11th Aug 2016
FONT SIZE: A+ A-
RBA Governor urges Government to borrow and spend
RBA Governor urges Government to borrow and spend

Departing Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) Governor Glenn Stevens used his farewell speech to implore Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to borrow and spend to dial up growth.

Mr Stevens believes the nation is in denial over the need for stronger decisions on budget repair and that the Government should take greater responsibility for spurring on economic demand through infrastructure investment.

Mr Stevens believes we can no longer rely on interest rate cuts alone to dial up economic growth and that while cuts still had some effect, they worked by encouraging private borrowers to borrow more.

"In Australia, gross public debt, for all levels of government, adds up to about 40 per cent of GDP. We are rightly concerned about the future trajectory of this ratio. But gross household debt is three times larger – about 125 per cent of GDP. That is not unmanageable – but nor is it a low number. It's an interesting question which sector would have the greater capacity to take on more debt, in the event that we were to need a big demand stimulus," said Mr Stevens.

Mr Stevens has held the job as Governor of the RBA for more than a decade and, in the last few years, has declared that Canberra needs to wake up to the challenges facing the nation.

"The case for governments being prepared to borrow for the right investment assets – long-lived assets that yield an economic return – does not extend to borrowing to pay pensions, welfare and routine government expenses, other than under the most exceptional circumstances," he said.

Read more at www.rba.gov.au
Read more at www.afr.com
Read more at www.smh.com.au

Opinion: Invest in our future

The level of debt held by Government in Australia is always strongly debated in the lead up to Federal elections, with both sides of politics promising to tackle debt levels. I was pleased to see the departing RBA governor yesterday offering a different opinion on debt in his farewell speech.

For the average Australian, taking on a massive home loan debt is seen as move towards securing their financial future. With international lending rates currently so low, it makes sense for the Government to take a similar approach; borrowing more to invest in the assets that will set Australia up for decades of growth.

Previous governments have come out in support of Australian innovation and told small, medium and large businesses to back themselves to succeed. It’s now time for the Australian Government to do the same by preparing to borrow and invest in long-lived assets that will yield an economic return.

What do you think? Should Australia make strategic investments over the next decade with the specific goal of increasing economic growth? Or should we focus on reducing Government debt to $0?

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login

    11th Aug 2016
    10:14am
    With interest rates at an all time low, yes, it's obviously time to borrow and build infrastructure.

    I don't know how anyone could argue with that.
    Anonymous
    11th Aug 2016
    12:16pm
    I agree - the RBA has been left to do all the lifting - the government are just leaning to use that twat Hockey's words.

    Governments don't have the same budgeting problems as households and can take on far more debt. Most people don't get that - and the government panders to their perceptions.

    They need to have complimentary fiscal policies to assist the RBA - but probably won't do anything until it is too late - as usual.
    Rod63
    11th Aug 2016
    2:10pm
    Agree with you Reasons.

    BTW the word you want in you second last line is "complementary".
    Oars
    12th Aug 2016
    12:20pm
    Reasons- You are incorrect. The RBA merely sift through figures that have been created by workers- yes workers. These werkers include each and every small medium and big employment group, that create products that sell. The outcome of all those workers is placed into accountants' books from which these RBA "oracles of doom" make their review. These RBA people do absolutely nothing except create negative comments which sends ripples through the business community: from small, one man bands, to the big fullas. Without the RBA, the commercial world could be a better place. They are like headmasters bragging about the end-of-year results of hard working students.At least headmasters do something during the year to assist their students.
    Old Geezer
    11th Aug 2016
    10:31am
    Stupid idea as the Government already has way too much debt. Time to reign it in and stop mortgaging our kids and grandkids future.
    Batara
    11th Aug 2016
    10:54am
    OG it is people who fall for the misinformation about debt who are the real threat to our grandkids' future. Invest to grow the economy. Don't you get that? Far smarter than giving the rich more taxation favours. That money would be squirrelled away by the scrooges and their would be NO JOBS & NO GROWTH.
    Old Geezer
    11th Aug 2016
    11:13am
    I disagree. It would be better to reduce the company tax rate and get more revenue to fund the infrastructure. Why do you think Trump wants to reduce the company tax in US to 15%?

