MYEFO: How will Scott Morrison balance the books?

Just how the economy is faring is set to be revealed tomorrow.

MYEFO: How will Scott Morrison balance the books?

Just how the economy is faring is set to be revealed tomorrow when Treasurer Scott Morrison delivers his Mid Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO) and we may not like what we hear.

Mr Morrison clearly indicated yesterday that all spending measures announced since the Federal Budget in May will need to be offset by savings.  In the lead up to the MYEFO, Deloitte Access Economics calculated that the extra spending since the May budget totalled $5 billion over four years.  The impact on revenue due to stagnant wage growth and the sharp drop in commodity prices will make the job all the more difficult.

The extra spending, which includes the Prime Minister’s $1.1 billion innovation strategy and the cost of resettling 12,000 refugees, estimated at $700 million, is predicted to cost the Budget $1.74 billion in 2015-16 and $1.56 billion in 2016-17.  Figures that have not escaped Mr Morrison’s notice, "The budget rules state that any new spending must be fully offset," he said. "There have been a series of measures since the budget that require the offset rule to be applied such as the commitment to accept 12,000 refugee and humanitarian entrants, the reversal of the bank deposits tax as well as additional funding for Roads to Recovery".

With economists predicting that the Treasurer will announce a worsening budget position, with the deficit between $33 billion and $39 billion, the message at the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) on Friday was clear. A joint communication from the Federal Government and COAG warned of "emerging budgetary pressures across all levels of government, particularly in the health sector".

Where the savings will be found remains to be seen but Mr Morrison assured it would not be through additional taxes, "The government will continue to restore the budget by controlling expenditure and supporting policies that grow the economy.  The budget will not be restored by increasing the overall tax burden on Australians."

Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen challenged Mr Morrison’s position that the Government was spending too much, rather than failing to secure revenue. "For the Treasurer to claim that he can return the budget to balance without dealing with revenue is just plain wrong," Mr Bowen said.

Read more at SMH.com.au

Opinion: Is Malcolm Turnbull’s honeymoon over?

So, our economy has the same problem that a lot of us do – spending more than we earn – and we’re about to find out the ramifications of such splurging.

As Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has ridden the wave of popularity, and rightly so many would argue. He has addressed many of the issues his predecessor Tony Abbott simply swept under the carpet, only this weekend lifting the ban on the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) investment in wind power.

For a while we could pretend everything was rosie, but how quickly the political landscape changes. The long Christmas Parliamentary break possibly came as a blessed relief for Mr Turnbull as it meant he didn’t have to deal with the tricky case of Mal Brough, who has again found himself embroiled in the Peter Slipper saga that just won’t go away.

The signing of the climate deal in Paris not only means additional costs for Australia to meet targets and cover its contribution to future funds, but it will also bring back into the spotlight the controversial Adani mine deal, which it is estimated will produce more emissions than Bangladesh. 

And let’s not forget the curly question of GST – will it be raised or won’t it? While many believe that it’s a ‘when and how’ question rather than ‘if’, it could be the policy that makes or breaks a government in a Federal Election year.

Often the Mid Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO) is considered a necessary evil, perhaps even something of a damp squib. This year, however, in his first big gig, Treasurer Scott Morrison will have to burst the bubble of optimism that has cushioned Mr Turnbull over the last three months. Mr Morrison, the man given the toughest jobs in Australian politics due to his unwavering commitment to what he believes is right, may just be facing his most difficult year yet in his political career – trying to balance the books and the expectations of a nation.

So, who will pay the price for spending, on a grand scale, more than we earn? I think it could be you and me. 

Do you think the MYEFO will be all bad news? Or do you think that Mr Morrison has a handle on the economy? What measures do you expect to see to redress the imbalance between revenue and expenditure? Do you think Malcolm Turnbull is in for a bumpy ride, or will he simply roll with the punches and continue with his vision for the country?





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    10:15am
    So here we are again. Blind Freddy can see where this is now heading: increase in the GST (the first one), a broadening of the base (to hit the dirt poor) and maybe holding off on tax cuts for the rich until after the next election...........when a LNP government will act within the first few weeks.
    The storyline never changes and the history of the current government is clear: rich exempt, everybody else fair game. Some things never change!
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    11:53am
    We will see Morrison smoking cigars soon.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    12:38pm
    Left in the cigar box by Hockey?
    What about Carbon reduction?
    libsareliars
    16th Dec 2015
    2:10pm
    Yes, here we go again - Co-payment Mark II. What is it with this lot that they always go after the least able and disadvantaged? Turnbull is no different to Abbot. They just changed the snake oil man selling their disgusting policies.
    Anonymous
    18th Dec 2015
    7:18am
    Comes next election we must NOT forget all of the lies and broken promises the Li(e)berals made during and after the last federal election. Abbott promised that the health expenditure would not be cut, yet it was (for example). Many of the myriad of lies are still being perpetuated by Turnbull and his cabinet.

    Kick these mongrels OUT at the next election. (If we don't, then we deserve to be screwed over.) Then force the ALP government to raise revenue by sorting out superannuation tax concessions for the rich, end negative gearing, etc.
    Happy cyclist
    14th Dec 2015
    10:17am
    You do sort of have to laugh don't you? The Libs were so self-righteous about Labor's deficit. No matter how many experts tried to explain that due to the global financial crisis (which Labor kept us largely out of) the country had lost of lot of its income so the natural economic reaction is a deficit. The Libs promised they were going to immediately balance the books. Now their deficit is twice the size of Labor's and growing. But do we hear one word of apology for making promises which they always knew were rubbish? No, I don't think so.
    PlanB
    14th Dec 2015
    10:31am
    Darn right there Happy,


    The smirk on Morrison's face says a lot, I find that so many of the Libs have that sly smirk --Costello had it, Morrison and Hockey.
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    10:32am
    Yes, I agree, the Libs made some/many very stupid promises that we all know we're pure BS! Trouble is, we would do worse under Labour .... Perhaps mick would disagree. ("Perhaps'' that's an under statement!)
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    10:50am
    I'm waiting for the "bad baad Carbon Tax" to be the next wonderful revelation from the current government. That will leave me in hysterics on the floor. Wonder if we'll see Frank post on that one.
    mogo51
    14th Dec 2015
    11:02am
    Please at least try and be accurate with the information you put forward. Labour was a disgrace with handouts after handouts that did nothing to stimulate the economy. This is well documented. So called 'community projects' such as pink bats and school improvements (the latter was a fair idea but poorly executed) were nothing more than money for rorters. There was no spike in the economic scene - Infrastructure spending and job creating business
    development was the correct answer!

    I agree that Liberal has done little to try and balance the budget, in the face of a very large global economic downturn. Look at the price of our commodities now compared to a couple of years ago. There needs to be a concerted change towards evening the balance between rich and poor. NEITHER party has had the necessaries to do this. Super rorts, corporate tax dodging, politicians rorts with pension entitlements etc. all must be addressed for the people of Australia to be convinced that this or any other Government is serious and fair in their efforts to bring ghe economy of the country back on track.
    GST increases are a must, like it or not and across the board with trade offs by way of pension increases and tax cuts only for 'lower' income workers.
    The next thing is, they will be trying to resurrect industries they legislated out of existence with offers of assistance! Veil the small local businesses and manufacturers that were pushed out of business by 'free trade agreements' that only help the other side.
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    11:11am
    PlanB, at least all those you mention show one face not two, as do lots of opposition members, who come up with unbelievable replies to interviews of our PM or front benchers.
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    11:21am
    Mogo51, Labor inherited a massive spending obligation from the Howard/Costello Government which cut taxes and extended benefits for the wealthiest 20%. I'm not sure how, given the GFC, Labor could have been expected to do much better than they did. Handouts may have been unwise, but were to stimulate the economy and many experts say they reduced the impact of the GFC. Pink batts and school halls were a debacle, but come nowhere near the cost of the obligations they inherited from Howard and Costello. We SHOULD have had a huge wealth fund from the mining boom, but not only were the proceeds of the boom gifted to the wealthy, the boom was used an excuse to make long-term commitments to give more to the rich.

    Until the Government finally accepts that you can't get blood out of a stone and inequality is destroying society, and starts to tackle tax evasion, unfair superannuation concession, trusts, etc., there is no hope for Australia. But don't hold your breath for this Government to do the right thing. We will just see more bleeding the poor and killing the middle class and destroying all incentive to work, save and invest (which is what hypocrite Morrison says we need to do to restore the nation to economic health).
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:41am
    Mogo:
    Thing about the GFC was that Australia needed an INSTANT HIT. I was of the opinion that infrastructure was a much better option but unfortunately this takes many years of planning and organisation to get to the start date. We did not have that!
    The GST is going to very disproportionately hit the poor. Its intention. And then will come the next round of tax cuts for the rich. You know the storyline!
    The way forward is to COLLECT TAX FROM THE AVOIDERS...multinationals and the rich. Won't have a bar of that will we?

    Emps: your writing show all the traits of a brain dead stooge who repeats the dogma like a recording.
    Address the ISSUES Emps and avoid the blame game....and avoid deflecting attention from the indefensible. Tells a story. I feel sorry for you.
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    12:47pm
    mick, 'Emps aka brain dead stooge'? Well,I never ....
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    1:42pm
    mick - I believe you are correct and infrastructure should have been first option- it can be done without years of planning - look what Roosevelt did from 1930 to 1933 after Depression of 1929 - massive spending on infrastructure and many of USA major highways/tollways were built during this time - massive way to reduce umemployment. I think your right about some mutlinationals but its clearly not easy otherwise government would have done it - as for super rich - it doesn't seem to matter what govns do - they just buy the best financial advisors and lawyers and get away with it.
    the libs have been major disappointments with economic management since election BUT labor would be much worse - Shorten and Bowen are clueless-
    Rae
    14th Dec 2015
    3:20pm
    Good luck with stimulating the economy.

    The ASX200 is under the 5000 level today. Not pretty when the support level is breached like that.

    The junk bond market has begun to fail as well.

    I'm afraid that Morrison is too ideologically driven and will introduce a GST and cut government spending.

    I was in the US in 2009 and the malls were empty.
    Day after day of no sales.

    I bought some gorgeous clothes and accessories at discounts of up to 80%. It was a nightmare for business owners.

    I do hope the LNP don't scare the punters like that but am not holding my breath.

    @50 000 to 300 000 immigrants over a decade and a half was too many for the States health and education budgets. It was stupid to bring in those numbers with no infrastructure spend.

    Then a massive sell off of public assets that returned dividends and
    ridiculous tax legislation that decimated revenue even further.

    None of it makes sense in a Global Great Recession with deflation howling and a huge liquidity trap.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:25pm
    I remember the discussion at the time. No choice!
    Not sure about your last 2 lines. Sure Shorten is a herring....but the important thing is that Labor would spend money on us rather than sending it to well heeled business associates like the current government has done....and we are talking about significant sums of money. And then there is the 'blind eye' to collecting tax from the very wealthy with attempts to give tax relief. You can see why I throw my hands up in the air.
    I repeat my solution: VOTE FOR THE BEST INDEPENDENTS IN YOUR ELECTORATE (NO MATTER HOW POOR THEY ARE) AND SEND BOTH SIDES AN UNMISTAKEABLE MESSAGE. Then sit back and watch the cancer ridden major parties heal.
    mogo51
    14th Dec 2015
    4:07pm
    Mick, Bob, Rae and others with sensible contributions, am in agreement with your posts.
    I am a conservative voter, but did vote for an Indepenadent, in fact joined it and they got a couple of senators in and the big boss into the lower house.
    Regrettably, he has proven to be a clown, like one of the Senators and it has all gone pear shape. I am like many fed up with the two main players, unless voters looked to alternatives, there will be no going up the road that we all want. A fairer tax system, with the upper crust paying the same percentage of tax as the poor bastards in the bleachers, ie. pensioners, low income earners, many self funded retirees who just seem to be neglected.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    8:11pm
    mogo: Clive is a businessman with his own interests. He did sound good at election time...but has failed to deliver. Not sure if his senators are all that bad.
    Just for the record Palmer United is a smaller party, not Independent.
    My take is for communities to listen to what their candidates offer and band together voting in the best person they hear. And if this person fails them GET RID OF HIM the very next election. That way he does NOT get the parliamentary pension (need to be in 2 terms). It won't take long for the message to get around.
    The real trick is getting communities to understand the solution.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    9:58pm
    So Happy Cyclist in that case, how long is this GFC going to last???
    Adrianus
    15th Dec 2015
    7:06am
    mick you do realise that there are always plenty of infrastructure projects planned and ready to go. They are just waiting for funding. Labor could have brought forward any number of projects.
    That Labor government will be part of Australia's shameful history.
    We did the wrong thing by electing novices at a time when we needed strong leadership. But much worse, these novices were there for themselves. They have not changed.
    MICK
    15th Dec 2015
    3:40pm
    heemskerk: always amusing listening to a parrot repeating things you have said word for word. Polly want a crack?

