Opinion Politics (warning, may contain political views you disagree with)

[Square Peg]

I agree. Although they probably need to not be hypocrites with their previous shouting about Labor's stimulus measures during the GFC. Time for them to stop pretending they are fiscally superior perhaps?

Yes there are examples of 'corruption' with both JobKeeper and the GFC stimulus but fundamentally these are measures that Federal governments need to take when necessary.

Yep agreed, the myth that the libs are better economic managers than labor is one they like to perpetuate with very little evidence.
Truth is they're both mediocre to poor at it.

 

[wayToGo_]

Truth is they're both mediocre to poor at it.

This is probably true of everything (not just economically).

Us voters seem to be voting for the least bad these days it seems.

 

[Halfbaked]

I agree. Although they probably need to not be hypocrites with their previous shouting about Labor's stimulus measures during the GFC. Time for them to stop pretending they are fiscally superior perhaps?

Yes there are examples of 'corruption' with both JobKeeper and the GFC stimulus but fundamentally these are measures that Federal governments need to take when necessary.

This is so true.

 

[Purple_Turtle]

I agree. Although they probably need to not be hypocrites with their previous shouting about Labor's stimulus measures during the GFC. Time for them to stop pretending they are fiscally superior perhaps?

Not really hypocritical.

1. The Liberal criticism of GFC stimulus memory was that it was excessive ($52b vs the Liberal's proposed $20b,) had individual components like pink batts that were horrible, wasn't as significant as the mining boom in causing Australia to avoid recession and left us with a significant deficit that Rudd and Gillard failed to bring under control.

2. The GFC and Covid-19 are fundamentally different problems. You can't hand out $1000 cheques for people to go out and spend money to make up for a shortfall in private spending if the government has also locked down households and closed non-essential businesses.

 

[wayToGo_]

Not really hypocritical.

1. The Liberal criticism of GFC stimulus memory was that it was excessive ($52b vs the Liberal's proposed $20b,) had individual components like pink batts that were horrible, wasn't as significant as the mining boom in causing Australia to avoid recession and left us with a significant deficit that Rudd and Gillard failed to bring under control.

2. The GFC and Covid-19 are fundamentally different problems. You can't hand out $1000 cheques for people to go out and spend money to make up for a shortfall in private spending if the government has also locked down households and closed non-essential businesses.

I got to the term 'pink batts' and then realised reading the rest of your post might be a futile exercise. Like I said you can find faults with both but to do so is cherry picking to suit your political bias. Thanks for demonstrating my point perfectly.

 

[Purple_Turtle]

I got to the term 'pink batts' and then realised reading the rest of your post might be a futile exercise. Like I said you can find faults with both but to do so is cherry picking to suit your political bias. Thanks for demonstrating my point perfectly.

Lol, what?

It's a government program that only happened because of the GFC stimulus and wasn't regulated properly by the federal government, resulting in 4 deaths. Not sure how that's not worthy of criticism or being raised when discussing the difference between how the Liberals criticised the Rudd Stimulus and the Liberal's own policies with Covid.

 

[Taylor]

Last time I checked the USA was at >91% not tested positive for COVID-19.

There could be an argument for the government seizing the retirement savings of the over 60s to pay for the businesses they compelled to close down in order to protect those over 60s from a disease that is mostly a risk to them.

I'm not serious, but has the pension been stopped from being paid while the casual workers are under lockdown at home?

 

[Square Peg]

Last time I checked the USA was at >91% not tested positive for COVID-19.

There could be an argument for the government seizing the retirement savings of the over 60s to pay for the businesses they compelled to close down in order to protect those over 60s from a disease that is mostly a risk to them.

I'm not serious, but has the pension been stopped from being paid while the casual workers are under lockdown at home?

Well it may be that you are not serious, but there is a strong moral argument that the people that have benefitted most from lockdown (retirees and salaried health workers) should bear more of the burden of the cost of these measures. No government of course would have the guts, but this should be a rationale for freezing health sector wages or including the family home in an assets test for the age pension and health care concession card, for example. Why are the young with the least to gain going to be stuck with the debt for this craziness?

 

[wayToGo_]

Lol, what?

It's a government program that only happened because of the GFC stimulus and wasn't regulated properly by the federal government, resulting in 4 deaths. Not sure how that's not worthy of criticism or being raised when discussing the difference between how the Liberals criticised the Rudd Stimulus and the Liberal's own policies with Covid.