    Also can you risk the government building anything? No real accountability for the costs at all. NBN a good example.
    Anonymous
    11th Aug 2016
    12:00pm
    OG - you do realise that government TAX is a government's ONLY revenue - and if they drop the tax - they immediately get LESS revenue?
    Hasbeen
    11th Aug 2016
    12:27pm
    Go tell that to the Greeks & Spanish Batara.
    Old Geezer
    11th Aug 2016
    3:50pm
    A lower tax rate to companies does not mean they will pay less tax. I know of a company who made $10 million and paid a tax specialist $7 million so that they paid no tax on it. With a lower tax rate then companies would be more inclined to pay more tax as it become uneconomic to paid tax professionals to save tax.

    Also if you know anything about taxation you will realise that if someone takes dividend out of a company they will have that dividend taxed at their rate less what they tax the company paid. If all the income is distributed then the tax rate paid is that of the individual which is the same no matter what the company tax rate is. Even if all the income is not distributed now it will be in the future.

    Why do you think Trump wants to lower the company tax rate in the US to 15%? Collect more tax!
    Anonymous
    11th Aug 2016
    4:51pm
    What a load of tripe, OG. Lower tax rates will make companies pay more? Garbage! Lower tax rates will mean they will pay less, and foreign companies will pay less to the ATO and more to the tax office in their home country. It's an idiotic notion that we can't afford.
    Old Geezer
    11th Aug 2016
    5:55pm
    Ha ha Rainey you really have no idea what happens in reality.
    Golden Oldie
    11th Aug 2016
    6:04pm
    Old Geezer, how do you expect revenue to grow by cutting company income tax rates?
    Old Geezer
    11th Aug 2016
    6:23pm
    It's called the multiplier effect. If you cut taxes there is more money to spend to create more revenue which due to the multiplier effect produces more tax payable to the government coffers. Likewise if you increase taxes there will be less revenue and less tax payable.
    Anonymous
    11th Aug 2016
    8:44pm
    It's actually called trickle down economics. The theory is the recipients get the money and spend it.

    And it is now totally discredited.

    The reality is that history now documents that the rich keep the money and get richer - and the poor get poorer.

    It's a scam perpetrated by the elite on the working class.

    And it just doesn't work.
    Hasbeen
    11th Aug 2016
    10:42am
    What a fool. No wonder the reserve bank has been getting it all wrong for years.

    Big government spending always gives heaps to a few large players, jobs to a very limited sector in the construction industry, & that being mostly the basically criminal Builders Labourers Federation, & then depends on a trickle down which never reaches us.

    Anyone seen the money from heaven from the last time?

    Obviously this clown approves in Rudd running up the debt with fool schemes, [pink bats anyone?] & our idiot current PM spending $50 billion to buy $20 billion worth of subs, built in the failed state of South Oz.

    God help us, because these fools wont.
    Batara
    11th Aug 2016
    10:57am
    Love your name Hasbeen. So appropriate. Still on about pink batts - get up to date with Census Fail mate.
    Old Man
    11th Aug 2016
    11:52am
    Oh Batara, I'd rather be known as a Has Been than like a lot of people who can identify as Never Was.
    HarrysOpinion
    11th Aug 2016
    2:05pm
    "Anyone seen the money from heaven from the last time?"

    Yes- when RBA got a $7 billion "leg-up" from the Coalition government in 2014. That was money from heaven for them !
    Old Man
    11th Aug 2016
    4:25pm
    You're right HS but would you care to expand? Labor ripped funds off the Reserve which needed the funds to run properly. The Coalition merely replaced the funds to enable the Reserve to continue doing the job it is required to do.
    HarrysOpinion
    11th Aug 2016
    11:36pm
    Do you have factual evidence that Labor ripped it off RBA? If so please enlighten us.
    Batara
    11th Aug 2016
    10:48am
    Only Blind Freddy could not see the wisdom in this advice. I wish Glenn was PM instead of the craven nincompoop we have who is so focussed on his party room opinion that he fails Australian society every time. Pull finger Mal and do something smart for the first time since last September when you knifed Abbott - that was smart but since then you have been dumb and dumber.
    particolor
    11th Aug 2016
    1:04pm
    Now where's the Mirror ?? I want to straighten up a Tad for a Selfie !! :-) :-)
    Julie
    11th Aug 2016
    10:51am
    Yes, Glen Stevens' comments are absolutely correct. Government debt is a different entity to private debt. Government debt is necessary for nation building and ongoing development. Our nation has already been outstripped by many "developing" nations across Asia both in transport infrastructure and information and communications technologies. I am concerned about the difficult lifestyles that many of succeeding generations of Australians may face if we do not act now to promote infrastructure development, which can only be financed by government borrowings.
    Pamiea
    11th Aug 2016
    10:52am
    In one's own home we try to live within our budget and not get ourselves into debt IF WE ARE WISE. The Government should do likewise. Get rid of debt first and then when that is in order then go ahead and look at our infrastructure. To me that is plain common sense.
    Batara
    11th Aug 2016
    10:59am
    Take it you never bought a house then. Worried about the debt
    Anonymous
    11th Aug 2016
    11:01am
    No, it's not common sense. It's ill-informed, unthinking, right wing dogma.

    Did you actually read the article?
    Rosret
    11th Aug 2016
    11:46am
    Batara, you can only get a loan for a house if you have the equity. We are selling all our assets. So what would we be putting up as equity? Our children's future. I realise you need to invest for future growth but we really need to make sure what we use those borrowing for will be economically viable. i.e. a loan to give retirees medical care would not be wise (nice but not wise).
    TREBOR
    11th Aug 2016
    11:51am
    By the time we get there, Pamiea, there will be no means of earning a living so you can stay in your house. That is the difference. Governments need to BUILD - not sustain as is.
    Rae
    11th Aug 2016
    2:34pm
    Except the government can print money legally and you can't. Sovereign debt is not like household debt.

    Forget inflation because there isn't any and won't be any unless the IMF create it.

    The LNP should have printed $AU when they were worth $1.08US and built with it or used it to pay down debt.

    We were in a boom with a high dollar and they missed that opportunity.
    Rosret
    11th Aug 2016
    6:39pm
    Rae there is a surreal level of inflation. A house in Sydney has gained $30k per year since 1986 just sitting there without any improvements whatsoever.
    The government is fluttering the idea of increasing the GST from 10 -15%. A stamp went from 60c to a $1. etc etc. What we don't have is interest bearing deposits.
    downunder
    11th Aug 2016
    11:30am
    With a government that has only 5 cents of brain it would be a 'no-brainer', but the current mob in Canberra, the moppets would do a better job
    Anonymous
    11th Aug 2016
    11:46am
    "Now is the time to invest" - what a lot of crap! With the government we have now it would be the worst thing to do. Even IF you were lucky enough to benefit from an investment you would be penalised by the government in greater taxes and/or a cutback in some other kind of entitlement. There was s VERY little business or consumer confidence at the moment and this is mostly because of this government - world instability, terrorist threats, upcoming overseas elections, etc are all secondary to eroding faith and trust after the inept political leadership we now have.

    11th Aug 2016
    11:36am
    In the photo Stevens is saying, "I'm up here and the rest of you are down there".
    Rosret
    11th Aug 2016
    11:40am
    Yes, indeed. hehehe
    particolor
    11th Aug 2016
    1:09pm
    No ! I want it UP here ! :-) but I'm afraid its DOWN There !! :-(
    Rosret
    11th Aug 2016
    11:39am
    Ah - there are two different types of people in our community. Those who wait until they can afford to spend and those who spend to the limit of their ability working on future interest and capital gain. There is a balance. The later is a sandcastle. It may stand for quite some time but eventually the high tide will wash it away. If you want a strong structure that will last for centuries it needs to be built of rock and no matter what economic climate they will be able to weather the storm.
    Unfortunately, Sydney is being built on tomorrow's money and everyone gets excited about the price of houses rocketing passed $1m. Those in the pyramid buying are happy - but not their children. Similarly, we can all go on happily spending and borrowing on Australia's assets- but not our children.
    The reason we survived the global crisis to some extent is we didn't have the low doc homes and we didn't borrow against thin air.
    Old Man
    11th Aug 2016
    11:54am
    Rosret, there are three different types in our community; those who can count and those who can't.
    particolor
    11th Aug 2016
    1:12pm
    And a third Type that always Stops at 2 :-) :-HIC !!
    Phil1943
    11th Aug 2016
    11:44am
    Stevens is 100% correct. Now is the time to start making up for so many years of falling behind in areas like public transport, road repairs, building new schools and hospitals - the list goes on. Instead of selling off infrastructure like ports and 'poles and wires' we should be building the Australia of the future. Hey, doesn't that give us both jobs and growth? Why can't Canberra's resident fools get it?
    Rosret
    11th Aug 2016
    12:00pm
    Phil1943, I am not sure where you live however the A1 north and south of Sydney is cutting through pristine farmland at the most astounding rate. The Eastern seaboard is opening up. Its such a shame we didn't preserve the coast and develop the Great Dividing Range Hume Highway with exit distributors to coastal towns.
    However, Sydney is like a traffic rootball that is strangling itself. We do need to invest in new satellite cities however with only a population of 26 million and no longer having the financial input that Great Britian initially invested in our nation we are somewhat limited. Our new immigrants don't come with a "dowry" and current policy appears to be to sell off bits of Australia to fund infrastructure.
    TREBOR
    11th Aug 2016
    11:49am
    Built the railways and the 'Arbour Bridge that way..... then paid it off over years, like a mortgage.

    I've previously cited the cycle of industrial dominance stemming from WW II - first the Allies, with their greater established industrial capacity, won the war by flattening their chief opponents. The same Allies, under the Marshall Plan, then rebuilt those flattened opponents as bastions against rising Communism, and in doing so ensured that they started off with the latest technology and equipment and organisational approach - which soon demonstrated that they could out-strip the now aging and often obsolete former Allied industrial base. BHP was a clear example of continuing to use 1930's infrastructure while competing with Japan and Germany who used 60's and 70's infrastructure.... never going to happen.....

    Now the wheel has turned full cycle and the countries developed under a modern form of capitalist Marshall Plan, of introducing industrial capacity to 'developing countries' has forced the descent of the former Allies even deeper into the mire of now becoming only the end users of products, as well as, in the case of Oz, a Banana Republic much loke those countries recently developed under that second (unofficial) Marshall Plan (with all its unforeseen (don't make me laugh) consequences for the West.

    Zo, Poppets - we of the West are left with only one or two choices - we either accept our demise as striders of world industrial power - or we re-equip using even more modern and efficient technology and organisational structures.

    Hence my Plan for the GAIA - the Great Australian Infrastructure Advance - which has its first base as a serious industrial capacity built on the coast of Western Australia, and using wind, solar and Shelf gas to power its industries and cities - cities filled with living units as self-sustaining as possible. The GAIA idea was to create steel etc from the nearby fields, and then translate it into finished products, including ship-building.

    Just my humble contribution here, and an example of what needs to be done in some way.

    Governments need to get away from viewing 'infrastructure' as toll roads and such - and begin to look forward to genuine infrastructure as being industrial blocks that operate efficiently.

    On another note - I see cracks appearing in the 'global economy' as we speak - many cracks, and as I've also said for a long time - chopping off your own hands (industrially) and shifting your operations offshore to cheaper labour means that all you are doing is placing your industry in an area whose inhabitants cannot buy your product, while you simultaneously chop off the ability of your 'old country' to buy your products - eventually resulting in no market at all, and no real change in ability to 'compete' with cheaper wage countries at all, since once all are on the same 'level playing field' (with masses of poor for life peasants), NONE can compete!!

    The basis of genuine competition is differences in incomes - and once all are reduce to penury equally (apart from those running the show), - no competition exists any more, and no market.
    Sen.Cit.90
    11th Aug 2016
    12:47pm
    Hi Trebor,
    Well wrote, I cannot argue or wish too with your input, the marshal plan in particular
    Rae
    11th Aug 2016
    2:46pm
    Well explained TREBOR.

    Funny how the LNP IPA faithful cannot see the end result of neoliberal ideology and globalisation.

    The Western corporations and governments have sold us out and let China win with a bit of help from the IMF and World Bank.
    TREBOR
    11th Aug 2016
    8:52pm
    It was a quick draft off the top of the head - needs a little refining...

    Thanks, guys.
    TREBOR
    11th Aug 2016
    9:02pm
    Oh - I expect China to go the way of Japan - with rising costs of production, internal competition on the part of farmers (etc) to compete financially with the CHIMP (Chines Industrial and Manufacturing Person), what we see is a rapid rise in costs of manufacture in China - wage rises are 17% or so a year.... (hello)... and all the other producers/workers need to keep up with that.

    It's really a form of neo-colonisation - or capital colonisation... and the end result, as you can see, has been to bring down the largest Communist state in the world, and create it anew as a capitalist state.

    China currently leases many patterns for automobiles etc from Japan - while the Japanese are increasingly hard pressed to compete with the 'Asian Little Tigers', such as Malaysia, Taiwan, etc.

    In any case, once the market is flooded, and the majority in the world are reduced to penury - who will be buying?