    Frank: tell me the projects which were ready to go? The previous 2 Labor governments were far from perfect but the word 'SHAME' belongs entirely with this government and the Liberal Party corruption which appears to be common place. Never saw the previous governments trying to shovel money into the bank accounts of rich people! That is truly "shameful".
    libsareliars
    16th Dec 2015
    1:32pm
    Well said Rainey
    Anonymous
    18th Dec 2015
    7:22am
    During their first year in office, the Lieberals' treasurer, Joe Hockey, instantly DOUBLED our debt.
    Anonymous
    18th Dec 2015
    7:28am
    @Peterrj "Trouble is, we would do worse under Labour ...."

    1. It's a LABOR government, not "Labour".
    2. Your assertion is absolute BOLLOCKS! Under Labor, Australia had the third best debt-to-GDP ratio in the world. The lying Liberal vermin certainly wrecked that. It's a sick (and sickening) myth that the abovementioned vermin are 'good economic managers': they NEVER have been. That mantle truly belongs to Labor.
    ray from Bondi
    14th Dec 2015
    10:19am
    Please do anything that will upset the fat rich multinational corporations with the government, pensioners can find food in bins
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    1:05pm
    It's easy to snipe from the sidelines ray from Bondi but as my old boss used to say "Don't bring me problems, bring me solutions." I have no idea how any government can make multinationals pay more tax and I'll be interested in your solution.
    Rae
    14th Dec 2015
    3:23pm
    A small transaction tax would do it with a slightly higher overseas money transfer tax. All income and CST could be lowered.

    It would also slow down the crazy speculation within the markets and the currency war.
    Oldman Roo
    14th Dec 2015
    5:25pm
    Old Man , I do not accept your excuse that multinationals can not be made to pay more taxes . It is more a matter of nobody trying to get them to pay more taxes and if you read my comment that I am about to write you may just get the answer .
    TwainAndHume
    14th Dec 2015
    6:08pm
    Roo .... spot on .....
    ex PS
    16th Dec 2015
    11:27am
    Hey, Oldman, the government seems to have no problem making us pay taxes, don't seem to be trying too hard. Maybe, just maybe, they don't want to upset the ones who donate all those lovely campaign funds?
    maxchugg
    18th Dec 2015
    8:25am
    ABC late news on December 17:
    38% of big businesses paid no tax last year.
    30% paid less than the full rate, with banks included in this group.
    The loss of revenue was estimated at $26 billion.
    Next year the government is going to attempt to shame these parasites into paying their dues.
    Gee they are heroes. Pensioners have no escape from their financial obligations, even in the face of ongoing, savage attacks on their current living standards.
    In contrast a substantial portion of the wealthy decide how much tax they are prepared to pay, secure in the knowledge that any suggestion that any attempts to compel them to pay their taxes will be easily be rebuffed.
    If a letter from their high priced clever accountant doesn't cause the ATO to back off, the certainty of a court appearance represented by an expensive legal team will certainly do the trick.
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    10:25am
    "Mr Morrison clearly indicated yesterday that all spending measures announced since the Federal Budget in May will need to be offset by savings."

    Gee, wonder where that will come from???

    If you are on a part Aged Pension then you can assist by donating more of you saved cash to the Govt by a voluntarily payment to the ATO OR wait to be taxed out of existence.

    Another alternative would be to spend before the tax man catches you with more and more changes to the threshold limits which will rule you ineligible to claim the Aged Pension .... Even though the Aged Pension is your right ... Yeah right indeed!!!

    So if you are a part Aged Pensioner and you do spend 'some' of that soon to be taxed Super cash on things that you have denied yourself during your Super life how would that impact upon your fortnightly part Aged Pension payment????

    Believe it or not .... if you are on part Aged Pension and you spend some of your assessible assets on yourself for your pure indulgence .... LOL, the Govt will increase your Aged Pension payment!!!!

    Yep, hold cash and then loose some of that through a new tax OR indulge in a spending spree on yourself AND you will the be rewarded by the Govt by earning (that's another laugh) you will earn a higher Aged Pension payment due to your labor of spending you own money!!!!

    I note that Uncle Dan has DOM on special this week .... Which is a vast improvement on my cellar of clean skins!!!
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    10:57am
    We have already seen the feelers go out Peterrj. The assets test lowered, the retirement age increased (except for politicians) and now the big one: the family home to be sold, pensioners to move into a cave in the western suburbs and the money derived lived on.
    A wonderful deal for governments which care not about retirees having played by the rules for a lifetime.
    As was said above...the big end of town is off the list.
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    11:20am
    Quote... Mick,

    "and now the big one: the family home to be sold, pensioners to move into a cave".

    Typical scare mongering by labor who know very well Morrison has categorically stated the opposite. Family homes will never have to be sold by pensioners, and will not ever affect their pension income.

    However the idea is so very socialist, watch out if ever labor get back in to government, it seems the seed has been sown in their minds.
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    11:26am
    Oh come now, Emps. The Government was elected on a solemn promise ''no changes to pensions, health or education''. And you suggest we should believe Morrison's hollow pledges now? How gullible are you?
    And it was NOT Labor scare mongering that raised the threat in regard to the family home. It was the Productivity Commission, the board of which is supposedly independent but which appears to include a significant number of LNP supporters.
    As to socialist ideas, actually the LNP enacted a far more socialist and unfair pension change than the one Labor proposed.
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    11:43am
    Rainy: I'm not gullible, a large section of rank and file labor members support that idea. They are the gull1bles ones, or rather i would say callous ones. They push the notion that every pensioner home owner should reverse mortgage their homes to fund retirement. How revolting is that?
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:43am
    Emps: Scare mongering??? Check your facts. Hockey wanted exactly that. At the same time he rocked up in New Zealand claiming that there was no budget emergency...which has since hit us like a sledge hammer.
    The problem with you appears to be that you are only capable of writing right wing propaganda. Unable to argue the issues!
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    1:33pm
    You ARE gullible, Emps, because you indicated quite clearly that you accept Morrison's assurances. As I said, they were elected on promises not to cut pensions, health or education. And we all know they've broken every promise. They also promised not to increase GST, but guess what they've been debating the last few months.
    And how is it that Labor members who MIGHT support including the family home in the means test are callous and gullible, but LNP members who attack retirees who dared to save a little, but don't have enough to retire on, are not?
    As Mick says, you are only capable of right wing propaganda - in other words, ill-informed BS!
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    2:01pm
    Rainy:

    You ARE gullible, Emps, because you indicated quite clearly that you accept Morrison's assurances.

    I accept treasurer Morrisons sound management of Australia's economy. Oh dear, is that statement more of my right wing propaganda?

    The BS is left wingers BShttng about,broken promises,(remember Gillard?). Scaremongering about the GST. That is BS.

    What needs to be done and will be done is not BS. Regardless of left wing BS BS BS.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:29pm
    Emps: other posters suggest you are brain dead. I have to respectfully agree. Gillard broke ONE PROMISE. This government has come into office and BROKEN THEM ALL. And no 'he lied' campaign from card carrying Liberal Alan Jones.
    You are the one slinging BS because you, like your party, plain lie. It sickens me that people like you call yourself Australians.
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    6:47pm
    "I accept treasurer Morrisons sound management of Australia's economy."

    Obviously, Emps, you know NOTHING about what constitutes sound economic management. Destroying all incentives to work and save and making battlers far worse off while continuing to transfer more and more wealth into the hands of those who have far more than they can ever spend, and who dodge tax and keep their money off-shore is NOT sound economic management. In fact, it's a sure recipe for economic collapse, as we are seeing as we watch the share market movements.

    Now they are talking about making everything more expensive so that they can continue to ignore issues like tax evasion and superannuation tax concessions for the rich. Meanwhile they steadfastly refuse to make huge companies disclose their earnings or to try to make them pay their fair share of taxes.

    It's about as bad as mismanagement can get! Mind-boggling to think anyone is foolish enough to actually endorse their abuse of power.

    Guess what? When you punish people for working and saving, they stop. Then your tax take reduces and your pension costs increase. When you attack health services, more people get sicker and health costs rise. When you make the average Australian worse off, he spends less so there's less economic activity to stimulate jobs. The tax take reduces and unemployment increases.

    Labor has been widely criticized for their economic stimulus package, but it got people spending and money circulating, and that's precisely what we need to do now. We need money to go around, not to sit in foreign bank accounts of mega millionaires! And we need the revenue that we are forgoing by allowing tax rorts and superannuation concessions to continue. But no, they'll hit the average Joe again and again and again until the middle class is wiped out and the lower class is living in poverty, and meanwhile we keep spending more keeping very rich superannuants in luxurious retirement than any aged pensioner could ever dream of collecting over even a long lifetime!

    Of course, since you are such a staunch LNP supporter, it's likely you are one of the rich they are over-indulging.
    MICK
    16th Dec 2015
    9:13am
    Good post Rainey. You give a large dose of reality which the supporters of the destitute current government will never accept. It is all about 'their' right to rort the tax system and 'their right' to put taxes on those who are less well off. The rhetoric which is used is quite perverse. Anything other than own up and get a good balance....which I would never argue against.
    Sad that Emps and a couple of others on this site spend their time ignoring the many many sins of this government, its continual attempts to attack the bank accounts of the poor and its complete ignorance of morals of any sort.
    WE NEED AN ELECTION.
    Stork
    14th Dec 2015
    10:30am
    Memories are short. The deficit began with Rudd and Gillard. Remember Rudds $2,000 handout? The Gonski scheme? And other items committed by Labor just before the Liberals were voted in. Labor knew the economy was slowing and yet they set up the following government with overwhelming debts. OK, I know the Liberals leave much to be desired, but they are not the whole cause of our current situation. And unfortunately nobody is willing to sacrifice something to help sort out the mess so please stop complaining unless you are prepared to contribute something. No, I am not rich, I depend on the age pension for income.
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    10:47am
    Stork, You bragging about your Long Memory???

    When I was at school I ran the Commonwealth Bank outlet on a voluntary basis. I would collect pennies from students and make entries into their Bank Books and then go to the Bank handling over the relevant documents and cash. In those days you only spent what you could afford. Now Govt spending is getting out of control and 'we' have to pay for this waste of money. If there is no cash in the Govt Bank Book then they need to balance the books by taxing us more!!!!

    Is there another solution other than raising more taxes???

    How about less Govt spending??? That's OK just so long as it does not impact upon the 'me' factor!!!!!
    Fredklaus
    14th Dec 2015
    10:49am
    Lucky you ,you got $2000,i only got $900
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    10:59am
    And the deficit continued with Abbott...WHO REMOVED THE DEBT CEILING so that this disreputable bunch could borrow on forever whilst playing the blame game to justify a deficit which only ever went in one direction.
    See it for what it is. Blatant lying corruption.
    mogo51
    14th Dec 2015
    11:09am
    Well said Stork, I have covered some of what you say in my post.
    We need a Government who will not fear or favour either end of town, but I do feel that the Aged Pensioner with little or no other income, has been shot at enough.
    There is more game to be had at the other end of town and it is now their turn - if only we had a Government with enough B,,ls to do it.
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    11:26am
    Fredklaus, I missed that, perhaps Stork's ... memory is not that good? I 'only' got $900 to buy a new Japanese TV from Bing Lee to help stimulate the Aussie economy. I don't remember getting a $2,000 handout. Can we back claim that money we missed out on???
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    11:32am
    'scuse me, but you are dead wrong Stork. If you had an accurate memory, you would know that the deficit arose because Labor INHERITED unaffordable spending obligations from Howard and Costello, who squandered the proceeds of the mining boom and gave huge tax cuts and benefits to the wealthiest 20%. Type ''howard and costello squandered the mining boom'' into Google and read some of the articles. You might educate yourself!

    The only reason we had a surplus under the LNP was that revenue was up due to a mining boom, but the obligations they created guaranteed a deficit would come when the boom ended. Fortunately, Labor managed the economy moderately well during the GFC, and we suffered less than most nations. But sadly neither party has any sound financial management abilities, and they are constantly under pressure from various self-serving, greedy ''advisory groups'' and wealthy political supporters who buy their favour. It's a recipe for economic disaster, and it seems the victims of it will always be the 80% who missed out on most of the goodies Costello bestowed on his buddies.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:44am
    Don't be too unhappy Peterrj. We got NOTHING....but I am happy with that.
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    12:58pm
    Good try mick but I am happy as a pig in mud!