I must have missed where the pink batts scheme was the only part of the stimulus? It's like saying JobKeeper is a complete failure because a bunch of CEOs kept it despite paying out big dividends on increased profits during Covid. Effectively tax payers are paying to line the pockets of some very rich people due to JobKeeper, similarly because of poor regulation by the current Federal govt.

Yes both are bloody terrible outcomes that wouldn't have existed if the GFC stimulus and JobKeeper payments hadn't had existed respectively. But they aren't the sole determinant on the success or failure of either program. To say so (for either) is cherry picking to suit a political bias (and yes I do get it, you are unashamedly partisan - nothing wrong with that).

If you think there weren't vastly positive outcomes overall from both the GFC stimulus and JobKeeper then you've got your blinkers on. People are welcome to debate the process but the results speak for themselves - and claiming the other side would have done better is conveniently unverifiable. They were both necessary actions, albeit with faults (as you would expect from any govt). They weren't exactly moves of financial geniuses though -> akin to locking down Australia to avoid Covid running rampant here (pretty basic common sense).

Both parties are pretty s**t at managing the economy because they often react to the wrong indicators. Labor has inherited a recession from every single recent Liberal government. This concept that Libs are better economic managers is not supported by the data. That lie that they are needs to stop and both parties need to get better at fiscal policy.

 

[Purple_Turtle]

I must have missed where the pink batts scheme was the only part of the stimulus? It's like saying JobKeeper is a complete failure because a bunch of CEOs kept it despite paying out big dividends on increased profits during Covid. Effectively tax payers are paying to line the pockets of some very rich people due to JobKeeper, similarly because of poor regulation by the current Federal govt.

Yes both are bloody terrible outcomes that wouldn't have existed if the GFC stimulus and JobKeeper payments hadn't had existed respectively. But they aren't the sole determinant on the success or failure of either program. To say so (for either) is cherry picking to suit a political bias (and yes I do get it, you are unashamedly partisan - nothing wrong with that).

If you think there weren't vastly positive outcomes overall from both the GFC stimulus and JobKeeper then you've got your blinkers on. People are welcome to debate the process but the results speak for themselves - and claiming the other side would have done better is conveniently unverifiable. They were both necessary actions, albeit with faults (as you would expect from any govt). They weren't exactly moves of financial geniuses though -> akin to locking down Australia to avoid Covid running rampant here (pretty basic common sense).

Both parties are pretty sh*t at managing the economy because they often react to the wrong indicators. Labor has inherited a recession from every single recent Liberal government. This concept that Libs are better economic managers is not supported by the data. That lie that they are needs to stop and both parties need to get better at fiscal policy.

Not sure where I said the pink batts was the only part of the stimulus either. I said that "had individual components like pink batts that were horrible," so I think you've completely misread what I said. And TBH I think if anyone is cherry-picking to suit a partisan bias it would be you going off that I brought up pink batts as a *-up associated with the Rudd stimulus which the Liberals have criticised since (rather than going with your narrative that the Liberals just oppose the idea of stimulus in general.)

You can claim the stimulus was necessary, but given the excessive nature of it, the quesiton-mark over how much of an impact it had compared to the mining boom and the amount of debt that the federal government has been left with from the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd deficits just chalking it up to a few faults and that it's partisan bias to bring them up is a joke.

If you're talking about the federal government Labor have only inherited from the Liberals 3 times and only once recently, so I'm not sure what your basis is for saying they've inherited recessions each time. Particularly since the GFC had *-all to do with Howard.

 

[Taylor]

Well it may be that you are not serious, but there is a strong moral argument that the people that have benefitted most from lockdown (retirees and salaried health workers) should bear more of the burden of the cost of these measures. No government of course would have the guts, but this should be a rationale for freezing health sector wages or including the family home in an assets test for the age pension and health care concession card, for example. Why are the young with the least to gain going to be stuck with the debt for this craziness?

It would make for an interesting plebiscite question at the election mid March.

"Lockdowns for community cases and all public sector, pension and super funds for those over 55 are given a haircut to pay the economic cost, or targeted isolation orders for close contacts, no lockdowns and no financial penalty for those getting the most benefit and wearing the least cost?"

See how attitudes change when there's skin in the game, you've always had the choice to bunker yourself down in your home regardless of what the rest of the state is required to do.

 

[FreoRicci]

50 countries and 170 000000 million have been vaccinated, Australia nil.
Morrison stated Australia will be amongst the first in the world to receive the covid 19 vaccine.
Anothe lie conveniently forgotten.

He was confident in the University of Queensland’s trail but alas was defeated.
He has sPinned it and said Australians can wait due to low if no cases of COVID. No or limit community transfe, which is what was achieved by the state governments not his. Typical ScoMo. Federal government has done jack, and ScoMo once again like the NSW bushfires, is being proved completely irrelevant to the country.

 

[stax on the mull]

Not sure where I said the pink batts was the only part of the stimulus either. I said that "had individual components like pink batts that were horrible," so I think you've completely misread what I said. And TBH I think if anyone is cherry-picking to suit a partisan bias it would be you going off that I brought up pink batts as a fu**-up associated with the Rudd stimulus which the Liberals have criticised since (rather than going with your narrative that the Liberals just oppose the idea of stimulus in general.)

You can claim the stimulus was necessary, but given the excessive nature of it, the quesiton-mark over how much of an impact it had compared to the mining boom and the amount of debt that the federal government has been left with from the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd deficits just chalking it up to a few faults and that it's partisan bias to bring them up is a joke.

If you're talking about the federal government Labor have only inherited from the Liberals 3 times and only once recently, so I'm not sure what your basis is for saying they've inherited recessions each time. Particularly since the GFC had fu**-all to do with Howard.

Of course the GFC was completely different problem for governments to get control of, and after 7 years the Liberals got us out of debt by manufacturing some "back in black" coffee mugs.

 

[bushchook]

Would you expect something that passed standards in other first world nations to need to take two to three times as long to approve for use in Australia? Is that a reasonable assumption?

Pretty much par for the course in Australia, yeah. The most over-regulated country in the world. So it's pretty much what I would expect.

 

[wayToGo_]

amount of debt that the federal government has been left with from the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd

It's a futile conversation because you keep making comments as if they only apply to Labor when it clearly applies to both parties.

What was national debt when the Libs took over and what is it now? Has it risen or fallen in that time? Has it risen at a faster or slower rate than when Labor were in power? Has the growth of debt as a share of GDP been far greater under either the last Labor or Lib governments?

Like I said, they both have questionable economic credentials. Everything you say about the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd govt you can pretty much apply to the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison govt as well.

It's easy to criticise though because we don't have to stand in their shoes ourselves (just like criticising footy players). I think overall we go ok as most of what happens just happens without any media coverage/general public knowledge. We spend 90% of our time complaining about 10% of what they do. That other 90% probably doesn't differ much whether Labor or Liberal are in power, and even the 10% doesn't seem vastly different these days - just has a different PR spin depending on who it is driving it.

 

[bushchook]

Yep agreed, the myth that the libs are better economic managers than labor is one they like to perpetuate with very little evidence.
Truth is they're both mediocre to poor at it.

The libs haven't banned any important export industries because a cow got hit on a head with a stick.

Advantage Libs.

 

[Taylor]

We learned pretty quickly that there is zero electorate interest in reduction of spending or services and no appetite for new taxes after the GFC spending finished and they tried to bring the budget back into line.

I'm not convinced any democracy could see their government slash services or spending or raise taxes to bring down the national debt and survive the next election. It's the easiest thing in the world to oppose.

You can't even give people a tax cut here without the media jumping up and down about how people with a job and money now are going to be better off under a tax cut than those who don't work much now and that's so unfair - even if the economic boost of more money in the system increases jobs, it's all bad.

These politicians are primarily interested in being elected again and they won't find themselves sitting on their balcony drinking a toast to getting the nation out of debt but losing their job for it - only for the opposition to spend up again because we are so dependent on it now.

 

[Taylor]

Unfortunately I think the only way for Australia to get out of debt is for the economy here to outgrow the spending increases.

Every three years we will be faced with a challenge, do they spend that extra $15,000,000,000 that was going to be paying down the debt on paying debt, or do they instead give back to the people and win the election.

I guess it will never happen.

Oh, there's an idea.

What if the government made it a legal requirement for super funds to own a percentage of the new "Australia Debt Bonds" which pay 0.5% for 99 year terms. All super funds for people over the age of 55 have to give 20% of their value to the government until 2035 where the total super fund wealth is projected to be nearly ten trillion dollars, and our national debt is removed.