    How many Asians are buying Holden cars? How many Australians are these days, since they are no longer a local product. And for how long can a market for both Asian and Holden cars continue here?

    That's what is important in the 'global economy' fiasco (I call it that deliberately, since it is designed ONLY to produce a massive income over a short term for the middle men - and NOBODY else).
    Spitfire
    11th Aug 2016
    11:51am
    There is an old expression that rings true here, you need to 'Speculate to Accumulate'
    Anonymous
    11th Aug 2016
    3:24pm
    You can speculate and "decimate", as well.
    ex PS
    12th Aug 2016
    5:55pm
    Spitfire, I believe that the old expression that you mentioned was used a lot by con men and snake oil salesmen to rip people off.
    Old Man
    11th Aug 2016
    12:00pm
    Glenn Stevens has done a good job and has the right to express an opinion. The position he held does not necessarily mean that he is right. There are economists all over Australia who have opinions and those opinions are as diverse as there are economists. The answer may well lie halfway between the question put; do we make strategic investments or do we reduce the debt to $0.
    Old Man
    11th Aug 2016
    12:10pm
    On reading a lot of posts, I see a number of very good suggestions. A lot of these suggestions fall directly under the responsibility of state governments and not federal governments. In the case of NSW, assets are being sold off to raise funds to construct necessary infrastructure against very vocal opposition. Back when I first started work, there was a huge number of organisations being controlled by various governments and most of these have been privatised. It matters little which side of government sold these off because the sales were of benefit to the general population.
    lasaboy
    11th Aug 2016
    12:42pm
    We would not need to borrow if these bastards (successive governments, both Liberal and Labor) had not sold every asset we owned off to all and sundry
    Anonymous
    11th Aug 2016
    12:46pm
    Well, we would. Bob Menzies used huge borrowings.
    particolor
    11th Aug 2016
    1:14pm
    You got it in One there Lasaboy !! :-( :-(
    Thumper88
    11th Aug 2016
    12:59pm
    Here is a question for you all, who knows the Queen Victoria Building in Sydney? Who knows when it was built? Who knows why it was built? If you research this it will answer all the questions of when and why government should build to stimulate economies
    floss
    11th Aug 2016
    1:01pm
    Yes lets borrow so we can build more infrastructure so we can then sell it or give it away as we have done in the past.Sound a bit third world to me, but that is where we heading.
    particolor
    11th Aug 2016
    2:34pm
    They'll sell our Dams Next !! :-( And Water will be the same price as Beer ..Plus TAX.. Excise and GST :-(
    Hawkeye
    11th Aug 2016
    3:19pm
    Parti, that won't affect me. SA doesn't have any dams.
    And the water is already more expensive than the garbage they pass off as being beer.
    Fair dinkum, there's so much sediment in each bottle that I don't know whether to drink it or eat it. (That applies to both the water and the beer.) Thank god there's a good supply of Tooheys over here now.
    particolor
    15th Aug 2016
    3:22pm
    Lived there for 25 years or more and know what you mean :-) The Chicken Noodle Soup on tap was bad :-( but the stuff they called Beer was Worse !! :-( :-( Glad to be back home :-)
    KSS
    11th Aug 2016
    1:06pm
    Surely the difference is borrowing to build a future (much like the home mortgage) or borrowing to fund a lifestyle you can't afford (much like using the credit card and not paying it off every month).