    Curious, why did you miss out on the $900? Was that because you did not have a taxable income that year? Did those on welfare/pensions get the $900 Govt handout?
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    1:09pm
    Oh mick, please tell all of the story. Labor were the ones who kept increasing the ceiling but only just enough to cover immediate needs. They left office leaving "hand grenades" in every drawer and commitments legislated to bring the debt up to a possible $667B. The ceiling had to be lifted, Labor knew this but carried on like a pork chop trying to make out it was Abbott's fault
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:30pm
    None of the above Peterrj. I bailed and took my super so not entitled. Apparently super was treated the same as income when Kevin was signing the cheques.
    Tom Tank
    14th Dec 2015
    9:38pm
    The National Audit Office has just released a report condemning Abbott's transfer of $1.5 billion to the Victorian Government so that it would appear in Labour's last year of office and not in the LNP's first year.
    This was supposedly for the Libs pet East-West road link which was an election issue in Victoria. The Libs signed a contract for that project without a proper assessment being carried out and provided a letter guaranteeing a large penalty payment should they lose the election and the project not proceed.
    This contract was signed 60 days before the election.
    The Vic taxpayers had to pay mega dollars because of this arrangement.
    Based upon these facts how good financial managers are the Libs?
    How honest is tony Abbott?
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    11:25pm
    mick, I don't care about the pros and cons of the political parties. I am here for the stats and to try and understand the rules of the retirement game. Re the $900 Govt gift ... I'm guessing but I think that if you had your income from Super then that income was tax free, therefore you had a non taxable income and were excluded from the handout. I was a bit lucky that year as I received the low income earners rebate and got the $900!!! What I could not understand was that those with a taxable income were given a $900 Govt gift yet if you had no taxable income then you were excluded. Pensioners and others on welfare missed out. And this was from a Labor Govt giving money to those with a taxable income ie those who worked yet no gift for those who did not work ie. The 'poor' with no taxable income. It made no sense to me at the time and it still doesn't???
    Anonymous
    15th Dec 2015
    4:42am
    I agree, Peterrj. We were between jobs at the time and doing it very tough, and got nothing. Yet millionaires and people earning very high incomes got a big handout.
    Adrianus
    15th Dec 2015
    10:05am
    Peter, my understanding was that the government targeted possible Labor voters because they thought those people would spend the $900 immediately.
    I thought at the time it was the reason I was overlooked. I was already stimulated working my but off trying to save it and having others relying on me.
    I did wonder about the source of the list because quite a few cheques went to dead people. Proof that Labor had far too high opinion of their stimulus package.
    Peterrj
    15th Dec 2015
    3:50pm
    Rainey, I do not think Iess of you that you were out of work at the time. I rely upon stats and stats say that some will be out of work. You just happened to fit that statistical line and the time and there is no justice in this world that I can see.

    Why Labor discriminated against the unemployed and those who really needed the money att hat time is beyond my understanding?

    But I can't let your assertion about 'people on vey high incomes getting a big handout' slip through as if true.

    I note that you read a lot, a lot more than Imdo, so here is your homework. How much were people 'on very high incomes' given by the Govt when they gave away this so called '$900 handout'?

    Got the question? And you answer is .......?????
    MICK
    15th Dec 2015
    3:51pm
    The right is never any different: ignore the dirt in their own ranks. Ignore the statistics. Ignore the comparisons. Ignore the facts. And then launch a nonsensical one sided attack on Labor. Quite laughable really.
    Anybody who has been reading a bit lately will have caught the Liberal MPs corruption stories. You know...the mates doing mate favours. Rezoning land after their mates have bought in. Selling them prime land for zilch. The results being windfall profits. You'll never see that on 7 or 9 media or in the Murdoch Press. Funny that! Just the same as you only saw the Climate Conference Agreement the day it was signed and no more. Tell me it's not a right wing (corruption) club..............????
    Anonymous
    15th Dec 2015
    3:55pm
    I suppose you are objecting to the term ''big handout'' Peterrj? Sure, it was the same $900 low wage earners got. To me, at the time,that would have been a lot of money - so, yes, it WAS a big handout. No bigger to the wealthy than to battlers. Just much less necessary to the wealthy and more likely to be invested rather than spent to stimulate economic growth.
    Peterrj
    17th Dec 2015
    11:53pm
    Rainey, you are not real good on facts nor stats are you????

    Yes, I do object to your wild claim that persons on very high incomes got a 'big handout' during the Labor give away bonus of cash commonly known as the $900 bonus payment scheme.

    High income earners with an income of over $100,000 actually got paid a big fat $zero bonus payment!!!

    So yes, I do so object!!!! I consider that a bonus payment of $zero is NOT a big handout what so ever!!!!
    Anonymous
    20th Dec 2015
    7:38pm
    And what about high income earners with incomes of under $100,000, Peterrj? I guess it all depends on what you call a high income and what constitutes a lot of money. Having grown up in poverty due to being orphaned, and having struggled to raise children on a shoestring due to neither my partner or I ever having any kind of opportunity, I guess $50,000 is a high income by my standards, and $900 is a whopping big handout. Naturally, the more privileged will see things differently.
    Adrianus
    21st Dec 2015
    9:27am
    Rainey, I can now see why you have been alienated from some facts.
    Your story, including the facts, changes to suit your argument.
    So now $50,000 is high income????
    Let's just forget that the average PE income is $76,000 shall we??
    Like your fellow poster mick, you have complained about being poor when it suits. But then at other times complained about losing your aged pension because you have over $1m in assets.
    If one was to put all your posts together and try to make some sense, then one would need some serious counselling.
    So when you talk about those high income wealthy so and so's rorting the superannuation system, many of them are on just $50,000 pa. and not on the top marginal tax bracket???
    Rusty
    14th Dec 2015
    10:41am
    Like always its us who have to bear the burden rescuing our budget,while Mr Hockey goes on a $400 000 US holiday and the next Politicians pay rise wond be to fare of ' multi nationals still don't pay there fare share of tax and we have not heard that Politicians reduce there spending on useless overseas " holidays" or perks...The "defence " budget will still go up and refugees will still get millions in aid to "settle " here with no chance of finding work.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:04am
    Worse than that is that Hockey is taking his parliamentary pension + getting a $350 000 pa salary. Wonder if the second one comes with another paid pension?
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    11:30am
    Again i feel the need to quote ...Mick:

    "Worse than that is that Hockey is taking his parliamentary pension + getting a $350 000 pa salary. Wonder if the second one comes with another paid pension?"

    Mick: Hockey is at least serving, still doing a job. Now what do say about all those long time retired Labor high flying pollies, ie;

    Bob Hawk, seems a whole generation on perks provided by us.
    Paul Keating, Same.
    Julia Gillard, Will be same in time.
    Kevin Rudd, Same in time.
    Oh! and just to remind you, how long was Kim Beasley in the job Joe Hockey is about to start?
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    11:35am
    And who created and endorsed the system that allows past politicians to plunder the public purse? Who didn't change it when we were so poor we had to attack retirees and sick and disabled people and make them poorer? And who was happy to raid the public purse to pay his wife rent for a house she owned?

    Emps, your political bias is showing, sadly.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:47am
    And all the Liberal Party leeches as well Emps. Forgot to mention them I see. A story building here............
    In regard to Beasley he was in the job a long time. Same deal as Hockey. Its wrong. At least Rudd shared the ambassadorships between the Parties. Abbott gave ALL to his side of politics.
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    11:49am
    Rainey:

    Emps, your political bias is showing, sadly.

    LOL, and your's isn't ?
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    11:53am
    rainy:

    And who created and endorsed the system that allows past politicians to plunder the public purse? Who didn't change it.

    None of the above i listed, lol
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    12:00pm
    BTW. Emps, just how does collecting BOTH a huge pension (paid for doing nothing) AND a huge salary (paid for doing a little) make Hockey any better than those who collect only the pension? Isn't it rather hypocritical to say Australians should work until they are 70 and those who have saved a little or can continue to work should have pension entitlements cut or denied, but to then claim an enormous pension from the public purse while still working and earning a huge salary, AND while retaining mega-millions in assets?

    Your double standards concern me. No wonder the government gets away with corruption and immoral conduct when people like you make excuses for the inexcusable, just because it happens to be the party you favor committing the sin.
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    1:13pm
    And all the Liberal Party leeches as well Emps. Forgot to mention them I see.

    Name them Mick?
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    1:37pm
    I don't have any political bias, Emps. I've always voted Liberal, until recently. I deal in facts, not political BS. I don't like or approve of either party, but I will give Labor credit where it's due, and the current Liberal Government is to be condemned for it's attack on battlers and refusal to address inequity and the greed of the rich, just as Howard and Costello must be condemned for their mismanagement.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:33pm
    Are a simpleton Emps? EVERY POLITICIAN HAS THE SAME ENTITLEMENTS. They all exercise them when they leave politics............not just the Labor ones, which appears to be what you believe.
    Your train of thought is not even bias. Its stoogedom!
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    8:48pm
    Oh dear me, Hockey is getting paid to do a job because the incumbent wishes to retire. He is drawing some of his superannuation because it is legal to do so. What I wonder about is when Bomber Beazley did exactly the same thing, nobody thought to mention it. Be even-handed people.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    9:51pm
    Old Man, you cant expect that. mick has been working this crowd for a while now. He has developed a following and on his way to becoming a real Mahatma Gandhi. :)
    Anonymous
    15th Dec 2015
    4:47am
    It was also legal for Hockey to pay rent to his wife. Doesn't make it moral, ethical, or decent. I have doubts about his qualifications for his new job, and I know for sure that there are many better qualified who wouldn't stand a chance of being appointed. Jobs for the boys! The privileged get it all. And they rub our noses in it and claim superior entitlement, while declaring that ''the age of entitlement is over'' and depriving battlers of their basic livelihood. I don't care who did it in the past or which party a person supports or belongs to, it's vile and disgusting and it's symptomatic of the greed and selfishness that is destroying our society. I despise everyone who seeks to excuse or condone it.
    MICK
    16th Dec 2015
    9:07am
    Not a "following" Frank. People gain understanding over time. Myself included as I'm no oracle...but I do have an insight into the manipulation of society and who benefits. Not too hard to see.
    I'm quite happy for you to do your bit bet do something all readers will appreciate: TELL THE TRUTH.....something that those who work for coal and Liberal Party interests are incapable of doing. Whilst I feel sorry for such morally devoid people I deplore the fact that these people call themselves Australians. They are not.
    maelcolium
    14th Dec 2015
    10:44am
    The real tragedy is that the notion of a balanced budget is a self imposed policy of governments which has nothing to do with economic reality. As a currency issuing sovereign with floating exchange rates, the idea that a national "budget" to be "balanced" is errant nonsense. Fiscal management is constrained by the real resources in the economy utilised in a productive cycle. The national accounts simply measure the difference between government outlays and taxation, having nothing to do with the revenue and spending which describes a household, business, state or local government. When the federal government has control over the issue of currency they can never be bankrupt. Far more important are the uses of productive capacity in the economy such as resources and labour, but we give away our resources and maintain unemployment in order to balance the books which is a meaningless objective.
    The fact is that Australia has experienced more deficits than surpluses since the gold standard was abondoned in the 1970's. When the dollar was floated in the 1980's this released government from the need to run balanced budgets, but they are stuck in the past, driving a narrative which is dishonest and destructive to the populace. The realisation is beginning to bite, but to admit to the public that they have been conned for thirty plus years would take the intestinal fortitude not evident in the polity. The day will come when we look at these fools and try to figure out if their behaviour was ignorant or treasonous. I know which side I would come down on.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:11am
    I fail to understand why average Australians are so stupid as to believe the lies which are told by politicians. Given that iron ore, coal and LNG prices have fallen off a cliff and that we keep seeing NEW spending initiatives then how can we have anything other than deficits? Not rocket science and not going to end any time soon.
    The only way out is to:
    1. collect the correct amount of tax from multinationals and the rich and end the accounting game.
    2. reduce government spending. Not a hard one despite the media beating up any attempts to restore fairness and accountability.
    3. increase royalties on exports. It is disgraceful that governments in this country have sold out the nation by allowing valuable strategic assets like LNG to be SOLD to foreigners. A fair return needs to be demanded.
    Good luck baby boomers. Expect our lives to become more and more difficult. It will. You allowed this to happen under YOUR watch. Sorry if the truth hurts.
    Rae
    14th Dec 2015
    3:34pm
    Exactly. I fail to see how stripping any money out of the economy by paying off the deficit will help right now.

    And yes mick we should have hit the streets at the very first privatisation but were sucked in with being able to buy those shares. If all future sales had been to our superannuation funds or Australian shareholders it may have been alright but those sales to private equity have been a disaster.

    I'm hoping they haven't started on water privatisation while we weren't looking or we really are in strife.
    downunder
    14th Dec 2015
    10:46am
    I said from the beginning "New shovel - same shit', just presented in a more human like manor, better wording, no mhhs and ahhhs and no three word sentence. If Turnbull cannot get his 'flat earthers' on the far right under control I cannot see a bright future for him.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:15am
    Turnbull is a far far better politician than Abbott but you are correct when you state "same shit".
    Whilst I applaud Turnbull's view on climate change he is, as he himself says, a "team player". So Turnbull is controlled by vested interests the same as Abbott. Lucky for us that climate change is now being adopted as reality by world leaders and the trolls posting on the internet for their coal industry bosses are becoming silent. I mean even poor old Frank is rarely making a comment.
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    11:03am
    Happy, Australia was hardly affected by the GFC. Labor of course made out the country could be in a difficult position, but our banks were sound, no problem, unlike the countries that where genuinely affected. Whats more this country's terms of trade where high, revenue from the mines so good they wanted to cream off as much as possible, however it came too late fro Mr Swan, his taxes never happened, lol. Now the current government as is usual has to fix the economy left by labor who went ahead and overspent on stupid things like school halls, roof batts, etc; not to mention the 42 billions inherited from the Howard goverment.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:23am
    Funny how you acknowledge that Labor kept you in a job but then attack the same Party. I never saw Labor remove the debt ceiling. I never saw Labor put an $8 billion tax on the nation which did nothing for us (repeal of Carbon Tax). I never saw Labor attack retirees and demonise them. I never saw Labor protect the big banks by repealing legislation which gave consumers some protection. I never saw Labor want to give the rich repeated tax cuts when they do well already.
    Sorry to sound like a Labor Party advertisement. Its not. Just a statement to put your right wing 'can do no wrong' post into perspective.
    Whilst I dislike Labor I have to admit that the current government is off the planet and that I understand corruption at work when I see it. What really saddens me is the brain dead folk who refuse to confront the bad policies on both sides of politics and prefer to back their 'footy' team.
    As I always say 'FOLLOW THE MONEY TRAIL' and you'll understand who is calling the shots. It ain't us!
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:26am
    For what it is worth Emps YOU need to find out what state schools were like before they were fixed up. Not to be believed! You also need to ask about savings in electricity for the nation when you poo poo pink batts as well as address the burning question of the time: 'what do you do QUICKLY to ensure that the nation does not grind to a halt' when the rest of the world has been decimated. Hence the deficit. Hence the pink batts and school fix ups.
    Please offer alternative suggestions. Yes....you have none?
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    11:41am
    There you go again, Emps, getting it all wrong. The difficult position we encountered under Labor was a result of Howard/Costello tax cuts and handouts that primarily benefited the richest 20%. For goodness sake do some study before you display your ignorance of economic history. Labor inherited a mountain of unaffordable obligations from the Howard Government - INCLUDING an obligation to allow superannuation concessions to the wealthy, the elimination of which, now, would fix the budget overnight. But this government won't do it. Sad that Labor didn't. Sadder still that Morrison won't.
    maelcolium
    14th Dec 2015
    11:45am
    Emps. seriously, "Banks were sound in the GFC" ????????

    No. The banks were bailed out by the federal government. They were on the cusp of a liquidity crisis as they had money locked up in non performing overseas loans and borrowings had dried up overnight. If the government had guaranteed only private savings and let the parasites fail with their oveseas adventures the economy would be in a better place. The managers of those banks then voted themselves pat on the back huge pay rises. They are parasites of the worst kind.

    The fiscal stimulus at the time saved Australians from the impact of that bailout, but they stopped it too soon when the Abbot numbskulls started criticising Swan on the debt issue.

    Err, no again.....the 42 billion inheritance from Howard was in fact gifted to the Reserve Bank by the Abbot government so they could play the FOREX market and mess with the dollar - that worked well-not!

    Terms of Trade were high? No they weren't, we had terrible TOT because the dollar was too high and overseas markets collapsed.

    The present government has to fix the economy? Oh,I get it - that's why debt has doubled and un-underemployment is almost two million. Thank God for the LNP must be the catch cry.

    It's people like you making stuff up that is so ludicrous.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:52am
    The banks WERE SOUND. The guarantee was made so that people would not worry about things like the Cyprus haircut and take their money out of the banks. Totally different to your spiel.
    Having read the posts from Emps for some time I have to wonder where this poster comes from. Most of the posts sound like right wing propaganda. Whilst the same might be said about my posts I am more than happy to provide the reasons I make statements. This is what Emps and troll are unable to do because the facts prove that they do not have a leg to stand on.....so better to throw around assertions.
    Peking
    14th Dec 2015
    11:53am
    Something being overlooked here. Our banks were "sound" only because they were prevented from dodgy lending and the GFC toxic mortgage practices by APRA. Remember previously when all but one bank had a Bond, Skase etc?
    As for terms of trade being high and revenue from mines "so good", what did we get out of that?
    We certainly missed a decade of opportunity which enriched the few and starved the nation of investment in research, technology and alternative energy so obviously needed after the boom of mining investment.
    If you look for the beginning of the current deficit problems, read the economists who agree that Howard set up Australia for structural deficit with his last desperate handouts, unsuccessfully seeking another term.
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    12:04pm
    Mick, you just hate to be contradicted.

    BTW, i just don't have the time to sit here and go to writing long lengths of misguided and misinformation competitively.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    12:19pm
    Sorry to wake you up from your Labor love in dream.
    But I must set the record straight. The Australian Federal Government did not bail out our banks. It was the US federal reserve which provided the safety net to The NAB and WBC. Our Capital reserve in our Reserve Bank was cleaned out by Swan and only replaced by The Abbott Government against howls of discontent from Labor.
    Dream on!!!
    maelcolium
    14th Dec 2015
    12:27pm
    Mick, with respect, if the Banks were sound they would not require the bailout they received. The government guarnatee on balances up to $250K was the price the banks paid for the buyout, but don't forget MacQuarie et al who were all assisted to prevent collapse. The entire financialised economy was saved by the government when they should have been allowed to sink. The FIRES lobby convinced Swan to come to the party and Captain Glenn lead the charge. The public were distracted by the Abbot circus in opposition against Swan and Rudd.

    The Cyprus haircut was a crisis of sovereign debt and doesn't relate to the situation in Australia.
    maelcolium
    14th Dec 2015
    12:29pm
    Emps, let me quote you. " i just don't have the time to sit here and go to writing long lengths of misguided and misinformation competitively. " Yup. that says it.
    maelcolium
    14th Dec 2015
    12:36pm
    Frank, can you explain how the Fed provided a saftey net to the two dometic banks you mentioned? What was the mechanism they used to do that? Also have you forgotten the ADI guarantee? Do you understand the RBA liquidity policy controls on domestic banks?

    Also explain how a Treasurer can clean out the capital account.

    All politicians are trash - not just the LNP turkeys, buddy, remove your fist from your posterior when accusing me of favouring one lot over the other, I'm simply stating the facts. You are stating nonsense.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    12:41pm
    Emps: "contradicted"? Mount an argument with FACTS rather than right wing 3 word slogans and propaganda and we'll debate the truth. Not the lies.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    12:44pm
    Frank: topped up is a more apt description. That was done by removing the debt ceiling and by borrowing more huge sums......all the while blaming the other side for mismanagement. Never a day of mismanagement for this government was there.............despite a very large addition to the deficit. And so the right wingers crow on.....
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    12:56pm
    let me get this right, .. maelcolium.

    Emps, let me quote you. " i just don't have the time to sit here and go to writing long lengths of misguided and misinformation competitively. " Yup. that says it.

    Yes i really did stuff that didn't i, the words replying to, instead of, to writing would have been better.
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    1:17pm
    mick, 'Sorry to sound like a Labor Party advertisement. Its not.' No you are not and yes it is.' You are a living contradiction!!!!
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    1:28pm
    I’m talking about the near collapse of the Australian banking system in 2008. I’m talking about the likelihood of two Australian banks collapsing in 2008 if they hadn’t secured a secret loan from the US Federal Reserve.

    The fact that National Australia Bank [ASX: NAB] had to borrow USD$4.5 billion from the US Federal Reserve during 2008 and 2009.

    And Westpac Banking Corp [ASX: WBC] needed USD$1.09 billion in January of 2008 and 2009.

    What’s that, you don’t know anything about it?

    And you don’t remember reading about it?

    There’s a simple reason for that. It’s been top secret information until 3/12/2012.
    That’s right, if it wasn’t for the passing of controversial legislation in the United States you’d never have found out about NAB and Westpac’s Federal Reserve bail outs.
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    1:33pm
    Maelcollium:

    The fiscal stimulus at the time saved Australians from the impact of that bailout, but they stopped it too soon when the Abbot numbskulls started criticising Swan on the debt issue. (my reply, no it did not, it wasted money, a furphy, commerce, ie; businesses employing people kept the economy going)

    Err, no again.....the 42 billion inheritance from Howard was in fact gifted to the Reserve Bank by the Abbot government so they could play the FOREX market and mess with the dollar - that worked well-not! (wrong: The surplus left by Howard was long gone ,wasted, before Abbots government came in. BTW the inherited 42 billion surplus left to labor would have much more if Costello had not shifted some into the future fund, very wise, and thank god Rudd didn't get his hands on that, even though he tried.).

    Terms of Trade were high? No they weren't, we had terrible TOT because the dollar was too high and overseas markets collapsed.(wrong again, terms of trade where high, and China was importing record amounts of ore)

    The present government has to fix the economy? Oh,I get it - that's why debt has doubled and un-underemployment is almost two million. Thank God for the LNP must be the catch cry. (wrong: employment is up, unemployment is down to 5.2%, lowest for years.).

    It's people like you making stuff up that is so ludicrous.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:40pm
    Peterrj: just peddling the facts. That is something that I see some people not doing, especially the right wingers who choose to ignore these. If I get a bit p*ssed off at times it's not because people don't agree with me but rather because they fib outright or choose to, as the bible says 'point out the splinter in their opponent's eye whilst ignoring the log in their own'......so to speak.
    As has been said above our banks were sound and the reason the guarantee was introduced was to stop a stampede.
    I'd like to know which banks were about to collapse Frank. Sounds like misinformation to me.
    Rae
    14th Dec 2015
    3:42pm
    I was going to bring up that bail out Frank and I'm glad you did.

    Also Emps the Great Recession is not over by a long shot. In fact it is only getting started.

    Let us hope the LNP is up for the challenge.
    Adrianus
    18th Dec 2015
    2:19pm
    mick, you would be wise to read my next post above. If you think the big four are out of their financial woes then think again. They are overpriced for the size of Australia and every time they venture OS they get burnt. Follow them down, sell or sit down for the ride? It's your choice. Henry has moved to CBA. I will watch what he does with interest. It seems all the Labor people finish up at the CBA sooner or later.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    11:05am
    It's nice to see the COAG agreeing on something. That something is to tax us more, but they can't agree on how to do it. They can't seem to agree on the level of pain to inflict on us.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:29am
    Yes.......average citizens Frank. NOT the rich who can well afford higher taxes or who even pay tax!
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    11:49am
    I disagree mick. We, "all of us", got us into this mess because we didn't vote in large enough numbers to keep Labor out in 2007. Therefor we all must help in the recovery.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    12:47pm
    And now you would have us vote for this government so that your wealthy mates, their businesses and multinationals can plunder what is left in the nation whilst piling taxes on to average citizens. You'll need a pretty big propaganda campaign to achieve that. One that even American Rupert Murdoch may not be able to provide. And a slogan..."the bad bad Carbon Tax" ( which the leaders of a growing number of countries are proposing). Let run a 'baby boomers are ruining the country' slogan. That'll win 'em over Tangles.......
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    1:03pm
    No Frank. ''All of us'' got into this mess because Howard and Costello squandered the profits of the mining boom giving handouts to the rich and making commitments that the country couldn't afford when the boom ended- like huge superannuation concessions for the wealthy. We remain in this mess because this government won't end those unfair concessions and won't tackle tax evasion and all the legal loopholes that are wrongfully exploited by the well to do to reduce tax - but then, why would they? They need those loopholes to support their own greed.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    1:51pm
    The mining boom went from 2004 to 2012.

    One side of politics handled it well.

    The Rudd government had enormous revenue, much more than Howard/Costello, but they wasted it and didn't realise that Global economies have cycles.
    Swan did not realise Australia was not a goose which would continue laying golden eggs.
    Costello gave tax cuts to workers, he invested in people!!! That is a good thing!!!
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    3:26pm
    Frank, that's quote of the year and worth repeating, 'I disagree mick. We, "all of us", got us into this mess because we didn't vote in large enough numbers to keep Labor out in 2007. Therefor we all must help in the recovery.'

    Does anyone really not think, '.... we all must help in the recovery.'

    We have had the party now the hangover!!!!
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:44pm
    Frank: And the political party who employs you????? Baby bonus? Remember that one? Paid Parental Leave Scheme? Remember that one? Got your mate elected.....and then he backflipped Well, lied!). Next the repeal of the Carbon Tax? Do you feel the $8 billion a year taxpayers are sending to coal industry every year?
    Give the propaganda and BS a break Frank.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    4:38pm
    mick you will be happy to know some mines are now closing and cannot afford to employ people. The transitional 2 tiered economy needs to be managed, because people are more important than political idealism. It's Christmas, the time to be generous. Have a look around the country. Have you ever seen so many cheap houses for sale? Workers are hurting. Try to have some empathy mick.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    8:22pm
    And that is WITH NO CARBON TAX Frank. Was always going to happen. Nobody can stop this change. Not even the world coal industry. People understand what your coal mates are doing and are looking for alternative energy and no matter what corruption the industry and Liberal governments band together to unleash this is a done deal. The only variables are the time it takes and whether or not Labor governments in this country can move the country into new industries before the coal Titanic sinks. It has already hit the iceberg and is starting to sink..............
    Anonymous
    20th Dec 2015
    7:46pm
    Peterrj, I didn't have any party, and I didn't vote for Labor - though it's clear to me that the Howard Government bears at least as much responsibility for the deficit than Labor and the current LNP is doing nothing constructive to address it because it's too worried about offending its wealthy supporters.

    The solutions have been put forward. The current government refuses to embrace them because it is ideologically committed to continuing to transfer wealth from the working and middle class to the rich and to buying the votes of its wealthy supporters.
    ace
    14th Dec 2015
    11:25am
    Yes I know it will be the underdog who gets kicked again , we wont see the big end of town affected, How can Morrison expect our respect when He only stands over those who can't fight back , The big savings can come from the overhaul of Super & taking on Corp Tax avoidance..
    He wont take them on they can fight back , Has anybody found an organisation we can support as Pensioners to have a voice ? GetUp seems to have had some success ?

    14th Dec 2015
    11:27am
    "Is Turnbull's honeymoon over?" Of course it is. I also know the marriage was consummated as I can still hear people yelling "OUCH!"
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    11:32am
    Love it.
    And the first bank account 'opened' by our new PM was his tax haven in the Cayman Islands. Since that day I have to wonder if Dracula has been elevated to the blood bank. We'll see in time.
    Whoray46
    14th Dec 2015
    11:41am
    History tells you that it's the people who can't afford it well be hit the most! We have to find the money to pay for the people who get away from paying their fair share of tax plus the pollies just put their hand up for a pay rise which they really need, NOT! So thighen your belts again!
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    11:51am
    If you need to borrow any money see one of the 12,000 "refugees" who are being "holidayed" here. They should have a few of our taxpayers' bucks left over from the government's generous handout.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    12:48pm
    You get what you deserve. Vote accordingly!
    Gee Whiz
    14th Dec 2015
    11:52am
    Turnbull is an egomaniac. And a tax dodger. He titled his autobiography "Born to Rule". What crass conceit.

    With his untold wealth, him and Scott Morrison have no idea of how the "great unwashed" struggle to survive each day.

    But considering the 15% swing against the Liberals in the by-election held in Joe Hockey's old seat they must now be sweating razor blades. And since Labor didn't field a candidate the swing was to Independents.

    And that's the way to go at the next Federal election. None of the major parties are worth a voters spit.

    If Nick Xenophon gets his party up and running he would be worth a vote. Otherwise vote for Independents.
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    12:46pm
    I certainly wouldn't look upon Turnbull EVER as being an ordinary guy or "one of he boys". Success at what he has done has certainly given him a big head (literally) and he seems to be so far up himself only his shoes are showing. Anyone in his position who says, as he did, that terrorism must be fought with our life values does not deserve to be there. He is a razza-matazz showman-type politician with all the catch words of a snake oil salesman and one not to be trusted. He will lead this country down the red-carpeted garden path and impoverish all but the ultra-wealthy like himself. Xenophon seems to be a straight-shooter with none of the circus ringmaster pizazz of Turnbull and one of the VERY few politicians who is for the people and not just his wealthy LNP party funders.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    12:51pm
    Hope the electorate does embrace INDEPENDENTS....with a Labor preference. It is time both sides were shown that voters have had enough.
    We need responsible politicians. Not stooges and puppets owned by big business on the one side and the Greens/unions on the other. WE NEED PROPER GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE!!!!
    Mygasheater
    14th Dec 2015
    12:02pm
    The Coalition, claim that they are always the better money managers. You must be joking.

    ScoMo ScumBro, is the same old boy he was when he was Immmigration Minister. He will make the former Treasurer Hockey look positively generous to those receiving any form of Social Security benefits.

    Hey Scott you can save one billion dollars, yes, $1 BILLION DOLLARS a year, by closing off shore detention centres.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    12:53pm
    In all fairness the Coalition rarely spends money ON THE NATION, preferring instead to send money to the big end of town. So who do we think 'owns' the Liberal Party? Answer: currently Murdoch and the Mining Industry.
    Crimmo
    14th Dec 2015
    12:21pm
    The real problem with the so-called community projects, such as the pink batts as mentioned below, is the corrupt small businesses that implement them. Australia may be the next Greece, in 10 years time.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    12:55pm
    Of course. The (small) business owners were responsible for where they sent their employees and what danger they put them in. NOT THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DAY. This is the convenient cop out that Frank and trolls generally use to shift blame. The mode of operation of the corrupt right side of politics. And you wonder why Australians hate politicians.
    Emps
    14th Dec 2015
    1:06pm
    here we go again with another of Micks one sided view.

    quote: Of course. The (small) business owners were responsible for where they sent their employees and what danger they put them in. NOT THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DAY. This is the convenient cop out that Frank and trolls generally use to shift blame. Unquote.

    Generally the small contractors did a good job under a rushed government engagement.

    Then of course, when Rudd and that pop star guy minister realized
    the stuff up and cancelled the project, those same contractors where left with tons of roof insulation stock on their hands.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:47pm
    Fact Emps...unlike your BS. Contractors ARE RESPONSIBLE for whether or not they send workers into a roof cavity on a hot day. Not rocket science.
    All you ever do is demonise Labor because your side of politics is corrupt to the core. And your (supposed) 'facts' are either fabricated or you ignore the sins from the cesspit of a Party you support..
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    5:47pm
    how true
    Jurassicgeek
    14th Dec 2015
    1:28pm
    we all know where the cuts will be made while Morrisson,turnbull and idiots will be riding on the hogs back,snouts in the trough and squealing with delight ..just look at hockey ..he must be chuffed at the way things turned out ...
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    6:38pm
    just look at those with their snout in the trough for the next 30 to 40 years, keating, rudd, gillard, hawke, beasly, you want any more I will supply them!
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    8:23pm
    How about Hockey and Abbott as a starter. And the rest......
    Ahjay
    14th Dec 2015
    1:47pm
    If all Politicians and Public Servants Were to be put on exactly the same superannuation, 9.5%, and pension laws as the workers of Australia (THE LIFTERS),we would probably see a vast difference to the budget bottom line. No grandfathering. Do it now!

    If nothing else,there would be no further detrimental changes in the future.

    These people work for us and as our employees, deserve to be treated equally to us,not,better than us.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:49pm
    How about THEY collect the right tax from the big end of town. They won't have any of that...............
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    1:57pm
    Talking about government waste, in the 2010-11 budget, Labor allocated $10 million for “trade union education foundation grant”. in that budget, $10 million was handed to unions for supposedly ‘education resources to their membership’.
    My question is.......Did that 'training ' include advanced driver training???
    I mean the hard stuff like "how to avoid parked vehicles" and "how to text while driving" .
    Are they some of the things covered??
    Maybe we could see the invoice sent to the then Labor Government???
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:52pm
    How does $8 billion a year sent to the coal industry sound Frank. I'd call it corruption, not waste. And that is the tip of the iceberg with a lot of dirt below it.
    Maybe we should send the $80 million invoice for the Royal Commission witch hunt to Tony Abbott and his cronies.
    Its funny that you are so short of straws that you can only find small change and ignore the really big ticket items from the current government. Items which appear to be outright corruption, not accident of government.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    5:12pm
    mick if you are talking about the carbon tax repeal, then I am pleased they did it. Those miners are copping a hiding. Our biggest corporate tax payer BHP has had a 55% write down. RIO is in similar territory. Twiggy has suffered severely and on the back of his very generous donation. Your Medicare shares taking a hit too mick. Almost back to your buy in price. Its a blood bath.
    These are our big employers.
    By the way does Medicare pay the right amount of tax?
    Rae
    14th Dec 2015
    6:51pm
    Not quite a bloodbath yet Frank but I suspect investors are working on it. Going under the 5000 support level today was very bad indeed for our share market.
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    7:09pm
    From article dated April 2014 (the cost of super tax concessions has ballooned since then)
    '''The age pension currently costs $39 billion and superannuation tax concessions will cost the budget around $35 billion in 2013-14,'' the study found.
    It notes that the Commonwealth bill for these concessions is projected to rise at a staggering 12 per cent annually to be $50.7 billion in 2016-17.
    ''The overwhelming majority of this assistance flows to high-income earners,'' the report finds.
    ''Low-income earners receive virtually no benefit. The combined cost of these two policies will be $74 billion in 2014 alone.''

    Someone on $200,000 a year contributes at least 9% to super (not counting any additional voluntary contribution) and pays 15% tax on a contribution of at least $18000 that would otherwise attract a much higher rate of tax. Then there are the earnings of the fund, which are tax advantaged. Meanwhile someone on $30,000 a year gets no tax benefit for contributing to super.

    Try reading http://grattan.edu.au/news/super-system-allows-some-big-earners-a-tax-edge/

    Even those who benefit from the current regime agree it's too costly and has to be reformed. But not Frank! He's determined to protect the interests of the greedy rich whose tax evasion has caused the deficit and is guaranteeing it will grow.
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    7:16pm
    If you take, take, take from those whose spending generates jobs and tax revenue, and give, give, give to those who hoard excess dollars in overseas havens and dodge tax, of course the economy will contract. Medicare shares falling? No wonder. It's getting too hard for people to be able to afford private health insurance. Poor health services mean less serious illnesses develop into more serious and more costly ailments. Next we'll see fresh food skyrocket in price due to changes to the GST and then people will ask how come our health bills are rising due to less healthy eating.

    And meanwhile we have a government determined to scare the wits out of people and punish them for working and saving, so of course economic activity continues to contract, driving revenue down and unemployment up.

    Blind Freddy can see the answer, but not Morrison or Turnbull. They are far too focused on looking after the bank accounts of their rich mates and buying political support.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    8:10pm
    Rae, don't pay too much attention to the index. It is being pulled down by the commodities sector. If we take them out, the market doesn't look too bad. Although there is some negativity about this next budget. We just cannot seem to get on top of it. Far too much fixed spending Interesting to see what happens on Wednesday with US fed cash rate? I'm thinking the US Fed has been jaw-boning a recovery. It would be nice though if they're back on their feet.
    MICK
    15th Dec 2015
    4:02pm
    Frank: you lack of understanding of low commodity prices is astounding and your view of the world is unlikely to eventuate.
    None of your economist talk mentions debt. You know...money that countries owe countries. US$230 trillion currently and rising. Add in the fact that money is being printed on the printing presses. Not from growth. Then factor in that China has stalled.
    By all means talk your crap about the poor poor BHP and the like miners. You would fully understand that governments tax and that governments cannot undo a global downturn. FYI when Labor brought in the Mining Tax miners were riding high on the hog. Their demise has nothing to do with the Mining Tax and the fact that the coal industry has closed quite a number of mines is symptomatic of the price coal is fetching, not government policy.
    It must be very convenient to find yourself a scapegoat. I have noticed that the right side of politics is a master at this.

    14th Dec 2015
    2:09pm
    Simply reducing obscenely generous superannuation concessions to the wealthy would almost eliminate the deficit. Why won't this disgusting government do it? Howard and Costello should never have put us in this mess by introducing these unfair concessions, and the government should have addressed them long ago. There is simply no excuse for giving the rich far more, over a lifetime, than any aged pensioner draws over a lifetime, when battlers get no benefit from the concessions and in some cases actually pay MORE tax because of them
    There are far fairer and more practical ways to provide incentives to save for retirement. But as long as gullible folk and Liberal trolls keep blaming Labor for the mess Howard and Costello bequeathed us, there's not much hope for improvement.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    2:19pm
    Why didn't the previous disgusting government do it??? They had 6 years but only whinged about it. This government has had 2.5 years and is doing something about it!! :)
    Peterrj
    14th Dec 2015
    3:47pm
    Rainey, 'Simply reducing obscenely generous superannuation concessions to the wealthy would almost eliminate the deficit.'. I am not such a person so pray tell what are these 'obscenely generous superannuation concessions' you speak about? Yes, they can Salary Sacrifice $25,000 or $35,000 max per year depending on age and only be taxed at 15% .... Such rules apply to every person. And yes, they can put in a bucket of cash each year into their Super Fund BUT such deposits are in cash that was taxed at their marginal rate.

    What are these mythical obscene concessions you speak about that will end the deficit???
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:56pm
    The only thing the current government has done in 2.5 years is to run the nation into the gutter (a place this government knows well), pile on huge amounts of debt which have achieved NOTHING for the nation and blamed the other side so as not to own up to the mischief which was being perpetrated.
    This government is a disgrace to all that we hold dear in Australia. WE WANT AN ELECTION!!!
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    4:58pm
    Peter, I think Rainey is more concerned about the non concessional amount they deposit into their fund. I think the limit is $180k on which they have paid tax, but it's the earnings which are taxed at only 15%. So using Rainey's previously provided income figures that member achieves a 3% return amounting to $5,400. This amount is only taxed at 15% equalling $810. Rainey finds this obscene because the ATO may be missing out on the top marginal rate of 45% or $2,430. This could be bigger than the Rudd "Home Insulation Program" which as we all know saved us from the GFC. Oh, the Home Insulation Uninstall Program also played an important roll economically. Yes, both programs provided 10,000 jobs for 6 months.
    Rainey I wonder why the Labor government didn't take those steps to make Superannuation less generous? Bob Hawke had the courage to make super less generous.
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    7:17pm
    From article dated April 2014 (the cost of super tax concessions has ballooned since then)
    '''The age pension currently costs $39 billion and superannuation tax concessions will cost the budget around $35 billion in 2013-14,'' the study found.
    It notes that the Commonwealth bill for these concessions is projected to rise at a staggering 12 per cent annually to be $50.7 billion in 2016-17.
    ''The overwhelming majority of this assistance flows to high-income earners,'' the report finds.
    ''Low-income earners receive virtually no benefit. The combined cost of these two policies will be $74 billion in 2014 alone.''

    Someone on $200,000 a year contributes at least 9% to super (not counting any additional voluntary contribution) and pays 15% tax on a contribution of at least $18000 that would otherwise attract a much higher rate of tax. Then there are the earnings of the fund, which are tax advantaged. Meanwhile someone on $30,000 a year gets no tax benefit for contributing to super.

    Try reading http://grattan.edu.au/news/super-system-allows-some-big-earners-a-tax-edge/

    Even those who benefit from the current regime agree it's too costly and has to be reformed. But not Frank! He's determined to protect the interests of the greedy rich whose tax evasion has caused the deficit and is guaranteeing it will grow.
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    7:18pm
    "I wonder why the Labor government didn't take those steps to make Superannuation less generous?"

    That's one area where I'll agree wholeheartedly Labor failed. Doesn't excuse the LNP for refusing to address that failure though.
    Anonymous
    14th Dec 2015
    7:50pm
    Here's yet more evidence that even staunch LNP supporters and those with an interest in retaining tax breaks on super admit that the system is unfair and unsustainable and MUST change. And this article suggests a logical and fair way to change it.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-27/bagwell-super-tax-breaks-must-be-addressed/6887130

    What a shame Morrison is more interested in persecuting battlers than doing what is required to help balance the budget and stimulate economic growth.
    Peterrj
    15th Dec 2015
    12:01am
    Rainey, as you know, there are lies, damn lies and statistics. You quote figures where the rich get richer from Super and that sounds warm and fuzzy BUT you make a very specific claim, 'Simply reducing the obscene generous superannuation CONSESSIONS to the wealthy would blah blah blah.' OK I'll bite, for the second time, please spell out what are these obscene generous concessions that the wealthy get that should be stopped?

    And your claim that those on $30,000 get NO tax benefit contributing to Super demonstrates that you don't know the first thing about Super or tax rules. So there is a challenge, try and demonstrate how someone on $30,000 gets no tax benefit if they contribute to Super. I need a good laugh! mick, I think that even you would be to smart to take up that challenge???

    Talk about BS flying think and fast on YLC. Hey, editors of YLC, do you also want to gake up the challenge on behalf of Rainey? I'm here to try and learn a few tricks of the trade and all I am learning all the time is pure BS!
    Anonymous
    15th Dec 2015
    5:09am
    Okay, Peterrj, I'll concede that someone on $30,000 pa MIGHT get $108 tax benefit each year from superannuation, depending on deductions and rebates they may be entitled to. Wow! $108! While someone on $200,000 a year gets $5400 on their basic 9% contribution alone, plus can afford an additional contribution that is tax advantaged 30c in the dollar - and that's not counting the tax advantage on fund earnings or the benefit of retiring tax free with a whopping superannuation balance.
    Yes, I'd call these concession obscenely generous. Someone earning $200,000 a year DOES NOT need support from the taxpayer. And someone on $30,000 a year needs a lot more than $108 a year to have any hope of building a retirement income that would negate the need for a pension. But it gets worse. When you look at someone earning $500,000 a year, the taxpayer is donating $13500 each year to their retirement fund + the concession on voluntary contributions + the concession on earnings, and when they retire with millions, they do so tax free. Consider the taxpayer contribution to the retirement of CEOs of banks etc!
    Common sense says we should reduce the concessions to the rich and use the money to assist battlers to build their super funds up so that eventually most can fund their own retirement at least to a substantial degree. But who wants to apply common sense? Not the greedy whose luxurious retirement is being substantially funded by the poor taxpayer, that's for sure.

    I don't think that when there is broad agreement between economic advisers, leading accounting firms, all political parties, and the superannuation fund managers themselves as to the need for superannuation tax reforms, it's fair to refer to ''lies, damn lies and statistics''. Even those who oppose changes don't dispute the cost of the concessions or the unfairness of them. They oppose them because they don't want the beneficiaries to lose the benefit. In other words, because greed rules.
    Adrianus
    15th Dec 2015
    10:31am
    Rainey, Peter has called it correctly.
    It's very clear that your problem is that some people get paid more. Oddly, mick has the same problem? Equality is a good argument when one can use the fairness rule. There is no fairness in everyone being paid the same though?
    MICK
    15th Dec 2015
    4:05pm
    Frank: you crack me up.
    You say "I wonder why the Labor government didn't take those steps to make Superannuation less generous?"
    Have you conveniently also forgotten that when Tony Abbott came into office he immediately abandoned legislation waiting to go through parliament which taxed super incomes > $100 000? I thought so.
    Anonymous
    20th Dec 2015
    7:54pm
    Frank, you are wrong. I have no objection to people being paid more. I don't for an instant support the idea that it's fair to pay everyone the same. But neither do I view it as fair that taxpayers spend more ensuring a wealthy superannuant has a luxurious retirement than they do providing an aged pension to someone who worked their guts out for five decades in a dangerous, dirty, physically strenuous job that paid peanuts. And it irks me that half those who are paid more don't earn a tiny fraction of what they receive, while many who are paid next to nothing actually earn many, many times more than they get.
    particolor
    20th Dec 2015
    8:04pm
    How Very True !
    JoMojo
    14th Dec 2015
    2:19pm
    Of course those that can least afford it will be penalised ! GST here we come too ! No cut backs on pollies perks ($40,000 pay rises) I'd axe them quick smart. No captains lounge with freebie family trips local/overseas.

    Now in these hard times with 1 million unemployed and many more underemployed is the time to spend on relevant Infrastructure. Yee Haw mateys thing is wealthy must pay more tax for the interim. Make me PM ...I fix.
    MICK
    14th Dec 2015
    3:59pm
    I'd be happy to see the wealthy pay the right amount of tax. I mean the tax due, not that after their creative accountants and lawyers have played their game. Also, and end to tax havens which are little more than outs of the tax system. Rorts. Corrupt behaviour.
    Maybe ask our PM why he needs a tax shelter and what percentage of his gross income he is paying in tax. You won't get an answer and new laws recently passed now hide the amount of tax wealthy Australians pay. How convenient to the crooks.
    Jen
    14th Dec 2015
    3:31pm
    It'll be interesting to see how he makes a silk purse out of a pig's ear.
    Jude
    14th Dec 2015
    4:11pm
    How about the government confiscating the money from halal certification fees, that would go a long way towards covering the extra expense involved in resettling the 12000 refugees.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    4:24pm
    Jude I think you may find that money is already earmarked for the building of mosques.
    Rae
    14th Dec 2015
    6:59pm
    It is an absolute disgrace that this is charged. The religious leaders or whoever should do it for free. Why are all of us paying for 2% of the populations belief system?
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    8:26pm
    Could it be because of their encouraging forward thinking of women?
    Rae look on the bright side. Saudi women can now vote and next we may see women being allowed to drive. That will be something!
    Bob Hawke started the halal tax. And (in 1983 I think from memory) in those days it was to facilitate meat export to Malaysia.
    Rae
    14th Dec 2015
    8:50pm
    Okay Frank I will accept that if it is necessary for exports. There should be control over the use of the funds though and they should benefit all Australians surely.
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    9:42pm
    Rae, I agree. I have a bar code scanner on my iPhone which tells me if food items carry a halal tax. I was surprised to learn how much of our food is actually taxed by the Saudis or Indonesians. I think much of the money goes to the local imams who in turn collect even more money from mosque attendees. The Imams then provide some of these funds to advance the "religion" or Sharia law. In 2011 (?) Leaders of the Islamic faith in Australia made a formal application for the introduction of Sharia Law in Australia. Recently a young Muslim refused to stand before the judge during his court case, because as he said, he does not recognise Australian Law. I know the ABC said Halal certification doesn't affect the quality of the food but its the tax which I don't like paying.
    Jude
    15th Dec 2015
    3:01pm
    the point is that many Aussies who avoid where possible halal certified products don't do it because of any change in the taste or quality of the food but because of the fees that are paid to the Islam community and this amounts to millions per year in Australia alone. Maybe the money goes towards mosques and Islamic schools, who knows, nobody seems to be accountable and no tax is paid. Why should non-Muslim Australians financially support these huge lavish mosques that seem to be springing up all over Australia. If halal certification is a food requirement for a minority group of people who choose to live in a foreign country surely the certification process should be a free service provided by the leaders for their people. They do not actually do very much, so I've heard, for the millions of dollars they receive. However, apart from halal meat which I would never knowingly buy, for a different reason, I would be happy buying hc food if the fee, tax etc want to the government. Meanwhile I will continue to do without Vegemite, Cadbury's chocolates .........
    MICK
    15th Dec 2015
    4:09pm
    Jude: maybe end the program and not allow domestic taxing other than by governments.
    As I keep saying if you want revenue then go after multinationals and the big end of town. Unlikely that this government will do this as it is 'owned' by the big end of town. Can't have you bite the hand that elects you!
    Oldman Roo
    14th Dec 2015
    5:45pm
    As usual the battlers and low income earners are going to be hit again .
    According to information just released by Labor , One in Five companies earning over 100 Millions in profits pay no tax . With the support of the Greens this threshold was increased to 200 Millions ensuring two thirds of companies will be able to keep how much tax they pay a secret,
    I think this is clearly spelling out just how the rich are favoured and while I am not affiliated with any party , the middle and low income will continue to get burnt by the Liberals and will have to express their dissatisfaction at the ballot box or sooner .
    Adrianus
    14th Dec 2015
    6:25pm
    Oldman Roo, wasn't it Paul Keating of the Labor Party who allowed these companies to keep secret the details of tax paid??
    If that's the case I think the Greens are showing some intestinal fortitude in helping the government change this important piece of legislation.
    Labor may not be too happy when details of political donations are revealed. Is that the real reason they were stalling the change???
    Oldman Roo
    14th Dec 2015
    6:56pm
    Frank , We are no longer in Paul Keating times and considering the dire economic situation of the country in these days , there can be no special deals for the wealthy when the low to middle income earners are more than getting screwed .
    Just what the Greens motivations are in these days is is something only they know and judging them additionally on supporting the severe Pension cuts for part Pensioners , I actually wonder whether they know where they are heading .
    I think all parties have dirt on their hands when it comes to political donations and to use one of your phrases , at least Labor have the political fortitude to strongly challenge this unjust tax fiddle . They are also circulating a petition in protest against it and maybe you too are interested in signing it .
    Oldman Roo
    14th Dec 2015
    8:25pm
    heemskerk99 . I really do not see the relevance to my comments in your reply . I am usually polite in my discussions but hope you can spare me your ranting in future . I am also not affiliated with Labor , as pointed out , but regrettably have encountered enough blind Liberal followers in my time and am convinced they are to blame for their failings .
    MICK
    15th Dec 2015
    4:13pm
    Oldman Roo: Your original comment is spot on.
    I agree with your comment above too. There are a few posters who post on this website who are clearly being paid to troll. Heemskerk is in that camp and you the same often vile crap comes from him. Most readers would understand that his comments have no fact or merit so keep up the good and honest posts. Won't get those from trolls.
    Young
    14th Dec 2015
    5:49pm
    There are so many negative comments on this site.
    Let's hope the senate no longer blocks serious attempts to stop us going down the gurgler.
    No doubt I will be called a troll after these comments.
    We must put what we want aside and get things done for the good of Australia.
    Rae
    14th Dec 2015
    7:08pm
    Yes let's take that 668 billion debt out of the economy, pay it off and see what happens next?

    You do realise that debt adds dollars to the economy but paying it back takes them away again.

    I don't think you are a troll Young.

    What exactly do you want to get done though?

    Will it give ordinary people money to spend in the economy?

    If so then that is a great idea.
    Oldman Roo
    14th Dec 2015
    7:23pm
    Young , Contrary to your interpretations , I actually consider this majority , of what you conveniently class as negative comments , as very constructive comments . I will not call you a troll because every man has the right to express his opinion in a democracy , but do not expect us to give you the benefit of the doubt about which side of Politics you come from .
    MICK
    15th Dec 2015
    4:15pm
    Can't disagree with doing what is in the interests of the nation Young. Handing our money to the wealthy and using taxpayer money for political mischief are not in the interests of the nation. And yes comments are negative when trolls are allowed to post dishonest rhetoric.
    niemakawa
    14th Dec 2015
    6:51pm
    Don't resettle the so-called "refugees. saving over 700 million, which more than likely will be ongoing.
    Rae
    14th Dec 2015
    8:56pm
    We have to do our bit offering refuge in my opinion.

    Not sure about why it would cost $700 million.

    The idea of country towns taking these families may work out very well.

    At least the process is legal and we will know who these people are.
    Rusty
    14th Dec 2015
    7:13pm
    We all know politics is a ass job where lies and backstabbing are rules of the day ...BUT every election is held between two parties and some odd ones, which we all know will mostly look after there own ..Why has no one come up with a party which will actually do what they promise , hold election not on the promises the will make when elected but on achievements there done while in office. It could save millions ? But sorry i am just a dreamer.
    Rusty
    14th Dec 2015
    7:22pm
    A lot so called "refugees" what i seen on tv are young men running away from there country because of someone is inviting there country. Should there not fight for there country instead of running away and let other countries sort out there problems ..So we pay twice..first to try to make there country save second to support them when there run away.
    wally
    14th Dec 2015
    11:04pm
    Imagine the year is 1940 and a boat load of military age Pommies washes up on Cottesloe Beach in West Australia. They are seeking asylum. The Luftwaffe is bombing England and they say they are afraid. They are also too yellow to fight for their country. Would the Australian government of 75 years ago grant them asylum and give them the welfare benefits Rudd and Gillard gave the boat people? I think not, any more than the Brits in 1940 would run out on their families and leave them to the tender mercies of Adolf Hitler. It shows the sort of people Rudd, Gillard and their do gooder mates want to populate Australia with.
    Peterrj
    15th Dec 2015
    1:12am
    I don't want to get into a refugee argument re the pros and the cons. But when you ask, "Why are they not back there fighting for their country" I wish to give part of the answer. Actually they have no intention for fighting for their country but against it. They are from rebels fighting the legitimate Govt of 'their' country. If they were fighting for their country then the refugees would be joining the Assad Army! They don't and they don't support their own Govt. There may be some legitimate reasons why this is so but it does explain, in part, why they are not fighting for 'their' country!
    Adrianus
    15th Dec 2015
    9:15am
    M E countries may sing from the same hymn book but that does not make them friends. They all hold very strong and differing views about a religion which has a legal framework, unchanged for 1500 years. It's becoming increasingly apparent to me that the only common goal is expansion of the religion/law.
    niemakawa
    14th Dec 2015
    7:51pm
    This may or may not make you feel better. Some may have already seen this article.

    This was in The Age

    Enjoy Australia………………for a little while anyway…………..

    Are we lucky .. or what ?


    Interesting set of observations from a visitor from the other side of the Pacific.'Value what you have and don't give it away.' There's a lot to admire about Australia, especially if you're a visiting American, says David Mason. More often than you might expect, Australian friends patiently listening to me enthuse about their country have said, ''We need outsiders like you to remind us what we have.'' So here it is - a small presumptuous list of what one foreigner admires in Oz.



    1... Health care. I know the controversies, but basic national health care is a gift. In America, medical expenses are a leading cause of bankruptcy. The drug companies dominate politics and advertising.
    Obama is being crucified for taking halting baby steps towards sanity. You can't turn on the telly without hours of drug advertisements - something I have never yet seen here. And your emphasis on prevention - making cigarettes less accessible, for one - is a model.

    2... Food. Yes, we have great food in America too, especially in the big cities.
    But your bread is less sweet, your lamb is cheaper, and your supermarket vegetables and fruits are fresher than ours.
    Too often in my country an apple is a ball of pulp as big as your face.
    The dainty Pink Lady apples of Oz are the juiciest I've had. And don't get me started on coffee.
    In American small towns it tastes like water flavoured with burnt dirt, but the smallest shop in the smallest town in Oz can make a first-rate latte.
    I love your ubiquitous bakeries, your hot-cross buns. Shall I go on?

    3... Language. How do you do it?
    The rhyming slang and Aboriginal place names like magic spells.
    Words that seem vaguely English yet also resemble an argot from another planet.
    I love the way institutional names get turned into diminutives - Vinnie's and Salvos - and absolutely nothing's sacred.
    Everything's an opportunity for word games and everyone's a nickname.
    Lingo makes the world go round.
    It's the spontaneous wit of the people that tickles me most.
    Late one night at a barbie my new mate, Suds, remarked, ''Nothing's the same since 24-7.'' Amen.

    4... Free-to-air TV. In Oz, you buy a TV, plug it in and watch some of the best programming I've ever seen - uncensored.
    In America, you can't get diddly-squat without paying a cable or satellite company heavy fees.
    In Oz a few channels make it hard to choose.
    In America, you've got 400 channels and nothing to watch.

    5... Small shops. Outside the big cities in America corporations have nearly erased them.
    Identical malls with identical restaurants serving inferior food.
    Except for geography, it's hard to tell one American town from another.
    The 'take-away' culture here is wonderful.
    Human encounters are real - stirring happens, stories get told.
    The curries are to die for. And you don't have to tip!

    6... Free camping. We used to have this too, and I guess it's still free when you backpack miles away from the roads.
    But I love the fact that in Oz everyone owns the shore and in many places you can pull up a camper van and stare at the sea for weeks.
    I love the 'primitive' and independent campgrounds, the life out of doors.
    The few idiots who leave their stubbies and rubbish behind in these pristine places ought to be transported in chains.

    7... Religion. In America, it's everywhere - especially where it's not supposed to be, like politics.
    I imagine you have your Pharisees too, making a big public show of devotion, but I have yet to meet one here.

    8... Roads. Peak hour aside, I've found travel on your roads pure heaven.
    My country's ''freeways'' are crowded, crumbling, insanely knotted with looping overpasses - it's like racing homicidal maniacs on fraying spaghetti.
    I've taken the Hume without stress, and I love the Princes Highway when it's two lanes.
    Ninety minutes south of Bateman's Bay I was sorry to see a billboard for a McDonald's.
    It's blocking a lovely paddock view. Someone should remove it.

    9... Real multiculturalism. I know there are tensions, just like anywhere else, but I love the distinctiveness of your communities and the way you publicly acknowledge the Aboriginal past.
    Recently, too, I spent quality time with Melbourne Greeks, and was gratified both by their devotion to their own great language and culture and their openness to an Afghan lunch.

    10. Fewer guns. You had Port Arthur in 1996 and got real in response. America replicates such massacres several times a year and nothing changes.
    Why?
    Our religion of individual rights makes the good of the community an impossible dream.
    Instead of mateship we have ''It's mine and nobody else's''.
    We talk a great game about freedom, but too often live in fear.
    There's more to say - your kaleidoscopic birds, your perfumed bush in springtime, your vast beaches.
    These are just a few blessings that make Australia a rarity.
    Of course, it's not paradise - nowhere is - but I love it here.
    No need to wave flags like Americans and add to the world's windiness.
    Just value what you have and don't give it away.

    David Mason is a US writer and professor, and poet laureate of Colorado.
    MICK
    15th Dec 2015
    4:49pm
    niemakawa:

    We travel to the US every year for a couple of months so we get to live the American lifestyle. A couple of comments about your list which is not too far from the money:

    1. Health Care: doctors are paid huge salaries in the US so the system is very very expensive to average wage earners. The bottom of society essentially has no cover from what I understand. Add to that wage rates of $10 an hour and the picture is clear. If you want to see a great expose on the health system in America then watch a documentary called "Sicko" (SBS).

    2. Agree about the bread. Very average. The coffee is the worst in the world. Tries every coffee shop in town and came to the conclusion that the problem was the (bitter) beans they used, not the lack of expertise with the cappuccino equipment. As for fruit and veges I thought they were pretty good. We do not exactly have fresh fruit and veg either unless you pay some of the ridiculous top prices or demand out of season foods.

    3. TV: it's crap in the US and we are following this trend as cable companies want to sell us what has always been free. Don't hold your breath on that one.

    4. Roads: they're pretty darn good in the US. Don't know what the writer has to complain about. If he is truly from Colorado then I have to say that I70 is a superb piece of road...unless there is a heavy snowfall which closed it for a few hours.

    5. Multiculturalism: never saw a big problem there but was never in the Southern states.

    6. Guns: no comment. I never personally saw any guns but I know they are everywhere. The fact that the Gun Lobby 'owns' the Republican (=Liberal!) side of politics tells the same tale as the coal industry here. It does not matter how many massacres there are in the US because the Republicans will never pass any controls on guns. A sickening betrayal of average citizens. Do not even know how you would possibly collect guns from so many owners. Frightening!

    You are on the money with the perception Americans have of us niemakawa. Sadly our world is changing. Hopefully for the better...but I'm not at all sure this will be the case. Ask me in 20 years time.
    Good post though. Nice to bail out of the nasty politics which happens on this site sometimes.
    Jen
    14th Dec 2015
    9:14pm
    Just found this graph on how Australia fits in with the rest of the industrialised world regarding pensioner poverty: https://www.facebook.com/MikeKellyEdenMonaro/photos/a.10150410913301528.415513.111295601527/10153825683741528/?type=3&theater

    You will need to be a member of Facebook to see it.
    Anonymous
    15th Dec 2015
    5:14am
    A rather damning indictment! And the LNP is talking about increasing taxes on the poor.
    Peterrj
    15th Dec 2015
    8:38am
    See Rainey's last avatar posting:

    Rainey, "... someone on $30,000 a year gets no tax benefit for contributing to super".

    Then Rainey 10'hrs later when his utter diatribe of BS is challenged, "OK Peterrj, I concede ...... (You caught me with my pants down, what I said was, in fact, BS). Read Rainey's last posting above!