By that time the debt would be costing us $20 billion in payments a year for interest, so it will be like a waterfall of cash once the debt is paid off and they can cover the pensions.

That way those who got the most benefit and wore the least cost can pay their part in recovering from these lock downs.

 

[Purple_Turtle]

It's a futile conversation because you keep making comments as if they only apply to Labor when it clearly applies to both parties.

What was national debt when the Libs took over and what is it now? Has it risen or fallen in that time? Has it risen at a faster or slower rate than when Labor were in power? Has the growth of debt as a share of GDP been far greater under either the last Labor or Lib governments?

Like I said, they both have questionable economic credentials. Everything you say about the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd govt you can pretty much apply to the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison govt as well.

It's easy to criticise though because we don't have to stand in their shoes ourselves (just like criticising footy players). I think overall we go ok as most of what happens just happens without any media coverage/general public knowledge. We spend 90% of our time complaining about 10% of what they do. That other 90% probably doesn't differ much whether Labor or Liberal are in power, and even the 10% doesn't seem vastly different these days - just has a different PR spin depending on who it is driving it.

Believe me when I say I have plenty of criticism of the Liberals for the last few years. But when it comes to debt and deficits a significant part of the problem has been that the spending cuts and/or tax increases needed to cut that deficit are politically unpopular, which has required the government to be far less aggressive in resolving it. (For what it's worth I blame Abbott a fair bit for the 2013 election promises that he had no hope of keeping while also having a meaningful impact on the deficit.)

You can bang on about both being questionable, but Labor are consistently worse. The Liberals were on track before Covid to finally get the budget back to surplus; something Labor weren't going to do under Rudd or Gillard.

 

[wahooo]

The Liberals were on track before Covid to finally get the budget back to surplus

There's been some strange stuff thrown around on this thread but this takes the cake.

 

[Bicco]

ScoMo once again like the NSW bushfires, is being proved completely irrelevant to the country.

He go us into a fight with China.

 

[fnerd]

Not really hypocritical.

1. The Liberal criticism of GFC stimulus memory was that it was excessive ($52b vs the Liberal's proposed $20b,) had individual components like pink batts that were horrible, wasn't as significant as the mining boom in causing Australia to avoid recession and left us with a significant deficit that Rudd and Gillard failed to bring under control.

2. The GFC and Covid-19 are fundamentally different problems. You can't hand out $1000 cheques for people to go out and spend money to make up for a shortfall in private spending if the government has also locked down households and closed non-essential businesses.

Is that you mr fraudenberg?

 

[Purple Jesus]

Believe me when I say I have plenty of criticism of the Liberals for the last few years. But when it comes to debt and deficits a significant part of the problem has been that the spending cuts and/or tax increases needed to cut that deficit are politically unpopular, which has required the government to be far less aggressive in resolving it. (For what it's worth I blame Abbott a fair bit for the 2013 election promises that he had no hope of keeping while also having a meaningful impact on the deficit.)

You can bang on about both being questionable, but Labor are consistently worse. The Liberals were on track before Covid to finally get the budget back to surplus; something Labor weren't going to do under Rudd or Gillard.

Funny. People have short memories. The only government able to get the budget in surplus was Johnny H in 2007 before the financial crisis (by increasing spending on welfare and education no less) and before that the last time was in 1973 under Gough Whitlam (Labor).

Rudd then blew it all which his stimulus checks although that could have easily been paid for with a carbon tax.

 

[mightymouse75]

Rudd was vilified for his dollar roll outs during the global crash that kept Australia working and in the black.
A lot of hypocrisy being displayed by media outlets at the minute.
And yes bouquets to both governments for the financial help.
Removing job keeper is the wrong decision though.

Was that the splash for retro fitting pink bats that do next to * all & killed a couple of young labourers.
What a waste of money.
They could have built outer harbours bridges or built bullet trains with those Billion's.
Nation building is so last century

 

[mightymouse75]

Funny. People have short memories. The only government able to get the budget in surplus was Johnny H in 2007 before the financial crisis (by increasing spending on welfare and education no less) and before that the last time was in 1973 under Gough Whitlam (Labor).

Rudd then blew it all which his stimulus checks although that could have easily been paid for with a carbon tax.

He was given the biggest pie in history when the Chinese were going ballistic on our minerals
He still wasted a lot of it by literally buying votes before elections, just like McGowan is now with the electrical subsidy..