    Currently Australia is using its credit card with no ROI and no hope of re-paying the on-going debt. This simply can't continue.
    Drew
    11th Aug 2016
    2:48pm
    Just to be fair, there are a few projects (the NBN for one) that have contributed to the current debt that will generate a return on investment and should stimulate growth in the online sector one would imagine. These are the type of projects (hopefully a bit more successful) we should be looking to.
    particolor
    11th Aug 2016
    1:17pm
    Now is the time for all Good Big Businesses to come to the Aid of their Party !! :-) :-)
    HarrysOpinion
    11th Aug 2016
    1:52pm
    The government's Budget over next 7 years shows income tax revenue -v-expenditure as negative deficit. You can't borrow more if you don't have enough tax revenue to pay the interest on borrowings now. Didn't Joe Hockey make a huge song and dance about this? Reducing company tax is stupid, given that company tax only generates about 23% of tax revenue. Company tax must be go up higher. An extra tax of $2 billion per year on all 4 major banks plus a proportionate increase in tax on all other banks wouldn't go astray over the next 10 years = $80 billion + in extra revenue. The big bucks to take are not in robbing welfare expenditure but from corporate multinationals and mega-buck banks. As for infrastructure, this should be the responsibility of each state government and local councils, some are sitting on very nice surpluses, they have to spend this money for the benefit of future generations.
    Rae
    11th Aug 2016
    2:53pm
    Winding back Howard's tax cuts, sorting out superannuation tax perks a little, raising the GST and land taxes may all be necessary now that all the dividends from the assets we once owned are no longer available.
    Boof
    11th Aug 2016
    2:08pm
    The Pink bats helped Austrakia weather the world money crisis along with other measures applied by Rudd. It wasn't his fault that houses were illegally wired & contractors faiked to turn off the "sparks" b4 sending people into the roof. Drongo's would n know that.
    ex PS
    12th Aug 2016
    9:02am
    Workplace safety is and always will be the responsibility of the business owner. If Rudd was personally responsible for the pink bat deaths then it must automatically follow that Turnbull is personally responsible for the Census fiasco.
    Wrong assumptions in both cases but politically motivated sheep will always slant the truth to suit their own views. Slanting the truth often means lying.
    MICK
    11th Aug 2016
    3:10pm
    I think that Morrison should borrow for more $11,000 dinners. Maybe that could be an everyday event in future.
    Glenn Stevens is just another failed Central Banker. They're littered all around the planet: money printers, supporters of 'too big to fail banks' who are laughing at us all, near zero interest rates, etc.
    What this government needs to do is the increase interest rates for the domestic market. That will put a value on money again and a sick system will start to cleanse. Investing in the nation misses the point that big business in this country is inept and incapable of making strategic investments of any sort. We do not need more debt from a failed political system which can do no more than flog off the nation.
    Old Geezer
    11th Aug 2016
    4:29pm
    What about the government issues infrastructure bonds for pensioners to invest in at a higher rate than the cash rate?

    Domestically interest rates cannot be increased because of the carry trade and it's effect on the Aussie dollar. The higher our interest rates the higher our dollar will go as overseas people invest in our dollar for the better than their own interest rates. If the rate had not been cut last week we would have a dollar over 80c today. NZ had to cut their interest rates for the same reason.
    Anonymous
    11th Aug 2016
    4:33pm
    You mean this is a BAD thing?
    Old Geezer
    11th Aug 2016
    4:39pm
    RBA thinks it is a bad thing.
    ex PS
    11th Aug 2016
    5:24pm
    Of course it makes sense but the government can't do it. If they did it would be tantamount to admitting that the LNP was right. Getting back at the LNP is more important to them than fixing the economy.
    Petty politics will ultimately destroy this country.
    ex PS
    11th Aug 2016
    5:27pm
    That should have been "ALP was right"
    fordyoot
    11th Aug 2016
    6:16pm
    Glen Stevens did a great job in the circumstances. Just like every other reserve banker all over the world he has no idea where it is all going. The general consensus of opinion was that the GFC was a warning. There will be another collapse but when and how bad is not known. The system is broken but nobody wants to face up to it.
    jackyd
    11th Aug 2016
    7:20pm
    At last somebody has posted something that does make sense.
    Only issue is that there is nothing in the kitty to provide economic stimulus should and when the big crunch comes and unlike the period post WW2, when the West had an industrial position that was able to be built upon, that advantage has now shifted to the East.
    A very sick scenario we are handballing to the next generations.
    Oars
    12th Aug 2016
    10:06am
    Instead of placing MONEY as our centre of attention, why not place health ( keeping fit) and humour - try it sometime- it's a larf that sends away the blues .
    Fredklaus
    11th Aug 2016
    6:51pm
    Pity he's not our PM
    Oars
    11th Aug 2016
    9:57pm
    It is typical of these types of Officilas with little "on the ground" experience. The first question I ask is : How much do we borrow and from whom ? Also , do we have a greedy Ozzy banker breathing down our neck at every gitter in our business" The yanks have made it easier to borrow- for better or for worse- but these Ozzy bakers are like Barracodas- just waiting to devour the borrower, and sell it to a mate. Baaaa- The yanks have picked up their lot, why not Ozzy- Answer- Ozzy bankers/investors too dammed slow and costly to borrow here. Good night.
    BundyGil
    12th Aug 2016
    1:04am
    Only way to go!