    Then he reasserts, "Yes I call these concessions obscenely generous" then he claims "Common sense tells you that we should reduce the(se) concessions to the rich"!!!

    What only reduce these obscene Super concessions ... " reduce"???

    If something was SO BAD then why not STOP them if they are so obscene????

    Ans: Because these concessions apply to us all, rich or poor'!!!! They are not so 'obscene' as you claim.

    Rainey you have no credibility what so ever. You talk as if giving a political speech but you credibility is a big fat zero! And like a political we will suffer more of your fanciful hot wind, the same mantra "Tax the Rich, Tax the Rich, Tax the Rich and vote Labor for a better deal". Such mantra is boring day in and day out.

    mick, what no post from you? That's right, I did say that you were too smart to attempt to try and justify Rainey's deliberate distortion of the facts to suit his Labor mantra.

    But that won't stop you will it? You will have to come out and try and defend you political mate Rainey.

    So let's just confine the issues to Rainey's rather foolish claim that those on $30,000 receive no tax benefit from Super contributions.

    Do you agree or disagree with Rainey's foolish claim before you call me a political troll and start name calling!!!! mick, I concede that that would be one of your strong points, 'name calling'!

    I just want some truth and honesty in YLC comments and not read all this grossly bias 'anti this' or 'pro that' which I keep on reading all the time. How about some advice where we can understand the rules better (be they fair no not fair) so we all can benefit from this web site??? And it it possible to do away with name calling? We learn nothing by that.

    YLC, how about stepping in and give us some ground rules for comments??? Is that asking too much???
    Anonymous
    15th Dec 2015
    2:39pm
    Peterrj, in my view $108 a year is akin to nothing, especially when someone on a very large salary is picking up more than $5000 on their employer-funded contribution alone, and much more if contributing additional funds voluntarily, and much more when concessions on earnings are counted. And no, I don't propose to cancel concessions altogether, because common sense tells us we need to encourage contributions to super and we need to reward those who work hard to fund their own retirement. I support recommendations to wind them back substantially for the well-to-do and increase them for battlers. Sorry if that logic offends you and your privileged LNP mates, but I'm not a Labor supporter and my claims are not ''foolish''. They are supported by some renowned economic advisory groups, actually, and that's because they make sense. They just happen to be at odds with the greedy and self-serving LNP whose goal appears to be to maintain and hopefully increase inequity, regardless of the long term economic and social cost.

    One suggestion I read was to replace the 15c concessional tax rate on super with a 15c rebate, so high income earners on a 45c marginal rate pay 30c on super contributions and low income earners may actually get a 15c top up contribution for each $1 invested. Then apply a 15c tax to earnings both in accumulation phase and retirement, with a $50,000 a year tax-free threshold in retirement. And place a lifetime cap on contributions, replacing the annual cap that discriminates against those who earn little or nothing in some years and have higher earnings in other years.

    This proposal makes sound economic sense. It redirects taxpayer funds from subsidizing luxurious retirements and huge bequests to children by the wealthy to actually supporting the efforts of battlers to save and thus reducing, over time, the cost of retirement funding.

    Sorry if you can't see the sense in it, Peterrj. But it's you who has no credibility. I support a well-thought-out proposal that would clearly save the government money and strengthen the superannuation system. Only the greedy privileged will object. But of course they will scream blue murder at any proposal to wind back their unfair tax breaks and make them pay their share.

    ''Tax the rich'''. Yes, to the extent that it's fair and equitable to do so. Preserve incentives and rewards, because the health of our economy depends on them (which is why the taper rate change was so irresponsible), but abolish the rorts that make the system so unfair and unsustainable.
    Anonymous
    15th Dec 2015
    2:44pm
    BTW. Of course the current concessions apply to us all, but they are inequitable because clearly the poor cannot take advantage of them to any reasonable extent, while the rich benefit enormously from them. The fact that they apply to the poor doesn't make them fair or equitable. It just gives the self-serving and greedy a convenient excuse to quote to try to justify the unjustifiable.
    Peterrj
    15th Dec 2015
    3:28pm
    Rainey, 'OK Peterrj, I concede ...."

    Now you don't concede and try and say that 'something' ($108 but I have not done the maths) is aka nothing????

    So in Rainey's world something is nothing ... and you accuse me of being foolish???

    And even though you consider 'these tax concessions to be obscene' you don't propose to cancel (these obscene) tax concessions altogether ... yet they remain 'obscene'' using your language???

    Yeah right Rainey, I think that you are onto something remembering that something in your language is nothing!

    But you are right with one assertion ... I can't make any sense out of what you are saying!!!!

    I may lack credibility but I correctly guessed your war cry of 'Tax the Rich'.

    Rainey, I agree with some of your ideas. But you need to tone down you language and think more about what you are saying. Don't shoot from the hip and make comments that are wildly inaccurate like 'you and your priviledge LNP mates'. LOL Rainey, I don't have any mates on these postings and I didn't vote LNP in the last election and I feel totally betrayed by the false promises made by Abbott when he won power! But I would just like YLC comments to be reflective of the facts without making wild incorrect assertions.

    If you were to say that the Tax and Super rules favour those with higher incomes than those with lower incomes then, yes, I totally agree!

    But I even think less of the Tax and Super rules than you do! In my view, the glitter of Super is like fools gold! It is a sham at every level and the Australian public are being conned into thinking otherwise by our politicians on both sides. Does that sound like a LNP public announcement???? I am waiting for the right topic to expand those views. Have a good day.
    MICK
    16th Dec 2015
    8:59am
    Peterrj: you seem to have a few issues mate.
    Sorry that you are a pro rich Australian. All well and good to feather one's own nest but fairness is also a human quality of value.
    If you listened to Morrison last night you would have again heard the battle cry to tax those who are struggling. More taxes for average and poor citizens, tax cuts coming for the rich and multinationals and the rich rorting the superannuation scheme to be left alone. It is what it is mate!
    Adrianus
    16th Dec 2015
    11:25am
    Oh mick, you think Peter has issues because he is making sense. I can only imagine that you and Rainey are paid to write the illogical crap you both keep espousing. :)
    There is no "them and us" mick.
    That is just a war cry to create anger and envy in the proletarians so that they join the political battle. A battle which is self defeating. Rise above the class warfare because you're better than that mate.
    "ask what you can do for your country, not what............"
    Peterrj
    18th Dec 2015
    12:06am
    mick, you are as logical as Rainey!

    I said, 'If you were to say that the Tax and Super rules favour those with higher incomes than those with lower incomes' then, yes, I totally agree!

    Then you accuse me of being 'pro rich'???? The above sentence is 'pro rich'???

    I am left wondering if the word 'logical is the correct word???

    What I am asking for is that you and Rainey stop making political speeches and think how illogical some of that rubbish sounds!!!

    15th Dec 2015
    5:46pm
    Evidently Scott Morrison said ''"The government will continue to restore the budget by controlling expenditure and supporting policies that grow the economy. The budget will not be restored by increasing the overall tax burden on Australians. Such policies favoured by the opposition will only serve to retard growth and the revenue that flows from a growing economy," (Source: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/ending-four-tax-lurks-would-deliver-38-billion-budget-relief-for-scott-morrison-budget-office-finds-20151213-glme15.html#ixzz3uMxf7FgS)

    But in the next breath he talks about increasing the GST. So how is that NOT ''Increasing the overall tax burden on Australians''? I can't think of a more onerous and oppressive way to increase the overall tax burden on Australians, actually.
    MICK
    16th Dec 2015
    8:56am
    I listened to Morrison the snake oil salesman last night.
    Morrison intends to hit average Australians and the poor with a new (GST) tax whilst refusing to go after multinationals or ending the superannuation tax shelter for the wealthy. Both would remove any need to tax struggling families in the country.
    Remember the above when you vote as listening to the government and Murdoch propaganda at election time and doing what you are instructed to will only result in average citizens sending their money to the rich. Your choice I guess.
    particolor
    16th Dec 2015
    9:10am
    Did anyone else notice they gave themselves a Pay Cut to make up the Shortfall ? :-( :-(
    particolor
    15th Dec 2015
    7:51pm
    2021 Now till Pensioners see another Crust ! :-( :-(
    Adrianus
    16th Dec 2015
    11:07am
    There is a lot of irrational negativity coming from a few on here. (Most of it coming from mick just quietly.)
    Let's put things into perspective.
    When we insisted the LNP take charge the position was woeful, with a $48b budget deficit. Now at $37.4b.
    Labor's unemployment projections were at 6.4% for this time slot. Last months actual puts it at 5.8%.
    Coming into office the LNP had an iron ore price at $120, which has continued to drop to it's current price of around $38.
    Economists estimate that for every $10 drop in ore the government revenue drops by $2.5b. My rough math tells me if the ore price was still at $120 the budget would have another $20b revenue.
    Sometime next year the $AUS - $US exchange rate will be more favourable for our exporters and providing we have businesses capable of identifying, securing and developing trade opportunities created by Andrew Robb and his team, we will look back on this past 5 or 6 years as a watershed moment.
    We have been too comfortable for too long and just forgot that we needed a disciplined and innovative fiscal management.
    We have been forced into change.
    ex PS
    16th Dec 2015
    12:01pm
    Frank, for a country to base its future economic growth on iron ore and coal is irresponsable at the least. ore might be a source of income into the future, but to who, how do we stop the majority of the profits going to off shore companies, we can't even get our share of the tax due. But coal, really, who is going to buy it? China and USA have an agreement to reduce or stop the usage of coal in the near future, Indai is following suit . They are introducing a carbon tax which means they will pass that tax onto the exporters of that product as it enters their region. This means that Australian exporters will pay a carbon tax to the importers in order to land their products instead of into our own revenue stream. How does this help our economy long term?
    Adrianus
    16th Dec 2015
    12:52pm
    ex PS I agree with you and this is why I feel the change has been forced upon us rather than us being proactively managing change. We did have an economy reliant on the resource sector. We also had a government far too reliant on having it destroyed when their term in office ended. With taxes and state royalties the resources sector provides the lions share of Government revenue. The CEO of BHP said recently BHP will not stop what they are doing to make solar panels.
    I prefer a government to not let emotion and ideology be it's prime motivator for change. It's an economic issue requiring a disciplined change management process. I know some would like every mine closed tomorrow but they are also the ones who want a pension and a $1m in the bank.
    Peterrj
    18th Dec 2015
    3:28pm
    Frank, I have to agree with exPS, how irresponsible is it to say, 'We have been too comfortable for too long and just forgot that we needed a disciplined and innovative fiscal management. We have been forced into change."

    I give up!
    Adrianus
    18th Dec 2015
    4:24pm
    Peter, That is my personal view, based on overall government strategies/policies in the last decade. Our government has been too reactive. We have been forced into change by China's reduced demand. The same way diesel fueled cars became more expensive to run because of China's increased demand. Now that China's demand has slowed diesel is less expensive again. We are a small economy getting pushed around by the big economies.
    I like the talk of Turnbull and the way he has us all, including the opposition, using the word innovation. However, I will reserve my judgement until I see some actual innovation.
    With 24 years of continued growth it has been same old same old and yes, in my view we have been complacent.
    Our Government has very little control over it's revenue and not much control over the 20% of the budget that it has influence over.
    Peterrj
    19th Dec 2015
    7:36pm
    Hi Frank, actually I was having a 'go' at exPS! I just give up when I read so many stupid postings!!!!
    libsareliars
    16th Dec 2015
    1:25pm
    Here we go again. Co-payment Mark II. The LNP never change - always go for the little people than their mates in big business. They have the same policies as Abbott just a different snake oil salesman in Turnbull.
    particolor
    17th Dec 2015
    1:02pm
    Don't Blame Me ! I never voted for them ! :-)
    Gee Whiz
    21st Dec 2015
    10:32am
    Of course the lowest common denominators in society will feel the pain most and pick up the bill. The politicians will simply give themselves another pay rise to offset any extra costs the may suffer.

    Most of the other state premiers are ready to cave in to a 15% GST. They're being blackmailed by Morrison who is threatening withholding grants if they don't toe the line

    Of course the Premiers are just as useless as the federal government when it comes to
    handling taxpayers money.

    I'd like to see anyone of them run a household budget. They would be lined up at Centre link inside a month.

    Its quite amazing how many trash politicians we have in this country no matter who's in power.

    Time for the independents to take over. They couldn't do any worse the current bunch of buffoons.
    particolor
    21st Dec 2015
    8:47pm
    Yeah after watching that Smooth Mouthed NSW Premier this morning I've Given Up !! :-(