Debt and Deficit - Coalition Budget Emergency

[medusala]

Reinhardt and Rogoff is thoroughly debunked - it even had spreadsheet errors in it! The only reason people still desperately try and cling to debunked theory is ideology, not practice....

you are incorrect. The spreadsheet error had little overall effect on their findings.

...

Please tell me more about how Spain & Greece have faired so well against Iceland, and how interest rate policy will be effective when in many parts of the world they are zero or negligible....

Iceland repudiated debts. You can hardly put that down to fiscal policy. Apples and pears. Greece and a number of other Euro countries embarked on stimulus post GFC with predictable results. Why are the PIGS in trouble? Yep, Rogoff doesn't apply does it?

As for interest rate policy, have you forgotten Keynes belief in permanently low interest rates? Just another piece of his madness.

....

You ignore theory and practice and want to try and deride educated opinions?....

Which is the educated opinion? Keynesian economics doesn't work. It takes a certain sort of gullible person to believe in nonsense like the paradox of thrift. Time and time again it has failed. The evidence is overwhelming.

If you want to follow the beliefs of a chap who was full of quotes like the below, then knock yourself out.

"It is not agreeable to see civilization so under the ugly thumbs of its impure Jews who have all the money and the power and brains."

 

[CM86]

you are incorrect. The spreadsheet error had little overall effect on their findings.

...

Iceland repudiated debts. You can hardly put that down to fiscal policy. Apples and pears. Greece and a number of other Euro countries embarked on stimulus post GFC with predictable results. Why are the PIGS in trouble? Yep, Rogoff doesn't apply does it?

As for interest rate policy, have you forgotten Keynes belief in permanently low interest rates? Just another piece of his madness.

....

Which is the educated opinion? Keynesian economics doesn't work. It takes a certain sort of gullible person to believe in nonsense like the paradox of thrift. Time and time again it has failed. The evidence is overwhelming.

If you want to follow the beliefs of a chap who was full of quotes like the below, then knock yourself out.

"It is not agreeable to see civilization so under the ugly thumbs of its impure Jews who have all the money and the power and brains."

So much evidence to prove your point... so little time.
Or so it seems.

 

[medusala]

So much evidence to prove your point... so little time.
Or so it seems.

I can point to numerous examples that debunk Keynes eg UK in the 30s, 80s and recently. The US under Obama (CBO stimulus vs no stimulus). etc etc

Where are all your examples of it ever working?

 

[Long Live HFC]

As for interest rate policy, have you forgotten Keynes belief in permanently low interest rates?

ok i admit, it's been a long time since i was at school, but im pretty sure i've never heard this. got a quote or a source or something?

 

[CM86]

I can point to numerous examples that debunk Keynes eg UK in the 30s, 80s and recently. The US under Obama (CBO stimulus vs no stimulus). etc etc

Where are all your examples of it ever working?

It seems that Mofra has posted plenty of evidence, and reasoning behind his views.

You tend to try to shout your ideology as an authority.

Just being a dismissive a-hole doesn't make you right. It just makes you an a-hole.

 

[medusala]

It seems that Mofra has posted plenty of evidence, and reasoning behind his views.

No he hasn't. One effort by Treasury defending their pro Keynesian stance. The supposed debunking of Rogoff wasn't all it appeared to be ie once the recalculation was done results weren't that different.

http://www.economist.com/news/finan...ationship-between-debt-and-growth-comes-under

you tend to try to shout your ideology as an authority.

Ideology? It is called the real world as per Stiglitz vs Hugh Hendry on youtube.

ok i admit, it's been a long time since i was at school, but im pretty sure i've never heard this. got a quote or a source or something?

Below touches on it.

http://www.skidelskyr.com/index.php?/site/article/the-relevance-of-keynes/

His solution to the problem is to use monetary policy to establish a permanently low long-term rate of interest. For ‘any level of interest which is accepted with sufficient conviction as likely to be durable will be durable…’ (Keynes, 1973A, p. 203). For this reason, he did not want to use interest rates to manage the business cycle: the exact opposite of present practice. Nevertheless, he believed that it ‘seems likely that the fluctuations in…the marginal efficiency of capital…will be too great to be offset by any practicable changes in the rate of interest’ (Keynes, 1973A, p. 164). Hence, apart from keeping interest rates permanently low, investment needed to be ‘socialised’. Keynes wrote: ‘I expect to see the State…taking an ever greater responsibility for directly organising investment’ and ‘I conceive, therefore, that a somewhat comprehensive socialisation of investment will prove the only means of securing an approximation to full employment’ (Keynes, 1973A, pp. 164, 378).

 

[CM86]

No he hasn't. One effort by Treasury defending their pro Keynesian stance. The supposed debunking of Rogoff wasn't all it appeared to be ie once the recalculation was done results weren't that different.

http://www.economist.com/news/finan...ationship-between-debt-and-growth-comes-under

Weak as piss.

How does that refute Mofra's statement?
You can't just state something, and then provide a link that doesn't fully support that stance...

Mofra delves into it, you just say "Rubbish, "my opinion, my opinion, my opinion --- mildly connected link to *knows ecconomics", and act like that's the end of the matter.

Austerity doesn't actually work. And it's been tried...

Show me your work, and we can critique that... Otherwise stop pretending you know better than the majority of economists (wizards).

 

[swansfan51]

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2014/wp14179.pdf

^Study of 91 individual cases of fiscal consolidation. They found that most of them did achieve their desired results of narrowing budget deficits and lowering public debt. Its a good read if anyone is actually interested, rather than just flinging ideological poo at each other. Only 30 pages.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Weak as piss.

How does that refute Mofra's statement?
You can't just state something, and then provide a link that doesn't fully support that stance...

Let's not forget that Medusala is a guy who purports to be an economic genius, but can't even read basic graphs.

 

[little graham]

 

[Maggie5]

Watching Q & A last night, I am on the 'John Daley for Treasurer' bandwagon. Gee he was good, concise, clear language.

What I can't understand is why we are spending so much time talking about the retirement age.
Labor's policy is that it be increased to 67 from 2017 and the Libs want to change it to 70 in 2035.
Neither is unrealistic, 2 years in two years time seems okay and another 3 years in 20 years time is okay too.
What is the big deal about the change. the bigger issue is tying in with the CPI and not the minimum wage.

 

[little graham]

Watching Q & A last night, I am on the 'John Daley for Treasurer' bandwagon. Gee he was good, concise, clear language.

What I can't understand is why we are spending so much time talking about the retirement age.
Labor's policy is that it be increased to 67 from 2017 and the Libs want to change it to 70 in 2035.
Neither is unrealistic, 2 years in two years time seems okay and another 3 years in 20 years time is okay too.
What is the big deal about the change. the bigger issue is tying in with the CPI and not the minimum wage.

Distraction.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

I have Solar Power. My estimate is that it should pay for itself in 20yrs.

ah the great talk about radio myth, i paid $4,500 for my solar average bill before solar $415 dollars a quarter, average bill now $83 credit per quarter.
i'm no mathlete but i'm sure thats less then 4 years.

 

[Maggie5]

I am still waiting for my $500 saving.

 

[Xsess]

In the wake of the devastating collapse of the Iron Ore price, is this the time to re-enact Labor policies to repair the damage to our biggest export market?

* Reintroduce a mining tax.
* reintroduce a carbon tax.
* Allow his union bosses to push for higher wages across the board.
* Remove the diesel subsidy for mining and mineral exploration.

That'll fix things.

 

[Pessimistic]

In the wake of the devastating collapse of the Iron Ore price, is this the time to re-enact Labor policies to repair the damage to our biggest export market?

* Reintroduce a mining tax.
* reintroduce a carbon tax.
* Allow his union bosses to push for higher wages across the board.
* Remove the diesel subsidy for mining and mineral exploration.

That'll fix things.

you sound like you are enjoying it. much like the herald sun cheering on multinationals to screw over our country, after all we are 'stupid' and deserve it !

 

[Xsess]

you sound like you are enjoying it.

Enjoying what? I knew how stupid and damaging those policies were all along and railed against them. Can you imagine if Wayne Swan had got his way and SPT Mark I was law? Right now on top of the plummeting revenues the federal government would be making out huge cheques to liquidators for the accumulated credits from the losses of failed miners. I bet you have all forgotten that. That’s why it was described as part nationalisation of the mining industry with government sharing the risk of the mining boom and bust cycle. Incompetence 101

 

[CountryRace]

EMMA ALBERICI: Almost 25 years later, a Senate committee is gearing up to grill today's business leaders.

Pressure is being applied on the world's biggest media and tech companies - Google, Apple, Microsoft and News Corp - to explain their tax avoidance strategies.

Along with some accounting firms and mining giants, they will essentially be asked how they sleep at night - because just to be clear, these companies aren't breaking any laws.

So Joe Hockey wants to change the laws. When Australia hosted the G20 last year the Treasurer put tax avoidance right at the top of his list.

JOE HOCKEY, TREASURER (Sep. 2014): There is a global warning message to multinationals: you have to pay tax where you earn the profits. And wherever you are located, the developed world has had enough. The developed world has had enough.

We are not going to cop this sort of minimisation and, in certain circumstances, avoidance and even evasion. We're not going to cop that anymore.

EMMA ALBERICI: Problem is: they've been copping it for decades. It's estimated the ATO has lost up to $80 billion over 10 years through complicated corporate tax arrangements. That figure could pay off the Government's deficit more than twice.

But collecting all that unpaid tax is easier said than done. Australia's corporate tax rate is 30 per cent, which is turning many companies off setting up here. Why pay 30 per cent when you can locate your headquarters in Singapore and pay just 17 per cent? Or, if you're happy to go further abroad, you could base yourself in Ireland and pay only 12.5 per cent.

So it's no surprise the latest estimates show that 61 of Australia's top 100 companies have subsidiaries in low- or no-taxing countries.

 

[CountryRace]

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2015/s4212189.htm

no reclaim australia rally about that eh

on no halal food is ripping off the system zomg

 

[greennick]

In the wake of the devastating collapse of the Iron Ore price, is this the time to re-enact Labor policies to repair the damage to our biggest export market?

* Reintroduce a mining tax.
* reintroduce a carbon tax.
* Allow his union bosses to push for higher wages across the board.
* Remove the diesel subsidy for mining and mineral exploration.

That'll fix things.

There are still numpties out there claiming the mining tax would raise revenue this year. It would have raised a big fat 0. It was a good idea, but brought in by idiots who didn't negotiate with the only people they needed to, the states that control the resources. Who brings in a tax through negotiation with the people being taxed???

 

[greennick]

This tax debate is so frustrating. People with no knowledge of the tax system pull out figures as to what "rate" multinationals are paying, neglecting the fact much of their revenue comes from overseas and is therefore not subject to tax here. The use of some of these offshore "marketing" hubs to move revenue overseas clearly needs to be looked at. However, people are already out with their pitchforks before the investigation has even been finalised.

I saw someone online claim that BHP and Rio pay no tax. They're our two biggest tax payers. We can't have a debate with all the misinformation going around and with the emotive response so often being the "big boys" aren't paying their fair share. BHP and Rio combined paid more tax than the bottom 40% of taxpayers combined. Should they be paying more? Maybe, we'll find out, though it seems likely. Should we close some of these loopholes down? Absolutely.

However, we need to identify what these loopholes are in a methodical way and ensure they're closed down in a way that makes sense. Too many people just throw out misinformation and lead everyone to the pitchfork emporium. This has become far too emotive of an argument driven by ignorant people, when it should be a conversation backed by facts and with an understanding of the taxation system.

 

[Maggie5]

I find it equally frustrating when people compare the top ?% paying more than the bottom?%. Do the bottom percent earn billions?
Such a silly comparison and arguement to make.

 

[Xsess]

I find it equally frustrating when people compare the top ?% paying more than the bottom?%.

Its not an argument its a fact.

 

[Xsess]

This tax debate is so frustrating. People with no knowledge of the tax system pull out figures as to what "rate" multinationals are paying, neglecting the fact much of their revenue comes from overseas and is therefore not subject to tax here. The use of some of these offshore "marketing" hubs to move revenue overseas clearly needs to be looked at. However, people are already out with their pitchforks before the investigation has even been finalised.

I saw someone online claim that BHP and Rio pay no tax. They're our two biggest tax payers. We can't have a debate with all the misinformation going around and with the emotive response so often being the "big boys" aren't paying their fair share. BHP and Rio combined paid more tax than the bottom 40% of taxpayers combined. Should they be paying more? Maybe, we'll find out, though it seems likely. Should we close some of these loopholes down? Absolutely.

However, we need to identify what these loopholes are in a methodical way and ensure they're closed down in a way that makes sense. Too many people just throw out misinformation and lead everyone to the pitchfork emporium. This has become far too emotive of an argument driven by ignorant people, when it should be a conversation backed by facts and with an understanding of the taxation system.

Company profit = employment = higher taxes = good for everyone.
Company losses = unemployment = lower taxes = bad for everybody

The great Australian handout addict cant understand the fine balance between sustaining a profitable business, and providing a social benefit from the success of industry through taxes and the like. They are in an ideological war that threatens to unbalance the equasion, tearing down everything successfull to "GET" as much as they can. Even if they understood the facts it would make no difference to them.

 

[rodney hoo]

Company profit = employment = higher taxes = good for everyone.
Company losses = unemployment = lower taxes = bad for everybody

The great Australian handout addict cant understand the fine balance between sustaining a profitable business, and providing a social benefit from the success of industry through taxes and the like. They are in an ideological war that threatens to unbalance the equasion, tearing down everything successfull to "GET" as much as they can. Even if they understood the facts it would make no difference to them.

I keep forgetting the multi nationals & big business are charitable organisations & are not getting as much as they can