    Unfortunately, the dozy Australian electorate elected a government who couldn't run a chook raffle, so I'm not at all sure his advice will be taken. Turnbull, and a few forward looking cohorts would be all for it, but the rest of them are without a clue. DEPT!! WE CAN'T HAVE MORE DEPT!! I'm sure they all are in dept to their eyeballs with their houses, but Australian national dept, no way, even though the interest rate is now negligible.

    One hopes sense will prevail, but unfortunately there's precious little sense in that lot of turkeys.
    BundyGil
    12th Aug 2016
    1:04am
    Only way to go!

    Unfortunately, the dozy Australian electorate elected a government who couldn't run a chook raffle, so I'm not at all sure his advice will be taken. Turnbull, and a few forward looking cohorts would be all for it, but the rest of them are without a clue. DEPT!! WE CAN'T HAVE MORE DEPT!! I'm sure they all are in dept to their eyeballs with their houses, but Australian national dept, no way, even though the interest rate is now negligible.

    One hopes sense will prevail, but unfortunately there's precious little sense in that lot of turkeys.
    Oars
    12th Aug 2016
    10:04am
    BundyGil


    have you got a shaky hand or are you trying to press a point with repetition ?
    It's a bit early for a drink !!!!!
    BundyGil
    12th Aug 2016
    1:04am
    Only way to go!

    Unfortunately, the dozy Australian electorate elected a government who couldn't run a chook raffle, so I'm not at all sure his advice will be taken. Turnbull, and a few forward looking cohorts would be all for it, but the rest of them are without a clue. DEPT!! WE CAN'T HAVE MORE DEPT!! I'm sure they all are in dept to their eyeballs with their houses, but Australian national dept, no way, even though the interest rate is now negligible.

    One hopes sense will prevail, but unfortunately there's precious little sense in that lot of turkeys.
    ex PS
    12th Aug 2016
    9:06am
    Unfortunately both of the so called major party's are so bogged down in party political propaganda that they are not able to exercise common sense for fear of appearing weak.
    bohemian
    12th Aug 2016
    12:07pm
    Borrowing to build infrastructure will create jobs and grow the economy into the future.
    Another way is to print money to reduce or get rid of foreign debt completely. The interest saved from borrowings can be immediately used to create jobs and fund services we need
    Scrivener
    12th Aug 2016
    1:28pm
    Pity it has to be done with 'borrowings' while all the dividends from corporate profits goes to overseas investors. Why not reinvest some of Australia's wealth in itself.
    Hell, the Rockefellas and the Chinese own the joint anyway. Who cares!
    Scrivener
    12th Aug 2016
    1:24pm
    Yep!
    Pity all Morrison and the Libs understand is conservative garnering of cash. 'Business' people who just don't get 'investment'. Tax Tax Tax. Goodness that's innovative. Who would have thought of that? The Sherif of Nottingham maybe.
    Pamiea
    12th Aug 2016
    2:40pm
    Batara were u referring to me about never having bought a house? Try about 6. Built three,, two without a partner, renovated one and bought two brand new so yes I've certainly had mortgages.
    MD
    12th Aug 2016
    6:31pm
    Accountants, Financiers, Speculators, Bankers & collectively, (dare I say) - Wankers all: deal generally in facts & figures historic, ie, past and established record of fiscal dealings.
    Well sure, we do (or at least they do) need this collated data to help determine future direction for both lending & borrowing. Regards quite a few posts herein; far, far, too much emphasis is placed on the past - "The Marshall Plan", "Bob Menzies (did this)", Krudd (ditto) not to mention the stand off between LNP vs ALP hecklers.
    The little I understand of world affairs gives me to believe that 'disruptors' - bitcoin, crowd funding & the like, (ISIS might be considered successful? at this) will largely determine the degree of investment going forward. Believe it or not, forward is considered progressive, the past is just that - past.
    We can only hope that of those elected to LEAD: and thereby their choice of appointments
    to leading institutions, is whether they address the present crises with due consideration to the past, balanced thought to the present and a determinate consideration for our future will yet remain to be seen. Everyone of us is required, at some point; to 'toe the line' at the behest of the Rockerfellers, Vestys, Aga Khans or any other of their countless multi - faceted 'fronts', PM's or RBA Guvner's included.
    Borrow to invest in/for the future ? - it's the only way to go. Growth = progress, & progress costs , for that matter - what is progress ?
    Spare a thought for poor retiring Glen, for him going forward it's bound to be struggle street ! I wish him well.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles