-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusPoliGAF |OT| Boats? What Boats?
- Thread starter Bernbaum
- Start date
- Status
roosters93
Member
"Shorten wrote his speech on Wednesday and Thursday with help from his speechwriter James Newton (a speech writer in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet under Labor) and input from colleagues and mentors, including Paul Keating and Bill Kelty."
Interesting.
--
"Well have a better fix on the magic 3.5% GDP growth number. We should all hope it pans out. Mr Hockey certainly should. Hes wagered his political credibility on it."
Interesting.
--
"Well have a better fix on the magic 3.5% GDP growth number. We should all hope it pans out. Mr Hockey certainly should. Hes wagered his political credibility on it."
Interesting how? I mean, I know why I think it is, but wanna hear you say it first ;P
Edit: This stunned me:
Edit: This stunned me:
So the amount of debt that Hockey et al has been spouting is the amount of debt NOT minus the amount of debt that other countries owe us? Holy fucking shit, that's despicable.
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
I noticed he used a term that Keating liked to use when he called the budget deficit the government's "call on national savings".
roosters93
Member
Oh nothing, it was just unexpected.
And yeah both major parties can be very misleading when talking about economics. They use whatever measure serves their political purpose the best at the time. It's depressing because the average Australian, if they even manage to get past the mentality that the govt budget can be compared to the nature of a household budget, is then faced with economics they may find hard to understand which is then confused even more by the parties manipulating it.
Indeed. It is completely dishonest to say that there is a budget emergency. It's not an emergency. Our financial position could be better (an absurd statement, they could ALWAYS be better), but they're well in order and we have always been a financially responsible country.
The ALP, to their credit had a plant to get us back into surplus in a few years, and while I didn't think they'd reach their goal I think they would've gotten close. I don't see anything that merits the measures being put forward by this budget.
If you were to argue reasons for saying for example, that entitlements increase dependency, that's fine. Argue that. That's a much better argument than "THIS IS AN EMERGENCY, GIVE US EMERGENCY POWERS, WE'LL MAKE THEM GO AWAY WHEN THE EMERGENCY GOES AWAY!!!"*
I have to at least be consistent with my views, there's parts of the budget I like, but not for the reasons they're espousing but that doesn't matter. The budget is as far as I'm concerned illegitimate because it's undemocratic.
(*they never do)
The ALP, to their credit had a plant to get us back into surplus in a few years, and while I didn't think they'd reach their goal I think they would've gotten close. I don't see anything that merits the measures being put forward by this budget.
If you were to argue reasons for saying for example, that entitlements increase dependency, that's fine. Argue that. That's a much better argument than "THIS IS AN EMERGENCY, GIVE US EMERGENCY POWERS, WE'LL MAKE THEM GO AWAY WHEN THE EMERGENCY GOES AWAY!!!"*
I have to at least be consistent with my views, there's parts of the budget I like, but not for the reasons they're espousing but that doesn't matter. The budget is as far as I'm concerned illegitimate because it's undemocratic.
(*they never do)
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
This is an odd view to take regarding a federal government. The "quality" of the fiscal position of the federal government should be determined by the real macroeconomic goals it wants to achieve: growth, inflation, interest rates, unemployment etc... the amount of debt or deficit is not one of these factors unless you're talking about a government that is not the monopoly issuer of its currency (e.g. a state or local government or the government of a nation using the Euro) where its fiscal position impacts its ability to secure financing. I don't know why a proponent of small government like yourself would ever want the federal government to take more of your money than it needs to.
On a semi-related note, here's what Steve Keen reckons private debt needs to increase to for the government to meet the figures it's projecting. Take with a grain of salt etc...
Dastardly Jerks
Banned
Just came back from the #MarchinMay Budget protest in Melbourne. Awesome turnout of 25,000!
The $7 for vaccinations is interesting though. That will have hideous effects for all Australians.
shanshan310
Member
Yikes.
shanshan310
Member
Seriously though this sounds like a great way to stop people from vaccinating their kids.
This is an odd view to take regarding a federal government. The "quality" of the fiscal position of the federal government should be determined by the real macroeconomic goals it wants to achieve: growth, inflation, interest rates, unemployment etc... the amount of debt or deficit is not one of these factors unless you're talking about a government that is not the monopoly issuer of its currency (e.g. a state or local government or the government of a nation using the Euro) where its fiscal position impacts its ability to secure financing. I don't know why a proponent of small government like yourself would ever want the federal government to take more of your money than it needs to.
On a semi-related note, here's what Steve Keen reckons private debt needs to increase to for the government to meet the figures it's projecting. Take with a grain of salt etc...
You're right, dumb argument. I'm fairly tired so I'm not surprised I spewed out garbage. I'll rephrase properly in a bit.
bobnowhere
Member
Make no mistake, this is all about Medicare but the wildcard is Palmer and hates the LNP more than all of them. The Green's won't let it through, Labor won't let it through and Palmer has said he won't. There is no way it will get through and based on the above numbers there is no way Abbott would push for a DD election. It's over, Abbott lost.
