation is likely to lead to worse times, not better.

I've numbered it to make it easier to target with the flame throwers .

 

[emufingers]

For a mod you have an unfortunate turn of phrase
I'm not an economist (i.e. ignore everything I'm about to say because I'm speak from my ...), butT:

However your summary make some sense. When Norway had its il boom it created infrastructure and a future fund. Howard aid off his friends and told Australia that Australia no longer needed taxation to provide service. He destroyed education, undermined health when it was clear that an ageing population would create enormous pressures and failed to tackle the outflow of revenue to multinational companies. Labour arrived and so did the GFC, the mining companies pulled out their investment because they we no longer getting the free ride that Howard had given them. Labour had an agenda to restabilise the social, transport and industrial infrastructure of the country but were distracted by the GFC and couldn't handle a PM who didn't paly by the old factional rules. Implementation systems broke don and we ended up with three years of Tony acting like a two year old because the electorate had taken his ball away. Remarkably Gillard managed some reforms thanks to the cross benches. Gillard had lost the ability to communicate with the people
The economy is not stuffed, but there are serious challenges ahead due to the mismanagement of Howard and the instability of the ALP.

What remains before us is back to the Howard mismanagement or the risk of Rudd not being backed by the people in his party who can be effective managers. The private sector will try to undermine Labor if they are elected. The States will continue to play games . There is a need to remind all MPs that they are there to serve their electorates and the country and not play kiddy games.