Who else is there?
Saw a fantastic Ad tonight from the Labor Party, Abbott in his own words, no yelly screamy guy, no 3 word slogans. Keep it up and Abbott is cooked.
Who else is there?
- The LDP Guy hates everything socialised, he might get behind it.
- THE DLP guy probably won't play ball if you can drag him away from the forge.
- The FF guy will fall in line with some religious bribes. Bit like Harradine.
- Xenephon, maybe not sure who really knows. He might fall for the economic case.
Saw a fantastic Ad tonight from the Labor Party, Abbott in his own words, no yelly screamy guy, no 3 word slogans. Keep it up and Abbott is cooked.
Again I'm still unsure of when the budget goes to the Senate, before/after July and nobody here has an answer to that question.
But the ad the ALP put out was fantastic, it's clear they understand that they have to hammer these changes now and until the next election is called, whenever that is.
roosters93
Member
bobnowhere
Member
Is this ad online?
PS. I'm thinking now that having Palmer represented in parliament isn't such a bad thing after all. I'd wager that a good number of people that voted for him (if not all) probably would've gone Lib if PUP wasn't an alternative.
PPS. Don't forget that Australian Motoring Party guy or whatever. Don't they have a seat?
bobnowhere
Member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHWNmeV9tw4&list=UU9V-f1rmmcfv0L0sQzSwNqQ
The thing with Palmer is his whole image is based on him being the outsider, even though he has been an insider his whole life! As soon as he becomes a politician like the rest his entire political career and those associated with him, is over and he'll get laughed out of office.
But if you listen to Abbott or Hockey they're adamant that they absolutely told the electorate that this would happen. That was absolutely their message during the election. (Just forget about that other message they put up on the giant billboards.)
And this balanced media messaging is why a DD election isn't a guaranteed thing to reject this budget.
I'm finding it really difficult to deal with it. It's like arguing with someone who claims the sky is nova green at all times and also incidentally made of pizza. Just a total denial of reality.
AdventureRacing
Member
Paying for vaccinations, scripts and doctors appointments all have a negative impact on the goal of a proper health system. Prevention is the key to preventing disease and to limiting how much money we have to spend on health. This is short term thinking that will cost us an obscene amount of money in the future both in terms of increased expenditure on health care and decreased productivity.
Combined with a reduction in funding to the health care industry and poor people and old people having less money and it's a pretty nasty future for the sick in this country. Hopefully some of these changes can be stopped.
This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Governments don't recover from polling this badly. (without a change of leadership lol)
Oh sure, polls whatever right now, but that'll bounce right back once Murdoch & co get back into full swing in election mode.
Oh wow, and his going back on the agreement should be blamed on the previous government because they made the agreement.
Wow.
Edit: actually, I think I misread the article. I think he's saying that Labor had the agreement but not funded it? But it sounds like that funding should have been in this budget to cover the agreement and Tone is declining to put it in.
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
"Bill Shorten claims we've underestimated the Australian people, well if anything I think the opposite. The Australian people know very well that when you're in Government you have to make the tough decisions, and I personally have been very clear about the fact that getting the budget back into surplus is our main priority and that more specific non-core promises were secondary to that. This is something I said to the public not only during the last election but the one before that. So if Bill Shorten wants to claim that Australian families should be somehow surprised at what's in this budget then I think that it's Bill Shorten who is underestimating the Australian people, because unlike the Labor party, Australians know that you simply can't spend money that you haven't got."
They've used this sort of argument a number of times now. Labor didn't sign the forms or renew the agreements before the election so it's really their fault that we're not signing the forms or renewing the agreements now. I think the most appropriate term for it is piss weak.
EDIT: Holy shit at Bolt.
Sorry Arksy, any draconian media censorship laws that ensure that this lunatic is given the psychiatric treatment he so desperately needs is a national priority in my book.
I doubt it especially after the severity of the self inflicted wounds Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey have inflicted on themselves.
Carbon tax wasn't making a tough decision?
That's pretty standard LNP fare though, neglect infrastructure now and if it gets fixed later there's spending you can call out the opposition for. A few elections for now they'll be campaigning on getting Labor's health spending under control.
How's that cost of living reduction going for the lower classes?
A
A More Normal Bird
Unconfirmed Member
Just to clarify, that's not a real Tony Abbott quote.
Exactly; see the sale of Telstra vs the NBN. Shaun Micallef made a similar point when he did a bit on a Peter Costello interview last year. Costello was saying something about how the NDIS was a potentially good idea but it wasn't something the government should be doing when it has budget deficits, whilst also saying how great a treasurer he was because of all those surpluses. Where was the NDIS then Peter?
Wow at Bolt. The guy is an outright culture warrior. He completely ignores all of the spending cuts losers vs winners and fails to notice it does nothing to save us from the imaginary budget emergency. The only overarching purpose to it seems to be to exacerbate inequality. If you're going to argue that's a good thing then argue it. Crying about a culture war on the "haves" ironically screams entitlement of the rich.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked